Initial thoughts after reading


Advanced Class Guide Playtest General Discussion


Just wanted to throw these out there and see what other people think:

•Needs more unique names (like it or not SKR ;) ).
Brawler is taken.
Swashbuckler is taken.
Shaman isn't taken, but it's so close to other archetype names that it's questionable.
Etc.

•Spell lists need to be somewhat more unique to the class.
Yes, that is a lot of work, but that's what goes along with making a 20-level class.

•Arcanist
Pretty much makes both Sorcerers and Wizards obsolete.
Even with the penalty of lesser spells to cast, the benefits of combining prepared and spontaneous spell-casting, cost free, are huge. We're talking, "All the strengths of the Wizard with none of the weaknesses."
Seems like the only reason to play a Sor or Wiz with Arcanist as an option is for flavor alone.

•Bloodrager
Don't get me wrong, I like the concept, but how is this it's own entire class? Currently it's a Barbarian archetype that trades Rage Powers and Trap Sense for a spell-casting ability and bloodline powers.
I think this class really needs something to give it it's own identity. Otherwise, again, how is it anything more than an archetype?
"Worst-case scenario" question: How is this not just a huge upgrade over Barbarian? Bloodline Abilities are similar to Rage Powers, but spell-casting is SO MUCH BETTER than Trap Sense. Every other ability is shared with the Barbarian class.

•Brawler
I think it's very well done, if not that exciting. My only real concern is that it makes the core Monk class obsolete; If you want to be martial, go Brawler - If you want to be mystical, you'll need a Monk archetype to actually pull that off anyway, so there's no longer a niche for the Core Monk class other than as a stepping stone for archetypes.
That said, it's not like Monk was ever going to get enough errata to truly fix the class, so with that consideration I think the Brawler will fit in just fine.
Only concern is the Knockout ability - While I realize it's a strong ability, I worry that a cumulative -5 penalty is so severe that it will never land past the first use in a day.

•Hunter
Really trying to get those teamwork feats used, huh? ;)
I don't dislike the class, but nothing about it "wows" me. For example, this is one of those classes that really needs a unique spell list; some blending of the Druid and Ranger lists would be great, I think.
Animal Focus seems rather weak as well. It could use some love, maybe increasing the number of times per day it can be activated, or adding something to each animal type to make it more desirable.
I do also worry about it's offensive potential. It doesn't really get anything in the way of Martial abilities, so is it supposed to rely on the Pet and Spells for almost all of it's Offense? If so, another hint that it needs a unique spell list.

•Investigator
I'll start off by saying this style of class really isn't my cup of tea.
However, I feel even more bad for the poor Rogue class now - Another class that just utterly outdoes it. I think the best thing for people to do here is just accept that Ninja is the new martial Rogue, and Investigator is the new non-Martial Rogue, and just never bother with that poor abused Core class again. (Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing, I'll leave up to the individual opinion.)

•Shaman
I really like this class, and it's the first class that I'm fine with it borrowing from another caster's spell list. However, I think Cleric was the wrong choice - It really needs to be drawing from the Witch list, regardless that it's a divine caster and not arcane; that's just semantics at this point. I also don't think Shaman should be spell-restricted by alignment; this is a primal caster, and primal forces do not pick sides the way other divine powers might.

•Skald
I've always liked Viking-style warrior poets, but simply put, I see no reason to play this over a Bard.
It's offensive capability is actually worse. Your friends won't always enjoy the benefit you bring to the party until level 20, but most people don't play at that level. The spell-casting is identical, so no boon there. Bardic Music offers a host of potential abilities while Raging Song only offers one.
At the very minimum, I think Dirge of Doom and Raging Song should stack.
Admittedly, Spell Kenning is great, and being able to hand out Rage Powers is neat, but I really think the class still needs some work if it's ever going to compare.

•Slayer
I'll echo some others that this should probably be "Any non-good" required, but I won't get too much into that.
And did I say earlier that Ninja was the new Martial Rogue? Well, no, apparently it's Slayer! Yet another stab to the Rogue class, but much like the Monk, errata won't be fixing the Rogue anyway. That said, I don't really see anything about it I don't like - A playable Assassin, finally! I'm surprised that Skill points aren't 6+Int though.
There is some formatting issues with the Sneak Attack description, but that's easily cleaned up.

•Swashbuckler
Can I just start by saying I've grown incredibly tired of years and years of being told I cannot buckle any swash with one-handed slashing weapons? Why do you hate Longswords?? For reals!
Ahem, anyway...
So I really like the class, but there's some things I want to pick at:
Opportune Parry - Should really be activated after an opponent's attack roll, not before. It's not exactly cheap to activate, and if you activate it and they miss, then what exactly were you attempting to parry in the first place? The whoosh of air from their not-hitting you?
Swift Feint - This should really replace an attack instead of requiring a Standard Action to activate. Make your attack - decide if you want to spend the Panache and miss or not - make the rest of your attacks, or do whatever else you would in that turn.
Deeds in general also seem unclear. Do you have to select them at the appropriate levels? If so, why are they worded as if you just get them as an option once you hit a certain level? And why are they so randomly scattered through the leveling process?
The Bonus Feat ability is also unclear. Is it, "Starting at 4th and every even level after," or is it "every 4 levels after?" The Ability reads like a bad copy/paste from Fighter while table 1-12 reads as it's one feat every 4 levels.

•Warpriest
Arguably a much-needed class, since Paladin is so limited in it's scope because of it's LG requirement and it's Code (it's also arguable that Cleric's were already good enough at combat based on spell selection, and I tend to agree - Errata base Clerics to be less martially proficient already!)
Also, I know I'm getting to be a broken record here, but seriously! Unique spell lists! Late-casting spells that are power-balanced for earlier levels is super-annoying!
Otherwise... Seems fine. Much like Hunter, it's not incredibly exciting. You take a Cleric, give him free Armor and Weapon bonuses, strip his highest level spells and the majority of his Domain powers, and toss in some bonus feats for good measure. It works, but it's kinda "meh."
If Clerics alone couldn't already make for very good combatants, then I think this class would be more exciting. As is? I just don't see the point.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Advanced Class Guide Playtest / General Discussion / Initial thoughts after reading All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion