If there was one class you'd wish Paizo to drop from PFS legality, which one would it be and why?


Pathfinder Society

251 to 300 of 453 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge 4/5

Zach Williams wrote:

I am not really sure why rogues are seen as so terrible. While they require much more forethought and finesse than fighters I have had my frontline, weapon finesse, improved feint rogue destroy enemies while maintaining an ac of around 31 at level 7 in skull and shackles using almost no homebrew rules, with a DPR of around 23 with only a +1 Rapier.

I personally despise Summoners for several reasons:

1. They almost never keep track of summoning notes, as such they often bog the game down.

2. Eidolons are horribly powerful in the hands of a minorly competent summoner. If you know how to build your Eidolon, its incredibly obnoxious, and deffinitly more powerful than most animal companions.

3. Access to feats to add more power to their eidolon while their eidolon ALSO gains access to feats.

4. They get good spells early. Haste is a Level 2 spell for them, DDoor level 3.

5. Standard Action Summons. Summon Wooly Rhinocerous and have it charge from opposite direction of your eidolon. Eidolon Charges. +4 from charge+flank.

Cant do #5. You'r average summoner CANNOT use his summon monster power and Eidolon at the same time. The Eidolon goes away if they do. If they are using Summon Edidolon the spell to do it, then it is possible but you're eating up spells to do it.

5/5 *****

Zach Williams wrote:
I am not really sure why rogues are seen as so terrible. While they require much more forethought and finesse than fighters I have had my frontline, weapon finesse, improved feint rogue destroy enemies while maintaining an ac of around 31 at level 7 in skull and shackles using almost no homebrew rules, with a DPR of around 23 with only a +1 Rapier.

The problems with rogues are pretty well known by now. They are a primarily melee class with only 3/4 BaB, no inbuilt method of increasing accuracy, weak defences, poor saves and lowish HP. Much of their offensive power is also rather situational.

23 damage per round at level 7 is also pretty terrible. That is less than a third of a single equal CR opponent and that is an encounter a group should be able to waltz through.

I would also be rather dubious about how they are achieving AC31 at level 7 without utterly screwing up their offence.

The Exchange

EY. Wot's wrong wit muskets?

Liberty's Edge

Full round action to reload.

4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

For GMs who have problems with Gunslingers:

A while back I put together a guide to dealing with Gunslingers. It's here for now (may disappear when/if the Google Drive version of the PFS GM Prep goes down).

---

tl;dr

When a Gunslinger sits down at your table, ask them for the normal misfire range for their weapon, as well as any modifiers from ammunition, special abilities or magical enhancements. Write this down.

Ask them for the range increment of their weapon, as well as any modifiers from special abilities or magical enhancements. Write this down.

Ask them how long it takes to reload their weapon normally, and what abilities or equipment they are using to reduce this time.

Ask them up front to give you the results of each attack roll as well as the die result and range of their weapon (e.g. "23 to hit. 15 on the die. I'm within 20 ft so it's a Touch Attack).

This gets all the information up front and helps ensure that the Gunslinger's player doesn't forget (or "forget") about the touch range limitations and misfire range.

---

I honestly believe that most (but not all) problems with Gunslingers can be solved by a more rigorous enforcement of their very specific rules.

Silver Crusade 2/5

"1. They almost never keep track of summoning notes, as such they often bog the game down.

2. Eidolons are horribly powerful in the hands of a minorly competent summoner. If you know how to build your Eidolon, its incredibly obnoxious, and deffinitly more powerful than most animal companions.

3. Access to feats to add more power to their eidolon while their eidolon ALSO gains access to feats."

This is also true for druids, animal domain clerics, mad dog barbarians, and sylvan sorcerers. Animal companions get large size for free, and have access to monster feats. I honestly don't see the difference between an eidolon that eats a scenario and an animal companion that eats a scenario. Except the fact that the druid can fill the table with summons on top of the animal companion. So the druid is actually guilty of #5 on top of numbers 1-3.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I just don't get it when people complain that eidolons are more powerful than animal companions. The eidolon is the main point of being a summoner, while every class that uses an animal companion gets them as a secondary feature. I would be increadibly disapointed in the summoner class if the eidolon was any weaker than it currently is.

Edit: Druids with their full spellcasting, animal companion, easy summons *on top of* having an animal companion, and shapeshifting are arguabily far more powerful than a summoner. Druids just require more system mastery.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

There aren't any classes I'd ban, but there are a few things I'd like examined.
Look at the following as an example.

The rogue (CRB) can take rogue talents at level 2 and every two levels thereafter. These two talents exist, minor magic and major magic. The first allows you to take a single 0-level spell as an SLA three times per day. The second allows you to take a single 1st level spell as an SLA two times per day. Let us assume that the rogue selects vanish as this spell.

Let's move forward and now look at the ninja (UC). The ninja has access to a new ninja trick starting at level 2 and every two levels thereafter. There is a trick called vanishing trick that allows the ninja to cast vanish as a swift action a number of times per day equal to 1/2 her level + CHA. This is 1/day minimum and scales as the ninja levels up. I'd say that this is better in every regard than the rogue's options listed above to try and accomplish the same thing.

Lastly, let's examine the bloodrager (ACG) for a moment. The bloodrager selects a bloodline, and that bloodline defines some of the abilities the class grants as they increase in level. The arcane bloodline enables a bloodrager to cast a 2nd level spell when they enter rage at level 4, and cast an additional 3rd level spell when they rage at level 8. In addition, all bloodragers get Greater Bloodrage, which allows them to cast another spell on themselves when they rage. That spell must be 2nd level or lower. A bloodrager can rage for an amount of rounds per day equal to 4 + Con modifier + (2*level) rounds per day. Now this class is only released as a playtest now, but let us assume that it remains relatively unchanged before release.

So between the three, we have.
Rogue (CRB) - twice per day as a standard action, cast a first level spell
Ninja (UC) - CHA + (0.5*level) per day as a swift action, cast a first level spell
Bloodrager (ACG) - CON + 4 + (2*level) per day as a non-action, cast two second level spells and a third level spell.

This is just the easiest version of power creep that I can come up with. All three are your fairly standard martial classes, and while the flavor and other abilities between the three are different, the mechanical breakdown of these similar abilities is not. The rogue is just terrible at casting of any kind, the ninja is substantially better, and the bloodrager is (IMO) amazingly powerful. I'll admit my hasty analysis of this disregards the other mechanics of the classes, but this is an obvious comparison that shows the kind of power creep I'm talking about. The promise of "better" character options shouldn't be what is driving new book sales.

As it stands though, it seems pretty cut and dry to me that an increase of power creep is happening with each new book that's being released, which is why I think a lot of people to find issue with newer classes. I think that the developers should re-examine each new thing they're considering publishing, and ask "is this needed, does it invalidate something else we already printed?" As it stands, we don't have to look far to see instances where class X or ability X invalidates class or ability Y. And I think that if we took some datapoints, we would see a trend where the vast majority of things being invalidated are older than the things invalidating them.

Silver Crusade 2/5

Matrix Dragon wrote:
I just don't get it when people complain that eidolons are more powerful than animal companions. The eidolon is the main point of being a summoner, while every class that uses an animal companion gets them as a secondary feature. I would be increadily disapointed in the summoner class if the eidolon was any weaker than it currently is.

This. This ^ 10. I personally don't think the gap is large enough, but mainly because I think animal companions are far too strong. Who needs my level 7 fighter? We've got a cat!

5/5 5/55/55/5

redward wrote:


I honestly believe that most (but not all) problems with Gunslingers can be solved by a more rigorous enforcement of their very specific rules.

You'd only get the incompetent ones that way. Most of them have minimized these drawbacks.

Silver Crusade 2/5

Walter Sheppard wrote:

There aren't any classes I'd ban, but there are a few things I'd like examined.

Look at the following as an example.

The rogue (CRB) can take rogue talents at level 2 and every two levels thereafter. These two talents exist, minor magic and major magic. The first allows you to take a single 0-level spell as an SLA three times per day. The second allows you to take a single 1st level spell as an SLA two times per day. Let us assume that the rogue selects vanish as this spell.

Let's move forward and now look at the ninja (UC). The ninja has access to a new ninja trick starting at level 2 and every two levels thereafter. There is a trick called vanishing trick that allows the ninja to cast vanish as a swift action a number of times per day equal to 1/2 her level + CHA. This is 1/day minimum and scales as the ninja levels up. I'd say that this is better in every regard than the rogue's options listed above to try and accomplish the same thing.

Lastly, let's examine the bloodrager (ACG) for a moment. The bloodrager selects a bloodline, and that bloodline defines some of the abilities the class grants as they increase in level. The arcane bloodline enables a bloodrager to cast a 2nd level spell when they enter rage at level 4, and cast an additional 3rd level spell when they rage at level 8. In addition, all bloodragers get Greater Bloodrage, which allows them to cast another spell on themselves when they rage. That spell must be 2nd level or lower. A bloodrager can rage for an amount of rounds per day equal to 4 + Con modifier + (2*level) rounds per day. Now this class is only released as a playtest now, but let us assume that it remains relatively unchanged before release.

So between the three, we have.
Rogue (CRB) - twice per day as a standard action, cast a first level spell
Ninja (UC) - CHA + (0.5*level) per day as a swift action, cast a first level spell
Bloodrager (ACG) - CON + 4 + (2*level) per day as a non-action, cast two second level spells and a third...

Power creep in hard to stop, but notice that SOME core classes are not being invalidated. The ones that were designed well to begin with. Rogue and all its derivatives are tainted with a virus called teh suck.

Grand Lodge 4/5

BigNorseWolf wrote:
redward wrote:


I honestly believe that most (but not all) problems with Gunslingers can be solved by a more rigorous enforcement of their very specific rules.
You'd only get the incompetent ones that way. Most of them have minimized these drawbacks.

You'd be surprised how many rely on GM apathy/ ignorance

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

Power creep is hard to stop but not impossible, and just requires a bit of work. The alternative is a slipping back into the 3.X trap, where there are countless sourcebooks that build power creep, leading to known broken and otherwise disgustingly overpowered combinations, which causes the system to reboot, leading to a disillusioned player base.

I hate slippery slope arguments with a passion, but we've all seen what power creep has done to a gaming system in the past. It's difficult to not make the comparison.

Extra Credits has a fairly good handle on some things you can try when it comes to video games. I think that, as a mechanical gaming system, Pathfinder could be examined the same way as a video game. Given this, some of the solutions offered in that video would be viable.

Silver Crusade 2/5

I think plenty of base classes still have plenty of punch: cleric, wizard, druid, paladin, bard, etc.

Again, rogue has been invalidated since archaeologist bard came out. No one cared then, why should we now?

Fighter is largely invalidated in PFS because of the ubiquity of evil NPCs that become paladin smite fodder. And because of easily-accessed pets whose stats are too high.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

If other people don't want to care, that's their business.

I mentioned something I'm noticing that irritates me in this thread which exists for the sole purpose of mentioning things that irritate you.

Feel free to dissect as needed, but don't expect me to discuss much more than I already have.

Again, this is a vent thread.

Scarab Sages

Walter Sheppard wrote:


The rogue (CRB) can take rogue talents at level 2 and every two levels thereafter. These two talents exist, minor magic and major magic. The first allows you to take a single 0-level spell as an SLA three times per day. The second allows you to take a single 1st level spell as an SLA two times per day. Let us assume that the rogue selects vanish as this spell.

You have a point, but the rogue would be much better off taking Chill Touch than vanish. Vanish will allow a single sneak attack. Chill touch will allow several rounds of touch attack sneak attacks per casting.

I'm not saying that the rogue doesn't need help, it does. But trying to match the vanish trick as a rogue with major magic is a waste of resources.

Silver Crusade 2/5

Well, it DOES irritate me that the rogue got dumped on so badly. At least this isn't a competitive game like Warhammer or something. If people enjoy playing rogues, flawed as they are, then rogues are still doing that right.

I guess the ultimate litmus test will be the advanced class guide. But I don't really think that the classes they have rolled out since the CRB, as a group, are more powerful than the core classes.

The general options provided by splat books are where I think most of the creep comes from. For example, the CRB has no solutions to incorporeal as efficient as ghost salts.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Walter Sheppard wrote:
(stuff about power creep)

You compare the Rogue's Minor/Major Magic talents, the ninja's Vanishing Trick, and the bloodrager's whatever (didn't follow the playtest on that one, sorry). Okay, well let's also compare these magical abilities to the fighter's lack of anything magical and the sorcerer's ability to cast a bajillion spells of all levels. Does the sorcerer "invalidate" even the bloodrager's and ninja's spellcasting ability? Does the rogue's magic "invalidate" the fighter's (lack of) magic?

How can you even make the comparison of one ability to another without taking into account the class that it's bolted onto? It's not like these are class-agnostic abilities, like if there were one feat that said "gain a 1st-level SLA 2/day", then a new feat with the same prereqs that said "gain a 1st-level SLA 5/day as a swift action". That would be power creep: for the same cost, you get more. But the abilities you compared are attached irrevocably to the classes that get them; any comparison that doesn't take this into account is simply not legitimate.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

andreww wrote:
The problems with rogues are pretty well known by now. They are a primarily melee class with only 3/4 BaB,

I would say that you summed up the actual problem with Rogues that plagues the forums perfectly, in that people continue to mistake the Rogue for a primary melee class. Rogues are not Fighters with a crapload more skills. Rogues are just fine, and still a pretty commonly seen and fun class.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

"Devil's Advocate" wrote:
andreww wrote:
The problems with rogues are pretty well known by now. They are a primarily melee class with only 3/4 BaB,
I would say that you summed up the actual problem with Rogues that plagues the forums perfectly, in that people continue to mistake the Rogue for a primary melee class.

If that's what you think the forums' main issue with rogues is, you haven't been paying attention. But that's a topic for a different thread, I suppose.

Silver Crusade 2/5

"Devil's Advocate" wrote:
andreww wrote:
The problems with rogues are pretty well known by now. They are a primarily melee class with only 3/4 BaB,
I would say that you summed up the actual problem with Rogues that plagues the forums perfectly, in that people continue to mistake the Rogue for a primary melee class. Rogues are not Fighters with a crapload more skills. Rogues are just fine, and still a pretty commonly seen and fun class.

Rogues have poor fort and will saves. That's one foot in the coffin at mid level right there. I don't think it's accurate at all to call rogues "just fine" from a balance perspective.

And yes, let's not derail.

4/5

Jiggy wrote:
Walter Sheppard wrote:
(stuff about power creep)

You compare the Rogue's Minor/Major Magic talents, the ninja's Vanishing Trick, and the bloodrager's whatever (didn't follow the playtest on that one, sorry). Okay, well let's also compare these magical abilities to the fighter's lack of anything magical and the sorcerer's ability to cast a bajillion spells of all levels. Does the sorcerer "invalidate" even the bloodrager's and ninja's spellcasting ability? Does the rogue's magic "invalidate" the fighter's (lack of) magic?

How can you even make the comparison of one ability to another without taking into account the class that it's bolted onto? It's not like these are class-agnostic abilities, like if there were one feat that said "gain a 1st-level SLA 2/day", then a new feat with the same prereqs that said "gain a 1st-level SLA 5/day as a swift action". That would be power creep: for the same cost, you get more. But the abilities you compared are attached irrevocably to the classes that get them; any comparison that doesn't take this into account is simply not legitimate.

Jiggy, Walter is directly comparing the ability of a martial base/core class to cast spells, and it is obvious who comes out on top here.

I played a tengu rogue for one session and opted out before I locked into that character. I was planning to take the exact rogue talents that Walter had outlined. I even thought about rebuilding him into a ninja, but vanish only guarantees a sneak attack on the first hit. Theoretically, when the rogue I built got sneak attack, he could be a viable melee combatant, but combining a fragile character with highly situational abilities made this PC unfun for me to play. I looked a valid ways to ensure sneak attack, and most of them involved being much higher level (9+ it stopped being an issue, assuming shattered defenses worked.)

As far as power creep goes, to be honest EVERY class is invalidated by the existence of summoners. They can build a melee monster, they have control and buffing spells, and their skill pool is fairly high including the eidolon. About the only shtick they don't do well is ranged combat, and with snowball they can be reasonable at that.


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Kyrie Ebonblade wrote:
Zach Williams wrote:

5. Standard Action Summons. Summon Wooly Rhinocerous and have it charge from opposite direction of your eidolon. Eidolon Charges. +4 from charge+flank.

Cant do #5. You'r average summoner CANNOT use his summon monster power and Eidolon at the same time. The Eidolon goes away if they do.

It is actually even worse than that. You can't use your Summon Monster ability while your eidolon is present, so if you really want to use it while your eidolon is out, you spend one turn dismissing your eidolon and (usually) have to wait until your next turn to summon the monster. Very few foes are nice enough to inflict enough damage to banish your eidolon so you can save the action of dismissing it.

Silver Crusade 2/5

" to be honest EVERY class is invalidated by the existence of summoners. "

I've seen animal companions that your typical eidolon would struggle to even hit. Who's the real melee monster? Protip: the one that gets barding to stack on top of their huge natural AC bonus.

Another problem with summoners: who wears the cloak of resistance? The other one is going to get hosed by save or suck spells quite often. Sharing the item slots is a much bigger deal than I realized before playing one.

I'll take a Sylvan sorcerer over a summoner any day of the week.


Jiggy wrote:
I cast disintegrate pet! It functions like disintegrate except it can only target animals, vermin, or outsiders. And it's 1st-level.

Are you aware that you're in the Society section of the boards?


Yknow I can totally understand people's desire to remove gunslingers for mechanical reasons in PFS, but having them removed because "I don't like guns in my fantasy" is ridiculous. I'm not saying someone in this thread has said that but I have definitely heard stories of GMs demanding to a player that he switch from gunslinger "because I said so" with no good reason, or players who loudly proclaim how people who play gunslingers "completely destroy my suspension of disbelief".

That being said, I would completely understand if they did a blanket ban on everything in the upcoming Technology Guide. While I love sci-fi in my fantasy, I know damn well not everyone else does for good reason.

As to the OP's question: nothing.

Silver Crusade 2/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

" "completely destroy my suspension of disbelief""

Mine was destroyed when the medium-sized humans are fighting huge-sized fire giants and winning. But it's still hella-fun. Gunslingers don't bother me at all.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

DrDeth wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
I cast disintegrate pet! It functions like disintegrate except it can only target animals, vermin, or outsiders. And it's 1st-level.

Are you aware that you're in the Society section of the boards?

That line was a joke. I wasn't actually suggesting bringing in homebrew spells. I thought that was clear, but I guess not. Sorry for the confusion.

Silver Crusade 2/5

Jiggy wrote:
DrDeth wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
I cast disintegrate pet! It functions like disintegrate except it can only target animals, vermin, or outsiders. And it's 1st-level.

Are you aware that you're in the Society section of the boards?

That line was a joke. I wasn't actually suggesting bringing in homebrew spells. I thought that was clear, but I guess not. Sorry for the confusion.

I thought it was funny. But I don't NEED such a spell in homebrew. The GM retains their godly powers in homebrew. I just empirically determine the party's TRUE APL which could be anything from APL-2 ish to APL+5 ish.

5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't like any class that averages more than one standard deviation away from the normal length of time to take a turn. If I have to do a lot of extra work to guarantee equal involvement of every player at the table, I'm not happy and I probably hate you.

Counter argument: "well I can do X to speed up class or option Y"

Counter to the counter: "great, I'm talking about averages. The average player using an average build of a given class using average tactics. If the class itself takes twice as long to run in combat, then it needs to be refined or removed. I'm looking at you pet classes and classes that routinely require 10 d20 rolls plus math each turn."

Silver Crusade 2/5

My summoner solves this by having an eidolon with one attack and cowering on his actual turn. But he's not winning any dpr awards. Come to think of it, none of my PCs are.

1/5

Walter Sheppard wrote:
As it stands though, it seems pretty cut and dry to me that an increase of power creep is happening with each new book that's being released

This is by design, even if the designers won't admit it. It's a technique that TSR, WotC, Paizo, and probably every other RPG publisher uses. The fact is, and it is a fact, a publisher is going to sell more books if people perceive that these new books make their characters stronger, or have "better" options. Splat books sell more because they offer something better. There is going to be a direct correlation to the number of subjectively "better" items offered and the sales of the book.

Sure, we can try and argue that variety is something people will pay for, but it pails in comparison to new spells/feats/traits, etc. that are subjectively better. A perfect example of Inner Sea Gods/Faiths and the trait Defensive Strategist:

Inners Sea Gods & Faiths of Purity wrote:
Your study of dwarven history has trained you in defensive strategy. You aren’t flat-footed during a surprise round that you don’t get to act in or before you get to act at the start of a battle.

To my knowledge, there isn't even a feat that allows one to avoid being flat-footed in the surprise round i.e. Uncanny Dodge is not for sale...until now. Just buy the new book(s).

"Power creep" is a fundamental tool of game designers/publishers to generate sales of new books. It taps into the same fundamental psychology that drives the computer sales, auto sales, and any industry were something can be perceived to be better than last year's model. The only difference is that RPG designers have to be more subtle/careful because of the backward compatibility issues are unique.

EDIT: Yes, I know ISG toned down Defensive Strategist, it's still the closest thing to Uncanny Dodge in the game, AFAIK.

Silver Crusade 4/5

Kyle Baird wrote:

I don't like any class that averages more than one standard deviation away from the normal length of time to take a turn. If I have to do a lot of extra work to guarantee equal involvement of every player at the table, I'm not happy and I probably hate you.

Counter argument: "well I can do X to speed up class or option Y"

Counter to the counter: "great, I'm talking about averages. The average player using an average build of a given class using average tactics. If the class itself takes twice as long to run in combat, then it needs to be refined or removed. I'm looking at you pet classes and classes that routinely require 10 d20 rolls plus math each turn."

Yeah, I know. Fighters with all those iterative attacks just take way too long. :P

5/5

Fromper wrote:
Yeah, I know. Fighters with all those iterative attacks just take way too long. :P

Over all the most common fighter build types, does it take longer to run a fighter at a given level than the average of all the other classes out there?

Silver Crusade 4/5

Kyle Baird wrote:
Fromper wrote:
Yeah, I know. Fighters with all those iterative attacks just take way too long. :P
Over all the most common fighter build types, does it take longer to run a fighter at a given level than the average of all the other classes out there?

You must have missed the smiley at the end of my post, which was included as an aid for the sarcasm impaired.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

Jiggy wrote:
Walter Sheppard wrote:
(stuff about power creep)
You compare the Rogue's Minor/Major Magic talents, the ninja's Vanishing Trick, and the bloodrager's whatever (didn't follow the playtest on that one, sorry).

David Bross said basically what I would have regarding everything else you said.

I just wanted to mention that you should definitely check out the bloodrager and see how they size up to barbarians. Here's what I was speaking of specifically.

Quote:

At 4th level, when you enter a bloodrage, you can choose one of the following spells and apply its effects on you: blur, protection from arrows, resist energy, or spider climb. The effects of the spell last for as long as the bloodrage lasts, regardless of it's normal duration.

...
At 8th level, when you enter a bloodrage, you can choose to apply the effects of either displacement or haste to yourself. This is in addition to arcane bloodrage, and otherwise works as that ability.
...
At 11th level, when a bloodrager enters a bloodrage, the morale bonus to his Strength and Constitution increases to +6 and the morale bonus on his Will saves increase to +3. In addition, when he enters a bloodrage, the bloodrager can apply on himself the effects of a bloodrager spell he knows of 2nd level or lower. The spell must have a range of touch or personal. if the spells duration is greater than 1 round, it instead lasts for the duration of the bloodrage.

Definitely balanced for a straight BAB martial class that gets barbarian rage and minor spellcasting ability.

Another cute one is the Abyssal bloodline, that can enlarge person for free when raging at level 4. Even if they aren't legal targets (like Tiefling or Aasimar). Talk about an enlarged middle finger at all those level 14 titan maulers.


Remove Gunslingers.

Or fix them by not allowing them to hit touch AC.

Silver Crusade 2/5

I think they should have made the rage less effective then.

2/5

I would remove SLA's and other things that allow you to access the prestige classes earlier than intended. Perhaps make it a rule that you cannot access prestige classes until level 5

Silver Crusade 2/5

Slacker2010 wrote:

Remove Gunslingers.

Or fix them by not allowing them to hit touch AC.

Guns should be adept at penetrating armor. Besides, if we get rid of gunslingers or their touch AC shenanigans, what will I template my NPCs with in home games with lots of pets?

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

David Bowles wrote:
I think they should have made the rage less effective then.

Unless the physical book ends up being substansially different than the playtest, they did not.

  • +4 STR, +4 CON, +2 Will, -2 AC
  • Rounds per day equal to 4 + CON, 2 additional rounds per level.
  • Counts as the barbarian's rage class ability for the purpose of qualifying for feat prerequisites, feat abilities, magic item abilities, and spell effects.

  • Silver Crusade 2/5

    They should have halved the bonuses in order to make it a synthesis between magic power and rage power.

    Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

    Well, they should have done something. I'm seeing less and less reason to play a barbarian now that there are bloodragers.

    Once again, something new is invalidating something old.

    =/

    Sovereign Court

    Fromper wrote:
    Kyle Baird wrote:

    I don't like any class that averages more than one standard deviation away from the normal length of time to take a turn. If I have to do a lot of extra work to guarantee equal involvement of every player at the table, I'm not happy and I probably hate you.

    Counter argument: "well I can do X to speed up class or option Y"

    Counter to the counter: "great, I'm talking about averages. The average player using an average build of a given class using average tactics. If the class itself takes twice as long to run in combat, then it needs to be refined or removed. I'm looking at you pet classes and classes that routinely require 10 d20 rolls plus math each turn."

    Yeah, I know. Fighters with all those iterative attacks just take way too long. :P

    I bet I could build a spiked chain tripper that takes more than his share of time each round. Not on his turn - but with the plethora of AOOs each round. (not as much as in 3.5 with it's opposed rolls for tripping - but still alot)

    Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

    Walter Sheppard wrote:

    Well, they should have done something. I'm seeing less and less reason to play a barbarian now that there are bloodragers.

    Once again, something new is invalidating something old.

    =/

    Well, there was lots of gnashing of teeth when a preview blog focused on nerfs, so we probably don't know what scale-backs might have taken place as the bloodrager's preview won't have focused on them.

    As an aside, have you noticed any trends on which types of abilities/classes tend to get eclipsed/invalidated/outpaced most often?

    Scarab Sages

    Walter Sheppard wrote:

    Well, they should have done something. I'm seeing less and less reason to play a barbarian now that there are bloodragers.

    Once again, something new is invalidating something old.

    =/

    Movement Speed & better Hit points to start. Not to mention not having access to the final class to see what other nerfs were there.

    5/5 *****

    ErockB wrote:
    I would remove SLA's and other things that allow you to access the prestige classes earlier than intended. Perhaps make it a rule that you cannot access prestige classes until level 5

    Why?

    As things stand early entry into things like the Mystic Theurge or Edritch Knight pretty much just about brings them up to the level of maybe perhaps taking.

    I can see an argument that leaving such options limited to only a small number of narrow races/domains is not a good idea but as is if we go back to MT having to have Arcane3/Divine3 then frankly it may as well not exist.

    5/5 *****

    Walter Sheppard wrote:

    Well, they should have done something. I'm seeing less and less reason to play a barbarian now that there are bloodragers.

    Once again, something new is invalidating something old.

    =/

    Can the bloodrager take rage powers? As things stand they don't get any at level up. Could they take the extra rage power feat? Bloodrage counts as rage for feat pre-reqs so possibly.

    As things stand the barbarian almost certainly does the pouncing near magic immune agent of death and destruction better than the bloodrager. If the BR can take rage powers and has the feats to spare they might be able to come close but I doubt it.

    Silver Crusade 2/5

    "How long do you think it'll take for this to turn into a paladin hate thread? If we can't go at least 25 posts (real ones, not posts just to get the post count up because I said that) without an anti-paladin rant, then I'll make a new aasimar paladin, just to cheese those people off. :P"

    Just to point it out: it's a summoner/gunslinger hate thread. Myth busted :)

    Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

    Jiggy wrote:
    Walter Sheppard wrote:

    Well, they should have done something. I'm seeing less and less reason to play a barbarian now that there are bloodragers.

    Once again, something new is invalidating something old.

    =/

    Well, there was lots of gnashing of teeth when a preview blog focused on nerfs, so we probably don't know what scale-backs might have taken place as the bloodrager's preview won't have focused on them.

    As an aside, have you noticed any trends on which types of abilities/classes tend to get eclipsed/invalidated/outpaced most often?

    I think that straight spellcasters are the ones that are often the most unaffected with new splatbooks. Not because there isn't anything in there that applies to them, but because a majority of those improvements come in the forms of new spells. And spellcasters can always pick new spells, or choose them when they level up. Other classes are hampered by only being able to select new feats, or respec into different classes or archetypes.

    Emergency force sphere is a perfect example of this. I have yet to meet a level 7+ wizard that knows of that spell's existence and refuses to select it. It's just too good.

    So I'd say that non-spellcasters experience the "eclipsing" factor the most. With the ninja > rogue from earlier being a perfect example. And now, I'd argue, with the bloodrager > barbarian. Sure, they have 2 less HP at level 1 and don't (currently) have access to rage powers, but the bloodline abilities are just better than existing rage powers. The only rage power that's comparable is the beast totem tree that gives you pounce at level 10. That aside, having a free resist energy, blur, and haste every time you rage is a fairly good deal.

    251 to 300 of 453 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / If there was one class you'd wish Paizo to drop from PFS legality, which one would it be and why? All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.