best class for a general


Advice


What would be the best class for an army leader? He will have advisors but still need to know something about everything...

-offense
-defense
-magic
-engineering
-support functions
-much more

I think generals should lean towards LN where possible...


I would say a lore warden/student of war, use the extra intelligence points to pick up the knowledge skills.


Bard/Aristocrat/Expert

"A general who uses his own sword in battle has already lost."


Noble. He's going to be an NPC, and needs the money to pay his troops.

what?

Okay, when magic's in the mix it's always magic. Because magic as a force is like technology, superior tech wins wars, forges empires, and slaughters millions. A small army with magical tanks beats a large army with cavalry. A small army with air power beats a large army stuck on the ground. A small army with longer range artillery beats a large army with nothing but catapults. A small army with reliable fortifications and clean water beats a large army with dysentery and besieging.

But magic's tricky, a lotta folk hate it for a lotta reasons (both the fictional soldiers and members of this very community), and the plays are just as good whether the magic user is a minion or calling the shots.

And that's the thing, As Marcryser said the general is going to be giving commands, not doing the job. And know what commands need to be given and getting people to follow those potentially-lethal commands is charisma, so you find yourself with bard or rogue or expert, with the ranks and the charisma to do that job.

But RP is a funny thing. Sure the RAW says that a bard makes a DC50 Diplomancy check and turns the army from indifferent to fanatically and suicidally devoted, but if the DM doesn't GIVE you that check "unless the soldiers trust you as one of them," you're SOL without a fighter, barbarian, or at least a Paladin to do the talking.


Bard.


Dragonflyer1243 wrote:
I would say a lore warden/student of war, use the extra intelligence points to pick up the knowledge skills.

But can a lore warden rise enough through the ranks without magic?

marcryser wrote:

Bard/Aristocrat/Expert

"A general who uses his own sword in battle has already lost."

But a general needs to know the way of the sword to become general...

boring7 wrote:
Noble. He's going to be an NPC, and needs the money to pay his troops.

True, however Aristocrat is a NPC class that doesn't give much in the way of battles

Various wrote:
Bard perhaps multiclass

Bard looks like a winner, but...

Another class that can du magic, combat and use some int, is magus... could a magus become a general? The same thing can be said about the inquisitor, or even a cleric/oracle...

I guess that I'm trying to say that any 3/4 BAB class with magic is in the run...

Student of war prestige class was mentioned, and I think this could work very well... especially ontop a int based caster... any1 with skills enough to put one together??


Bacon666 wrote:
But a general needs to know the way of the sword to become general...

Only in an academic sense. A general needs not be able to perform well with a sword in order to know how to deploy swordsmen in battle--rather, she must know what swordsmen (particularly her swordsmen) are capable of.

Aristocrats and/or experts can make stellar generals. Commoners can as well, though it's much more difficult with less breadth of knowledge. A fighter has very little advantage over a commoner in this respect.

Bards are natural choices due to the ease with which they gain historical and tactical knowledge. They also have mechanical ways to inspire their troops--though such a role might be better suited to a standard bearer than a general.


SO a general doesn't need to be good at combat to be the general. Depending on your countries rule. A noble could be assigned as the general just because he's the noble. Thus the troops wouldn't like him much if he didn't do well.

Or a general is a well proven soldier. But what causes you to rise in the ranks? The lore warden could have hit crucial supply lines, or something like that. Showing he knows how to win wars.

Now to point out, people good at doing something doesn't make them good at leading. A super special barbarian could kill everything and never die, but his tactics might not be the best idea for an entire army.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Of the PC classes, I would say cavalier would probably be the most typical for a nobility-oriented fantasy general. They have tactical and leadership powers, and typically decent face skills like Diplomacy and Sense Motive, which are useful for leader types. Generals tend to be drawn from the upper classes, which in fantasy warfare means they'll usually be knights, rather than foot soldiers (which would tend toward the warrior or fighter classes, depending on how professional/skilled they are). Knights are probably going to be best represented by the cavalier class.

Bard, as stated above, is an excellent choice for power, and they can cover a lot of the same inspiration and teamwork ground. I've played a fighter/bard with Perform (Oratory) that was a tactical leader-type, and he was really good at it. Bards are nice because their powers aren't limited in how many people are affected - if you can find a way to inspire a whole battlefield, they'll all get your bonuses, which can be impressive.

Evangelist cleric is a different, but probably pretty effective, way to go as well. Not as many skills, so probably not as personable about it, but capable of powerful magic and healing to protect and lead troops. This would work well for a Joan of Arc type.


Do you mean mechanic-wise or theme-wise?
In both cases it depends on the army. Bards and cavaliers can make small groups into deadly units. Mighty spellcasters can enhance whole regiments and throw deadly spells. A ranger might be a good choice in his favorite terrain, especially in a guerilla army. A gunslinger might be the choice for a modern army.
If you take the mass combat rules from Ultimate Campaign the main factors are ranks in proffession soldier and charisma.

Bacon666 wrote:
I think generals should lean towards LN where possible...

While Lawfull People tend to be better organized, every intelligent/charismatic/welthy/highborn can lead an army. Aligment doesn´t influence your leadership, only your worldview.


Avatar - what happens when you put a soldier in charge of tactics.

For a good general magical ability/combat ability is secondary to knowledge. Knowing how magic works so you can counter-deploy your mages is much more important than casting dispel magic yourself. You are most likely too busy speaking to your spies trying to work out where the enemy general is, or making sure your lines of supply are intact, orr any one of a hundred other hings a general needs to keep his mind on.

High skill characters make the best generals. Unfortunately, history has shown that nepotism and wealth are surer ways to the top than ability :).


You will find no Orc-General incapable of fighting.
Succesfull real-world warleaders and generals like Robert the Bruce, Vercingetorix, Odoaker, Allerich, Dschingis Khan (in his early years), Theoderich, Leonidas had all their fair share of victories while fighting at the front line. Most samurai generals were also expected to be able to fight in a duel.


A bard is great officer but bard song does not cover enough area to influence a battle involving 10,000 troops.

I am going to go with sorc or wizard. Sorc will have better ability to lead the troops with cha skills but the wizard will have more knowledge and tactics.

Both can decimate an army on their own.

Lets call out an E6 world where large numbers of troops will make a difference. I 15t level party or 100,000 2nd level warriors is not a hard choice.

In that case I am going to call out the caviler for his banner or the lore warden.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

A multiclass bard cavalier with the Battle Herald Prestiege class.


Mathius wrote:
A bard is great officer but bard song does not cover enough area to influence a battle involving 10,000 troops.

It influences any ally who can hear it (or see it, for visual performances). Anybody got a megaphone or a Jumbotron?


I back up Lore Warden/Student of War. Really high STR and INT, no DEX, good WIS and CHA. Some CON.

You have really high skills on all Knowledge skills and if you are allowed to prepare in battle, you can have some really high modifiers against enemies... but will swiftly die if not prepared. Thanks to advisors granting bonus to Knowledge skills, this guy can probably take down anything.


Bacon666 wrote:
Dragonflyer1243 wrote:
I would say a lore warden/student of war, use the extra intelligence points to pick up the knowledge skills.

But can a lore warden rise enough through the ranks without magic?

Maybe, he just needs to know enough about to know how to best command mages and to combat enemy casters.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bacon666 wrote:


marcryser wrote:

Bard/Aristocrat/Expert

"A general who uses his own sword in battle has already lost."

But a general needs to know the way of the sword to become general...

Eisenhower never led troops directly in battle and never participated in combat.


The smaller the number of troops the general leads, the more important individual battle prowess, spells, and/or direct buffs or debuffs are going to be. For large number of troops the key is going to be co-ordinating the intelligence from the various advisers and field commanders where either skills or maybe divination spells become more important.

Sense motive, intimidate, bluff, and diplomacy (=gather information) are great from a squad leader on up to five star general. At least a rudimentary spellcraft as well in order to understand battle technology.

So Bard and Expert would work well at either end of the spectrum.


Why not a diviner specialized wizard? Per modern-day tactics knowledge is power and by skill and spell they have it in spades.


sylvansteel wrote:

You will find no Orc-General incapable of fighting.

Succesfull real-world warleaders and generals like Robert the Bruce, Vercingetorix, Odoaker, Allerich, Dschingis Khan (in his early years), Theoderich, Leonidas had all their fair share of victories while fighting at the front line. Most samurai generals were also expected to be able to fight in a duel.

Julius Ceasar, George Washington and Napoleon however were not particularly known as being duelists or their personal fighting skills. Obviously many other examples exist as well.

In a relatively disorganized society, only physically capable people are able to attract followers and get the chance to be a general. More organized societies have different means of selecting generals, such as wealth, accomplishment or patronage.


I think my answer really answers it. It Depends on the society you've created. Unless you tell us how generals are picked in your world it'll be hard to find the class that works best.


I don't see why a paladin wouldn't make a good general. I admit they wouldn't be the master of skills. But if build right they could do ok with skills.
With Cha they could inspire the troops. He would know battle tatics as well as know how to use magic. Plus they have the surviveabilaty to lead from the front lines if so desired. Not saying it would always happen that way but that they could do so and that it would be another boost to the troops.

The advisors they would be with him can help make up for and cover what ever skills he is low or missing. After all its hard to believe a general knows everything about everything. Thats just unbeliveable.
But i do like the idea of Magus as well for general.


Razal-Thule wrote:

...

But i do like the idea of Magus as well for general.

Magus is an excellent choice- probably better than my choices of Bard or Expert.


Dave Justus wrote:
sylvansteel wrote:

You will find no Orc-General incapable of fighting.

Succesfull real-world warleaders and generals like Robert the Bruce, Vercingetorix, Odoaker, Allerich, Dschingis Khan (in his early years), Theoderich, Leonidas had all their fair share of victories while fighting at the front line. Most samurai generals were also expected to be able to fight in a duel.

Julius Ceasar, George Washington and Napoleon however were not particularly known as being duelists or their personal fighting skills. Obviously many other examples exist as well.

In a relatively disorganized society, only physically capable people are able to attract followers and get the chance to be a general. More organized societies have different means of selecting generals, such as wealth, accomplishment or patronage.

Hell, George Washington wasn't particularly known for his marshaling skills either.


I'm surprised someone hasn't said Divine Commander warpriest (Archetype) yet, given the fact that it kind of states that it is suppose to lead an army, and I imagine one looking like an old fashion general on a mount fully capable of charging into the fray to bolster his/her troops. if someone mentioned this and I missed it I apologize.


George Washington was a badass who wrote to his brother that there was nothing quite as musical as the sound of bullets whizzing by your ear.

Silver Crusade

Bard, or Skald more then any other classes have every thing you need. Cha so people will follow you. Not just because you out rank them, but because they want to. Over all knowledge and not just knowledge skills. This includes the ability to speak dozen or more languages with linguistics. So you can communicate with local people with out needing a translator to convince them your way in the right way. This is in addition to identifying spell tactics with spell craft. Knowledge skills to know what way to best handle the problem in front of you.

Leadership is not being in charge. It's going to the front and saying follow me. I know how to win this fight. (and you mean it)


When i think bards i think of performers and storytellers, not generals. Now please don't get me wrong I'm not saying they cant be generals but they just seem way over qualified to be generals to me.

I don't know why people seem to think a general has to be a master of all trades. How many generals in history where ever close to a master of all trades?


Consider this Cavalier archetype as well.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

In the ACG there's a Slayer archetype called the Vanguard that gets a version of Tactician that's better than what the Cavalier gets, can date his Studied Target ability with others, adds 1/2 his class level to initiative checks, and always acts in the surprise round. Considering he's got reasons to pump INT and starts with 6+INT skills, he's pretty much perfect as a general.

Silver Crusade

Razal-Thule wrote:

When i think bards i think of performers and storytellers, not generals. Now please don't get me wrong I'm not saying they cant be generals but they just seem way over qualified to be generals to me.

I don't know why people seem to think a general has to be a master of all trades. How many generals in history where ever close to a master of all trades?

I only need one name. Black Jack Pershing

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_J._Pershing


The big bad guy in the last campaign I was in was a general and he was just a fighter. All you need to do to be a general is lead, and there's no class ability for brains and intuition. He can have any class ability he wants at his command just by enlisting people with those abilities. This specific guy was a two weapon fighter with a shield, a vicious flail and the mini pounce thing. It was a super tough, manly build.


To summarize some things posted above, what Class(es)/Prestige Class(es) are best for General depends upon both the type of army and the type of nation (or non-national militarized organization) the army serves.

Tribal/Barbarian nation/organization armies might require the General (if they even use that name at all) to be a top-notch martial combatant, even if that doesn't make strategic sense. Doesn't matter how good you are at tactics and strategy if you can't get the troops to follow you, and they won't follow anyone who can't do the slugfest part themselves, and they will also expect you to serve as your own single combat champion.

More modern nation/organization armies let the General focus less on personal combat and more on tactics and strategy, although expect a spectrum of intermediate stages in which the personal combat champion shtick is out, but the General is still expected to lead from the front.

Also as noted above, the size and type of army even within 1 type of nation matters a lot. Is it a small Special Forces type of army, or a massive spread out army? For the former, the personal buffing and battlefield control abilities of the General (although the leader would more likely be someone of lower rank) are actually important; for the latter, even the greatest Bard, Battle Herald, Cleric, or Arcanist isn't going to be able to affect more than a very small fraction of the battle by using personal buffing and battlefield control abilities, so Knowledge (and related) Skills and interpersonal relations skills become the premium abilities.


Well, if you think of an army as a pyramid, the person at the top just directs the underlings. Once you reach "General," you only have your limited command group you actually speak with, leaving the sargents, lieutenants, commanders, etc., to lead their troops. So an early General would work on gaining the trust of his command group first, to make sure you have a loyal heart of the army.

To understand all this, a couple of Skills pop out: Diplomacy, Perception, Sence Motive, and Profession: Soldure would probably be good for a "Vanilla" mid-evil general to have... add in Spellcraft and all the Knowledge skills if you want to have the breath of your experience to back things up, or any other skills for flavor purposes.

As for class suggestions? I would probably NOT reccomend Druid (too hippy for military), Rogue (unless you wanna play as General Nuisance), Summoner (why have a standing army when I can call one up?), or Barbarian (Hulk Smash!). Since "General" would be like the "Employed Position" and your Class would be your individual path towards being a good general, play the style of character you enjoy!

Special call-out to the Foresight school, because knowing is half the battle! Plus, if you "invent" some magical devices for military communications, your army's instant responses would become legendary... I would also reccomend reading Treatmonk's "So you want to play a God wizard.." because it brings up a LOT of good ideas for a back-line general, especially if you can pick up some Mythic stuff for massive battlefield control.

Just remember: Standard Issue Dragonslayer Kits!


Many great posts so far, so I'll try to recap

Aristocrat - can be because he can pay the troops salary. May be general to prove his leadership abilities.

Barbs - probably won't make good generals. While great warriors themself, they lack abilities in leadership. The barb might forget (or may even not understand) the need for logistic. The Barb can on the other hand be great as sergeant or even lieutenant on smaller forces. Tribes can have barbs as army leaders, but the army will probably not be big enough to grant general rank.

Bard - can make a great general due to knowing a lot about everything. Great charisma, but MAY have problems getting respect from warriors/fighters at the front line. The Bard general is probably appointed be a political organ

Cavalier - the knight who does well and gets promoted can become general if he show he show he have the right leadership abilities. If not he won't get past the rank of lt...(and will probably be known as the lt who keeps getting his troops killed, and gets away due to a faster horse...) The cavalier general will need advisors on anything magic.

Cleric - with the right deity/domain the cleric can make a great general too... Especially in a religious themed army. Few skillpoints need to be placed right, but he can easily be loved by the troops ("dont worry recruit, our general himself controls magic that cures any injury, so you can earn your wages the next day...")

Expert - as written above any class CAN be a general... However I see the expert as a quartermaster b4 general any day...

Fighter - more likely to become captain of the city guard than general. The lack of skill points and leadership class abilities hurt to bad.
Lore warden arc type changes this... Here we have the fighter who may not be the best in a duel, however he knows which of his units ate best used where... As cavalier he may need advisors on magic unless skill points are spent correctly.

Gunslinger - probably won't become a general. Those maniacs holds death traps in their bare hands instead of relying on good old fashion sword and sorcery... (sorry... Don't like guns in my view of fantacy...) Their understanding of guns, powder etc. Are just too expensive to use throughout an army. I see them more as captains of the experimental company...

Magus/inquisitor - are both strong generals in my book. They fight well, they know magic. The aren't the best at anything, and will need mire specialized advisors, but they know enough of everything to handle most situations on their own

Paladin - great general as long as he serves in the right army. He won't do well in one of asmodeus' devil armies, or even dn mist mercenary armies where getting payed is more important than the content of the job... But in an army that focus on protecting the good ppl of "insert nation" in the name of anything that is good he works well

Ranger - like the barbarian he make a great leader of a small group hunting his favored enemy, or working in his favored terrain knowing both martial and magic is likely to give him promotion in an army, but he needs to place his skill points very carefully to rise to the top. Knowing much pfs few groups of potential enemies might hurt his overall ability...

Sorc - great social abilities make it easy fir a sorc to be political appointed general, but their chaotic tendencies may make them not care about the details ourside their focus... May become generals to solve a specific problem, but probably won't stay a general for long...

Wizard - great general if he want to... However all that warfare takes time away from magic. Wizards who want to serve ad generals can do it as well as any but researching spells, experimenting with rituals etc. Needs to be on hold during wartime. A wizard is imo more likely to be an advisor for a martial general when needed than be a general himself

Rogue - can be int based, and will in that case have mire skill points than any... He know something about fighting, anatomy, traps, magic(knowledge skill no actual casting) politics etc. Build around the more classic sneak attacking thief, just no!

There are many more classes, but most can be matched with the above...

Agree? Disagree? On the above statements...


Want to have a great general, put ranks in Knowledge Military, Profession: Soldier, Tactician, Strategist.

Having some skill in Diplomacy, Bluff and Sense Motive would help.


I don't know why, but one of my favorite fictional generals is Gareth Bryne from the Wheel of Time.

Followed by William Adama of Battlestar Galatica, if you want to call him a general. (Admiral is the naval equivalent of General so I'm counting it.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bacon666 wrote:

What would be the best class for an army leader? He will have advisors but still need to know something about everything...

-offense
-defense
-magic
-engineering
-support functions
-much more

I think generals should lean towards LN where possible...

The Short answer is all of them and none of them it really depends on the kind of general you're looking for. If you're looking for a well rounded student of war you're probably looking at Wizard, Bard, Rogue, Alchemist, etc. people with lots of skill points who have a lot of Knowledge skills as class skills and/or can pump a lot into them at the expense of more adventury skills (like Survival).

This is someone who probably hasn't seen much actual combat, and they're going to delegate most of the practical day-to-day matters (feeding troops, getting clean water, etc.) to other people and focus their attention on the front. This is the kind of general who leads the war from miles behind the lines, always keeping ahead of the enemy, and is normally bested by an enemy acting outside studied convention.

If you want a general who rose through the ranks, earning their position by proving themselves in countless battles. The student of war knows war but this is a general who understands it. You're likely looking at a Fighter, Paladin, Cavalier, Magus, etc. someone who started on the front lines and worked their way back by virtue of survival. Fewer skills in general (knowledge skills in particular) and more focused towards whatever branch of the army they rose up through, probably big focuses would be Profession (Soldier or the like) and Sense Motive.

This is someone who relies heavily on advisers to cover the gaps in their own knowledge of warfare, they lead because they're able to apply the perspective of someone on the ground to the high-minded plans of Lords and Wizards who're like the student of war, technically rather than practically proficient. This is a big reason for Sense Motive, this general relies on other people so he needs to be able to discern who they can trust. This is the kind of general who is likely present at most major battles, reading the flow of battle to determine his enemies real goals so he can get out ahead of them. This general is likely to be bested by his own inability to be present on multiple fronts.

I could go on like this forever. Any class could make for a good general, depending on the style of general you're looking to make. Ultimately though all the classes are built to be more effective as the guys on the ground doing the things, rather than the people directing the guys doing the things.


If you're open to 3PP, you may want to check out the war master from Rogue Genius Games.


Snively wrote:
As for class suggestions? I would probably NOT reccomend Druid (too hippy for military), Rogue (unless you wanna play as General Nuisance), Summoner (why have a standing army when I can call one up?), or Barbarian (Hulk Smash!). Since "General" would be like the "Employed Position" and your Class would be your individual path towards being a good general, play the style of character you enjoy!

...have you seen the special rules for druid followers of Gorum (scroll to bottom)?

With that, you could wear metal armor and still retain wildshape. Their armor does not meld with them, and the source even says they use followers or slaves to put it on for them. Gorum doesn't allow no hippies. He only respects might,heavy metal, survival of the fittest, and becoming the alpha of the pack (army in this case).

Grab wild speech at level 7, and suddenly the army is now being lead by a talking tiger in armor. Or a giant eagle. Or whatever the druid feels like and happens to buy armor for. And imagine an entire druidic order that takes several roles in the army as cavalry, air force, and navy... and become any of these with just a couple minutes prep (because armor). That could be highly effective, and I could see them taking an iron grip over a nation.

And lets not even get into how a druid could act as a perfect assassin that can remove opposition by flying in as a small bird, turning back and and stabbing them with a dagger (with a wide variety of poisons that can finish the job if there are any mistakes), and then turn back into a bird without anyone knowing they were there. It is hard to be the one telling them 'no' after the first few assassinations.

Druids can be hardcore when they aren't stupid nonviolent hippies. They can dictate a battlefield just using their sheer size, and just a couple taking off their armors (..or just wearing dragon scale armor) could then use their spell lists (including spontaneous summoning spells- in fights done mainly with martial warriors, a T-rex or 5 could make a large difference, at least psychologically).

Oh, to also add- I think that for many martial characters, they should at least have some levels in cavalier (maybe the 4 necessary for horse master). This doesn't necessarily mean they have to start as such, but that they multiclass into it after attaining a position so they can more easily keep up with others in the army (who may often be full cavaliers). With 4 levels, they can have a loyal steed able to keep up with them, and they can challenge 2 times per day for an extra 4 damage per hit (which isn't exactly bad).


I think all a general really needs is:

-The ability to make GOOD split second judgement calls in the heat of battle (Wisdom and Profession(Soldier) help here, with Perception possibly)
-The ability to get people to listen and follow said judgement calls without fatal second-guessing (Charisma and either Diplomacy or Intimidation help here)
-A group of advisers he can trust. Most of the other skills needed can rest more heavily on this group. Having a Seer or Diviner in this group, especially at high levels, would be a big bonus.


What you want is a sorcerer Eldritch Knight, he is a KNIGHT! after all, he has defense, support, knowledge of magic, knowledge of martial weapons and he could grab leadership as a feat, along with high charisma.


If I recall correctly, according to the mass combat rules, your charisma is by far the most important factor when leading an army. Then level, then ranks in profession soldier.


Commoner. Definitely Commoner. I'm sure it could do the job just fine. The people could all relate to his plight. It'd be great!


I'd say that no matter what class you'd get. You'd want your general to have a good/high charisma and more then a decent intelligence.
Depending on the society (I am assuming medieval, chivalrous society), it will require a general to be good at the joust and tournaments. A certain amount of nobility is a pre-requisite (no noble => no officer), as no commoner would make it to higher ranks, no matter how talented.

It is smart for a general to have the profession (soldier) at max rank and earlyer mentioned: diplomacy, sense motive, perception and maybe bluff and intimidate. Knowledge of logistics (profession (cook)??) is the most important skill of any army-leader as armies travel on their stomach => no food equals no army and over 80% of any battle ever fought was won on the ability of the general to feed his troops (historical fact!).

The high intelligence will provide some extra skill slots and will provide the character with a reasonable excuse to come up with excellent battle plans.
Any good leader must be charismatic and there are plenty of examples of generals rallying their troops with a good speach (diplomacy?) to regain their morale.
Leadership is a very solid choice as any general would appreciate a group of loyal companions to his cause and well being.


Rogue/Magus

Dark Archive

I recently threw together a commander/general.

He's a human cleric/fighter with a heavy lean towards evangelist and tactician (though Lorewarden and other archetypes work depending on necessary flavor).

The cleric spells are all utility and battlefield specific, like clarion call and silent table. These work great as an evangelist. The proper fighter archetypes address the limited skill points and appropriately form the foundation of various knowledge bases and militaristic training. His feats are nothing showy but they are practical and have a place both in and out of combat. He takes feats such as Field Repair, Kirin Style, and Fortified Armor Training with spells like Know the Enemy, Reinforce Armaments, Abundant Ammunition and Detect Charm.

As a cleric, he has access to a domain or two. Typically the Knowledge and its Memory and Thought sub domains are a good choice. The animal domain and all of its sub domains have value and fit as well but as a commander the war and tactics sub domain are an easy fit, too.

His skill set leans heavily towards Knowledge in History, Geography, Religion and Arcana and with his above average intelligence and bonus skill for being human he also knows about nature and survival. He alternates his studies from time to time to learn to be more perceptive and to understand the motives of others.

His primary ability scores are Wisdom and Dexterity with modest Con and decent Intelligence and average charisma and strength. In combat his focus is primarily on defense and finding opportune moments to strike either with an appropriate mechanical ability like the Lorewarden or a cleric domain might offer or via an appropriate teamwork feat shared with allies as a strategist. He is capable, as a PC, of functioning at camp or in the tent where making a plan is important and his spell list and various knowledge skills and divinations give him a powerful edge in acquiring information and deciding on the best courses of action. He functions equally well in scouting environments and first encounters as his defensive, patient style of combat enables him and the party time to learn whatever they need to know about that enemies and others like it, capabilities. Any further encounters are easily prepared for and typical combats within a given region are rarely surprises.

The Strategic Commander can be any number of classes, but a cleric/Fighter with the proper forethought on spells, archetypes and feats can easily make a great choice and be a solid build for an adventuring PC who wants to play the role and still be useful in actual gameplay.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / best class for a general All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.