Is the sacred fist just better than the base Warpriest?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 165 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

Let's take a look first at what isn't modified.

1) BAB
2) Saves
3) Spells
4) Fervor
5) Blessings

This means for both of them they are self buffing monsters who are glutted with swift actions. They have positive saves and a poor BAB.

Quicken blessing retains its power as do all the swift actions.

Trades 1 by 1

1) Weapon and armor prof. It's a clear loss for the sacred fist here and one of the only losses they have. FORTUNATELY he isn't prohibited from wearing heavy armor and a splashed level of fighter fixes the heavy armor prof if Monk/Sacred fist can't get wis to armor twice. The AC bonus goes here.

2) Flurry of blows for sacred weapon. This is horribly lopsided. Flurry of blows is effectively free TWF feats. It, especially with the new feats (Looking at you pummeling style) makes this a key value of one size but more importantly you gain EFFECTIVELY full BAB.

3) Weapon focus vs Improved unarmed strike. Well this is a bit of an odd situation. Weapon focus makes up for poor BAB at level 1 while unarmed strike effectively grants you access to the above which is much stronger than WF. This gives you scaling dice.

4) Blessed Fortitude vs bonus feat. It is unclear to me why we get this but it's likely weaker than a fighter bonus feat although it's true uniqueness makes it valuable.

5) Style bonus feat vs combat bonus feat. I have exactly 2 problems with this, it comes too late and the first one can't be in the feat tree. It's fine if you're starting at high level but annoying if you start at 1.

6) Ki pool vs sacred armor. A ki pool which happens to key off your MAIN STAT is awesome. Extra attacks on TOP of full BAB + flurry is crazy.

7) Miraculous fortitude vs bonus feat (Likely greater weapon focus). Normally I wouldn't say it's a clear win if it's debatable but it should be noted this makes you virtually immune to significant ability damage/drain and completely negates 1 point of ability damage and more importantly drain. Unlike it's previous incarnation where fort negates doesn't do a ton but is sometimes awesome this is simply awesome.

So where the Warpriest beats the sacred fist is in the prof category, Possibly base blessed fortitude, and the first style feat. The sacred fist wins in to hit, damage, number of hits, and defensive qualities especially given he can flurry in full plate if he takes fighter or a full BAB class.

Is there any reason to play a base warpriest?


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Blessed Fortitude is incredibly strong and definitely worth more than a bonus feat.

Sacred Fist is better than Warpriest in just about every way as long as you wanna make a "spell casting Monk"

Alternatively you can play an Inquisitor, which is a better Warpriest no matter what.


Undone wrote:
Is there any reason to play a base warpriest?

Yes. Since Sacred Fist and regular Warpriest are so different. The real question is: "Is there any reason to play a base monk now that Sacred Fist does its' thing better?".

And if I put it like this: How much better is a Warpriest than a Fighter? As a 6th level caster I would say that Warpriest is a clear winner.

Insain Dragoon wrote:
Alternatively you can play an Inquisitor, which is a better Warpriest no matter what.

Not true. Warpriest is a better supporter. Normally, prepare casting is better than spontaneous. And with access to bonus feats you can take on more feat-hungry builds.


Rub-Eta wrote:
Undone wrote:
Is there any reason to play a base warpriest?

Yes. Since Sacred Fist and regular Warpriest are so different. The real question is: "Is there any reason to play a base monk now that Sacred Fist does its' thing better?".

And if I put it like this: How much better is a Warpriest than a Fighter? As a 6th level caster I would say that Warpriest is a clear winner.

Insain Dragoon wrote:
Alternatively you can play an Inquisitor, which is a better Warpriest no matter what.
Not true. Warpriest is a better supporter. Normally, prepare casting is better than spontaneous. And with access to bonus feats you can take on more feat-hungry builds.

The fighter was obsolete by the class entry Barbarian.

Quote:

Sacred Fist is better than Warpriest in just about every way as long as you wanna make a "spell casting Monk"

Alternatively you can play an Inquisitor, which is a better Warpriest no matter what.

With the exception of the spell list and skills I don't see how. The WP objectively does more damage.

Sacred fist is a better version of the WP though. You can even flurry with a weapon and with 1 level of fighter you can flurry while wielding a tower shield and full plate.

As to DPR

Spoiler:

The inquisitor is only better than the WP at extremely high levels when they have 6th level spells and the inquisitor spell list is better. At normal levels (1-11) the inquisitor is hilariously worse because divine favor with fate's favored can be cast every encounter by level 3-4 which makes the pitiful judgement damage laughable. At 5th they get bane which is good but by 6th level +3 to hit and damage is close in terms of damage and sacred weapon brings it closer or for sacred fist KI which is hideously lopsided since bonus attacks tend to win the DPR race.


Undone wrote:
The fighter was obsolete by the class entry Barbarian.
No, not really.
Undone wrote:
Sacred fist is a better version of the WP though. You can even flurry with a weapon and with 1 level of fighter you can flurry while wielding a tower shield and full plate.

I think it's an oversight that you even can do that. And still, flurry while wielding tower shield and full plate, how good is that anyway?

It doesn't sound like it's plain better than the Warpriest, it just sounds like it's less restricted than the monk.


Rub-Eta wrote:
Undone wrote:
The fighter was obsolete by the class entry Barbarian.
No, not really.
Undone wrote:
Sacred fist is a better version of the WP though. You can even flurry with a weapon and with 1 level of fighter you can flurry while wielding a tower shield and full plate.

I think it's an oversight that you even can do that. And still, flurry while wielding tower shield and full plate, how good is that anyway?

It doesn't sound like it's plain better than the Warpriest, it just sounds like it's less restricted than the monk.

If you could flurry while in full plate and shield you'd have the first class in the game where you could do good damage while wielding a shield. You lose 0 damage by using one since you can FoB with any appendage.


Undone wrote:
Rub-Eta wrote:
Undone wrote:
The fighter was obsolete by the class entry Barbarian.
No, not really.
Undone wrote:
Sacred fist is a better version of the WP though. You can even flurry with a weapon and with 1 level of fighter you can flurry while wielding a tower shield and full plate.

I think it's an oversight that you even can do that. And still, flurry while wielding tower shield and full plate, how good is that anyway?

It doesn't sound like it's plain better than the Warpriest, it just sounds like it's less restricted than the monk.

If you could flurry while in full plate and shield you'd have the first class in the game where you could do good damage while wielding a shield. You lose 0 damage by using one since you can FoB with any appendage.

Alchemists could already do that by putting a shield in one of their vestigial arms.


Chengar Qordath wrote:
Undone wrote:
Rub-Eta wrote:
Undone wrote:
The fighter was obsolete by the class entry Barbarian.
No, not really.
Undone wrote:
Sacred fist is a better version of the WP though. You can even flurry with a weapon and with 1 level of fighter you can flurry while wielding a tower shield and full plate.

I think it's an oversight that you even can do that. And still, flurry while wielding tower shield and full plate, how good is that anyway?

It doesn't sound like it's plain better than the Warpriest, it just sounds like it's less restricted than the monk.

If you could flurry while in full plate and shield you'd have the first class in the game where you could do good damage while wielding a shield. You lose 0 damage by using one since you can FoB with any appendage.
Alchemists could already do that by putting a shield in one of their vestigial arms.

I was unaware alchemists could do that in full plate to give them a good AC.

Shadow Lodge

Pretty much. Its kind of sad the Warpriest turned out the way it did. If the Sacred Fist was able to pick a single weapon rather than unarmed strike (its perfectly fine for the theme of the Archtype, I'm saying hypothetically, if the Sacred Fist could choose any one weapon), it would literally be the better actual Warpriest class in all ways. But as it, it really fits the niche and flavour better, and is really where the class needs to be. But its more of a failure of the base Warpriest than it is the Sacred Fist Archtype that starts to fix it, and a very nice nod back to 3.5's Sacred Fist.

It does make a better Monk than the Monk, and with different options, probably a better Ninja than Ninja, and other sort of ideas. But, for the most part, so does the base Warpriest so that's not really saying much.


DM Beckett wrote:

Pretty much. Its kind of sad the Warpriest turned out the way it did. If the Sacred Fist was able to pick a single weapon rather than unarmed strike (its perfectly fine for the theme of the Archtype, I'm saying hypothetically, if the Sacred Fist could choose any one weapon), it would literally be the better actual Warpriest class in all ways. But as it, it really fits the niche and flavour better, and is really where the class needs to be. But its more of a failure of the base Warpriest than it is the Sacred Fist Archtype that starts to fix it, and a very nice nod back to 3.5's Sacred Fist.

It does make a better Monk than the Monk, and with different options, probably a better Ninja than Ninja, and other sort of ideas. But, for the most part, so does the base Warpriest so that's not really saying much.

Shockingly Crusaders flurry lets you chose nearly any 1 weapon which isn't exotic (You couldn't get those on the base WP anyway). You can also SHOCKINGLY wear any armor you want and lose basically nothing.

Shadow Lodge

Why is that shocking?

What I'm saying is that if the Sacred Fist was able to just pick any one weapon rather than being designed around Unarmed Strike as a general focus, (which is perfectly fine for the theme of the Sacred Fist), it would in all ways be better and more in line with what we wanted from the Warpriest.


Crusader's Flurry.

No more multi classing needed.

Sovereign Court

I nearly forgot that crusader's flurry feat existed...this is actually very beast.


Ki Channel

Potentially grants an extra 7 Ki Points per channel if you want to use up your fervor for more ki. Also gotta worship Irori.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yes. The Sacred Fist is just better. The pseudo-full BAB from Flurry makes is a viable "long day" class rather than just another redundant nova class. The SF therefore actually fills at least part of its hybrid role while the base WP can't handle the cleric load because of its slower casting progression and can't handle the fighter load because it falls behind the NPC warrior when not burning resources.


Atarlost wrote:
Yes. The Sacred Fist is just better. The pseudo-full BAB from Flurry makes is a viable "long day" class rather than just another redundant nova class.

The "pseudo-full BAB" is only at work when you use full-attack actions. And it will normally only be 1-2 (passes in level 10 from 1 to 2) higher than the regular Warpriest's (since Warpriest gain Weapon Focus and flurry gives -2 to hit). And when not full-attacking, base Warpriest is ahead with 1. Such differnece, base Warpriest isn't viable. Resources management can't be done.

Atarlost wrote:
The SF therefore actually fills at least part of its hybrid role while the base WP can't handle the cleric load because of its slower casting progression and can't handle the fighter load because it falls behind the NPC warrior when not burning resources.

It seems like you think a hybrid class should fully fill the roles of two core classes. And saying "it falls behind the NPC warrior when not burning resources" is like saying or "Sacred Fist falls behind the NPC warrior when not burning resources or using flurry" or "wizards falls behind the NPC Adept when not casting spells". Why wouldn't you use your resources and class feats?

Btw, Sacred Fist would have to pick two extra feats to get Crusader's Flurry (Weapon Proficency and Weapon Focus, since they gain neither unless the favoured weapon is one of the very few Sacred Fist gets proficency in).


I'm actually starting to like the idea of taking a warpriest with a level of monk or sacred fist of a race that gets the weapon I want (or human) and doing a reach build with flurries to back it up. Then getting sacred flurry, obviously. But unless I'm missing something a pure sacred fist or warpriest /monk(of some sort) can only take it at level 5, the first time they have a feat and channel.

Whereas you could do this at level 2 if you went cleric/sohei. Limitations: you have to use a deity weapon, you have to spend your L1 feat on weapon focus, and of course it doesn't get you a ki pool, which would be a shame.

But you could flurry a glaive at level 2, with divine casting joy ahead of you. Tell me that isn't neat.

---

Or I supposed you could take one level of cleric and then be a sacred fist to do the same thing? That's kind of cooler.

Dark Archive

Crusader Clerics get Weapon Focus with their deity's favored weapon for free, iirc.

Scarab Sages

Seranov wrote:
Crusader Clerics get Weapon Focus with their deity's favored weapon for free, iirc.

They do not. They get proficiency in the favored weapon for free, and a bonus feat at level 1 that can be applied to weapon focus, but only if they have BAB 1+ when they take the cleric level.

Dark Archive

You're right. Shows me for claiming that from memory when I haven't even looked at the Crusader archetype in like six months. D:


Lucy_Valentine wrote:

I'm actually starting to like the idea of taking a warpriest with a level of monk or sacred fist of a race that gets the weapon I want (or human) and doing a reach build with flurries to back it up. Then getting sacred flurry, obviously. But unless I'm missing something a pure sacred fist or warpriest /monk(of some sort) can only take it at level 5, the first time they have a feat and channel.

Whereas you could do this at level 2 if you went cleric/sohei. Limitations: you have to use a deity weapon, you have to spend your L1 feat on weapon focus, and of course it doesn't get you a ki pool, which would be a shame.

But you could flurry a glaive at level 2, with divine casting joy ahead of you. Tell me that isn't neat.

---

Or I supposed you could take one level of cleric and then be a sacred fist to do the same thing? That's kind of cooler.

Depending on how you want to look at it though, the Sacred Fist/Monk combo does offer better AC in that you can dip Wis twice. Additionally, if you want to fully take advantage of your flurry ability, the Sacred Fist gives you the best spell casting (as counter-intuitive as that may seem) while still giving you full FoB progression.


My personal point of view is that sacred fist + Monk of many styles to cheat pummeling style is the strongest. Irori is DEFINITELY the strongest god with KI channel existing.

I'm attempting to use a base WP as a reach weapon BF control guy. It's ok but the pummeling style SF 1 and MoMS 1 has performed significantly better. The ability to charge twice is just so good. I don't know possibly at 3 when I get power attack and pushing assault the reach weapon war priest will feel like it catches up.

As for crusaders flurry you can just splash 1 level of mutagen fighter if you really need the feat. Which coincidentally lets you play with full plate/shield and still flurry with deities favored weapon.

Scarab Sages

If you are going to splash one level of fighter with a sacred fist it should be unarmed fighter. Proficiency in ALL monk weapons negates the need for crusader's flurry, light armor for brawling enchantment, and a free style feat.


Anyone know of a spell that the warpriest can cast or get onto their spell list that would allow for pseudo pounce or movement?

Like using fervor on a teleportation spell that targeted them?

It would be cool if they could get the equivalent of pounce at a reasonable level other than with pummeling style.


Deadkitten wrote:

Anyone know of a spell that the warpriest can cast or get onto their spell list that would allow for pseudo pounce or movement?

Like using fervor on a teleportation spell that targeted them?

It would be cool if they could get the equivalent of pounce at a reasonable level other than with pummeling style.

Monk of many styles. Presently divine casters get no real teleportation spells.

Scarab Sages

Travel blessing at 10th level.


Imbicatus wrote:
Travel blessing at 10th level.

Swift actions are too valuable. Fervor surpasses it. Pummeling style, the bard giving you a move action, and quickrunners shirt are the best ways to gain "Pounce".


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rub-Eta wrote:
It seems like you think a hybrid class should fully fill the roles of two core classes. And saying "it falls behind the NPC warrior when not burning resources" is like saying or "Sacred Fist falls behind the NPC warrior when not burning resources or using flurry" or "wizards falls behind the NPC Adept when not casting spells". Why wouldn't you use your resources and class feats?

Using class feats is fine. They don't provide enough accuracy to make a difference. Using per diem limited resources just to keep up with the NPC warrior when you're supposed to be a martial class is not fine.

Flurry is not use limited. Everyone except certain druid builds and pure casters suck when not making full attacks. The Sacred Fist at least gets pummeling charge at 12 without dipping, which is better than most martials can manage.


Atarlost wrote:
Rub-Eta wrote:
It seems like you think a hybrid class should fully fill the roles of two core classes. And saying "it falls behind the NPC warrior when not burning resources" is like saying or "Sacred Fist falls behind the NPC warrior when not burning resources or using flurry" or "wizards falls behind the NPC Adept when not casting spells". Why wouldn't you use your resources and class feats?

Using class feats is fine. They don't provide enough accuracy to make a difference. Using per diem limited resources just to keep up with the NPC warrior when you're supposed to be a martial class is not fine.

Flurry is not use limited. Everyone except certain druid builds and pure casters suck when not making full attacks. The Sacred Fist at least gets pummeling charge at 12 without dipping, which is better than most martials can manage.

Marshal characters need to be able to do their thing every round otherwise magic is just better. That's the problem. Magic should make you BETTER when using it not EQUAL.


I disagree completely.

Dark Archive

The straight Warpriest is hardly a slouch. Nobody claims the Bard should be doing more damage than it currently does when not spending resources.

And for the record, the options you can take as a straight Warpriest (Vital Strike, TWF or Weapon Specialization, for example) boost it up over a straight Warrior that gets no special class mechanics, with ease.

Do I think the Sacred Fist is better? Yes. Do I think the normal Warpriest is worse than an NPC Warrior at fighting? HELL no.


Seranov wrote:

The straight Warpriest is hardly a slouch. Nobody claims the Bard should be doing more damage than it currently does when not spending resources.

And for the record, the options you can take as a straight Warpriest (Vital Strike, TWF or Weapon Specialization, for example) boost it up over a straight Warrior that gets no special class mechanics, with ease.

Do I think the Sacred Fist is better? Yes. Do I think the normal Warpriest is worse than an NPC Warrior at fighting? HELL no.

Even the rogue is better than the npc warrior. I think the problem here is that the lines you're talking about (Except WF/WS/GWF/GWS) are really, really bad based on math. There aren't a ton of feats you'd be happy to take as combat bonus feats. The power from spells is limited. Blessings provide nearly no power at all.

Quote:
I disagree completely.

And you're free to do so. A lot of people can't handle level 5+ magic and because they don't understand it label it as broken as an example.

If you're not strictly better than someone who can do the same thing every round of the entire day while expanding your limited resources and instead only EQUAL when using your limited resources why in the infinite hells would you play a character which is strictly worse the majority of the time.

It's why smite is allowed to make the paladin so strong. It's limited and when he's using it he's at the tipy top of awesome. While raging the barbarian is better than the fighter while not raging he's WAY worse than the fighter the only imbalance is the distribution of resources some classes have (Rage may scale too hard/too fast vs the fighter as an example). If fervor and spells were removed from the WP (Or in this case you'd expanded them all) the class would be literally worse than a rogue. There's at that point no point in playing it. If you start out strictly worse there is no point in having the other class.

As a point if I created a class called "Magic Knight" with full BAB, wizard class features, and wizard casting progression there would be no point in having the wizard at all. It would become nothing more than a trap option.


Undone wrote:


If you're not strictly better than someone who can do the same thing every round of the entire day while expanding your limited resources and instead only EQUAL when using your limited resources why in the infinite hells would you play a character which is strictly worse the majority of the time.

It's why smite is allowed to make the paladin so strong. It's limited and when he's using it he's at the tipy top of awesome. While raging the barbarian is better than the fighter while not raging he's WAY worse than the fighter the only imbalance is the distribution of resources some classes have (Rage may scale too hard/too fast vs the fighter as an example). If fervor and spells were removed from the WP (Or in this case you'd expanded them all) the class would be literally worse than a rogue. There's at that point no point in playing it. If you start out strictly worse there is no point in having the other class.

This would be true if there was value to being able to something all day. Sadly there is not. The only value is being able to do something *!when you need to do it!*. And I have never seen an 11th level caster run out of spells for when they need to do something. Ever. This makes them being stronger then the "go all day abilities" unbalanced, because they will always be stronger *when it counts*. And that's the correct measure of balance to use. The 20 some rounds (6 encounters easy) a day you need to something. Not the 14,380+ you don't.

Drops mic.


It depends on how many encounters you make your players go through. I regularly force people to go through 10 + encounters before a rest.

Dungeon crawling doesn't afford rests and things like crypt of the everflame represent closer to a standard adventuring day in terms of encounters to me.


Undone wrote:

It depends on how many encounters you make your players go through. I regularly force people to go through 10 + encounters before a rest.

Dungeon crawling doesn't afford rests and things like crypt of the everflame represent closer to a standard adventuring day in terms of encounters to me.

Except you see, unless you are throwing 10+ APL+4 challenges at the party, that would pretty much kill most parties. if its on level than the Sacred Fist could actually get away with using very little resources (just saving them for bigger enemies)


Undone wrote:

It depends on how many encounters you make your players go through. I regularly force people to go through 10 + encounters before a rest.

Dungeon crawling doesn't afford rests and things like crypt of the everflame represent closer to a standard adventuring day in terms of encounters to me.

Ok... so thats still only 14370 rounds that don't matter. It's not like the casters are going to run out of spells even if for some reason they need to cast one each round (unusual especially since one good spell can end an encounter). And force? How? No really... at 9th level Teleport is online and good to go. And extended rope trick has been around since 5th level(or 4th if you can get a CL boost to it). Forcing casters to continue when they want to stop is difficult at best.


Anzyr wrote:
Undone wrote:

It depends on how many encounters you make your players go through. I regularly force people to go through 10 + encounters before a rest.

Dungeon crawling doesn't afford rests and things like crypt of the everflame represent closer to a standard adventuring day in terms of encounters to me.

Ok... so thats still only 14370 rounds that don't matter. It's not like the casters are going to run out of spells even if for some reason they need to cast one each round (unusual especially since one good spell can end an encounter). And force? How? No really... at 9th level Teleport is online and good to go. And extended rope trick has been around since 5th level(or 4th if you can get a CL boost to it). Forcing casters to continue when they want to stop is difficult at best.

Honestly the biggest way seems to be "well you are on a time table" which honestly, can get old quick and make a party feel like they are being rail roaded...


Anzyr wrote:
Undone wrote:

It depends on how many encounters you make your players go through. I regularly force people to go through 10 + encounters before a rest.

Dungeon crawling doesn't afford rests and things like crypt of the everflame represent closer to a standard adventuring day in terms of encounters to me.

Ok... so thats still only 14370 rounds that don't matter. It's not like the casters are going to run out of spells even if for some reason they need to cast one each round (unusual especially since one good spell can end an encounter). And force? How? No really... at 9th level Teleport is online and good to go. And extended rope trick has been around since 5th level(or 4th if you can get a CL boost to it). Forcing casters to continue when they want to stop is difficult at best.

Dungeons gain new denizens if you leave. Loot occurs in the loot room at the end. Time crunches. There are a lot of problems with high level magic but leaving and coming back is not really one of them. If you're having trouble time crunching them you may need to be a better GM.

Quote:
Except you see, unless you are throwing 10+ APL+4 challenges at the party, that would pretty much kill most parties. if its on level than the Sacred Fist could actually get away with using very little resources (just saving them for bigger enemies)

You can throw even leveled encounters at high level parties when you have favorable circumstances and it forces reactionary spells/abilities out wearing them down.


Loot only occurs in the "loot room"? The hell kind of metagame nonsense is that? I think those adventurers need to stop doing dungeons then and resort to good old fashioned sellswording. At least you can sell all the magic items the NPCs will have after you kill them.

The point is that balancing an ability against "able to use all day" is meaningless, because you never have to do something "all day".


Um... what???

I swear, you make it sound like your game is like a table-top MMO...

If monsters keep getting denizens after you clear it out, what is the point of even clearing it out? Its like a stupid video game logic. And what the heck is a "loot room?" I mean, unless every dungeon the party goes through has an obligatory dragon at the end of it with his obligatory "pile of treasure" RIGHT THERE, it makes no sense....

As for wearing down a party, that is not really even true. The only thing you will really start burning through is Wand of Cure Light Wounds charges. If a party is well built, they can handle most APL +0 encounters with very little difficulty (I say most because there are some things *cough cough* aboleth*cough* are are MUCH tougher than their CR suggests)..

And honestly, your comment about time crunching is kinda false. If you force too much "GO GO GO IT NEEDS TO GET DONE NOW!!!!!!!!!!!" you can start making your party feel railroaded. Having a sense of urgency every now and again is a good tactic but making everything a rush fest just feel very rushed. That and it starts making little sense for a lot of stuff, for instance:

GM: Ok so you guys find a clue that points you to a city to the Capitol City in the west. How do you guys proceed?
Wizard: Well I can always teleport us there?
Party: Cool ok!
*TELEPORT*
GM: Ok when you get to the city you follow up on the clue, it turns out that you need to find the Mcguffin in the dungeon labyrinth maze of Undermountain beneath the city. Unfortunately the gate will close in 12 hours and once it seals, it will not open again until the next solar eclipse. Once you get in the only way out is to reach the end of the maze.

Wizard: *OOC*Wait... so your telling me that if I DIDN'T teleport us then, we would have never made it in time to catch the gate and we would have been stuck for gods knows how long, unable to progress with the story?

GM: *silence*....

Something like that kind of stinks of railroading and meta-gaming. If a party can teleport, then ideally they should very rarely be rushed because they save so much time vs have to walk from point A to point B...


Seranov wrote:

The straight Warpriest is hardly a slouch. Nobody claims the Bard should be doing more damage than it currently does when not spending resources.

And for the record, the options you can take as a straight Warpriest (Vital Strike, TWF or Weapon Specialization, for example) boost it up over a straight Warrior that gets no special class mechanics, with ease.

Do I think the Sacred Fist is better? Yes. Do I think the normal Warpriest is worse than an NPC Warrior at fighting? HELL no.

Warriors also get feats. The Warpriest doesn't even get that many more.

The warpriest is a pointless failure of a class because there are too many stupid nova classes already and the others are just better. Maybe not as explosive, but they're actually capable of things other than combat. The Inquisitor can also nova, but has things like skill points and class abilities and a spell list that isn't just coming late to the party with cleric spells. The Magus, being int based, also has skill points even if it's otherwise a boring nova class. The Cleric can already pull off divine nova based combat with quicken spell and actually has remove/restore/heal spells in a timely fashion. The Oracle, too, can pull off divine combatant novaing with quicken spell.

There is no room for yet another nova class that's completely tapped out 16 minutes into the adventure because it's having to burn resources in even the breather encounters barbarians and paladins and cavaliers can sleepwalk through.

Dark Archive

You're entitled to believe that, but I doubt it's the case in actual practice. If you're going to compare it to the Cleric, of course it's going to seem weak. That's not quite on the same level as comparing the Fighter to the Wizard, but it's in the same vein.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Teleporting in and out of a dungeon has always worked poorly for us. The first time the residents don't expect it, the next time they are prepared.

Even though they have been reduced in number, when the mobs start funneling the PCs to choke points and kill lanes, that's when things tend to go south very fast.


Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:

Teleporting in and out of a dungeon has always worked poorly for us. The first time the residents don't expect it, the next time they are prepared.

Even though they have been reduced in number, when the mobs start funneling the PCs to choke points and kill lanes, that's when things tend to go south very fast.

Teleporting is kind of a last resort, so if you are in a situation where you need to it is always the best option. And I'm not sure what teleporting has to with the mobs funneling the PCs to choke points and kill lanes. They can do that any time. I'm not sure I follow your logic.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Undone wrote:
Dungeons gain new denizens if you leave. Loot occurs in the loot room at the end. Time crunches. There are a lot of problems with high level magic but leaving and coming back is not really one of them.

So presumably this loot room and the rooms up to {acceptable number of encounters} back are warded against teleportation and scrying. Which means the dungeon is built around the magic system with the goal of protecting some treasure.

What is this, a bank heist? Are adventurers just bank robbers, looting the vaults of the First International Monster Bank? And if so, doesn't that make the monsters who attack them actually the good guys?

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lucy_Valentine wrote:
Are adventurers just bank robbers, looting the vaults of the First International Monster Bank? And if so, doesn't that make the monsters who attack them actually the good guys?

Adventurers wish they were bank robbers. Bank robbery is a step up from standard murder-hobo.


Atarlost wrote:
Using per diem limited resources just to keep up with the NPC warrior when you're supposed to be a martial class is not fine.

Your problem with the class is that you think it's a martial class. It's not a martial class. I know this since it's a 6/9 caster and not full-BAB.


well, thats like saying that magus isn't a martial class, 6/9 spell casting not full bab sound familiar?

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Without his resources, the Magus is up a creek, too.


Bobo D wrote:
well, thats like saying that magus isn't a martial class, 6/9 spell casting not full bab sound familiar?

Yes, just like Summoner, Bard and etc.

I wouldn't call Magus, Warpriest and probably also Inquisitor, martial classes. Not only due to those two points, but I do belive that their focus is far from the same as the martial classes (The full-BAB and possibly 4/9 casters classes). While a Magus is closer to that than a Bard, I still wouldn't call it a martial class.

1 to 50 of 165 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Is the sacred fist just better than the base Warpriest? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.