WORMY'S WEDNESDAY WHAT? Which classes need some love?


Product Discussion

Scarab Sages RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4; Contributor; Publisher, Legendary Games

Every week we pose a question for YOU, the fans of Legendary Games, something short, sweet, and to the point. And since we like a little alliteration, I think the Worm that Walks will wear the crown as the WEDNESDAY WHAT? mascot! In honor of the late, lamented Dave Trampier, we shall call him… Wormy!

The setup:

The Pathfinder RPG has 11 core classes from the Core Rulebook,8 more base classes in the APG, Ultimate Combat, and Ultimate Magic plus 3 alternate classes (antipaladin, ninja, samurai), 10 hybrid classes from the Advanced Class Guide, and now another half-dozen base classes announced for Occult Adventures. That seems like a lot, though compared to the surfeit of classes that erupted throughout the history of 3.0 and 3.5 it’s really not too bad. If you count Pathfinder’s history from the release of the Alpha Playtest in 2008, by the time Occult Adventures comes out they will have released only 27 new classes in 7 years, less than 4 per year.

Still, in all the rush to boost this class or expand that class, despite attempts to balance things it could be fairly argued that not every class has gotten an equal amount of attention over those 7 years. Every class has gotten something along the way, and some things that used to be intrinsic to classes can be adjusted with feats, skills, equipment, etc., but some have been more equal than others, as they say, either in the amount of support or the quality of it. True, you’ll never have perfect balance in a game system and that’s okay, but Wormy wants to know which classes still seem like they’re always standing at the back of the line when it comes to getting fun new toys.

This week’s WORMY’S WEDNESDAY WHAT? Which classes really need more love, design-wise? Which ones have gotten plenty already? And are there any toys that thus far have been the province of just some classes that really ought to be shared with others? Wormy wants to know!


Classes that don't need new stuff:

Full casters.

Full casters get enough new toys with all the new spells that will inevitably be included in any new book. They really don't need much more in the way of archetypes, feats, and such like.

Maybe, maybe, make an exception for Witch.

----

As for what needs more love, my knee-jerk answer would typically be "Fighter, Rogue, Monk". So long as any new archetypes function like the higher end Monk archtypes like Zen Archer, I'd probably be happy with throwing them another few bones.

But Fighter and Rogue I think are pretty much out of commission. I can't think of a single concept that I could do with Fighter that I couldn't do better with Cavalier, Brawler, Barbarian, Ranger, or Paladin; and Rogue is now thoroughly covered by Bard, Ranger, Inquisitor, Alchemist, Investigator, and Slayer. I think at this point any love given to the Fighter and Rogue is too little, too late. I would rather see that effort spent on giving those new options and resources to those replacement classes - Cavalier, Brawler, Barbarian, Ranger, Anti/Paladin, Bard, Inquisitor, Alchemist, Investigator, Slayer. I think anything you could give to a Fighter or Rogue would not only work for any of those classes, but it would inevitably work better.

Instead, I think the new low-hanger that could be great if given some boosts, but isn't so far gone as to be not worth helping, would be Swashbuckler. There's a lot of potential in this class, it seems, but it needs some nudging and tweaking to really blossom.

Advocates

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Maps Subscriber

I'd love to see more things for all the hybrid classes, as well as some new options for ninja and samurai, as well as non-order options for cavaliers. New shaman spirits, new bloodrager bloodlines, and some interesting stuff to toy with for literally every other class in the book.


I'd definitely like to see more Ninja and Samurai options. Perhaps some archetypes based either on some different takes of these classes from elsewhere in Japanese lore, or archetypes based on similar types of "classes" found in other Asian cultures (such as Korean Hwarang, for instance. Or the Chinese Jinyiwei, as an alternative "ninja.")


2 people marked this as a favorite.

NPC classes.

PCs should be encountering more Commoners, Experts and Warriors than any alternate, base, core or hybrid class.


People still use NPC classes?


Orthos wrote:
People still use NPC classes?

Um... yes. As NPCs. All the time.


Most of my NPCs either have normal class levels or are statless 1-HP blobs.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Orthos wrote:
Most of my NPCs either have normal class levels or are statless 1-HP blobs.

Pretty much this. NPC classes are kinda...they're not narratively useful.


Prince of Knives wrote:
Orthos wrote:
Most of my NPCs either have normal class levels or are statless 1-HP blobs.
Pretty much this. NPC classes are kinda...they're not narratively useful.

I'd have to disagree; narrative usefulness has nothing to do with character class. The captain of the guard that hires you to investigate the brittle iron coming out of the local mine is as narratively interesting as a Warrior 4 as he is as a Cavalier 4. Statistical usefulness is another matter of course...

Back on topic, I think the Cavalier and Gunslinger are dreadfully linear in design and could use some love.

RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

Ninja and Samurai could definitely use some more love. I agree that Monk would almost certainly benefit from some more high-end archetypes, such as they are.

I don't want to give up on the rogue or the fighter just yet...but I realize that I may have to. :(


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ken Pawlik wrote:
Prince of Knives wrote:
Orthos wrote:
Most of my NPCs either have normal class levels or are statless 1-HP blobs.
Pretty much this. NPC classes are kinda...they're not narratively useful.
I'd have to disagree; narrative usefulness has nothing to do with character class. The captain of the guard that hires you to investigate the brittle iron coming out of the local mine is as narratively interesting as a Warrior 4 as he is as a Cavalier 4. Statistical usefulness is another matter of course...

First, high five for the Baldur's Gate reference.

Second, a quest giver is...well, he has a narrative role but it's not particularly a great one. What happens if I want players to interact with this NPC? For that matter, what happens when circumstances cause me to try and have that NPC do his job? A captain of the guard is going to need, at the very least, Know: Local, Diplomacy, Sense Motive, Perception, and probably Bluff. Warriors can't hack that, let alone any of the other requirements of the job.

NPC classes have this problem where they say they fill niches that they don't. Which is why they're not useful.


You don't have to single class every NPC. There's no reason your captain of the guard can't be a warrior 3/expert 1, or something to that effect. NPC classes have no class features (aside from adepts, technically), which makes them very easy to mix and match to fulfill NPC concepts or to quickly add some extra numbers to a creature in place of racial hit dice or templates.

On the main topic; I'd say some Paladin love would be well appreciated. There still isn't much of anything in the way of building a non-LG paladin, and the class has only gotten a small handful of decent archetypes to customize it.


Prince of Knives wrote:
Ken Pawlik wrote:
Prince of Knives wrote:
Orthos wrote:
Most of my NPCs either have normal class levels or are statless 1-HP blobs.
Pretty much this. NPC classes are kinda...they're not narratively useful.
I'd have to disagree; narrative usefulness has nothing to do with character class. The captain of the guard that hires you to investigate the brittle iron coming out of the local mine is as narratively interesting as a Warrior 4 as he is as a Cavalier 4. Statistical usefulness is another matter of course...

First, high five for the Baldur's Gate reference.

Second, a quest giver is...well, he has a narrative role but it's not particularly a great one. What happens if I want players to interact with this NPC? For that matter, what happens when circumstances cause me to try and have that NPC do his job? A captain of the guard is going to need, at the very least, Know: Local, Diplomacy, Sense Motive, Perception, and probably Bluff. Warriors can't hack that, let alone any of the other requirements of the job.

NPC classes have this problem where they say they fill niches that they don't. Which is why they're not useful.

All the more reason for them to get some 'more love', wouldn't you say? To take them out of the realm of obscurity and into the place of being viable or useful :)


While many say the Rogue has been replaced(several times over, according to some) but I still really like the class a lot.

One problem I do have however, is that pretty much every archetype I've seen(Paizo official at least) only trades out Trapfinding/Trap Sense or Uncanny Dodge/Improved UD, and like that's it.

Heck, I don't even think I know of any archetypes that trade out all four, usually just one or the other.

This then is where I feel the Rogue has been replaced, so to speak. You have a built in system via archetypes to really customize the class, just like all the others, but for some reason, its just not happened. Aside from the four aforementioned class features, Rogue Talents, Evasion, and Sneak Attack could all be traded out here and there. In fact, I believe a few archetypes have done just that, but not very many. Even still, those archetypes still end up only trading out a few things, vs say the Fighter ones, which often trade out most, if not all, of the standard class abilities.

The other class that I feel got the short end of the stick is the Cleric. Why doesn't he get a capstone at 20? Every other class gets one, including his "cousins" the Wizard and Sorc who share a similar customization. Granted, many are variations on a death attack, but they all still get them.

Not only that, but there is a decided lack in a healing focused archetype or PrC(Again, Paizo official). I get that magical healing is more abundant than it used to be in 3.x days, but that shouldn't mean such a concept for an archetype or PrC should be ignored.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Third-Party Pathfinder RPG Products / Product Discussion / WORMY'S WEDNESDAY WHAT? Which classes need some love? All Messageboards

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