EK is still viable. F1/wis5/EK10/wis4 = 9th level spells, 18 levels of casting, and 15 BAB. Switch that to F1/wis5/EK10/wis3/F1 for 17 levels of casting, and 16 BAB.Did your campaign start and end at 20th level? Because there are levels where you have less-than-3/4 BAB.
Also, even at 20th level, base classes who land at 15 BAB will have higher to-hit than the EK, because every 3/4 BAB class (except the rogue) has a built-in attack bonus.
I played a traditional-entry EK from scratch to almost 14th level, and it was rough.
Start at 10+ Live a little. If you are EK, your strength should be decent. Enjoy your polymorph + tons of other buffs.
Is it the most optimal? No. Can you do things with it that you could not with a magus? Yes. Can you smack things better than a wizard? Yes. Can you cast spells better than a fighter? Yes.
Not all groups are very optimized. You could go fighter 1, play as a BSF while you grind through the wizard levels into EK and your fellow players may not even notice the lack of BAB or weapon training.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wouldn´t mind that SLA empowered Arcane strike, but one cantrip being enough for Crafting, thats BS. Thats like I know how to use a plaster and I am an expert ingeneur, now let me do open heart surgery because the body is like a machine!
I don't see how that applies. Your skill is based on your Spellcraft skill. You know, the skill that represents your knowledge of magic and s#@!. On top of that, a level 3 Wizard, Fighter 2 with a trait can craft just as well as a Wizard 20 if they invest in Spellcraft, can they not?
|
I played a traditional-entry EK from scratch to almost 14th level, and it was rough.
You've mentioned this a couple times now, and I was wondering if you might expand on your build a little bit. I've got a 2nd level blade adept looking at EK (arc 3/ftr 1/arc 3/EK X) and right now, things don't seem to be so bleak looking ahead. I mean, right now he's pretty terrible, but I'm actually playing through the painful doesn't-have-Dervish-Dance levels, so that's kind of to be expected. After 3rd level he seems like he's going to be able to function pretty well as a kind of not-magus magus, and that's what I was wanting from him. Where do you see the potholes?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, the forums aren't a good sample of the population anyway. We're just the most vocal part. :)
How many people who aren't on the forums do you think were even affected by the rulings here? If you aren't on these boards chances are you aren't interested or at least not knowledgeable about the FAQs.
|
Non-early-entry Arcane Trickster, Eldritch Knight, and Mystic Theurge are probably a good fit for a smaller party, or a party of lower-tier PCs.
Wizard is an *extremely* powerful class. "Wizard at two levels lower but slightly more durable" sounds better for a "classic" party than pure wizard. Less powerful, but fits in better.
Arcane Trickster is a fine alternative to straight rogue, losing not much on the skills side and having some magical ability to enhance sneakiness. As a surrogate wizard it is 1 level behind EK, but has UMD for some more versatility (e.g. the occasional bard or cleric scroll).
Mystic Theurge seems a reasonable PC in a 3-person party alongside fighter and rogue (and able to use nearly any wand or scroll).My point is, I do not think these half-wizard PrCs are meant to compete head-on against full wizard, as they undoubtedly lose luster there. But full wizards are so powerful that even somewhat depowered PrCs are still a net asset to a party lacking that capability. Games tend to go better when the characters are closer in tier, and my personal preference tends towards lower-optimization and lower-tier.
Exactly right.
I play my Arcane Tricksters on a Rogue chassis with a Rogue playstyle, and that's when they really shine. If I tried to play them like I would a full caster than I would be very disappointed.
How many people who aren't on the forums do you think were even affected by the rulings here?A non-zero number of people that play with the people who ARE on the forums.
I'll be honest, I skyped called with two people to talk about this FAQ, and sent excited messages to all my friends.
None of whom will brave the maw of the paizo forums.
|
|
Without early entry, arcane trickster can be entered at 6th level, eldritch knight and mystic theurge at 7th. Would rewriting their prereqs to bring them all to 6th level help? Is that enough? Traditionally PrCs have been limited to 6th+ across the board. Do we need to look at more serious changes to the PrCs once we get them to 6th level entry?
Without early entry, arcane trickster can be entered at 6th level, eldritch knight at 7th level and mystic theurge at 8th. Would rewriting their prereqs to bring them all to 6th level help? Is that enough? Traditionally PrCs have been limited to 6th+ across the board. Do we need to look at more serious changes to the PrCs once we get them to 6th level entry?
MT is still 7th...
|
|
Without early entry, arcane trickster can be entered at 6th level, eldritch knight at 7th level and mystic theurge at 8th. Would rewriting their prereqs to bring them all to 6th level help? Is that enough? Traditionally PrCs have been limited to 6th+ across the board. Do we need to look at more serious changes to the PrCs once we get them to 6th level entry?MT is still 7th...
Whoops, yes. Edited.
|
In a 20 level game, prc shouldn't be more than 5 levels to be quite frank. Considering how many people are playing AP or PFS, which means most people will retire by level 15 at most, how many campaigns reaches level 20? Not many. So if the first 5 or 6 levels of the prc aren't worth it, no need to bother about it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How many people who aren't on the forums do you think were even affected by the rulings here?A non-zero number of people that play with the people who ARE on the forums.I'll be honest, I skyped called with two people to talk about this FAQ, and sent excited messages to all my friends.
None of whom will brave the maw of the paizo forums.
O_o The maw of paizo forums...did they hear about that toothy bag guy?
I share Tels's sentiments here, and I think it shows that people who like this game aren't happy with the way it's being handled.Every time I see a FAQ like this, I come closer and closer to declaring Paizo unfit to issue rulings on their products.Declare all you want, it amounts to nothing more than whale farts.
Some people, yes.
Others are fine with it.
Reddit seems just as split about it as this forum, and since reddit is the generally-more-even-keeled forum for pathfinder, I'd have to say that it's just divisive - a third like it, a third hate it, and a third doesn't care 'cause it doesn't affect 'em.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
My wife is not on the forums and gets to hear ALL about it. :)
Just another piece of evidence that our wives are smarter than we are. ;-)
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I played a traditional-entry EK from scratch to almost 14th level, and it was rough.You've mentioned this a couple times now, and I was wondering if you might expand on your build a little bit. I've got a 2nd level blade adept looking at EK (arc 3/ftr 1/arc 3/EK X) and right now, things don't seem to be so bleak looking ahead. I mean, right now he's pretty terrible, but I'm actually playing through the painful doesn't-have-Dervish-Dance levels, so that's kind of to be expected. After 3rd level he seems like he's going to be able to function pretty well as a kind of not-magus magus, and that's what I was wanting from him. Where do you see the potholes?
Oh yeah, very-low levels were sweet! Up through 3rd level, I was only at -1 to hit compared to a full-BAB character, and on-par with 3/4 BAB characters. I was still a dude with a STR bonus and armor, and therefore viable. I hit 5% less than a full fighter, in exchange for a handful of nifty magic tricks.
It starts losing its shine for the next couple levels, then starts really getting rough when you get to about 6th level (wizard5). You're at half-BAB, so hitting like a strong wizard.
By comparison, I was at:
-4 to hit compared to a fighter (3BAB/1WT)
-3 to hit compared to a bard (1BAB/2IC, not counting his greater access to heroism, etc.)
-1 to hit compared to the melee cleric I played next (not counting his plentiful slots of divine favor, a mere 1st-level spell)
-3 to hit compared to an inquisitor (1BAB/2J)
-1 to hit per attack compared to a flurrying monk (who had more attacks)
-5 to hit compared to a raging barbarian
The list goes on. For a character allegedly blending might and magic, I had sacrificed some magic for a level of might that still didn't go beyond what the wizard already had.
It's not very fun to miss on a 7 with your frontliner, while other people are hitting on a 4.
It wasn't until 9th level that my BAB caught up with 3/4 BAB, but even then I was missing the built-in attack buffs that real 3/4 BAB classes had, so I was still 2-4 points below par for a "half-caster/half-frontliner" class. (Forget about any full-BAB classes.) I could cast heroism, but that's a 3rd-level spell and my progression (which includes slots per day!) was two levels behind. So at 9th when my BAB got up to 3/4, I had 3 slots per day of that level (including the bonus slot for INT). How many of those is it appropriate to have to use on buffs to still be a point behind 3/4 BAB classes?
If I had a string of good rolls, I could feel relevant. The rest of the time... not so much.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mystic Theurge finally returns to his former glory...mystic turd.
I will argue that Mystic Theurge actually can be extremely powerful...
As an NPC.
A lv10 Wizard/Sorc/Witch lv10 Cleric/Oracle/Shaman lv10 Mystic Theurge is a really powerful final boss - all the spellcasting power of a 40th level character in a 30th level body. Eesh!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Simple answer. Why was a prestige class not worth taking without a loophole?Keep in mind that most of the prestige classes affected by this: Arcane Trickster, Eldritch Knight and Mystic Theurge were options available from level 1 back in AD&D 1st and 2nd edition days. They were called Magic User/Thief, Fighter/Magic User and Cleric/Magic user respectively, were quite popular, and surprisingly enough, entry was limited by race. (Which is perhaps why I never had any trouble accepting that only certain races were eligible for early entry.)
Combining these things are iconic to the system, they're what I grew up playing, and weren't actively unfun to get into or play. They were simply normal. 3rd edition changed multiclassing, making these types of characters impossible to create, but the prestige classes brought them back, in theory. This FAQ made them actually playable, though still at a lower relative power level than their original incarnations: The original Cleric/Magic User would be roughly 1 level behind either a pure Cleric or pure Magic User, for example.
Actually, a 1E/2E multiclassed character lags 2 or 3 levels behind behind a straight class caster, since they effectively halve their XP.
Meaning that they wind up about where a normal-access mystic theurge does.
I agree that the mystic theurge takes a long time to get wound up, but it's supposed to fall behind in exchange for the access to two spell lists. (And if the campaign is going all the way to 20, you'll get 9th level spells in one of your classes anyways.)
I'll agree that mystic theurge is a painful PrC to start, though.
Under 3.X, base classes were often one-level wonders that offered no actual reward for continuing to level the class itself and you tried to prestige out of them as soon as possible.
Under Pathfinder, base classes are honestly pretty good, and reward sticking with them. Which in turn makes most prestige classes much less appealing.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you are sad about this change, don't ask for a reversal -- ask for better PrCs.
If the choice was between leaving the SLA thing in place with the current version of the PrCs versus fixing the PrCs and SLA trick, I would take fixing both any day. But do you honestly think Paizo is going to take the time to go back and fix them when they can be spending that time cranking out new material that they can sell? Not to mention that if they were going to do it, you'd think they would do it at the same time. THAT is why I think changing the SLA thing was a bad move - yes, it was a problem, but it was a problem that fixed another imho bigger problem.
Like I said elsewhere, the one potential point of hope is that they fix it in Unchained and that this change was a prerequisite to the release of Unchained. If that's the case, it would really be nice for one of the developers to drop a hint that it's coming, as it would do a great deal to resolve the contention. If that's not the case, I expect it to be a cold day in hell before they fix them.
|
|
Some good stuff
Does blade adept change any of that calculation, though? Because you're saying 6th level is where you bottomed out, but my build expects that to actually be a really good bump, as it's when I pick up arcane accuracy, and then at 7th level I'll get spellstrike too, so I only need one hit for it to really count. I mean, I haven't actually played through those levels yet, but the theory looks reasonably decent from where I'm sitting.
But do you honestly think Paizo is going to take the time to go back and fix them when they can be spending that time cranking out new material that they can sell?
I mean, you say that like we already know everything that's going to be in Pathfinder Unchained. For all we know those PRCs may get a massive overhaul, since the Monk, Barbarian, and Rogue are getting beefier versions as well.
Anyway, I still wouldn't mind an "Ultimate Hybrids" book that turns most of the other prestige classes into base classes. REALLY want to see a divine Rage-Mage that's a mix of Oracle and Barbarian.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The PRCs are one thing. But this ruling mainly targets martials who were trying to remain viable vs the superstrong casters. Thanks for widening the disparity once more.
Please don't ever pretend not to hate martials, paizo.
Now now, the devs have been very clear in stating that the martial/caster disparity is nothing but an evil lie perpetrated by a shadowy cabal with a sinister agenda.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Some good stuffDoes blade adept change any of that calculation, though? Because you're saying 6th level is where you bottomed out, but my build expects that to actually be a really good bump, as it's when I pick up arcane accuracy, and then at 7th level I'll get spellstrike too, so I only need one hit for it to really count. I mean, I haven't actually played through those levels yet, but the theory looks reasonably decent from where I'm sitting.
If you're picking up Arcane Accuracy, then that means you're not picking up Eldritch Blade, and therefore your blackblade stops advancing when you hit EK.
And yes, Arcane Accuracy will help, but that's a pool point per turn. So, you can nova into competence, and the rest of the day, you're right there where I was.|
|
Frankly among the prc out there, arcane trickster and arcane archer do deserves the downgrade to being either alternate classes or new classes.
Eldritch Knight can be hit or miss, but far from being terrible and Arcanist (Blade Adept) at least make an effort of making, the prc viable by using caster levels instead of arcanist levels to determine the abilities of the intelligent blade.
Dragon Disciple, not much else to say about it, if that's what you are going for...congratulation, I guess.
|
|
If you're picking up Arcane Accuracy, then that means you're not picking up Eldritch Blade, and therefore your blackblade stops advancing when you hit EK.Some good stuffDoes blade adept change any of that calculation, though? Because you're saying 6th level is where you bottomed out, but my build expects that to actually be a really good bump, as it's when I pick up arcane accuracy, and then at 7th level I'll get spellstrike too, so I only need one hit for it to really count. I mean, I haven't actually played through those levels yet, but the theory looks reasonably decent from where I'm sitting.
I'll grab eldritch blade via Extra Exploit at 9th, when my CL starts advancing again. I had planned to do it sooner, but realized it was utterly wasted until then.
And yes, Arcane Accuracy will help, but that's a pool point per turn. So, you can nova into competence, and the rest of the day, you're right there where I was.
*nod* I get that, but I'm hoping that spellstrike will make up the difference on the other turns. A single attack that has an extra 5d6 kicker will help a lot; maybe not enough to make me equal to my hypothetical competition, but hopefully enough to make me still relevant to the combat. I'll use arcane accuracy on the turns I'm not casting, after I've already got haste in play.
Eventually - although probably not until 11th level - I could also pick up arcane weapon and/or dimensional slide, but I honestly am not sure it'd be worth it, especially the former, at least not without a houserule that eldritch blade also switches arcane weapon to running off of CL instead of class level.
But do you honestly think Paizo is going to take the time to go back and fix them when they can be spending that time cranking out new material that they can sell?
Nobody really thinks that.
It's easier to nerf stuff and bring it back in another book later. As seen with the titan mauler -> titan fighter. The latter would not have been so special if the first had not been nerfed prior to print.This way paizo erns money twice for the same basic idea.
Without early entry, arcane trickster can be entered at 6th level, eldritch knight and mystic theurge at 7th. Would rewriting their prereqs to bring them all to 6th level help? Is that enough? Traditionally PrCs have been limited to 6th+ across the board. Do we need to look at more serious changes to the PrCs once we get them to 6th level entry?
Honestly, I feel that even sixth level entry is too restrictive. In seven months of playing PFS the only PrC I've seen played outside of those created with the early entry loophole was a Dragon Disciple.
Most PrCs seem to be built on the concept of sixth level entry or later, focus on skills for classes that might not necessarily have a lot of skill points and/or feats that are only really useful for certain builds. Combine this with the fact that for most PrCs the first level is a dead level and a lot of them are fairly back loaded in terms of good class features and it's not surprising to me that very few people are willing to go to the effort without early entry.
I share Tels's sentiments here, and I think it shows that people who like this game aren't happy with the way it's being handled.Every time I see a FAQ like this, I come closer and closer to declaring Paizo unfit to issue rulings on their products.Declare all you want, it amounts to nothing more than whale farts.Some people, yes.
Others are fine with it.
{. . .}
Well, whichever side you're on, you've got to admit that this argument isn't going to run out of gas any time soon . . . .
Frankly among the prc out there, arcane trickster and arcane archer do deserves the downgrade to being either alternate classes or new classes.
Eldritch Knight can be hit or miss, but far from being terrible and Arcanist (Blade Adept) at least make an effort of making, the prc viable by using caster levels instead of arcanist levels to determine the abilities of the intelligent blade.
Dragon Disciple, not much else to say about it, if that's what you are going for...congratulation, I guess.
The Magus is pretty much what the EK wanted to be, so that's that.
Myrmidarch functions as the Arcane Archer (diminshed casting kinda sucks, but whatever). So, their probably doesn't NEED to be an Arcane Archer equivalent.
And the DD is still pretty strong. Barb/Sorc/DD vs pure Barbarian vs Bloodrager is a fair divide - each build has it's own strengths and weaknesses, and the three are pretty balanced with one another.
|
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Myrmidarch functions as the Arcane Archer (diminshed casting kinda sucks, but whatever). So, their probably don't NEED to be an Arcane Archer equivalent.
...except that myrmidarch doesn't actually function. Get us some errata on that, though, and you're probably right.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
And half-elfs and elfs and aasimar and and and...What does this mean for Arcane Strike? I suppose you need actual spellcasting now to qualify for it.Yes. Gnomes and Rogues are weeping.
And anyone that could take traits...
I wouldn´t mind that SLA empowered Arcane strike, but one cantrip being enough for Crafting, thats BS. Thats like I know how to use a plaster and I am an expert ingeneur, now let me do open heart surgery because the body is like a machine!
I can take them and only be able to cast cantrips. How does being able to cast light make me better at creating items then an SLA to cast light?
The problem is with the power level of Prestige Class features -- it makes absolutely no sense that a flavor ability that imitates a spell (such as daylight) serves to fulfill expertise requirements that would have been granted by actual magical training.
If you are sad about this change, don't ask for a reversal -- ask for better PrCs.
What I'd like to ask for is for the FAQ reversal to be reversed until better PrCs are made. Obviously that won't happen, but I'd be nice to dream.
I'd also love to see Arcane Strike modified to work with Spell-like Abilities. That makes sense to me, at least. Even an inkling of magical talent can be channeled to grant minor imbuement of weapons.
I don't think the FAQ was made to fix prestige classes. I think it was just a nice side affect of clarifying what the "just like spells" part of SLA's works. As such, I see this FAQ a separate issue from prestige classes.
Without early entry, arcane trickster can be entered at 6th level, eldritch knight and mystic theurge at 7th. Would rewriting their prereqs to bring them all to 6th level help? Is that enough? Traditionally PrCs have been limited to 6th+ across the board. Do we need to look at more serious changes to the PrCs once we get them to 6th level entry?Honestly, I feel that even sixth level entry is too restrictive. In seven months of playing PFS the only PrC I've seen played outside of those created with the early entry loophole was a Dragon Disciple.
Most PrCs seem to be built on the concept of sixth level entry or later, focus on skills for classes that might not necessarily have a lot of skill points and/or feats that are only really useful for certain builds. Combine this with the fact that for most PrCs the first level is a dead level and a lot of them are fairly back loaded in terms of good class features and it's not surprising to me that very few people are willing to go to the effort without early entry.
PrCs are not meant for PFS, if your character is guaranteed not to play after 12, then a PrC is a trap option.
AT, MT, and EK all cap at 16 or higher. PFS rarely even gets to 12. You won't even get half-way down your prestige class.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Frankly among the prc out there, arcane trickster and arcane archer do deserves the downgrade to being either alternate classes or new classes.
Eldritch Knight can be hit or miss, but far from being terrible and Arcanist (Blade Adept) at least make an effort of making, the prc viable by using caster levels instead of arcanist levels to determine the abilities of the intelligent blade.
Dragon Disciple, not much else to say about it, if that's what you are going for...congratulation, I guess.
The Magus is pretty much what the EK wanted to be, so that's that.
Myrmidarch functions as the Arcane Archer (diminshed casting kinda sucks, but whatever). So, their probably doesn't NEED to be an Arcane Archer equivalent.
And the DD is still pretty strong. Barb/Sorc/DD vs pure Barbarian vs Bloodrager is a fair divide - each build has it's own strengths and weaknesses, and the three are pretty balanced with one another.
Except that the magus doesn't fill the role of a sorcerer, bard, witch, or arcanist who wanted to go EK.
Except the myrmidarch doesn't fill the role of any of the above OR the ranger, paladin, monk, slayer, or ninja that wanted to go AA.
Point being that archetypes and hybrids DO NOT fill the gap left empty when PrC's were abandoned.
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Magus is pretty much what the EK wanted to be, so that's that.
The Magus functions as what a subset of EK's wanted to be, while bringing its own new bag of tricks. Which is why I like Magus just fine; but it's not a replacement for every EK build idea, and I really dislike the idea of replacing every prestige class with a new base class or archetype that only fits a particular subtype of what the prestige class could be used for. I especially dislike the idea of having a prestige class, that I may want to take less than all ten levels of, and replacing it with an archetype so that I can't do what I wanted with it anymore. Forcing anyone who wants to play an Arcane Archer to instead play a specific Magus archetype is an excellent example.
I don't want one way to play a guy with a bow that shoots spells at people. I want to be able to put together a guy with a bow that shoots spells at people my way. There are several classes that can cast arcane spells, and tons that can shoot a bow. I should be able to combine them however I want and then take the prestige class that's about doing both. An archetype of one class, that may well lose abilities that I don't particularly want to give up for a particular character can't hope to compete with the versatility of a prestige class.
Killing off prestige classes and discouraging multiclassing in general is something that I've always been unhappy about with Paizo. Multiclassing and prestige classes open options up to players, and the Paizo attitude of trying to "encourage" people to pick one class and colour inside the lines of that class for twenty levels just feels like restricting players from having badwrongfun with their game.
So, what about the prestige classes in the core rulebook make them weaker than they were in 3.5? Or is the complaint that the base classes are now better, so by comparison, the PrC's are 'broken'?
|
But do you honestly think Paizo is going to take the time to go back and fix them when they can be spending that time cranking out new material that they can sell?Nobody really thinks that.
It's easier to nerf stuff and bring it back in another book later. As seen with the titan mauler -> titan fighter. The latter would not have been so special if the first had not been nerfed prior to print.
This way paizo erns money twice for the same basic idea.
Bad example. Titan Fighter is still garbage compared to core fighter or the titan mauler. It can use a large sized greatsword for +3.5 damage per hit with no penalty. But it also has no accuracy or static damage bonus. Weapon Training alone gives +5 to hit and Damage, or +7 with gloves of dueling. A barbarian has rage to cover the gaps. Titan Fighter is a waste of an archetype.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Killing off prestige classes and discouraging multiclassing in general is something that I've always been unhappy about with Paizo. Multiclassing and prestige classes open options up to players, and the Paizo attitude of trying to "encourage" people to pick one class and colour inside the lines of that class for twenty levels just feels like restricting players from having badwrongfun with their game.
Oh, yeah, that's totally what Paizo is doing - I mean, if they wanted to make prestige classes more accessible and multiclassing easier, they'd remove racial restrictions on certain prestige classes and take away that dumb "your other classes have to be within X levels of your Favored Class or else you suffer an XP penalty, except humans who can ignore this for one class".
Oh, wait, that's right - they did exactly that.
If they try to discourage multiclassing by making single classes more appealing through archetypes, it's more because multiclassing has historically been (and still is in many cases), something that renders lots of builds UNDER-powered.
I mean, the fact that many archetypes or hybrid classes mention that they count as levels of other classes, and thus stack, totally means they hate multiclassing and think it badwrongfun that no-one should ever engage in.
You want to see hating on multiclassing? Look to 3rd and 3.5. DEFINITELY look to 4E. Hell, even 5th Edition can really d`ck you over when multiclassing (since stat gains are determined by class level, not character level), though at least pooled spellcasting is nice on their part there.
Wow Titan fighter is bad.
The armor training replacement wants to push you into TWF greatswords if you want to get the full benefit (believe it would help against twf size related penalties), but the only benefit of large weapons over to-hit would be the vital strike synergy instead of using power attack.
If you could get to a 6d6 weapon (class features + enlarge person) with greater vital strike for 24d6 damage, that seems somewhat decent. The class blocks that though by limiting penalty reduction to one size category larger.
Frankly among the prc out there, arcane trickster and arcane archer do deserves the downgrade to being either alternate classes or new classes.
Eldritch Knight can be hit or miss, but far from being terrible and Arcanist (Blade Adept) at least make an effort of making, the prc viable by using caster levels instead of arcanist levels to determine the abilities of the intelligent blade.
Dragon Disciple, not much else to say about it, if that's what you are going for...congratulation, I guess.
The Magus is pretty much what the EK wanted to be, so that's that.
Myrmidarch functions as the Arcane Archer (diminshed casting kinda sucks, but whatever). So, their probably doesn't NEED to be an Arcane Archer equivalent.
And the DD is still pretty strong. Barb/Sorc/DD vs pure Barbarian vs Bloodrager is a fair divide - each build has it's own strengths and weaknesses, and the three are pretty balanced with one another.
Except that the magus doesn't fill the role of a sorcerer, bard, witch, or arcanist who wanted to go EK.
Except the myrmidarch doesn't fill the role of any of the above OR the ranger, paladin, monk, slayer, or ninja that wanted to go AA.
Point being that archetypes and hybrids DO NOT fill the gap left empty when PrC's were abandoned.
There is the Arcane Duelist, Hexcrafter, and Eldritch Scion to fill those gaps.
And there is an Arcanist archetype that is based on a weapon.| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Can't in PFS.Good to know a lot viable of concepts are garbage again.*shrug* Don't like it, keep using the old ruling.
Like I care.
EDIT: Does this also mean that the newly-released familiar-toting Fighter archetype will be unable to take Improved Familiar as he lacks caster levels or any way of adding them through SLAs? That's disappointing and odd.
I don't think you need to worry there, because if you look at the RAW, Improved Familiar rules don't scale on "arcane caster level", the table references "arcane spellcaster level"... Spellcasters' levels being measured in Class Levels of spellcasting classes, i.e. Wizard levels, which in this case the Fighter levels count as (like how Ranger Level -3 counts as Druid Levels for Companion ability).
The Pre Req line simply states "sufficiently high level", where "level" by itself basically always is used to refer to class level (when in reference to characters, as opposed to spell levels, etc). The base Familiar ability itself's "scaling abilities" explicitly key off of "class level", so it should be EXPECTED that Imp Familiar functionality is in line with that, rather than establishing a usually-similar-but-not-quite scaling mechanic... That they don't use the exact same wording is indeed unfortunate and confusing (and should be Errata'd), but "spellcaster level" is AFAIK nowhere else used as a stand-in for the defined game term "caster level", so I see no reason to ignore the fact that "spellcaster levels" are something that is measured in class levels, and therefore understand the term "spellcaster level" as a measure of (certain) class levels in this case.
I'm always game for a good I-told-ya-so.
I think a better solution to this whole thing would be giving the older PRCs some small buffs.
Since PF hates prestige classes, I think they should just expand them out into full classes. A third party publisher has already done this for several of them.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Like I care.Can't in PFS.Good to know a lot viable of concepts are garbage again.*shrug* Don't like it, keep using the old ruling.
Like I care about your lack of caring.
PFS is a major part of Pathfinder for a lot of players. You are free to ignore any FAQ or any actual rule in your home games. They aren't.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also as a guide writer, can we get a moment of silence for the Mystic Theurge guide that just exploded thanks to this.Yeah, that sucks. Sorry.
As observed elsewhere, perhaps this FAQ change is a prelude to revamping the core prestige class entry requirements.
I'll believe it when I see it.
And probably not even then, considering that as we've just proved, a FAQ that' been in place for years can get repealed with the snap of a finger.
Who's to say that a year and a half from then Paizo doesn't just decide to go "Yeah, PrCs are useful and we don't want that. Bye FAQ."
The only thing we have to guarantee that doesn't happen is trust in the company, which they've pretty effectively eroded over the past year or two.
Since PF hates prestige classes, I think they should just expand them out into full classes. A third party publisher has already done this for several of them.I'm always game for a good I-told-ya-so.
I think a better solution to this whole thing would be giving the older PRCs some small buffs.
They did with a few of the ACG classes really.
EK is the magus, Assasin is completely outclassed by the Slayer, White Mage can do some Mystic Theurge esk things, or that Spell Sage. I actually found that I like the draconic blooded bloodrager better than the DD.
The only original PrC that really can't be done better by an existing class is the Arcane Trickster, and that is assuming you don't like the Greensting Slayer.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bad example. Titan Fighter is still garbage compared to core fighter or the titan mauler. It can use a large sized greatsword for +3.5 damage per hit with no penalty. But it also has no accuracy or static damage bonus. Weapon Training alone gives +5 to hit and Damage, or +7 with gloves of dueling. A barbarian has rage to cover the gaps. Titan Fighter is a waste of an archetype.But do you honestly think Paizo is going to take the time to go back and fix them when they can be spending that time cranking out new material that they can sell?Nobody really thinks that.
It's easier to nerf stuff and bring it back in another book later. As seen with the titan mauler -> titan fighter. The latter would not have been so special if the first had not been nerfed prior to print.
This way paizo erns money twice for the same basic idea.
But its announcement helped sell the book. And that's what matters.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Like I care.Can't in PFS.Good to know a lot viable of concepts are garbage again.*shrug* Don't like it, keep using the old ruling.Like I care about your lack of caring.
PFS is a major part of Pathfinder for a lot of players. You are free to ignore any FAQ or any actual rule in your home games. They aren't.
Which is why they b+$+@ and moan about every little thing until they get their way until a rule is changed for the entire game instead of just for PFS, like what happened with Crane Wing.
If PFS imploded tomorrow the game would probably be better for it. Or took advantage of the fact that they use their own special brand of houserules, and changed stuff PFS players were complaining about JUST FOR PFS instead of everyone.
Design Manager
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Magus is pretty much what the EK wanted to be, so that's that.
Is it though? Because they play completely differently, have the potential for very different spell lists and combinations of class features, etc.
I don't really have a horse in this race, having never actually played using the loophole, but I feel like there were two equally balanced ways to go here, and the option that was chosen was the one that restricted character options instead of enabling them, which I'm not a big fan of.
Hopefully they use the more predictable nature of this ruling to launch either solid fixes to the negatively impacted materials, or to make some new materials that are worthwhile and help fill that design space.