Sacred Fist change from Full BAB to 3 / 4 BAB - help understanding


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 175 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Everything I have read is that people hate the changes to this archetype.

I on the other hand don't understand some of them.

Everyone was happy with the Full BAB that the Archetype had.
So I'm confused Full BAB all the time or just with Flurry?
If so, how?
If they changed it, how?
First guess is it had do do with that line from the flurry errata:

Quote:
except the sacred fist’s attack bonus from warpriest levels does not count as his warpriest level

And I don't understand that.

I tried to go back to the Monk's Flurry to see if that had any sense in it but there was nothing I could fined.

So what am I missing.

Any help would be great. ...actually lots of help would be great


1 person marked this as a favorite.

When flurrying, the Monk is treated to have BAB = class level, rather than 3/4 BAB.

The Sacred Fist had the ability to get flurry for the extra attacks, but it nowhere mentioned that they got BAB = class level.

Now it's explicitly clarified they don't.

Change is fine and balanced though. Try the class out.


Given the huge amount of resources available to a sacred fist my guess is that even with this "clarification" the class will still easily outperform even an unchained monk. It is somewhat vexing though because it makes the archetype much more dependent on buffs relative to other classes and a bit more difficult for inexperienced players to use since the penalty for poor spell selection and buffing tactics is little higher.


p-sto wrote:
Given the huge amount of resources available to a sacred fist my guess is that even with this "clarification" the class will still easily outperform even an unchained monk.

Hyperbole.


Blessings, fervor, spells and a ki pool compared to the unchained monk that gets style strikes, a ki pool and ki powers that are about as powerful as blessings. Though perhaps you're right, the ability to 1.5 strength to damage in flurry probably isn't a class feature I should brush off so easily, the game isn't all about resource management.

Shadow Lodge

ngc7293 wrote:

Everything I have read is that people hate the changes to this archetype.

I on the other hand don't understand some of them.

Everyone was happy with the Full BAB that the Archetype had.
So I'm confused Full BAB all the time or just with Flurry?
If so, how?
If they changed it, how?
First guess is it had do do with that line from the flurry errata:

Quote:
except the sacred fist’s attack bonus from warpriest levels does not count as his warpriest level

And I don't understand that.

I tried to go back to the Monk's Flurry to see if that had any sense in it but there was nothing I could fined.

So what am I missing.

Any help would be great. ...actually lots of help would be great

I think you might be overstating this a bit. From most of the threads I've seen, the original Sacred Fist was counted as hands-down better than the base Warpriest, and that pseudo full BaB was one of the big reasons.

It was also a pretty popular idea that it was probably not intentional, either because it was not corrected after the base Warpriest lost it's pseudo BaB or because it wasn't actually intentional to begin with.

For the most part, at least on the boards, it seems most people are ok with the change, (though a lot would still rather have the Warpriest itself with the pseudo full BaB). The Sacred Fist is still pretty good, and still slightly better than the Warpriest itself in a lot of ways.


(though a lot would still rather have the Warpriest itself with the pseudo full BaB): This. A lot of us never liked that the pseudo full BAB went away after the playtest and the sacred fist was a way to get it back. I don't know if I'll play a 'plain' warpriest without it.


graystone wrote:
(though a lot would still rather have the Warpriest itself with the pseudo full BaB): This. A lot of us never liked that the pseudo full BAB went away after the playtest and the sacred fist was a way to get it back. I don't know if I'll play a 'plain' warpriest without it.

Try it out.

Scarab Sages

It works surprisingly well. It's also the only way I would play a vital strike build, which with greater weapon of the chosen is very solid.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

There's so many other classes I want to play that I feel comfortable not playing a 3/4 BaB 6 level caster with a gimped spell list (before the ACG, all 6 level casters had tailor made spell lists. There was a reason for that), only 2+Int skills, bad case of the MADs, and inferior versions of paladin and Cleric features (Sacred Weapon's ability to add Enhancement is a crappy version of Divine Bond, Blessings are bad Domains, Sacred Armor is likewise a worse version of a Paladin archetype ability).

"Ooh it gets to deal 2d6 damage with a dagger eventually" yippee skippy. It has nothing else that piques my interest except maybe Fervor.

Its only redeeming quality as a class was "Monk that doesn't suck", so Paizo in their infinite wisdom decided to nerf it to "Monk who sucks less" instead.

I'll play an Inquisitor or a Psychic Warrior again any day.


Don't play it then. The fact you don't like it doesn't mean it's not a perfectly solid class. It only means you don't like it.

Liberty's Edge

I wouldn't go so far as to say it sucks, but the warpriest really could have use it's own spell list. And 4+ skill points per level. As for the Sacred Fist, I'm not super cool about having to use fervor+divine favor to get back to where the core monk is. Sure you can use fates favored so it's actually a boost, and you come out ahead in time, but balancing anything around the core monk is a bad idea, even if it's only at low level play.


Deighton Thrane wrote:
I wouldn't go so far as to say it sucks, but the warpriest really could have use it's own spell list. And 4+ skill points per level. As for the Sacred Fist, I'm not super cool about having to use fervor+divine favor to get back to where the core monk is. Sure you can use fates favored so it's actually a boost, and you come out ahead in time, but balancing anything around the core monk is a bad idea, even if it's only at low level play.

Unlike the core monk, though, you eventually get level 2 spells, and you are able to pull out way ahead.

And then you get level 3 spells...

Additionally, I do believe that the Warpriest should have had 4+skills per level.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Really, I firmly believe every class that isn't primarily dependent on Intelligence should have a minimum of 4+Int skills per level. Any less and you have all sorts of weirdness at first level when you're lacking skills that you should at least be competent in based on your backstory, then you get to spend the next few levels spreading around your precious few skill points to fill in the gaps. Hope you didn't want a skill just for flavor.


*most* fullcasters getting 2 skill points/level makes sense. You can solve 90% of things with magic that you have on hand, and the other 10% of things with magic you can have on hand next time you prepare spells. And wizards have a high INT to make up for lost skill points. They won't come anywhere near the number of skills as a Bard or Rogue pumping all their points into INT, but they can make up for lost ground by being significantly more effective in combat and out of combat by using INT for spells.

For fighters, depending on your view, getting 2 skill points/level makes sense. You fight so much that you literally don't have time for anything else. Of course, fighters don't have many ways to patch that lack of skill points up, as combat feats are nowhere near the power or versatility of spells, and there are few incentives to boost INT. Mechanically speaking, fighters should get more skills just as a matter of balance. A fighter of average intelligence (10) will have just as many skill points as a barbarian who tanked INT (7). And literally every other class has a way to boost skill checks built in. As terrible as Trap Sense may be, both Rogues and Barbarians get it. Monks have their acrobatic jumpy thing, most other classes have spells or alchemy. Cavalier gets orders, Swashbuckler and Gunslinger have deeds. And even some full casters such as Oracle and Shaman have better skill points/level. Fighter at least deserves 4/level.

Rant aside, I agree that fighters and fighter derivatives could use more skills.

Liberty's Edge

ZZTRaider wrote:
Really, I firmly believe every class that isn't primarily dependent on Intelligence should have a minimum of 4+Int skills per level. Any less and you have all sorts of weirdness at first level when you're lacking skills that you should at least be competent in based on your backstory, then you get to spend the next few levels spreading around your precious few skill points to fill in the gaps. Hope you didn't want a skill just for flavor.

That's specifically one of my house rules. Only int bases casters can have 2+ skills per level, everybody else 4+ minimum. And Secret Wizard, I agree they're a better choice at higher level, I'm just not a huge fan of a number of classes being inferior than similar classes for 3-4 levels, like the investigator. I hate that they have to wait til 4th level to get studied combat. Before that they're basically a worse alchemist.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Secret Wizard wrote:
graystone wrote:
(though a lot would still rather have the Warpriest itself with the pseudo full BaB): This. A lot of us never liked that the pseudo full BAB went away after the playtest and the sacred fist was a way to get it back. I don't know if I'll play a 'plain' warpriest without it.
Try it out.

Well, I tried out the sacred fist and it didn't seem overpowered in the least. In fact it seems pretty much in the sweet spot. That leaves me thinking that a 'normal' warpriest would have to have some buff spells active every fight to get up to 'normal' so instead of using spells to do cool things, I'm spending them to keep up. So the spells aren't really a bonus when they're pre-spent to keep you relevant.

Imbicatus: You may have a point with a vital strike/weapon of the chosen builds. I haven't built one so it might work. It's just not a build I'd normally make.

Deighton Thrane: I look at it a similar way. I play 1-10th levels most times. If a class really only comes into it's own later in the game, I'll almost never see it.


Rynjin wrote:
"Ooh it gets to deal 2d6 damage with a dagger eventually" yippee skippy. It has nothing else that piques my interest except maybe Fervor.

Compared to other features, increased damage dice is an afterthought that's simply there to make favored weapons more viable. I don't know why people think that's the big Warpriest feature.

Swift action Divine Favor - particularly with Fate's Favored - is basically an instant upgrade to martial class level, putting a Warpriest on par with other frontline AB. Things like Sacred Weapon and a pile of Level = BAB bonus feats make it a very powerful combatant that can do things with feats no other divine class could hope to do.

But I guess this has all been gone over before. Some people look at it and say "psh, 3/4BAB and stunted Cleric casting, it's junk". Other people calculate what can happen with numbers and tactics when all it's abilities and bonus feats come together with a little build-alchemy.


BadBird: So I can spend my spells, Fervor and feats so I can be a fighter? Not exactly high praise. When I was playing the sacred fist, I was using fervor to cast interesting spells instead of casting spells to make up the BAB gap.

As far as "no other divine class could hope to do", paladin do pretty well.

Some people look at it and say "psh, 3/4BAB and stunted Cleric casting, it's junk": I did more than look, I played a old sacred fist. I don't see myself enjoying the same character with the lower BAB. I'd be playing a fighter that has to buff first.

Now Imbicatus may be on to something with his build but I'm wary of putting all my eggs in one basket since there are plenty of ways to mess up a single attack. If it IS a viable combat method, it might be usable.


This is my Vital Strike/Weapon of the Chosen Warpriest. He's okay.

Rarely missing his one big hit a round because he gets to roll twice is neat. He IS reliant on having Fervored Fate's Favored Divine Favor up. He's currently in his prime, as he has finally gotten Vital Strike and can actually sort of compare to a full-attacking martial right now. But past level 8 Vital Strike gets kind of lame, until he gets the Improved version at level 11. It once again falls off after 12-13 until, he gets Greater at level 16.

It's not bad, really. I'd almost never play a base Warpriest if given the option to play PoW, though, because it's really very simplistic. It's all just "cast Divine Favor and use Vital Strike" and he doesn't even really have enough spells or skill points to be terribly useful outside of combat.

The Sacred Fist changes were a little heavy handed, but now it's likely right on par with the normal Warpriest: playable, but nothing impressive.


graystone wrote:

BadBird: So I can spend my spells, Fervor and feats so I can be a fighter?

Here's the problem:

1. Ideally, no class should fully imitate a fighter, because that undermines fighters themselves. But considering the state of a no-stamina fighter in terms of balance, I can understand this being a bad thing, particularly because you have more ramp up time.

2. You are not spending abilities to be A fighter, you should be spending them to be SEVERAL fighters, adapting to each situation. The fighter is dead on water if the enemy can deter his favored tactics. The cleric will be done buffing by next week by the time he can fully adapt to a battle. But the Warpriest can swift action in whatever buff would be needed.

If anything, I think the Warpriest suffers from not having more ability to spontaneously cast some spells.


Secret Wizard: As Rezol Born-in-Steel points out, it's not "swift action in whatever buff would be needed" but a swift to get a "Fate's Favored Divine Favor" because the class "IS reliant" on it.

That's my main issue. Fervor is a sweet ability but if you spend it all on getting your BAB from 3/4 to full, then all it's really doing is being full BAB disguised as a cool new feature. I LOVED it when my sacred fist COULD swift action whatever spell was needed/wanted but those days are gone. Now it's Full BAB fervor.


The main problem here is the Inquisitor does it better.

He gets long term buffs like Heroism the Warpriest and Cleric don't have, along with most of the buffs like Divine Favor it DOES have, plus Judgement (or Studied Target) and Bane.

Plus more skills, a Domain, and several unique and flavorful abilities that aren't just +1 to attack/damage or AC.

If I'm going to play a 6th level casting beatstick, why would I pick a Warpriest over Inquisitor?


Plate Armor and Swift Action summons.

Protip: Only one of those things is a game changer.

Scarab Sages

Sacred Fist Flurry of Blows with Fervor Blood Crow Strike =)


graystone wrote:
BadBird: So I can spend my spells, Fervor and feats so I can be a fighter? Not exactly high praise. When I was playing the sacred fist, I was using fervor to cast interesting spells instead of casting spells to make up the BAB gap.

You spend a level 1 spell to make up most of the difference, and then use other class features and spells to do all kinds of other things. It's obviously a combat class primarily, but things like Divine-Favor-buffed Admonishing Ray and Instrument of Agony certainly give it some spell-character.

graystone wrote:
As far as "no other divine class could hope to do", paladin do pretty well.

That's a pretty glaring misquote. "that can do things with feats no other divine class could hope to do". By level 9 a Warpriest has collected 3 BAB=Level bonus combat feats and free Focus. Thus, way more feat-based build options.

graystone wrote:
Now Imbicatus may be on to something with his build but I'm wary of putting all my eggs in one basket since there are plenty of ways to mess up a single attack. If it IS a viable combat method, it might be usable.

Vital Strike is an obvious application of BAB = Level bonus feats, but TWF can really exploit the fact that many of the Warpriest's best assets are "+damage per hit". For example, by level 6 you can be using ITWF with a shield, doing 1d8 with that shield, and adding static damage bonuses to it.

Rynjin wrote:

The main problem here is the Inquisitor does it better.

If I'm going to play a 6th level casting beatstick, why would I pick a Warpriest over Inquisitor?

Because they're both strong combatants and play in very different ways? There are a ton of potential builds I'd love to try with a Warpriest that an Inquisitor couldn't pull off due to lack of feats, so personally I'm quite pleased it exists. If you don't care about feats or the things you can do with Blessings like Destructive Attacks or the Quicken Travel Blessing pounce, then nobody is forcing you to play a Warpriest.


Inquisitor is also a spontaneous class, and has VERY LITTLE in the way of adaptability.

Plus, if you are going to handwave the turns the Inquisitor must spend buffing...


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Secret Wizard wrote:

Inquisitor is also a spontaneous class, and has VERY LITTLE in the way of adaptability.

Plus, if you are going to handwave the turns the Inquisitor must spend buffing...

Man, all those turns spent buffing with your 10 min/level or hour/level spells before combat really matter a ton.

Oh wait, no they don't.


BadBird:

spend a level 1 spell to make up most of the difference: My point is that you're using up fervor and spells to get to a full BAB and NOT using it for something extra. The "Divine-Favor-buffed Admonishing Ray and Instrument of Agony" is only after using two resources up.

That's a pretty glaring misquote: I had NO idea you where talking about just the AMOUNT of feats, I thought you where talking about WHAT feats could be taken. It was a quote that was accurate on my understanding of what you where talking about and not an intentional misquote.

The paladin has less feat but all are at full BAB, so there are pro's and cons to both. Volume of total feats vs volume of full BAB feat is a toss up.

TWF: I was working with a character with flurry so I'm not seeing how TWF would be much different.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
My point is that you're using up fervor and spells to get to a full BAB and NOT using it for something extra.

I see casting a level 1 spell as a swift action on 'round 1' as a miniscule use of resources and time in the grand scheme of things.

graystone wrote:
The paladin has less feat but all are at full BAB, so there are pro's and cons to both. Volume of total feats vs volume of full BAB feat is a toss up.

The Warpriest's bonus feats at 3/6/9 count as full BAB. Even aside from that, for builds requiring quantity of feats, the Paladin's potential maximum of 6 feats by level 9 is simply crushed by the Warpriest's potential maximum of 11.

graystone wrote:
TWF: I was working with a character with flurry so I'm not seeing how TWF would be much different.

The Sacred Fist is working with a limited selection of poor weapons, no bonus feats other than very inconveniently placed Style feats (6/12), and some missing Warpriest features, which potentially makes it a quite different combat experience.

For example, the Sacred Fist can't charge with a high-die Sacred Weapon scimitar in two hands and then break into high-die scimitar-and-cestus TWF crossed with two-handed Cornugon->Hurtful strikes. Or for another example, a Sacred Fist can't wear full-plate and go rapier-and-spiked-light-shield using TWF with Shield Slam and Amateur Swashbuckler with Extra Panache to fuel a Blue Scarf Swordmaster's Flair in his shield-hand and Pommel Strike standard attacks.

It's certainly true that if you play a Warpriest and don't really use those bonus feats it's a far less interesting class.


Cao Phen wrote:
Sacred Fist Flurry of Blows with Fervor Blood Crow Strike =)

You can't actually do that, sadly.


Any concrete reason? It's patently ridiculous cheese but seems to be legal per the RAW, however you can apply it to something as poorly written as that spell.


Quote:
As a swift action, a warpriest can expend one use of this ability to cast any one warpriest spell he has prepared. When cast in this way, the spell can target only the warpriest, even if it could normally affect other or multiple targets.

So unless you want to bloodcrow strike yourself in the face...


I remember during the playtest that a large concern was how it differentiated itself from Inquisitor. Even now that's a pretty serious concern for the Warpriest.

Pretty much unless you're planning to abuse swift action summonings or going Divine Commander you're almost always better off going Inquisitor. Whatever minor or non-existent DPR loss you will incur is made up for by

4 more skill points
Monster Lore
Stern gaze
Track
Bonus initiative
Unique Spell list with some very useful spells
An Inquisition which can often be better than 2 blessings.

What does the Warpriest have over Inquisitor that actually matters?

-Can take some combat feats earlier (Matters for archery and mounted combat)
-Can quicken summon blessings
-Heavy Armor Prof (can be up to a 3 AC difference)
-Cleric Style casting so it's possible to be rewarded for advance knowledge on foes in some cases

It really depends on what kind of campaign you're running, but I know I'd rather see an Inquisitor on my side.


I always forget it's not a buff spell.


hi all.
we are using the german rules. a friend of mine was planning to Play a sacred fist and his build was with full BAB.

Can somebody link the errata where it got changed. or is it FAQd? my english is not enough to understand precisly yet how he had full BAB before and now only 3/4. thx


Quote:
Page 131—In the Sacred Fist archetype’s Weapon and Armor Proficiency, before the last sentence, add “When wearing armor, using a shield, or carrying a medium or heavy load, a sacred fist loses his AC bonus and flurry of blows.” In the AC Bonus ability, in the third sentence, change “deflection” to “dodge”. At the end of Pathfinder RPG Advanced Class Guide First Printing, Update 1.05 the ability, add the sentence “This counts as the monk ability of the same name, and the sacred fist’s warpriest levels stack with monk levels for determining the benefits.” In the Flurry of Blows ability, at the end of the second sentence, add “, except the sacred fist’s attack bonus from warpriest levels does not count as his warpriest level.


BadBird:

I see casting a level 1 spell as a swift action on 'round 1' as a miniscule use of resources and time in the grand scheme of things: You only have so much fervor. No matter how "miniscule" each use is, if you never get to use it for anything else, it's just full BAB disguised as something else. Not exciting...

Sacred fist: I was using the OLD pummeling charge so it was a clustered shot + improved crit. SO it wasn't a "poor weapon". In addition, the old Sacred Fist could flurry in armor. So again, "I'm not seeing how TWF would be much different."

Scarab Sages

LoneKnave wrote:
Quote:
As a swift action, a warpriest can expend one use of this ability to cast any one warpriest spell he has prepared. When cast in this way, the spell can target only the warpriest, even if it could normally affect other or multiple targets.
So unless you want to bloodcrow strike yourself in the face...

Forgot that it is for buff only.

Well, back to Quicken SLA with BCS for monks.


LoneKnave wrote:
Quote:
As a swift action, a warpriest can expend one use of this ability to cast any one warpriest spell he has prepared. When cast in this way, the spell can target only the warpriest, even if it could normally affect other or multiple targets.
So unless you want to bloodcrow strike yourself in the face...

Some of us trained with the best Judean suicide squards.

Also, things no one seems to have mentioned: The Sacred Fist is now a bit MAD. When you have not-insignificant reliance on a casting stat, that's actually very burdensome.


Physically Unfeasible wrote:
LoneKnave wrote:
Quote:
As a swift action, a warpriest can expend one use of this ability to cast any one warpriest spell he has prepared. When cast in this way, the spell can target only the warpriest, even if it could normally affect other or multiple targets.
So unless you want to bloodcrow strike yourself in the face...

Some of us trained with the best Judean suicide squards.

Also, things no one seems to have mentioned: The Sacred Fist is now a bit MAD. When you have not-insignificant reliance on a casting stat, that's actually very burdensome.

The other real irony is that the Sacred Fist could easily be matched or beaten by the basic Warpriest depending on what you took:

An Archery-base Warpriest could do a pretty ludicrous number of attacks each round.

A Natural Weapons Warpriest could fairly easily out-damage a a Sacred Fist, or at worst keep up with it.

A Warpriest combining Unarmed and Natural Attacks blew the Sacred Fist out of the water for number of attacks AND for damage as a result.

A Crit-based Warpriest had its own levels of absolute nonsense.

And this was all BEFORE the Sacred Fist got hit with the nerf bat of "Class Level =/= BAB when Flurrying".

A Gunslinging Warpriest is hilariously SAD - takes until about lv4, but once you hit Warpriest 4, you can take Guided Hand and boom! All you need is love WISDOM!

The Sacred Fist is still good, but now it's no longer "Better than the base Warpriest 85% of the time".

Arguably, the base Warpriest actually ends up being a massively more-competent Unarmed combatant now, since it could almost always keep up with the number of Attacks and Damage based solely on using Sacred Weapon; that hasn't changed for the Warpriest, but the Sacred Fist now gets fewer attacks, meaning the Warpriest's Sacred Weapon gives it a MASSIVE edge over the SF.

The base Warpriest can take TWF, ITWF, and GTWF, can use 'em in Armor, and even after taking Weapon Finesse and a few others, it STILL has several Feat Slots open that the Sacred Fist does not.


chbgraphicarts wrote:
The base Warpriest can take TWF, ITWF, and GTWF, can use 'em in Armor, and even after taking Weapon Finesse and a few others, it STILL has several Feat Slots open that the Sacred Fist does not.

Well, I suppose the issue is that the Sacred Fist is a Cleric/Monk.

As we all know, Paizo hates Monks. :P

I think we've long evolved into a thread analysing the Sacred Fist (from answering the OP's question) by this point. Personally, in a twist to find out for its own sake (and because there's a lot of vitriol on the forums at the moment so I'll make a shot for useful things):
What is Sacred Fist good for? What can be achieved using Sacred Fist that is useful?

All I can think of is it's an ok 3-level dip:
IUA, some spells, fervor (assuming you weren't going to dump WIS), and Blessed Fortitude.
Though given the last of those is an 11th level Inquisitor ability, I'd say that's worth it if you're trying to cobble up some saves-for-days build.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Physically Unfeasible wrote:
chbgraphicarts wrote:
The base Warpriest can take TWF, ITWF, and GTWF, can use 'em in Armor, and even after taking Weapon Finesse and a few others, it STILL has several Feat Slots open that the Sacred Fist does not.

Well, I suppose the issue is that the Sacred Fist is a Cleric/Monk.

As we all know, Paizo hates Monks. :P

I think we've long evolved into a thread analysing the Sacred Fist (from answering the OP's question) by this point. Personally, in a twist to find out for its own sake (and because there's a lot of vitriol on the forums at the moment so I'll make a shot for useful things):
What is Sacred Fist good for? What can be achieved using Sacred Fist that is useful?

Well, the Sacred Fist is STILL excellent for Unarmed builds, especially those focused on Strength. The base Warpriest is just better, ironically.

An Unarmed Warpriest needs to focus on Dex to not fall hard into MAD territory, which means you need to take Weapon Finesse and buy at least an Agile AOMF. A Warpriest also needs to take Double Slice to get full ability mods to Offhand attacks.

And then there's the whole matter that there are far fewer bonuses to Dex than there are buffs for Str.

The biggest downside to being a Sacred Fist is that you don't count as a Fighter for your Bonus Feats, meaning a Warpriest becomes more accurate and hits harder because of Focus/Specialization feats. The really sad/hilarious thing is that prior to this errata, the base Warpriest was only ever 1 BAB point behind the SF for accuracy and fairly equal for damage because of WF/GWF/WS/GWS stacking with Sacred Weapon... at least until the SF hit about lv15, where it FINALLY edged out the WP pretty squarely (and even then, 2+ Natural Attacks put that arms race back in heated contention again).

The base Warpriest may beat the SF out for damage, but the Sacred Fist will cost you less in Gear and doesn't require you to do as much planning for effectiveness via Feat choices.

---

BOTH are pretty substantially better Unarmed combatants than the base Monk due to their ability to swift-cast buffs on themselves. However, the Sacred Fist now isn't any more effective than the Unchained Monk, Brawler, or Earth/Fire/Water/Airbender Elemental Ascetic.


Deighton Thrane wrote:
I wouldn't go so far as to say it sucks, but the warpriest really could have use it's own spell list.

Honestly, the only spell that screams that it needs to be on the Warpriest spell list is Enlarge Person.

Most of the other buffs and other spells are pretty fine where they are.

Enlarge Person is just one of those spells that I keep wanting to put on a Wapriest, and am constantly reminded of "no, it's not a Cleric spell - it's a Domain-only spell". It's like THE spell you'd expect for this class, but, nope - Sorc/Wizard only...

True Strike could also stand to be there, but swift-casted True Strike every round might be a little totally broken.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I want a lot of small changes for the warpriest, but the obvious thing it should have had was being able to use fervor for spells on its equipped equipment.

The biggest change it needs is consolidating its 4 resource pools into one. It's currently far too much book keeping.

Sovereign Court

chbgraphicarts wrote:
True Strike could also stand to be there, but swift-casted True Strike every round might be a little totally broken.

Might? Lol - think of a Greater Dirty Trick build.


Melkiador wrote:

I want a lot of small changes for the warpriest, but the obvious thing it should have had was being able to use fervor for spells on its equipped equipment.

The biggest change it needs is consolidating its 4 resource pools into one. It's currently far too much book keeping.

+1


Melkiador wrote:

I want a lot of small changes for the warpriest, but the obvious thing it should have had was being able to use fervor for spells on its equipped equipment.

The biggest change it needs is consolidating its 4 resource pools into one. It's currently far too much book keeping.

Sacred Weapon +X, Sacred Armor +Y, Fervor Nd6, and Blessing effects are hard to keep track of?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
chbgraphicarts wrote:
Melkiador wrote:

I want a lot of small changes for the warpriest, but the obvious thing it should have had was being able to use fervor for spells on its equipped equipment.

The biggest change it needs is consolidating its 4 resource pools into one. It's currently far too much book keeping.

Sacred Weapon +X, Sacred Armor +Y, Fervor Nd6, and Blessing effects are hard to keep track of?

You don't just have to keep track of what bonus they give, but of how many uses you have of each, and they all use different formula for calculating their daily allotments. This is in addition to keeping track of all of the spells you have as a 6th level caster.

Edit: Though when I said "biggest", I meant that more as widest reaching instead of most important.

1 to 50 of 175 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Sacred Fist change from Full BAB to 3 / 4 BAB - help understanding All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.