Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game

Starfinder


Pathfinder Society


Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Weakest / strongest / favorite Class of each Chassis


Pathfinder RPG General Discussion

101 to 150 of 162 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:

I guess I'm always a bit taken a back by how popular the bard is.
Is it fun? Yes
Is it good in a party? Yes
Is it full of interesting options for makings lots of different exciting bard builds? I'd say no, not without archetypes, which is why I don't really get why so many people are enamored with them. I always look at the class and feel like there is only really one thing to do with the class features you're given. Compared with an Occultist or an Alchemist.

This is intresting to me because my brain went the other direction. For the full Bab no casting. Everyone loves the barbarian because of beast totem pounce and spell sunder. It's the majority of the builds I see and it's great but it's also common. Brawlers don't have a lot of support but strangler, wild child, mutgnic mauler, Snakebite, and exemplar are each unique and exciting.

Slayers excel and so many different build types and have small stackable archtypes.

Shadow Lodge

Garbage-Tier Waifu wrote:


  • 0.75/6: Arsenal Chaplan Warpriest. Cannot be matched for pure DPS by even full BAB classes....
  • I see that they get Weapon Training and can save a feat (by not have to manually take Quicken Blessing), but that doesn't seem sufficient to merit the title of DPR champ. What am I missing?

    (Fabulous handle, BTW. <thumbs up>)


    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    Weirdo wrote:


    I'm not surprised to see that it's one of the better liked classes in that category - but I'm surprised that it's 50% ahead of the next runner up

    I guess I'm always a bit taken a back by how popular the bard is.

    Is it fun? Yes
    Is it good in a party? Yes
    Is it full of interesting options for makings lots of different exciting bard builds? I'd say no, not without archetypes, which is why I don't really get why so many people are enamored with them. I always look at the class and feel like there is only really one thing to do with the class features you're given. Compared with an Occultist or an Alchemist.
    {. . .}

    On the other hand, it has a ton of archetypes, several of which are actually pretty good . . . .

    Lantern Lodge

    avr wrote:


    They're more or less required to use a single one-handed or light weapon with a decent crit range (OK, you could make a str-based swashbuckler who carries a heavy pick and dresses in full plate armor, but that gets people's hackles up.) That's a fairly tight restriction on the build. It also limits the usefulness of power attack or piranha strike to improve damage and makes sure they stay a step behind the other full BAB types in DPR. Not a huge step but it's there.

    Fort saves aren't that critical. Also, they can shore up that weakness with charmed life. People say it's a hindrance but they are looking at it incorrectly. On fights where you are worried and need to use charmed life, don't use your reaction to parry save it for charmed life.

    Also, the DPR difference is a myth. Swashbucklers are actually ahead of a two-hander in DPR. Essentially every 4 levels the two hander is getting +3 damage off power attack. A Swashbuckler is getting +2 from power attack +4 from precise strike. Other classes have ways to add their level to damage but they are limited. Combine this snowballing damage bump plus the extra attacks / durability from parrying and a higher AC... You're looking at a nice package.

    The swashbuckler is all about managing your reactions / swift actions properly. Do I think it could function better? Absolutely but it's far from the worst class.

    RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

    Swashbucklers should get an immediate action AND a swift action every round, instead of one or the other. Or a way to use AoOs to activate their fast abilities. Oh well....

    I guess swashbucklers are about very short term resource management. Instead of spells per day or ki points per day, or rounds of rage per day, etc., they have to manage their swift/immediate action each round. That's an interesting take on the class you have there kaisc006. Neat! :-D


    Sir Thugsalot wrote:
    Garbage-Tier Waifu wrote:


  • 0.75/6: Arsenal Chaplan Warpriest. Cannot be matched for pure DPS by even full BAB classes....
  • I see that they get Weapon Training and can save a feat (by not have to manually take Quicken Blessing), but that doesn't seem sufficient to merit the title of DPR champ. What am I missing?

    (Fabulous handle, BTW. <thumbs up>)

    (thanks)

    It's the combination of weapon training, divine buffs (divine power+fates favoured, prayer, etc.) and swift action buffs all at once that makes for some serious DPS power. Specifically, they're really crazy archers. And get fighter specific feats on top.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    kaisc006 wrote:
    Fort saves aren't that critical.

    Are you serious? Fort saves include save-or-sucks, which are bad enough, but they also include save-or-dies.

    Quote:
    Also, they can shore up that weakness with charmed life. People say it's a hindrance but they are looking at it incorrectly. On fights where you are worried and need to use charmed life, don't use your reaction to parry save it for charmed life.

    Which can mean taking more hits delivering poison (or other Fort save effect), either directly or because the enemy lives longer and can make more attacks/cast more spells.

    Quote:
    Also, the DPR difference is a myth.

    Directly untrue. If you want to specify a level and some other conditions we can make some comparisons, but you're missing other bonuses to damage here. Fighter weapon training, ranger favored enemy and barbarian rage get more support in the system, and inquisitors, magi, gunslingers, warpriests etc. are naturally buff; swashbucklers are in fact low on the DPR totem pole.

    Quote:
    The swashbuckler is all about managing your reactions / swift actions properly. Do I think it could function better? Absolutely but it's far from the worst class.

    Which class do you think is the worst?

    Shadow Lodge

    Swashbuckler was an OK dip for a DEX martial (so long as they don't mind using a rapier), but an awful straight-class, and especially so in any point-buy system where you need to squeeze your starting attribute points in a vice until they yelp and cough up one or more dump stats to fuel some good ones. Difference between CHA:7 and CHA:12 in a Swashbuckler? +1 miserable panache point, but *six* build points that could be transferred elsewhere to turn two 12s into two 14s, or convert a 15 into a 17 in the prime stat.

    Now along comes Unchained Rogue to totally slurp Swashbuckler's milkshake, and they're not even the best finesse-granting dip anymore.

    Lantern Lodge

    avr wrote:
    Are you serious? Fort saves include save-or-sucks, which are bad enough, but they also include save-or-dies.

    Pretty much any save group has some bad spells but Fort doesn't come up as often as others. Plus most swashbucklers can have around 16 CHA which will only put them at max 3-4 down from a fighter. I'll take a 20% chance of being worse than the fighter at a save while pumping out more damage at a higher AC all the time.

    Yes people say Reflex is the worst one because it avoids hp damage but as a full BAB avoiding hp damage means you're in the fight longer. Also charmed life gives the swashbuckler flexibility to apply it to all their saves. I agree that it shouldn't be a reaction that is should be just an X amount of times per day or even the equivalent of divine grace. But I don't think it's so terrible more like icing on an already powerful chassis.

    avr wrote:
    Fighter weapon training, ranger favored enemy and barbarian rage get more support in the system, and inquisitors, magi, gunslingers, warpriests etc. are naturally buff; swashbucklers are in fact low on the DPR totem pole.

    Swashbucklers essentially get weapon training too. I don't want to put in the time to make a build but like I showed before it's pretty simple to see how a swashbuckler gets higher on the DPR curve. With just their precise strike feature they are already ahead of a fighter +3 damage every four levels. That's hard to keep up.

    Plus they have a very high AC. There's a reason I have to have my attack bonus, damage, and AC written out because in PFS almost every DM will inevitably ask how I have it that high... And there isn't any cheese involved. Literally just basic feats like power attack, dodge, slashing grace (he uses scimitar), toughness and straight bonuses on weapons / armor. Granted he's a paladin 2 / noble fencer 7 but his damage would be even higher with if he was a full swash.

    avr wrote:
    Which class do you think is the worst?

    Out of the full BAB, no spellcasting I would say Cavalier. One of their main niches is mounted combat which is highly situational or cheesed into situations where it shouldn't happen (taking your horse/pony into a dungeon). Also there is an emphasis on charging which is again situational. Then they get teamwork feats which are pretty meh. Challenge is nice, but a swashbuckler is getting level to damage all the time. They are a "confused" full BAB in my opinion. Full BAB should just care about killing what's in front of them.


    @kaisc006: I guess we just have different experiences around fort saves.

    About the DPR; swashbucklers get what is essentially weapon training, but without the option to use gloves of duelling, and without the fighter advanced weapon training options. The latter is the main reason for the renaissance of interest in the fighter I think. It also doesn't qualify for weapon mastery feats. Precision damage doesn't multiply on crits which complicates the DPR calculations for a swashbuckler too, especially since they're trying to crit-fish to regain panache. You're right as far as you go - but you don't go far enough.

    Fair enough about the cavalier. You can do interesting things with that class but I'd never call it a powerhouse.

    @Sir Thugs': Cha 12 gives a swashbuckler the same panache as 7, i.e. one point. You need Cha 14 to get two. It doesn't contradict your argument of course, it reinforces it, though people wanting to play a swashbuckler often want a decent Cha regardless of mechanical implications.

    Grand Lodge

    To try to re-rail this thread, favorites only:

    Full BAB, no casting: Swashbuckler. Other may win the DPR race, but killing enemies on a riposte is quite fun regardless.

    Full BAB, 4th level casting: Paladin

    3/4 BAB, no casting: Unchained Rogue. Finesse training and the ability to sneak attack in concealment are huge boosts.

    3/4 BAB, 4th-level casting: Medium. Champion spirit is fun, pity it's so hard to build around any other.

    3/4 BAB, 6th-level casting: Bard. Do anything. Do more of anything with archetypes.

    3/4 BAB, 9th-level casting: Oracle. Be a healer, a debuffer, a support or a frontliner depending on chosen mystery.

    1/2 BAB, 9th-level casting: Sorcerer. Best spell list, without those pesky spellbooks or component pouches to keep track of.

    Shadow Lodge

    Garbage-Tier Waifu wrote:
    Sir Thugsalot wrote:
    Garbage-Tier Waifu wrote:
  • 0.75/6: Arsenal Chaplan Warpriest. Cannot be matched for pure DPS by even full BAB classes....
  • I see that they get Weapon Training and can save a feat (by not have to manually take Quicken Blessing), but that doesn't seem sufficient to merit the title of DPR champ. What am I missing?
    It's the combination of weapon training, divine buffs (divine power+fates favoured, prayer, etc.) and swift action buffs all at once that makes for some serious DPS power. Specifically, they're really crazy archers. And get fighter specific feats on top.

    I get the impression that some players are running their warpriests wrong....

    1) Sacred Weapon: "...At 4th level, the warpriest gains the ability to enhance one of his sacred weapons with divine power as a swift action. This power grants the weapon a +1 enhancement bonus..."

    --a) d20pfsrd.com unhelpfully and erroneously hotlinked and italicized "divine power" straight to the spell (no doubt confusing probably everyone who kites it all off the internet).

    --b) The "divine power" referred to here grants an enhancement bonus (which can't exceed +5 after all stacking), which Fate's Favored (and/or Sacred Tattoo) flat won't with (because they're Luck-based).

    --c) The spell Divine Power confers a Luck bonus, but it takes a standard-action to cast....

    --d) ...unless the warpriest unloads it through his Fervor ability (which is the one massively schweet thing about this class, IMO, far more so than the fighter gimmicks, the gain of which is trivial compared to the loss of full 9-levels spellcasting.).

    2) Blessings: unless stated otherwise, these take a standard-action to activate (which makes them utterly worthless in combat given that the duration of almost all of them is one minute), an impediment which the warpriest might ameliorate by taking the Quicken Blessings feat...twice, if we wants to do 'em both fast. *And* they eat up twice as many daily usages to swift. Wow...are these poor bastard warpriests living in New York? Talked about getting taxed out the wazoo.

    --a) "At 7th level, an arsenal chaplain gains Quicken Blessing (War) as a bonus feat even if he does not meet the prerequisites, but cannot grant a War blessing to himself as a swift action with Quicken Blessing until he is at least 10th level." ...well that's nice, Paizo; why not just give it to them at 10th then, a level after a straight clerics with actually useful domain powers are casting augmented sacred summons to bring in snarling monsters that will go harass distant targets without him having to spend any money at all on bows and ammunition?

    3) Unless I missed it somewhere, warpriests don't get to stack the Luck bonuses from Divine Favor, Divine Power, and Prayer.

    Shadow Lodge

    avr wrote:
    @Sir Thugs': Cha 12 gives a swashbuckler the same panache as 7, i.e. one point. You need Cha 14 to get two.
    Ouch. You're right. (That's nine build points between the 7 and the 14.)
    Quote:
    It doesn't contradict your argument of course, it reinforces it, though people wanting to play a swashbuckler often want a decent Cha regardless of mechanical implications.

    I still can't see much use from it other than as a dip class to get a finesse bard or paladin going. (A halfling Mouser, I think, would be particularly effective. ...is there anything in the game that will let you dismount without provoking?)

    Shadow Lodge

    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    Favorites:

    1/1 Fighter, just because you're forced to roleplay how *rotten* your skills are, and how much you really need someone else in the party to figure out that whatchamacallit or talk to the thinginmahface. Yeah, that thing. I don't what it's called. Do you? No, I don't speak that language either.

    1/1 4th casting: paladin, but only because I've never gotten around to ranger.

    3/4 no casting: Rogue (chained or core, I like 'em both)

    3/4 6th level casting: Bard, if only because there's a greater buildup of goodies for 'em than Inquisitors.

    3/4 9th level casting: Clerics, because I'm in love with domain powers.

    1/2 9th level casting: Wizard. (I can make myself look like a witch anytime I want to.) <make a will save> You see a witch.


    Grandlounge wrote:

    This is intresting to me because my brain went the other direction. For the full Bab no casting. Everyone loves the barbarian because of beast totem pounce and spell sunder. It's the majority of the builds I see and it's great but it's also common. Brawlers don't have a lot of support but strangler, wild child, mutgnic mauler, Snakebite, and exemplar are each unique and exciting.

    Slayers excel and so many different build types and have small stackable archtypes.

    you make a valid point, for the barb I think part of the attraction is all the movie characters that get attributed to them (Conan) and that the flavor of rage is fun and easy to understand mechanically and flavor wise.

    I actually really like the Brawler, its my second choice for fave in that chassis, I just find them kind of intimidating, Martial flex feels like potentially a huge amount of power that could easily not be taken advantage of.

    @Sir Thugsalot

    Regarding war-priests I think most people understand the sacred weapon divine power and the spell version. They're just more than happy to use fervor for Divine Favor and Divine Power, because a luck bonus to hit and damage and eventually bonus attacks is massive.


    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:


    @Sir Thugsalot

    Regarding war-priests I think most people understand the sacred weapon divine power and the spell version. They're just more than happy to use fervor for Divine Favor and Divine Power, because a luck bonus to hit and damage and eventually bonus attacks is massive.

    What I said also was not the sequence of buffs but a suggestion of what buffs you could apply (also, divine power does nothing for saves and prayer inflicts penalties on your enemies, so it has its uses even in this build). And I don't actually know all the buffs and build setup for archer AC Warpriest, I just know it is on paper the highest and achieving that is apparently realistic in an actual combat situation.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    Least Favorite:

    Full BAB, no spells: Gunslinger (I don't mind firearms, but Paizo rules are an unbalanced mess, and having to have a class just so you're not a total loser with them sucks. Also since the nerfs no reason to go more than 5 lvls in it), secondary is swashbuckler (all the reasons have been given in the thread), and an honorable mention goes to the brawler (mainly because I think Martial Flexibility is something that should have been a core fighter thing, and whole class without it is a fighter archetype).
    Full BAB, 4th spells: Antipaladin (surprised it hasn't been mentioned, having an almost unplayable code of conduct, while simultaneously being worse than paladin...), secondary Child of Whoever fighter as a: Why?
    3/4 BAB, no casting: monk (I just don't care about the class mechanics or flavor at all).
    3/4 BAB, 6th casting: I could go the easy way and name an occult class (probably mesmerist or spiritualist), but since I'm not familiar with them probably hunter or summoner (I don't like pet classes at all).
    3/4 BAB, 9th casting: druid (don't like pets, don't like changing into beasts, don't like the spell list very much, and class abilities other than those are legacy crap).
    1/2 BAB, 9th casting: Probably witch, hexes are either one trick pony OP, or flavorful crap.


    Follow up from my group about "favorites" and some of the comments made regarding people's perceptions of things...

    First, we run APs exclusively. Because of player's guides, the Ranger actually becomes more useful because Favored Enemy will often work out really well in execution. It also covers several skills that the other three characters often do not get involved with, but are nice to have at times. Before the Investigator came around, he even served as the trap finder.

    For us, Bards are popular *because* of archetypes. There have been very few (if any) vanilla Bards played. I think there was one in Council of Thieves when the the game was new.

    Things like Occultists and Investigators are still sort of "new" and haven't had time to build up a good rep yet. The Investigator is most often played by the person that plays the Bards, so it will probably equalize over time. Bards are indeed force multipliers, but their role can get stale quickly if you aren't archetyping. The Occultist has been played once and was noted as "high overhead". It requires more than the usual character/build planning and was viewed as "complex", even after playing it. The player that created it generally enjoys that sort of thing though.

    Clerics are popular because of how our game deals with them. Spell lists and Domains have been tweaked by deity and so each one feels distinct if you pick a different deity. Other groups that have seen the system feel it weakens the class overall, which we are ok with. We made a few changes to Wizards as well to accomplish similar things.

    War for the Crown will actually see a couple first time plays... Mesmer and Vigilante, but also a Ranger and Investigator again.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    @sir thugsalot

    The set up as other have said involves fervor swift casting fate's favored OR divine power. Then the continued acceleration of attack and damage. The swift casting is in addition to the weapon training + dueling gloves, weapon focus, weapon spec while still having the feats for more feat intensive combat styles.

    Each consecutive round using other spells, blessing, or weapon enhancments like, contagious zeal, weapon of awe, righteous might, or holy, as examples, keeps them ahead of other Gish classes because they never give up a full attack.

    Long term buffs at high levels like eaglesoul, hunter's blessing further add to their abilities.

    Spells (align weapon / instant weapons) and sacred weapon give them early access to overcoming Dr which helps even in adverse conditions for other builds. Two strong saves means it's easy to build stat arrays that do leave you with crippling weaknesses.


    I just like bards a lot.

    Honestly any hybrid 3/4 caster class is amazing and would love whole games of just those for a party.

    Then again bards for a whole party would kick ass too.


    Somewhere in here I already did a review of which classes would be best for an all one-class party (although if I remember correctly I didn't make it all the way to Hybrid and Occult classes or Vigilante). Time to dig this up and finish the job when I'm not on a phone (which I will be for the next several days).


    The remaining reason why warpriests are weirdly good is the human favored class bonus. 1/6 of a combat feat may only be a single feat in the level range usually played but that's still nice, and for those who do play to 12th or 18th level (or who plan that far at least) it keeps them up with the fighters.


    Human favored class bonuses do that for a number of classes. All spontaneous casters that get extra spells, shamans get spells of other lists, brawler's get better CMD, Slayer get 1/6th of a talent.

    Other races get good fcb for some classes but human seem to be ahead of the pack overall.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

    weakest

    Full BAB, no spells: Brawler
    Full BAB, 4th spells: Bloodrager
    3/4 BAB, no casting: Rogue, mainly because they don't have a lot of competition
    3/4 BAB, 4th casting: Child of Acavnen and Amaznen Fighter
    3/4 BAB, 6th casting: Summoner
    3/4 BAB, 9th casting: Cleric
    1/2 BAB, 9th casting: Sorcerer (Lack of Archetype support really hurts them)

    strongest

    Full BAB, no spells: Fighter
    Full BAB, 4th spells: Paladin
    3/4 BAB, no casting: Chained Monk
    3/4 BAB, 4th casting: Medium, easily
    3/4 BAB, 6th casting: Occultist (Implements is the only reason this class edges out Bard imho)
    3/4 BAB, 9th casting: Shaman (While Druid is a close second, the ability to mix and match whatever class features you want on a daily basis is ridiculous)
    1/2 BAB, 9th casting: Psychic (They have better defensive options than a Wizard does, and I think undercasting does not get the respect it deserves; that being said, I think they suffer from the slayer problem: They are mechanically good, but I have absolutely no desire to play one)

    favorite

    Full BAB, no spells: Fighter
    Full BAB, 4th spells: Paladin
    3/4 BAB, no casting: Chained Monk
    3/4 BAB, 4th casting: Medium (I'll paraphrase Lord Vader here: If only you knew the power of possession!)
    3/4 BAB, 6th casting: Bard. Hands down and easily.
    3/4 BAB, 9th casting: Cleric
    1/2 BAB, 9th casting: Wizard (Easily)


    ^Child of Acavna and Amaznen Fighter is actually full BAB. Unfortunately, that's where its virtues end.


    Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

    So it is. Now that I think about it, are there any other 3/4ths bab 4th level spell classes besides medium?


    Vrog Skyreaver wrote:

    weakest

    Full BAB, no spells: Brawler

    Really? howcome?

    Quote:


    Full BAB, 4th spells: Bloodrager

    Thats a rare opininon

    Quote:


    3/4 BAB, 6th casting: Summoner

    Nope to weird, you're gonna have to explain this one xD

    Quote:


    strongest

    1/2 BAB, 9th casting: Psychic (They have better defensive options than a Wizard does, and I think undercasting does not get the respect it deserves; that being said, I think they suffer from the slayer problem: They are mechanically good, but I have absolutely no desire to play one)

    O.o really? Undercasting is nice for a spontaneous casters, but it still doesn't really compete with being a prepared caster. Plus their spell list is worse than the wizard one


    I would also like to know in what way shape or form(eh?) the summoner is the weakest 3/4|6 class. I understand there aren't many(summoner, bars, occultist and mesmerist[which is basically bard]?), but summoner is, if not the strongest, certainly not the weakest.


    What do you mean there aren't many? O.o

    Bard, Alchemist, Investigator, Inquisitor, Summoner, War Priest, Mesmerists, Occultists, Spiritualists, Magus, Hunter and Skald are all in that Chassis.

    There are loads.

    Also the Mesmerist is quite far from the bard. Lol.


    I can see the brawler being thought weak. Without a pretty good knowledge of the feats you're after via flexibility it risks being very hard to play. It doesn't get an attack/damage bonus (at least, if you don't know about the dedicated adversary feat) and uses light armor without any serious defence bonus.

    Maybe it's the unchained summoner that's thought weak by Vrog? I could see that maybe.

    & no, there are no other 3/4 BAB, 4-level casters unless you count the gillman's eldritch raider rogue archetype, which can pay rogue talents to get up to 3rd level spells as SLAs. So close...


    Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

    Yep, Mesmerists are way cooler than Bards.


    captain yesterday wrote:
    Yep, Mesmerists are way cooler than Bards.

    I'll agree with this. Recently played one in the tank role and boy was it silly when the melee monster had to move through the area of the AoO build to attempt to attack the back-line archer (meek facade)

    At -3 attack and 20% miss chance from lock gaze.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:

    What do you mean there aren't many? O.o

    Bard, Alchemist, Investigator, Inquisitor, Summoner, War Priest, Mesmerists, Occultists, Spiritualists, Magus, Hunter and Skald are all in that Chassis.

    There are loads.

    Also the Mesmerist is quite far from the bard. Lol.

    Whoooops! Guess too much crb only campaigns have drained my knowledge to... well, potato level.

    RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Potato disciple wrote:
    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:

    What do you mean there aren't many? O.o

    Bard, Alchemist, Investigator, Inquisitor, Summoner, War Priest, Mesmerists, Occultists, Spiritualists, Magus, Hunter and Skald are all in that Chassis.

    There are loads.

    Also the Mesmerist is quite far from the bard. Lol.

    Whoooops! Guess too much crb only campaigns have drained my knowledge to... well, potato level.

    At least you can power a clock...


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    SmiloDan wrote:
    Potato disciple wrote:
    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:

    What do you mean there aren't many? O.o

    Bard, Alchemist, Investigator, Inquisitor, Summoner, War Priest, Mesmerists, Occultists, Spiritualists, Magus, Hunter and Skald are all in that Chassis.

    There are loads.

    Also the Mesmerist is quite far from the bard. Lol.

    Whoooops! Guess too much crb only campaigns have drained my knowledge to... well, potato level.

    At least you can power a clock...

    Linkified for your convenience.


    Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    Vrog Skyreaver wrote:

    weakest

    Full BAB, no spells: Brawler

    Really? howcome?

    They aren't as good as Monks and they don't have the archetype support that either of their parent classes have.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:


    Quote:


    3/4 BAB, 6th casting: Summoner

    Nope to weird, you're gonna have to explain this one xD

    Almost all of the summoners I have seen and played with have little to no contingencies for the inevitable situation where their eidolon dies. Their spell list is kinda meh, too, imho.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:

    O.o really? Undercasting is nice for a spontaneous casters, but it still doesn't really compete with being a prepared caster. Plus their spell list is worse than the wizard one

    I think that's debatable.

    Potato disciple wrote:


    I would also like to know in what way shape or form(eh?) the summoner is the weakest 3/4|6 class. I understand there aren't many(summoner, bars, occultist and mesmerist[which is basically bard]?), but summoner is, if not the strongest, certainly not the weakest.

    3/4th's bab, 6th level spells covers some of the strongest classes in the game: Inquisitor, Bard, Alchemist, Occultist; Even if you just compare them to the other classes with the same chassis that are pet orientated, they still come out even with hunter and well below spiritualist.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
    captain yesterday wrote:
    Yep, Mesmerists are way cooler than Bards.

    I would vehemently argue that.


    Vrog Skyreaver wrote:


    They aren't as good as Monks and they don't have the archetype support that either of their parent classes have.

    I mean other than the archetype support thing this is very arguable. And there are other full babs to consider, like the Swash, Samurai and Cavalier.

    Quote:


    Almost all of the summoners I have seen and played with have little to no contingencies for the inevitable situation where their eidolon dies. Their spell list is kinda meh, too, imho.

    They get scaling summon monster spell like abilities as standard actions that scale with wizard spell progression and are for when their eidolon isn't up.

    Their spell list is amazing xD they get all the classic control spells like the pit line, grease and glitter dust, Aqueas orb. They get some nice blasts like snow ball and then there the early access...

    They get early access to some amazing spells, just to name a few
    Haste (they actually get this sooner than even wizards do)
    Black Tentacles (same level as a wizard)
    Dimension Door (same level as a wizard)
    Obsidian Flow (same level as a wizard)
    Magic Jar (Same level as the sorc)
    Overland Flight (Same level as the sorc)
    Teleport (Same level as the sorc)
    Tar Pool
    Create Demiplane
    Dominate Monster (quicker than a wizard does)

    thats just a few, they're all amazing and they all get them at lower than typical spell level. Meaning a lot of them come online at the same level they would for a wizard which is crazy for a 6th caster, or in some cases even earlier.

    Quote:


    I think that's debatable.

    I'm beginning to get the sense you and I have very different standards for what makes a class powerful. We may never agree.

    Wizards/Sorcs get better evocations, plenty save or sucks that target every save where as psychics struggle with mostly will saves, better control spells (the fog and pit line are absent from psychic list), and most of the psychics mind effecting stuff(not all, but most).

    They psychics get some kewl immediate action defenses, and a few mind effecting attacks wizards don't get, like mind thrust and psychic crush and Ego Whip. But they are largely inferior to wizard options filling the same roll. And they miss out on some big defense options most notable Emergency force sphere.

    Quote:


    3/4th's bab, 6th level spells covers some of the strongest classes in the game: Inquisitor, Bard, Alchemist, Occultist; Even if you just compare them to the other classes with the same chassis that are pet orientated, they still come out even with hunter and well below spiritualist.

    Most people agree that the summoner is the strongest class in that Chassis though.. I don't even like them but I can see they're strong.

    They're definitely not well below the spiritualist.
    The Phantom is less customisable than the Eidolan and has a lower melee potential. The Phantoms get incorporeal which is strong but Eidolans get so much more. And the Spiritualist spell list just can't compete with the summoner's early access.
    I should know I've made and played two spiritualist's myself xD

    Like I said, I get the feeling we're probably not going to agree on this.


    High level brawlers have crazy flexibility, I really don't think they're weak. You might get a book thrown at you though.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    FangDragon wrote:

    High level brawlers have crazy flexibility, I really don't think they're weak. You might get a book thrown at you though.

    I first interpreted this as brawler flexes Throw Anything and Improvised Weapon Mastery.


    I think that speaks to their brilliance xD

    Sovereign Court

    As others have said, there's quite the disagreement here about what is or isn't powerful.
    I don't feel like having that argument, so I'm going to list only my favourite from each.

    Full BAB, no spells: Unchained Monk
    Full BAB, 4th spells: Bloodrager
    3/4 BAB, no casting: With archetypes Monk, otherwise... Kineticist, I guess?
    3/4 BAB, 4th casting: Medium (only ever a level 1 dip)
    3/4 BAB, 6th casting: Warpriest*
    3/4 BAB, 9th casting: Druid
    1/2 BAB, 9th casting: Sorcerer

    *The 3/4 BAB, 6th casting category is a tough one for me, as it's where many of my absolute favourite classes live.
    If I have to pick just one, it's probably Warpriest, as listed, but it's more realistically a tie between Warpriest, Magus, Hunter, and Summoner.
    Basically the only ones here I dislike are Investigator, Occultist, and Mesmerist.


    Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    I mean other than the archetype support thing this is very arguable. And there are other full babs to consider, like the Swash, Samurai and Cavalier.

    I like both Samurai and Cavaliers, but Samurai really has the short end of the archetype stick (second only to Ninja), and Cavaliers have a problem where there is a good likelihood that, assuming you go the mounted combat route, as much as half your adventuring career you will not be able to make effective use of your abilities, unless you play a small-sized race, which can have it's own problems.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    They get scaling summon monster spell like abilities as standard actions that scale with wizard spell progression and are for when their eidolon isn't up.

    This feeds right into the other problem that monster summoning focused classes have: You either have more bookwork to do than most other people, you create a small list of creatures that you pick from when summoning, or you fumble around, slowing down the game for everyone else while you try to pick the right creature to summon, then modify their stats on the fly.

    There's also the issue with players who summon taking up more playtime than the rest of the party, so you either hamper yourself by not being the most effective summoner you can, or you hog the spotlight.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    Their spell list is amazing xD they get all the classic control spells like the pit line, grease and glitter dust, Aqueas orb. They get some nice blasts like snow ball and then there the early access...

    All of the control spells you listed (with the exception of Glitterdust) are low-level control at best. Once anyone can reasonably fly, the pit spells stop being a problem; Grease really stops being a problem around level 3 if you put ranks in acrobatics.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:

    They get early access to some amazing spells, just to name a few

    Haste (they actually get this sooner than even wizards do)
    Black Tentacles (same level as a wizard)
    Dimension Door (same level as a wizard)
    Obsidian Flow (same level as a wizard)
    Magic Jar (Same level as the sorc)
    Overland Flight (Same level as the sorc)
    Teleport (Same level as the sorc)
    Tar Pool
    Create Demiplane
    Dominate Monster (quicker than a wizard does)

    Only Dominate Monster and Haste on your list are early access spells, and the Dominate spells take too long to cast to really be effective, not to mention that the DC is going to be lower than any other class that can cast the spell, Meaning that it's reasonable that your one-round casting spell gets resisted.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    I'm beginning to get the sense you and I have very different standards for what makes a class powerful. We may never agree.

    It is too early to assume that, we've just started the discussion! but to help manage expectations, I'll explain what I believe makes a powerful class:

    My definition of a strong class:

    First, the class has to contribute meaningfully to combat. They don't have to be the most damaging member of the party, but if they are seriously damaging or dropping an enemy a round, or making it so one or more enemies are significantly hindered, then they qualify here for me.

    Secondly, they have to have good defenses. I consider a good regular AC to be 20+level. It's not always obtainable, but that's the goal. Additionally, they ideally have to have either two good saves, or good save synergy (for example, being a wisdom based caster, even if they do not have will primary).

    Thirdly, they have to be able to meaningfully participate in social situations. They don't need to be the master diplomancer, but being able to make themselves heard and understood, as well as sway people's opinion.

    Fourth, be able to meaningfully contribute to exploration encounters. Again, they don't need to be able to blow things out of the water, but being able to hold their own here is, I consider, an oft overlooked piece of the puzzle.

    Finally, they have to have escape buttons, or barring that, ways to deal with situations where things go wrong. Healing, condition removal, protection, and escape/evasion abilities.

    The stronger a class is in those five pillars, the stronger I feel a class is.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:

    Wizards/Sorcs get better evocations, plenty save or sucks that target every save where as psychics struggle with mostly will saves, better control spells (the fog and pit line are absent from psychic list), and most of the psychics mind effecting stuff(not all, but most).

    They psychics get some kewl immediate action defenses, and a few mind effecting attacks wizards don't get, like mind thrust and psychic crush and Ego Whip. But they are largely inferior to wizard options filling the same roll. And they miss out on some big defense options most notable Emergency force sphere.

    And Psychics can potentially heal themselves, get Freedom of Movement, or add two stats to their AC, not unlike a Monk. Psychics also get Mental Block, one of the most insane I can't believe they thought this spell was a good idea spells.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    They're definitely not well below the spiritualist. The Phantom is less customisable than the Eidolan and has a lower melee potential. The Phantoms get incorporeal which is strong but Eidolans get so much more. And the Spiritualist spell list just can't compete with the summoner's early access.

    The spiritualist gets access to healing spells (including Heal), disintegrate, and negative energy spells (including Harm), as well as lesser restoration and restoration. Their spell list doesn't suck by any means.

    Response comparing Chained Eidolon to the Phantom:

    Let's compare the two, shall we:

    Base Statistics:
    *The Eidolon is a d10 HD, Full-BAB Outsider that gets 4+int skills, has two good saves, and gets a pool of evolution points to modify their pet. They also have a maximum number of attacks, dependent on the level of the summoner. It chooses one of three distinct forms to be the chassis of the creature (serpentine, quadruped, or Biped).

    *The Phantom is a d10 HD, full bab Outsider that gets 2+int skills, and has two goods saves. Instead of getting Evolution points, Phantoms get an emotional focus, which determines what the creature's combat focus will be. The Phantom is always a humanoid-shaped creature, which appears as it did in life.

    Winner: They're both pretty close at this point. I would call this a tie.

    Manueverability:
    The Eidolon can get increased ground speed, winged flight, a burrow speed, or a swim speed.

    The Phantom has can walk through walls in both it's builds, can fly in it's incorporeal form.

    Winner: I'd give the edge to the Phantom, as burrowing and swimming are less useful options when compared to walking through pretty much anything.

    Melee combat:
    The Eidolon's primary combat style involves lots of melee attacks made with natural weapons, with a capped number of attacks at 7. Roughly half the Eidolon's natural attacks are secondary attacks. Additionally, in order for an Eidolon to have attacks that count as magic, they must either use evolution points, feats (plural), or magic items.

    The Phantom gets two slam attacks that have scaling damage, based on the level of the Spiritualist. Phantom slam attacks are automatically magic attacks.

    Winner: Eidolon, as it can take enough Primary natural attacks to meet it's max.

    Utility:
    The Eidolon can get the ability to scout (primarily via flight, although burrowing with tremorsense can work as well) and can get some very limited spellcasting. Additionally, Eidolons have no class skills, meaning that while they can assign skill points to any skill, they do not get the trained bonus.

    The Phantom's combat role changes completely based on it's emotional focus, but before we get into some specifics, let me start by pointing out that it can act as both offensive caster and medic, as long as the Spiritualist is within 30' (50' at higher levels), and since the spiritualist gets all of the healing spells up to 6th level (including Heal) on their spell list, the Phantom can be an incorporeal healer, running around the battlefield delivering touch-based healing as an immediate action.

    As promised, on to the Emotional Focuses:
    Depending on your emotional focus, you can be a beatstick melee character (Wrath, which gets strength bonuses and Power Attack for free at first level), a melee support (Kindness, which gets the ability to grant an ally a free attack against a target they hit (the ally makes the attack as an immediate action), Debuffer (Pride gets a no save shaken aura, and Remorse has an aura that hands out penalties to skill checks, caster level checks, CMB checks, and CMD), and spellcaster (Besides delivering their master's touch spells for them, at high levels they get the ability to do some powerful spellcasting of their own (Anger gets Wail of The Banshee, for example).

    Winner: Phantom.


    Vrog Skyreaver wrote:


    I like both Samurai and Cavaliers, but Samurai really has the short end of the archetype stick (second only to Ninja), and Cavaliers have a problem where there is a good likelihood that, assuming you go the mounted combat route, as much as half your adventuring career you will not be able to make effective use of your abilities, unless you play a small-sized race, which can have it's own problems.

    We're talking about what is weak not what you like and those classes have blaring weaknesses the brawler doesn't have, some of which you yourself pointed out.

    Quote:


    This feeds right into the other problem that monster summoning focused classes have: You either have more bookwork to do than most other people, you create a small list of creatures that you pick from when summoning, or you fumble around, slowing down the game for everyone else while you try to pick the right creature to summon, then modify their stats on the fly.
    There's also the issue with players who summon taking up more playtime than the rest of the party, so you either hamper yourself by not being the most effective summoner you can, or you hog the spotlight.

    perfectly valid reasons to dislike the class, not to suggest that its weak, summoning is strong, very strong. This is well documented.

    Quote:


    All of the control spells you listed (with the exception of Glitterdust) are low-level control at best. Once anyone can reasonably fly, the pit spells stop being a problem; Grease really stops being a problem around level 3 if you put ranks in acrobatics.

    Plenty of things in the bestiary don't fly, the pit spells are generally popular. Grease is a strong early game option they have, no-one said it was a good late game option. The early game matters, its the most played bit.

    Quote:
    Only Dominate Monster and Haste on your list are early access spells, and the Dominate spells take too long to cast to really be effective, not to mention that the DC is going to be lower than any other class that can cast the spell, Meaning that it's reasonable that your one-round casting spell gets resisted.

    Early access means they come online as lower level spells than is typical. Not that you get them at an earlier level than a wizard. All the spells I listed are early access and the Dominate spells do not take too long to use. You simply have to take some care before you cast them. They're very powerful spells.

    Quote:


    It is too early to assume that, we've just started the discussion! but to help manage expectations, I'll explain what I believe makes a powerful class

    not really, judging by your answers to my points you're using weak as a synonym for things you dislike.

    See your defense of Cavalier, Samurai and rebuttal to the summoner's spell like abilities for my reasoning.

    Quote:


    And Psychics can potentially heal themselves, get Freedom of Movement, or add two stats to their AC, not unlike a Monk. Psychics also get Mental Block, one of the most insane I can't believe they thought this spell was a good idea spells.

    Healing in combat is generally bad, I've yet to see a psychic that can do it effectively enough to justify not doing something else instead, healing out of combat wizards and sorcs can do with a wand of infernal healing.

    Freedom of movement is one nice spell they have. It doesn't outweigh their dependency on mind effecting and will saves and lack of many control and evocation based spells.

    Mental block is a level 2 mind effecting will save EVERY TURN to keep your class features turned off.
    Hold Person is a level 2 mind effecting will save EVERY TURN to keep you completely helpless.
    Hold person isn't even that good.

    Quote:
    The spiritualist gets access to healing spells (including Heal), disintegrate, and negative energy spells (including Harm), as well as lesser restoration and restoration. Their spell list doesn't suck by any means.

    Healing spells are still bad and they get heal 5 whole levels after clerics are casting it. As for disintegrate, they have no DC boosters and not enough spells per day in the early game to invest in exclusively spell casting, so their DC will never be reliable once they get disintegrate. Harm is terrible.

    Restoration is nice.
    I never said their spell list sucked.

    Quote:

    Response comparing Chained Eidolon to the Phantom

    this is literally the very first time you've mentioned Chained summoners. Moving the goal posts much?

    as for your assessment. You're clearly extremely bias.

    For base statistics, the Eidolan is clearly ahead as evolutions offer much more potential for power than the emotional focus does.

    In maneuverability you neglect to mention that the Ectoplasmic phantom can't move more than 50ft away from you without having to make checks. Clearly this is a massive disadvantage. Furthermore I believe if the superior scouting form is more than 50ft away it leaves.

    For utility I agree with you although you neglect to mention that Eidolans can also use evolution to gain a +8 to any skill they choose.


    The psychic spell list is underrated. They don't get many blasting spells, but in a pinch early access to telekinesis & similar can fill that role. And while most of their offensive or control spells have will saves, that doesn't much matter so long as they have others that don't. Ear-Piercing Scream, Magic Missile, Blindness/Deafness, Ectoplasmic Snare, Black Tentacles, Etheric Shards, various wall spells.

    At the highest levels it looks like someone picked the most important sorc/wiz spells, added a couple of other useful ones, and called it good.


    Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:


    We're talking about what is weak not what you like and those classes have blaring weaknesses the brawler doesn't have, some of which you yourself pointed out.

    You completely misread what I wrote. I said that I like them, BUT they have fairly glaring issues. I was in no way defending them.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:


    perfectly valid reasons to dislike the class, not to suggest that its weak, summoning is strong, very strong. This is well documented.

    I wasn't speaking about the Summoner class in particular, but Summoning-focused characters in general.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    Plenty of things in the bestiary don't fly

    Except that there is relatively plentiful access to flight magic, as most of the classes have some means of getting access to flight, and the ones that don't have access to consumables.

    As for creatures in the beastiary that would be stopped by pit spells, Animals, Magic Beasts, Humanoids, and Monstrous Humanoids are the most likely candidates.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:


    the pit spells are generally popular. Grease is a strong early game option they have, no-one said it was a good late game option. The early game matters, its the most played bit.

    You forgot "Based on my experience" there at the end. Different groups have different experiences, so some people only tend to play low level games, some graduate from low to high level games, and some people don't start their games before 10th level.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    Early access means they come online as lower level spells than is typical.

    Okay, it's good that you defined your term here, as your definition and mine are different.

    The problem with early access as you define it comes with anything that requires a save. One of the reasons that 9th level spellcasters are so dangerous is that they can push their save DCs into the realm of "Only save on a 20", even for what a traditionally considered "Good Saves" for a class.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    not really, judging by your answers to my points you're using weak as a synonym for things you dislike.

    Not particularly. As I mentioned in my initial list, there are classes (psychic among them) that I dislike but recognize to be strong.

    Also, I would be keen to see what your definition of a strong class is.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    Healing in combat is generally bad

    Based on what metric? Given that healer is considered one of the pillars of an adventuring group, I'd say that this is not true at all. I will grant that there are times when it is more effective to deal with enemies than to heal allies, but that is a case-by-case scenario, not a default rule.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    It doesn't outweigh their dependency on mind effecting and will saves and lack of many control and evocation based spells.

    Evocation is the weakest indicator of a spellcasting class, in my opinion. If all a wizard can do is throw direct-damage dealing spells, they are significantly limiting their potential.

    As far as control spells go, what specifically are you referring to? When you say control, are you talking about cutting enemies off from a fight (with things like wall spells), debuffing them (with, well, debuff spells), or controlling them directly (with spells like charm and dominate)?

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    Mental block is a level 2 mind effecting will save EVERY TURN to keep your class features turned off.

    It also turns off activated feats, skill ranks, spells both known and prepared, and extraordinary, supernatural, and spell-likes. Meaning that a rage-cycling barbarian with spell sunder effected by this spell can do nothing but hope to make the save, like everyone else.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    Healing spells are still bad

    So then, presumably, you never take them and make active suggestions against anyone in your group taking them?

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    Harm is terrible

    Harm is one of the flat most damaging spells in the game. Even with a successful save it can be near lethal to a target.

    Which the spiritualist can have their Phantom hit someone with as an immediate action.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    I never said their spell list sucked.

    That's fair.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    this is literally the very first time you've mentioned Chained summoners. Moving the goal posts much?

    Not particularly. I made a point to compare what many people say are the more powerful version of the eidolon. I can certainly make the same comparison with the chained version, if you would prefer.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    as for your assessment. You're clearly extremely bias.

    Cite an example please.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    In maneuverability you neglect to mention that the Ectoplasmic phantom can't move more than 50ft away from you without having to make checks. Clearly this is a massive disadvantage. Furthermore I believe if the superior scouting form is more than 50ft away it leaves.

    Actually, the incorporeal is limited to 50'. The Ectoplasmic can stay within 100' but they have to concentrate on the link as a spell. I also did not mention that if an Eidolon is ever more than 100' away from it's summoner*, they lost half of their maximum HP and current HP, meaning that even if the Eidolon later returns to their master, the lost current HP are still gone.

    They can effectively kill their eidolon by having it exceed 100' distance more than once or twice in a combat.

    (*I know that unfetter spell is a thing, but that spell causes some problems as well (chief among them being that you can't save your Eidolon from death, and as a spell it is dismissable). I'll also grant that there is not currently a version for the Phantom, but I would not be at all surprised if such a thing weren't forthcoming.)

    Also, all of the above is predicated on having combats at longer than point-blank shot range. I can't speak to your experience, but in my experience close-range combat far exceeds long-range combat.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    For utility I agree with you although you neglect to mention that Eidolans can also use evolution to gain a +8 to any skill they choose.

    That was an oversight on my part. Thank you for pointing it out.


    @Vrog I think this argument is pointless you clearly have a very different value system to me and I find talking to you about these subjects actually deeply frustrating as you seem either oblivious or opposed to a lot of what I would consider the basic assumption of what is strong and what isn't in pathfinder.

    I've put my reply to you in spoilers because these walls of text are unsightly and I suspect putting anyone else off commenting on the thread, should they desire to do so.

    I would ask that you do the same, or better yet, PM if you wish to continue this discussion. Although chances are I won't reply again as like I said, I find talking to you about this deeply frustrating.

    Spoiler:

    Vrog Skyreaver wrote:


    You completely misread what I wrote. I said that I like them, BUT they have fairly glaring issues. I was in no way defending them.

    Oh no, I fully understand what you wrote, I just don't understand why you wrote.

    You said brawlers were the weakest of their chassis
    I asked why
    you said they're worse than fighters and monks
    I said what about these other classes which have more glaring weaknesses
    you agreed they have glaring weaknesses, but you haven't addressed the original point. The brawler.

    Quote:


    I wasn't speaking about the Summoner class in particular, but Summoning-focused characters in general.

    But the whole point of this fraction of debate was you said the summoner is weak because it can't do anything without it's Eidolan

    I said it could do things, very powerful things and you replied you don't like that thing.
    That doesn't address the point, which is that they can do powerful things, whether you like said things or not is immaterial. I don't like summoning particularly either, doesn't mean it isn't strong.

    Quote:


    Except that there is relatively plentiful access to flight magic, as most of the classes have some means of getting access to flight, and the ones that don't have access to consumables.

    Create Pit is something Summoners get access to at level 4, no class gains access to flight that early.

    some thing sin the bestiary fly, plenty of things don't.

    Quote:


    As for creatures in the beastiary that would be stopped by pit spells, Animals, Magic Beasts, Humanoids, and Monstrous Humanoids are the most likely candidates.

    most corporeal undead and most constructs. Two areas of the beastiary which Psychics struggle with. A lot.

    Quote:


    You forgot "Based on my experience" there at the end. Different groups have different experiences, so some people only tend to play low level games, some graduate from low to high level games, and some people don't start their games before 10th level.

    Like I said, I don't think we're going to agree. If you're simply going to ignore early game options then this is pointless.

    Quote:


    The problem with early access as you define it comes with anything that requires a save. One of the reasons that 9th level spellcasters are so dangerous is that they can push their save DCs into the realm of "Only save on a 20", even for what a traditionally considered "Good Saves" for a for a class.

    A) Most of the spells I listed don't allow a save.

    B) Getting your DCs to the realm of unmake-able isn't what makes casting classes overpowered. Take a CR19 Red Dragon example, their good save is 22, making a fort save a DC42 is extremely difficult and most builds won't do it. No that doesn't mean it can't be done, no you posting a couple builds to contrary does not disprove what I'm saying.
    The fact that standard DCs are 10 + casting stat (usually between +8-+13 at this level) + spell level (probably between 6-9) + spell focus and G spell focus for (+2), means the standard DCs are going to be between 26-34 is why what I am saying is true.

    Whats much easier is simply bypassing saves entirely, or target their weak save, for aforementioned dragon that is a 13. Wizards have a much easier job targeting weak saves than psychics because their spell list has sooo much more variety.

    Quote:


    Not particularly. As I mentioned in my initial list, there are classes (psychic among them) that I dislike but recognize to be strong.

    yet your rebuttal to the strength of the summoner was effectively I don't like summoning.

    Quote:


    Based on what metric? Given that healer is considered one of the pillars of an adventuring group, I'd say that this is not true at all. I will grant that there are times when it is more effective to deal with enemies than to heal allies, but that is a case-by-case scenario, not a default rule.

    the metric being that for a Cleric one charge of their highest level healing spell, which they won't have many castings of at all. That spell will roughly mitigate the damage of one hit from an on CR creature. Using your highest level spell to mitigate an attack is not worthwhile when that same spell could be taking an on CR creature out of the encounter entirely.

    The healer hasn't been a pillar of adventuring in pathfinder for years, because it is in-efficient. It takes very specialized classes with very specialized builds to make it worth while and neither the spiritualist or the psychic can do that.
    The life Oracle is the classic example.

    Quote:


    Evocation is the weakest indicator of a spellcasting class, in my opinion. If all a wizard can do is throw direct-damage dealing spells, they are significantly limiting their potential.

    Evocation isn't an indicator of spell casting.... Its a school.

    Having access to evocation is good, it fills a role, it doesn't mean it is all they can do. That is the exact strength of the wizard spell list. It lets you do anything. Meanwhile the psychic spell list has considerable holes.
    The wizard list by virtue of not having those holes is better.

    Your argument amounts to, they have access to a load of options psychics don't have, but I don't rate those options, so I consider the psychics lack of them a strength. Explain how less options is a strength?

    Quote:


    As far as control spells go, what specifically are you referring to? When you say control, are you talking about cutting enemies off from a fight (with things like wall spells), debuffing them (with, well, debuff spells), or controlling them directly (with spells like charm and dominate)?

    Fogs, Walls, Pits, various other potential avenues, such as animate of the dead. Although tbf I think Sorcs do that better than wizards.

    but again by virtue of having a much longer spell list wizards have much more options.

    I've made psychics and I've made characters using the Sorc/Wiz list. That is were I noticed the lack of options.

    Quote:


    It also turns off activated feats, skill ranks, spells both known and prepared, and extraordinary, supernatural, and spell-likes. Meaning that a rage-cycling barbarian with spell sunder effected by this spell can do nothing but hope to make the save, like everyone else.

    Spells and most EX, SU, SP abilities a character will have are class features, rage cycling is class features. So like I said, it turns off class features. You're right its also feats and skills.

    But like I said and you ignored, for the exact same same, hold person will stop them acting entirely. Which is better and like I said, it isn't that good, they get a will save every turn. They're going to beat that save pretty quick. This is less of an issue for Hold Person since you'll Coup-de-grace them the following turn so they only get one save.
    but yeah my point is, this spell is inferior to an already meh spell.

    The benefit as I see it is that it can turn off monsters abilities which hold person can't target, but they're not nearly as reliant on said abilities and like I said. They're gonna make that save.

    Its a meh spell.

    Quote:


    So then, presumably, you never take them and make active suggestions against anyone in your group taking them?

    No? do you control everything everyone in your group takes? I don't.

    I would suggest they do something stronger or if their heart is set on it I'd try to help them build one that works, through the Oracle class most likely.

    Quote:


    Harm is one of the flat most damaging spells in the game. Even with a successful save it can be near lethal to a target.

    A) Its damage is never enough to kill on CR opponents (take level 11 when it first comes online, it does 110, CR11 creatures have roughly 140 health)

    B) It literally cannot kill anything, it has to leave them on 1 hit point

    If you want to do hit point damage with psychic magic the best spells are disintegrate and mind thrust.

    However the best spells to actually do that with are Chain lightning and battering blast. Neither of which do they have access to.

    Either way doing so requires an intense build.
    Which the spiritualist can have their Phantom hit someone with as an immediate action.

    Quote:


    Not particularly. I made a point to compare what many people say are the more powerful version of the eidolon. I can certainly make the same comparison with the chained version, if you would prefer.

    Thats irrelevant, you very much did move the goal posts. Its most significant because the Chained summoner has a different spell list to the unchained one.

    Talking about the chained spell list and then the unchained Eidolan isn't gonna get us anywhere.

    Quote:


    Cite an example please.

    I did...

    Quote:


    Actually, the incorporeal is limited to 50'. The Ectoplasmic can stay within 100' but they have to concentrate on the link as a spell.

    Thats literally what I said, the Ectoplasmic can't go beyond 50ft without forcing checks. Which are a full round action for your spiritualist.

    Quote:


    I also did not mention that if an Eidolon is ever more than 100' away from it's summoner*, they lost half of their maximum HP and current HP, meaning that even if the Eidolon later returns to their master, the lost current HP are still gone.
    They can effectively kill their eidolon by having it exceed 100' distance more than once or twice in a combat.

    maneuverability beyond 100ft is for scouting, they don't need all their hit points to scout. But they can do it, Phantoms can't. Going beyond 100ft in combat is almost never necessary.

    Quote:


    Also, all of the above is predicated on having combats at longer than point-blank shot range. I can't speak to your experience, but in my experience close-range combat far exceeds long-range combat.

    No you made that predication, I was talking about scouting.


    Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

    Chromantic Durgon <3 :

    A couple of things, and then I'll let this go:

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    Thats irrelevant, you very much did move the goal posts. Its most significant because the Chained summoner has a different spell list to the unchained one

    I was comparing the Eidolon to the Phantom; it had really nothing to do with the casters of such creatures. I'm not sure how that's "moving the goalposts".

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    Spells and most EX, SU, SP abilities a character will have are class features

    This also covers most racial features.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    yet your rebuttal to the strength of the summoner was effectively I don't like summoning.

    Actually, my rebuttal of casting summoning spells in general is that it is disruptive of game play, mainly because it grinds down game time, as the summoner drops 1-5 creatures on the battlefield a turn. meaning that their turns take 2-6 times as long as anyone else's, even if they only cast one summoning spell at a time.

    and all of the above is predicated on the idea that a character who summons is fully prepared to summon creatures, with correctly modified statblocks on hand. If it's a summmoner who is now summoning because they don't have access to their Eidolon and they're still trying to contribute to the combat, that just exacerbates the issue.

    Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
    I would consider the basic assumption of what is strong and what isn't in pathfinder.

    I can't say one way or the other, as you won't give me a definition.

    Also, I apologize that you find this discussion frustrating. It was not my intent.

    Liberty's Edge

    So, did something change with the Eidolon's class skills? Because I though both chained and unchained Eidolons got bluff, craft, knowledge planes, perception, sense motive, and stealth as class skills, as well as any 4 others of the summoners choice, and fly if they have a fly speed.


    I could probably play that fighter archtype with spells. It's not amazing but it could work.

    101 to 150 of 162 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
    Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / General Discussion / Weakest / strongest / favorite Class of each Chassis All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.

    ©2002-2017 Paizo Inc.® | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
    Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours, Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM Pacific time.

    Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, Starfinder, the Starfinder logo, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Legends, Pathfinder Online, Starfinder Adventure Path, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.