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

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game


Pathfinder Society


Starfinder


Starfinder Society

Classes most in need of a rebuild


Product Discussion

1 to 50 of 90 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So as I've been curious about this for quite some time, I figured I'd ask the community which classes you believe need to be rebuilt the most. I've got a straw poll here to vote, but I'd also like to hear reasons why you think classes should be rebuilt.

Which classes do you believe should be rebuilt?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Interesting. Neither Fighter nor Shifter are available options.

Silver Crusade

Omnius wrote:
Interesting. Neither Fighter nor Shifter are available options.

Fighter isn't there because it'd be the obvious number 1 choice (we all know it needs rebuilt), and shifter isn't because I've been doing the legendary shifter for Legendary Games, so at least on my end, that isn't a rebuild on which I'd need to concentrate.


Out of those options, Cavalier. For a class who revolves entirely around having an awesome ride, he has shockingly few options for mounts and how to use them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I feel like what the Cavalier needs rebuilt (and clarified) is the entire mounted combat rules, which is something bigger than just the class.

So I'll go with the Medium, which can be pretty strong as someone who is just the Champion 9/10 days, but doesn't use much else out of the class, which is unfortunate since it's a cool concept. What I want, more than anything for the class, is the ability to switch spirits during a given day, but not have things measured in rounds so something like "channeling the trickster so you can impress at a fancy masquerade ball" is feasible, but you can switch to the Champion if the inevitable bloody end of said masquerade gets especially hairy. Doing it like wild shape where it's hours/day and you get multiple uses would probably work.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I picked Medium too. I would've liked to see sorcerer up their too, to make bloodlines more like oracle Mysteries.


I voted cavalier because I'm most interested in seeing him out of these classes. Mostly because I think it should have ability to skip mount(yes it's funny considering a class called cavalier).
I've looked at medium yesterday for the first time extensively and on paper it just doesn't look very good (although I've seen people praise him).
Cleric is really bland but as long as oracle exists I don't really care. Other classes have enough options between archetypes & 3pp products so probably not needed.
Spiritualist I'm not familiar with, but I don't care for pet classes.


Who are all these people voting for the magus? A rewrite for clarity might help it for people encountering it for the first time, but a rebuild for the class seems excessive.

Anyway, I voted medium because it seriously lacks flexibility during the day, which is bad for a supposed jack of all trades. Yes, that goes for the spirit dancer and similar too - a few rounds isn't enough to get anything much done. It has a large number of moving parts for not much in the way of a result.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I voted for the cleric.

These are my reasons:

1. At first level you choose a deity, domains and whether to channel positive or negative energy. Apart from skills (only 2/level) and feats (the basic number) you get no other opportunities to customize your character. If it wasn't for the splat books it would be very difficult to build a cleric who stands out from other clerics.

2. The domains aren't equal. Some are far more powerful than others. For example, Luck is very powerful. The Bit of Luck power is useful at all levels of play. In fact it probably gets better at high levels when you can apply it to a martial character who may get half a dozen attacks a round. And since it's a spell-like ability you can take the Quicken Spell-Like Ability at 10th level to make it even more useful. Whereas, say, the Water domain's Icicle ability is pretty much useless after about 5th level.

3. The cleric has no capstone ability so there's no incentive to advance all the way to 20th level.


I feel like this needs to be a multiple-choice poll, as I can see myself picking Cleric, Monk, Ranger, and maybe agreeing on Cavalier (it's not that I don't think it needs changing, it's that I'm not sure I actually care what happens to it).


I don't really have an issue with any of the classes listed.

If anything needs a rebuild, it is the Synthesist archetype.

The current mechanics are not well thought out.


Hmm, it depends on the reason why you want a rebuild. Personally I consider monk a legacy mess of random class features (Unchained doesn't really address this):

They have an exotic list of weapon proficiencies, but damage scales only for unarmed. Flurry of blows encourages full-attacks, but then you don't gain any benefit from your high movement speed. A ki pool is something mystical that doesn't fit to a martial artist. The same with abundant step, tongue of the moon and sun and empty body.

To be fair, there are also several well-connected class features: Evasion, fast movement, bonus feats Mobility + Spring Attack, high jump and abundant step all support the theme of a mobile warrior, for example.

I am a big fan of the martial artist archetype which trades away all (?) the mystical class features in favor of being physically tougher and punching harder. In my opinion classes should be focused on two or three things, which are more or less connected.

Scarab Sages

I selected Alchrmist because there is actually a discussion of how muddy the writing is on the Alchemy class feature amongst my circle at the moment, though I wish I could have selected more than one option.

I think Alchemist (and Investigator by extension), Magus, and Cavalier are all in need of a serious rework. Either because of poorly defined rules, or because they are very much a one trick class.

Edit: I wish Gunslinger was included on the list as well, because that is a rediculously poorly designed class in my opinion. Should have been a fighter archetype, not an entire class.


Moonclanger wrote:

I voted for the cleric.

3. The cleric has no capstone ability so there's no incentive to advance all the way to 20th level.

How about a domain-based capstone?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Segovax wrote:
Edit: I wish Gunslinger was included on the list as well, because that is a rediculously poorly designed class in my opinion. Should have been a fighter archetype, not an entire class.

It's probably not because the "Legendary" line already did one for Gunslingers.


Cleric got my vote, for reasons described already.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Volkard Abendroth wrote:
If anything needs a rebuild, it is the Synthesist archetype.

Derail:
This one is probably easy.

1) Do not replace the Summoner's physical Ability Scores when 'wearing' the Eidolon. Instead they gain the same increase a regular Eidolon would as they level up(except the +1 the Eidolon would get every 4 HD of course).
2) Add your Constituion per HD in temporary HP that cannot be restored until the next time you regain spells.
3) Move Pounce to 10th level.
4) Apply the Max Natural Attacks per round to all attacks per round. Exclude bonus attacks from spells like haste, weapons with speed, and feats like Rapid Shot from this restriction.


I voted for the Cavalier, though the Fighter is going to need a rebuild sooner or latter, although if it does the Samurai will ALSO need to be rebuilt too as its tied to the Cavalier class.

Would you be up to rebuild both?


N. Jolly wrote:
Omnius wrote:
Interesting. Neither Fighter nor Shifter are available options.
Fighter isn't there because it'd be the obvious number 1 choice (we all know it needs rebuilt)

???

Silver Crusade

SilvercatMoonpaw wrote:
Segovax wrote:
Edit: I wish Gunslinger was included on the list as well, because that is a rediculously poorly designed class in my opinion. Should have been a fighter archetype, not an entire class.
It's probably not because the "Legendary" line already did one for Gunslingers.

Well, that and because I wrote that rebuild (which I just added to my gunslinger guide last night).


blahpers wrote:
N. Jolly wrote:
Omnius wrote:
Interesting. Neither Fighter nor Shifter are available options.
Fighter isn't there because it'd be the obvious number 1 choice (we all know it needs rebuilt)
???

In other words, the poll is to put together a to-do list that the Fighter is already on, therefore making it a useless option to add to the poll.


I voted for the Medium because I feel it's the class that does the poorest job of fulfilling it's described function; much like the shifter it seems like a class that wants to be constantly changing its role to complete the task at hand but the day-by-day function makes this largely impractical, if not impossible.

Whoever voted for the Barbarian, fight me.


I picked cavalier; the class has never escaped from the shadow of being a weak-sauce paladin who gives up a fat Smite bonus to attack in exchange for the ability to be of any alignment (and therefore be able to multiclass-dip barbarian, because you'd be an idiot not to).

I.e., there's no optimal reason to play a lawful cavalier (let alone a lawful-good one), even though, thematically, it's implied.

Jon Brazer Enterprises

Dasrak wrote:
Out of those options, Cavalier. For a class who revolves entirely around having an awesome ride, he has shockingly few options for mounts and how to use them.

Might I recommend Cavalier Mounts as a way of addressing the lack of mount choices.

Jon Brazer Enterprises

I picked cleric because this class suffers from being in it's 3.5 shadow worse than any other core book class. It needs a complete redo to give it more class choices throughout it's life.


Paladin needs a rebuild that loses the lawful stupid restriction and better defines the code of conduct to include EXACTLY what can and cannot cause them to fall. IMO, less DM fiat and more concrete rules are better on this matter.

Cavalier's, IMO, don't need a rebuild. The only feature they have that doesn't work without a mount is the 3 charge upgrades. Everything else works perfectly well on-foot or mounted (except for perhaps 2-3 specific orders). I would, however, like to see an official expanded list of mounts for them to choose from.

Unchained already perfectly, IMO, rebuilt the barbarian, monk, and rogue. Altho, I would like to see official upgrades to some of the archetypes from core version to unchained version (especially the monk).

Everything else on your list I either don't play (so don't care if it gets rebuilt) or I think is fine as is and doesn't need a rebuild.


Childeric, The Shatterer wrote:

Paladin needs a rebuild that loses the lawful stupid restriction and better defines the code of conduct to include EXACTLY what can and cannot cause them to fall. IMO, less DM fiat and more concrete rules are better on this matter.

If the only end is to make them not necessarily lawful/good, that's not a rebuild. That's a handwave.

The details of the code are not a part of the class, but of the order and the deity, to be laid out with the setting. Most of the Golarion gods that have paladins have a code detailed. Here's Shelyn's:

Spoiler:
• I see beauty in others. As a rough stone hides a diamond, a drab face may hide the heart of a saint.

• I am peaceful. I come first with a rose rather than a weapon, and act to prevent conflict before it blossoms.

• I never strike first, unless it is the only way to protect the innocent.

• I accept surrender if my opponent can be redeemed—and I never assume that they cannot be. All things that live love beauty, and I will show beauty's answer to them.

• I live my life as art. I will choose an art and perfect it. When I have mastered it, I will choose another. The works I leave behind make life richer for those who follow.

• I will never destroy a work of art, nor allow one to come to harm, unless greater art arises from its loss. I will only sacrifice art if doing so allows me to save a life, for untold beauty can arise from an awakened soul.

• I lead by example, not with my blade. Where my blade passes, a life is cut short, and the world's potential for beauty is lessened.

And no, the code is not a binary list that the GM wields as a hammer to make you fall. It's a guiding philosophy and code, and a fall should be a narrative event.


Medium easily.

It was clearly inspired by the popular Tome Of Magic Binder class which at the beginning of each day let the player equip spirits that defined their class features. Abilities it granted had the excellent once every 5 rounds mechanic instead of the almost omnipresent x times per dat mechanic of pathfinder. Abilities where built around flavor and theme.

The medium is a pale uninspired shadow. You can choose to become a poor mans version of a few classes at the start of each day.

Liberty's Edge

It's not a rebuild, and doesn't have the whole spirit aspect, but you might check out the savant class in the New Paths Compendium: Expanded Edition hardcover. The entire idea behind the savant is the ability to assume other roles and pick up skills and abilities (sometimes temporary, sometimes permanently) through observation. It's a very interesting and unique class!

Actually, although they are all new classes (12 in all) instead of rebuilds, there are a number of classes in the New Paths Compendium: Expanded Edition hardcover that could be better alternatives to some of the classes mentioned here as needing a rebuild.

The Skin-Changer immediately comes to mind as what some have called "closer to the shape-changing class that players were expecting with the Shifter ..."


NoTongue wrote:

Medium easily.

It was clearly inspired by the popular Tome Of Magic Binder class which at the beginning of each day let the player equip spirits that defined their class features. Abilities it granted had the excellent once every 5 rounds mechanic instead of the almost omnipresent x times per dat mechanic of pathfinder. Abilities where built around flavor and theme.

The medium is a pale uninspired shadow. You can choose to become a poor mans version of a few classes at the start of each day.

There is Secrets of Pact Magic and Villains of Pact Magic if you want a more developed Binder.


Sorcerer.


Cleric. Despite all its power, the lack of customization can really make it a bore to play. I'm also not a fan of having a single class feature based on a different mental stat than all the other ones.


I ultimately voted for the Cleric, as I feel it needs more class features.


N. Jolly,

I voted Cavalier, to hopefully get some Samurai love. I admit though I was torn as seeing Cleric get some domain work and some actual class features would be amazing.

Good poll, looking forward to the result.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Omnius wrote:
NoTongue wrote:

Medium easily.

It was clearly inspired by the popular Tome Of Magic Binder class which at the beginning of each day let the player equip spirits that defined their class features. Abilities it granted had the excellent once every 5 rounds mechanic instead of the almost omnipresent x times per dat mechanic of pathfinder. Abilities where built around flavor and theme.

The medium is a pale uninspired shadow. You can choose to become a poor mans version of a few classes at the start of each day.

There is Secrets of Pact Magic and Villains of Pact Magic if you want a more developed Binder.

The same people (Radiance House) have since released a Pathfinder version, the Grimoire of Lost Souls.


I don't disagree with people about cleric, but sorcerer has the same problem (no choices, poor choices that are not as good) only worse. The sorcerer gets to make one actual choice, which bloodline to take. Most of its archetypes are junk.

I would argue the oracle shows just how much sorcerers need a rebuild. It is not that there is no power in the class, it's the fact the class is boring, has little room for customization, and needs updated.


I honestly feel Slayer could use a pass, since it just feels like it doesn't have enough tools for different builds in my opinion. If I hadn't picked that one Alchemist needs clarification and Cav is just dire.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Abraham spalding wrote:
I don't disagree with people about cleric, but sorcerer has the same problem (no choices, poor choices that are not as good) only worse.

I honestly think whole swaths of Pathfinder could use a rework, especially if they're legacy classes.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Class Deck Subscriber

Seconding the Sorcerer, as too many bloodline options are melee. Sure, have a melee-focussed bloodline such as draconic, but what's an Abyssal summoner doing with claws?

Also, this is not specific to one class, but all the character options that are limited in duration and/or uses per day need a second look to decide if the ability is that powerful that it needs to be limited. The draconic sorcerer's claws are a good example of an ability that should be at will with an unlimited duration. Even wildshape would be more interesting if its duration was unlimited - you could hear stories of druids who stayed wildshaped too long and start believing they are the animal they appear to be ...

Spell taxonomy needs an overhaul - particularly for clerics. Domains with their artificial restriction of one spell per spell level means too many appropriate spells get left out and strange choices are included. If spells were grouped to a tight theme such as Healing, Creature Summoning, Undead, Charm, Polymorph (possibly needs subdivisions), etc., then a given specialty has all the spells for that specialty. Also, clerics shouldn't derive their powers from domains, but from the god they worship. Inner Sea Gods had the right idea, it just needs to be pushed further and developed more: If Urgathoa is the god of undead, make Urgathoan clerics better at undead stuff. Clerics should get full or partial access (they may need to choose) to a list of abilities matching a god's portfolio.

Necromancers should just get channel negative energy in its full capacity without any related feats or other benefits specific to the necromancer specialty. They should also have the ability to "desecrate" like a gravewalker witch instead of an arcane bond.

In general, most specialist wizards don't have much that says "I'm better than other wizards at my specialty." Specialist wizards could benefit from the tighter taxonomy above and have much stronger school powers to complement their narrow focus. A blast mage that could lower resistances and eventually reduce or strip immunity to his element of choice would be flavourful, useful, and keep the class viable at higher levels. A wizard focussing on charm who was able to have lesser effects to his charm spells if opponents made their saves would make charm spells a lot more interesting, such as a failed domination acting as a suggestion or command spell. Other ideas include a Charm specialist able to affect those immune to charms by virtue of their type, or the ability to sustain a charm attack that forces a save every round until the opponent fails.

Silver Crusade

Abraham spalding wrote:

I don't disagree with people about cleric, but sorcerer has the same problem (no choices, poor choices that are not as good) only worse. The sorcerer gets to make one actual choice, which bloodline to take. Most of its archetypes are junk.

I would argue the oracle shows just how much sorcerers need a rebuild. It is not that there is no power in the class, it's the fact the class is boring, has little room for customization, and needs updated.

There was actually a reason I didn't include the sorc/wizard on here, and that was because for a list like this, the cleric fills the same role; a class with full casting that has few class features. Effectively, it makes voting for the Cleric the same as voting for the sorc/wizard due to their almost exactly similar issues in creation and customization.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I voted Cavalier, but Cleric is a close second.

The Cavalier needs it most because it tends to be a very one-dimensional chassis for a class despite having more going on than, say, a base fighter. You feel like you're being contrary if you don't play the class as all about dat lance charge but at the same time that's an inconvenient thing to have your class revolve around on several levels.

Cleric kind of has a different problem in that while it's powerful and versatile as all getout it has so little customization going on compared to things like the Oracle that it's kinda boring despite being a strong contender for one of the strongest classes in the game.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't get why Barbarian, Alchemist, Spiritualist, Investigator, Ranger and Magus are there. None of them have big problems at least not enough to need a rebuild. What would you even do with them?

Slayer mostly needs more material to become it's own thing instead of just Rogue with full BAB.

Also, poor Monk everybody has given up on them.

Voted for Medium. After the Medium playtest and what we actually got my dissapointment will never be sated.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I voted Cleric, purely from my personal standpoint that they don't behave anything like I think they should.

1> They shouldn't get spells that aren't part of their diety's/belief system's portfolio. No water spells for fire gods. No darkness spell for sun gods. Etc.

1a> Channel Energy. Not every god/belief has a bugaboo about positive/negative energy. The Variant Channel rules are perfect for this ... a Strength cleric channels and people get bonuses to Strength-based skill checks.

2> They should be spontaneous casters. Even beyond the concept of prepping spells being personally distasteful, it seems like Cleric spells would be more of an on-the-spot entreaty than something prepared in advance.

2a> They should know their entire spell list. Related to #1 above, their individual spell lists would be rather small, so having access to all of them wouldn't be that big of a deal (especially with broken spells removed en toto). So, Earth cleric just quickly begs for assistance for getting out of a trap, and Stone Shape happens to create a doorway.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I picked the cleric. I think Paizo did a really good job with the oracle.

The ability to pick and choose class features is one thing I like about my favorite Paizo classes. Alchemist, Oracle, Magus, etc.

With the cleric, you can pick from a handful of domains, but that's about it. Many of them really don't give you anything interesting...especially if the domain spells are already on the clerics list, so the domain spell is just another spell slot.


The cleric seems like a hard one to rebuild without "just making it better" since 3/4 BAB, 9-level spell casting, medium armor, and a potentially useful weapon is a strong chassis to begin with.

Of course, they did print the Druid...


I'll go with magus.

There's no class worse for photocopy characters. It isn't a class, it's a single character being reprinted over and over.

Boring as hell.

Shadow Lodge

Well when Paizo nerfs all other weapon options into the ground...


I feel like the solution to the carbon-copy Magus issue is "bring Dervish Dance in line with all the other dex-to-damage options."

There are a lot of interesting magi you can build (Dwarven Skirnir doing spell-combat at reach with a Dorn-Dergar, say), it's just that they don't do the numbers of that one build.


Zhayne wrote:

I voted Cleric, purely from my personal standpoint that they don't behave anything like I think they should.

1> They shouldn't get spells that aren't part of their diety's/belief system's portfolio. No water spells for fire gods. No darkness spell for sun gods. Etc.

1a> Channel Energy. Not every god/belief has a bugaboo about positive/negative energy. The Variant Channel rules are perfect for this ... a Strength cleric channels and people get bonuses to Strength-based skill checks.

2> They should be spontaneous casters. Even beyond the concept of prepping spells being personally distasteful, it seems like Cleric spells would be more of an on-the-spot entreaty than something prepared in advance.

2a> They should know their entire spell list. Related to #1 above, their individual spell lists would be rather small, so having access to all of them wouldn't be that big of a deal (especially with broken spells removed en toto). So, Earth cleric just quickly begs for assistance for getting out of a trap, and Stone Shape happens to create a doorway.

I did a cleric rewrite that kind of addresses these points. I didn’t ban spells, but I did put in ways for channel energy to be modified by specific domains. I kept them as prepared casters, but instead of gettinga domain spell of each spell level, I eat them spontaneously cast from any of their domains’ spell lists using a point pool. Other stuff too, but that’s the short version.


Out of all the non-psychic classes listed, Cavalier is the only one I can't think of any build that is interesting, unique (among classes) and useful, even with archetypes. There are plenty of mounted archetypes that do that better than Cavalier and none of the orders are really something to base a character on. The archetypes that make major changes are all junk, change very little, or do things any mounted character could do.

1 to 50 of 90 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Third-Party Pathfinder RPG Products / Product Discussion / Classes most in need of a rebuild 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.