Yeah, I sat down with the statistics for a zweihänder and figured out what size of one proportionate for a large sized character would be. Powerful build lets me wield it without penalty but he is certainly not going to be able to wear it on his back or at his waist. I was planning to have him switch to his claws when in narrow corridors and the like because it was simply too unrealistic to wield that sort of a blade in certain situations.
The claws are supposed to be similar to good-sized daggers (1d6s) and fold back and into his hands when not needed. They are mounted to two extra and very muscular digits on the back of each hand. I'd imagined them as being rather like a pair of small scythe blades mounted to the back of each hand.
Cool cool, I probably wouldn't have gone with the same statistics for the sword but that's just me. Attacking with reach usually sucks unless you can turn it off and on. The aegis thing is pretty wild. A synthesist summoner with infinite duration? Yummy.
Personally I'll take a barbarian any day. Nothing makes casters weep harder than a good rager.
He does not technically get reach with the weapon RAW. Reach is often treated as a function of a creature's size and not the size of their weapons. A lot of broadsword stances also involve holding a lot of the blade next to the body, and defensive motions often focus of sweeping the opponent's weapon aside so stat and flavor wise, it is a heavy and very large cleaver that hurts a bunch when he hits you with it.
The aegis is cool because it is a full BAB synthesist that is somehow balanced better. For instance, the bonuses they can get to their physical stats is an enhancement bonus meaning it will not stack with most magical items. Khol's AC is still going to get pretty ridiculous but he should be nowhere as bad as a synthesist can be.
Mmmmm, well considering that a 7 ft tall human with a 10 ft sword would have about 4.5 ft of empty space in his swing before getting to the blade. Obviously this is all fluff theory, as you aren't forced into reach because of powerful body. 10 ft swords being weird in-and-of themselves.
Really, I shouldn't even be talking given the literal LAUNDRY LIST of immunities and goodies that constructs get.
One of the saving graces for psionics for me is that they can be effected by dispelling magic and such. Honestly, given how powerful they can be it gives them some much needed vulnerability.
I'm just trying to shoot the breeze till every is accounted for is all.
I expected Victor to have posted by now, but life happens. When it comes to these PbP's I have the patience of a sugar-addled middle schooler. :P
Ignus 'Tiny' wrote:I'm just trying to shoot the breeze till every is accounted for is all.I expected Victor to have posted by now, but life happens. When it comes to these PbP's I have the patience of a sugar-addled middle schooler. :P
I believe we are waiting for Muziel over here as well, but such is the way of things
Well let me just make up a nice list:
*He's an NPC mercenary, which means that likely his alignment is CN. Given that, he has absolutely no reason to keep his word to us.
*He fired live weapons at children with no hesitation.
*I would question how reliable fear is as a motivator considering that 1) he was going to kill children simply for money and 2) we aren't going to give him any money to counter the fact that he could still have payment waiting for him.
*We are relying on him to guide us to his allies. Now I know we won the last fight handily, but it should be obvious to both us and him that that was mostly luck. Luck that may not favor us if he, say, led us straight into a trap.
*For a mercenary who seems to know next to nothing as to why he is actually here, I doubt that he actually knows the locations of all the other ambushes.
*Given that he was threatened with death, he may just be saying whatever we want to hear until he gets the chance to escape. With no Sense Motive checks made on our part, his sincerity is still questionable.
Now I realize this is all hearsay and could just be circumstantial ramblings on my part, but doubt is doubt and I have it. Obviously I can't really make these accusations IC so ultimately it is up to the group. I just don't see much benefit from bringing him with us, he's just a liability. I'm all for calculated risks, but the only thing we have on our side here is an Intimidate check. I'd prefer to just get the information from him and then either restrain him or send him on his way.
I agree that these are all good points and disagree that you cannot make them in character, just strip out the game terms and restate them as Ignus would. They are all good points and ones I'm sure Ignus would think of since he is here to protect the students.
Here is my reasoning for Khol:
The raider is unarmed and, if Khol has his way, will be unarmored as well. No one applied any healing to him which means in his current battered state, it would be a simple thing to reach out and re-render him unconscious or dead. Hopefully, by now, the raider is cognizant of Khol's willingness to take his life if things go sour. This guy is a merc and has demonstrated a less than loyal attitude to his bosses when pressure was applied. It would be easier to appease the murderous mutant than give the fellow a reason to end his life.
This is not to say Khol trusts the raider. Lack of trust is why he is asking Rawgr and Duskade to act as outriders and scouts.
Khol is a little bit of a savage and currently enjoying the terror he inflicted on the raider. He is smart but not exactly wise. The only reason he is trying to take charge is no one else really stepped up and did so already. If you don't agree with his methods or decisions, please, please, bring it up. He may sulk and drag his heels but he will listen to a good idea from a friend.
I have rope. The issue is that Ignus is so young and lacks real world knowledge (remember I did run around punching things the entire first fight). He doesn't understand the true intricacies of mercenaries or people so I can't reasonably go around dropping complex analysis of something I've never dealt with.
That being said I do have a card in my back pocket if the rest of the group decides to go along with it. You have asserted yourself into a leadership role, and while I may not speak out against it I will continue to act as I see fit (no offense).
Most of them are junk. Given that the designer openly admitted that they are just throwing together two classes (lazy) I can't say I'm too surprised. It's like they're trying to do gestalting again but with a different name. The classes that I like (Bloodrager, Swashbuckler, Slayer, Brawler) have some major issues that I doubt will get worked out considering the ridiculous way in which they are organizing the playtest. Other classes (Skald and Shaman) are archetypes given a full twenty levels, and then given their own archetypes in turn. The last of them (Investigator, Hunter, Arcanist, Warpriest) were incredibly disappointing in their own ways.
I could go on if anyone is up for a discussion.
I can honestly say that I really don't care for most of the Advanced Classes at all.
***WARNING!!! WALL OF TEXT INCOMING!!! WARNING!!! WALL OF TEXT INCOMING!!!***
The Arcanist is a vile amalgamation of the Sorcerer and the Wizard. You take a class limited by it's knowledge but can cast more efficiently and add in class features that allow it to gain all the knowledge it needs and cast just as efficiently. Also it is now a "prepared spontaneous" caster, meaning it can have ALL the magic feats that originally only applied to one or the other. I guess it has slower magic growth and no familiar...whoop-de-do. Why would I ever play a Sorcerer/Wizard again (which were already at nearly the top of the food chain mechanically speaking)?
The Bloodrager -
Generally I like the Bloodrager. It's almost like a bad magus in some sense, however it's Arcane bloodline add interesting abilities to it's blood rage. However, without any other powers that I can activate without needing to cast it's just not worth it to me. I've never raged as a Barbarian and thought "Man, if only I could cast" it would make my actions inefficient, which could get me killed. However, 10 Barbarian / 10 Bloodrager...now that's a bit scarier.
The Brawler -
As long as it doesn't get nerfed to hell (which it will) then say goodbye to the monk. Despite no abundant step (virtually worthless by the time you get it) and no adding Wisdom to your ac (counter acted by light armor) this class out preforms the monk immensely. The monk was already pretty obsolete, but this is just the final nail in the coffin. Well unless you wanna go Zen Archer I suppose. Also I love their Martial Maneuvers.
The Hunter -
I'm not really happy with this class either. What if you played a Druid, and stay with me, were completely worse than a Druid. I'm really not "in love" with any of their abilities. I suppose the Animal Aspect is kinda cool...but really it's just not cutting it for the class.
The Investigator -
At least the other not-as-good classes still seem to have a combat role which make them playable in a Pathfinder game, the Investigator just doesn't. For a long time people have been clamoring for a full Role Playing class, that really doesn't lend itself to combat and is completely utility, unfortunately those same people also don't realize that Pathfinder is a game that centers around combat. If you take out all the skills, abilities, and feats that focus combative purposes, there is nothing left to Pathfinder. The Investigator focuses on that little bit that is left, which make it an unplayable class. Sure he has sneak attack, but no other abilities to really enhance this. IF you focus his combat, you only take Rouge Talents and feats and WHY AREN'T YOU PLAYING A ROUGE? If you focus his spells, and only take Alchemical Discoveries, and feats that focus his spell abilities, WHY AREN'T YOU PLAYING AN ALCHEMIST? Also 9d6 sneak attack? What the hell paizo!?
The Shaman -
A Cleric with Hexes poorly stapled to it's face...I guess that's about it.
The Skald -
Even though I don't understand why this is a full class, I still like it. Give out rage bonuses like candy instead of inspiring heroics and courage inspire "SMASH". It's a cool concept and I genuinely like it. I just don't understand why it took up room in a book of "new classes" when clearly it is just an archetype that replaces two of the bard abilities.
The Slayer -
I like the Assas - I mean Slayer. So I enjoy this class a lot, even if it kinda stole a prestige class and does it only slightly better. But I suppose that's what everything in this book does. So the real question is why ever play a rouge again? "This doesn't get trap sense" no one takes trap sense because everyone uses Rouge Archetypes. My only real complaint to this class is that Ranged sneak attack just doesn't get any better, which I was really hoping for when I read "Rouge/Ranger". I know Ranger doesn't ALWAYS mean a bow and arrow, but it's nice when it does.
The Swashbuckler -
I hate Bravery. Why give him a bad will save progression and then instantly fix it with Bravery which nets a single +1 less than if we were just to say "He's good at will saves too". I hated it then and I hate it now. It's a bad class ability because it doesn't make sense to be an ability. Other than that I love this class. In the first 3 levels we absolutely destroy the Fighter, Swordlord, and Duelist because this class is simply better. I enjoy the idea of Panache and I hope that this class gets better when the play-test is over, because some of it could use a little fine tuning...but I know it won't.
The Warpriest -
The Inquisitor, Cleric, and Paladin are all better choices than this class. It's just not good.
***WARNING!!! WALL OF TEXT INCOMING!!! WARNING!!! WALL OF TEXT INCOMING!!!***
I'll do you one better.
Firstly: a word about the "playtest". Paizo has made it abundantly clear that any actual player feedback is entirely nominal. Less than a month to playtest 200 new levels is completely ridiculous. On top of that, the fact that they have specifically stated that the only feedback they care about should be positive and should not contain any actual build analysis or theorycraft (instead just say if you had "fun" with it or not). Just the other day SKR closed a thread questioning the point of hybrid classes because it was "too negative". At best this playtest is just a teaser to tide people over until they finalize the book next August, at worse it's a deliberate hugfest.
Now, as for the ACG itself: it appears that they are trying to revive gestalting from 3.5, only in a horribly awkward way. The book is reported to contain, besides these ten classes, new archetypes and a guide to creating your own hybrids. I can't speak to anything that isn't in the playtest (and I'm still hopeful for new Magus archetypes), but from what I have seen of these new classes (that are getting their own archetypes nonetheless) I'm not impressed. Let's go down the list:
A sorcerer bloodline
A resource pool to buff your own spells
A favored school without having to select an unfavored one
Sorcerer spell progression
No familiar immediately as you begin
No D20 HD
No casting in Full Armor
2+INT skill ranks
Apparently late on night someone decided PF didn't have enough full-casters. So they made the Arcanist, blending all of the benefits of a wizard and a sorcerer but seemingly forgetting to include any of the significant drawbacks. The versatility of preparing from a spellbook but then being able to cast spontaneously is just silly. Your resource pool (Blood Focus) can be used to activate your bloodline features when you need them and boost your own spells at the same time. Your capstone ability allows you to add FREE METAMAGIC to any of your favored spells. Supposedly balanced because you don't have a familiar (rectified with two feats or by taking the Arcane bloodline) and you get Sorcerer spell progression (darn). On a side note: why are classes still getting 2+INT skill ranks?
Luckily (or not depending on how you view this class) Paizo has decided to scrap this class in the face of overwhelming criticism. The finalized Arcanist is said to be focused on dispelling and will still get a resource pool.
Casting and Raging
Some bloodlines are really good
Rage Cycling no longer required for competence
Alignment: Any (WTF!?)
Loss of rage powers makes life hard
Bloodradge doesn't count as a prereq for important feats like Raging Vitality or Extra Rage.
Some bloodlines are really bad
Paizo was too lazy to give you your own spell list.
D10 HD and two bad saves makes you really vulnerable.
To be honest spells seem to be entirely unnecessary for this class. 4th level casting of the Magus list is not helping anyone. The real candy comes from Bloodlines. That is, if you choose a good one. For example: Abberant gives you DR, crit immunity, increased reach, blindsight, and a ton of immunities. Arcane gives you blur or haste (among other things) for the entire duration of your rage! Undead let's you become incorpreal! On the other hand, Infernal gives you flight and immunity to one damage type and Draconic gives you a bunch of extra attack methods you don't need and flight. Hopefully Paizo will at least include more bloodlines by the time they finally publish this. Hopefully they will also keep that you can cast while in medium or light armor.
Statless bonus to AC
So many feats
Flurry as a full-attack
You don't need a constant IV of Ki to live.
Monks Unarmed Strike
100% guarantee it will get nerfed
Despite being infinitely better than a monk, you still aren't very good.
You probably have the worst high level abilities in the entire game
The crusade against Monks continues as they finally create a class that it is literally better than it in every way. With Full BAB you can actually hit reliably outside of Flurrying and D10 HD means you are that much more survivable in melee. Stat-less bonus to AC and light armor means you can actually pull off building one of these without a 25 point buy. Martial Maneuvers is so awesome it's ridiculous. Burn a move action and you can pick up almost any style tree whenever you want. That being said: this will get nerfed as people realize that the Brawler encourages optimizing and holding up the game so they can find that perfect combination of feats. The only other thing of note is that both Awesome Blow and Knockout are laughably bad. Pretty much anything will past the fort save for Knockout and Awesome Blow is just a cut-and-paste feat. They probably intended it as an option you can take if you aren't flurrying (and also to negate Brother of the Seal along with the Monk). Unfortunately, not being able to affect thing bigger than you (and at 20th level, everything is bigger than you) and not being able to flurry with it makes this probably the worst capstone of all time. Barbarian 10/Brawler 10 is probably the best thing you can do with your later levels.
Free teamwork feats that you can share with your companion makes the two of you a pretty good flanking team.
No one will willingly play a nerfed Druid
Wildshape replaced with flimsy buffs
Both you and your companion must meet the prereqs for any shared feat (good luck with that).
This is a nerfed Druid, if that wasn't obvious look again. Animal Focus is awful and your choice of companions isn't great. On top of that, your animal companion will be blowing most of its feats trying to meet the prereq for the teamwork feats so say goodbye to anything helpful from them. Consider yourself a bad cavalier. Even possessing a tactician-esque ability would make the Hunter slightly more viable.
9d6 Sneak attack
Investigator Talents, Rogue Talents, AND Ninja Tricks
You are powered by the tears of rogues and ninjas alike
Paizo can apparently not write a non-combat class to save its life.
Someone still thinks that class abilities that replicate first level spells are good
So if you were hoping because of its name that the Investigator would be Paizos first attempt to make a viable non-combat class, you were wrong. You have more combat abilities than you can shake a stick at and sneak attack along with extracts makes you infinitely superior to the Rogue. Unfortunately the Vivesectionist still beats you out at your own game so your kind of left in a limbo.
Wow! Look at all of these new Oracle mysterious. Oh wait, "Spirits". Excuse me.
You get hexes too I guess...
For some reason you have Hexes
This is a class that could have easily been an Oracle archetype, but they decided to force the whole Oracle/Witch thing anyways. The text for Hexes calls you a witch multiple times, but it doesn't matter much since no one cares about hexes. Other than some interesting flavor this class doesn't really possess anything else of note.
All of that Bard flavor with none of the calories!
Handing out Rage and Rage Powers
Rage + Moment of Greatness
Casters don't like you
You fatigue your mundane friends
Objectively worse than the bard
Skald is another class that really should have just been an archetype. Making others Rage is cool but most of the time you will be missing Inspire Courage. Casters can't use your rage lest they stop casting and Mundanes probably don't want to be fatigued all of the time. On a side note: the idea of a Dervish Dancer but with rage both excites and terrifies me.
Favored Target fun times
6d6 Sneak Attack
Slayer Talents suck
Feedback from playtesters who have no idea what they're doing will end with your Favored Target getting nerfed
Ranged Sneak Attack is FUR DA DEVUL.
This class should be fairly self-explanatory. I really like the idea, but major flaws in the execution kill it for me. Namely: Why more Slayer Talents weren't stolen from the Skirmisher and why are casters the only ones who can make Ranged Sneak Attack?
You negate two PrC in your first three levels
Panache is suave as all get out
Deeds are crap
No free Weapon Finesse or Dervish Dance equivalents
Again, playtesters who have no idea what they are doing will likely destroy your class.
Swashbuckler, again something that could have just been an archetype but I don't really care. This thing is smoother than a newborns bottom. Parry seems really cool as does Riposte. Unfortunately you suffer huge drawbacks that will likely go unfixed as the focus of most feedback seems to be making you better at shmoozing the opposite sex. A lack of Weapon Finesse and Dervish Dance equivalents means you will immediately get locked into a single playstyle while trying to widdle away at a huge feat tax. Someone decided to give you bravery instead of something that is actually useful. Deeds are pretty much as bad as they were for the gunslinger. Parry doesn't scale with levels (nor does it function against missiles or rays) and most others are full-round actions. Unfortunately none of this will likely be addressed thus relegating the Swashbuckler to the fate of mediocrity.
Praise the Sun?
Paladins, Clerics, and Oracles all laugh and call you names
Nobody likes you
Even the developers don't like you
A nerfed cleric, so nothing anyone will ever willingly play. Desperately you want to be a Divine Magus, unfortunately everyone else does it better. The only thing, only thing I say, that I can ever see this used for is Warpriest 3/Magus 7/Mystic Theuruge 10 or as a replacement for clerics in low-power campaigns.
I'm more than a little inebriated right now so it is a struggle to coherently form statements, much less arguments.
In the end, I see a whole lot of potential in the ACG (Yes, even in the Warpriest) and the purpose of the playtest is to make use of this potential. I do however despise getting into debates on the internet and especially on these forums (especially, especially after seeing the toxic attitudes many took about the ACG) so that is about all you're going to hear from me on the matter.