Advanced Class Guide

If you read the forums, it becomes clear that a monk/fighter would be worse than it's constituent parts.

If you read the forums, it becomes clear that a monk/fighter would be worse than it's constituent parts.

How so?

Assuming it's a full BaB/d10 HD/4+Int class, you've fixed a decent swathe of problems with both already.

Dustin Ashe wrote:

I want a class that is swift as a coursing river, with all the force of a great typhoon, with all the strength of a raging fire and, of course, mysterious as the dark side of the moon.

Be a man!

Dustin Ashe wrote:

I want a class that is swift as a coursing river, with all the force of a great typhoon, with all the strength of a raging fire and, of course, mysterious as the dark side of the moon.

Somehow, I'll make a man out of you.

I'm not getting the reference here. Can you help me out?

If you read the forums, it becomes clear that a monk/fighter would be worse than it's constituent parts.

I read the forums. But no amount of spherical chickens in vacuums are going to make me believe the forums. =P

ThatEvilGuy wrote:

Dustin Ashe wrote:

I want a class that is swift as a coursing river, with all the force of a great typhoon, with all the strength of a raging fire and, of course, mysterious as the dark side of the moon.

Be a man!

Jiggy wrote:

Dustin Ashe wrote:

I want a class that is swift as a coursing river, with all the force of a great typhoon, with all the strength of a raging fire and, of course, mysterious as the dark side of the moon.

Somehow, I'll make a man out of you.

I'm not getting the reference here. Can you help me out?

Mulan is the answer you seek.

Banizal wrote:

Hey guys - im here in atlanta at dragoncon. Has anyone heard about the Arcanist yet? Jason Bulmahn spoiled it at the paizo panel. Its a Sorcerer/Wizard combo that prepares spells like a wizard, but their spells have slots kindof like a Sorcerer. It seems "out there", but Jason gave a good teaser about it. Keep your eye out!

This is what the wizard should have been in the first place in 3.0 instead of having both Wizard and the Half Class Sorcerer. This just sold me on this book, as it will completely replace the wizard. Make the Icon Ezren!!

If you really want a caster like this that is pretty balanced (and even flavorful, in world), run out and buy Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed.

http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/1946/Monte-Cook%27s-Arcana-Evolved?it =1

It's pretty awesome...

Mulan is the answer you seek.

Ah OK then, that explains it, as I don't watch animated movies.

I hope they make a class that combines fighter/wizard/cleric/rogue/monk in one. Well, of the course it must be better than the rogue or monk, because those obviously suck. Maybe for compensation it can add something like the synthesist on top. Or I'm not buying this book!

Why on earth would you want the Rogue or Monk when you can have the Paladins of Justice, Freedom, Tyranny, and Slaughter with your Cleric/Fighter/Wizard/Summoner???

I want a 'Chef' class. Make fantastic meals that last hours per level and give passive, untyped bonuses to everything... Bonus points if they can cook a creature and gain EX, SLA, or SU abilities of it's race for a limited time.

Oh, and they fight with frying pans. Because frying pans are awesome.

"Devil's Advocate" wrote:

I kind of hope that they don't go this route, honestly. That would pretty much invalidate the Cavalier, whose only really advantage over a Fighter is a few skills and some benefit for Cha, and those are already very minor.

Zark wrote:

I’m not a big fan of the Cavalier, but you really oversimplifying things.

The Cavalier is far more than a Fighter with “a few skills and some benefit for Cha”. If you want a fighter with a mount and you like teamwork feats the Cavalier is a rock solid class. If you don’t like teamwork feat then you can play the Samurai, another rock solid class. Actually I would rather play a Samurai than a fighter.

It is, but at the same time, no it really isn't. Its kind of worse. I'm not a fan of it either, but mostly because every time I want to build one, I walk away half way through so disappointed that it can't actually do what it is supposed to. A mounted Fighter is significantly better at being a mounted warrior. I like the inclusion of Int and Cha, but the problem is that it just makes the Class way too MAD. They have far too many skills (the intent was to make a warrior with some social ability to counter the idea of martials being useless outside of combat), but the thing is that they just don't have the skill points to do what they need to do as a Warrior, and a mounted warrior at that, and also social skills. Most of the time they are probably not going to be in their element (so the focus on mounted combat is a poor direction for the class unless you cheese it for a small cavalier with a medium mount). Weapon Training/Focus/Specialization far outclass the very circumstantial Challenge.

At 10th level Cavalier gets +10 to every attack vs selected foe 4 times per day AND some other stuff depending on their order. You call all that that circumstantial? It’s like a smite evil that works against any target regardless of alignment. Then we have the Banner that gives an always on buff unless people are blinded/can’t see the banner.

Order of the Dragon is just awsome. +1/4 levels to all attacks is silly good and “Aid Allies” is one of the best buff abilities in the game if the take If they take Swift Aid. True that Strategy is circumstantial since it costs the Cavalier a standard action, but Act as One is just awesome.

The reason I don’t like the Cavalier is not because it is “weaker” than the fighter. It is because A) I don’t like teamwork feats, b) Too many of his abilities are tied to his mount, C) The Samurai is so much more appealing to me.

I think both the Cavalier and Samurai should have gotten 6 skills per level (since they both need ride and handle animal), but why that should affect the Swashbuckler is beyond me.

A mounted Fighter is significantly better at being a mounted warrior? Prove it, and when I say prove it give me a fighter that gets a mount that is just as good.
Create a new thread so we don’t thread jack this thread anymore and like to it.

The focus on mounted combat is a poor direction for the Cavalier? Well it is a class built around the mount. I don’t understand why a Swashbuckler shouldn’t be better than the Cavalier at non mounted combat. It’s like saying that if Paizo created a Cavalier archetype that didn’t use a mount, but got some other stuff instead it would be bad because it could be more popular than the Cavalier. So what? A mounted class is not something a lot of people like.

If you like mounts and teamwork feats then the Cavalier is a good class.
If you like mounts and don’t like teamwork feats then the Samurai is a good class.
Both have their problems, but that nothing exceptional when we talk mundane classes.

Oh, I agree it's fitting. That's got nothing to do with it though. It's how do you not make the Fighter, Cavalier, Rogue, etc. . . look like chumps and this the automatic go to class for anything martial? I'd probably also drop Perception, Diplomacy, and Swim and add Acrobatics.

You are talking about some of the most debated classes on the messageboards. So the benchmark should be the rogue and the fighter? Seriously? You are aware that the rogue is by many considered to be the most problematic and redundant class in the game?

We could look at a different way and say that the barbarian (or even the summoner) should be the new benchmark. The barbarian has 4 skills per level, medium armor, full BAB and d12 HD and is just as good as the fighter, or better, at killing stuff and has a lot of out-of-combat utility.

If Grit is being based on charisma it would make it more MAD than the rogue and fighter. 4 skills per level and light armor is less skill points than the Rogue and worse AC than the fighter and the Cavalier. Also, the Cavalier, as pointed out before, has a mount and a lot of abilities tied to mounted combat. So no, it won’t be a Fighter, Cavalier or a Rogue.

Edit:

Shouldn't everyone be able to block incoming attacks? Swashbucky shouldn't be special like that just because. Id give it to the Fighter, Ninja, or Monk first. (just my opinion)

My bold.

Wouldn’t also it be if the Ninja and Monk could get something called Ki Pool and that the ninja could turn invisible and at higher levels even stay invisible when fighting and that the monk could spend Ki on getting +4 dodge bonus to AC or getting a bonus attack.
Well, actaully they do.

Seriously: Just because the Bard doesn’t get arcane strike does that mean the Arcane Duelist shouldn’t get it?

I’m sure that ALL other classes will have stuff the Swashbuckler won’t have. As for blocking incoming attacks. Both the Fighter and the Cavalier and can use heavy armor and use a shield or even tower shield. I’m pretty sure a +4 tower shield grants a better bonus to AC than a frying pan. I’m also prey sure the Swashbuckler – just like the Rogue - will only be able to use light armor and possibly a buckler ….. or a frying pan.

Keep in mind that needing 4 decent abilities is the norm. There are outliers that need 2 o 3, but they are just that. The math behind the game also assumes about 15 point buy, so if the swashbuckler needs charisma, or even Int, it should do just fine.

If you really want a caster like this that is pretty balanced (and even flavorful, in world), run out and buy Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed.

http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/1946/Monte-Cook%27s-Arcana-Evolved?it =1

It's pretty awesome...

Yes, those were AWESOME.

I sometimes wish that line would merge with Pathfinder; I think the hybrid system would be amazing.

Really? Hrm. This is sounding more and more like a sneaky way to move toward PF 1.5: testing new mechanics that might supplant old ones whenever 2.0 comes around. Not that I have a problem with that, I guess. I had just envisioned this book as a bit more niche and it's sounding more like a bunch of classes I'll have to really learn because they'll make some of the old ones obsolete.

Even more curious for the playtest now.

PF 2 is inevitable. They are learning just like we are.

I hope this guide offers many improvements.

If the Arcanist is similar to the Magister from AU it will be awesome, or the Beholder Mage, best class announcement so far, but still waiting for the Artificer.

I would not get your hopes up on the Arcanist being a full 9 level caster. If they are, they'll have fewer 'known' spells per day than the sorcerer (probably half by level) and also probably the sorcerer's slower spell level progression. And probably the wizard's spells per day (or one less per day of each level).

Why? Because they are not going to create a class that has the sorcerer spells known as a per day mechanic, and the sorcerer's spells per day and the wizard's spell progression because it would utterly replace both classes and nobody would play either.

Personally, I'd suspect a d6, 6th level caster with more spells per day than the summoner, a few less known per day than they can cast (about 2/3rds), and some nifty abilities that neither class has.

Has the arcanist actually been confirmed?

The only evidence of the arcanist class I've seen so far is "some guy on the internet says its true." That individual may well be correct, but I'd prefer to have a link to a Paizo employee announcing the arcanist before assuming it actually exists.

If you are combining two classes with 9th level spells, why the result will be one with 6th level? It doesn't make any logic to me. Also I don't believe it will have more spell that any class like the summoner, Paizo don't change that tables, all 6th level caster use the same table, because make things easier and transparent, a good point to Paizo for doing that.

My prediction: d6, 9th level spells, spells per day like wizard, spells know like wizard, and a new strange mechanic for spontaneous casting.

If you are combining two classes with 9th level spells, why the result will be one with 6th level? It doesn't make any logic to me. Also I don't believe it will have more spell that any class like the summoner, Paizo don't change that tables, all 6th level caster use the same table, because make things easier and transparent, a good point to Paizo for doing that.

My prediction: d6, 9th level spells, spells per day like wizard, spells know like wizard, and a new strange mechanic for spontaneous casting.

It could have a lesser progression because they are giving up access to higher spells for more flexibility (which is common). Your prediction would result in a class that had all the spell casting power of a wizard and the flexibility of a sorcerer. Which would negate both classes. That will not happen.

There are already examples of classes giving up spells per day for other abilities (archetypes that reduce spells per day by one at each level for example). So no, not all casters have the exact same progression. Sorcerers and Oracles get 6, Clerics get 4+1, Druids and Wizards get 4. So already we see classes getting different spells per day.

That is my point, all spontaneous (sorcerer and oracle) casters use the same progression, prepared casters (wizard, cleric, druid, witch) use their own, the case with of 4+1 with the cleric is because of Domain class ability, also paladins and rangers use the same for 4th level progression.

Also, a decent portion of a wizard's power is his school. How many people take Divination just for that init bonus? They'll take 9 mostly useless spell slots for a huge bonus to Init.

I wonder of the Bloodrager would allow the character to use hit points to empower spells or some sort of mechanic like that. Makes sense with the Barb Rage. Maybe feets to increase the HP gained or focus the stat bump to be CON specific.

On the Swashbuckler, I hope the focus on the combination of a pistol/sword and abilities around that. There are some feats that allow some bonuses when using melee and ranged weapons. That would be neet. On an unrelated topic I believe the name Swashbuckler can from the noise made when someone would "swash" their rapier on their buckler to make a noise. Sort of an announcment that they wanted to duel. So, I wonder if they will get any bonuses for buckler use in combination with pistols/swords.

I want a 'Chef' class. Make fantastic meals that last hours per level and give passive, untyped bonuses to everything... Bonus points if they can cook a creature and gain EX, SLA, or SU abilities of it's race for a limited time.

Oh, and they fight with frying pans. Because frying pans are awesome.

Maybe it could be a Monk Hybrid. Sort of a Drunken Masteresk class. Monk/Wizard? Monk/Sorcerer.

Artemis Moonstar wrote:

I want a 'Chef' class. Make fantastic meals that last hours per level and give passive, untyped bonuses to everything... Bonus points if they can cook a creature and gain EX, SLA, or SU abilities of it's race for a limited time.

Oh, and they fight with frying pans. Because frying pans are awesome.

Maybe it could be a Monk Hybrid. Sort of a Drunken Masteresk class. Monk/Wizard? Monk/Sorcerer.

Possible Abilities include: Imbue Frying Pan, Scalding Soufflé, Waffles of Doom!

With mithral waffle pans! Finally, they have a use!

Oh the foresight the design team had with those items in Ultimate Equipment! <3

Has the arcanist actually been confirmed?

The only evidence of the arcanist class I've seen so far is "some guy on the internet says its true." That individual may well be correct, but I'd prefer to have a link to a Paizo employee announcing the arcanist before assuming it actually exists.

It would be sad if it was just a joke.

At 10th level Cavalier gets +10 to every attack vs selected foe 4 times per day AND some other stuff depending on their order. You call all that that circumstantial? It’s like a smite evil that works against any target regardless of alignment. Then we have the Banner that gives an always on buff unless...

You seem to be taking this very personal, and I'm not sure why. +10 damage a few times a day vs a +3 to hit and +6 damage all of the time. I'd take the Fighter as being better, personally.

My bold.

Wouldn’t it be cool if the monk got Wisdom bonus to AC and that she got a bonus feat al level 1 so she could pick Deflect Arrows?

Wouldn’t also it be if the Ninja and Monk could get something called Ki Pool and that the ninja could turn invisible and at higher levels even stay invisible when fighting and that the monk could spend Ki on getting +4 dodge bonus to AC or getting a bonus attack. Well, act<ua>lly they do.

Seriously: Just because the Bard doesn’t get arcane strike does that mean the Arcane Duelist shouldn’t get it?

I’m sure that ALL other classes will have stuff the Swashbuckler won’t have. As for blocking incoming attacks. Both the Fighter and the Cavalier and can use heavy armor and use a shield or even tower shield. I’m pretty sure a +4 tower shield grants a better bonus to AC than a frying pan. I’m also prey sure the Swashbuckler – just like the Rogue - will only be able to use light armor and possibly a buckler ….. or a frying pan.

Not trying to be a jerk, but what does any of this have to do with a class feature that lets you block attacks? I mean, where is any of this even coming from. With the partial exception of Deflect Arrows, nothing else is even relevant to my post.

Let me say this. I am giving my personal opinion and what I would like to have happen in regard to the class. On one hand, I'm sorry that that ruins it for you, but on the other, well, I don't really care, because I would rather not have the Swashbuckler be ridiculously better than any other martial, but particularly not the Fighter which it draws from, and even moreso just because it's called The Swashbuckler. The same goes for all of the classes. I also really hope that they very much limit new mechanics and options, but also outride avoid trying to make anything that is exclusive to one class, especially a new one.

Has the arcanist actually been confirmed?

Not formally by Paizo staff.

-TimD

P.S. I sadly have no news regarding the Tika Waylan pan-warrior class

@Devil's Advocate
No, it's cool. I don't think you are trying to be a jerk.

My point was simply it would be cool if it could block. Especially if it will be a full BAB class that won’t be able to use heavy armor or shield. If Paizo ever comes up with some form of blocking mechanism and made it a feat/feat chain I wouldn’t mind if Fighter or monk could pick that feat/feat chain. Where the other stuff is coming from? My point was just because a class get cool options don’t mean all classes get same cool options, Fighter don’t get Ki, Monks don’t get to use Heavy armor nor can they or fighters turn invisible. All these different features helps each class not getting hit.

We don't agree and that is cool. Especially since neither you nor I have any idea of how the class will turn out. LOL. We just have to wait until the playtest comes along. :-)

I mean Paizo might even let it use medium or heavy armor. Blocking is just something I hope for, but what looks cool in a movie and what worked fine in the RPG “Earth Dawn“, might not be a good idea in Pathfinder. Especially if it turned out similar to what the Duelist get.

Sorry for the block of text and my apology if I came off as a jerk.

Tharkune wrote:

Artemis Moonstar wrote:

I want a 'Chef' class. Make fantastic meals that last hours per level and give passive, untyped bonuses to everything... Bonus points if they can cook a creature and gain EX, SLA, or SU abilities of it's race for a limited time.

Oh, and they fight with frying pans. Because frying pans are awesome.

Maybe it could be a Monk Hybrid. Sort of a Drunken Masteresk class. Monk/Wizard? Monk/Sorcerer.

Possible Abilities include: Imbue Frying Pan, Scalding Soufflé, Waffles of Doom!

With mithral waffle pans! Finally, they have a use!

Oh the foresight the design team had with those items in Ultimate Equipment! <3

Reminds me of my 3.5 Drunken Master dual-wielding Adamantine Everfull Mugs.

Tell us more :-)

Tell us more :-)

Not sure who you're talking to.

@FlySkyHigh. More info please :D

@Devil's Advocate

No, it's cool. I don't think you are trying to be a jerk.

We don't agree and that is cool. Especially since neither you nor I have any idea of how the class will turn out. LOL. We just have to wait until the playtest comes along. :-)

Sorry for the block of text and my apology if I came off as a jerk.

No its cool. Id actually like a block mechanic as well, but I guess the way I read your responce sounded like you thought I had said some things I hadnt rather than to expand on your point. But I agree and Id like to see the playtest before I really form an opinion. :)

@FlySkyHigh. More info please :D

Oh, well, back in 3.5 I played a Drunken Master named Glanili (which meant something like Forgotten Pride in dwarvish), a human who had been adopted by dwarves and had become well... a drunken master. He got really fed up of having to stop and pour himself a drink in the middle of combat, so he requisitioned a mage to make him some everfull mugs made out of adamantine so that he could actually fight while using them and not just break them accidentally. My GM found it absolutely hilarious that I had this monk tumbling/flailing around and smacking people with adamantine mugs. It was lots of fun.

Any idea when the playtest might be making its way out (roughly)?

@FlySkyHigh: That... Sounds awesome. I'll have to see if I can do that when I play a Drunken Master. I shall also have to add these mugs as mythic artifacts in the PF-inspired comic I'm writing (a pair of the main party includes a Drunken Monk and a Drunken Barbarian).

@Cheapy: As am I. I suppose Adamantine Pans would have been too obvious what they were planning, eh?

@TimD: +1 for Tika Waylan. There was just something awesome about a waitress going adventuring with the rest of an adventuring party and whacking things with a frying pan through most of the story.

@FlySkyHigh: That... Sounds awesome. I'll have to see if I can do that when I play a Drunken Master. I shall also have to add these mugs as mythic artifacts in the PF-inspired comic I'm writing (a pair of the main party includes a Drunken Monk and a Drunken Barbarian).

@Cheapy: As am I. I suppose Adamantine Pans would have been too obvious what they were planning, eh?

@TimD: +1 for Tika Waylan. There was just something awesome about a waitress going adventuring with the rest of an adventuring party and whacking things with a frying pan through most of the story.

-Touched- My idea gets to be in a comic :'D

Artemis Moonstar wrote:

@FlySkyHigh: That... Sounds awesome. I'll have to see if I can do that when I play a Drunken Master. I shall also have to add these mugs as mythic artifacts in the PF-inspired comic I'm writing (a pair of the main party includes a Drunken Monk and a Drunken Barbarian).

@Cheapy: As am I. I suppose Adamantine Pans would have been too obvious what they were planning, eh?

@TimD: +1 for Tika Waylan. There was just something awesome about a waitress going adventuring with the rest of an adventuring party and whacking things with a frying pan through most of the story.

-Touched- My idea gets to be in a comic :'D

Yup.. Now if I can only find an artist, we could share the awesomeness of adamantine ever-full mugs of booze with the world! Muwahahahaha!

FlySkyHigh wrote:

Artemis Moonstar wrote:

@FlySkyHigh: That... Sounds awesome. I'll have to see if I can do that when I play a Drunken Master. I shall also have to add these mugs as mythic artifacts in the PF-inspired comic I'm writing (a pair of the main party includes a Drunken Monk and a Drunken Barbarian).

@Cheapy: As am I. I suppose Adamantine Pans would have been too obvious what they were planning, eh?

@TimD: +1 for Tika Waylan. There was just something awesome about a waitress going adventuring with the rest of an adventuring party and whacking things with a frying pan through most of the story.

-Touched- My idea gets to be in a comic :'D

Yup.. Now if I can only find an artist, we could share the awesomeness of adamantine ever-full mugs of booze with the world! Muwahahahaha!

If it helps any, some of the other players dubbed my mugs "Punch-Drunk" and "Slap-Happy"

Also, not sure if you've gotten the mythic book yet, but there's a mythic magic item called "Cayden's Cup" which kind of reminds me of my mugs, but is much more awesome.

I'd also was at the panel at dragon con. There was an announcement of the Arcanist.

Any idea when the playtest might be making its way out (roughly)?

Yeah I am also interested in this. I'm assuming October? November maaaybe? Hopefully we'll hear an announcement sooner than later.

"Fall" is such a malleable word. ^^

Did they release any more details on the Arcanist?

As many people are discussing about crunch, maybe I should toss in some questions about flavor.

"Does this book means that we get more of Wayne Reynolds' greatly illustrated new iconics?!"

Jason said the archanist was a wizard/sorcerer mix. It had a spell book but when you prepared spells, each spell had 'slots". He then summed it up as a sorcerer that basically could change there spells but could cast less a day than a normal sorcerer.

He also said each of the classes will have a unique mechanic. The swashbuckler doesn't have grit but one called bravado (if i remember) instead.

A question i forgot to ask him was if there are new favored class options for each race for these new classes.

Based upon the most recent info on the Arcanist, it looks like at least one, maybe more, of the classes will not have a hybrid class made out of it in this book. We have Cavalier, Bard, Monk, Summoner, Alchemist, Paladin and Inquisitor all with no hybrid. Which one, or two don't make the cut?

I would say probably Alchemist and Inquisitor won't make the cut, since they're already technically "hybrid"-esque classes anyway. Probably even SUmmoner won't see a showing.

It occurs to me that, as the Ranger kind of already is a hybrid (3/4 Fighter / 1/4 Druid?), a Ranger / Rogue 'hybrid' might actually end up making a spell-less Ranger type that is *less* of a hybrid than the base class.

In that vein, a 'purer' Paladin that had zero spellcasting, but strapped on some Cavalier mechanics in their place, could be an interesting 'Holy Knight' or 'Crusader' hybrid...

The Bard is, or was before PF or in a lesser degree 3.5, a "jack of all trades" type of class. Some of that is still prevalent, though he isn't a useless jackwagon like in 2nd edition. I doubt there will be any "hybrid" classes that have the Bard as a part of the equation. It will just be a class with Bard Spells.

Epic Meepo wrote:

Has the arcanist actually been confirmed?

Not formally by Paizo staff.

On the other hand, I was in the panel so I don't need it confirmed :)

-TimD

P.S. I sadly have no news regarding the Tika Waylan pan-warrior class

This wasn't one of those panels where they close the door and make you sign an NDA was it?