Advanced Class Guide

Wednesday, August 28, 2013

Just a few weeks ago, we announced the Pathfinder RPG Advanced Class Guide, an exciting new addition to the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game due out next summer. While we talked about it a fair bit at Gencon, this blog post is here to get you caught up on all the news!

This 256-page rulebook will contain 10 new classes, each a mix of two existing classes, taking a bit from each class and adding new mechanics to give you a unique character. Around the office we're calling them "hybrid classes." You can think of the magus (from Ultimate Magic) as our first test of this concept. It takes some rules from the fighter, some rules from the wizard, and then adds its own unique mechanics.

At this point, you're probably wondering what new classes you can expect to see in the Advanced Class Guide. So far, we've announced five of the ten classes.

Bloodrager: This blend of sorcerer and barbarian can call upon the power of his blood whenever he goes into a rage. He also has a limited selection of spells he can call upon, even when in a mindless fury!

Hunter: Taking powers from both the druid and the ranger, the hunter is never without her trusted animal companion, hunting down foes with lethal accuracy.

Shaman: Calling upon the spirits to aid her, the shaman draws upon class features of the oracle and the witch. Each day, she can commune with different spirits to aid her and her allies.

Slayer: Look at all the blood! The slayer blends the rogue and the ranger to create a character that is all about taking down particular targets.

Warpriest: Most religions have martial traditions, and warpriests are often the backbones of such orders. This mix of cleric and fighter can call upon the blessings of the gods to defeat enemies of their faiths.

Of course, those are just half the classes in this book. There are four more we have yet to reveal.

"Four?" you say. "But I thought there were ten!" And you would be right—because I'm about to let you in on another of the classes that will appear in this book, which we haven't announced until this moment!

Swashbuckler: Break out your rapier and your wit! The swashbuckler uses panache and daring to get the job done, blending the powers of the fighter and the gunslinger! For those of you who don't use guns in your campaign, fear not—the base class is not proficient in firearms (although there will certainly be an archetype in the book that fix that).

But that's not all! This book will also contain archetypes for all 10 new classes, as well as a selection to help existing classes play with some of the new features in this book. There will also be feats and spells to support these new classes, as well as magic items that will undoubtedly become favorites for nearly any character. Last but not least, the final chapter in this book will give you a peek inside the design process for classes and archetypes, giving you plenty of tips and guides to build your own! Since class design is more art than science, this won't be a system (like in the Advanced Race Guide), but rather a chapter giving you advice on how the process works.

So, there you go. That's six of the 10 classes that will appear in the Advanced Class Guide and an overview of what else you can expect from this exciting new book. While it's due to release next August, you won't have to wait too long to get your hands on these classes, because we're planning to do a public playtest here this fall! Check back here for more news as the playtest draws close!

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
1,601 to 1,650 of 2,258 << first < prev | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | next > last >>

Guys, help me fill this out:

Arcanist- ?
bloodrager- ?
brawler- ?
investigator- Batman
hunter- ?
shaman- Yoh Asakura
slayer- Buffy
skald- ?
swashbuckler- Westley
warpriest- ?


Thank you, Neil!

RPG Superstar 2009, Contributor

Cheapy wrote:
Thank you, Neil!

You're welcome. The playtest goes live on Tuesday. So, no one should have to wait too long to see the first draft of these hybrid classes. From there, the playtest will help drive out any tweaks they wind up making to them.


Thanks for the additional info, Neil. That clears up a few of my questions!


Neil Spicer wrote:

I just got back from the first night of the local convention (MACE) here in Charlotte, NC. Jason Bulmahn is the Gaming Guest of Honor and he held a panel called "What's New With Paizo?" wherein he talked about the Advanced Class Guide (among other things). Here's some additional takeaways based on what he shared while giving a rundown on each of the new hybrid classes:

** spoiler omitted **...

Sweet, thanks a bunch.


Rynjin wrote:
Neil Spicer wrote:

I just got back from the first night of the local convention (MACE) here in Charlotte, NC. Jason Bulmahn is the Gaming Guest of Honor and he held a panel called "What's New With Paizo?" wherein he talked about the Advanced Class Guide (among other things). Here's some additional takeaways based on what he shared while giving a rundown on each of the new hybrid classes:

** spoiler omitted **...
Sweet, thanks a bunch.

Oh boy the Brawler is gonna be good at grappling too I can't wait.


Honestly not too enamored with that bit (I'm not a huge fan of grapplers), but hey, maybe a class that has grappling built in as one of its options (and not the main focus, like the Tetori) will change my mind.

I can take or leave the grappling currently though.


Where did you guys see anything about grappling? Maybe I'm just misreading it.

Silver Crusade

Rebis Ouroboros wrote:

I'm really hoping that the Shaman has a version that is more of a Spiritist, Medium... say what you will, but someone who interacts with actual spirits of the dead instead of just a shaman who is only nature and animal totem based.

I have been trying to create a character like this for awhile now, and the best thing I could come up with is a Druid (Menhir Savant) for the spirit detection at 1st level, Cleric (for the Soul domain), Oracle (for the Ancestor mystery and the Haunted curse). She ends up with a nice theme and some great powers, but loses a lot having to multiclass that much.
If they go with a "character haunted by spirits / uses them for spellcasting) option, even if it's an Archetype (YOU HEAR THAT, BULMAHN?), I will be in heaven.

Have you looked at the new Juju Oracle in Faiths and Philosophies? Seems pretty close to me (perhaps with a bit of reflavouring)


"...quintessential combat maneuver opponent utilizing unarmed combat."

I can't imagine why an unarmed combatant wouldn't want to be good at grappling.


Well, yes. But that doesn't mean grappling. They are the quintessential combat maneuver opponent.

And they utilize unarmed combat.


Cheapy wrote:

Well, yes. But that doesn't mean grappling. They are the quintessential combat maneuver opponent.

And they utilize unarmed combat.

Okay okay. Maybe I'm extrapolating an awful lot. Hopefully I'll be able to pick and choose some maneuvers to be good at. And I hope they'll be viable to use against some creatures. And hopefully the Brawler will be able to keep up with the outrageous CMDs in the later half of the game.


Regarding what Neil said about the Hunter...

Spoiler:
Neil Spicer wrote:
Hunter - This is a druid/ranger mash-up focusing pretty heavily on the tandem of a hunter with an animal companion. Both he and the animal companion get teamwork feats which they can obviously use in synergy with one another.

Honestly that sounds more like Ranger/Huntmaster Cavalier...

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

I was hoping for a Cultist class. A hybrid of cleric and rogue. Maybe 6 levels of divine spells, maybe 7/10 sneak attack, 6+ skills, and some creepy powers.


Neil Spicer wrote:

I just got back from the first night of the local convention (MACE) here in Charlotte, NC. Jason Bulmahn is the Gaming Guest of Honor and he held a panel called "What's New With Paizo?" wherein he talked about the Advanced Class Guide (among other things). Here's some additional takeaways based on what he shared while giving a rundown on each of the new hybrid classes:

** spoiler omitted **...

Excellent...you, sir, are a CHAMPION


Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Okay, after reading Neil Spicer's post, my hopes and impressions are a little modified.

Arcanist: Okaaaaay... I'm still gonna need to see it. It sounds a bit weird to me and not in a way that I would enjoy it; and I usually do enjoy the weird.

Bloodrager: This is sounding about how I have been expecting it to be so far, which is good.

Brawler: As expected from my initial impression.

Hunter: I figured about as much for this one, though I was hoping for a little... more... for a new class. I guess we'll find out soon enough

Investigator: I am acually even more psyched about this one. Oh yeah, I think this might now be the first class I look for when I open that PDF on Tuesday.

Shaman: I now have a sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach about this one after being so psyched about it for so long. It isn't sounding at all how I had hoped it would come out. I will have to wait and see, but my hopes feel like they are about to be dashed.

Skald: That is reassuring, but I don't think it is very promising for what I had hoped. I might like this less than I had hoped.

Slayer: I actually like the sound of this better now than I did previously. But still... I'll wait and see.

Swashbuckler: This is sounding about as good as I could have hoped for.

Warpriest: Still meh to me.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Asgetrion wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:


3. Class over Archetype: We made an intentional choice with these 10 classes to revisit a few concepts that had already seen the light of day as archetypes. We felt that these concepts were just too good, too iconic, to leave as an archetype and that they deserved a full class treatment. Once you see them, I think many of you will agree.

Jason, would it be possible not to duplicate archetype names, though? I'm fine with having multiple ways to create a certain kind of character concept, but IMO it'll be a tad confusing if there are brawlers (new base class) and brawlers (fighter archetype) in the game. :)

I guess we won't mention the shaman (new base class) and the shaman (druid archetype) then. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The shaman actually sounds a lot like what I was expecting, but I recall being surprised that everyone else's expectations for it were so different.


Hmm, shared teamwork feats for the Hunter gives me pause. Perusing through them, I only found a few useful for an archer. Unless they added a mechanic that allows you to use them at range. I guess we'll see on Tuesday.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Majuba wrote:
LazarX wrote:
The magus was not built as a hybrid class in the same way these others were. It does have the dual role aspect, but it otherwise does not lift directly from fighter or wizard. It doesn't have the fighter BAB, bonus combat feats, nor the wizard spell progression or school abilities.
You might want to have another look. It has a spellbook, it has bonus feats (which both fighter and wizard have), and it even has a class feature that says "I count as a fighter!".

It does not have the every other level of bonus feats, it does not have wizard progression. (it has the 6th level progression of bard actually) and while it "counts as a fighter" for feat acquisition, it still does not have the core features of either class. (missing bab, bonus feat/2 levels, weapon/armor training, bonus metamagic feats, wizard spell progression, school powers.) It really only has secondary features from both classes, an abbreviated wizard spell list, and martial weapon proficiency.


LazarX wrote:


I guess we won't mention the shaman (new base class) and the shaman (druid archetype) then. :)

At the very least, Druids are hard to confuse since they're "<Animal> Shaman" instead of just plain Shaman. =)


Brawler needs to keep Still Mind or be shot in the foot on support, as most Monk related things require it.


Gillacatan wrote:
Hmm, shared teamwork feats for the Hunter gives me pause. Perusing through them, I only found a few useful for an archer. Unless they added a mechanic that allows you to use them at range. I guess we'll see on Tuesday.

Have to say this makes me nervous as well. I'd prefer no teamwork feats and something else to go in place of it.


I'm hoping that the iconic Brawler is a female halfling or gnome.


I'm hoping not one iconic is a dwarf, gnome or halfling because those races are completely ridiculous. And I'd like to see an elf that wasn't shark-attack, but with black eyes that's gonna be hard...

Grand Lodge

I have to admit that I am most definitely not looking forward to this given the 10 classes we've got coming. Most of them have no point whatsoever.

Arcanist: Seems alright, but a little unnecessary. Guessing that it's got abilities to prepare and be spontaneous at the same time.

Bloodrager: Doesn't sound all that bad. Actually a little intrigued.

Brawler: You can already make a monk into a fighter or vice versa. I see no reason for combining the two.

Hunter: Rangers are already druid/fighters. Other than maybe getting a few very niche bonuses on certain creatures, I don't see the reason for combining the two together.

Investigator: Not bad. Seems like it could work well.

Shaman: Again, seems alright but rather unnecessary. Combining a divine and arcane user could have some benefits.

Skald: Much like the bloodrager, I don't see anything against this. Intrigued, and liking how this could work.

Slayer: Seems like a decent assassin class. Could be alright.

Swashbuckler: This is where you lost me. A gunslinger fighter? Gunslingers ARE fighters. They count as fighters, they get bonus feats like fighters, and they they have deeds which make them better than fighters. Why the combination. Like others, this seems like a bit of a waste. I'd rather see them mixed with rogues. Maybe even a gunslinger/rogue. That I could have accepted.

Warpriest: This was pretty much a given. Just about every group I've ever played in has made a cleric/fighter.

What I would have like to have seen are classes that actually make sense, and are better for the whole party. For example: a paladin/inquisitor and a bard/cavalier. Make someone who's even more dedicated to the law, or maybe you're a knight that rallies the troops together. I'd have called them the Sentinel and the Marshal. Seriously, why weren't these thought of?

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The Bard/Cavalier combo already exists --> Battle Herald PrC.

As for Paladin/Inquisitor combo, the less classes that generate endless "did I violate The Code by sexually violating a puppy?" arguments, the better.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
kevin_video wrote:

I have to admit that I am most definitely not looking forward to this given the 10 classes we've got coming. Most of them have no point whatsoever.

Arcanist: Seems alright, but a little unnecessary. Guessing that it's got abilities to prepare and be spontaneous at the same time.

Bloodrager: Doesn't sound all that bad. Actually a little intrigued.

Brawler: You can already make a monk into a fighter or vice versa. I see no reason for combining the two.

Hunter: Rangers are already druid/fighters. Other than maybe getting a few very niche bonuses on certain creatures, I don't see the reason for combining the two together.

Investigator: Not bad. Seems like it could work well.

Shaman: Again, seems alright but rather unnecessary. Combining a divine and arcane user could have some benefits.

Skald: Much like the bloodrager, I don't see anything against this. Intrigued, and liking how this could work.

Slayer: Seems like a decent assassin class. Could be alright.

Swashbuckler: This is where you lost me. A gunslinger fighter? Gunslingers ARE fighters. They count as fighters, they get bonus feats like fighters, and they they have deeds which make them better than fighters. Why the combination. Like others, this seems like a bit of a waste. I'd rather see them mixed with rogues. Maybe even a gunslinger/rogue. That I could have accepted.

Warpriest: This was pretty much a given. Just about every group I've ever played in has made a cleric/fighter.

What I would have like to have seen are classes that actually make sense, and are better for the whole party. For example: a paladin/inquisitor and a bard/cavalier. Make someone who's even more dedicated to the law, or maybe you're a knight that rallies the troops together. I'd have called them the Sentinel and the Marshal. Seriously, why weren't these thought of?

You have no clue what any of them actually do. Kinda hard to make a quality judgement just yet, don'tcha think?

Stop harshing my hype, man.

Grand Lodge

Gorbacz wrote:
The Bard/Cavalier combo already exists --> Battle Herald PrC.

Yeah, as a PRESTIGE CLASS. That's not a base class. You want to get into semantics the wizard/sorcerer exists in two different PrCs already. One for 3.5 and another's PF 3PP.

That being said, we already have the investigator and the swashbuckler. They're both rogue archetypes. All the better to confuse the players, I'm sure. Just like having a winter witch (witch archetype)/winter witch (PrC) build.

Rynjin wrote:

You have no clue what any of them actually do. Kinda hard to make a quality judgement just yet, don'tcha think?

Stop harshing my hype, man.

You don't know either, but when they're fighter/cleric or gunslinger/fighter, it's not hard to at least guess what that might entail. So no, I don't figure it's all that hard to make a quality judgement. Especially given how the magus is designed, and how we already have three "books" done by homebrewers on hybrid classes.

At the very least they could have made one more divine based hybrid. I don't see how all 10 of these made the cut over the others.

Now then, that being said, when the playtest pdf comes out and if my group enjoys it, fine. I'll likely buy the book when it comes out next year. However, in the mean time, I'm not holding my breath.


Indeed, we won't know until Tuesday.
I can say I feel underwhelmed by all of them (since all I wanted was a viable Wizard/Cleric) but I think the Magus wouldn't have seemed interesting, either, until you saw the full write up.

The book will be nearly 300 pages, I'm sure there will be more than enough gems to satisfy everyone.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Just remember everyone, any form of complaint or critique about these ten classes are not based on any facts yet because the Playtest hasn't even started yet. All that is being said now is personal opinions.

If you disagree with any classes that's fine, not everyone can play every class and equally like each one. However Paizo has already put alot of time and effort into these ten so the chances of a class being scrapped for something new is 0%. All you can do now is accept that Paizo has released these ten and help play, then critique them in order to improve how they function.

Also please don't ignore a few just because you don't like the concept or the initial class abilities, play them and critique them. I had a bit of an argument with another person on the forums about the Witch class in which they believed the class bore too many flaws. However they had the chance to help critique it and they did nothing. The argument got bad enough that the thread had to be shut down due to some not so nice off topic comments.

In short what is said now is personal first opinions,But after the playtest is released please don't say how the class is terrible to you and instead provide critique as to how to make the class play better and feel more fun. :)

See you all here on Tuesday!


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Oceanshieldwolf wrote:
I'm hoping not one iconic is a dwarf, gnome or halfling because those races are completely ridiculous. And I'd like to see an elf that wasn't shark-attack, but with black eyes that's gonna be hard...

I actually want to see a female dwarf iconic. We have never seen one of those.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ashanderai wrote:
Oceanshieldwolf wrote:
I'm hoping not one iconic is a dwarf, gnome or halfling because those races are completely ridiculous. And I'd like to see an elf that wasn't shark-attack, but with black eyes that's gonna be hard...
I actually want to see a female dwarf iconic. We have never seen one of those.

It's already been explained why there are no Dwarven women:

Gimli: It's true you don't see many dwarf women. And in fact, they are so alike in voice and appearance, that they are often mistaken for dwarf men.
Aragorn: [whispering] It's the beards.
Gimli: And this in turn has given rise to the belief that there are no dwarf women, and that dwarves just spring out of holes in the ground!
[Eowyn laughs]
Gimli: Which is, of course, ridiculous.

Sczarni

If I'm not mistaken the one for the prestige class in the seeker of secrets is a dwarf female.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Everyone seems so disinterested in the Warpriest from reading this thread. I on the other hand couldn't be more excited for such a class. Probably because it is right down my alley, I love the holy warrior type classes in role playing games (Having a paladin and an Inquisitor of Gorum in PFS above 12th level for example). My favorite of the classes introduced in pathfinder thus far is certainly the inquisitor. I have played 3 of them to high levels, and consistently had a blast. I always felt irked that I had to tailor my race/religion choice to get a decent martial weapon and eat heavy armor profiecency as a feat. This class looks like it will be giving me that all built in, of course with changes to other aspects of the class. Will certainly be the first thing I look to on Tuesday, and am really excited to dig into the classes mechanics next weekend in depth.

My order of interest in the new classes is as follows:
Warpriest
Bloodrager
Hunter
Slayer
Arcanist
Investigator
Swashbuckler
Skald
Shaman
Brawler

Dark Archive

I am most looking forward to the slayer. The ninja is a fairly good assassin, but it would be nice to see a non-mystical assassin that isn't automatically evil. Please, oh please, let it at least have a dpr as good as a two-handed barbarian/fighter/zen archer monk. It has always been so annoying in post 3.0 d&d to have an "assassin" not be able to deal nearly as much damage consistantly as the raging, foaming at the mouth barbarian with a greatsword.


I'm not exactly impressed with what I see here. A lot of this is unneeded retread. Am I the only one interested in seeing a Fighter/Rogue combo that isn't based on Errol Flynn? Make him a thug, or a bandit or some other sort of underhanded sneaky SOB who can sneak attack with something other than a pathetic rapier. Is it really too much to ask to have some guy who just wreaks carnage upon his enemies like doing sneak attack damage combined with, oh, I don't know a great sword? Maybe the slayer should be a fighter/rogue combo instead of ranger/rogue. I also like the idea of a Sorcerer/Oracle combo. Either that or if somebody from Super Genius or Rogue Genius is reading, update your Magus class to be this sort of combo instead of what you published with the adventurer's handbook.

I don't use Paizo's Magus or the Gunslinger in my campaigns. The Gunslinger to me is an alternative class fighter. SGG has a better Magus than what got published in UM in the Archon and the Vanguard. I like the concept of the Magus that SGG came up with initially but right now I would rather see it retooled in to a combination of sorcerer and oracle. I also would like to see guidelines of making our own hybrid classes in something like this. A whole chapter might be asking too much, but could we get an appendix or something for that sort of idea. I like Pathfinder because of the customization options it offers. This sounds like it could an interesting buy.


What's stopping you from Sneak Attacking with a Greatsword?

It's just a Feat, a trait, a Talent, or a dip away...


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Troodos wrote:
I'm hoping that the iconic Brawler is a female halfling or gnome.

I'm hoping for a male gnome with a luchadore wrestling mask named "El Gnombre".


A Ninja wrote:

Bard-barian..... I'm done, no need to playtest.

I'm buying this book regardless of whats in it, because it has the single greatest class combo ever.

That was my first reaction until I cooled down and read the fine print:

Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Instead of inspiring speeches and words of encouragement, the skald incites fury and anger in his allies.

If this class trades out Inspire courage for something like Incite Rage, then it will for me probably be the biggest disappointment ever. It’s like finding a recipe for making gold and then someone decides to swap out one of the key ingredients so now you can only make rocks. Inspire courage is such a versatile ability and Incite Rage is not.

Rage can actually be a nerf on other party members. They can’t use charisma and Int skills and they can’t cast spells. I really hope this isn’t all about inciting fury and anger in party members and going on a murderous rampage.

Anyway, ever since I start playing this game there are two concept I’ve been wanting to play. A bard-Barbarian and a swashbuckler.
Now there is a chance I get both, but there is also a risk one of them, or both, will be something other than what I hope for. Time will tell.

Coridan wrote:
Quote:
[#10] Skald: Taking parts of the bard and the barbarian, this class can rage and inspire rage in its allies (we initially called it the “bard-barian”in-house). Instead of inspiring speeches and words of encouragement, the skald incites fury and anger in his allies, allowing them all to go on a murderous rampage.
Yay for Brawler, but Skald is exactly what I am complaining about.

I’m gonna wait with bashing it until I see it. It could be my next favorite class or it could be one of the biggest disappointments ever.

Seriously, I think either love it or hate it, but then I've been wrong before ;)

The Brawler is a rock solid choice. The game needs more mundane classes, and I think this class can finally give some of the monk lovers what they really want from the monk.


Zark wrote:
The Brawler is a rock solid choice. The game needs more mundane classes, and I think this class can finally give some of the monk lovers what they really want from the monk.

[Emphasis mine] Just from a different class. A hybrid, sure, but not a monk.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
ecw1701 wrote:
Ashanderai wrote:
Oceanshieldwolf wrote:
I'm hoping not one iconic is a dwarf, gnome or halfling because those races are completely ridiculous. And I'd like to see an elf that wasn't shark-attack, but with black eyes that's gonna be hard...
I actually want to see a female dwarf iconic. We have never seen one of those.
** spoiler omitted **

Doesn't apply to Pathfinder dwarves. (thankfully!)


I would very much like to see more Dwarf, Halfling and Half-Orc iconics. All three of these races only have one iconic so far. And I agree with Ashanderai; a female dwarf would be nice.

lantzkev wrote:
If I'm not mistaken the one for the prestige class in the seeker of secrets is a dwarf female.

The illustration for prestige classes aren't iconics though, just like the antipaladin. They're just artworks without any particular backstory.


Oceanshieldwolf wrote:
Zark wrote:
The Brawler is a rock solid choice. The game needs more mundane classes, and I think this class can finally give some of the monk lovers what they really want from the monk.
[Emphasis mine] Just from a different class. A hybrid, sure, but not a monk.

Edit:

Remove the word "Brawler". Replace with the word "Monk".


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Zark wrote:
Oceanshieldwolf wrote:
Zark wrote:
The Brawler is a rock solid choice. The game needs more mundane classes, and I think this class can finally give some of the monk lovers what they really want from the monk.
[Emphasis mine] Just from a different class. A hybrid, sure, but not a monk.

Edit:

Remove the word "Brawler". Replace with the word "Monk".

Or Martial Artist.

Sczarni

pretty sure that the illustrated and then stated up for any prestige or class is about as close to iconic as you can get for that. Beyond that, and the person gender being refered to in the abilities, there's not much more you can ask for really for race/gender....


so.. I gather this comes out shortly?


Zark wrote:
Rage can actually be a nerf on other party members. They can’t use charisma and Int skills and they can’t cast spells. I really hope this isn’t all about inciting fury and anger in party members and going on a murderous rampage.

There's another bit from Jason Buhlman that Neil Spicer posted which specifies that it lets the Skald throw their party members into a Rage, but only if they CHOOSE to. It won't forcibly shut down casters. =)


Neil Spicer wrote:

I just got back from the first night of the local convention (MACE) here in Charlotte, NC. Jason Bulmahn is the Gaming Guest of Honor and he held a panel called "What's New With Paizo?" wherein he talked about the Advanced Class Guide (among other things). Here's some additional takeaways based on what he shared while giving a rundown on each of the new hybrid classes:

** spoiler omitted **...

Thanks Neil!!!

This post of yours let me cool down until the play test starts :)

Swashbuckler, Brawler and Warpriest are all full BAB classes, Wonderful news!

Champagne for everyone !!!! ;)

I hope the Bloodrager also is a full BAB class.

Arcanist and Investigator also seems interesting.

Good new you you don't have to be evil to be a slayer.

Skald seems to be something I hade hoped it wouldn’t be :(

Well, well. They can't please everybody. At least I'm really happy we get a full BAB Swashbuckler and full BAB Warpriest :D

1,601 to 1,650 of 2,258 << first < prev | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Paizo Products / Product Discussion / Paizo Blog: Advanced Class Guide All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.