Advanced Class Guide Preview: Warpriest

Kudaku wrote:

Squeakmaan wrote:

It has six levels of spellcasting. why in the world would you think it needed anything else.

On the one hand we have the Warpriest: D8 HD, 3/4 BAB, strong Fortitude and Will save, 6th level cleric spell list.

On the other hand we have the Cleric: D8 HD, 3/4th BAB, strong Fortitude and Will save, 9th level cleric spell list.

More than any other ACG class, the class features will make or break the Warpriest. Come on too strong and it might will the fighter or even the paladin, come on too weak and it'll be ignored for the Cleric and the inquisitor.

It's a tricky class to balance because it's trying to make a niche for itself in a fairly crowded design space.

This post was the best of all the 794 posts so far... (i read them all since the begining)

This pretty much sumarize all the problems people are expressing since the first page and fanboys keep diminishing or making the awesome "let see the class finished".

They previewed ONE blessing, and the blessing just MADE the chance WORSE(the blessing procs on hits, while they nerfed your ability to hit, WOW, a blessing "buff" is in reality a nerf)

The single thing everyone reported on the playtest is how fast you burn ALL your resources... with full bab, you dont have to waste every resource in every fight, now, if you wanna use you lv10 previewed blessing, you NEED to buff your too hit before(divine power or divine favor, possible with fervor, 3 resources, 1 fight, right of the start)... if you hit without problem without buffs, there is no single reason to use the blessing at all, since all the attackers will be reliable hitting anyway since all class hit at least as well as the warpriest, and many hit better. So the "unuseful lv10 community blessing" is now the "more unuseful lv10 blessing unless your want to burn 2 more resources right of the bet".

The problem is that if one archetype "fixes" it, the archetype will become the core class and the class will only be a worse...

Nobody is expressing problems, because they don't know what they're talking about, they're complaining about a class they haven't even seen yet. Fanboy or not, ya'll don't know anything, so any complaint you make now, is completely, utterly, meaningless.

Expressing problems you found during playtest is very valid. And if, on top of that, the change moves to augment the problems, instead of aliviating, it just even more valid.

I played a warpriest, with full bab, some time ago. Youre awesome and all, but you burn all your resources stupidy quickly, even more on low levels, so you have the 15 min work day character... with 3/4 bab, now you MUST buff up before every encounter, youre a cleric with extra feats and less spells. The cleric extra resources will win prety much every time.

If you compare combat, you have the inquisitor... at level 1 he has more resources, from 5 and on, with 3/4 bab, he just humiliates the warpriest.

The chassis is flawed with 3/4 bab. Like the rogue. You dont balance the rogue by making OP talents, you balance more by making a better chassis. WP will not have that much OP class abilities, or it will become just a multiclass dip, you take until the cool ability is gained, than change to something better.

We dont know all class abilities, but we know the "core" of the class, and the core itself is flawed.

Remove the Inquisitions from the inquisitor and you have the Warfail.

"Devil's Advocate" wrote:

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Yes, they do have something to do with each other. Fighter was significantly worse in 3.5, and Rogue was better only because of material outside the class itself.

The 3.5 Fighter had 3.5 Power Attack. They had the 3.5 CLEAVE. They had a ton of amazing Feat options with no Pathfinder equivalent most of the time, and they had a Spiked Chain with 10ft Reach that threatened both 10ft and 5ft. Yah, 3.5 fighter stomps the crap out of the PF Fighter, hands down.

Okay...but all that's outside the Class itself. Which makes it not a class design issue per se. Which was sorta my point.

You want to argue Paizo write some bad stuff, I won't argue (everyone does). But Classes pretty much aren't one of those things. Looking at the class by itself, it's better than the 3.5 version.

I agree with you most of the time, but the ”outside the Class itself “ argument doesn’t hold any water.

So the Warpriest get access to fighter feats? All 15 of them (, vs the +100 rage powers the Barbarian got)?
How many of these feats are actually worth having?

1. Pin Down – no not really. Step up is far better.
2. Disrupting Shot – Weak
3. Shield Specialization – Weak
4. Greater Shield Specialization –Weak
5. Point-Blank Master – Good if you are an archer
6. Critical Mastery – Not really with a 3/4 BAB
7. Disruptive – Nice feat, but weak at higher levels
8. Spellbreaker – not that good
9. Greater Shield Focus – Weak
10. Greater Weapon Focus – If you like bonus to hit, but not fantastic
11. Penetrating Strike - Not needed with the cleric spell list
12. Greater Penetrating Strike - Not needed with the cleric spell list
13. Weapon Specialization – Good
14. Greater Weapon Specialization – Also good if damage is all you want
15. Teleport Tactician – Weak and circumstantial.

Good points all around.
However, they treat their level as BAB for all combat feats, not just fighter feats, with regards to their bonus feats. That means that, while they can't have as many feat chains as fighter, they can certainly pull off some good ones.
Getting access to Fighter Only feats is nice, but all combat feats is nicer.
Personally, I'm also waiting to see if their levels can count as cleric levels for the purpose of feat prereqs.

Good points all around.

However, they treat their level as BAB for all combat feats, not just fighter feats, with regards to their bonus feats. That means that, while they can't have as many feat chains as fighter, they can certainly pull off some good ones.
Getting access to Fighter Only feats is nice, but all combat feats is nicer.
Personally, I'm also waiting to see if their levels can count as cleric levels for the purpose of feat prereqs.

Access to all combat feats as in their level counts as BAB for all feats? Kind of nice, especially if power attack scales off level for them instead of 3/4 BAB... aside from their lower accuracy at least. What cleric feats are you thinking of? I can't think of many at all and none that would benefit a Warpriest.

Major_Blackhart wrote:

Good points all around.

However, they treat their level as BAB for all combat feats, not just fighter feats, with regards to their bonus feats. That means that, while they can't have as many feat chains as fighter, they can certainly pull off some good ones.
Getting access to Fighter Only feats is nice, but all combat feats is nicer.
Personally, I'm also waiting to see if their levels can count as cleric levels for the purpose of feat prereqs.

Access to all combat feats as in their level counts as BAB for all feats? Kind of nice, especially if power attack scales off level for them instead of 3/4 BAB... aside from their lower accuracy at least. What cleric feats are you thinking of? I can't think of many at all and none that would benefit a Warpriest.

Vital Strike Chain, even if subpar, would be better for the warpriest if their level is combat bonuses. It will scale to 8d8+8 eventually. Add power attack and furious focus to remove the penalty and you have a subpar but playable character. At least you have some options to combats you dont want to burn all your resources... and the one you want, like boss fights, you just use divine power and go normal full attack.

One tricky poney... but playable. Still worse than the inquisitor and the cleric.

Not sure what you were trying with that post but I find myself frowning all of a sudden. So you mean to say I only need to slog through 20 levels of 10 minute adventuring days (warpriest not having the resources for a 15 minute day) and I can almost meaningfully contribute in almost all combats? I really want to crack this book open and be amazed by whatever it is they aren't talking about in the previews. As is, it can't match a non raging core barbarian when unbuffed or a core book barbarian in a rage when burning everything it has. Plus less skills and... yeah, can't shake this frown man.

Nobody is expressing problems, because they don't know what they're talking about, they're complaining about a class they haven't even seen yet. Fanboy or not, ya'll don't know anything, so any complaint you make now, is completely, utterly, meaningless.

Well for one, calling people's opinions meaningless is a pretty..,well awful thing to do when they're expressing concerns. There are most certainly things we do know. So "Ya'll don't know anything" isn't exactly accurate. We know that they're keeping Sacred Weapon. We know that it's HD, Skill points, and casting is relatively unchanged(They've said absolutely nothing on whether it might get early entry spells). We know it's BAB got nerfed. We know blessings are vaguely better. We know it no longer needs Charisma. That's about it.

A massive concern that is still blatantly in the air is if the Warpriest class features are going to be worth 9th level casting and faster progression.

Two, these teasers are supposed to get us hyped up about the ACG, but this one only made a lot of people anxious and justifiably worried for the state of the Warpriest.

Very well said Scavion...

People use argument of ignorance a lot when youre not ignorant about the fact.

The thing is, as much as we may be wrong and the class can come out good, the developers may also be wrong and the class can come out worse than the monk!

Playable doesnt equal to well designed either. One class, like the monk, may be perfect playable(I love to play monks), but well below the average.

Warpriest was one of the class i was more anxious about, like the magus back on ultimate magic, cause they are single class suposed to remove prestige class needs to do good multiclass, but when they nerfed the Bab, a fighter/cleric will be almost always better, unless some miracle archetype that will be played like 95% of the time, like the Qinggong monk.

Not sure what you were trying with that post but I find myself frowning all of a sudden. So you mean to say I only need to slog through 20 levels of 10 minute adventuring days (warpriest not having the resources for a 15 minute day) and I can almost meaningfully contribute in almost all combats? I really want to crack this book open and be amazed by whatever it is they aren't talking about in the previews. As is, it can't match a non raging core barbarian when unbuffed or a core book barbarian in a rage when burning everything it has. Plus less skills and... yeah, can't shake this frown man.

I am extremely dubious on this class atm. I will wait and see, but I am not expecting much. This would be a shame because this was one of the classes I was most looking forward to during the playtest.

I think a lot of people feel that way. It's been pretty questionable since the 2nd update, when the focus seemed to be "how can we make Warpriests of Desna, Shelyn, and Pharasma work?" instead of asking "Why would there be Warpriests of Desna, Shelyn, Pharasma, etc. . . anyway?"..

That is kind of a good point actually, does every deity need to be a warrior? Warpriest of fertility? Or healing? Going back to most war like deities have martial weapons for their favored weapon. Most of their Warpriests don't know they have sacred weapon progression.

Well, that's kind of the rub. On the one hand, it is kind of a wasted class feature for most Warpriests that should even be Warpriests thematically until much higher level. It's a major factor in the "Warpriests are too good and need to loose something" idea, but that really only applies to those Warpriests that don't really have a warrior type patron. And on the other hand, it gives them a class feature that A.) not even straight Fighters get and B.) is going to make armored Warpriests with Brass Knuckles as their chosen weapon make Monks cry, (or other such kind of ridiculous ideas).

Throughout the Playtests, the Blessings kept on coming up, and we even had an entire thread devoted to the many issues with the individual Blessings, as well as the concept as a whole (does the Good Blessing overcome DR/Evil?). The preview doesn't really give us any practical clues if and how Blessings where fixed, and shows us one that's questionable at best, while also hyping us fans of the class up by showing how much of the stuff we (in general) tended to like. Obviously everyone's got different preferences, and that's fine. I's just the take away I get from a lot of people. Compare the Warpriest preview to the others, kind of tune out the typical fanboy/girl responses, and it seems like all the others are just awesome previews.

And on the other hand, it gives them a class feature that A.) not even straight Fighters get and B.) is going to make armored Warpriests with Brass Knuckles as their chosen weapon make Monks cry, (or other such kind of ridiculous ideas).

Not to worry, the brawler gets to do this with the entire close weapon group now. Monks ARE going to cry! ;)

I think a lot of people feel that way. It's been pretty questionable since the 2nd update, when the focus seemed to be "how can we make Warpriests of Desna, Shelyn, and Pharasma work?" instead of asking "Why would there be Warpriests of Desna, Shelyn, Pharasma, etc. . . anyway?"..

Shelyn clergies often battle with Urgathoan ones. Defenders of art institutes...Protection is one of her domains so defenders in general aren't hard to imagine.

Pharasma strictly despises undead and encourages their destruction. Followers of Pharasma believe it to be a holy duty. Warpriests dedicated to the destruction of undead in her name is a pretty iconic concept.

Warpriest freedom fighters of Desna and those who take the fight to Lamashtu whom Desna pointedly opposes. Hunters of Ghlaunder and his followers...

The "Why" is a question easily answered by even a skimming read of the deities you have in question.

Right, but why do those Pharasmites need to go to battle with knives instead of a more appropriate weapon?

Aratrok wrote:

Torbyne wrote:

Hopefully the class is perfectly fine and capable on its own and we just don't know all of the awesome edits made yet and there are awesome archetypes available to customize it.

I really, really, really want this to be true. But I'm still pretty nervous.

From what I gather in this thread, that is a common enough view point but notice how the designers seem to think we are over reacting. They collectively have, likely, over 200 years of play and development on their team and have done wonderful work since before pathfinder was even a thing... I suppose we can extend them some level of trust when it comes to further developing their own game. But yeah, the preview here was quite the shocker.

Say it with me: EXPERIENCE DOESN'T STACK LIKE THAT.

Unless you, specifically, have lived for over 200 years and done a thing for that long, you will never have "200 years of experience" doing something.

It's just a silly thing to say. 4 guys with 50 years of experience each are quite experienced. They do not have 200 years of experience. They have 50. Apiece.

I could use the same argument for something else to show you how silly this statement is.

"My company deserves the benefit of the doubt. We have a collective 200 years of experience doing our job, so you can trust us!"

What I fail to mention of course is that I have 200 employees with only 1 year of experience apiece. Whoops.

Right, but why do those Pharasmites need to go to battle with knives instead of a more appropriate weapon?

They don't. That's why we fought so damn hard to make sure that Sacred Weapon wasn't bound solely to their Deity's Favored Weapon.

Not really, no. Seems what you are describing is a Paladin, Cleric, and a Ranger/Inquisitor respectfully.

I only mentioned those three as they are the ones that I can recall that kept coming up in the Sacred Weapon Damage debates. Desna also came up as her weapon is both a melee and ranged weapon (though so is Pharasma's).

Ross Byers wrote:

Right, but why do those Pharasmites need to go to battle with knives instead of a more appropriate weapon?

They don't. That's why we fought so damn hard to make sure that Sacred Weapon wasn't bound solely to their Deity's Favored Weapon.

You're missing my point. A Pharasmin warpriest has no reason to invest Weapon Focus in a sword: his dagger does the same damage with the same crit range. It can also be thrown and presents a lesser penalty when two-weapon fighting.

That seems silly, to me. The mechanics drive Warpriests away from one-handed weapons. They either want two-handed weapons (because they're trying to maximize strength bonus and Power Attack like many warriors), or the smallest weapons possible (because Sacred Weapon removes the drawback of those weapons, the smaller damage die.)

DM Beckett wrote:

And on the other hand, it gives them a class feature that A.) not even straight Fighters get and B.) is going to make armored Warpriests with Brass Knuckles as their chosen weapon make Monks cry, (or other such kind of ridiculous ideas).

Not to worry, the brawler gets to do this with the entire close weapon group now. Monks ARE going to cry! ;)

True, but the Brawler is kind of stuck in lighter armor and is probably going to have a similar AC. Warpriest is not.

Not really, no. Seems what you are describing is a Paladin, Cleric, and a Ranger/Inquisitor respectfully.

I only mentioned those three as they are the ones that I can recall that kept coming up in the Sacred Weapon Damage debates. Desna also came up as her weapon is both a melee and ranged weapon (though so is Pharasma's).

I think its rather awful to constrict others based on personal taste.

If it where just that, I'd be right there with you. Thing is, (at least in my point of view), it's ruining the class so that a few can have their personal tastes, if you will.

Also, to clarify, my personal taste is to have the class be the goto class for divine characters of martial patron deities, and I believe that that concept should be the focus of the class and not trying to make it a viable class for followers of NOT martial deities.

If it where just that, I'd be right there with you. Thing is, (at least in my point of view), it's ruining the class so that a few can have their personal tastes, if you will.

Also, to clarify, my personal taste is to have the class be the goto class for divine characters of martial patron deities, and I believe that that concept should be the focus of the class and not trying to make it a viable class for followers of NOT martial deities.

What defines a martial patron deity? You'd be hard pressed to find a god that didn't have some kind of martial sect.

DM Beckett wrote:

If it where just that, I'd be right there with you. Thing is, (at least in my point of view), it's ruining the class so that a few can have their personal tastes, if you will.

Also, to clarify, my personal taste is to have the class be the goto class for divine characters of martial patron deities, and I believe that that concept should be the focus of the class and not trying to make it a viable class for followers of NOT martial deities.

What defines a martial patron deity? You'd be hard pressed to find a god that didn't have some kind of martial sect.

Quite. The comments about Pharasma in particular keep making me scratch my head, since not only does she have sects dedicated to making undead stop existing through violence, but also a rather hardcore bunch of anti-tomb-raider types that play a sizable role in Mummy's Mask...

I've seen a paladin of Shelyn do really well with a compelling backstory.

Why limit people on what they can play just because it doesn't fit your taste? Easier to have options that you can ban, rather than less options.

I've seen a paladin of Shelyn do really well with a compelling backstory.

Why limit people on what they can play just because it doesn't fit your taste? Easier to have options that you can ban, rather than less options.

Heck, our Council of Thieves party had two paladins of Shelyn. They eventually converted my character to Shelyn as well.

Odraude wrote:

I've seen a paladin of Shelyn do really well with a compelling backstory.

Why limit people on what they can play just because it doesn't fit your taste? Easier to have options that you can ban, rather than less options.

Heck, our Council of Thieves party had two paladins of Shelyn. They eventually converted my character to Shelyn as well.

Off topic, but congrats on being hired by Paizo. Living the dream!

Rogue Eidolon wrote:

Odraude wrote:

I've seen a paladin of Shelyn do really well with a compelling backstory.

Why limit people on what they can play just because it doesn't fit your taste? Easier to have options that you can ban, rather than less options.

Heck, our Council of Thieves party had two paladins of Shelyn. They eventually converted my character to Shelyn as well.

Off topic, but congrats on being hired by Paizo. Living the dream!

Thanks!

I've seen a paladin of Shelyn do really well with a compelling backstory.

Why limit people on what they can play just because it doesn't fit your taste? Easier to have options that you can ban, rather than less options.

It also helps that Shelyn has a ridiculous Boon for Deific Obedience for Paladin/Sentinels.

Odraude wrote:

I've seen a paladin of Shelyn do really well with a compelling backstory.

Why limit people on what they can play just because it doesn't fit your taste? Easier to have options that you can ban, rather than less options.

It also helps that Shelyn has a ridiculous Boon for Deific Obedience for Paladin/Sentinels.

True, though this game predated Inner Sea Gods. :)

Odraude wrote:

Rogue Eidolon wrote:

Odraude wrote:

I've seen a paladin of Shelyn do really well with a compelling backstory.

Why limit people on what they can play just because it doesn't fit your taste? Easier to have options that you can ban, rather than less options.

Heck, our Council of Thieves party had two paladins of Shelyn. They eventually converted my character to Shelyn as well.

Off topic, but congrats on being hired by Paizo. Living the dream!

Thanks!

Oh wow! Grats.

Rynjin wrote:

Odraude wrote:

I've seen a paladin of Shelyn do really well with a compelling backstory.

Why limit people on what they can play just because it doesn't fit your taste? Easier to have options that you can ban, rather than less options.

It also helps that Shelyn has a ridiculous Boon for Deific Obedience for Paladin/Sentinels.

True, though this game predated Inner Sea Gods. :)

Just noting something that makes the "Why should a god like Shelyn have warrior priests?" thing harder to support. =)

Rogue Eidolon wrote:

Odraude wrote:

Rogue Eidolon wrote:

Odraude wrote:

I've seen a paladin of Shelyn do really well with a compelling backstory.

Why limit people on what they can play just because it doesn't fit your taste? Easier to have options that you can ban, rather than less options.

Heck, our Council of Thieves party had two paladins of Shelyn. They eventually converted my character to Shelyn as well.

Off topic, but congrats on being hired by Paizo. Living the dream!

Thanks!

Oh wow! Grats.

Makes me wish I decided to stick with trying to get into the RPG world, rather than my current goal of becoming a chef...

Still will be doing Wayfinder stuff though. Got two articles in. Gotta keep the streak going!

Rogue Eidolon wrote:

Odraude wrote:

Rogue Eidolon wrote:

Odraude wrote:

I've seen a paladin of Shelyn do really well with a compelling backstory.

Why limit people on what they can play just because it doesn't fit your taste? Easier to have options that you can ban, rather than less options.

Heck, our Council of Thieves party had two paladins of Shelyn. They eventually converted my character to Shelyn as well.

Off topic, but congrats on being hired by Paizo. Living the dream!

Thanks!

Oh wow! Grats.

I shall now reveal my one-winged angel form!

On topic--Linda's Council of Thieves game was also long before Inner Sea Gods was out. It started when Council of Thieves was on Book 4, so that must have been only months into Pathfinder existing as a game system. Wow, it doesn't seem so long ago, but I guess it was! Man, so much Shelyn in that game (it helps that Cheliax isn't exactly friendly to many of the popular good religions that were also chaotic).

I am contemplating dipping warpriest for other builds but the class as a whole was really deflated for me, still hope it comes together in the book but otherwise it's a one level dip to switch weird weapons over to the D6. Puts it on par with a MoMS at least.

I am trying a warpriest for a new campaign.

1) Shouldn't the Warpriest have Knowledge Arcana on their skill list? Why do they have Knowledge Engineering instead?

2) Any word if the final version of the warpriest still gets the cleric spell list? I feel like they should have their own spell list like the Inquisitor

3) Really wish they had Channeling at 1st or 2nd - still feels like the cleric is far superior than the Warpriest

I am trying a warpriest for a new campaign.

1) Shouldn't the Warpriest have Knowledge Arcana on their skill list? Why do they have Knowledge Engineering instead?

2) Any word if the final version of the warpriest still gets the cleric spell list? I feel like they should have their own spell list like the Inquisitor

3) Really wish they had Channeling at 1st or 2nd - still feels like the cleric is far superior than the Warpriest

My guess for why they have knowledge: engineering is because of siege tactics

Amazing. 838 posts later and we're still talking about the class. Shows you how much folks are invested in this bad boy versus some of the other prestige classes.

However, others have said it, and I gotta agree, if Paizo wanted a Paladin for any god type of build, why didn't they just do that instead?

Odraude wrote:

I've seen a paladin of Shelyn do really well with a compelling backstory.

Why limit people on what they can play just because it doesn't fit your taste? Easier to have options that you can ban, rather than less options.

Heck, our Council of Thieves party had two paladins of Shelyn. They eventually converted my character to Shelyn as well.

Heck, I am running a Dhampir Inquisitor of Shelyn in Carrion Crown. Woe be to those who would defile beauty or love. :D

Rogue Eidolon wrote:

Odraude wrote:

I've seen a paladin of Shelyn do really well with a compelling backstory.

Why limit people on what they can play just because it doesn't fit your taste? Easier to have options that you can ban, rather than less options.

Heck, our Council of Thieves party had two paladins of Shelyn. They eventually converted my character to Shelyn as well.

Heck, I am running a Dhampir Inquisitor of Shelyn in Carrion Crown. Woe be to those who would defile beauty or love. :D

I need to look into this "Shelyn" of yours, you just had me imagine a warpriest helping a young couple elope with some good old fashioned holy parent murdering. Could be a fun character. Would probably still just dip warpriest and then go cleric or inquisitor though.

I need to look into this "Shelyn" of yours, you just had me imagine a warpriest helping a young couple elope with some good old fashioned holy parent murdering. Could be a fun character. Would probably still just dip warpriest and then go cleric or inquisitor though.

Barring abusive, psychopathic, parents, that's really not Shelyn's area. She's NG and, well, really nice.

Torbyne wrote:

I need to look into this "Shelyn" of yours, you just had me imagine a warpriest helping a young couple elope with some good old fashioned holy parent murdering. Could be a fun character. Would probably still just dip warpriest and then go cleric or inquisitor though.

Barring abusive, psychopathic, parents, that's really not Shely's area. She's NG and, well, really nice.

Eh. Within one step of alignment and all that...

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Torbyne wrote:

I need to look into this "Shelyn" of yours, you just had me imagine a warpriest helping a young couple elope with some good old fashioned holy parent murdering. Could be a fun character. Would probably still just dip warpriest and then go cleric or inquisitor though.

Barring abusive, psychopathic, parents, that's really not Shely's area. She's NG and, well, really nice.

Eh. Within one step of alignment and all that...

Lawful Good, Chaotic Good, and Neutral are your "one steps".

None would be okay with murdering random people in their homes.

Not even to help young love bloom?

Not even to help young love bloom?

No, that falls into the realm of Evil, possibly Chaotic Evil even.

Chaotic evil but for a greater good, so more of evil-good, EG, aligned. There, within one step :) Crown me.

Probably wouldn't work for a warpriest concept but there could be some fun with an Oracle chosen by darker forces who firmly believed they worked for a goddess like Shelyn.

Torbyne wrote:

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Torbyne wrote:

I need to look into this "Shelyn" of yours, you just had me imagine a warpriest helping a young couple elope with some good old fashioned holy parent murdering. Could be a fun character. Would probably still just dip warpriest and then go cleric or inquisitor though.

Barring abusive, psychopathic, parents, that's really not Shely's area. She's NG and, well, really nice.

Eh. Within one step of alignment and all that...

Lawful Good, Chaotic Good, and Neutral are your "one steps".

None would be okay with murdering random people in their homes.

Torbyne wrote:

Not even to help young love bloom?

No, that falls into the realm of Evil, possibly Chaotic Evil even.

I think killing people to help young love bloom falls off of the alignment scale entirely, clearly someone who thinks that way is nuts.

Amazing. 838 posts later and we're still talking about the class. Shows you how much folks are invested in this bad boy versus some of the other prestige classes.

Because the frustation.

The warpriest can easily be the most "RPG ICONIC" of the new class.

Cause it is a partial caster partial fighter, like the magus do for arcane and the psychic warrior for games that have psi.

We used to do this concept with multiclass, but since 3.0 D&D multiclass is almost always gimp unless youre aiming for a powefull prestige class. And the problem with prestige class is that you waste half your campaign playing "something" until you develop "the character you wanted when you created this PC".

The awesome thing about the magus(i am playing one) is that you play "the character you wanted" since first level.

The warpriest was made to make something similar.

It missed the mark... by lot!

Making a 3/4 BAB class that NEED to buff up to get to the "right fighting level" just made the class something like low level mages. You go on adventure... spells out? Rest. So you have 3 round workdays. Since clerics have access to more spells, you acomplish the same as cleric and eventually you will acomplish much more as cleric cause it scales a LOT better. (At 15th level you can cast quickedned divine power anyway, at level 9 you can cast quickened divine favor) but at 15 level a Warpriest cant cast an empowered flamestrike or true ressurection.

If you dip 1 level in fighter, as a cleric... the humiliation grows.