Advanced Class Guide Preview: Warpriest

Tuesday, June 17, 2014


Illustration by Subroto Bhaumik

Many years ago, back in the days of the Advanced Player's Guide, there were plans to open up the paladin class to characters of any alignment. Unfortunately, the constraints of the class and its many alignment-based abilities made it too much of a challenge to fit in the pages of that book. Fortunately, the Advanced Class Guide gave us the opportunity to revisit the idea in the form of the Warpriest.

Blending together the powers of the fighter and the cleric, the warpriest is a class that allows you to represent the ideals of your deity, but to back them up with cold, hard steel. The class had 6 levels of divine spellcasting, combined with an ability called blessings that work like domains, but grant combat focused abilities. It seemed like a perfect blend, but the first version of the class that we put forth to playtest did not go over very well. The powers and abilities, as initially designed, just did not give the player enough martial ability to get the job done. It had some the spellcasting and some of the combat skill, but the two just did not work well together as initially presented. Fortunately, in round 2 of the playtest, we got it right (or maybe a bit too right). We added an ability called fervor that allows the warpriest to channel energy to heal his allies similar to a paladin's lay on hands, but it also could be spent to cast warpriest spells as a swift action, as long as those spells only targeted the warpriest. We also changed an ability called sacred weapon, which allows the warpriest to designate a weapon (or the favored weapon of his deity) and use that weapon to greater effect, increasing the damage and attack bonus.

Unfortunately, that caused a bit of a problem. The class was a bit too good.

The second round of playtest showed us some really interesting data. Everyone seemed in love with the class, which is certainly good, but our surveys also showed us that the class was now at the top of the power curve. After a number of internal playtests, it became clear that attacking with the full attack bonus of a fighter, combined with swift-casting a number of "buff" spells made the class a juggernaut. Since we really liked how the fervor mechanic worked, the sacred weapon rules had to change. Sacred weapon still increases the damage of weapons and it can still be used to grant special abilities to the weapon, but it no longer increases the attack bonus of the warpriest when using the designated weapon. Just like that, everything seemed to fit.

We also took another look at a wide number of the blessings, bringing them all in line with one another and making them a more seamless part of the class. Take the community blessing for example. The major version of the blessing did not fit really well and was outright useless to a warpriest of Erastil. It got changed to the following.

Fight as One (major): At 10th level, you can rally your allies to fight together. For 1 minute, whenever you make a successful melee or ranged attack against a foe, allies within 10 feet of you gain a +2 insight bonus on attacks of the same type you made against that foe—melee attacks if you made a melee attack, or ranged attacks if you made a ranged attack. If you score a critical hit, this bonus increases to +4 until the start of your next turn.

There are a lot of other exciting changes in the blessings as well, but for those, you will have to wait until the book arrives in stores and at Gencon in mid-August. Come back on Thursday to unleash your inner rage, now improved with magic!

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Igor Grechanyi Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Warpriest
351 to 400 of 1,041 << first < prev | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | next > last >>
Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

Ross Byers wrote:
DM Beckett wrote:
Cheapy wrote:
Insain Dragoon wrote:


Using playtestV2 I would have traded out blessings, sacred armor, and the round/level sacred weapon just to keep it.
Which is an amazing argument for why it had to go: It was too good. Well said, even if unintentionally.

:P

So people enjoying something and not caring for other things is a good reason to get rid of it?

If someone says that they'd trade a limb for something, that usually means the something was pretty good. Not that the limb was worthless.

"I'd trade my vestigial third arm to be able to do that!"

"Who wouldn't?"

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Ssalarn wrote:
Ross Byers wrote:
DM Beckett wrote:
Cheapy wrote:
Insain Dragoon wrote:


Using playtestV2 I would have traded out blessings, sacred armor, and the round/level sacred weapon just to keep it.
Which is an amazing argument for why it had to go: It was too good. Well said, even if unintentionally.

:P

So people enjoying something and not caring for other things is a good reason to get rid of it?

If someone says that they'd trade a limb for something, that usually means the something was pretty good. Not that the limb was worthless.

"I'd trade my vestigial third arm to be able to do that!"

"Who wouldn't?"

"I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous!"


Anyone look at the Pregen Warpriest? It shows off two of the blessing at 3rd level. One a swift action self buff, the other a minute long buff called War Mind letting someone choose their buff for the round.

Liberty's Edge

Kairos Dawnfury wrote:
Anyone look at the Pregen Warpriest? It shows off two of the blessing at 3rd level. One a swift action self buff, the other a minute long buff called War Mind letting someone choose their buff for the round.

Both are unchanged from the playtest document. Though, for the record, he is entirely Wisdom based as per the teaser above. In fact, he's even dumped Cha to 8.


Cheapy wrote:
Undone wrote:

The problem is that swift action casting is barred by swift action domain powers.

Which is good because quicken spell gives regular clerics this ability.

The warpriest's ability doesn't increase the spell level by four spell levels. This means that the war priest can cast things like Divine Power as a swift action 5 levels before the Cleric can, to say nothing of using up higher spell level slots.

One of the biggest issues with Clerics is that they need to buff up to be able to fight well. And the optimal number of rounds to buff is 2 or 3, due to all the standard action spells they need to cast. Sure, they can pick and choose the spells to get the most bang for their buck, but the warpriest doesn't necessarily have to. And instead of waiting until level 9 to be able to do a swift action spell and a standard action spell in the same round, the warpriest can do that from level 1. It's barely worthwhile to cast divine favor as a cleric if you can't prebuff

The ability to buff while smashing face and not using up your higher spell slots is tremendously powerful, and is exactly the thing clerics want.

So at say level 11. you have a cleric with quicken vs a warpriest. Assuming cleric is a battle cleric type and buys appropriate items a blessing of fervor UNQUICKENED (since self only) from either will contribute more to the encounter than a self only buff. Divine power is basically a useless buff until very very high levels thanks to divine favor and nerfs to the spell.

That's round 1. So what happened before round 1? Eaglesoul is out of reach for the war priest but not the cleric. Heros feast? Sorry war priest doesn't get that but the cleric does. Basically what happened before combat is important too. The poor war priest cannot participate in absurdly powerful buffs. Giving up high level magic for quick casted buffs is only a buff at level 2. Starting at level 3 it's worse.

As for offense? Tell me how a cleric spamming forceful strike while full attacking does less damage than buffing. +2 to hit and +2 to damage is significantly less than 10d4 damage and a status effect. There are plenty of swift action spells which don't require quickening. There are plenty of 24 hour or 8+ hour spells. The war priest is pathetic at levels > 4 when compared to an equal leveled cleric for purposes of being a divine caster who hits people.

Full BAB is literally everything. Without it the class is simply not even close to being parallel to a cleric at its explicit job being a war priest. Spells can replace every single one of it's class features.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ross Byers wrote:
Insain Dragoon wrote:


Using playtestV2 I would have traded out blessings, sacred armor, and the round/level sacred weapon just to keep it.

Wouldn't that be a fighter with six levels of spellcasting?

1/3 of bonus feats for 6-level casting is not a fair trade.

Fighter is probably not hte class balance other classes around. If the warpriest was inteed to be the paladin of any aligment then the paladin class is a better comparision.


This sounds very very interesting and I know a player who'd be dying to play this :)


Can someone kindly direct me to where the downloadable pregens are available?


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It's Here at the bottom of the description as a pregenerated character sheet download.

Shadow Lodge

Ross Byers wrote:
DM Beckett wrote:
Cheapy wrote:
Insain Dragoon wrote:


Using playtestV2 I would have traded out blessings, sacred armor, and the round/level sacred weapon just to keep it.
Which is an amazing argument for why it had to go: It was too good. Well said, even if unintentionally.

:P

So people enjoying something and not caring for other things is a good reason to get rid of it?

If someone says that they'd trade a limb for something, that usually means the something was pretty good. Not that the limb was worthless.

Or it could mean that to them that something just fits and works perfectly, so they are willing to trade other things to make it just right. Where did limb come into this?

But let me reemphasize the " :P " part of that reply.

:)


zergtitan wrote:
It's Here at the bottom of the description as a pregenerated character sheet download.

Many thanks.


DM Beckett wrote:
Ross Byers wrote:
DM Beckett wrote:
Cheapy wrote:
Insain Dragoon wrote:


Using playtestV2 I would have traded out blessings, sacred armor, and the round/level sacred weapon just to keep it.
Which is an amazing argument for why it had to go: It was too good. Well said, even if unintentionally.

:P

So people enjoying something and not caring for other things is a good reason to get rid of it?

If someone says that they'd trade a limb for something, that usually means the something was pretty good. Not that the limb was worthless.

Or it could mean that to them that something just fits and works perfectly, so they are willing to trade other things to make it just right. Where did limb come into this?

But let me reemphasize the " :P " part of that reply.

:)

It's closer to him saying he'd trade his hat and gloves for a coat. Since the coat is as useful but also necessary.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

Anyway, something worth noting here is that the point of divine power is (like transformation) to turn a cleric into a fighter, by giving them 1 HP per level (same as difference between d8 and d10 HD), an extra attack (to replace the extra iterative), and a bonus to attacks (that actually scales faster than the gap between +3/4 and +1 BAB).

The warpriest has several ways to improve his attack. He can cast divine favor or other buff spells, as swirft actions if necessary. He can use Sacred Weapon to give his weapon a bonus to hit and damage. I'm sure there are blessings that let him improve his attack, too.

He doesn't need a flat bonus to stack with those, too. That just makes him too good compared to the vanilla fighter.

A sidenote on 6-level casters:
A cleric has a 3/4 BAB, but it is less relevant because the answer to 'what is the most useful thing I can do?' is often 'cast a spell', because they are 9-level casters.
Inversely, a 4-level caster's spells are not that often actually used in combat, because answer to that question is often 'attack'.
6-level casters are the ones that are meant to have some tension there. That's why most of them are in books like the APG and ACG that assume some system mastery. Alchemists, bards, and inquisitors usually have to choose if they want to attack or cast on a given turn. Magi and warpriests are in the relatively unique* position of being able to do both on the same turn.

*Summoners also get to do both on the same turn, by the summoner casting and the eidolon attacking.


Ross Byers wrote:

Anyway, something worth noting here is that the point of divine power is (like transformation) to turn a cleric into a fighter, by giving them 1 HP per level (same as difference between d8 and d10 HD), an extra attack (to replace the extra iterative), and a bonus to attacks (that actually scales faster than the gap between +3/4 and +1 BAB).

The warpriest has several ways to improve his attack. He can cast divine favor or other buff spells, as swirft actions if necessary. He can use Sacred Weapon to give his weapon a bonus to hit and damage. I'm sure there are blessings that let him improve his attack, too.

He doesn't need a flat bonus to stack with those, too. That just makes him too good compared to the vanilla fighter.

** spoiler omitted **

The extra attack does not replace the iterative. The extra attack does not stack with haste/BoF. As such Divine power is just divine favor at +3 levels until very high levels.


The fighter and cleric are simple classes in their own ways. The fighter always does what he is designed to do. It's not always useful, but he can always do it. The cleric always has the right spell, given time to prepare. As long as the right spell is on his spell list and low enough level for him to cast.

All of the warpriest's class feature budget that didn't go into spells should have been invested into static or use unlimited features. McFarland appears to have gotten that right on the investigator, though I still consider putting the sneak attack replacement starting at level 4 a mistake. The warpriest, though, has succumbed to Paizo's obsession with pools and lost the essence of at least one parent class and unless it has early entry on the sorts of annoying cleric only spells that are her raison de etre he's just not doing anything new.

So, yes, I would have preferred to lose anything up to 1/3 of the spellcasting to losing the one continuous effect that gives the warpriest the ability to be at least as fighter-like as the least fighter-like of the fighting-man derivatives since I'm quite certain he won't get the early entry remove and restore spells to hold a cleric's job.


zergtitan wrote:
It's Here at the bottom of the description as a pregenerated character sheet download.

Thanks!

BTW, why are people still complaining?
Jason has spoiled that the class now can dump char and use his level as prereq for fighter feats, both features are very nice. Not to mention that we haven’t even seen the final product.


Cheapy wrote:
Insain Dragoon wrote:


Using playtestV2 I would have traded out blessings, sacred armor, and the round/level sacred weapon just to keep it.
Which is an amazing argument for why it had to go: It was too good. Well said, even if unintentionally.

It could be that blessings, sacred armor, and round/level sacred weapon are just pants.


So what he's saying is...he'd rather go without pants.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

who wouldn't


For me it's not the power level lost with the bab, I guess the class is fine as is power wise. However, thematically it doesn't seem like a nonalignment restricted paladin which is what I thought the orginal goal was.

Anyways, I'll wait until I see the finished product before going full turdballs.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

Undone wrote:
The extra attack does not replace the iterative. The extra attack does not stack with haste/BoF. As such Divine power is just divine favor at +3 levels until very high levels.

Time for some math. A warpriest can start casting divine favor at first level. Since he can do so as a swift action, what happens if divine favor is the only buff the warpriest uses, and he does it as a swift action on the first round of each combat?

You're right, we can ignore the bonus attacks for now: A warpriest has to get haste from allies or buy boots of speed the same as a fighter. So, fine, assume he gets that stuff before 10th level, when divine power lets him get the extra attack for himself.

Warpriest DF | DP | Fighter
1st|+1|N/A|+1
2nd|+2|N/A|+2
3rd|+3|N/A|+3
4th|+4|N/A|+4
5th|+4|N/A|+5
6th|+6|N/A|+6/+1
7th|+7|N/A|+7/+2
8th|+8/+3|N/A|+8/+3
9th|+9/+4|N/A|+9/+4
10th|+10/+5|+10/+5|+10/+5
11th|+11/+6|+11/+6|+11/+6/+5
12th|+12/+7|+13/+8|+12/+7/+2
13th|+12/+7|+13/+8|+13/+8/+3
14th|+13/+8|+14/+9|+14/+9/+4
15th|+14/+9/+4|+16/+11/+6|+15/+10/+5
16th|+15/+10/+5|+17/+12/+7|+16/+11/+6/+1
17th|+15/+10/+5|+17/+12/+7|+17/+12/+7/+2
18th|+16/+11/+6|+19/+14/+9|+18/+13/+8/+3
19th|+17/+12/+7|+20/+15/+10|+19/+14/+9/+4
20th|+18/+13/+8|+21/+16/+11|+20/+15/+10/+5

A divine favor-using warpriest is only ever a worse attacker than a fighter due to iteratives, except 5th level, but only by missing the last iterative, which is the least likely to hit anyway. At 13th level, he needs to switch to divine power to keep up, but is actually better on his first attacks than a fighter at 12th, 15th, 16th, 18th, 19th, and 20th levels.

If Sacred Weapon still gave pseudo-full BAB, like Flurry of Blows, but the warpriest still had access to divine favor and divine power, then the warpriest would just plain be better at attacking than the fighter. Let's take a look at what a full BAB + divine favor/power would look like.

Full BAB|+DF/P
1st|+1|+2
2nd|+2|+3
3rd|+3|+4
4th|+4|+5
5th|+5|+6
6th|+6/+1|+8/+3
7th|+7/+2|+9/+4
8th|+8/+3|+10/+5
9th|+9/+4|+12/+7
10th|+10/+5|+13/+8
11th|+11/+6/+1|+14/+9/+4
12th|+12/+7/+2|+16/+11/+6
13th|+13/+8/+3|+17/+12/+7
14th|+14/+9/+4|+18/+13/+8
15th|+15/+10/+5|+20/+15/+10
16th|+16/+11/+6/+1|+21/+16/+11/+6
17th|+17/+12/+7/+2|+22/+17/+12/+7
18th|+18/+13/+8/+3|+24/+19/+14/+9
19th|+19/+14/+9/+4|+25/+20/+15/+10
20th|+20/+15/+10/+5|+26/+21/+16/+11

I hope it is self-apparent why that's a problem.

Shadow Lodge

Lemartes wrote:
However, thematically it doesn't seem like a nonalignment restricted paladin which is what I thought the orginal goal was.

Actually that was never the goal for the Warpriest. A few posters kept trying to push for that, but it was called out as not being the intent.

(Depending on what exactly you mean by that, Paladin-like or Paladin without Alignment = no, a more martial battle priest type, yes)

The goal was to blend Fighter and Cleric in a way similar to how Magus blends Fighter and Wizard, offering some unique mechanics and flair to make the two classes jive a bit more than just playing a Cleric/Fighter.


Ross Byers wrote:
Spoiler:
Undone wrote:
The extra attack does not replace the iterative. The extra attack does not stack with haste/BoF. As such Divine power is just divine favor at +3 levels until very high levels.

Time for some math. A warpriest can start casting divine favor at first level. Since he can do so as a swift action, what happens if divine favor is the only buff the warpriest uses, and he does it as a swift action on the first round of each combat?

You're right, we can ignore the bonus attacks for now: A warpriest has to get haste from allies or buy boots of speed the same as a fighter. So, fine, assume he gets that stuff before 10th level, when divine power lets him get the extra attack for himself.

Warpriest DF | DP | Fighter
1st|+1|N/A|+1
2nd|+2|N/A|+2
3rd|+3|N/A|+3
4th|+4|N/A|+4
5th|+4|N/A|+5
6th|+6|N/A|+6/+1
7th|+7|N/A|+7/+2
8th|+8/+3|N/A|+8/+3
9th|+9/+4|N/A|+9/+4
10th|+10/+5|+10/+5|+10/+5
11th|+11/+6|+11/+6|+11/+6/+5
12th|+12/+7|+13/+8|+12/+7/+2
13th|+12/+7|+13/+8|+13/+8/+3
14th|+13/+8|+14/+9|+14/+9/+4
15th|+14/+9/+4|+16/+11/+6|+15/+10/+5
16th|+15/+10/+5|+17/+12/+7|+16/+11/+6/+1
17th|+15/+10/+5|+17/+12/+7|+17/+12/+7/+2
18th|+16/+11/+6|+19/+14/+9|+18/+13/+8/+3
19th|+17/+12/+7|+20/+15/+10|+19/+14/+9/+4
20th|+18/+13/+8|+21/+16/+11|+20/+15/+10/+5

A divine favor-using warpriest is only ever a worse attacker than a fighter due to iteratives, except 5th level, but only by missing the last iterative, which is the least likely to hit anyway. At 13th level, he needs to switch to divine power to keep up, but is actually better on his first attacks than a fighter at 12th, 15th, 16th, 18th, 19th, and 20th levels.

If Sacred Weapon still gave pseudo-full BAB, like Flurry of Blows, but the warpriest still had access to divine favor and divine power, then the warpriest would just plain be better at attacking than the fighter. Let's take a look at what a full BAB + divine favor/power would look like.

Full BAB, like Flurry of Blows, but the warpriest still had access to divine favor and divine power, then the warpriest would just plain be better at attacking than the fighter. Let's take a look at what a full BAB + divine favor/power would look like.

Full BAB|+DF/P
1st|+1|+2
2nd|+2|+3
3rd|+3|+4
4th|+4|+5
5th|+5|+6
6th|+6/+1|+8/+3
7th|+7/+2|+9/+4
8th|+8/+3|+10/+5
9th|+9/+4|+12/+7
10th|+10/+5|+13/+8
11th|+11/+6/+1|+14/+9/+4
12th|+12/+7/+2|+16/+11/+6
13th|+13/+8/+3|+17/+12/+7
14th|+14/+9/+4|+18/+13/+8
15th|+15/+10/+5|+20/+15/+10
16th|+16/+11/+6/+1|+21/+16/+11/+6
17th|+17/+12/+7/+2|+22/+17/+12/+7
18th|+18/+13/+8/+3|+24/+19/+14/+9
19th|+19/+14/+9/+4|+25/+20/+15/+10
20th|+20/+15/+10/+5|+26/+21/+16/+11

I hope it is self-apparent why 6-level spellcasting and full BAB cannot co-exist.

1) A fighter is a really, really pathetic measure of class power. It's the worst designed class in the entire game. A barb would be a better measure.

2) You're not comparing an actual fighter you're just using full BAB. A fighter with weapon training and appropriate items (IE increase weapon training gloves, GWF) has significantly higher to hit. A barbarian with a furious courageous weapon and rage is even more lopsided.
3) At over level 13 nothing the war priest can do even comes close to 7th level magic. Literally nothing. Basically as you gain levels the war priest becomes worse and worse. It's definitely better at 1-2 then is worse at 3 about even (Slightly better?) at 4 then never becomes better than a cleric ever again.

The problem is the class is too front loaded. After level 2 you gain literally nothing. Nothing further gained is that important. Casting progression is magus/inq which is to say very bad and only slightly better (Or in reality worse) than paladins/rangers which have special spells to make the lists not suck (Litany's, lead blades, exct) You're better off just being a cleric if you want a war priest.

This class like the magus, and inquis just needs full BAB or psudo full BAB to not feel aweful.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

1) Those classes have the same BAB. Feel free to sub them.

2) Warpriests have access to Combat Feats and magic items, same as fighters. I'm roughly assuming those things cancel out. (That is, boots of speed are not a fighter class feature. If the fighter can wear them, so can the warpriest.)

3) The point isn't to be better than a cleric. If you think you need 7th-9th level spells to be cool, by all means make a cleric instead (since clerics definitely don't have full BAB, pseudo- or otherwise.)

If you think the Magus and Inquisitor are underpowered, then you're going to think any other class built around the same chassis is underpowered. I can't help you there. When I say 'The warpriest is a better caster than the fighter', your answer is 'But it doesn't cast as well as a cleric.' When I say 'The warpriest is a better combatant than a cleric', your answer is 'But it's a worse combatant than the fighter.'

Expecting more generalized classes to be as good as the specialized classes in their specialty is foolish. You can't have it both ways.

If you want to be the best at a given thing, play a specialist. Not every class has to appeal to every player.


DM Beckett wrote:
Lemartes wrote:
However, thematically it doesn't seem like a nonalignment restricted paladin which is what I thought the orginal goal was.

Actually that was never the goal for the Warpriest. A few posters kept trying to push for that, but it was called out as not being the intent.

(Depending on what exactly you mean by that, Paladin-like or Paladin without Alignment = no, a more martial battle priest type, yes)

The goal was to blend Fighter and Cleric in a way similar to how Magus blends Fighter and Wizard, offering some unique mechanics and flair to make the two classes jive a bit more than just playing a Cleric/Fighter.

Based on the first paragraph of the blog post I'd say the Warpriest is definitely an attempt to make something similar to the paladin. I don't necessarily think the warpriest and the paladin are very similar though - the WP has more in common with clerics than with paladins.

And let's please not base the Warpriest power balance on the Fighter. In my opinion the sweet spot for the power balance should be based on a fighter 1/cleric x, a paladin, and a martially inclined Inquisitor. I'd like him to be slightly better (but not dramatically better) than the fighter/cleric and the inquisitor in combat (better than the cleric since he gets 9th level spells, better than the inquisitor since he gets a host of non-combat abilities), and slightly worse than the paladin who like the Warpriest is about 90% combat-focused.

IE you shouldn't compare the WP's buffed attack bonus to an unbuffed fighter, you should compare it to an inquisitor using Judgement and/or Bane, or a paladin using smite evil.

And while I don't think you were intentionally dishonest, showing the WP attack bonus with class features included and not taking the fighter's weapon training into account strikes me as misleading.

A fighter's attack bonus (not taking gear into account) would be +24/+19/+14/+9 - and with gloves of dueling (which is a nobrainer for any fighter) that bumps him up to +26, putting him on equal footing with the full-BAB WP - without the need for spell slots or fervor charges. He also has the Luck bonus available for buffing another other source (such as Prayer).

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Undone wrote:
This class like the magus, and inquis just needs full BAB or psudo full BAB to not feel aweful.

O_O

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
RJGrady wrote:
It could be that blessings, sacred armor, and round/level sacred weapon are just pants.

There are no pants in Pathfinder.

I would petition for the addition of pants.


Ross Byers wrote:

1) Those classes have the same BAB. Feel free to sub them.

2) Warpriests have access to Combat Feats and magic items, same as fighters. I'm roughly assuming those things cancel out. (That is, boots of speed are not a fighter class feature. If the fighter can wear them, so can the warpriest.)

3) The point isn't to be better than a cleric. If you think you need 7th-9th level spells to be cool, by all means make a cleric instead (since clerics definitely don't have full BAB, pseudo- or otherwise.)

If you think the Magus and Inquisitor are underpowered, then you're going to think any other class built around the same chassis is underpowered. I can't help you there. When I say 'The warpriest is a better caster than the fighter', your answer is 'But it doesn't cast as well as a cleric.' When I say 'The warpriest is a better combatant than a cleric', your answer is 'But it's a worse combatant than the fighter.'

Expecting more generalized classes to be as good as the specialized classes in their specialty is foolish. You can't have it both ways.

If you want to be the best at a given thing, play a specialist. Not every class has to appeal to every player.

1) Those classes are also underwhelming. Not horrible but underwhelming.

2) Fighters have access to two items which increase the weapon and armor training for very low costs that improve to hit and damage.

3) It's a worse fighter than the cleric at higher levels though. The cleric gets tons of hours/level buffs which improve it significantly more than the swift action self buffs. Heros feast is +1, Eaglesoul is another, GMW and greyflame are huge buffs, there are tons more. Enough to fill almost every spell slot if you extend 10/level buffs which end up as 4+ hour buffs or "All day". The rounds/level buffs which are not named blessing of fervor (because ironically fervor is TERRIBLE with this spell) are rarely worth casting because they take an action. Even as a swift action they're barely worth it. It's trivial to make a cleric which is highly superior at fighting to a war priest at levels >4.

The cleric is both better at casting and at fighting than the war priest.


DM Beckett wrote:
Lemartes wrote:
However, thematically it doesn't seem like a nonalignment restricted paladin which is what I thought the orginal goal was.

Actually that was never the goal for the Warpriest. A few posters kept trying to push for that, but it was called out as not being the intent.

(Depending on what exactly you mean by that, Paladin-like or Paladin without Alignment = no, a more martial battle priest type, yes)

The goal was to blend Fighter and Cleric in a way similar to how Magus blends Fighter and Wizard, offering some unique mechanics and flair to make the two classes jive a bit more than just playing a Cleric/Fighter.

I stand corrected then I was mistaken.

I supose then I'm a bit confused as to the point of the class as I think that certain cleric archetypes already fit that niche.

Granted new mechanics might be fun. I'll wait and see.

Shadow Lodge

Lemartes wrote:
I supose then I'm a bit confused as to the point of the class as I think that certain cleric archetypes already fit that niche.

No worries. It's kind of the issue. Everyone has their own view on what the class should be, but that's also just as true with Clerics and what exactly a mesh of Cleric/Fighter should be.

Like someone just posted, some are looking for a Fighter 1/Cleric 19. Others want a Fighter 19/cleric 1. Some want a Cleric 10/Fighter 10. Some want a Paladin. Some want a Barbarian/Cleric. Some want a Divine version of the Magus, (literally, and that is one thing that has been very popularly requested since the Magus). Some wanted a Crusader Cleric that works a little more as intended. When PF came out, the Cleric itself got blasted with nerfs so that it was very difficult to play a "selfish" character like most other classes, hardcoding that the majority of it's abilities only work on other characters, not the Cleric player's character themselves. So some people viewed it as finally getting back to that, even if it is still forced to have things like Channel Energy.


DM Beckett wrote:
Lemartes wrote:
I supose then I'm a bit confused as to the point of the class as I think that certain cleric archetypes already fit that niche.

No worries. It's kind of the issue. Everyone has their own view on what the class should be, but that's also just as true with Clerics and what exactly a mesh of Cleric/Fighter should be.

Like someone just posted, some are looking for a Fighter 1/Cleric 19. Others want a Fighter 19/cleric 1. Some want a Cleric 10/Fighter 10. Some want a Paladin. Some want a Barbarian/Cleric. Some want a Divine version of the Magus, (literally, and that is one thing that has been very popularly requested since the Magus). Some wanted a Crusader Cleric that works a little more as intended. When PF came out, the Cleric itself got blasted with nerfs so that it was very difficult to play a "selfish" character like most other classes, hardcoding that the majority of it's abilities only work on other characters, not the Cleric player's character themselves. So some people viewed it as finally getting back to that, even if it is still forced to have things like Channel Energy.

What does the Cleric have that can't be used on himself?

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

Undone wrote:
3) It's a worse fighter than the cleric at higher levels though. The cleric gets tons of hours/level buffs which improve it significantly more than the swift action self buffs. Heros feast is +1, Eaglesoul is another, GMW and greyflame are huge buffs, there are tons more. Enough to fill almost every spell slot if you extend 10/level buffs which end up as 4+ hour buffs or "All day". The rounds/level buffs which are not named blessing of fervor (because ironically fervor is TERRIBLE with this spell) are rarely worth casting because they take an action. Even as a swift action they're barely worth it....

I haven't played enough clerics at higher level to contest this, but I'm willing to believe that its true. The Cleric is one of the most (if not the most) powerful base class, because it combines 9-level spellcasting with a 3/4 BAB. If I had my way (and a time machine), I'd make sure the Cleric had 1/2 BAB instead, because as it stands now Inquisitors and Warpriests are kind of between a rock and a hard place when it comes to class features.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

DM Beckett wrote:
When PF came out, the Cleric itself got blasted with nerfs

What about the cleric got worse between 3.5 and PF?

Domains got better. Turn Undead was replaced with the much more useful Channel Energy. They got a better weapon proficiency.

Unless I'm forgetting something major, the only thing that got worse about clerics was losing Heavy Armor Proficiency.


Clerics are awesome...1/2 bab...no way imho.

I see your point though I just disagree.

Anyways, we are getting of topic.


Ross Byers wrote:
DM Beckett wrote:
When PF came out, the Cleric itself got blasted with nerfs

What about the cleric got worse between 3.5 and PF?

Domains got better. Turn Undead was replaced with the much more useful Channel Energy. They got a better weapon proficiency.

Unless I'm forgetting something major, the only thing that got worse about clerics was losing Heavy Armor Proficiency.

To be fair, the Cleric spells got hit with some major nerfbats, which is completely okay in my book. Clericzilla came out once in our game... after that we, as a group, agree'd to never go down that road again.


Jiggy wrote:
Undone wrote:
This class like the magus, and inquis just needs full BAB or psudo full BAB to not feel aweful.
O_O

Agreed. Both the Magus and Inquisitor and very good and very fun classes. Saying otherwise means you would never like the Warpriest unless they made it stupidly overpowered.

Not everything that comes out of a new Paizo book needs to be power creep people.


Just saw the pregens. Fervor self healing is a joke.

Also for whatever reason they gave Warpriests spontaneous heal or inflict.

If the devs actually think those have value I can see why they thought Warpriest was OP!

Rogues get 10 rogue Talents you know! That's a lot of class features! They must be OP too! I mean quantity>quality.


Would be nice if the Warpriest not only counted as fighter levels for bonus feats but also Cleric levels. Mostly for that Gorum feat about clerics getting armor training.


The fervor self heal has actually saved my bacon a few times. And the spontaneous heals have greatly helped in a group in which I am the only one capable of healing.

Shadow Lodge

Tels wrote:
What does the Cleric have that can't be used on himself?
Ross Byers wrote:
DM Beckett wrote:
When PF came out, the Cleric itself got blasted with nerfs

What about the cleric got worse between 3.5 and PF?

Domains got better. Turn Undead was replaced with the much more useful Channel Energy. They got a better weapon proficiency.

Unless I'm forgetting something major, the only thing that got worse about clerics was losing Heavy Armor Proficiency.

I didn't say worse. :)

What I mean is that a lot of the Domains are not usable on the Cleric themselves, no longer offer permanent bonuses, bonus Feats, or things like that. Worse is subjective.

All the Domain abilities that don't specify that they take less than a Standard Action, end just before your next turn, (not after it). So you can't, for example, use Strength Surge on yourself. You can, but it will not help outside of maybe an AoO. Similar with the Good Domain's Touch of Good. Very limited in what you can actually do with it outside of basically using it as an Aid Another. If it is a Standard Action to use and lasts one round, it ends just before your next turn, so is only going to affect things done after the turn you use to activate it but before your next turn.

All of the Elemental Domains lost the ability to Rebuke/Command Elementals, which was amazing. So many spells where altered or officially interpreted differently. Other things where shifted to, which kind of boned the Cleric, so now the +wis/cha headband can no longer be worn with a Phylactery of Channeling/Turning, as they now take the same slot instead of the Wis/Cha being a cloak. Circlet of Persuasion no longer helps the Cleric with Channeling. The usefulness of 3.5 Turning vs PF Channeling is subjective. I'd rather have Turning/Rebuking, personally.


Insain Dragoon wrote:


Also for whatever reason they gave Warpriests spontaneous heal or inflict.

Haven't Warpriests always been able to spontaneously heal/inflict?


Rawrsong wrote:
Insain Dragoon wrote:


Also for whatever reason they gave Warpriests spontaneous heal or inflict.

Haven't Warpriests always been able to Spontaneously heal/inflict?

Yes. And the fervor heal is as least as old as the V.2 playtest.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Insain Dragoon wrote:
Just saw the pregens. Fervor self healing is a joke.

It's...less than awe-inspiring, yeah.

Insain Dragoon wrote:
Also for whatever reason they gave Warpriests spontaneous heal or inflict.

Because it's awesome and lets then heal at need even with all their memorized spells put in combat stuff?

Insain Dragoon wrote:
If the devs actually think those have value I can see why they thought Warpriest was OP!

The second certainly has value. Spontaneous cures are very nice.

Insain Dragoon wrote:
Rogues get 10 rogue Talents you know! That's a lot of class features! They must be OP too! I mean quantity>quality.

I agree in general but not in specific...quality of class features is certainly important, but we don't have enough info on the Warpriest Class Features to say this about them as of yet.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.
DM Beckett wrote:
I didn't say worse. :)
DM Beckett wrote:
When PF came out, the Cleric itself got blasted with nerfs

I am having difficulty reconciling these two things.


My general feeling on the pregens is hope. Hope that whoever built the pregens did not playtest the classes. 16 charisma on the bloodrager, while the warpriest is statted like a boss? Investigator lacking in stats. No power attack on the swashbuckler. Feels bad man.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Matrix Dragon wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Undone wrote:
This class like the magus, and inquis just needs full BAB or psudo full BAB to not feel aweful.
O_O

Agreed. Both the Magus and Inquisitor and very good and very fun classes. Saying otherwise means you would never like the Warpriest unless they made it stupidly overpowered.

***

Yoou could do a lot worse than balance something to the Inquisitor. It may be the best designed and balanced class out there, with full functionality in all spheres of play and the ability to powerfully and effectively perform just about any role you could ask for. I have less experience with the Magus, but the players in my games who've run one have always been some of the strongest contributors in the group, with solid damage and tons of excellent tricks.

A Warpriest designed to be balanced against those two classes is pretty much exactly what I'd expect and hope for.


Ross Byers wrote:
Insain Dragoon wrote:


Using playtestV2 I would have traded out blessings, sacred armor, and the round/level sacred weapon just to keep it.

Wouldn't that be a fighter with six levels of spellcasting?

1/3 of bonus feats for 6-level casting is not a fair trade.

Thankfully, it's not an archetype, so it's not constrained by "fair trade", but rather by what is balanced.

You're not trading out Fighter features for Cleric features, you're building a new class from the ground up, inspired by both.

The Warpriest, as of Playtest v2, was exactly what a lot of people wanted, bar some issues with extraneous features nobody really cared about (Channel Energy, the Blessings in their state at the time) or cared FOR (the class running on Cha AND Wis, instead of one or the other).


2 people marked this as a favorite.

While I am disappointed with the direction taken on three of the major issues with the class... I can tell a lot of work has gone into making this a playable and balanced class. I feel comfortable predicting it will be a pretty good whatever-it-turns-out-to-be. It's not going to be what I was hoping it would be, which is, you know, an okay thing. Different people can want different things. I have my reservations, but I don't have the behind-the-scenes conversations in front of me, I don't have the completed class in front of me, and it's not my boat to paddle. While the sneak peek is interesting, I don't think there's much more to debate until the book goes to press.

Shadow Lodge

Tels wrote:
To be fair, the Cleric spells got hit with some major nerfbats, which is completely okay in my book. Clericzilla came out once in our game... after that we, as a group, agree'd to never go down that road again.

That's true, but not everyone that wants to play a "selfish" cleric wants to be a Clericzilla, (which was sort of a the sky is falling sort of thing anyway). People saw it on the old Optimization boards, but it really wasn't that common, and a lot of people that did pay it found that they got bored around 3rd level or so.

Some people just want to play a Cleric similar to how nearly every other class is played, using their class features to make themselves do cool things, the same way no one expect the Fighter to sit back and devote all their Feats to making other player's characters have a better AC, Attack more and better, and to deal more damage. Nor do people play a Rogue so they can devote their actions to giving other player's characters the ability to deal Sneak Attacks, disarm traps, and avoid damage from Reflex Saves. They do it because that's the stuff they want to do. Cleric is kind of the opposite. Many of it's abilities are designed to make other characters do cool stuff. Not all, but many.

Others that want the more "selfish" Cleric just enjoy playing divine warriors as a concept. Again, not the Clericzilla (or the much more common and worse Druidzilla/Godzilla), just the basic divine "gish" that the Cleric class has always been modeled after, (until PF).

Shadow Lodge

Ssalarn wrote:
Yoou could do a lot worse than balance something to the Inquisitor. It may be the best designed and balanced class out there, with full functionality in all spheres of play and the ability to powerfully and effectively perform just about any role you could ask for. I have less experience with the Magus, but the players in my games who've run one have always been some of the strongest contributors in the group, with solid damage and tons of excellent tricks.

These two and Alchemist are, by and large, the best-designed classes in the game. Yeah, there are the occasional outlier broken/overpowered option that crops up, but by majority they're far less stupid powerful than some classes and don't risk being rendered obsolete like others.

351 to 400 of 1,041 << first < prev | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Paizo Products / Product Discussion / Paizo Blog: Advanced Class Guide Preview: Warpriest All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.