Out of curiosity, does the deceptive acolyte witch also change her hex saving throws to cha or are they still int based?
Search Posts
*waits patiently for very cool sounding options that have been teased*
So I've been working on the finer points of the Wayfaring Haunter archetype and need to make a decision on something that I'd like to put to you fine people: given that they are primarily based out of Alkenstar, would you be interested in this archetype being proficient with firearms? Or would you prefer that they only gain more traditional Kelishite weapon proficiencies? A beguiler with a gun just doesn't sound right to me.
Out of curiosity, what's the point of the sacred sentinel ability? Sivanah doesn't have an obedience or boons in Inner Sea Gods.Not in Inner Sea Gods, but she was covered in the recent Inner Sea Faiths. I didn't know about that, I'll have to keep an eye out for it at my LGS.
Out of curiosity, what's the point of the sacred sentinel ability? Sivanah doesn't have an obedience or boons in Inner Sea Gods.
I think my personal favorite would be either a Lizardfolk or Werecroc Skinwalker beguiler.Dwarven beguiler!Hobgoblin beguiler! I'm going to break from the mold a bit and say that this archetype might be an interesting niche for a Vishkanya beguiler. Especially if there's some sort of self-injury component to really synergize with its CON dependent poison.
I think people who play pathfinder are often looking for things to be upset about. When the scarred witch doctor was a CON caster a handful complained about how overpowered it was. Now that its an INT caster another handful complain that they lost a really flavorful option that wasn't overpowered. I personally don't think CON casting a problem for the archetype, especially if it has need for other key attributes like INT for AC like you're suggesting. One thing I'd be cautious about is giving it divine casting (not sure if you were considering that or not, but thought I'd mention it. Taking away armor proficiency and then giving them casting without the ASF issue seems to be inviting players to dip a level of fighter and cast in full heavy armor. This would also subvert the balance restriction of needing INT for AC. Either make sure all their class features require them to wear no armor (like the monk) or keep them as an arcane caster, just with divinely granted powers.
I'm drooling over the idea of a blink wolf. Those are some really cool options. Any thoughts on a bear companion option? Also there weren't any aquatic options like sharks.
So I've been looking over some of the archetypes and the elusive wildling caught my eye. In particular the wildling's pack ability seems a little out of place. The pack-type druid companion system has been (in my experience) frowned upon due to its breaking the action economy and bogging down combat. It also doesn't seem like a beguiler running around with a zoo would be a particularly stealthy option. I can't help but think it might be a better fit to give the wildling a regular animal companion and then powering it up later by granting the companion interesting, thematic powers. An example I thought of would be something along the lines of giving the companion a blink dog's constant blink and at will dimension door. Just a thought.
I really like the sound of the Beguiler, but it looks a little OP too (especially since it has full casting).When I first came across Ertw's beguiler I felt much the same way. I was worried my DM would veto it right off the bat for being too powerful. Instead, those people in the thread I linked pointed out just how limited the beguiler is by its spell list. When I ran it by my DM she agreed that it wasn't really that powerful, even as a class with 9th level spells. Now that I've played a few characters using the class, and DMed a bunch more, I can safely say that the power level for the beguiler is much closer to classes with 6th level spells (like the Inquisitor or Bard) than classes with 9th level spells. If you like it, run it by your DM, point him to Ertw's thread in the conversion forum where there has been significant discussion of the class' balance. The worst that can happen is he could say no. Thank you so much for this bit of encouragement. I showed my DM the thread and the arguments about its power level and he's going to allow me to roll up a beguiler. I'm really excited.
It took a little bit of "friendly discussion" (translation: protracted argument), but my DM has okayed the beguiler. I'm pretty pumped! Ertw, do you think the alignment restrictions on the orders are still relevant? Particularly since it's so easy to ignore based on the way you've worded it, it might make the class a bit more mutable to any setting. Also, I get that you're pricing things by the magic items pricing rules, but many of your magic items are priced at values like 24,950G, which could easily just be rounded to 25k without much annoyance.
Just a heads up, impose dependence is very similar to imbue with addiction and halcyon veil is very similar to aura of the unremarkable. I suppose an argument could be made that your spells are enchantment/illusion instead of transmutation/enchantment, but it's understandable if you didn't know these spells existed since they're from less popular splatbooks. You might just want to add these spells to the beguiler spell list.
SylverFox pointed me here from a thread I posted in homebrew and I've just been pouring over the pages of the PDF and this thread all evening. I just wanted to say that it's really cool that you've put in such amazing work and that you're still working so hard on crafting this class after years of work. I really hope my DM will let me roll up a beguiler, and if he does I'll share some of my war stories :p
Don't forget the sandman bard archetype for a "spell thief/trickster" type of character (not focused on blasting). I've seen bards mentioned a number of times in reference to this kind of caster (both sandman and archaeologist archetypes), but the fact that they can't use silent spell is a dealbreaker for me. I want a trickster to be stealthy, after all you can't really effectively scout out an enemy stronghold while singing your "song of invisibility" out loud. I really like the sound of the Beguiler, but it looks a little OP too (especially since it has full casting).When I first came across Ertw's beguiler I felt much the same way. I was worried my DM would veto it right off the bat for being too powerful. Instead, those people in the thread I linked pointed out just how limited the beguiler is by its spell list. When I ran it by my DM she agreed that it wasn't really that powerful, even as a class with 9th level spells. Now that I've played a few characters using the class, and DMed a bunch more, I can safely say that the power level for the beguiler is much closer to classes with 6th level spells (like the Inquisitor or Bard) than classes with 9th level spells. If you like it, run it by your DM, point him to Ertw's thread in the conversion forum where there has been significant discussion of the class' balance. The worst that can happen is he could say no. That's a really good perspective on this (especially the worst that can happen is he could say no bit). I can see your point about the spell list and I've really been enjoying reading through the pdf. Even after I'd discounted the class I couldn't help but finish reading it. I'll mull this over a bit and see if I can get my DM to agree.
I hope you don't take this as an insult, it's not meant to be, but I trust the person whose job it is to sell this class on the subject of balance about as much as I trust the kid who works at Best Buy when he tries to convince me that I really need to shell out for the gold plated HDMI cable. It may well have been stringently playtested, but I think maybe your playtesters weren't quite as optimization focused as a lot of the people I play with tend to be. The focused spell list is a major part of what puts half casters where they sit in the tier list (I'd argue even more so than 7-9th level spells) and the Trickster doesn't have that. Look at the Bard, the Magus, the Inquisitor: none of them get anything approaching their parent spell lists in their entirety. Maybe you could get away with it if you went the Eldritch Scoundrel route and bolted half casting with the whole spell list onto a chassis without any real other class features that complement or empower their spells, but with all the arcane powers that the Trickster brings with that full spell list? I won't touch it and I wouldn't let anybody at one of my tables touch it. If others don't agree, that's absolutely fine, however anybody else wants to play their game is their business, but (even though this is all theorycrafting as you say) your going to have a hard time selling me on the idea that this thing is anywhere close to balanced when compared against any other half caster.
Sorry, I meant that it had access to the entire wiz/sorc spell list rather than a restricted spell list like pretty much every other half caster. MysteriousFX talks about the issue here, and that's pretty much the same headspace as my DM and I are in. I'll take a look at the spellthief.
There are two good options mentioned in the discussion you linked to: my personal favorite is Ertw's Beguiler, but Ascension Games' Nightblade is pretty good too. Those both look interesting. I really like the sound of the Beguiler, but it looks a little OP too (especially since it has full casting).
I've looked at the Arcane Trickster, but I'm not really interested in playing a blaster.
Hey guys,
|