Knifechief's page

I had an idea that might be interesting. What if instead of having class spell list you assembled your spell list using patrons. At level 1 you get a patron, then at level 4 and every 4 levels after you get another patron. And then probably be a spontaneous caster as the spirits are casting and it not you prepping.

This has been suggested before. I think it sounds like an idea that would offer some pretty cool flavor but have the potential to be really troublesome, logistically; if you give patrons enough spells that it isn't crippling at low levels, it's probably going to be broken at high levels.

2. The familiar took a step toward a spirit animal concept, but I dont think that goes quite far enough. I am beginning to think that it might need to go off in a different direction.

I'd like to reiterate a suggestion for giving Shamans a bonded object as a "fetish" in lieu of having a familiar as a "spirit animal," or at least giving that as an option. The Scarred Witch Doctor's "fetish mask" could be a loose model for what this would look like. It gives the class a little more variability, including providing an option for those with flavor concerns about spirit animals. Obviously, the specifics of how it works would change the further you guys go from the familiar, but I think the Shaman is a class where a bonded object could really fit the theme.

4. Taken together, I think this means that the shaman has a lot of base components, many of which get more heavily augmented by the spirits chosen.

I agree, but I think the more heavily spirit selection influences the class, the more important it is to use the wandering mechanic for all the spirits. First, makes the spirits easier to balance, which is more important the more central spirits are to the class; the more influential spirits are, the more extreme the disparity between good and bad spirits will be. Second, unless the general utility of each spirit is considerably broadened (which I'm not saying it should be) it will be important for a Shaman to be able to change spirits so as not to end up pigeonholed to a pretty narrow role by an early selection; spirits focused on healing or a specific element could end up pretty crippling down the line, if they determine a lot of class abilities and spell access.

EDIT: I just wanted to make it clear that I didn't mean this post to come across as a complaint, or anything. I really appreciate you listening, and you seem to be hearing our input and really taking it to heart. My response was just more focused on (potential) problems because I figured that's the area where comments are needed; the rest of the stuff all looks great. Thanks again for your work and attention.

I'd also recommend an option, or at least an archetype, to use a bonded item as a fetish instead of having a spirit animal.

If someone wanted that flavor, there is nothing to stop them from always keeping the same one.

Yeah, exactly; having only wandering spirits leaves both options open, while ensuring that the spirits are designed so that they won't be broken as wandering spirits, or at least that they're designed with the wandering mechanic in mind.

Thinking about this class and the witch. The familiar links this class thematically with the witch, but doesn't affect how the class plays very much. Part of what makes the witch, the witch, is that the Hex list is full of flavorful, fun, and witchy abilities, including some that aren't even mechanically very strong. But they get flight, child-scent, animated huts, and of course, cackling.

To be like the witch in that regard, the shaman can't just borrow a bunch of revelations and call them hexes. They need a bunch of "shamanic gifts" that grant very shamanic things, like visions of the future, spirit lodges, chant (something like a cackle, but for buffs), scrying, magic jar, ethereal jaunts, consecration circles, etc. One category of gifts could be oracle revelations that match up with the corresponding spirit (relieving you of the need to rewrite all the mysteries as spirits with their own hex lists). Another gift could be to add another wandering spirit.

I agree, I think it would make more sense and make the class feel more like a witch to have its hexes follow the model of witch hexes rather than oracle revelations. I'm guessing the Spirit Lodge would be basically analogous to Coven? I really like both that idea and Chant, though I think Chant should work for both buffs and debuffs, since Cackle does. Maybe also give a Spirit Trance ability that starts as a bonus to concentration checks and adds benefits as the Shaman levels, like immunity to fear or resistance to mind-affecting spells and effects? In terms of thematic flavorful abilities that aren't particularly useful, maybe an ability that lets a Shaman ignore the side effects of flayleaf or other entheogens.

I would remove the idea of a permanent spirit, as Craft Cheese suggested, and have all spirits be "wandering." Let the spirits keep the spells and spirits abilities they currently have, but give the class a universal pool of hexes much more mechanically reminiscent of the witch's hexes from which to choose. This puts the witch back in the class, gives more variability thanks to hex choices, and has less "moving parts" in the class framework to consider; if all spirits are wandering spirits, the abilities don't need to be balanced for primary spirits and wandering spirits. A sufficient variety of spirits and hexes should probably be able to accommodate all but the most extreme ideas of what the class should be, thematically.

Yeah, I'm not sure how useful extra hex and accursed hex would be, as the hexes stand. Each spirit has a pretty limited hex list and at least one hex is basically non-functional. I'm on my phone, so I can't check, but would accursed hex apply to anything but confusion curse and the jester's jaunt[/i]-type Heavens hex?

I like Craft Cheese's suggestion a lot, it helps the Shaman feel more unique and really emphasizes the idea of communing with spirits. Also, in a class whose most serious mechanical problems stem from oversights, having all spirits be wandering spirits is one less variable to consider; it won't fix the balance issues on its own, but the streamlining makes them easier to solve.

I'd really rather this thread not get as hung up on the meaning of the term "Shaman" as the last thread did. Aside from the fact that its meaning is hardly universally agreed upon even within any given discourse (as the last thread should have demonstrated) the shaman isn't really going to end up less "factually accurate" than, say, the alchemist. It's fine if you don't like the druid list because that's just not how you want the class to play, but can we leave out the stuff about it not being a "real shaman" if it has or lacks some feature.

It's pretty much a moot point, since the main difference between Lore (Heavens) and Heavens (Lore) is going to be the capstone, which I agree won't come into play that often, and there's really not much reason to ever go with anything other than those two. I'd just still tentatively go Lore (Heavens) so that I can switch out Heavens if I somehow end up in a situation where one of the other spirits is more useful. A lot of the Heavens spirit's spells are going to be dead weight if you're going up against enemies with immunity to mind-affecting spells.

I think you're really overestimating hexes and underestimating spirit abilities and spirit spells, too.

The Lore Spirit hexes are just silly-MAD.

You need INT to use the spells one hex grants you. Three have duration based on CHA. One replaces INT on skill checks with WIS, and the spirit itself gives bonus INT while all your spells still rely on WIS.

The lore spirit can cry me a big ol' bucket of tiers about how MAD it is. Getting the entire druid list, some of the best spells from the cleric list, the entire sorcerer/wizard list, and a free wish 1/day is a perfectly fair trade-off for having to dump a physical stat.

That's what the Lore spirit gives you.

If you're good aligned, the Bones spirit gives you the inability to pick up a weapon without receiving a negative level.

I'd still really like to see full BAB. I think it'll be a hard sell, since the other 6/9 classes don't get it, but I think it'd help the skald a lot. If it's going to stay 3/4, I agree it's going to need a bonus feat at 2 to keep it from seriously lagging behind in combat at low levels

Otherwise, I'm really pleased with the changes. This is definitely shaping up to be one of the coolest classes in the ACG.

It's still too high-risk to be advisable for Shaman. Wiz and Arcane Sorc still get spells tomorrow if their fragile pet dies, Shaman doesn't.

Yeah, to be clear, I was referring to witch familiars. Sorcerers and wizards can basically use theirs as free rods of reach with impunity.

Anyway, big win on the spell list, even if I'd prefer the base list were witch rather than druid. The witch list is already an arcane/divine hybrid list (that pulls from the druid, no less), so it would be really interesting to see that list given to a divine caster too. It would certainly help quell cries that the witch is absent from the make-up of this class.

I think the main issue with using the witch list is that that it could prove problematic if they want to stick to the standard divine casting mechanics, such as knowing the whole list automatically and ignoring spell failure chance.

Confusion curse is the only hex that seems "witchy" to me, personally. Otherwise, I can't say the "hybrid list" strikes me as particularly reminiscent of the witch, though, like you said, I think it's a good move nonetheless.

EDIT: Eh, I could see doubling the size of an animal fitting the concept, but the others are a little out there, I agree. It's not like some of the cleric spells wouldn't have been weird, too, though.

Benefit of wisdom is definitely another problematic hex. Really, basically every spirit has at least one hex or ability that's just outright terrible, either because it has terrible synergies with the rest of the spirit, it doesn't really do anything useful, it does something actively harmful to the Shaman, or some combination of the above.

However, we do have to address the issues that have been brought up. The familiar feels useless to Shaman players partly because there's reference to melee touch Hexes that the class just doesn't have. Up until the spell change, the toucher status of the familiar was only good for delivering buffs/heals at some distance. Not exactly a good thing, nor has the list improved the situation that much.

This is exacerbated by the fact that the familiar is as much a liability as it is an asset. The familiar not serving as a spellbook stand-in mitigates this somewhat, but using one's familiar to deliver touch hexes is still probably ill-advised, since it can very easily mean going the next day without spells. In my experience, the familiar usually ends up as something that's just sort of there. The abilities it contributes are essentially just not worth the risk that comes with using them. It's basically a non-feature.

Shaman may not have the witch's mechanics, but it certainly nails the witch's theme. Witches barter with patrons. Shaman barter with spirits. The witch is definitely in this class.

I disagree; I think the class's theme is reflected by what it does more than by whatever arbitrary signifiers are tacked on to its abilities. I don't know if I really buy the similarity between patrons and spirits, besides; it's telling that the spirits mostly share their names and motifs with oracle mysteries, not witch patrons.

I think the main problem is that a lot of the "hexes" are literally just copy/pasted from Oracle revelations without any regard whatsoever for how the differences between Shaman and Oracle might affect them. Honestly, the biggest problem with the Shaman in general is that its abilities seem as though they were designed without really considering how they would interact with one another.

Not to mention that most GM's roll while declaring the attack, leaving very little room to mention that you're parrying.

I hadn't thought about this, but that's a really good point. The ability basically requires Swashbuckler-like reflexes on the player's part.

Anyhow, maybe my first read-through was just pessimistic, but I think a lot of the mechanical problems are still there. In terms of flavor, at least cutlasses become a viable option, even if it takes a feat tax for a Swashbuckler to use a cutlass as effectively as she would a heavy pick. I still think a specific list of weapons is much more sensible than one-handed piercing weapons, if the goal is to enforce the use of thematically appropriate weapons.

I still think the fact that the class can't really fight by using its environment and improvised weapons is a huge problem. I'd like to see the ability to force others to treat an area as difficult terrain, use the empty hand to wield improvised weapons and shields with some form of benefit, and so on. For me, being a Swashbuckler isn't about the number in the box next to "Dexterity" on my sheet or even the weapon I'm using so much as the actual manner in which the character fights.

I think some of the class's biggest problems aren't really addressed.

For one, there's still basically zero witch in this class. The word "hex" is used, but the abilities to which it refers are still oracle revelations. Otherwise, the only similarity is a familiar. I don't have a problem with this, in and of itself, but if the goal is to be a hybrid of the witch and oracle, though, the class still fails utterly at realizing that goal. To reiterate, I don't think that makes it a bad class; it's a perfectly fine oracle/druid hybrid as it is. I just think it should either officially become an oracle/druid hybrid of be changed to have some meaningful similarity to the witch.

Secondly, several of the hexes with pretty glaring issues haven't been touched. Taking arcane enlightenment as a wandering hex still basically lets a Shaman add every single sorcerer/wizard spell to her spells known. Aside from being pretty problematic on its own, this means that arcane enlightenment is strictly superior as a wandering hex than as a regular hex. Lure of the Heavens lets the Shaman fly for minutes per level after she has essentially received one free overland flight spell per day from her spirit magic; the hex's benefit is rendered obsolete by the same spirit that grants the hex before you even receive that benefit. Healer's touch is still a level 8 ability that replicates a level 0 spell with virtually no added benefit.

In general, I think it was a good move to steer the class away from the oracle, but I think the class has a lot more problems than that. Just because it's a promising class that's close to the mark in a lot of ways doesn't mean it doesn't have a ways to go, and I would have liked to see a lot more changes than were made.

Also, I assume it's just a typo, but the table still shows the Shaman receiving 5th-level spells prior to 4th-level spells.

3) using the combination of fly, invisibility and summon to push an "I win" button. Legal, sure. But wizards and sorcerers can do the same boring thing too. Not sure that is proving much beyond "wizards and sorcerers rock at level 11"

I disagree, actually. The main strength of the Arcanist is that it is as capable of preparing for any encounter as a wizard, but as capable of adjusting to changes as a sorcerer. In essence, the Arcanist gets the "best of both worlds," so to speak. I think this is a even more apparent in playtests like this than it is on paper.

I'm a little tired of "playtests" where it's a single invisible caster without a party. The game is usually played with a whole party, at least some of whom won't be invisible.

I think the fact that a party is more of a liability than an asset to some classes is a pretty serious concern to which attention should be drawn. I mean, seriously, let's say Marcus is a member of an adventuring party. His best option is to just leave them behind and do everything himself because they get in the way.

In other words, Gorzak the Gorespattered could best contribute to the team's success not by hewing through the flesh of foes with his mighty axe, but by staying at home and having a beer while his buddy Marcus does everything. Sure, it's not how things are usually going to be dealt with in practice, but I don't think that means it isn't a problem.

I think there's a difference between have a lots of options but a prefered style of fighting versus have a lot of options and only having 5 weapons that allow you to use your abilities. I'm pretty sure the only ones that fit the bill are the dagger, short spear, short sword, rapier, and, oddly enough, morningstar.

No other martial class is so limited in options, except the monk and brawler, but that's because their shtick is not using weapons at all.

It's actually broader than that. If I recall, the whole list is: trident, scizore, cestus, wooden stake, light pick, heavy pick, mere club, brass knife, spiked gauntlet, boarding axe, gladius, starknife, switchblade, spiked shield, and sword cane.

Dervish Dance

Hm, I'd entirely forgotten Dervish Dance let you treat a scimitar as a piercing weapon. Still, not what I was hoping for; Dervish Dance only works on the scimitar and the cutlass is, technically, a separate item. It's still more viable for a Swashbuckler to wield a pick or trident than a cutlass.

scimitar, done.

Huh? All the abilities require a piercing weapon, which a scimitar is not. Unless I've missed an update or something. I'd be relieved to be wrong; a Swashbuckler being able to use its abilities with a heavy pick but not a cutlass is laughable.

As it stands, the scope of the class is really narrow, yeah. The general design approach to it though largely seems to be based around that one Erol Flynn-ish concept and getting it to work right, at the expense of all else.

It still really doesn't do this, though. There's really no aspect of fighting using your environment, which is a pretty big part of nearly every swashbuckling character mentioned in this thread. Robin Hood kicks over tables to trip enemies, flings chairs with his off-hand, and so on; Jack Sparrow and Turner attack each-other as much with the blacksmith's shop as their swords. That's just one problem.

RJGrady, a swashbuckler is proficient with all simple and martial weapons. He can use a quarterstaff, halberd, or longbow just fine. However, none of them are his preferred weapon, and as such he shouldn't get all the perks when using them. A Dex focused Swashbuckler would likely be pretty good with a longbow, even without pinache, and I foresee a Robin Hood archetype in the future that might be able apply it in some way.

The point he's making is that there are archetypal Swashbuckling characters who use those weapons as their preferred weapons.

A cleric of Gorum OTOH gets a greatsword, so they are getting more out of the feature. Is this a game-breaker? Or rather, why is it suddenly a game-breaker for the warpriest?

One of the cleric's most central class abilities doesn't require it to use its favored weapon, while one of the warpriest's primary abilities does.

It's not a matter of being "narrow"....it's a matter of being thematically relevant.

If a fighter had 1/2 BA, only simple weapon proficiencies, and no armor proficiencies.....it wouldn't be much of a "fighter".

The basic definition of a shaman revolves around detecting and dealing with spirits, both to gain power, as well as defending the folk against the abilities of harmful spirits.

It's what a shaman is.

In what sense does the Shaman not currently deal with spirits to gain power and defend others from harmful supernatural creatures or restore the harm caused by those creatures? They gain all of their supernatural powers from spirits. If you're objecting to the manner in which the spirits are presented, I reiterate my concern about making a base class that's too narrowly-tailored; I'd rather see extremely vague spirits that can be refluffed to fit various settings and concepts than an extremely specific presentation of spirits that allows for very little variance of interpretation. The latter is fine for the Dragonlance prestige class because it's a prestige class for a specific campaign setting; for a setting-neutral base class, I think that level of specificity is extremely problematic.

The only real disconnect between the class and the typical idea of a Shaman is that the class apparently communes with the spirits through their familiars, rather than through reaching an altered state of consciousness. Even still, nothing is stopping anyone from spending some of their starting gold on flayleaf or taking ranks in Craft (Alchemy) and roleplaying their shaman entering a trance to gain their spells.

Finally, I'll reiterate that the pop-culture and pulp fantasy ideas of a Shaman aren't necessarily the same as the anthropological definitions of a Shaman; for that matter, it's not like there is a solid, universally acknowledged consensus amongst anthropologists about the meaning of the term of if it should be used at all.

LadyWurm wrote:

I mean, I'm not sure what the point of this class even is. What role is it filling exactly?

It's filling the role of people who wanted to play a prepared Oracle with the Curse: "Deal with a thematically stupid familiar" which gives you a +4 initiative bonus as it's benefit.

Or people who wanted to play a Cleric with revelations instead of domain powers and were okay with dealing with a familiar in exchange for +4 initiative.

I don't know if I necessarily see the thematic problem unless we're going for a really narrowly-tailored idea of a Shaman, which I think is an awful idea for a base class. Aside from the fact that there isn't exactly solid, universal agreement on what that narrowly-tailored vision of a Shaman would be, tying a base class to a very specific and restrictive idea drastically limits the kind of campaigns and settings in which it could reasonably fit.

Simply put, the class should remain thematically broad and the fine-tuning of the fluff as to what spirits are and how they interact with the Shaman should come down to the player.

Mechanically speaking, the class could use a lot of changes if it is supposed to feel in any way unique or is supposed to seem remotely similar to the witch. As it stands, it seems more like an oracle/cleric hybrid inexplicably given a familiar.

Knifechief wrote:

My objection isn't that the class will be broken, it's that there will be no mechanical reason to play a cleric instead of a Shaman after level four.

Spontaneously change to cure/inflict spells, more channel energy per day (if you choose that), way more domains to choose from so more domain spell choices, domains do different things from hexes, higher fort save, shield proficiency...that's about all I can think of.

Eh, I'm still not sold. Spontaneous cure/inflict spells just aren't very useful. They're certainly a strict downgrade from spontaneous spirit magic spells. Channel energy at least doesn't waste spell slots, but healing still usually isn't going to be the best use of your action. Simply put, it's not useful enough that two channels per day makes much of a difference. Similarly, I'd gladly spend a feat on shield proficiency, if it's that important, in exchange for everything a Shaman would get.

I'll grant that there are a lot more domains, and that's the main thing the cleric has going for it, I just didn't factor that in to my comment because I'm assuming there is going to be a similar multiplicity of spirits before very long. Even with the number of spirits there are now, I don't know if there are a pair of domains good enough that I'd rather get one domain spell per level per day than have access to two spirits' spells every level, without the need to prepare, in any slot, with the ability to change one of the spirits every day.

Don't forget archetypes that give you actual class features. Cleric is, by default, a bit light on features. (It's still a full caster, so it's not weak, but it doesn't have many bells or whistles.) Archetypes have mostly changed this by letting you trade one of your domains or channel energy for a big bag of stuff. If shaman ends up looking feature-packed compared to default cleric, I'm not too perturbed. Nobody actually plays default cleric, they're evangelists or undead lords or forgemasters or whatever.

To reiterate, I'm referring to a hypothetical Shaman that can spontaneously cast its spirit magic spells as a Cleric spontaneously casts cures. I'm not worried about the Shaman being more feature-packed, as it is, I'm just objecting to giving it a straight-up better version of a cleric feature in addition to what it already has.

Is that more flexable than the cleric or druid ?.....sure, they will have 2 spells at each level instead of one spell of each level they can cast spontaneously.

Is that "broken"?....I don't think it's broken at all....I don't think it's even "over powered".

However we have always allowed clerics to spontaneously cast domain spells rather than cure/inflict.

My point isn't that it's inherently game-breaking, just that it is a straight-up advantage over spontaneous casting; as such, if the Shaman is given the ability to spontaneously cast spirit spells, it will be strictly superior to the cleric, as the cleric is written. My objection isn't that the class will be broken, it's that there will be no mechanical reason to play a cleric instead of a Shaman after level four. I wouldn't mind if the standard Cleric, or even an official archetype, could spontaneously cast domain spells also, I just don't want to see the Shaman completely overshadow it, mechanically.

For years the only setting I played in was Dragonlance, a setting where it was the "norm" for clerics to spontaneously cast their domain spells.

It was never a problem in regards to balance, and was a very refreshing change from pigeon holing the cleric into the role of "band aid".

Huh, really? I never knew that. I only ever played Dragonlance before domains were a part of the rules and/or before divine casters were available in the setting. Learn something new every day.

I'm not sure what you mean by "free" spontaneous casting. As in they can trade out any prepared spell slot for a spell from a spirit list, or they can cast spells from the spirit list without limitation? Because the latter is problematic for what I would hope are obvious reasons. The former is still a pretty huge advantage that would put them far-and-away above a cleric in terms of flexibility and power. Basically, imagine a cleric that can switch any spell slot for a domain spell and gets to change one of its domains every day, then also gets oracle revelations on top of it, all in exchange for channel energy, unless they decide they need it that day and take the life spirit, in which case they get all of that stuff in exchange for nothing.

Knifechief wrote:

I didn't even really mean that I think it's a weak power (although I do), I just meant that I think more specific feedback is more useful than broad generalizations.

So, you're entire ranting post basically boils down to "Hey, being vague is bad, say something more specific"? And you don't recognize the irony in that argument? As you are not criticizing any thing specific, you're vaguely saying you didn't like how pointed the comments were? Seriously?

It basically boils down to "being vague is bad because it can lead to misunderstandings." I gave examples of things against which Parry didn't effectively defend in the hopes of showing the problem with being too vague; if developers hear a lot of feedback about "good defensive powers," it could send the message that the Swashbuckler's defensive capabilities don't need any work or, worse, that they should be toned down. Basically, saying how good opportune parry is while neglecting to mention that it's only particularly good in very specific situations is problematic. Opportune parry needs work if it's supposed to work against large groups, monsters, or really basically anyone who isn't a medium-or-smaller 3/4-or-worse BAB class fighting at close range without spells.

Any defensive power can be bypassed. Full plate and heavy shield are both good defensive powers, and they can be bypassed by firearms, touch spells, area of effects... it doesn't invalidate them as good defensive powers.

Improved Evasion is a good defensive power. It can be bypassed by fort/will save spells, archers, melee attacks, but it doesn't invalidate it as a good defensive power.

Just because there are things that Parry doesn't work on doesn't negate it as a good defensive power. There is such a thing as being too narrow in one's definition of 'good defensive power'. I don't know of ANY classical good defensive powers that can't be bypassed by a huge swath of abilities. That doesn't make them bad defensive powers.

I didn't even really mean that I think it's a weak power (although I do), I just meant that I think more specific feedback is more useful than broad generalizations.

I'm pretty sure the Dread Pirate Roberts as a very high Constitution and some unusual feat choices, and I doubt anyone in that movie is more than level 10, so it's kind of hard to say. Inigo doesn't seem to be able to hold his alcohol, and he actually seems more swashbucklery. Wesley might be a fiendishly optimized rogue/swashbuckler.

So, like, a ninja/barbarian or ninja/fighter? =P

So what if it does? The swashbuckler takes her 5 ft move forward and full attacks. Then, on the return sequence, the swash uses recovery, forcing the enemy to use its 5 ft move to follow... and then the swash can attack and 5 ft move to her heart's content, using recovery each time the enemy responds to break the full attack sequence. It's not fullproof outside the realm of theory, but I have seen it work fairly well in actual play.

If I were GMing, I'd have the enemy follow the Swashbuckler to get its full attack, then just attack someone else the first round that wouldn't be possible. If no-one else is in range, have the enemy attempt a trip or something.

All the negativity about how that was not worthwhile really is just telling people not to participate.

I did not say the Swashbuckler was OP, I simply said they have a REALLY good defensive power from 11th on. And even if you do make a barbarian that's too hard to shut down...

Personally, I objected to drawing so broad a conclusion from so narrow a circumstance. I think it's fair to say that their defensive power is extremely useful in one-on-one fights against opponents who rely on successful mêlée attacks. That is what your playtest demonstrated, and that's a fair point. On the other hand, opportune parry is not a good defensive power against a spellcaster who targets will saves. It's not a good defensive power against archers. It's not a (particularly) good defensive power against significantly larger opponents.

I wasn't trying to say you played wrong or your playtest was useless, I was trying to say that it's important for one to be careful about how one presents one's findings. My apologies if it came off another way.

But based on one spell of each level, per spirit...you can actually build up a pretty good number of spells known (actually faster than a Sorcerer of equal level).

Assuming new spirits are gained at 1/5/10/15/20, you'd know a single spell of each level until you hit level five. Later on it would outpace a sorcerer, but the early levels would be completely crippled unless you add a lot in the way of hexes and spirit abilities.

The class is really really MAD, which is a problem for low-point buy. This is actually where being a full caster is a little worrisome, as you'll eventually need at least 19 Wisdom and can't really dump Intelligence or Charisma with a caster build. I found that melee builds either need to choose to either Dervish Dance or go with a Strength Build with Heavy Armor.

It's pretty easy to build a successful caster Shaman with 15 point-buy and it only gets easier as you add more points or open up more races. I mean, for one, clerics get by just fine without free spells from the sorc/wizard list, so you can dump intelligence and be a perfectly acceptable caster. Secondly, you only need to start with twelve in intelligence if you are going for arcane spells, since the lore spirit gives an inherent bonus and you can afford a +2 intelligence item by the time you will need one.

You don't provoke from the enemy that you Recover away from. So, you don't provoke AoOs against single enemies and rarely so against 2 enemies. More than that gets dicey, but by that point, Recovery wouldn't be as useful anyway.

I think this relies on assumptions about how enemies are played that don't often hold true. The enemy can take a five-foot step away to force the Swashbuckler to use his to approach, just like the Swashbuckler can; I see no reason to assume the Swashbuckler just gets to take a full attack and then five-foot away, while the enemy cannot do the same. Similarly, I don't see any reason to assume multiple enemies aren't surrounding the Swashbuckler to gain flanking bonuses and make retreat more costly. Finally, if the Swashbuckler is going to play keep-away, the enemies should move on and take out targets of opportunity rather than chasing the Swashbuckler around and ignoring everyone else. Unless enemies are intentionally left holding the idiot ball, recovery is either useless or actively harmful to either the Swashbuckler or his team.

It would be interesting for him to have spell slots per day based on level....but no spells known of his own.

He would gain "spell known" from the spirits bonded to him.
All the customization anyone could want would be built right into which spirits where chosen....

The spell lists for each spirit would need to be considerably larger for this to work. I'm not saying it couldn't work, just that it would necessitate other modifications.

I'm not really seeing where people get the idea that Recovery is particularly useful. Maybe it's just the playstyle I'm used to, but I think it's going to provoke a ton of ops more often than it's going to get you out of a full attack.

So, every swashbuckler will get a 1 panache swift/immediate action attack once per round with or without parry at full BAB... the riposte might kill an enemy to stop its attack, the pommel swipe gives a free trip attempt.

Except that riposte actually costs two panache, requiring one for the probably-useless parry, unless Signature Deed is involved, in which case riposte costs one and pommel swipe costs zero. Riposte is going to run through panache points at least twice as quickly as pommel swipe, all other things being equal.

Swashbuckler had Celestial Chain, so flight was no help.

They are in an invisibility high zone, and everyone and their mother has counters to invisibility (level 11, remember, major bad guys in the area are Ogre mages). PCs have about given up on INvisibility.

Stoneskin would have helped, had he memorized it. He was used to the Sorcerer being the one to cast that, so he didn't memorize it.

Will Save, see Stoneskin entry. Magus had pretty much taken Shield and all damage spells.

Anecdotal evidence drawn from an extremely specific situation is not particularly relevant to a comparison of the classes and their abilities, in general. A Magus has a lot more options to totally shut down a Swashbuckler than a Swashbuckler has to totally shut down a Magus; one Magus happening to select none of those options doesn't mean they don't exist.

While the shaman have one spirit power at first level the cleric have two domain powers plus channel energy. The oracle have equivalent mysteries and revelations with more spells per day and no familiar spellbook to be targeted. They get the cure spells known for free and their curse is not only penalities, it also buffs them.

Like I said, I'll give you that a cleric with two strong domains might have an edge until the second spirit comes online. I'm personally not nuts about channel energy, since in-combat healing is generally a poor use of actions and resources and out-of-combat healing is better accomplished by the party pooling their money on a wand. It's good against undead, I guess, but that's a pretty situational advantage.

Confusion curse is very good but a Lore shaman is probably the MADdest class in the game right now, making one on a 15 point buy can be an exercise in frustration. Heavens oracle also gets said spells as the heavens shaman plus awesome display which allows them to still be relevant at later levels.

How so? You need wisdom and charisma and basically nothing else. Intelligence for the arcane spells is nice, but you don't really need to start with much there since you'll automatically get a bonus to your int. I'd put fourteen in wisdom (assuming a floating +2 goes here), fourteen in charisma, twelve in intelligence, twelve in either constitution or dexterity, and eleven in strength. Maybe it's just that I came up on 3d6 instead of 4d6b3 and point-buy, but I'm not seeing the frustration.

Heavens oracles are still oracles and thus have a limited amount of known spells, which is a pretty big deal. Moreover, they don't get color spray until second level, which makes level one rougher, and awesome display doesn't make patterns relevant later, it makes them relevant against larger groups; rainbow pattern is going to be largely obsolete because it's mind-affecting long before it's obsolete because of the HD cap.
Besides, if we're going to talk about being relevant later, Heavens Shaman gets more bonus spells, stops needing to breathe, and gets a free prismatic wall once per day. Oh, and it gets to add all but the capstone of a second spirit which the Shaman may then change day-to-day depending on its needs.

I'll maybe try a 1:1 comparison by running them through the same playtest, later, but neither my experience with the Shaman nor the way it looks on paper makes me think being underpowered is a worry.

I've been playing around with different ideas....

I still think I would rather see it keep the Cleric spell list, but as a spontanious caster...and then have the spirit magic ability add the spirits listed spells temporarily added to the Shamans "spells known" list.

I'm completely against this. Give the Shaman spontaneous casting with the Cleric list and it really is just an Oracle with a familiar instead of a curse.

Meanwhile I am playtesting what they gave us and I dont like the results. Right now the shaman is just a crippled cleric until they get the wandering mechanic at level 4 and 6. And I am not the only one saying it. That is a loooong strech to be underpowered specially when you have oracle an cleric doing that same job twice a good.

How on earth are they doing the same job twice as well? A cleric with powerful domains might have an edge, but it's certainly not twice as effective. An oracle has less spells known and has to deal with whatever penalty their curse gives.

Well, of course it resembles an Oracle mystery more. The class is an oracle-witch hybrid. However, each spirit grants some spells and a grab-bag of special abilities, just like a Domain. Granting that ability to a druid caster would feel... a lot like a druid. Obviously, a Bones spirit on a druid caster would be very different, and also, very strange and perhaps difficult to play.

I don't disagree, per say, I guess I'd just rather it feel a lot like a Druid than pretty much exactly like an Oracle.

Spirits: Ancestors should replace Lore as one of the starting choices. I have no problem with Lore being brought in later, but I can't thing of a shaman without thinking of revering and consulting one's ancestors.

I wouldn't object to this at all, especially given that Lore seems the most problematic from a balance perspective.

Bone Spirit: Spirit Ability: Touch of the Grave: I don't like that it forces one to have unholy weapons. I feel you should have the option of unholy or bane (undead)that doubles the bonus damage against corporeal undead (to help balance the +1 bane vs the +2 unholy). This allows a...

Or at least add a clause stating that the unholy weapon does not confer a negative level on a good-aligned Shaman.

Hey just catching back up on the conversation but wanted to talk about the spells list discussion again for a minute.

What is the reasoning behind not just giving the shaman the witches spell list? As it stands that spell list seems to have most of the spells mentioned before as being essential to the class like the protection spells and some of the nature based ones as well.

I imagine they avoided the Witch list because of balance concerns and potential problems with learning new spells; Shamans and Witches learning learn spells from each-others' familiars could provide some problems, for instance. It could also be that they didn't want the Shaman to have a list of specific spells known for flavor reasons, which would be problematic with an arcane spell list.

It's basically a note-for-note replacement of the option to take a clerical domain instead of an animal companion. Wildshape doesn't even show up until later, and many druids do not emphasize it.

I have to disagree. A spirit resembles an Oracle mystery much more strongly than it resembles a Cleric domain, in my opinion. A spirit is basically domain-style spell mechanics with mystery-style powers, and I think the latter comes off a lot more strongly in the feel of the class, especially since the Spirits' spell lists don't match up with domain lists to nearly the extent their hexes/abilities match up with revelations. Since I also don't think the familiar is particularly similar to an animal companion, in practice, I can't really say I get too much of a druid vibe from the class, as it is. That said, obviously a lot of this comes down to "feel," so it's not like I'm saying you're wrong, just that I don't get the same sense you do when I play the class.

Eh, with the benefit of Weapon Focus it's roughly on par with the benefit you get from the Inquisitor's Judgement ability, though the duration does suck until later levels.

I think it's mostly the duration that kills it, for me. A resource that scarce should give a much more meaningful advantage for its expenditure. I've never played an Inquisitor to compare it to, but from having been in a campaign with one, it seems as though they have more versatility with their judgments.

Derp, yes. It would have made the ability much more useful in terms of action economy. I still don't think I would have used it until what I would perceive as the final battle of a day, though. It just doesn't do much.

Yeah, basically this. Sacred weapon either needs to be more powerful or usable more often; as it stands, its duration is short enough that I felt like I had to save it for climactic battles because it was a scarce resource, but its bonuses were small enough that it didn't really seem that pertinent when those climactic battles came.

That would be nice but there is still the problem that Sacred Weapons have a +5 enhancement bonus cap. Drop that, and suddenly you've got something pretty interesting. How cool would it be to, at higher levels, be able to spontaneously bring the equivalent of an artifact to bear against your enemy?

I think this is a really cool idea. It's not like more "pluses" are going to make the ability overpowered, and I really like the flavor of being so pious that a mundane weapon turns to an artifact of overwhelming holy power in your hands.

I Like that they can use all martial weapons but requiring class features to use only the god's favored weapon really goes in the opposite direction of having all martial weapons.

Yeah, this is my main problem. Basically, sacred weapon and proficiency with all martial weapons don't work together. A warpriest is proficient with all martial weapons, but it can't use sacred weapon with any weapon. Again, I don't mind free weapon focus with the favored weapon. I just think it's silly to give it a class feature which essentially works against another class feature.

Then again, it's kind of a moot point since I haven't actually found sacred weapon to be remotely useful when trying out the class, whether I used it as written or let myself use it on whatever weapon I wanted. I guess my complaint is more on "the principle of thing."

A related, more pertinent complaint is that sacred weapon just isn't too helpful, as it stands. I was surprised by how small the bonuses were at any given leven and even more surprised by how short the duration was.

I think that is where the bigger problem lays.

The current "hexes" feel like replicas of the Oracle mysteries.

The hexes need to be re-focused along the lines of more traditional abilities linked to the different cultural specialists collectively referred to as "shamans".

I agree that changing the "hexes" is a better way to fix the feel of the class than changing the spell list, but since it sounds like the spell list is changing as things stand, I'm basing my ideas around the assumption that the list is changing, at least for now. I don't think it's the ideal solution, but I'm still happy to see the class moving away from the Oracle.

I'm using the traditional definition that all cultures I have researched use (all European, Native American,and many Asian cultures) :)

I don't know if that's particularly relevant, though. Pathfinder's inspirations are in pop culture and pulp fantasy more than actual history or extant cultures. I don't mean that it's an invalid opinion or anything, just that I don't think it should necessarily be privileged over other opinions just because it's based in fact.

More broadly, I think the best answer to fluff concerns about what is and is not adequately "spirity" is best solved, mechanically, through adding variety to the spirits so that they might better cover the holes in the default spell list to fit a concept. Give hexes more often, offer more hex choices, and maybe diversify the spell selection fron any given spirit.

One of the things that I don't think is coming through very strongly right now is that the spirits are in fact very like patrons--patrons that you commune with more directly/flexibly than the witch. The way they are presented and organized, though, makes them seem like oracle mysteries. This might be why you see people saying that the class is 90% oracle or an oracle with a familiar and no curse. Mechanically, I think that it is actually a decent blend of the two classes.

I think they function mechanically more like mysteries, too. Patrons don't control the hexes you can choose, mysteries control the revelations you can choose; spirits control the hexes you can choose, and some of those hexes are existing revelations. Given that, they strike me as much more like mysteries than patrons, mechanically.

I am really more interested in differentiating the shaman from the druid. Like, big time. Having a witch's familiar type creature instead of a curse is plenty of differentiation from the oracle. That's the high concept. In my mind, everything else that differentiates it should be the shaman's unique features.

Isn't having revela— er, uh, "hexes" instead of wilsdhape plenty of differentiation from the druid? I think that's a more noticeable difference than the familiar-for-curse, at least. Then again, it might not actually feel that different when playing it, I'll have to try it out.

Personally, when I playtested the class as-is, I basically felt like I was playing an oracle. The familiar's impact was negligible and the hexes are mostly revelations witch a different number of uses/day, if they were changed at all. The Witch side of the class feels practically non-existent and going to the druid list won't help with that, but it would at least make the class feel like oracle+druid instead of oracle+more oracle.

Also requires a pretty substantial INT to work well (16 by 11th level, 19 by 17th), and is the only hex that does that. Chances are you'll need at least a 14 unless you want to spend an inordinate amount of WBL on headbands, which means your sacrificing either 4th level bonuses that could be going into WIS, or between 1/3 and 1/5 of your points during character creation. Either way, chances are you're losing your otherwise perfectly reasonable melee capabilities.

The spirit from which one gets Arcane Enlightenment gives an inherent bonus to intelligence, though. That sort of takes the bite out of the ability-score requirement. Especially since I don't think losing a couple points of strength are as detrimental to mêlée capability as wide-open access to the sorcerer/wizard list on top of another list is beneficial to spell-casting capability, not to mention that the ability-score switch adds a few skill ranks every level, too. Moreover, I don't think the price of a +2 int item (which is all you'd need) is "inordinate" by the level at which it would become necessary.

That's more or less how I feel.

I'm curious....what about using the Witch spell list ?

As long as spells known were limited, I wouldn't see a problem with it. Using revelations in place of hexes and having higher HD/BAB would differentiate it from the Witch.

It still leaves a lot of the other hexes in the dust, that way. Even as a regular hex, it comes off as ridiculous when juxtaposed with Lure of the Heavens or Gravesight.

Ah, my apologies, I meant "specific type of weapon" in reference to something like "light mace" or "heavy pick." I included the word "type" to differentiate between a weapon in general (those warhammers on the shelf) and a single, individual weapon (this warhammer my grandfather made).

More broadly, I don't really think the restrictions are particularly comparable. For one, the weapons allowed by Spell combat are significantly broader than those allowed by Sacred weapon, as I said. Secondly, Spell Combat's restriction is essentially a moot point, since you'd need the other hand free to cast a spell, anyhow.

And the Warpriest can cast spells to buff whatever he is holding.

But the Magus gets additional bonuses to only one weapon.

Same as the Warpriest.

I'm not sure what you mean by "additional bonuses," but there is absolutely no standard Magus class ability which relates to using a specific type of weapon. A Magus may use his arcane pool to empower any weapon he is holding; Warpriest may only use his sacred weapon ability to empower his deity's favored weapon and only that weapon. That is not the same. As I said, I have no problem with the Warpriest only getting weapon focus with his deity's favored weapon, I just object to the fact a Warpriest can only use sacred weapon with his deity's favored weapon. That is not the same.

As for action economy, I think allowing the Warpriest to just apply a limited number of buffs for free at the start of combat will help at least a little. It still won't address the choice between casting and combat they'll face on their action, but they'll at least be able to go in swinging without "buffing rounds."

EDIT: I really like charge of valor. It's kind of a unique spin on the Magus's action economy solutions that shares their elegance while still letting the Warpriest feel distinct.

Aside from the above points about damage, with which I agree, I'd like to see some more deeds and some more variety. Using improved weapons/shields is a big part of the pop culture swashbuckler, and it's completely absent from the class. I'd like to see a little more support for things like kicking over tables to stop arrows and swinging-on-a-rope kicks or whatever.

Even if the class is fixed in terms of damage output and defensive capabilities, playing a swashbuckler isn't going to feel like playing an Errol Flynn character, as the class stands.

I think the good part about using the druid list is that it differentiates the class from the oracle, somewhat, and my biggest problem from the class aside from a few balance issues is that it just feels much too much like an oracle.

That said, there are still some pretty serious problems with the hexes.

On the one end of the spectrum, Arcane Enlightenment[i] as a wandering hex is basically "add every spell on the sorcerer/wizard list to your spells known." On the other end, [i]Lure of the Heavens gives you fly for minutes/day a full three levels after the spirit which grants that hex has already granted overland flight.

Not really. The Magus is going to have one weapon they take weapon focus, specialization, etc with. They aren't as good with other weapons, since they don't get bonuses with them.

The difference is that the Magus can use his arcane pool to improve any weapon he is holding. I don't care so much if the Warpriest only gets free weapon focus with his deity's favored weapon, I mean, c'mon, it's weapon focus. II do think, however, that it is a problem that a Warpriest can't use Sacred weapon with any other weapon. I can see the fluff reasons that they'd be more trained in the deity's favored weapon, but I don't see why they'd be forced to use it to receive the deity's blessing; it's not like clerics of Cayden can't cast bless weapon on rapiers or paladins of Abadar must use a bow for divine bond.

Also, I think it's silly that a Warpriest who doesn't worship a deity must pick a simple weapon as a focus weapon.

Should this really be something that can be taken with Wandering Hex? Because it effectively lets a high level Shaman choose any wizard/sorcerer spell they need for the day, and it's actually much better as a Wandering Hex then as a normal hex.

I'm glad I'm not the only person who thought this. The hexes in general seem a little wonky, but this one really reads as exploitable.

I'll also agree that this class feels like 95% oracle and 5% witch or thereabouts. Other than the word "hex" and the familiar, it's pretty much all oracle.