MukkBarovian's page

I would really like an answer to this.

I suspect Entryhazard has the interpretation that is closest to RAW. As a class feature this adds spells to the (useless???) list of spells you can prepare. As a class feature this also adds the spells to your list of class spells as per the FAQ.(Otherwise if you could prepare the spells, you would not be able to cast them because a different FAQ states you may not cast a spell unless it is on your class spell list.) You can use your normal allotment of spells known to select wizard spells you have also selected with the hex. Then you can cast these spells spontaneously as long as you have the hex selected. If you select a different hex, you cannot cast the spell spontaneously until you go back to arcane enlightenment.

Using Arcane Enlightenment, the Shaman is effectively a single class Mystic Theurge for prepared casters. Using this rules interpretation, the Spirit Guide Oracle is effectively a single class Mystic Theurge for spontaneous casters.

I think the Cleric is out of place as it is. I feel it should be:
Full Base Attack - 4th level spells
3/4 Base Attack - 6th level spells
1/2 Base Attack - 9th level spells

That gives a sliding scale between combat characters with a bit of casting ability, and full casters. Given how powerful full casters are, I don't have a problem giving them a mediocre chassis. But they didn't come in 3E with that thought so its a bit late now.

Put me at +1 for the priest idea, but he would have to have some nice abilities to draw people away from the 3/4 BAB and armor proficiency.

I don't know how people here feel about the tier system but I do have this to say about it: I have absolutely no problem with new classes being introduced that are more powerful than the weakest classes that already exist, and weaker than the strongest classes. We already have a wide variety of power levels to choose from. Having some more in the middle is just fine.

I actually find it fairly elegant to take the tropes the rogue was also used to express and give them each a good fleshed out class.

Pathfinder has made going single class better, but in no way has it killed multiclassing or dipping. It just made it so that if you want to multiclass you should have a very clear idea of what you're losing and gaining out of the deal.

I can't believe no one has mentioned it before, but the reason the Magus is such a successful hybrid class is that it synergizes the two components. You could play a Wizard X / Fighter X and at any given time cast a spell or hit something with a sword. At any given time either being a mediocre Fighter or a second class Wizard. The only way to force synergy was to use the Wizard spells to buff yourself up prior to hitting something with a sword. The Magus lets you cast and fight at the same time. This is what I believe the gold standard of a hybrid class should be. A hybrid class should allow you to combine the class features of both classes better than multiclassing alone would allow.

There is also open design space that can be filled. The slayer, investigator, and swashbuckler go this route.

The problem is that many of the classes that attempt to bridge class features do a poor job, and that concepts that fill new design space shouldn't count as hybrid classes. On top of that, there are possible balance issues and some of the core classes are getting shouldered out of their design space. Overall it feels desperately in need of polishing. Which is what the play test is supposed to do. However at the same time I hope that the designers take the ideas that made the Magus successful to heart.

What makes a hybrid class successful is the smooth integration of both component parts.