Person_Man's page

I apologize for invoking the Tier system in my post. I wasn't attempting to debate the validity of the Tier system or any ranking system in particular. And I recognize that full BAB is an important resource. I'm just doing my best to quantify how important it is in relationship to other resources.

A comment by Mythic Evil Lincoln (who by the way, has a great avatar name) about NPC classes and from a variety of others regarding players who enjoy the Fighter got me thinking - clearly some subset of players associate Full BAB with simple mechanics related directly to hitting stuff with weapons. They don't analyze the resources each class has, or worry about being overshadowed by other players with more abilities, or feel limited by the lack of options. They just like how it plays in their games.

I want to write classes that can be as fun as possible for as many players as possible. So I think that when I write a full BAB Pathfinder class, I need to find a way to make it as simple as possible, keep the fluff mostly non-magical, and keep the core role of the class related mostly to hitting stuff, while still providing it with other significantly useful options.

Having sufficient resources is very important, but it's not everything. It's also about the "feel" of the class for players who enjoy a certain play style. It'll be hard to cater to both groups, but not impossible (I hope).

Initial results of the survey I posted are in. So far 21 people have answered. If you'd like to see the results, you'll have to go over to the OotS mirror thread, since I can't format tables on this forum.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=329912&page=5

You can still take the survey here if you'd like. I'll post the results again if more people take it:

[url]https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/2Y2QTGG[/url]

21 people is is no way representative of anything, other then the 21 people who choose to read the thread and complete on the survey. It's a shame I can't get 400+ randomly selected Pathfinder players who buy supplements to answer this survey, so that it would be more representative.

I appreciate all the feedback I've received from everyone.

So clearly there are a variety of viewpoints. I'd like to know how many people fall into each camp, so I've made a survey.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/2Y2QTGG

Feel free to share it with anyone you know who plays Pathfinder.

OK, lets try the same question a slightly different way.

Lets say I have a base class called the Example.

The Example has full BAB, d10 hit die, light/med/heavy armor, shields, simple+martial weapons, 1 strong Save, 2 Skill points per level, and a small number of meh class Skills.

As a first level ability, once per day after some reasonable period of time the Example can choose one Thing from his class list of Things. As he gains levels, he can choose additional Things to use from his list, and he gets access to higher level Things.

Each Thing doesn't provide any sort of bonus (to damage, to-hit, Saves, Skills, AC, etc) or Feat, and studiously avoids any ability which is already provided by any other currently published full BAB class.

Instead, each Thing provides some sort of Blasty option (Standard Action, area of effect or ray + some have status effects + everything allows a Saving Throw to halve damage or negate) with a recharge mechanism (after using the Blasty Thing, you must wait 1d4 rounds) or sometimes helpful Utility option (interact with creatures in new ways, move in new ways, provide useful information, etc).

The author has thoroughly play tested the Example with multiple different groups, has balanced the number and progression of Things to the best of his ability. He is also willing to add or subtract Things, and/or change how they scale based on the feedback of the community, and earnestly cares about what players and the community think.

Is it ok if the Example keeps full BAB? Or does the presence of Blasty and Utility Things which he can change out each day mean that he should have 3/4 BAB or 1/2 BAB?

Just to provide some additional context, I'm not asking as a player. Individual players and DMs should do whatever they want to do. Nor am I here to argue about the merits of the Tier system, or any ranking system, or the concept of ranking classes.

I'm asking as someone who does freelance writing on the side. When I write a new class, I have to decide how many resources it's going to get at each level. And I need to decide what niches those resources are going to make the class better at filling.

BAB can be an important resource. It gives you a bonus to-hit and to Combat Maneuvers. It allows you get get the most damage out of Power Attack. It allows you to qualify for certain Feats earlier.

Is it that full BAB classes are designed to be simple. They do melee and/or ranged attacks with weapons and act as meat shields. It's ok to add some abilities which improve those things, but beyond that you shouldn't clutter their role.

Or is it that full BAB is valuable enough that the class abilities shouldn't be bigger then the minor/moderate bonuses provided by Feats, Rage, Favored Enemy, Grit, Smite, etc?

Is it a full thing? Full BAB classes shouldn't be able to have access to magic/psionic/etc powers, because full BAB = mundane?

Did it just happen by accident because of tradition? People don't want to depart too far from what the previous version of what each class has been.

How much should full BAB be worth?

I ask not to argue a specific point, but because I care a lot about what the community thinks. I want to write what people will play.

So within 3.5, there are four full BAB Tier 3 classes; Warblade, Crusader, Wildshape Ranger, and Duskblade. Also, anyone with access to Divine Power (Cleric, Favored Soul, Archivist, Artificer, etc) can also get full BAB when they need it, or all/most of the time via metamagic shenanigans.

Within Pathfinder, all of the full BAB classes are usually described as Tier 4. This includes all the currently published 3rd party Pathfinder full BAB classes that I've read. (Though I'm greatly anticipating some upcoming work from Dreamscarred Press which will break from this mold).

A high level Pathfinder Paladin with a Special Mount arguably comes the closest to Tier 3, in that you do one thing well (Meat Shield: You have two creatures to control, are immune/resistant to a lot of stuff, can deal decent damage against some enemies), plus you remove status conditions efficiently and play the party face. A well optimized Aegis is also in the same ballpark at mid-high levels.

But no full BAB Pathfinder class really feels like a Tier 3 or higher class. The Talents/Powers/Deeds/Bonus Feats/etc provided by full BAB are extremely granular (provide small bonuses/abilities). You can't change them out from day to day. They usually fill very limited niches. And none of them are open ended or flexible like Summons or Wildshape or fully scaled magic or psionics in general.

Was this a purposeful design decision? And if so, is it one that's worth upholding, so as to "protect" the viability of existing full BAB classes. ("Why should anyone play Class X when Class Y has full BAB and is superior?")

Or should writers just openly say, sorry, but the Fighter has a low amount of resources compared to other classes, and I'm not going to peg my new class to the Fighter just because they both have full BAB.

Thanks in advance for your feedback.