Suz's page

RPG Superstar 6 Season Star Voter. Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber. Organized Play Member. 68 posts (73 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. 2 wishlists. 1 Organized Play character. 1 alias.


1 to 50 of 68 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Thanks for the suggestions and clarification guys. It's been helpful.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Hi Mark

Pathfinder RAW rule on Threatening.
"You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn. Generally, that means everything in all squares adjacent to your space (including diagonally). An enemy that takes certain actions while in a threatened square provokes an attack of opportunity from you. If you're unarmed, you don't normally threaten any squares and thus can't make attacks of opportunity."

If you've spent your Attacks of Opportunity for the round, do you no longer threaten? The rules states that you threaten all squares into which you "can" make a melee attack, and I've got a RAW player who's suggesting it works like crossbow bolts.

If you have no more bolts then you can't shoot, if you've go no more attacks that round then you can't make a melee attack therefore you don't threaten.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I honestly agree, but I've got a player who plays Super RAW.

Reading it states that to threaten to be able to make a melee attack. His argument is that without any remaining AoO you can't make any melee attacks much like you can't make a ranged attack with a crossbow without bolts.

Flanking requires a character to threaten, so the question actually influences whether or not you can flank, use team-work feats or other abilities that rely on a creature being threatened.

If there are any references to help clarify I'd greatly appreciate it.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber


"You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn. Generally, that means everything in all squares adjacent to your space (including diagonally). An enemy that takes certain actions while in a threatened square provokes an attack of opportunity from you. If you're unarmed, you don't normally threaten any squares and thus can't make attacks of opportunity."

However if you've spent your Attacks of Opportunity for the round, do you no longer threaten until the next time you're able to make a melee attack (i.e next round or turn)

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Another version of this would be

Player 2 readies an action to attack Enemy 1 when Player 1 enters a flanked position.

Player 1 enters a flanked position during his/her movement and the readied action goes off.

Does that player 2 gain flanking bonuses for the attack, even if the attack resolves before the movement of Player 1 has ended.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Question, When conducting your move action, do you still threaten areas around you while moving?

Player 1 is moving 30ft towards his destination
Enemy 1 has readied once Player 1 is within melee range, he will drink a potion which provokes an attack of opportunity (stupid but prudent for the example)
Will player one be able to stop his movement and take an attack of opportunity against the enemy or does he simply not threaten?

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Hi I'm just posting this for a friend.

"Hey guys, expressions of interest please read the whole post before replying.

So myself and a few writers/bloggers/vloggers who are passionate about the craft of DMing are getting together in order to Live-stream a game on Roll20.
We're looking for one more player/dm to come and join our ranks. The table will be Round Robin and all players will eventually be required to DM a couple of paizo modules in time (not any time soon given first two DMs have been decided). Characters will remain the same through "Season 1" and rotate out when the GMs swap turns.

As mentioned in the title the game will be Live-Streamed so a working Webcam + Microphone is an absolute must.

System & Setting : Pathfinder
Game 1 : Wednesday 20th October 2016 (fortnightly sessions)
Timeslot : 5:00pm - 8:00pm EST

We have a lively and active crew so far comprised of
Michael Kesavan : An DM advice writer & Professional Dungeon Master from Perth, WA
Simon Munoz : A Blogger who is passionate and writes many articles pertaining to RP and Game mechanics
Timothy Ecklund : An avid and energetic contributor to various discussion pages and forum groups
Maize : A relatively new addition to the Pathfinder game, while not necessarily as experienced serves as our ever so important audience perspective.

The first game will be "God's Mouth Heresy" DMed by Simon.

The current characters are;
A Human Occult Oracle
A Halfling Rogue
An Elven Fey-blooded Sorcerer

If you have any questions please leave a comment and I'll get back to it as soon as I can. If you are a "Paid" DM via roll 20 this is also great exposure should you wish to have some concrete videos of you both playing and GMing games, so I encourage you to also throw your hat in as well.

Any expressions of interest please contact Michael Kesavan via Facebook

Hope to hear from you guys real soon.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
Suz wrote:

Apologies if this question has already been asked.

Is the use of poisons an evil act?

That is to say the knowing poisoning of a creature, not the natural venom of animals.

I imagine things that cause sleep/unconscious as effects are exceptions to this rule for their non-damage nature. But my question is geared more towards basic poison purchase/usage.

It absolutely is not. Want proof? Look at the couatl or the guardian naga; both of them are lawful good monsters who use deadly poison.

Poison use is not evil. It can be USED for evil purposes, but then so can fire or knives or kisses.

In D&D 3.5 Book of Exalted Deeds it states.

"Poison and Diseases are generally tools of evil monsters and characters, implements of corruption and destruction. If snakes and vermin are associated with evil, as they are in many cultures, it is usually because of their venom that they are viewed in such a negative light despite their neutral alignment. Using poison that deals ability damage is an evil act because it causes undue suffering in the process of incapacitating or killing an opponent. Of the poisons described in the Dungeon Master's Guide, only one is acceptable for good characters to use; Oil of Taggit, which deals no damage but causes unconsciousness. Ironically the poison favored by the evil drow, which causes unconsciousness as it's initial damage, is also not inherently evil to use."

The section on poisonous creatures associated with evil despite alignment implies that creature based poisons and venoms are an exception to the rule and that poison use is "generally" evil.

*Note* I am aware that Pathfinder isn't 3.5 but I've used them for rules that don't exist explicitly inside the Pathfinder rules.

*Question* You've given a few examples of venomous creature having poison despite being good, as there are also neutral creatures with poison as well.

But is there a general use for lethal poison that isn't evil?

*Note* Not trying to spark a discussion, I'm trying to resolve this as an ongoing issue for a player and I figure words from the J-man himself will hold enough weight ^_^.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Apologies if this question has already been asked.

Is the use of poisons an evil act?

That is to say the knowing poisoning of a creature, not the natural venom of animals.

I imagine things that cause sleep/unconscious as effects are exceptions to this rule for their non-damage nature. But my question is geared more towards basic poison purchase/usage.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I wouldn't worship a deity so much as an ideal, The ideal held by the Hellknights from the Order of the Scourge. I would devote my life to the pursuit of being law to a world in turmoil. Training rigorously daily to build up enough strength, conviction and tenacity to perform the trial of the Starstone in an all or nothing bid to become the god of Law and Order.

Working together with Abdar to bring absolute Justice to the universe.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Still holding out for a Spell Compendium

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber


Killing a target when their asleep has 2 outcomes as either a Neutral act or an Evil act.

Firstly addressing attacking a sleeping sentient living target (of any alignment) is an evil act. Attacking a helpless and or defenseless creature is evil. The difference between attacking a target who is alert and a target who is sleeping is the same difference between defending yourself (even if you instigated a fight) with an armed target and murdering a helpless victim. At this stage its just evil.

This said there are a few exceptions which makes this evil act neutral, by inserting the "necessity" for killing a helpless target. The obvious argument is that if the creature is evil and you kill them in their sleep, is it still evil? the answer imo is yes. Because at this level it is not "necessary" to deprive them of the ability to defend themselves to stop the evil of the person/creature. An example of this would be killing a few goblins in their bed as a level 10 adventurer. *Note also the group would have to know without a shadow of a doubt the creature is evil.

If the enemy raises a valid threat to the success of your mission to prevent evil, then the "good" you do by performing this evil act would turn it into a neutral act. An example of this would be killing a gargantuan dragon while it slept, this would save lives and the battle would be too dangerous to be done directly. Thus there is a genuine necessity to killing the creature while it slept. (or at least attempting to).

Does this mean you should wake up the creature and kill it then? the answer is no because they obviously might alert more enemies or disrupt your mission/quest. You can deal non lethal damage in a coup de grace. RAW there is no rule that states either a crit or a coup de grace must be lethal damage. However if they fail their fort save they will still die, but that's the fault of the gods. You at least "tried" to not kill a helpless creature.

This also does not apply to creatures who are not sentient, or living such as unawakened animals, constructs, oozes and the undead.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

@Adam Fully understood and expected, which is why the intent above all else is to create a free module. No profits, no gains, just sharing a hopefully intricate story with the community. Once it's completed of course.

@Skeld + Kyrt. Golarion is the setting for various reasons, and while I firmly understand copyright law, and publishing method and protocol. This isn't in any way intended to follow those traditional lines of publication. I have/had considered a neutral setting and there will be an option for that as a variation for those DMs wishing to apply the end product to their own or another setting, but the manner in which the project is being overall constructed it needed a firm foot hold. Golarion just happens to be one that lends itself to interesting cultural changes which are easy to maintain and manage.

@Captain. Thank you for your advice and encouraging words, I have done a lot of work in the past in stage and screenplay writing. My current occupation is an Operations Manager so I know better than most, when dealing with a big project don't tackle it yourself. Find a group of like-minded, passionate and talented individuals and share the workload. The Paizo forum isn't the only place I've advertised and I've had a lot of positive responses, it is always really inspiring to see people come out of the woodworks to do something like this for nothing more than to give something back to the community.

@Thanael I hadn't considered wayfinder but the project idea is simply too big.

I am not at liberty to discuss the details of whats being worked on as labelled out by the NDA. But what I can say is that when it's done it will be something avid fans will enjoy no matter what setting they are into.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Awesome to hear man and thank you for the interest. If you could email a sample of some of your work to the email address privately messaged to you we can go from there.


Absolutely right. However remote as it is, there is alway the chance paizo picks it up. It's more about being clear that there is no payment because there is no intent to profit from it. It will be a free series should paizo not pick it up. However I just wanted to assure anyone willing to help that "if" it were, and money were to change hands (legally) then they would be entitled to a cut.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It's all in the subject line.

If you or someone you know is interested I'd very much like to hear from you. Also if you know any reasonably priced freelancers (that is with industry credentials) I'd also be interested if you'd like to post details.

I have a great and riveting story idea that I have been working on and off for a year. It is unique, vibrant and requires a ton of work but if pulled off may create an adventure that would do for Modules what the Avengers did for films (FYI its not a ripoff, nor a fan fiction, it is an original story set in Golarion). This story is simply too big for one person and I require assistance.

There is no money involved. The exception being if it gets published in which case all profits will be negotiated. However this is unlikely given the base setting will be Golarion and as such no profit can be made from copywritten materials. I am looking for a few passionate writers to help me work on this, not for money but for the ability to say you achieved an incredible feat of skill and writing prowess.

Pre-emptive warning I treat this story and intellectual property very seriously and all people involved will be required to sign a non-disclosure agreement before working on the project.

Must be ok to communicate both via text and call correspondence. I look forward to hearing back.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

G'day JJ

Are there plans to add more custom Pathfinder Prestige classes? I mean don't get us wrong base classes and the archetype system is awesome but there's a character building itch that only working towards those specialty super classes can scratch. I would definitely love to see more of them both general use ones and campaign setting specific ones (like in Paths of Prestige).

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Or Paizo could get over their apparent hate of prestige classes and half this beast and turn it into a 10 level prestige instead. Cut the faff and bring its full potential out. I'm a big supporter of "add new content" not just repackaging and reselling the stuff they've already released ie the Pain Taster <sigh>

Also playing anti-X classes are great fun. Nothing more amusing than playing some of the anti-spellcasters. A specialist who knows how to hunt down the big 4 works in all kinds of situations for both PCs, NPCs and cohorts. They currently don't exist in the game and would add alot more variety than anything currently coming out.

By anti-rogue I mean like fortified armor/skin that eventually leads into sneak immunity. Tied together with the ability to rig "Disable traps" when someone attempts to disable one trap it activates another. Plus bonuses to perception to identify someone in stealth.

Anti-fighter would be someone with improved DR and deflect/dodge AC together with bleed or physical weakening stats.

Anti-cleric would be something that reverses, steals or diminishes channel and heal/inflict abilities. Even abilities that cut off ones ties to the divine power source.

Anti-spellcaster (While some exist) have something that counterspells, as well as binds their casting abilities via silence, still etc.

What would these classes do when they aren't fighting against their chosen class? Easy they go into the Startling Frightful Stunning appearances tree and focus on ambush tactics and perhaps even dealing Non Lethal damage as a bonus so as to be effective as a class designed for capturing others.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

They should convert this into a class specializing in hunting and tracking specific individuals but via ambush and observation rather than just tracking.

Call it the Bounty Hunter, Keep the Startling/Frightening/Stunning/Vengeance strikes

insert - Non lethal combat variation rules and convert the specialties into counter class variations. Turn this into a hunter that becomes and Avenger = Anti-fighter / Stalker = Anti-rogue / Warlock = Anti-Wizard / Zealot = Anti-cleric. Renaming them to suit of course

This would have waaaay more substance and be much more valuable to the Pathfinder class stable.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Just chiming in with my thoughts. I agree, the class is incredibly lack luster even with the variations. At best it is a 5th or even 6th wheel class. Hope you enjoy the read, just to clarify this isn't a debate just my feelings on it thusfar.

a) Firstly looking at the base abilities HD and Skills are similar to that of a Bard (another 5th class). With a wide assortment of skills coming from both the base and the specialty it easily fits into the "skilled" class of character

b)Dual Identity : This ability basically takes the disguise to the next level effectively allowing you to ignore repercussions of any act you take as your alter ego. The ability is like reading mechanical fluff, because the rules of the game without this feature are fundamentally the same. If you manage to hide your identity by adopting a disguise (which can be bought) then while not in a disguise people don't get knowledge checks to find out who you are unless its revealed. Just to be clear please stop and ask yourself how many NPCs have had to make knowledge checks against the party on your table?

"Changing identity is not like changing outfits and clothing (although that is a part of it); it often involves make-up, hair and other personal effects" sooooo a disguise check with a disguise kit or a hat of disguise. Which doesn't help you at all with this ability.

The actual affect of this ability boils down to, enjoy 2 alignments one for you and one for your alter ego. Which means effectively I could stick babies on spikes but when johnny law comes knocking on my door with detect evil I have pipe in hand and come up as MR Neutral. Mechanical reasons you are able to manipulate the morality of the world and for "some" reason a quick disguise kit and poof alignment away.

This ability also blocks scrying when people are attempting to find the alter ego. You know because when I find an item belonging to you and use a spell that says "find the person who last owned this" Because you have a disguise on my spell shouldn't work.

c)Social Graces : +20 disguise check, sure why not, no point giving it +1/2 level or anything sensible that behaves like any of the other classes nah, level 1 just have +20 no sweat. In fact at second level 2/4/6 pick up a mental stat to get +4 in all checks with because I know it must be brutal with the 6+int skill points you've got on you.

d)Vigilante specialization Talents *will address this down the bottom because it's a chunky piece*

e)Renown - I notice that this ability is pretty much trying (not very well) to strong arm the DM into acknowledging the PC as a vigilante, bonus intimidate when people know who you are and leveling up determines the size of the city you gain this bonus with. This is incredibly....boring. Also "Subject to GM approval" yeah cause that's what you want on a class feature. This should be the red flag that proves this class is just a big pile of mechanical fluff because people don't know how to just ROLEPLAY a vigilante character and use a disguise kit.

f) Startling appearance - When a vigilante makes an attack while stealthed or invisible the creature is flatfooted for the full turn instead of just for the opening hit and takes -4 atk on strikes on the vigilante for 1 round. Shame there is nothing besides the Stalker variant that would make much benefit from it.

g)Loyal Aid - Gain allies, +1/2 lvl to diplomacy for gather information and get them to cover for him (his normal persona) for 1 day usable 1/week and once per day can ask them to do a task for him "Subject to GM discretion" As above in point e) another ability which relies on the DM approving your actions and again something that can be done by ANY character with some freaking ROLEPLAY. The only thing right about this ability is the format of the diplomacy bonus.

h)Many guises - +20 disguise to appear as a mundane member of his race. Spells and abilities all fail while looking for the vigilante in this state. His mundane appearance can never be anything apart from an ordinary member of society "Subject to GM discretion". Just when I had restored some faith in the formatting rules, so should you have chosen a mundane identity for your Social Graces class you may now enjoy an undetectable identity with a +40 disguise check. See points e) for points around GM discretion abilities.

i)Frightening appearance - When attacking a unaware foe, free intimidate check to demoralize target and any enemy within 10ft before attack is resolved. IF the check is successful the targets are frightened as well as shaken (Should in instead of given shaken effect upgrades not stacks) unless target makes Will DC 10+1/2 vigilante level + Cha).Once hit creature is immune for 24 hours. Honestly this is actually a good power, straight forward and works well apart from the wording I mentioned.

j)Quick Change - Can change identity as a Full round action. But requires a disguise check, or 1 minute will negate the need for the check. Again nothing inherently wrong with this ability, short sweet, simple and comes in at a reasonable level.

k)Stunning Appearance - Attack an unaware foe and make a successful attack foe must make a will save DC 10 + 1/2 lvl + Cha or be stunned for 1 round. So striking a creature at level 17 entails them making 2 will saves and having creatures with 10ft be shaken/frightened and this poor sod being stunned. Well level 17 why not stun the hell out of people, with the 24 hour immunity this is a well balanced ability if anything I would have tacked on knocked prone to this as well just for some oomph because if they are frightened and stunned then they're not running for one round.

l)Everyman - +20 on disguise check and +10 bluff check to emulate a specific individual who MUST be a farmer, laborer or Peasant. With a 50% chance of divination spells finding the vigilante instead of the subject. At this point I think they've forgotten that a disguise check is actually an opposed Perception check and unless every person in your game is Sherlock Holmes most of these +20s are so damn excessive especially given they work on your pretending to be a civilian or peasant.

m)Vengeance Strike - Standard action to study target that is unaware of the vigilante up to a max of 5 consecutive standard actions. When the subject is attacked within 1 round of study, for each round spent studying the target gain +4 atk and one of the following +3d6 precision damage, treat his die roll as it were 2 higher to determine if the attack hits or confirms a crit (maximum die number 20). This is another awesome ability and one that I think makes a good capstone. In summary the Startling/Frightful/Stunning/appearances are the best part of this class and should be the main focus on something less pathetic.

At this point before I get into the specialties I want to just point out how regular disguise works.

Disguise check vs Perception check opposed roles. Why is this skill based class that has disguise as a class skill investing so much into disguising as a commoner? It's not hard to trick people, most people don't have +1/2 level in perception. By putting ranks in the skills and giving the class 1 ability that grants + 1/2 level to disguise you achieve what all those shocking +20 bonuses would do. It is excessive and underestimates the quality of good roleplay. I've played a vigilante before, I was a kitsune called the Grey Guardian and I only adventured as my fox. It was an enjoyable game and one that functioned easily without the need for this class.

My recommendation turn this class into something original and not just a batman ripoff. Call it the Hunter or something and center it around that, not fluff that can be roleplayed around and requires the GM to work to make the basic class abilities function effectively.


All of these function effectively as though you had rogue talents that could make you function as a core class. Avenger = fighter, Stalker = Rogue, Warlock = Wizard, Zealot = Cleric. Now I'm not going to badmouth their abilities, to be honest they are interesting and well balanced particularly in later levels.

I will say this though, we have all these classes Paizo. We love you guys and want to see some real hard hitting content, why waste time making something that does what each of these does already? Since I've played Pathfinder I've found that the BEST content is their conversion content, stuff like the Kinetisist from the upcoming Occult Adventures was inspired by the Warlock from 3.5 and they made an incredible class because of it. Thats the kind of stuff you want to be releasing, not trying to repackage whats already in your game, especially not core classes.

I know there is lots of debate circling around this and this is a long ass post so if nothing else, read the last too paragraphs. A third of this class is dedicated to fluff that can be done currently with any character with little to no effort. Another third is replicated core classes that have polished and perfected their roles over years of gameplay and the supplementary abilities gained by this class will ALWAYS fall short. The final third of this class is about ambushing unaware targets and devastating them in an opening volley which is by far the coolest element of this class and should be the central foundation of what makes it function and ditch the idea of social identity concealment and all those rubbish abilities.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Given that Enervation is the component spell for Vicious and it is considered a moderate "necromancy" affect it could be argued that Negative Energy is the type.

However the possibly unintended side affect is being wielded by someone with Negative energy affinity.

I would treat it as thus and raise it for approval from a GM before use in tandum with an undeadish character.

Otherwise untyped damage is the only way to play it "as intended" I would not be counting it as force damage because as intended doesn't seem like its suppose to be extra effective against incorporeal enemies.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Hey JJ

Some of the art in Familiar Folio is that of a Aboriginal with a koala I was wondering what part of Golarion takes inspiration from Australian culture?

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I am with Scrimmy on this.

As for the rest, the reason it isn't an argument isn't because there is no argument to be made, but that I am no longer indulging you guys on the matter. I have accepted your believe on the matter and don't rightly care if you take the opinions of others or not.

You are correct darling, and I don't find you rude because you give constructive input and have not once been agressive in any manner of your posting. I have made a few "spur of the moment" errors as I have been posting far more aggressively than I like so I have been missing some crucial details, with that in mind I am no longer contributing to that area of the discussion.


I noticed Solomen Grundy was looking at Gestalt vs Advanced Classes vs Base classes that fall into the role. For example rather than Bloodrager vs Barbarian sorcerer, he also looked at the Magus.

What would the other comparisons be if we looked at the roles they now fill as hybrid classes?

Arcanist - All 9th level spellcasters
Bloodrager - Magus/Paladin/Inquisitor
Brawler - Monk/Fighter/Barbarian
Hunter - Ranger/Druid
Investigator - Rogue/Bard
Shaman - Druid/Oracle
Skald - Bard
Slayer - Inquisitor
Swashbuckler - Rogue/Fighter/
Warpriest - Paladin

What do you think?

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

@both Scavion & Ancient Spark,

As I have repeatedly mentioned to you both this discussion is about the advanced classes being in a category above base classes. Not a contest of who would win when pitted up against each-other. I have admitted multiple times to a cursory look at each of the classes with the playtest to follow, so I accept my mistake with the swashbuckler with no excuses. As mentioned above I am currently playtesting the Bloodrager along side a Barbarian a Sorcerer and a Gestalt Barbarian Sorcerer.

The blood-rager is not an argument, I have said this repeatedly a barbarian requires a very specific build gained from rage powers and feats in order to get to a high enough damage output to compete with a mid-level spellcaster. The Bloodrager without the need to select feats or bloodlines can go toe to toe for damage/utility with this build of barbarian, if the barbarian shouldn't take the build then the Bloodrager wins out by more for each power you don't choose from your build.

Again as mentioned before RAW, there is no rule saying you can't choose sorcerer bloodlines. Have a good read of the Bloodline class feature "A bloodrager must pick one bloodline upon taking his first level of bloodrager. Once made, this choice cannot be changed." It does not say Bloodrager Bloodline only. If you doubt it further read the flavor text of the bloodlines which is copy and pasted from the sorcerer's, I am in the boat of "when you are copy and pasting text it's the same thing"

I also don't know where you are getting level 12 for casting fireball either. It clearly says the first 3rd level SPD comes at lvl 10. And from the Magus spell-list fireball is available.

And if you want to talk party composition requiring another party member's character taking a specific spell just for you? Then all the more I believe that there is a very Limited type of gameplay occurring on your end. If any class doesn't have access to their entire array of abilities at character creation then what is the point? Just make the base class give you the one build and be done with it, there is no point NOT choosing Superstitious or Beast Totem or Come and Get Me. Balance is about that, the ability to pick any combination of powers/feats and be able to wield it with the same efficiency as any other base class with the same role.

In terms of how my playtest is going?
I have stating three half orcs identically with a 20 point buy, given the two barbarians exactly the same gear and equipment. Levels 1-5 were identical, despite the rage powers having two claws 1d6 + str (Abyssal BL) was doing more damage a round than 2d6 + 1/2 str. From 5-10 Demonic Bulk automatically gave enlarge person when raging putting the Barbarian further behind, not just in STR but CMB/CMD as well. 10-15 Abyssal Bloodrage increaded the strength of the rage further and the higher level spells have left the Barbarians damage against multiple targets in the dust, against single targets the Barbarian "CAN" on occassion do as much damage as the BR, but being Large, the BR has a greater reach and is now wielding a 3d6+1/2 str Greatsword, and is making the same number of attacks as the Barbarian.

I intend to share my results in detail on the completion of my 1-20 playtest on another thread and I invite you all to discuss the Bloodrager in detail.

@Ancient spark

There is a reason why there aren't full BaB casters, even the Magus is 3/4 which is suppose to be the warrior gish.

Combining Spontaneous and Prepared spellcasting is "new" adding Chocolate topping to Milk and making chocolate milk is not making something new its combining two existing things. Its not "new" Witches Hexes are new, Alchemist Bombs are new, the Gunslinger deeds are new, this alternate method of spellcasting is not new.

For the Swashbuckler I did mention "slight variations to existing content" As you stated for the most they are gunslinger deeds repackaged. If you want a swashbuckler like this take levels of Duelist Prestige class or the Aldori sword-lord.

Your final comment I agree on, I know they are working hard on it and that they are making progress. I don't think negatively on Paizo or it's writers, or even this content its a beta test, I have also done alpha testing before for many games in the past as well. The goal of the Alpha-testers is to push the class to the limits and see where they stand and what breaks. Hense why I am taking my time before posting threads on the actual classes.

@Scavion, I have repeatedly told you one build against another build a playtest does not make and I told you in my previous post I am not further engaging in a shin kicking contest of "who can build better" I figured maths would be a simple explanation for you but apparently it is not.

Lastly, if any Gestalt players have any comments on game-play or even people who have compared the full base and core classes (not multiclassed and not if you are a power-builder/min-maxer/munchkin) against these new classes then I would greatly like to hear your opinion on their play.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber


No quite allright, I understand wall posts are not easy to digest. You are right there is time to go through and 90% of what I said is comparative data on the RAW rules between base classes and the new ones.

I am currently midway through several playtests, the first with a bloodrager and the second with an investigator. The Bloodrager is still maintaining a far greater power over both 1-15th level Barbarian and a 1-15th level Sorcerer. Still continuing the playtest before I post in detail on my findings.

The investigator is interesting as a skills/combat class but only gone 1-5 against the rogue and alchemist.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber


Very well you seem to be stuck on this 1 build of barbarian which includes predetermined feats being able to compete with a bloodrager. Once again you are still missing the specific customization you require to pull it off.

A damage of 10-60 (5-30 if saved) from fireball to all creatures in a 20ft radius to compared to 15-30 per strike on a single opponent seems to continually elude you as to which would do higher damage. If 2 creatures exist in the radius that damage dealt in that round becomes 20-120(10-60 if saved) again with a third person becomes 30-180 (15-90 if saved) etc etc. In terms of SR they have a full CL get it into your skull they have the same ability to dispel/counter/overcome SR as any full fledged spellcaster. At level 10 that's twice a day not including a potential bonus spell from stat block. Fireball is also just the tip of the iceberg, Shining Cord, Lightning Bolt, Blink are all spells that give a Rager an edge.

Again dispel magic is not that difficult either, with Haste active a Bloodrager can potential dispel a force wall and still attack in the same round. (why you chose to compete over who can destroy a force wall is beyond my reasoning)

Again you are specializing the barbarian further, so with this 1 specific build toting this 1 specific archetype, when the moon is at the peak during the winter solstices coldest night and the stars alight just so perhaps the Barbarian is not too far from the Blood rager? this seems to be a theme I sense from you.

If you want to compare rage powers vs bloodline powers you get superstition Blood ragers can even potentially use Dispel Magic as a counterspell to negate spell and spell-like all together. The difference then is I don't even have to make a save, and don't forget your saves only work while raging. Bloodragers have spells all the time.

Forget rage cycling when I can get Monstrous Physique on a Hasted creature that has rage and Bull strength tied to it. Yes they all stack
+4 Size from Monstrous Physique +4 Rage +4 Enhancement Bonus, so after +12 to my strength you really think your barbarian's +10 to sunder is really going to make "that" much difference?

You are correct about MAD, but with the ability to buff one's abilities the MAD is severely lessened. A Barbarian needs STR, DEX and CON. A Blood rager really just needs DEX, CON, CHA as I have stated above even with the base 10 attribute in STR a Bloodrager has enough buffs to boost itself up to at least 22 and thats without racial or level advancement points. Hell an Orcish Bloodline gets another +2 Str and 1/2 level morale bonus to Attack, damage and will saves. Even if this beast just hits something it could devastate it without min maxing.

Sorry dude, try as you might there isn't any way you are convincing me that your one barbarian build would disprove how much further ahead the bloodrager is on all levels without so much as a need to pick a Bloodline. Maybe if you took the time to look at the data rather than jumping up and down on your soap box you'd realize "Hmm maybe this is far too specific a way to stay in the game against a bloodrager. I mean this guy is only comparing my ENTIRE SETUP to a single spell." What about the other barbarians who don't wish to use that build what? tough luck? reroll your barbarian and use this 1 and only build?

Once again a reminder I am in this thread to talk about Gestalts, not pander to your fanatical believe that what exists is flawless. Get the message, this is a playtest and the numbers don't lie. However your ridiculously circumstantial evidence does. Count the ratio of Sorcerer abilities and the Barbarian Abilities this class uses, then figure out what percentage of them come from each (50% barbarian and 50% sorcerer? more or less?) Then actually LOOK at the numbers and figure out for yourself if they actually add up.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber


I couldn't think of another name for the classes to distinguish them :P When I mean "base classes" I speak of the Core and Base Classes and the new classes in the "advanced classes"

The feelings you have towards the hybrids are the same as me, that if their goal was to create "gestalt inspired" classes than the classes are great and work really well balanced with one another. As Gestalts they would be perfect for low number groups in order to allow for full party role coverage and versatile gameplay.

However from what I've read on the blogs and other forums discussions the intent was to create a series of unique base classes that combine aspects of multiple classes to create new and unique gameplay. This gives me the impression that the intent was to make a series of new classes akin to the core and base classes.

I think the "goof" as it were, comes from the idea that making a base class that combines 2 existing classes with the majority of the content coming from those classes is somehow "new and unique". As it stands is there really that much more "new" content?

No those things should not, because they are entirely circumstantial given they are not unique to any class, anyone can take them or equip themselves. It is a variable that distorts the strength and weaknesses of the comparison, for martial classes feats are taken as versatility and power in combat. Taking in mind both Barbarian and Bloodrager possess the same amount of feats (excluding the Bloodline feats which again is circumstantial) we extrapolate using the non-variable existing material to get a base comparison.

"More than half the CR10s have spells or spell-like abilities" not a blanket statement I'd readily agree with given the majority contain Supernatural abilities not Spell or spell-like. It is still entirely conditional not on the ratio of monsters available in Pathfinder but the ratio within the game you are in. Good luck using a Witch Hunter in the Mana Wastes for example.

How often do we encounter large group combat? Well that again is entirely conditional, for me I play a great deal of Pathfinder content including Ultimate Campaign, as well as custom games involving large military movements, swarms of demons, the orcish hordes. Hell I even put my group on the back of a giant beast where large parasites were massing to eat my group. How about you? but I digress however you want to slice it 10d6 in a 20ft radius even if 2 or 3 are in that area it still means it has a higher damage output than the 2 attacks a Barbarian gets.

Your build is also nonsensical, 5 rage powers at level 10. Superstitious, Witch Hunter, Beast Totems 1/2/3 and Strength Surge is one too many. If you want to have the shin kicking contest, don't try to build the biggest and the best and pit it up against the biggest and the best. Maybe look at the Barbarian and go hmm, if I don't build it this VERY SPECIFIC way I might actually be doing a lot less damage than the Bloodrager who doesn't need to do anything apart from select 1 spell. Seriously how much of your build needs to be in perfect sequence for you to even compete with a fireball spell.

Dispel requires 1d20 + your CL against a DC 11 + spell caster level. This is no easier or harder than any sorcerer or wizard to dispel, given it does not involve stats. And because they've failed to give the Bloodrager a -3 to it's caster level like the paladin they get full CL.

Also at 10th level both Barbarian and Blood Rager have Dr 2/- I assumed you were talking about 20 because that's when barbarians get DR 5/-

I haven't built this "Bloodrager" so how you are +4 higher than something I haven't made kinda brings into question what exactly you're looking at. Especially given Barbarians and Bloodrager have the exact BAB and save progression.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

@ Christos.

The rules as written still say to choose a bloodline, aside from a slight difference in a few of them and more favored feat selection, there is no reason why existing sorcerer bloodlines could not be applied to the Bloodrager. There is no restriction in the rules at all.

In regards to their similarity;

Abberant - Bloodragers get staggering strike instead of acidic ray, Abnormal reach is the same as long limb, unusual anatomy is the same as unusual anatomy, Aberrant resistance is the same as Abberant resistance, And abberant form grants and extra 1/- on your existing DR instead of giving you a DR/-

Abyssal - Claws are the same as claws, Demonic bulk and abyssal bloodrage grants a higher bonus than Strength of the Abyss. Demonic resistance is the same as demonic resistance and sure demonic aura and demonic might are different

Celestial - Only difference is Angelic attack

Destined - Pretty much cut and pasted with added buffs for the Bloodrager.

I have never said they are "identical" just that they are very similar, too similar to rule them out as a completely different and isolated feature. Not that the changes have been balanced out with the existing bloodlines for example;

Arcane Bloodline (which comparing the two the Bloodrager not surprisingly walks away with a great deal more firepower getting a stacking Disruption ability at level 1) Gaining free buffs when entering a rage including Blur, resist energy, eventually haste and displacement even Transformation/Beast-shape and Form of the dragon which are level 6 spells 2 levels higher than the Bloodragers can even cast.

But the majority of them are not that far from the sorcerer bloodlines, so aside from no restriction to Bloodrager Bloodlines, and a clear distinct similarity to the Sorcerer bloodlines I don't feel like my point is dis proven at all.

I believe you might want to go back and put all the bloodlines side by side, don't just look at their names but read how the powers work.

Bloodrager : Abnormal Reach (Su): At 4th level, your reach increases
by 5 feet

Sorcerer : Long Limbs (Ex): At 3rd level, your reach increases by 5 feet whenever you are making a melee touch attack. This ability does not otherwise increase your threatened area. At 11th level, this bonus to your reach increases to 10 feet. At 17th level, this bonus to your reach increases to 15 feet.

I have justified why, but I still can't hear anything as to why not? Why can't someone choose a sorcerer bloodline? Where in the rules does it say that they are not an option?

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber


The idea behind the comparison is the control, so feats/items/potions shouldn't really be included in the calculation. Witch hunter is also conditional on opponent. But if you want to talk power attack, Bloodragers also have a full BaB progression so they can use it as well, and all the same items.

You are correct about the saving throw but a fireball covers an area that can occupy anywhere from 1 to 44 targets within that area, and even dealing 1/2 damage you are distributing that damage across an area, making the potential total damage to the encounter far greater than that of a barbarian. To a single target, when the barbarian is kitted out to min max damage, perhaps not when they save, but not by far.

Also doesn't really bring into question Haste or the scores of other heavy combat spells readily available.

Also don't forget d12 vs d10 for hit die is not that big of a sacrifice. the average hp per level is 6 and 5, and which is 20 hitpoints at level 20. How many times have you been hit at 20 and gone, damn I wish I had a d12 instead of a d10. Fighters, Paladins and Rangers are not weak because they use d10s.

Why sunder a wall of force when you can just as easily dispel it?

DR 5/- is impressive yes and only available to 1 archetype, not that different to DR10/adamantine from Stoneskin how many creatures end up packing adamantine weapons in your games?

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber


hmm true enough, I do stand corrected on the example I gave previously. With that in mind the arcane armor thing seems less unbalanced but I agree with Ancient Spark in that Magus' should have gotten the same.

Assuming level 10, pounce gives you the ability to do a full attack after a charge which is 2 attacks at (+10/+5) with whatever weapon you are holding, assuming with a rage active is quite nice for damage. Lets assume a top barbarian with a Greatsword is (2d6 + 13 strength dmg "18+2race+2level+4rage)which deals potentially 60 damage to a single target in a round. However a 10d6 fireball will do that in an area, Haste grants 3 attacks on every subsequent turn in a full round with the same damage output, both options that put the 2 attacks you get from pouncing at not really "that" far ahead of even the most basic of Bloodragers, especially given pounce is only attained through one specific rage power tree. Where as every Bloodrager can get Fireball and Haste.

As for your final statement it is sad but true, most people do want everything from their character off the get go. I find the "waiting" section to be character building both as a player and as a DM watching players grow. As a story evolves so do the characters, an example of one person who wanted to make Thor as a character wished to fly have Mjolnir and whoop frost giants. Not being able to do that didn't make him dislike the character or the concept, rather it made him even more eager for the content and more adventurous to gain those levels.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

A barbarian is a combat class so is the Bloodrager, the difference between them does not decrease the Bloodrager's abilities in combat by enough to counterweight the combat gain.

Rage power would (I say this conditionally) balance the Bloodline powers, with the exception of a second 20th level ability and with the exception of a few power builds from either side.

Both Barbarian and Bloodragers gain the same rage bonus the entire level, but a Bloodrager gains access to magus spells which is a really combat heavy spell list. These spells are a heavy boost to the combat effectiveness of the Bloodrager and while being able to range as a full barbarian puts the Bloodrager ahead IMO.

I agree in part, there are people who want to play a Barbarian because that is exactly what they want to play, but if another person on the table plays a Bloodrager, I feel throughout the entire game the Barbarian will feel underpowered. Despite barbarians being as kickass as they are.

@Ancient Spark,
1. A very interesting perspective for the magus and it's armor training one that I greatly respect. The ability to negate armor spell failure is one that currently does and should take time to acquire, the reason being is what happens when a Wizard/Sorcerer takes 1 level of Bloodrager and 19 levels of Wizard. Suddenly you are staring down a 9th level arcane spellcaster with Mithril fullplate with the offensive output of a spellcaster and defense akin to your front line fighters. As I said I love your thinking though a different perspective on the playtest is really refreshing for me and definitely gets me to re-evaluate my perspective, sincerely, thank you for that.

2.Firstly, talk of the single sword combat is a little mute because a swashbuckler also uses a gun, and that is no single sword combat it is the same as two weapon fighting or changing to a two handed weapon mid combat depending on the gun. However to indulge, what you say about me and single sword martial combatants is for the most part I find myself either dual wielding, carrying a shield, or two handed weapon (Magus being an exception). I did play around with the idea of an Aldori swordlord once, but no game has arisen for me to use it. The challenge of building a single class that specializes in a single speciality is one that is difficult, but that is what multiclassing is for, even prestige classes allow players to carve their own unique style from the base classes. The Samurai/Cavalier, Fighter, Paladin/Inquisitor, Ninja, , the Duelist, the Aldori swordlord and scores more classes lend themselves to doing not just physical damage but the graceful and tricky combat. A gunslinger with Bravery, Weapon finesse and Bonus feats is bland, a gunslinger is a "fighter class" it would probably of worked better as an archetype as opposed to a new class.

I entirely agree with the Brawler and it's CMB/CMD based combat, I also understand that without the monks unarmed strike progression any unarmed combat is pointless. But like with the swashbuckler this could have easily been an archetype.

3. Another very insightful point, I would like to clarify something firstly. I don't think frankensteining is bad, fire bad, but frankensteining has it's place. You are also very right, how can I lay claim to that without going into the classes to show the "new" content against the recycled content.

-Arcanist- Blood-focus (new) - Spells/ Feats/ School Supremacy (old)

-Bloodrager- (all old) with a very minor alteration to Rage to allow spellcasting and even more minor changes to existing sorcerer bloodlines to allow better synergy with a barbarian.

-Brawler - Martial Maneuvers (new) - all other powers (old or available as feats)

-Hunter - Animal focus (new) Hunter tactics (new) all other powers (old) *Note hunter adds enough new gameplay with teamwork from the animal companion.

-Investigator - Inspiration (new) All other powers (old)
*note only issue is with 9d6 sneak attack, which should be reduced to 6 or 7d6.

- Shaman - All (new) with exception of Hexes

- Skald - Raging song (new) Spell Kenning (new), all other powers old *Note Skald is the right balance of frail skill jockey and combatant.

- Slayer - All old with slight variation, but the variation is interesting enough to stand on it's own two feet.

- Swashbuckler - All old or attained by feats

- Warpriest - All old

A great portion of each of these class abilities already exist as either class features from the base classes or as feats that are given for no cost to these new classes. The Slayer, The Hunter, The Shaman and to a far lesser extent the Skald are the only classes that play differently. The rest are almost a carbon copy of one of their parts with a bunch of extras stapled onto it. I mean look at 3.5 you would struggle to find 2 base classes that are exactly alike, that for me is a sign of a true base class.

You used the Magus as an example and it is a perfect example, the Magus class has little to no resembalnce to either a Wizard or a Fighter, same thing with the Gunslinger/Oracle/Alchemist/Witch/Cavalier and Summoner. These are what base classes are and should be.

@ Arae, I do agree with you secretly Arae, but I would like to see what an animal companion specialist would look like and how far you can take it. As Arae says it carries sooo much in common with the druid and ranger that it might as well be an archetype as well.

@Scavion, I never actually said I posted on these threads only that I followed them, and the blanket statement was a sarcastic response to the one you presented me. You assume a great deal about me as a person and have made statements to that affect, I don't know you or the context you speak from nor do you know mine, it was simply to prove a point.

I do apologize if you are frustrated, it is not my intention but allow me to ask, are you playtesting the classes hybrids against the advanced classes, the base classes against the advance classes or the advanced class against itself?

My opinions are based on base classes against the advanced, because the advanced are suppose to be "base classes" not the equivalent of a multi-classed character. You are aware you can multiclass the advanced classes as well right? Bloodrager + Wizard as mentioned above.

@ Joyd, You are correct the playtest is to feel how the classes run and it does require careful comparison and analysis. Your example is however set in the wrong direction, a Mystic Theurge is a prestige class not a base class nor is it designed to replicate or replace levels of both simultaneously, but the new base classes are. If I understand your example that would be a level 15 Wizard + 15 Cleric would not make a level 30 character, which is correct, but it would be far more powerful than a level 20 Wizard or cleric despite being at first glance "weaker".

@ Joyd and DragoDorn - To clarify I am no longer going as far as to say they "are" gestalt characters, I admitted the exaggeration in my earlier post. However I believe firmly these classes (with aforementioned exceptions) do exist in a space between what I feel Base Classes are sitting in, and the Gestalts. If you are making base classes that's what they need to be gauged against not against the hybrids that made them.

Also Triple Gestalt, man that toon must have been chunky ^_^. Thus far I have DMed 6 or 7 different gestalts in 3.5 and played a handful. My favorite Gestalt was a Dragon-shaman/Barbarian with Dragon Disciple/Frenzied Berserker prestige classed. Wrath of Tiamat was awesome.


Finally, I understand low to mid gameplay is what a lot of people do see, and I respect that what I say is pro-multiclass. The reason is there is a great deal of joy to be had customizing your own class something I think some people take for granted. These classes are definitely stronger than if you multi-classed no doubt, but is that a good thing?

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

@ Scavion

I apologize if this seems too direct.

1. PFS supports gameplay up to level 12, they are not a base-line for exploring what is available from the content to it's entirety as the highest level of PFS gameplay only results in just over 50% of any available content from any class.

2. If the Adventure Paths barely take you into 16th level then you imply that Paizo has only made just over 75% of the content available to fans with their published adventures. This I know is completely untrue and will not accept your slander towards the great adventure path writers. At the end of each of the final adventure path books you will find a section called "Continuing the Campaign" Which has been in all the adventure paths, with the exception of the first print of Rise of the Runelords (anniversary edition however does have a continue the campaign section). I accept not everyone is able to write or run modules that aren't written for them, and I don't hold that against them. But I also don't accept the opinion that there is "nothing to do" or that the adventure ends because the book says so. These beliefs spawn from the unimaginative and to lay blame at others feet is insulting to say the least.

3. I would dispute defense being the most important thing at highest level, again in a very "base" sense you are correct however at higher levels as some may tell you. Saves are out of line, your spells and powers fail 75% of the time while you maintain only a marginal chance of resisting the higher level abilities. I guarantee you when staring down a CR 20 you aren't just worried about it throwing a punch.

4. As for the Oracle, it functions as reincarnate works as follow, aside from not participating for 3 in game days (10 including mature date), you require your soul to be free, your body to remain in some shape or form, for the body to not have already been raised as an undead, you must then eliminate their racial adjustments and roll on a table for a brand new race, take 2 permanent negative levels. Its not as simple as you are immortal, you are changed and are weakened with the possibility that your body could be defiled and ruin your return entirely. So it has it's balance because of the nice bonus to your saves and fear immunity, if it wasn't balanced then they would simply be true resurrection.

Weapon Mastery allows all crits to automatically confirm, and increase their crit modifier by 1. To boot they can't be disarmed. This is on par with the Oracle for the simple fact that I guarantee the Fighter will use his capstone far more than the oracle with use theirs. While it doesn't provide "so called" immortality, it serves the purpose as a high powered class ability to fit the class it was designed for. Besides a 1d12 x4 weapon that auto confirms crits is not something to be taken lightly. Don't forget at level 20, a cleric could also just bring back the fighter with True Resurrection rendering your immortality point mute.

5. The Investigator we can actually agree on, the "only" issue I had was that they had 9d6 sneak attack. This for me steps on the rogue and the alchemists toes in terms of skills and combat, 3.5 had a class called the Factotum which was powerful enough both in skills and combat without needing to be at the top of either.

6. The druid vs cleric spell list is a catch 22, in the right game the druid spells are formidable and gain many bonuses and uses. Enough to outstrip a cleric, but without those conditions the reverse is true. The thing about the shaman isn't a balance thing more so than a flavor thing. The curse was a powerful element to the RP in the oracle and removing it takes away that bit of flavor.

7.The slayer was interesting because it involved the stalking element of gameplay, the ability to identify and specially hunt a quarry. It also made a versatile version of the ranger and it's ability. Just so we're clear the ranger matching a slayer for strength, is a good thing which is why (saying this for the third time now) the slayer is a good class.

8.The Skald has been introduced to the plight of the bard, it is what buff sticks go through, try playing a bard and then come talk about survival issues.

9. The hunter's merit is a different type of gameplay all together. It opens up gameplay with teamwork feats and an animal companion. A truly self sustaining survivalist, with the animalistic buffs.

Conclusion : PFS has 0 influence on my impression of the content because chances are its not even going to be available for Society play anyway. Also that it would be best to compare the classes by the subtypes of the class, rather than "who can kick who's ass". Assume all you wish, I am following the threads on the individual classes and at this point I am providing constructive criticism not just on the individual classes but the theme of the new arriving book and it's place within the pre-existing content.

If we talk about how you feel about my impressions and what I dubbed it then my impression is that you are the kick the door down gamer who doesn't think outside what you personally like, with no regard for others or for expanding your knowledge or opinions. You playtest by having a shin kicking contest with either a monster or a player and claim yourself to be learned on the matter, when you have clearly failed to even compare the classes even remotely to the existing base classes. Instead I hear excuses like "There's no point PFS and adventure paths don't go that high" which is just plain ignorant. My opinions are expressed from comparisons between the classes not just who's tougher.

If you read my posts properly you would see I have stated that;

"they are a halfway point between gestalt and base classes"

If you think I am incorrect, then why gloss over my questions like

1. Why does the bloodrager get Arcane Armor Training and Arcane Armor Mastery at level 1, when the feat and the Magus class ability only allow them to use it at level 3 and 7?

2. What about the Swashbuckler and the Brawler being a waste of class combination by offering little to nothing new or unique to the role?

3. What is wrong with asking for "new" classes rather than a frankenstien class devised for the express purpose of discouraging multiclassing?

Bloodrager Bloodlines are near identical to the core Sorcerer bloodlines, without the text stipulating the difference they potentially can select and use sorcerer bloodlines despite losing out on a few spells.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

@ Scavion, please see my previous post about the opinion that level 20 shouldn't matter. I could see some of the other discussions or alternatively I could express and justify my opinion in the hopes that something might be picked up. I accept your personal opinion on high level game-play, but you should accept it isn't the only opinion and level 20 gameplay may be short for some but not all.

@christos, perhaps read my post more carefully, I did no such thing as saying these classes are OP. I have expressed areas of concern and given props where they are due. The statement "Class is unsuitable in terms of regular play" comes from a direct quote on utilizing the gestalt system which was the topic of conversation. You are perhaps right about the text being written for the bloodrager, but before you get on your soap-box to try and defend the unfinish material re-read why I previously posted.

"Note : This post was a broad statement on how the classes are partway between Gestalt and the current base/core classes. I wasn't really counting on writing up a full analysis on any classes, but am happy to talk about it, as we continue I would like the participants of the conversation to bare in mind that the topic isn't these classes "can't" work. But that they have been unrealistically swung towards the upper end of the power scale as an attempt to remove the need to multi-class further from the game."

If you want to defend the system all the power to you, but don't expect me to indulge any attempts at provocation at the opinions I express unless you actually want to discuss the topic at hand which are that these classes are located, power wise, between the core and gestalt. If you don't know or have simply never come across the term I am sure you can google enough information about it.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

So what wait till it's official then point it out? The RAW and RAI is an argument as old as the game itself. It won't stop people trying, alpha and beta test is to hone in on those so they can be buffed out before it hits shelves.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I agree Darling,

To those who say "don't worry about it cause people don't play games that high level for long"

I say that's a terrible excuse not to balance it. That's like saying bugger the game its good enough and sod to anyone that wants to play it at 20. I've had games with content that lasted 6-8 months after they hit 20, for the most part yes we all wished there were epic level rules rather than the mythic stuff, but that's a separate gripe.

@Christos, The R.A.W doesn't exclusively say that sorcerer bloodlines can or can't be selected. The RAW states "A bloodrager must pick one bloodline upon taking his first level of bloodrager. Once made, this choice cannot be changed." Which implies heavily sorcerer bloodlines are not off the table by not excluding the sorcerer ones or stating that only the ones introduced by the bloodrager may be used. (See above for context)

I will also point out the Bloodrager also gains Arcane Armor Training and Arcane armor Mastery at level 1. The feats and even the Magus don't grant the removal of spell failure from medium armor till at least level 7.

Note : This post was a broad statement on how the classes are partway between Gestalt and the current base/core classes. I wasn't really counting on writing up a full analysis on any classes, but am happy to talk about it, as we continue I would like the participants of the conversation to bare in mind that the topic isn't these classes "can't" work. But that they have been unrealistically swung towards the upper end of the power scale as an attempt to remove the need to multi-class further from the game.

Combining two classes is a balancing act, and at the moment you cant give 75% from two classes and make it equal 100% no matter how you slice it you still get 150%. (and I am going to keep stating Hunter, Slayer and Warpriests are exceptions. Those are well made)

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

@ Kolokotroni

For the barbarians out-performing the bloodragers, I didn't state that a barbarian "can't" out perform a bloodrager. However finding a class with 2 capstone abilities regardless of it's source seems over powered. As mentioned previously it has the potential for serious abuse as stated with the orc bloodrager. The aforementioned Bloodrager was also made with the lowest strength stat without racial penalty, with some creative building and colorful equipment a character that could tear a building in half with their bare hands doesn't seem unreasonable.

I should also give my thoughts some context, in terms of players I do tend to look at the ones on my table who are the power gamers, munchkins and min-maxers. Which does give me a skewed perspective at times, however looking at the abusive players I find the holes that need patching. I view this system in terms of what it offers to the table, and at present it's just a way around multi-classing. With the exception of the Slayer, Hunter, and Warpriest, which are quite good and add a new element to gameplay.

I respect that there are other gamers who like myself believe in the value of good story and roleplay over the cookie cutter min-max characters. Taking the perspective that the oracle's curse added flavor to the oracles RP, then it should stand to reason that removing it takes that element away. It was something you suffered early game but grew into it's benefit, the Shaman lacking that just seemed unfair given the Oracle mysteries and the Shaman's Spirit powers are not that dissimilar.

I wholeheartedly agree about the arcanist with you, that most choose the sorcerer to avoid the nonsense of running with a spell book. However the powers being sacrificed are not really that much in comparison to the ability to spellcast in a combined manner as well as gaining the use of Blood-points.

Lastly I agree, the middle of the herd would be a nice place but it doesn't mean that outliers shouldn't be nerfed or culled. It's not my believe that all of the classes overshadow their predecessors, only that some have a much higher potential, and unlike characters like the inquisitor, witch, oracle etc... these aren't so much "new" classes with new content more so than repackaged reasons to not need to multi-class utilizing abilities already provided by existing feats and powers to mesh multiple classes at a fraction of the original cost.

A wizard with Eldritch Heratige is a pretty close fit to the arcanist, but why waste 3 or 4 feats when you could just take the arcanist and get them for free?

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Oops sorry I forgot rage powers on the previous list. The M.A.D is definitely something to consider, but it would be the case if you attempted to multiclass.

I see what you are saying with the rage powers, but even that does not equate to having the entire bloodline. I mean imagine a half orc, orcish bloodline blood-rager. MAD becomes almost mute when your strength could go from 8 Strength at level 1 to 26 without items or boosts at level 15.

8 at level 1 +6 from inherent bloodline bonus + 6 from power of the giants + 6 from greater bloodrage.



"Hello Darling"

I agree with you entirely, my opinion is one taken from the express P.O.V of synergy with existing gameplay. I am in the perspective of looking at the existing base classes and seeing how they've combined two. IMO they haven't balanced them with the other base classes, they have made them as powerful as each other. But with only a few exceptions they've made some of their bases redundant.

I ask why play an oracle or witch instead of the shaman? To which the answer is often, the new class is more powerful. An oracle without a curse but an ability that works as a mystery and full spellcasting.


Why play a Sorcerer or Wizard instead of the Arcanists? same deal, more versatility with more casts per day and the ability to bolster my spells. Sure I lose my bloodline capstone but I gain a different one

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'd agree they're not as powerful as a straight gestalt, but these classes are a halfway point between the base and gestalt. The problem is that for most of these classes they are a more powerful form of their two parts.

What about classes like the bloodrager? A straight barbarian has trapsense and 1d12hd instead of 1d10. While the bloodrager gets the entire sorcerer bloodline, a second 20th level capstone, and 4th level spells.

Where is the insentive to play a straight barbarian?

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It seems that these characters are all gestalt characters, as such are not suitable for play with core classes.

For those unaware a Gestalt was a variant rule created for use when a party was underpowered or there were few players. When levelling up one selects two classes and takes the best attributes of both and gains both of the classes powers. These classes are distinctly gestalt and the key thing to note about the Gestalt rules was that they are not designed for use with core play. I would not recommend anyone play this unless everyone is playing an advanced class.

Arcanist : Interesting concept of both prepared and spontaneous spellcasting, but makes current arcane casters redundant. As this class is simply the sorcerer with the versatility unique to wizards and the added ability to enhance their spells with points.

Bloodrager : A class that particularly frustrates me as it currently contains two capstone abilities, both the sorcerer bloodline up to 20th level and the Might rage of a 20th level barbarian...sorry guys I don't think Trapsense is a valid trade off for Spellcasting and six bonus feats.

Brawler : Not overpowered but very uninspired. There is a monk, the fighter who can specialize in unarmed combat, and the pugilist.

Hunter : I actually rather enjoy the concept of the hunter, what would be cool is if there was something different from the animal companions.

Investigator : A great idea but 9d6 sneak attack is way to much damage for someone with most of the kit from alchemist and rogues, with Inspiration points also thrown into the mix.

Shaman : A great mix of witch and oracle, but kind of unfair to not give them a curse also

Skald : a good mix of barbarian and bard.

Slayer : Fantastic and masterful, all the other classes should be like this.

Swashbuckler: Same as the brawler, there is a gunslinger and a fighter to specialize in firearm combat. Its very uninspired as a base class.

Warpriest : A really great combat cleric, an idea might be having something that protects as well as heals. Like those that are healed by a warpriest get sanctuary for 1 round, or something. I also can't believe I'm saying this but the cleric needs a capstone, Level 20 is the most boring level in the cleric.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Hey JJ,

I was just curious if there is ever going to be a reprint of Elves of Golarion or Cheliax Empire of Devils?

Trying to get my hands on a copy under $100

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I have the PDF but I am a collector as such and would like the hardcopy so my shelf looks nice and full as I collect all the Pathfinder books.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Found another for $106, either way short supply and massive cost that comes with it.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Hi I noticed there are a fair few of the older Pathfinder books like
Elves of Golarion which are no longer available in hardcopy.

Is there ever going to be a reprint of these books. I checked on ebay the next price is about $140 for a copy.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

@ Heaven's Agent & darkwarriorkarg

It is designed as the end game boss, ntellect devourers were in 3.5 as well. I think they were illithid pets ironically, do you know of any other Dark Tapestry heralds I might be able to bring in?

@ DM_aka_Dudemeister

I do like the idea of the psychic powers to the Whispering Tyrant, being a horror there can't be a happy ending. Something cool might be the party stopping Tar Baphon's revival but he retains his psychic power which he can use. kinda like The end....or is it?


Why Skum? aren't they in the same kinda category as Goblins/Sahuagin/Lizardfolk. My party is currently terrified of water in general (I never knew how deadly plain water is when a PC falls in and doesn't have swim ranks). I am bringing them to the edge of lake Caliphas so I do have the oppertunity for an aquatic bad guy.

I kinda treated the Illithids as a mix of template and creature, the creature is a Illithid larvae and they have the ability to add the Illithid template to a creature it inhabits. There are special varients called the Alhoon which reactivate dead brain tissue to animate the corpse, this is the type that can occupy undead. However its much harder on intelligent undead.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Hey all,

I currently run a Ustalavian horror game and one of the party's major villains are the Whispering Way, however they started also dealing with cults of the Dark Tapestry. As a bit of fun I made and threw in Illithids/Mindflayers as outworldly heralds of the dark ones.

Their plan is to help the Whispering way revive their lich master and then implant him with a flayer (alhoon) to then conquer enough of the world to allow their own masters entrance to the Material Plane.

However the Whispering Tyrant is too cunning, powerful and dangerous for that kind of plan.

Any thoughts on this exchange or even ideas for Tar Baphon to swing the machinations of the mad heratics in his favor?

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Here is my take on the first of the Racial archetypes. Because of the nature of the Runeforged, it didn't seem to be that the "Tribal" element of the Runeforged would be what defined them, but more their purpose. With a bit of inspiration from the Wrecking Crew and the Wreckers (Marvel comics and Transformers) Here is my first rough of the archetype. As always please leave critical construction and feedback. Enjoy.

Runeforged Juggernaut (Barbarian)

A Runeforged Juggernaut was used primarily for construction and deconstruction. After the Azlanti went missing these Juggernauts lost their purpose, as no new buildings were being made, but never lost their knack for both destruction and crafting.

STONECUNNING: Gain Stonecunning the racial ability

JUGGERNAUT ARMOUR: A Runeforged must take Adamantine Skin as a Racial Trait. The adamantine skin has Armour spikes, and the Runeforged gains proficiency for it's use as a weapon. These spikes deal 1d6 piercing damage on any successful grapple attempt and 1d4 damage when struck with any natural weapon. REPLACES : Fast Movement

EXPEDITIOUS CHARGE: At level 2 gain 10ft move speed on all charge attempts. At level 6 gain a +20ft move speed on all charge attempts REPLACES : Uncanny Dodge

SHATTER STRIKE: At level 3 a Barbarian adds 1/2 it's class level to Strength Checks made to destroy nonmagical objects. At level 6 it adds it's full class level. At level 9 gain Improved Sunder feat. Finally at level 12 Strength bonus applies to Sunder attempts. REPLACES : Trapsense.

JUGGERNAUT CHARGE: At level 5 gain Powerful Charge (2d6) REPLACES : Improved Uncanny Dodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Please tell me that you guys are going to make a cover like this for the Core books. That would be awesome.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
QXL99 wrote:
Glad you liked the suggested name ;)

Yeah I threw it out at one of my games and everyone seemed to really like it. What was even better was there was no confusion between the stories of the Warforged and the Runeforged.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber


Changing the racial traits to only have 1 slam attack.

Reason : The survivability of this race is important, mostly due to it's unable to be resurrected extra feature. Thus the two slam attacks we inserted, this works 90% of the time. However the 10% represents monks who with flurry of blows and two slam attacks amass too much strength early to mid game.

Adamantine Skin : Natural Armor bonus increased to +6 and max dex reduced to 0.

Reason : Early game this racial trait is a godsend in terms of cheap effective armor, however the bonuses previously were closer to medium armor than heavy. After careful consideration the max (unmodified) bonus would be +6 to AC from the armor and a possible +6 from bracers of armor, +4 from ring of deflection Leading to an AC of approx 26. Which in the grand scheme of things is neither the weakest nor most powerful way to attain armor.

Vulnerable to Rust Addition, any rust damage dealt to the Runeforged must be healed with a craft or mending based spell/ability. It can not be restored with cure or heal spells.

Reason : Runeforged have the benefit of healing from cure spells which puts a far less threat on the whole rust thing, especially if treated as any old kind of damage. This inspiration comes from VILE damage from 3.5 and I think adds a bit more terror to the prospect of things like rust monsters.


Fortified Skin : Prerequisite : Runeforged, BAB +5 : Gain bonus of Light Fortification enchantment on your skin.

Improved Fortified Skin : Prerequisite : Runeforged, BAB +10 : Gain bonus of Moderate Fortification enchantment on your skin.

Second Slam : Prerequisite : Runeforged BAB +6 : Gain an offhand slam attack.

PS : Still working on archetypes

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The way I'd rule it at my table is either

A) These creatures are immortal and do no age as normal races do, (Which still works with spells like Sands of Time which forcible age a creature and rusts constructs and objects.)

Unless you have an all Runeforged party you will not find yourself going forward in your campaign time-wise for enough time to have passed that would be considered advancing in age category given most races die after a few hundred years and the Runeforge have been around for thousands.

Runeforged can neither be born or killed, they can however be built (Azlanti or Runeforged crafting) and destroyed (Permanently destroyed with no means of resurrection or repairing) which I think is harsh enough without looking at going with the age categories.

B) If I were to add an age category it would look like the following

Adulthood : 0 years
Middle Age : 1000 years
Venerable : 5,000 years

and they would stay venerable until they stop functioning. With the loss of strength and increase in intelligence it kinda speaks for the Runeforged that have lived and gained the wisdom that comes with age.

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

15RP on the dot.

1 to 50 of 68 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>