Only giving 4 per level that I consider a top priority. Some need to be metamagick'd of course. I try to avoid too many enchantment spells, or spells that work as wands.
Level 1: Color Spray
Level 2: Glitterdust
Level 3: Ray of Exhaustion
Level 4: Black Tentacles
Level 5: Cloudkill
Level 6: Contingency
Level 7: Form of the Dragon II
Level 8: Incendiary Cloud
Level 9: Wish
Honorable mentions go to the Pit line and the Summon Monster line of spells.
Well first of all, it's generally non-spellcasters that are considered weaker. Some people lump Paladins and Rangers in there, but I'm playing a Paladin right now, and they're pretty damn good.
So where to start...
Monks are considered bad because, math aside, they have class features that mesh together poorly, or are just weak in general. Look at Flurry...can't take advantage of the monks speed. Look at Wholeness of Body...takes a standard action, so useless for in-combat healing. I could go on. Monks need their core abilities re-worked, so they synergize. Making them full BAB would also be a good idea.
The Rogue is considered weak, though personally I only think it's weak on its own. With good teamwork they're potent, and they're actually better than in 3.5 due to sneak attack hitting almost anything. I don't think they need anything done to them, as I believe they fit their role quite nicely, but perhaps some cool shadow powers to aid in stealth would be nice.
I've been playing a lot of Pathfinder, and the main issue with the other classes such as Cavalier or Fighter is that all they're really good at is doing damage in favorable situations, with their other option in combat (Combat Maneuvers) slowly getting worse as they level. They almost solely rely on feats to do anything interesting, and you get even more feats in PF than in 3.5, making, say, the Fighters bonus feats feel like useless bloat. A Ranger can do what a Fighter can, but also get spells and an animal companion. And I shouldn't even need to tell you why the Cavalier is situational.
Well normally I wouldn't like Sacred Servant, but it's main weakness (less smites) is offset by the Oath of V, so it's worth taking. And yes, I do plan on taking 1-2 extra lay on hand feats in my career. The idea was to play a Paladin of St.Cuthbert (3.5 Diety I loved, LN), who was all about Justice and Vengeance (for background reasons I have yet to write).
So wow Vital Strike AND Cleave suck? Well I won't worry about feats as much then, and power attack away. :p
As for skill points, I figured I only need diplomacy. I asked myself if taking a -2 to Will was worth 1 more skill. I said no lol. Unless I'm missing something.
I appreciate the feedback btw.
Hi, playing in a new campaign soon. Pathfinder only, and the books allowed beyond the Players Guide are the APG, UM, and UC. No 3.5.
Paladins look amazing, so I wanted to play a Half-Orc Paladin. I've looked around a lot and I think it's pretty good, but let me know if there are any improvements I can make. Starting at level 1, 18 point buy, and we houseruled that you can only lower one stat below 10.
Havok, Half-Orc Paladin. Oath of Vengeance.
Feat: Power Attack
I'll be using a Falchion, for the crit feats later. I thought about using a Bardiche, for the reach, but you can't attack opponents adjacent, and I could always take Lunge later.
I also plan on taking Sacred Servant at level 4, and using the Travel Domain.
My biggest concern is what feats to take. I'm not sure if the cleave feats are worth it, and maybe I should just take the Vital Strike line. Any suggestions for me guys?