Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Pathfinder Unchained (OGL)

4.60/5 (based on 15 ratings)
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Pathfinder Unchained (OGL)
Show Description For:
Non-Mint

Add Hardcover $39.99 $10.00

Add PDF $9.99

Add Non-Mint $39.99 $29.99

Facebook Twitter Email

Get ready to shake up your game! Within these pages, the designers of the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game unleash their wildest ideas, and nothing is safe. From totally revised fundamentals like core classes and monster design to brand-new systems for expanding the way you play, this book offers fresh ideas while still blending with the existing system. With Pathfinder Unchained, you become the game designer!

Pathfinder Unchained is an indispensable companion to the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Core Rulebook. This imaginative tabletop game builds upon more than 15 years of system development and an Open Playtest featuring more than 50,000 gamers to create a cutting-edge RPG experience that brings the all-time best-selling set of fantasy rules into a new era.

Pathfinder Unchained includes:

  • New versions of the barbarian, monk, rogue, and summoner classes, all revised to make them more balanced and easier to play.
  • New skill options for both those who want more skills to fill out their characters' backgrounds and those seeking streamlined systems for speed and simplicity.
  • Changes to how combat works, from a revised action system to an exhaustive list of combat tricks that draw upon your character's stamina.
  • Magic items that power up with you throughout your career—and ways to maintain variety while still letting players choose the "best" magic items.
  • Simplified monster creation rules for making new creatures on the fly.
  • Exotic material components ready to supercharge your spellcasting.
  • New takes on alignment, multiclassing, iterative attacks, wounds, diseases and poisons, and item creation.
  • ... and much, much more!

ISBN-13: 978-1-60125-715-4

Note: This product is part of the Pathfinder Rulebook Subscription.

Product Availability

Hardcover:

Available now

Ships from our warehouse in 1 to 5 business days.

PDF:

Fulfilled immediately.

Non-Mint:

Available now

Ships from our warehouse in 1 to 5 business days.

This product is non-mint. Refunds are not available for non-mint products. The standard version of this product can be found here.

Are there errors or omissions in this product information? Got corrections? Let us know at store@paizo.com.

PZO1131


See Also:

1 to 5 of 15 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Average product rating:

4.60/5 (based on 15 ratings)

Sign in to create or edit a product review.

Some of the suggested mechanics are worth the entire price

5/5

Automatic Bonus Progression is enough to justify the entire price of the book. Better versions of the Rogue and Monk, as well as fixes to the summoner and streamlining the barabarian seal the deal. There is a lot of other good stuff in here as well. Well worth it!


Upgraded Mechanics!

5/5

I love the idea of this book, I wish this happened more often. They took what they saw wrong with their game and spent proper time and effort to come up with proper solutions. It's pretty rare for a company to spend this much effort on tweaking things. The new proposed mechanics for combat and skills are unique and great ideas to help customize your groups' gaming experience.
I hope they release more books like this in the future. I've love for more variations for multiclassing, and I'm still waiting for a summoner archetype that removes the class summon monster ability and focuses more on the eidolon.
Highly recommend it, especially for anyone interested in how someone goes about making a gaming system. It provides awesome insights.


Fantastic product

5/5

It's been a while since it took me so long to digest a Pathfinder book, and boy, did Unchained ever keep me digesting. More optional rules than you can shake a stick at, to be implemented in modular or wholesale fashion, to tweak your game to your heart's content, and with top-notch art throughout, to boot. Excellent work by Paizo and one of their finest offerings in a while.

As for the negatives, the only thing I can really point out is that the writing can be somewhat scattershot and unfocused in a couple of reasonably complex sections, which would have benefited greatly from examples or bolded formulae.


Love The Options

5/5

This book is a great addition. Options are optional, and it's great that this book has so many. It really makes customizing a campaign easy. Of you'll like you never use every option, or likely even half of them in a single you play or run, but having them really gives you a great toolbox to use. Some people are finicky about house rules, so having an official batch of "house rules" to choose from is nice for people who prefer to stick to official products. No book is perfect, but being this book isn't really being forced on anyone (of course I suppose none of the supplements are), and that is a giant bag of options that you can pick and choose from to enhance the game, for those who'd like it enhanced, I give this product 5 stars, especially if I am comparing it to the usefulness of the average Pathfinder product.


Great Options for Pathfinder

5/5

I'm a huge fan of the rules options in Pathfinder Unchained. They do a great job of creating fixes to some of the potential issues with the Pathfinder system without upsetting the entire rule system.

I'm one of those weird people who loved playing my TWF core rogue through all 11 levels of PFS, but I have to admit that the unchained rogue is an improvement. I also actually prefer the unchained summoner to the base summoner; even though the new one may seem less powerful, it's more thematically appropriate. I'm considering playing a summoner for the first time.

I've been using some of the alternate rules systems in my Hell's Rebels campaign, and I like how they are working out. I'm using automatic bonus progression at least in part because I know some of my players like to ignore the Big 6, or spend all their gold on +6 stat items as soon as possible to the exclusion of other items. This way I know their AC is still going up, and they'll end up more balanced. I can now also let them craft---using the much more engaging dynamic item creation rules---without worrying too much about wealth by level.

Some of the rules I wouldn't personally implement. I feel like alignment affirmations will just lead to alignment arguments at the table, and in my experience, multiclassers don't need the boost from partial base attack bonus increases. But I am glad that these options exist for tables that want them.


1 to 5 of 15 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
701 to 750 of 2,415 << first < prev | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | next > last >>
Webstore Gninja Minion

I think you mean "punny," because that golem is anything but puny.

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Liz Courts wrote:
I think you mean "punny," because that golem is anything but puny.

What do you mean? I never called anything puny!

*Uses Mesmerizing Stare (Su)*


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Liz Courts wrote:
I think you mean "punny," because that golem is anything but puny.

What do you mean? I never called anything puny!

*Uses Mesmerizing Stare (Su)*

Requires Eye Contact and one does not just 'find' Gninjas.

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tels wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Liz Courts wrote:
I think you mean "punny," because that golem is anything but puny.

What do you mean? I never called anything puny!

*Uses Mesmerizing Stare (Su)*

Requires Eye Contact and one does not just 'find' Gninjas.

How do you know that I don't have eye contact? >:D


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

While the new cover is undoubtedly awesome, is it giving anybody else Pinocchio flashbacks? "I got no strings, to hold me back"


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Squeakmaan wrote:
While the new cover is undoubtedly awesome, is it giving anybody else Pinocchio flashbacks? "I got no strings, to hold me back"

Oh god the music in the new avengers trailer adds a creepy/awesome factor to Ultron.

I also say this because in the original Pinocchio, Pinocchio actually killed Jiminy Cricket which represented his conscious. This means that when Ultron references this song he is referring to a loss of conscience.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Squeakmaan wrote:
While the new cover is undoubtedly awesome, is it giving anybody else Pinocchio flashbacks? "I got no strings, to hold me back"

There are... no strings on me.


Do you want to build a snowman? Sorry I just watched the Hishe version of the Avengers 2 preview.

I like the cover, it shows the four classes that are getting new versions.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I just realized after looking at the archetechture and art style of the surroundings, is this Vudra?! Or is it Jalmeray?

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tels wrote:
Squeakmaan wrote:
While the new cover is undoubtedly awesome, is it giving anybody else Pinocchio flashbacks? "I got no strings, to hold me back"
There are... no strings on me.

This must confirm what we've all been thinking: Wayne Reynolds and Joss Whedon are one and the same.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Something that could be done in this book:

Give AoO´s on nearly any movement, on charging and nearing someone especially.


Alexander Augunas wrote:
Tels wrote:
Squeakmaan wrote:
While the new cover is undoubtedly awesome, is it giving anybody else Pinocchio flashbacks? "I got no strings, to hold me back"
There are... no strings on me.
This must confirm what we've all been thinking: Wayne Reynolds and Joss Whedon are one and the same.

Huzzah!


Dragon78 wrote:
I like the cover, it shows the four classes that are getting new versions.

Yeah I noticed that. Though I thought the Fighter was being fine tuned too, but it isn't listed in the blurb - I guess this kinda covers that:

Pathfinder Unchained blurb wrote:
Players will love the book's new resource pool for martial characters, allowing for exciting new tactical options

[Emphasis mine]

Shadow Lodge

Depending on how this goes this might as well be "Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Core Rule Book 2"


ElementalXX wrote:


Depending on how this goes this might as well be "Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Core Rule Book 2"

It won't cover all the rules, so nnly if you already have the original CRB and a lot of other books :)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Well, WotC's PHB2 didn't have all the rules either.


TriOmegaZero wrote:


Well, WotC's PHB2 didn't have all the rules either.

That's why neither Pathfinder Unchained or WotC's PHB 2 was a "2.0" version of the game. Both were additive to an existing body of rules...

Of course you might consider it a CRB 2 rather like the PHB 2. I just think some people are expecting too much from 1 regular hardback book.

Looking back at ElementalXX post I see he meant it might be a CRB 2. Maybe, but I'm not sure I'd see it the same way. PF Unchained stirkes me more like UA. Alternative / replacement rules rather than just more classes / rules. We'll see I guess. And it may very well do both...


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
R_Chance wrote:
That's why neither Pathfinder Unchained or WotC's PHB 2 was a "2.0" version of the game. Both were additive to an existing body of rules...

"Were"? "Unchained" isn't due out until next April! :-)


Ed Reppert wrote:


R_Chance wrote:


That's why neither Pathfinder Unchained or WotC's PHB 2 was a "2.0" version of the game. Both were additive to an existing body of rules...

"Were"? "Unchained" isn't due out until next April! :-)

True, but that's how PF: Unchained has been described. Alternative takes on classes seems to dominate the discussion of it (along with the revised Action system). I'd be happy with "alternative" stealth rules, Feats / Feat effects, Spell descriptions and having a system of unarmed combat integrated directly into regular combat (rather than as a separate subsystem). But, we'll just have to wait and see. In any event "new takes" and "alternatives" seems to cover everything in the current description.


What concerns me is that there seems to be no play test.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32

Dabbler wrote:
What concerns me is that there seems to be no play test.

A playtest seems more appropriate if the stuff in the book is going to find itself into official play like in Pathfinder Society or if it's going to show up in future adventure paths. This appears to be more along the line of optional/alternative rules, so it's a good time for designers to try out new stuff without needing to go through a public playtest.

Now if some of these alternate rules prove popular enough to land in a Pathfinder 2nd edition, I would bet that they will get more rigorously tested.


Dabbler wrote:
What concerns me is that there seems to be no play test.

In a way, we've been playtesting for years. I think the designers have a pretty good idea what people like and dislike about the four classes in question.


Dabbler wrote:
What concerns me is that there seems to be no play test.

The new classes are not completely novel, and the developers say they are using the criticisms/problems that had become evidence over the years since the initial release to update Rogue, Summoner, etc.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

They have had like 5 years worth of playtests so I think we are fine.


Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

One idea that hasn't gotten a lot of attention is the dynamic magic items section. The idea of the magic items that get better as you do has been something players and GMs have been trying for years. I think that will be one of the more interesting parts of the book.

Excited for this one.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

What was wrong with the Summoner? Clerics and Wizards are substantially more powerful and cheap (pounce ain't worth $#!^ next to wish/miracle).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
CoeusFreeze wrote:
What was wrong with the Summoner? Clerics and Wizards are substantially more powerful and cheap (pounce ain't worth $#!^ next to wish/miracle).

Summoner's disrupt games because their abilities allowed them to not need the majority of their party. In addition, they're Eidolon allowed them to cover a multitude of roles with relative ease on top of their summoning. Then, to add more insult, while the Summoner appears to be a 6th level caster, their spell list was "balanced" around the time frame of when other casters got spells.

For example, the Summoner got Teleport at around 10th level, because other casters got Teleport at that level, but to make this possible, Teleport had to become a 4th level spell, but doing this, makes Wands of Teleport possible.

The Eidolon rules are also deceptively complicated and allowed for a number of things to be possible that wouldn't otherwise. Like pounce being a PC option at incredibly low levels. This means a 'Hekatonkheires' or 'Hydra' styled Eidolon, that is, an Eidolon with lots of natural attacks, with pounce, was very preferable and filled the role of primary damage dealer quite well. Meanwhile, the Summoner could use his spells or summons to adequately perform other deeds to the point that the Summoner often overshadowed other characters in a party.

Sure, a Wizard, or Sorcerer or Cleric were more powerful, in the long run, but the Summoner is like a 'Nova' Caster. He achieves much of his power pretty early on and progresses from there, but never ultimately achieves the power of a full 9th level caster.

Besides, the argument that "XXX isn't as good as Wish/Miracle" is not a good one, as the majority of players never see Wish/Miracle come into play in their games. A comparison of casters over a ~14th level career is more apt, and you will find that Summoners have access to much of the same spells, at a similar rate, as most 9th level casters, while matching them Summon for Summon (and exceeding the Summoning capability of other casters).

Conjuration is an extremely powerful school of magic after all, and Summoners get all the best spells.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Tels wrote:


Summoner's disrupt games because their abilities allowed them to not need the majority of their party. In addition, they're Eidolon allowed them to cover a multitude of roles with relative ease on top of their summoning. Then, to add more insult, while the Summoner appears to be a 6th level caster, their spell list was "balanced" around the time frame of when other casters got spells.

For example, the Summoner got Teleport at around 10th level, because other casters got Teleport at that level, but to make this possible, Teleport had to become a 4th level spell, but doing this, makes Wands of Teleport possible.

The Eidolon rules are also deceptively complicated and allowed for a number of things to be possible that wouldn't otherwise. Like pounce being a PC option at incredibly low levels. This means a 'Hekatonkheires' or 'Hydra' styled Eidolon, that is, an Eidolon with lots of natural attacks, with pounce, was very preferable and filled the role of primary damage dealer quite well. Meanwhile, the Summoner could use his spells or summons to adequately perform other deeds to the point that the Summoner often overshadowed other characters in a party.

Sure, a Wizard, or Sorcerer or Cleric were more powerful, in the long run, but the Summoner is like a 'Nova' Caster. He achieves much of his power pretty early on and progresses from there, but never ultimately achieves the power of a full 9th level caster.

Besides, the argument that "XXX isn't as good as Wish/Miracle" is not a good one, as the majority of players never see Wish/Miracle come into play in their games. A comparison of casters over a ~14th level career is more apt, and you will find that Summoners have access to much of the same spells, at a similar rate, as most 9th level casters, while matching them Summon for Summon (and exceeding the Summoning capability of...

Isn't that sort of the concept of the Eidolon, to have a highly versatile and customizeable companion? I understand nerfing the spell list perfectly, but the eidolon in and of itself is intended to be a very powerful and customizeable summon. Granting them more physical power than a basic fighter (a class that I hope gets serious buffs) is just keeping in line with the way most summons work (A celestial ankylosaurus could likely trump a 9th-level fighter).Druids can start pouncing as early as 4th or even 2nd level, so why are Summoners singled out for their melee being too strong (natural attack limits do exist)? Besides, there is always the problem of banishment/dismissal to brutalize an eidolon


CoeusFreeze wrote:
Tels wrote:


Summoner's disrupt games because their abilities allowed them to not need the majority of their party. In addition, they're Eidolon allowed them to cover a multitude of roles with relative ease on top of their summoning. Then, to add more insult, while the Summoner appears to be a 6th level caster, their spell list was "balanced" around the time frame of when other casters got spells.

For example, the Summoner got Teleport at around 10th level, because other casters got Teleport at that level, but to make this possible, Teleport had to become a 4th level spell, but doing this, makes Wands of Teleport possible.

The Eidolon rules are also deceptively complicated and allowed for a number of things to be possible that wouldn't otherwise. Like pounce being a PC option at incredibly low levels. This means a 'Hekatonkheires' or 'Hydra' styled Eidolon, that is, an Eidolon with lots of natural attacks, with pounce, was very preferable and filled the role of primary damage dealer quite well. Meanwhile, the Summoner could use his spells or summons to adequately perform other deeds to the point that the Summoner often overshadowed other characters in a party.

Sure, a Wizard, or Sorcerer or Cleric were more powerful, in the long run, but the Summoner is like a 'Nova' Caster. He achieves much of his power pretty early on and progresses from there, but never ultimately achieves the power of a full 9th level caster.

Besides, the argument that "XXX isn't as good as Wish/Miracle" is not a good one, as the majority of players never see Wish/Miracle come into play in their games. A comparison of casters over a ~14th level career is more apt, and you will find that Summoners have access to much of the same spells, at a similar rate, as most 9th level casters, while matching them Summon for Summon (and exceeding the Summoning capability of...

Isn't that sort of the concept of the Eidolon, to have a highly versatile and customizeable companion? I understand nerfing the spell list perfectly,...

Well.. for one thing, the Eidolon is functioning as a frontline damage dealer, while the Summoner still remains a 6th level caster with almost 9th level access in many cases. The Summoner is still a powerful caster in and of itself, without the Eidolon. With the Summoner, you're getting nearly 2 full classes in one class, which is just not fair in the scheme of things.

If a Bard or a Magus or an Inquisitor wants to jump up and match the damage of the full BAB martials, they have to spend many resources to do so, and only for a shirt time. The Summoner just drops his Eidolon, which lasts all day, on the field and then goes back to casting spells, some of which would only further augment the Eidolon.

Even then, you're focusing on the singular, instead of the multiple. The Summoner isn't just one problem that can be fixed, it's a bunch of smaller problems that add up to a big one over time.

The base Summoner has:
-Summon SLA that auto scales with level, essentially giving the Summoner free spell slots.
-Front line melee pet that puts other pets to shame and can be built to do crazy things.
-Eidolon evolution system is hard to understand and often results in people building illegal Eidolons unknowingly.
-Nearly 9th level casting on a 6th level caster that ends up breaking many of the assumed crafting standards.
-Archetypes that further exacerbate any one problem of the Summoner, especially the Synthesist, Master and Brood summoner.

When it all gets added up together, the Summoner is a mess of a class that needs fixing. When one class is almost universally banned by nearly all tables, you know you've got a problem. The only other class I know of that comes close is the Gunslinger, and that has more to do with 'Guns in my Fantasy' than anything else (though the mechanics of the Gunslinger are a problem).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
CoeusFreeze wrote:
What was wrong with the Summoner? Clerics and Wizards are substantially more powerful and cheap (pounce ain't worth $#!^ next to wish/miracle).

Do not forget this key fact: The old summoner is not going away. All classes in these books will effectively be treated as new classes.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

"Fair" means "in accordance with the rules" or "legitimate" so it's hard to see how a Summoner built according to the rules can be "not fair".

If you mean "not fair" in the sense that it's not an appropriate class for the game, well, that's another debate. :-)

The level of a spell is specified how? If it's "in the description of the spell" then Teleport is a fifth level spell, and Wands of Teleport are not possible RAW. If it's "the lowest level at which any caster gets that spell" or "the lowest level specified in spell lists for any class" then Teleport is a fourth level spell, and AFAICS Wands of Teleport are legal (provided they're made by a class for whom Teleport is a 4th level spell).


Ed Reppert wrote:

"Fair" means "in accordance with the rules" or "legitimate" so it's hard to see how a Summoner built according to the rules can be "not fair".

If you mean "not fair" in the sense that it's not an appropriate class for the game, well, that's another debate. :-)

The level of a spell is specified how? If it's "in the description of the spell" then Teleport is a fifth level spell, and Wands of Teleport are not possible RAW. If it's "the lowest level at which any caster gets that spell" or "the lowest level specified in spell lists for any class" then Teleport is a fourth level spell, and AFAICS Wands of Teleport are legal (provided they're made by a class for whom Teleport is a 4th level spell).

Spells go off the spell slot that they are available in, in the core rules. PFS made special rules to stop this early on, because some classes, like Rangers and Paladins, have lower level spell access in the core game.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

For the record, either me and my players have been using them wrong (and my players are real good at making powergame type characters) or people need to give me real examples but in our games the Barbarian seems fine, the Monk seems overpowered, the Rogue seems fine if played right (if people would play the Rogue as a ROGUE and not a FIGHTER/NINJA/SUPER SAIYAN then I am sure we can leave that be) and, while we have not used Summoner yet, we have yet to see how their spell list is such a problem (we know the Eidolon can be). Their spells are mostly buff spells, that's it. They have almost no damaging spells, if you kill their eidolon, they are dead or have to flee. They can use their Summon Monster ability, but the monsters summoned have poor level scaling and can easily be destroyed by quit a number of spells (Protection from Law/Good/Evil/Chaos, Dispel Magic, and I have seen a few spells that free the summon from control or take control of a summon).


I believe the point behind changing the Barbarian is to simplify the math it uses, not nerf/power up the class.

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
MMCJawa wrote:
I believe the point behind changing the Barbarian is to simplify the math it uses, not nerf/power up the class.

I *think* that Jason mentioned that a few of the "so specific its weak" rage powers are getting simplified as well. For example, he mentioned that raging swimmer will change to simply grant a swim speed while raging instead of its current, relatively complicated form.


Barachiel Shina wrote:
For the record, either me and my players have been using them wrong (and my players are real good at making powergame type characters) or people need to give me real examples but in our games the Barbarian seems fine, the Monk seems overpowered, the Rogue seems fine if played right (if people would play the Rogue as a ROGUE and not a FIGHTER/NINJA/SUPER SAIYAN then I am sure we can leave that be) and, while we have not used Summoner yet, we have yet to see how their spell list is such a problem (we know the Eidolon can be). Their spells are mostly buff spells, that's it. They have almost no damaging spells, if you kill their eidolon, they are dead or have to flee. They can use their Summon Monster ability, but the monsters summoned have poor level scaling and can easily be destroyed by quit a number of spells (Protection from Law/Good/Evil/Chaos, Dispel Magic, and I have seen a few spells that free the summon from control or take control of a summon).

So... what you're telling me is that all of the people who play this game have been playing the rogue wrong, and your group has discovered the One True Path for playing a rogue?

Please, teach us your masterful rogue ways, oh supreme master!

Shadow Lodge

Barachiel Shina wrote:
(if people would play the Rogue as a ROGUE and not a FIGHTER/NINJA/SUPER SAIYAN then I am sure we can leave that be)

I think that is the problem, they play them as a Rogue and it sucks.


No class has to suck, if played intelligently.


Having said that, though, I wish Paizo would release some options for players who don't want to be limited to the established classes. Maybe a "generalist" class of some kind that lets you pick from a variety of class options, cafeteria style.


A "generalist" class would be interesting but then I am never tired of new classes or new options in general. Though we could use some reprints of a lot things found in the soft cover books put into a hardcover book or two.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
pickin_grinnin wrote:
Having said that, though, I wish Paizo would release some options for players who don't want to be limited to the established classes. Maybe a "generalist" class of some kind that lets you pick from a variety of class options, cafeteria style.

dont actually like the idea people have lvl in classes because they had training in that field or in the case of sorcerers they've had time to explore and develop their bloodline powers a generalist that just chooses what to be good at not only souds broken but kind of flavorless imo

and in case a generalist became a playable class i belive it'd be mediocre in many things good at none

Contributor

pickin_grinnin wrote:
Having said that, though, I wish Paizo would release some options for players who don't want to be limited to the established classes. Maybe a "generalist" class of some kind that lets you pick from a variety of class options, cafeteria style.

The rogue is surprisingly close to that design goal already, considering that it can nab several different class features from other classes with its rogue talents.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Godlings from SGG are great examples of generalists. I've never had a gm to allow one though.


London Duke wrote:
Godlings from SGG are great examples of generalists. I've never had a gm to allow one though.

As well they shouldn't, the design behind Godlings is horrible.


Alexander Augunas wrote:
pickin_grinnin wrote:
Having said that, though, I wish Paizo would release some options for players who don't want to be limited to the established classes. Maybe a "generalist" class of some kind that lets you pick from a variety of class options, cafeteria style.
The rogue is surprisingly close to that design goal already, considering that it can nab several different class features from other classes with its rogue talents.

i

how? where? what abilities?

i mean the reverse is certainly true--many other classes can take rogue class' abilities and talents via archetypes or even TRAITS (RRRGH), but i haven't seen anything even CLOSE to resembling what you're saying. hell, the rogue doesn't even get access to slayer and investigator talents for christ's sakes!


AndIMustMask wrote:

how? where? what abilities?

i mean the reverse is certainly true--many other classes can take rogue class' abilities and talents via archetypes or even TRAITS (RRRGH), but i haven't seen anything even CLOSE to resembling what you're saying. hell, the rogue doesn't even get access to slayer and investigator talents for christ's sakes!

They can pick up bombs and spells via rogue talents. They can make untrained knowledge checks, like a bard. They can gain a ki pool and learn ninja tricks. They can gain a favored terrain, like a ranger. These are all normal rogue talents. with Advanced talents offer things like Hide in Plain Sight and a Familiar as well as a few other things.

Mind you, when you read the actual talent details they are usually underwhelming, typically because they're 1/day or are otherwise limited, but they do have access to some class features not normally associated with rogues.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tels wrote:
London Duke wrote:
Godlings from SGG are great examples of generalists. I've never had a gm to allow one though.
As well they shouldn't, the design behind Godlings is horrible.

That seems a bit harsh. What makes them so? They seem pretty okay to me.


Adam B. 135 wrote:
Tels wrote:
London Duke wrote:
Godlings from SGG are great examples of generalists. I've never had a gm to allow one though.
As well they shouldn't, the design behind Godlings is horrible.
That seems a bit harsh. What makes them so? They seem pretty okay to me.

Way too much customization allows for numerous clashings of rules elements.

For example, the Eldritch Godling allows for him to select *any* ability score as his casting stat. So... select strength. Then you take the ability that adds Strength to your save. Then you can use the ability to select an Oracle revelation, substituting your casting stat, for the ability, so you pick up Nature's Whispers, or something like it.

Strength to casting stat, Strength to saves, Strength to AC.

An Eldritch Godling tried something like this in my cousin's campaign, but using Intelligence. Fortunately, he had set up the storyline for a 'Highlander' -ish level up system for the Godling in that, after a certain point, he must slay a Godling of equal or higher level to reach the next highest level, and there can only ever be two 19th level Godlings at one time.

So, I made a 19th level Eldritch Godling for my cousin to go up against the party with. Jaycen, Emissary of the Dark One. With the potent combination of having an Aroden's spellbane inside of a widened antimagic field, means he retains all of his magical items and powers, while anyone he fights against receives none of the benefits of their magic. So, even though he only has +28 to hit, he's going to be able to consistently hit nearly any martial in a fight (all martials at this point are taking up to a -15 to their AC or more, due to a lack of magical items).

I've messed around with the Godling classes, exploring avenues, and I find that it's ease of customization, and it's ability to cherry pick powers from other classes, leads to juggernauts of characters with relative ease.


Kudaku wrote:
AndIMustMask wrote:

how? where? what abilities?

i mean the reverse is certainly true--many other classes can take rogue class' abilities and talents via archetypes or even TRAITS (RRRGH), but i haven't seen anything even CLOSE to resembling what you're saying. hell, the rogue doesn't even get access to slayer and investigator talents for christ's sakes!

They can pick up bombs and spells via rogue talents. They can make untrained knowledge checks, like a bard. They can gain a ki pool and learn ninja tricks. They can gain a favored terrain, like a ranger. These are all normal rogue talents. with Advanced talents offer things like Hide in Plain Sight and a Familiar as well as a few other things.

Mind you, when you read the actual talent details they are usually underwhelming, typically because they're 1/day or are otherwise limited, but they do have access to some class features not normally associated with rogues.

Examination: underwhelming doesn't even begin to cover it.

Spoiler:
-10 bombs at the extreme endgame MAX does not a useful or helpful class ability make (though you are technically correct). that it runs off of INT which you have little need of, due to lots of inbuilt skill points and a crap-tacular will save requiring wis investment (or cha investment and a feat) just makes it worse.

-a single cantrip SLA 3/day does not a caster make (and a single level 1 SLA once per day if you invest further still doesn't--even if you use a precious feat to be able to swap them). that's by 3rd level earliest (by spending a feat on ERT (major magic)). if you wanted to be able to change them, you'd need to wait till 5th.

-esoteric scholar is 1/day, thus complete garbage. do note that the bard also gets half their level to said untrained knowledge checks as well.

-said ki pool is a gimped version of the one granted BY ITS OWN ARCHETYPE, though the wis-focus is rather helpful despite making you as MAD as a monk. as for ninja tricks you are correct, despite most of them requiring you to be 4th level or higher, and since the ki pool is useless without picking up any talents that use it it is full tax-mode from the start.

-favored terrain is true, yes. you require 3-5 to cover most bases, and get a decent bonus to a few skills (more if you invest yet more talents into things like camouflage and HiPS, which cuts into your talent limit further) and nothing else.

here's my problem:

Spoiler:
all of these (with the exception of favored terrain, that you can oddly get FASTER than a ranger if you really invest) are completely lobotomized compared to those they try to emulate, while other classes are able to get things like a warpriest's blessings, or a brawler's ability to grab feats, or panache, and so on (admittedly via archetypes).
the rogue gets none of these, and has to pay through the nose for anything else he gets with talents. that they're THIS bad is a slap in the face, and that a very large chunk of classes in the game have access to trapfinder (those that cant can take a simple trait to remedy that) and/or sneak attack.

but what of talents? well, at least three off the top of my head get access to those, but really why bother? most rogue talents are garbage anyway, other than ones that let you get feats (which is also painful to see--rogue talents should be worth spending a feat on, not spending talents for a feat). that paizo keeps cranking our more and more crappy ones while the barbarian is sitting on a pile of unique and powerful options (for a martial character, at least) that only keeps getting bigger is the kind of crap that has made me so cynical towards pathfinder of late.

the ninja is somewhat better off with the ability to become invisible (and therefore actually make use of the class' ONLY COMBAT ABILITY with some regularity) and having some better talents without having to pay a tax.

.

honestly, if paizo doesn't do something pretty spectacular with unchained, rogues are just going into the bin for my games and being replaced with slayer or investigator (depending on whether the player is more concerned with combat or skills, respectively).

monks i'm still kinda on the fence about, since they at least have a few decent archetypes, and one that is broken in PFS and will never get addressed as a source of trouble.

Spoiler:
MoMS' early style access is to blame for crane style's shift to utter uselessness, since it's nicely balanced for the intended level. that PFS cannot into creative monster encounters makes it incredibly potent when you get it earlier than intended.

even when unchained is released, i'm going to be waiting a few weeks before even considering buying it, since i dont want to spend money on a book specifically advertised with rogue enhancements only to find that paizo has completely missed the point yet again and produced more wastes of space for an already unfortunate class.

i mean sure paizo, you get a +4 bonus to kicking a prone target, and you've already built yourself for greater trip and vicious stomp, but come on already.

Scarab Sages

AndIMustMask wrote:
-a single cantrip SLA 3/day does not a caster make (and a single level 1 SLA once per day if you invest further still doesn't--even if you use a precious feat to be able to swap them). that's by 3rd level earliest (by spending a feat on ERT (major magic)). if you wanted to be able to change them, you'd need to wait till 5th.

You can actually make a highly effective Half-Elf or Elven rogue based around minor & Major magic. The Elven FCB allows you a LOT of uses of Minor & Major Magic, and if you choose Chill Touch for your SLAs, you have a level per use touch attack sneak attack delivery system. One use should be enough to last a combat, and you can easily have 10 uses per day.

Targeting touch AC fixes most rogue accuracy problems.

701 to 750 of 2,415 << first < prev | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Product Discussion / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Pathfinder Unchained (OGL) All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.