Things which I believe would benefit the Shadowdancer class:
1. Most everyone seems to look at the progression for this class and cringe: Hide in Plain Sight at first level, and then nothing of particular note thereafter; some even going so far to describe it as having a "backward progression."
SUGGESTION: Giving the shadowdancer the Shadow Jump ability before Hide in Plain Sight. The two abilities would seem to be thematically similar within the context of the class: enveloping oneself in shadow. They also serve similar purposes in combat situations (being a sissy).
2. Shadow Jump doesn't seem to be quite certain of what it's trying to achieve as an ability. When you first obtain the ability at fourth level you can use it a maximum of 2 times each day, provided each jump is 10 feet or less. This can get you behind an enemy you're currently adjacent to, which in DnD is only useful if you have to make space for another party member; particularly because Shadow Jump is a standard action.
This limits its usefulness to "escape tactic", but in most situations there's no reason to shadow jump over hiding.
The ability doesn't get enough feet per day to be useful as a means of transportation. Even at eighth level in the class with 80 feet per day, a character could almost make that up just with move actions.
The ability does, however, have its niche uses: Shadow-Jumping inside or outside buildings, behind doors or walls, past traps, ETC.
All in all, the ability "shines" outside combat, as opposed to in.
SUGGESTION: There's two ways one could go with this. Scenario A is to make it actually useful in combat, change it from a standard action to a move or swift action, to allow characters to attack in the same round as its used. I would also suggest giving Shadowdancers sneak attack against any target they shadow jump adjacent to-- but I can't speak on how balanced or broken that might be.
The second option is to make it into more of a travel utility, akin to the Shadow Walk spell. In either case, it could use more feet/day.
3. Shadow Illusion is basically of cantrip-level usefulness, only it's once per day and you get it at third level.
SUGGESTION: Give Shadow Illusion at first level and, like cantrips, make it unlimited uses. Say they require concentration to create and maintain, with no set number of rounds they exist for "on their own." The Shadowdancer is pulling mundane shadows out from where the are, and putting them somewhere else (Allowing NPCs and other PCs to notice the shadows disappearing from wherever the Shadowdancer has taken them from).
If requiring concentration to keep it up doesn't balance it out, specify that the Shadowdancer can't hide in their own Shadow Illusion. Or, let them hide in it starting at a higher level - 5 or 8 or something.
Have Light, Daylight and ETC spells dissipate the Shadow Illusion.
4. Summon Shadows is laughable. The thing is horrifically weak, and the Shadowdancer loses experience points when it dies.
SUGGESTION: The Shadowdancer doesn't really need a "familiar." Make Summon Shadow a higher level version of Shadow Illusion, where the Shadowdancer can make their "illusions" physical and "real" X times/day. The shadows could literally reach out and grab (grapple?) someone, or just making an attack, ETC.
5. Hide in Plain Sight clearly makes your PC a super spy.
SUGGESTION: The Shadowdancer needs a bonus to Gather Information checks (that's .. diplomacy, in Pathfinder? Or was it combined with something else :S) on account of they can just Shadow Jump wherever they please and overhear conversations at their leisure.
I know everyone is saying that they need more combat abilities, but, if Shadow Jump could just be made useful it could fill that gap. Adding slow sneak attack progression is also an attractive option, though I'm no good at "balancing the numbers," so can't speak on how nicely that plays with my other suggestions.
The Duelist is GREAT, with capitals, and bolds, just what the Dexterity Fighter needed!
The following has probably already been stated in spades, but I'm having an ADHDTLDR moment and don't feel like combing through everything right now to find it.
Anyhow, my greatest problems come with the Arcane Archer. I know someone has mentioned the skills. At the very least, Knowledge (Arcana), Craft, Profession and Spellcraft should be included. I also mirror the sentiment of no +1 spellcasting=bad. I myself would gladly give up the gimmicky and limited Seeker Arrow, Phase Arrow, Hail of Arrows and Arrow of Death abilities in exchange for a +1 to existing arcane spellcasting level at every even level (it seems to make the most sense to put them there).
|
I'm thinking that Mystic Theurge's requirements should be altered. As it is, you're behind the curve in regards to what you should be doing. If the requirements were changed to 2nd level spells of either type and 1st level spells of the other type, and Knowledge X 5 ranks, Knowledge Y 2, then you would be better able to function in your primary focus and have your secondary as well.
The following has probably already been stated in spades, but I'm having an ADHDTLDR moment and don't feel like combing through everything right now to find it.
Anyhow, my greatest problems come with the Arcane Archer. I know someone has mentioned the skills. At the very least, Knowledge (Arcana), Craft, Profession and Spellcraft should be included. I also mirror the sentiment of no +1 spellcasting=bad. I myself would gladly give up the gimmicky and limited Seeker Arrow, Phase Arrow, Hail of Arrows and Arrow of Death abilities in exchange for a +1 to existing arcane spellcasting level at every even level (it seems to make the most sense to put them there).
Yeah... it's the "Arcane Archer" after all. What exactly the point of Imbue Arrow when you have 1-3 levels of spell casting is beyond me. Less gimicky junk and give the AA some spellcasting levels.
Jason was talking about the skills. PrCs don't need many skills because they inherit the skills of the qualifying classes.
Jason was talking about the skills. PrCs don't need many skills because they inherit the skills of the qualifying classes.
OH! That makes sense! Thank you for that bit of information! :)
|
An Arcane Archer ability that allows the Archer to cast a touch or ray spell (such as Shocking Grasp or Ray of Enfeeblement) as a swift action to imbue into an arrow would seem like a neat starting ability.
A Touch spell that functions for more than one touch (such as Chill Touch) could even continue functioning for a number of arrows fired during it's duration, and not just be expended with the first arrow.
At somewhat higher level, it would be totally cool if the Arcane Archer could imbue that single touch spell into *all* of the arrows she fires in that single round, so that a 1st level Wizard, 6th level Ranger, 5th level Arcane Archer could Swift-cast Shocking Grasp and then fire three arrows (or four with Rapid Shot), each carrying the charge from that Shocking Grasp.
Then again, making these special abilities into feats and then making an arcane-caster version of the Ranger class might make even more sense...
I was going to hold off my question about the Arcane Trickster, I might as well take a run for it. At some point AT were describe as being vanilla and seriously need to be tweaked. I was looking at the New PrC and nothing has changed for them. Is there any plans to change them or is that it?
I'd like to see a complete AA spell list and unique progression, myself...Yeah... it's the "Arcane Archer" after all. What exactly the point of Imbue Arrow when you have 1-3 levels of spell casting is beyond me. Less gimicky junk and give the AA some spellcasting levels.
The problem with building spell lists for a class is then you have to carry around a separate spell list through every supplement or just not support it at all. The other problem is that you already have spells from your previous class and then you have 2 spell lists or some strange hybrid arrangement.
|
|
Speaking personally, I loved Green Ronin's take on the Blackguard concept with the Unholy Warrior base class - it always seemed to have much more flavor than the prestige class in the DMG.what happened to the Blackguard? What are the plans for this class?As I mentioned in another thread, the blackguard got cut due the fact that the class deserves to be a base class, not locked away as a prestige class. Unfortunately, I am not sure that we will have the room to explore this option in the core book.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
I personally see the Blackguard working better as a Prestige Class (I just love fallen Paladins who've traded their Pally levels for Blackguard levels). While I'm not wholly against the Blackguard base class, it makes me wonder how many base classes there will and should eventually be in the game, and should other PrCs be made into base classes -- for example, should the Eldritch Knight or the Arcane Archer be base classes? And where to stop? I wouldn't want to see every new supplement introducing more and more classes with slightly increasing power curve, like it happened in 3E.
My personal preference would be to keep the base classes to a minimum (i.e. the "core" classes) and everything else could be covered with Prestige Classes.
|
|
Thank you for removing spells from the assassin. I love the quiet death and silent death abilities as well.
The duelist looks better here as well. Parrying looks fairly simple and can be used to defend adjacent allies. This is a nice change along as is extra damage from precise strike being based duelist level rather than intelligence bonuses. Riposte, no retreat and the changes to crippling critical are all excellent.
Good work!
I agree with this, the new Assassin and Duelist look *GREAT*. :)
What I would like to see for the Arcane Archer is a boost in flexibility, something like this:
At Levels 1, 3, 5, 7 and 9, he can choose one +1 bonus equivalent magic weapon special ability he can use from then on to enhance his arrows with. He can choose from Distance, Seeking and the elemental abilities.
At levels 3, 5, 7 and 9, he can choose one +2 bonus equivalent magic weapon special ability. He can choose from the alignment and elemental burst abilities.
At levels 5, 7 and 9, he can choose one +3 bonus equivalent magic weapon special ability. He can choose Speed or Bane (which should be considered +3 equivalent instead of +1 for the archer, as he can always choose the correct creature type for an extra 2d6 of damage).
At levels 7 and 9, he can choose one +4 bonus equivalent magic weapon special ability. He can choose Brilliant Energy, and something else if there was another +4 ability...
At level 9, he coould choose one +5 bonus equivalent magic weapon special ability, if one did exist...
As a swift action, he can determine which combination of abilities is bestowed upon his arrows fired.
The total bonus of the abilities he bestows upon his ammunition can of course not be greater than +1 at 1st level, +2 at 3rd level, +3 at 5th level, +4 at 7th level and +5 at 9th level.
what happened to the Blackguard? What are the plans for this class?As I mentioned in another thread, the blackguard got cut due the fact that the class deserves to be a base class, not locked away as a prestige class. Unfortunately, I am not sure that we will have the room to explore this option in the core book.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
And ya know maybe this has been brought up before but why not just call him an Anti-Palladin instead of a Blackguard like most everybody has been doing for ages and generations anyway??? Or is Blackguard more cool. I like the name Blackguard but most folks have been making house ruled anti-palladins since 1st edition.
Charles
|
The problem with building spell lists for a class is then you have to carry around a separate spell list through every supplement or just not support it at all. The other problem is that you already have spells from your previous class and then you have 2 spell lists or some strange hybrid arrangement.
It's basically the same thing that the 3.5 assassin did and that didn't seem too problematic, to me.
It's basically the same thing that the 3.5 assassin did and that didn't seem too problematic, to me.
The problem with building spell lists for a class is then you have to carry around a separate spell list through every supplement or just not support it at all. The other problem is that you already have spells from your previous class and then you have 2 spell lists or some strange hybrid arrangement.
The assassin was the exception though. There were a few new assassin spells, but there weren't any new Apostle of Peace, Temple Raider of Olidammara, (etc., etc.) spells.
I think that every class that gives its own spell list would be better off just giving "+1 spellcaster level" every even level, say.
|
It's basically the same thing that the 3.5 assassin did and that didn't seem too problematic, to me.
The problem with building spell lists for a class is then you have to carry around a separate spell list through every supplement or just not support it at all. The other problem is that you already have spells from your previous class and then you have 2 spell lists or some strange hybrid arrangement.The assassin was the exception though. There were a few new assassin spells, but there weren't any new Apostle of Peace, Temple Raider of Olidammara, (etc., etc.) spells.
I think that every class that gives its own spell list would be better off just giving "+1 spellcaster level" every even level, say.
For specialised classes, you could probably also give them a selection of domains. Death, Trickery and War for Assassins?
|
|
The assassin was the exception though. There were a few new assassin spells, but there weren't any new Apostle of Peace, Temple Raider of Olidammara, (etc., etc.) spells.I think that every class that gives its own spell list would be better off just giving "+1 spellcaster level" every even level, say.
I guess I expected most of the hypothetical AA spells to be pre-existing ones (or else there'd be very few, perhaps).
For specialised classes, you could probably also give them a selection of domains. Death, Trickery and War for Assassins?It's basically the same thing that the 3.5 assassin did and that didn't seem too problematic, to me.
The problem with building spell lists for a class is then you have to carry around a separate spell list through every supplement or just not support it at all. The other problem is that you already have spells from your previous class and then you have 2 spell lists or some strange hybrid arrangement.The assassin was the exception though. There were a few new assassin spells, but there weren't any new Apostle of Peace, Temple Raider of Olidammara, (etc., etc.) spells.
I think that every class that gives its own spell list would be better off just giving "+1 spellcaster level" every even level, say.
Now this I could see. Thinking about the magic-using assassin I actually thought church-ordained would be the most logical, which then took my mind back to the old Al-Qadim Holy Slayer class.
|
|
OK I'm at work and cant download this right now, but would anyone post up the duelist list so I dont have to wait till I get home?
In any case, I have some things to say about the duelist since I've been playing it since it first came out in Sword and Fist.
I LOVE this prc. Absolutely LOVE it. It had some flaws but it was everything i wanted. I'm a huge fan of not having to wear armor to rock and this was just my thing. I also preferred one handed fighting so again this shined.
The flaws it had before I noticed were as follows:
Fort and Will were low. Sounds like this didn't change much. Luckily for me I eventually adopted the fey-touched template for a +1 lvl adjustment which kept most mind affecting spells at bay. No more big bad issues of being dominated and charmed :D. Save VS deaths always sucked but worked on getting that soulfire ability from book of exalted deeds which kept death attacks from working anymore.
Now i know you shouldnt have to rely on SPECIFIC items to off balance the weaknesses, but once you did you started to really work. But normally thats a common D&D thing where you have to use items or such to off set your weaknesses.
I also went down the swash/scout/duelist path to becoming a duelist, which gave me int to my damage as well as my ac. If it has to be high for duelist prc for ac, why not make it do TWO things? EVentually it made strength very unimportant once I picked up that ghosttouched style property from the magic item compedium, the one that lets you treat undead as if living with crits and sneak attacks, letting it all work. You could also pick up the gem to attack to it to have it work on constructs too :D
With a feat from mongoose publishing, (defensive fighting I think?) you only took a -2 to attack when fighting defensively, which i took over weapon focus since theoretically it gave me a +2 to hit more then the +1 from weapon focus (which only applied to one weapon, and as a duelist, I ALWAYS fought defensively).
Also when you got higher ranks in tumble, your defensive fighting increased. At 15 ranks it was +3 to ac, and according to Oriental Adventures, at 25 it was +4.
SO, fight defensively you get -2 to hit with + 14 to AC (10 from duelist Elaborate Parry and 4 from fighting defensive)
... + 14!! You add in some magic item ac boosts, throw in that little dodge ability, and you start having to make the monster roll a 20 to hit you. Survivability was through the roof with these guys. SO what if you had to get some items to offset the saves, your ac was better then any fighter wearing full plate with an enchanted shield.
As for the minimal damage, i never had an issue. Like i said, int for damage from swash plus the +2d6 from duelist and you were doing well. There was a feat in complete warriors (I think, maybe complete adventurers) which also gave you a +1d6 to damage when fighting defensively if you wanted a bit more.
Then add in the high crit of a rapier at 18-20, get improved crit for 15-20, and I really don't see where we have a whole lot of room to complain about damage. With the right feats plus the scout abilities, you also went first a lot so getting into defensive mode was easy and you were never caught flat footed.
Now i know all this is based off a certain build or others like it, but I guess I'm just saying I thought the duelist was always a very solid option, especially when you DIDNT have to worry about mages or spellcasters.
One more thing I wanted to add, I know you only get one weapon but thats LESS money you have to spend on a secondary weapon when you can focus on making your SOLO weapon even BETTER. Just my opinion though.
|
|
what happened to the Blackguard? What are the plans for this class?As I mentioned in another thread, the blackguard got cut due the fact that the class deserves to be a base class, not locked away as a prestige class. Unfortunately, I am not sure that we will have the room to explore this option in the core book.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Although I am loving the new PrCs to bits, and I'm glad the Blackguard isn't gone for good, I have a little regret about it becoming a base class. I agree that it needs more "space", but part of it's mystique in my mind was that any villain who could truly call themselves "Blackguard" was going to be a formidable opponent, and players knew this. Not only in the metagame sense of being high enough to take the PrC requirements, but also because of the rarity of blackguards in-game. The PrC also allowed for it to be more of a broad title than a defined skillset, as one blackguard could dabble in arcane magic, another could summon fiends or raise the dead, others could be assassins or barbarians or fallen paladins or clinical warlords, and the broad range of class features would emphasize aspects of any of them whilst offering distinctive abilities which tied them all together. As a balanced (for villains) base class by necessity these wide varieties of blackguard will have to be pared down. Yes, I can always just make an evil fighter/wizard and call him a blackguard, but it just isn't the same.
My lack of faith in Paizo is - disturbing. And misplaced. Keep up the good work, Jason.
|
|
Ok got home and read over the Duelist.
If you ask me, the class got a pretty big boost here and I don't see whats to complain about again. They are meant to be AGILE fighters, not sturdy ones per say. So the lack of FORT save makes sense. They might fail some fort saves just like a plate fighter will fail ref saves.
Guess the only diff is a lot of save or dies at higher lvls is fort based, but then again a lot of high end spells that require reflex can do almost as much damage anyway.
The upgrade is fantastic!!
Only problem is now my duelist has to put a shirt on ... at least sort of >_>
|
|
but I guess I'm just saying I thought the duelist was always a very solid option, especially when you DIDNT have to worry about mages or spellcasters.That would be in some other game?
No different then any normal fighter? They sucked against mages too. Thats the point. You're just moving from an armored, heavy weapon fighter to a lightly armored, light weapon wielding fighting. Same flaws just a little moved around.
How is it different? Oh except that you have way more ac possibility then a plate fighter.
Actually,I always thought that a fighter who prefers to wield light weapons and armor might be better as a base class.(Check out the unfettered class in Arcana Evolved as an example).
As for the archmage abilities,am I the only person on these boards who has both the Complete Arcane and Complete Mage books?The Sculpt Spell metamagic feat on page 83 of Complete Arcane essentially duplicates the archmage class ability,though a sculpted spell uses a spell slot one level higher than the spell's actual level.
|
|
Excuse me... have you read the same class writeup as me?
Yep
... sorry there wasn't really another question in there for me to reply to O_o
Maybe its a viewpoint thing, but I'd much rather play this new duelist as a fighter/rogue type then the ACTUAL straight up fighter. Not saying straight up fighter doesn't have mad skill, just saying I like this better and feel it offers lots of fun :D
... of course you DO have to pick up a greater true death augment crystal or something to work on that damage issue against the bigger boys. But as you said, the new precise strike DOES allow for crits, and with a rapier with a possible 15-20 crit range, its looking good.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
The following has probably already been stated in spades, but I'm having an ADHDTLDR moment and don't feel like combing through everything right now to find it.
Anyhow, my greatest problems come with the Arcane Archer. I know someone has mentioned the skills. At the very least, Knowledge (Arcana), Craft, Profession and Spellcraft should be included. I also mirror the sentiment of no +1 spellcasting=bad. I myself would gladly give up the gimmicky and limited Seeker Arrow, Phase Arrow, Hail of Arrows and Arrow of Death abilities in exchange for a +1 to existing arcane spellcasting level at every even level (it seems to make the most sense to put them there).
Shoot, even add it on in addition.
As stated, those abilities are limited in their usefulness AND can only be done once a day. I don't think it would be at all out of bounds to keep those abilities AND gain half spellcasting progression (i.e., every other level, as you say).
I was going to hold off my question about the Arcane Trickster, I might as well take a run for it. At some point AT were describe as being vanilla and seriously need to be tweaked. I was looking at the New PrC and nothing has changed for them. Is there any plans to change them or is that it?
Ok well I guess I tread slipped through, but I was wondering what people tought about the Arcane Trickster, I feel he is a little underpowers. So I thought about changing the +1 Spell level to +1 class level.
Uhmm... where is the link to download the Prestige Classes?? I can't find it.
It's in "My Downloads"Uhmm... where is the link to download the Prestige Classes?? I can't find it.
D'Oh! Thanks!
Could we get a clarification on if you can use weapon swap with the duelist's abilities please?
|
|
To me a blackgaurd should be more then just an evil paladin. It should have it's own skills, and ability's , with it's own feel not just the paladin class with the serial numbers filed off
I am late in reading this thread, but if it wasn't mentioned elsewhere: I think that the Unholy Warrior by Green Ronin (I think it's OGL) would make a very good anti-cleric/ anti-paladin. It is a base class and at least one of the PrC tied to it was a quoted favourite for emulating Hell Knights in Golarion.
What about eventually adapting this class to Golarion? :-)
Kind regards,
Günther
P.S.
Congrats to your guys at Paizo!
I really appreciate the thought spent by you on the sense of including the PrCs in the game: I especially like the fact that non magic PrC are so well represented in the PrC section. I always felt that most PrC concentrated on increasing magical prowess (something already done well in the new PF core rules).
/end of rant
The Pathfinder Beta Playtest edition of the Prestige Class rules are now available.
Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
If he wasn't core then he would have to be remade. You could use the non core one still as he will still work.
|
|
I love the new Duelist.
I play a Dervish (Complete Warrior) and after reading the new PRPG Duelist, I was hard pressed to decide Dervish or Duelist. Upon taking a very close look at both classes, both are almost EXACTLY on the same power level.
This has further convinced me that all the Complete Books need no power adjust, and that PRPG Beta is directly importable in any 3.5 campaign as-is.
Correct on the Chronicler vs. Red Wizard account.
And elves > dwarves! Everyone knows this! :)
Less Snarky: What about removing the requirement that an arcane archer has to be an elf? Opening that class up to all races? Is that too weird?
I'd be SO behind that. I always house rule that requirement away, anyway.
I still think the duellist should be able to use two weapons. It's hardly a big stretch to imagine that such styles might exist in terms of the actual conception of what a 'duellist' does, nor that it's not the sort of thing that a high-dex low-armour fighter would be able to do.
Heck Rapier and Main Ganche, it's historical fact.
The Swashbuckler was known as such becuase of the noise his buckler made as it moved against his hip and sword (by the way bucklers would be more accurately discribed as hand shields, they are NOT strapped to the arm!).
|
|
As it stands I've always like the duelist for the solo weapon feel it had going. I'm in love with the concept and having a free hand for improvisation in combat for whatever happens, as well as aiding in acrobatics if needed to confuse the foe. I guess when I envision a lone weapon fighter like the duelist, I've never pictured the dandy doing slight thrusts here and there.
I've always envisioned scenes out of The Musketeer (the over the top fighting one with Tim Roth and Justin Chambers). Or even the anime Samurai Champloo with how Mugen fights.
Of course I also never viewed a rapier in terms of a simple needle thin weapon. I've been more favored to the thicker, wider blades that some rapier and sabres had to add some slashing flavor to the weapon (even if it IS listed only as a piercing.)
Anyway, back on track the point is you can still duel wield as a duelist, you just get the precise strike if you don't. You GET something for using just one weapon unlike pretty much ANY OTHER melee only class/prestige class. If you say duel wielding gives you the bonus too, then why use one weapon? Takes away the duelists flavor.
|
|
If you're not getting the precision damage, you're giving up a fair amount.
I know what you're saying, but not only do, as Abraham Spalding points out, actual historical duellists fight with both hands, the class seems to me to be really narrowly directed at one sort of historical duellist wheras really, naming aside, it would make more sense to me for it to be an 'agile dex-based fighter' PrC. Obviously, Jason didn't create this problem -- it's right there in the DMG with the original Duellist PrC -- but I personally think that leaving it as it is would be to miss a chance to fix it. I don't think that you take away from the duellist flavour; you expand it to include more historical duellists and more fighting styles. And the fact that you only get the precision damage using a one-handed piercing weapon? You like that, too?
Also, of course, I think that we need all critical and precision damage to, like the new sneak attack, affect nearly everything.
You know I would like to see more expansion for the simple single weapon fighter too. Maybe more feats or what not.
However the Rapier is not the same as a Foil. People get them confused alot. A Foil is a square bladed practice weapon that has alot of flexibility and has only ever seen use in western european style olympic fencing. The Rapier is a regular weapon, with a blade generally starting at about an inch thick and tapering down to half an inch. The sides can be sharpened and used for simple slashes but they generally aren't going to cut, it's more like cutting a piece of meat than slashing with a large blade (i.e. you place the blade then pull or push it with pressure on the target). The rapier was generally a civillian weapon -- it's not meant for war use.