Director of Games
|
Welcome to the seventh stage of the playtest for the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game. We have now wrapped up the first six stages of the playtest, which took a look at the Ability Scores, Races, Skills, Feats, and all of the base classes. We are now jumping ahead a bit to take a look at prestige classes, an important part of character advancement. While it is ok to talk about these classes as they relate to other mechanics, the focus here should be on the prestige classes themselves. As a general note, if the rules would not be placed in this chapter, then it should probably wait (so discussing an Assassin's death attack is perfectly relevant here, but the Stealth skill is not). When discussing Prestige Classes, start your thread title out with the name of the class, followed by the issue you want to discuss. For example, if you wanted to talk about the enhanced arrows of an arcane archer, your thread subject might read: Arcane Archer - Enhanced Arrows
To get things started here, we need to take a look at a number of issues dealing with Prestige Classes. Here are some areas that need a good solid look at.
- As a general note, are these prestige classes in balance with class features gained by the standard classes at similar levels? Which ones go to far and which ones fall short?
- Saving throw progressions are different for prestige classes to help keep the save averages a bit closer to the "norm". Does this work and would it work for all multiclassing?
- Assassin's lost their spellcasting. Although this is not backward compatible, it fits closer with the original theme of the assassin. It might instead be possible to allow this to be a choice option, between spells and another ability. What should that other ability be?
- The dragon disciple now plays much more specifically with the draconic bloodline. This makes the class a great choice for sorcerers with that bloodline, possibly even better than sticking with sorcerer. This obviously opens the door for other bloodline themed classes. Thoughts?
- Other class specific thoughts. Do the changes go far enough to fix some of their deficiencies? Which ones go to far? Not far enough?
This is an area of the rules that can be quite contentious. To keep things clean, I would appreciate that you label your threads appropriately and keep things civil. Presenting entirely rebuilt prestige class is not very useful to us at this point, but presenting fixes to the rules we have is quite useful. Please keep that in mind, when you are posting. Finally, lets try not to stray all over the book in these discussions.
Please note that the selection of classes for the final book is pretty much set. Arguing for or against a class' inclusion at this point is not really helpful. Don't worry though, their concepts are not dead and will appear in later products in one form or another.
The previous playtests were very productive and I expect this one to be just as interesting.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Have there been any changes to Prestige Enhancement since you posted it in the announcement thread?
I ask because there has been some discussion on that thread about changes to some of the classes and I wanted to know if any of those recommendations have already been implemented.
|
While I'm not going to argue for their inclusion (because you've asked me not to) it might be useful to understand why the Archmage, Blackguard, Dwarven Defender, Hierophant, Horizon Walker, and Thaumaturgist were cut, if you've got a minute. (I suspect the dwarven defender may be in a dwarf issue of Pathfinder Companion?) My curiosity is killing me.
Just on a very quick glance-through, I think the new dragon disciple is awesome. The actual spellcasting advancement is a good thing, but I wonder if it's maybe a bit too good? As it stands, a dragon-blooded sorcerer almost should take this PrC. Massive hit dice, all kinds of powers, access to all but level 9 spells, higher BAB... ...that's quite a list of toys. Still, I can't help but love it. So.. damn... cool...
I don't see why there needs to be a separate progression that is neither good nor poor. If you wanted to get rid of the +2 bonus to good saves at level 1, you could do so without getting rid of the "either +1 per 2 levels or +1 per 3 levels" paradigm.
|
Director of Games
|
Some of that has been answered already: the blackguard is likely to be a base class at some point, and the horizon walker, archmage and heirophant have been made obsolete in some sense by the inclusion of key parts of their concepts into the core classes.
Shisumo is correct.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
Director of Games
|
Have there been any changes to Prestige Enhancement since you posted it in the announcement thread?
I ask because there has been some discussion on that thread about changes to some of the classes and I wanted to know if any of those recommendations have already been implemented.
There are no official changes as of this moment. There are a number of ideas that are being mulled, but now that we are in the right design forum, I will wait for the discussions to pop up before weighing in.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Well on the topic of what should that Assassin ability be, I vote for something that helps the assassin deal with the fact that anyone worthy of being "assassinated" is wealthy or important enough to be easily brought back to life, or at least having their murder solved by divination. So some sort of ability to help deal with this some kind of "soul eater" ability would be nice.
I don't see why there needs to be a separate progression that is neither good nor poor. If you wanted to get rid of the +2 bonus to good saves at level 1, you could do so without getting rid of the "either +1 per 2 levels or +1 per 3 levels" paradigm.
The new Prestige class saves are an excellent inventive solution. Hogarth - the saves do indeed still follow +1 per 2 and +1 per 3 levels. The first level (with +2's and +0's) has simply been cut off. That leaves the +1 from 2nd level at 1st, and +1 from 3rd level at 2nd.
Brilliant imho.
However - No, it will not work for all multiclassing. Prestige classes are balanced to merge in as a later class - multiclassing of base classes are better balanced with maintaining the +2's.
It also would also return us to having to know which class someone took first.
I don't see why there needs to be a separate progression that is neither good nor poor. If you wanted to get rid of the +2 bonus to good saves at level 1, you could do so without getting rid of the "either +1 per 2 levels or +1 per 3 levels" paradigm.The new Prestige class saves are an excellent inventive solution. Hogarth - the saves do indeed still follow +1 per 2 and +1 per 3 levels. The first level (with +2's and +0's) has simply been cut off. That leaves the +1 from 2nd level at 1st, and +1 from 3rd level at 2nd.
You're not quite getting my comment. I'm saying that the formula for save bonuses has gone from +N/2 or +N/3 (where N is your [prestige] class level) to +(N+1)/2 or +(N+1)/3.
Why is "+N/2 for regular classes, +(N+1)/2 for prestige classes" an improvement over "+N/2 for all classes"? It seems silly to add an extra rule that makes a whopping difference of +1/2 or +1/3 point of save bonus.
You're not quite getting my comment. I'm saying that the formula for save bonuses has gone from +N/2 or +N/3 (where N is your [prestige] class level) to +(N+1)/2 or +(N+1)/3.
Why is "+N/2 for regular classes, +(N+1)/2 for prestige classes" an improvement over "+N/2 for all classes"? It seems silly to add an extra rule that makes a whopping difference of +1/2 or +1/3 point of save bonus.
Ahh, I see what you mean. I would point out that it makes a +1/3 point of difference to the poor saves, but makes a -1.5 difference to the good saves (alternating down 1 and down 2 each level).
Ahh, I see what you mean. I would point out that it makes a +1/3 point of difference to the poor saves, but makes a -1.5 difference to the good saves (alternating down 1 and down 2 each level).
Why is "+N/2 for regular classes, +(N+1)/2 for prestige classes" an improvement over "+N/2 for all classes"? It seems silly to add an extra rule that makes a whopping difference of +1/2 or +1/3 point of save bonus.
Sure, I wasn't counting the +2 at level 1 (since it's clear that the intent is to remove that +2 at level 1).
I guess my point is that there's a simpler fix that's just as good and is closer to backward compatibility (e.g. just get rid of the +2 at level 1 when you multiclass) and there's a slightly more complicated fix that's better (e.g. fractional BAB from Unearthed Arcana). So in my opinion Jason's "fix" is in 4th place (behind the other two "fixes" and "leave it the same as in 3.5").
|
As for multi-classing saving throws (and BAB) my group fixed this problem by not looking to the class table for the numbers, but to the base table. Each class has either good, average, or poor BAB, and good or poor saves of the three types.
As an example: You are a Ranger 2/Rogue 2/Cleric 3
- You have +2 BAB from Ranger, and combine your levels in Rogue and Cleric (both have moderate BAB) for another +3, for +5 total.
- For Fort saves you combine your levels of Ranger and Cleric (both good saves) for +4 Fort and add the +0 from the levels in Rogue (poor saves) for a total of +4
- For Reflex you add your levels in Ranger and Rogue to get +4 and add your +1 from Cleric for +5 total
- For Will saves, you have +3 from your levels in Cleric and +1 from your combined Ranger and Rogue for +4 total
Perhaps this example isn't thought through thoroughly enough, but leaves you with +5 BAB and +4/+5/+4 for your saves, where using the old system you'd have +5 BAB and +6/+7/+3
This prevents the combinations where all you end up with is ridiculous saves and no BAB that are so common to Elan-esque multiclassing, and also negates multiclassing just to receive the +2 from first level over and over.
Ryn, who once saw a Cleric 2/Ranger 2/Wandering Mystic 2 with +4 BAB and +6/+6/+6 saves...
|
Hi Jason,
While my group won't be able to really test-drive the prestige classes, I've looked at them and here are my opinions:
- the new saving throw progression is a good change. People will get less wonky saving throw numbers from prestige classes.
- I think that assassins should keep their spellcasting as an option. Create a class ability called 'dark knowledge' and let them have either spellcasting or a form of favored enemy that gives them bonuses to hit and damage creatures. Obviouslly, all assassins would choose 'human' so all assassins favored enemy type should be their own race, maybe.
- Saving throw progressions are different for prestige classes to help keep the save averages a bit closer to the "norm". Does this work and would it work for all multiclassing?
I am very pleased that this solution was adopted and am entirely in favor of it. I do think it would work for all multiclassing, including the base classes. Indeed, I would go even slightly further and make good saving throws also start with +0 just like poor ones (though they would still improve faster) - after all the spread being too high between saving throws at higher levels is a common complaint. If there must be a first level bonus, it could be tied to race instead of class (Dwarves could get +2 (or maybe just +1) to Fortitude, Halflings could get the bonus to Reflex, Elves to Willpower, Humans (and Half-Elves and Half-Orcs) could chose any one saving throw and so on for other races).
|
|
Hi Jason,
While my group won't be able to really test-drive the prestige classes, I've looked at them and here are my opinions:
- the new saving throw progression is a good change. People will get less wonky saving throw numbers from prestige classes.
- I think that assassins should keep their spellcasting as an option. Create a class ability called 'dark knowledge' and let them have either spellcasting or a form of favored enemy that gives them bonuses to hit and damage creatures. Obviouslly, all assassins would choose 'human' so all assassins favored enemy type should be their own race, maybe.
I, too, fear that we didn't consider PrCs when my players created their characters... I may have to think about letting them "retrain" their abilities or perhaps even I might start a new 5th level campaign which would concentrate on playtesting the PrCs.
The new saving throw progression is a very good idea -- in my experience players "dipped" too often into two or more Prestige Classes just to rack up their saving throws.
As for the assassin... I miss all those nasty spells from BoVD, but I still think the new assassin is thematically a lot better than a spellcasting assassin.
Assassin's lost their spellcasting. Although this is not backward compatible, it fits closer with the original theme of the assassin. It might instead be possible to allow this to be a choice option, between spells and another ability. What should that other ability be?
Idea for the choice here.
quick question. are PrCs going to be intergral parts of future Chronicles and/or Companion books?
Idea for the choice here.
No please just no. I dont want replacement spell like powers. Keep it spell less
|
|
- Saving throw progressions are different for prestige classes to help keep the save averages a bit closer to the "norm". Does this work and would it work for all multiclassing?
I like this, and wouldn't mind seeing this sort of logic also applied to BAB progression, which often suffers just as badly as save progression leapt ahead of the curve due to multiclassing / PrCing.
Fractional BAB / saves seemed like the ideal solution, but perhaps you've got another idea that will be even better.
- Assassin's lost their spellcasting. Although this is not backward compatible, it fits closer with the original theme of the assassin. It might instead be possible to allow this to be a choice option, between spells and another ability. What should that other ability be?
Having spellcasting progression be one option, and a more martial progression (full BAB, better Sneak Attack progression, etc) be another might work. Alternately, just present one option at first, and introduce yet another later, for assassins who are more magically inclined.
No please just no. I dont want replacement spell like powers. Keep it spell less
Idea for the choice here.
i agree. I always liked 1e assassins
i agree. I always liked 1e assassinsNo please just no. I dont want replacement spell like powers. Keep it spell less
Idea for the choice here.
I also agree. The new assassin prestige class is pure awesome!
|
|
Not a fan of the new Assassin it just seems to feel like a rogue with very specific talents selected (In fact as it stands you could probably change all the assassin abilities into Rogue talents and get rid of the assassin class altogether probably work better as well.) Unfortunately I cant really explain this more since I need to go out soon so I'll probably post an actual topic about it once I get back.
|
|
(In fact as it stands you could probably change all the assassin abilities into Rogue talents and get rid of the assassin class altogether probably work better as well.)
I was thinking much the same, actually.
If a PrC, like the Assassin or Shadowdancer, is really taken for one ability (Death Attack or Hide in Plain Sight) or two at the outset (Shadow Jump, Poison Use), then perhaps those abilities should just be Rogue Talents, since that sort of fine-tuning / customization seems to be *exactly* what Rogue talents were made for in the first place...
A PrC, IMO, should be more than just one or two 'gimmicks.' And dragging a PrC into a 10 level class by having it just extend some of your Rogue progressions (such as Sneak Attack) IMO begs the question of why the character doesn't just take *Rogue levels* for those levels, instead of effectively 'dead levels' of Assassin or Shadowdancer that do nothing that Rogue levels wouldn't already have done anyway.
Oh come on, it's not as if the previous Assassin was a paragon of difference vis-a-vis the Rogue. He was basically a Rogue with spells (which never made any sense anyway). There are plenty of specialization-based prestige classes. It is one of the functions that these prestige classes are supposed to provide. What is a Loremaster other than a Wizard with a couple of his abilities exchanged for lore ones? This is a normal way prestige classes are supposed to and do function. The new Assassin is great in this regard.
The best version of assassin that I've seen was in Green Ronin's splat books. What I don't like about the Pathfinder assassin is it's focus on melee. When I think of an assassin I think of Waylander from David Gemel's books. Who used a crossbow, throwing knives, throwing stars, and sometimes, when things got rough, his sword. I don't see an assassin working at all in the D&D universe by sneaking up and stabbing someone in the back. Not with spellcasting advisors, and the hitpoint system in general. It just does not work for me. Personally, I don't see the assassin concept as worthy of a prestigue class, but considering it's going to be in the book regardless, hopefuly something better is developed.
Personally I thought the ninja from Complete Rogue (can't remember what it was actually called) would have made a superb assassin. The ki abilities gave you all the tools you would need to sneak into a secure location and eliminate a target, then escape. Dimensional travel, invisibility, being able to hold one's breath, being able to jump great distances...these are what would really help you kill someone. Getting arround the basic problems of the system's...not sure what to call it beyond flaws, though that's not the right word, but "issues", is a problem, but doable. The issues I'm talking about are hitpoints and the basic toughness important (aka high level) characters in a gaming system generaly become. Kings and politicians that are good targets for assassination probably aren't just 5th level aristocrats, so it's going to take more than a few die of sneak attack to whack them in one hit. No, not all targets for an assassin are going to be high level, but I'm trying to speak mostly in stereotypes here.
Poison is pretty stereotypical. The ability to use and craft truely effective posions would be handy. The death attack is a good idea, representing striking from suprise, and having studied your target. I just don't think it works all that well. For one, you can choose to slay or stun your opponent. Why? An assassin is an assassin. Not a bounty hunter, not a kidnapper. The point is killing people. So why the stunning option? Who are you wasting time studying that you want to stun instead of killing, when you should be focusing on the mark your being paid to whack?
i agree. I always liked 1e assassinsNo please just no. I dont want replacement spell like powers. Keep it spell less
Idea for the choice here.
I did as well. But frankly there are just way too many Assassins out there to kill their spell backwards compatibility. So we need a choice - what should it be? Needs to be a balanced choice between quite a few useful spells, and something else.
Poison is pretty stereotypical. The ability to use and craft truely effective posions would be handy. The death attack is a good idea, representing striking from suprise, and having studied your target. I just don't think it works all that well. For one, you can choose to slay or stun your opponent. Why? An...
To enhance your reputation. You leave survivors because you aren't being paid to kill the king's valet, just the king. Reasons to NOT kill aren't hard to find. Maybe you take a prisoner in order to get information you need to make the hit, such as the king's schedule. Questioning corpses can take more resources than it's worth.