Do we like additional base classes? I know 3.5 went base class crazy but I liked the various options myself although it do a bit kooky
Anyone else like more base classes? Anyone have any ideas?
We have tossed around the idea on other threads of a holy warrior without an alignment restriction. Some like a Crusader or Templar others think that same is covered by the cleric really
Any other ideas?
Here are some from me:
I like the idea of a Shaman. Some tied to and powered by spirits. It would be a bit like a druid for sure but there could be some changes.
I would like to see a Mystic class. Sort of a favored soul type, powered by raw divine energy. Maybe a little more spell oriented than the cleric.
I like the ranger/rogue feel of the scout class. perhaps it could be reworked under the name the Vanguard.
I also liked the Beguiler concept of a rogue/enchanter type. Perhaps that could be reworked into the Deceiver.
And, of course, a fighter/mage type ala the Mageblade or something
|
Along those types of lines, I would really love to see some simple variants like in Unearthed Arcana, for the classes. Maybe 2-3 for each base class like the option to swap out fighter feats for sneak attack progression, or trading out ranger fighting styles(archery or TWF) for the barbarian's Rage line.
That would instantly add a ton of customization to the base classes. Any added base class should also have simple variants added to it, so if you create a "Mageblade" class having the option to swap out certain abilities for others would be really cool. It's like getting a ton of extra classes for much less work.
If you have access to Green Ronin's Advanced Player's Manual, they have a Scout class, along with a fighter/mage based class called the Thanemage and the Spellmaster. You might take a look at those classes. They look fairly interesting.
I personally really preferred the 2E method of doing things over the 3.X Prestige Class concept. In 2E (as I'm sure many of you will remember) you still chose your base class normally and then applied subkits. You could be a fighter > cavalier or a cleric > shaman for example. You didn't have to wait to get into the PrC, you started off at 1st level as that subkit. I don't know why its not still done that way, as the entire concept seemed "cleaner" to me.
1) Choose a class.
2) [Optionally] Choose a sub-class.
3) Done.
Neat.
As opposed to:
1) Choose a class.
2) Make sure you have all of the attribute requirements you might later need to get into the PrC you really want to play.
3) Make sure you choose the right feats and skills so that you don't have to wait even longer to get the PrC you really want to play.
4) Advance several levels, not playing the character you really want to play.
5) Choose the Prestige Class you really wanted to play.
6) Advance in that class a few levels and then realize your spell progression blows.
7) Drop the PrC.
8) Done!
Ugh.
If you have access to Green Ronin's Advanced Player's Manual, they have a Scout class, along with a fighter/mage based class called the Thanemage and the Spellmaster. You might take a look at those classes. They look fairly interesting.
don't have it. is it good?
I like the Scout class from Com Adventurer myself along with Favored Soul, Beguiler and some others as well as the concept of the 4e swordmage (i.e. magic replaces armor for a fighter)
I have the book packed for my trip to my Sunday game, but I will answer your question later tonight when I get back. There are certain differences between the Com Adventurer and the Ad PM's Scout, but they have a few similarities also. The Thanemage reminds me of teh Duskblade somewhat. Post more later.
I have the book packed for my trip to my Sunday game, but I will answer your question later tonight when I get back. There are certain differences between the Com Adventurer and the Ad PM's Scout, but they have a few similarities also. The Thanemage reminds me of teh Duskblade somewhat. Post more later.
fair enough. good gaming
Warlock was my favorite class outside the core. It yielded an entirely different way of playing. "Blast you. Blast you too. Hmm... think I'll blast you. Anyone need any blasting? Okay. Think I'll go back to being invisible and flying around as much as I want."
I don't think it's OGL, so one would have to recreate the warlock feel, which lies primarily in the fact that he uses an unlimited number of spell-like abilities.
I don't think its OGL but it is a very good class and one of the more innovative base classes they introduced in the series of Complete Books. It should come to Pathfinder somehow in some form
Perhaps you can call the class the Conjurer? Or Mage?
|
If you have access to Green Ronin's Advanced Player's Manual, they have a Scout class, along with a fighter/mage based class called the Thanemage and the Spellmaster. You might take a look at those classes. They look fairly interesting.don't have it. is it good?
The Eldritch Weaver is a fairly awesome class from that book, learning spells from 'threads' and gaining special powers related to the 'threads' they've mastered. (Based on an old Dragon magazine article, IIRC.) Very flavorful, and the restrictions of mastering spells from particular threads to gain the new abilities make it quite focused.
The Spellmaster is like an arcane Archivist, being able to learn spells from all different schools and disciplines. There have been days when I've been frustrated to see new spells that are 'only usable by Bards' or 'only usable by members of this PrC' or 'only usable if you have X Magic feat,' and the Spellmaster seems designed to get around those sorts of frustrations.
The Scout is, IMO, not as interesting as the Complete Adventurer Scout.
The Evangelist is a cleric that converts people, so it's got some Bard mixed in there. IMO, the Cleric and Druid are such beefy classes, that it's really hard to make a compelling divine alternate core class.
The War Priest has less spellcasting ability than a standard Cleric, but is a better fighter.
The Thanemage is kind of like a fighter / mage, with a special ability usable a few times a day that increases in power as it gets higher in level. If I were to play something along these lines, the Mage Blade from Arcana Unearthed, or just a magical version of the Soulknife from the SRD would be, IMO, better choices.
The back of the book also reprints the Psychic, from the Psychic's Handbook, which is a much tighter version of the Psion, based on skill rolls instead of power points. I could see some really sick telekinetic or biokinetic builds, but it's a very, very squishy class.
|
|
I don't think it's OGL, so one would have to recreate the warlock feel, which lies primarily in the fact that he uses an unlimited number of spell-like abilities.
Using the various Specialist powers for the new Pathfinder Wizards, one could design a PrC (or some Feats or Alternate Class Features) that further expand on those abilities, at the cost of decreased spellcasting ability.
An Evoker 'Warlock' for instance could either buy some feats to increase his damage ray's potency (+1d6 for the first feat, +2d6 for the second feat, etc. within reason and with level requirements to keep it balanced).
Another Feat might allow increased uses per day of a particular ability, or the ability to burn higher level spells to activate a lower level one.
Alternate Class features could allow someone to swap out one of the spell choices for a Specialization level for a different spell-like ability.
Finally, a PrC might have only half spellcaster progression, but allow the Conjurer (for instance) to add extra dice to his Acid Dart for every level of the five level PrC or whatever, making him into an acid-spewing fool. Each level might also grant alternate ways to use that acid dart, perhaps as a Line attack, or as a shorter range Cone, or as a small Burst effect centered on it's point of impact, or making it do Continuing Damage (like Acid Arrow). These would be the equivalent of Warlock Blast Invocations, obviously, and the caster would have to choose one of these options at the time of 'blasting.'
The fun thing is that this could apply not only to Specialist Wizards, but also to Bloodline Sorcerers or Domain Clerics (or Elemental Domain Druids). A 'storm priest' (Cleric of Air) could take a PrC, Feat and / or Alternate Class Feature that allows her to blast lightning all day long, while a Druid who swapped out for the Water Domain could be a 'winter witch' and hurl ice blasts around.
Let me start by saying this...I've been gaming for nearly 25 years, and I've played A LOT! I have seen this industry go from just a few options to thousands.
That being said, I know that no single game can do everything, no matter what they claim or the thousands of support books they release. BUT (you knew there was a but in there, didn't you?), I believe that the Pazio gang has done a damn good job remaking the granddaddy into a fun and exciting product.
Now, being as long in the tooth as I am as a gamer, I must agree that I am a bit board with the base classes. I love the reworks, and I can't wait to see what mid and high level games are gonna look like, but I feel that the new soeceer blood lines is truely a thing of beauty, replacing several of the 3.5 classes like Dragon Shaman and the Favored Soul, but I must concede to the game could use a few more options.
Classes like the Dusk Blade, Battle Mage and the Scout would be a sweet addition to the game, be it stand alone classes or as variations. Scout as a variation Ranger, Battle Mage for Wizard and so on. I have been playing around with the Beta rules to convert a character from our current game into Pathfinder, he is a Dusk Blade and it's been interesting, to say the least. I would love to see a Player's Handbook II released (as I hope they will!), with new classes, spell, feats, ect.
It would be interesting to see the fans (us) and the Pazio gang working together on this project, say a submission contest or some such for the new classes, with the best that Pazio approves of going into a Companion guide or something. This could allow the established 'other classes' to get a make over and for new classes to be created, like the non Lawful Good Paladin idea someone had suggested.
The kit idea also has merit, and might make an interesting path to follow within the game system as well, but in some cases they might be like the Prestige Classes. The Battle Mage would be easy to do, but how would you do a Dusk Blade? Would you make it a base Wizard/Sorceer, and just lay down the changes at first level? It could be argued that you would need to start as a Wizard/Sorceer, and then take a level of Fighter before you could become a Dusk Blade. Do you see how this could become complicated?
And, on the idea of Prestige Classes, are we going to see more of them? I like the changes made to some of them, and it would be interesting to see some of the 3.0 and 3.5's get a make over for this system. Couldn't we make the 'other classes' into Prestige's instead? Think about it, the Battle Mage would be a sweet Prestige Class, and the Scout would be a nasty one as well! There would be one limit it would place on the Prestige Classes though, make them 5 levels only, and make it so that they are level specific for the new level. For example, you could take the first level once you met the base requirements, say +6 to hit base, +6 in Concentration, and the other requirements. Upon your next level, you go back to your base class and earn or gather the next set of requirements, be they feats, skill ranks, or so on. This would make the Prestige Classes more interesting because you could be a level 1 whatever for a long time, and they you could make the next level in it all that more sweet because of the Peer recognition and the deeds you performed to get there, think 1st ED Monk or Druid in this case as an example.
I know I got off topic a bit, by my hands got away from me. I look forward to any input.
Fight hard and roll high!
I like base classes for a simple reason. Most campaigns I play in start at level 1. This means that if my character concept is a fighter/wizard, he won't get to mix might with magic at 1st level, and he won't be any good at it until he's gotten quite a few levels in eldrich knight under his belt. (This assumes the campaign will reach levels where I could take those eldrich knight levels, which is usually not the case.)
However, if I start as a duskblade I'll get to play a figter/wizard from level 1 on.
More base classes mean more character concepts come together earlier than if one sticks to just core classes.
|
I have to admit, I do like the idea of a few more base classes. In fact, my favorite character that I've played was the Witch class from Dragon Magazine #114 used in a 2nd Edition campaign. Yeah, it was meant to be an NPC class, but we tried it as a character, and I got all the way up to about 21st level. Good times. (Since then, I've picked up a few third-party PDF's also featuring witches as a base class).
The base classes in Green Ronin's Cavalier's Handbook and Shaman's Handbook also look interesting.
I personally really preferred the 2E method of doing things over the 3.X Prestige Class concept. In 2E (as I'm sure many of you will remember) you still chose your base class normally and then applied subkits. You could be a fighter > cavalier or a cleric > shaman for example. You didn't have to wait to get into the PrC, you started off at 1st level as that subkit. I don't know why its not still done that way, as the entire concept seemed "cleaner" to me.
1) Choose a class.
2) [Optionally] Choose a sub-class.
3) Done.Neat.
As opposed to:
1) Choose a class.
2) Make sure you have all of the attribute requirements you might later need to get into the PrC you really want to play.
3) Make sure you choose the right feats and skills so that you don't have to wait even longer to get the PrC you really want to play.
4) Advance several levels, not playing the character you really want to play.
5) Choose the Prestige Class you really wanted to play.
6) Advance in that class a few levels and then realize your spell progression blows.
7) Drop the PrC.
8) Done!Ugh.
How about:
1) Choose a class.
2) Role-play the subclass?
That way there's no unbalanced kits/PrCs to worry about. Of course, there's no filler for future gaming supplements either.
|
For my part? I'd love to see reworkings of the Scout, Ninja, and Duskblade, either as alternate class features for the Rogue/Ranger to add Ninja/Scout abilities, or as another base class. I'd be THRILLED to see Wolfgang Baur take a crack at Pathfinderizing his Assassin Base class from Green Ronin's Assassin's Handbook as well.
I'd also love to see the Paizo crew rework the races and classes from the Dragon Compendium to Pathfinder, if that would be possible/legal.
I miss Warlock...
I'd also like to see a Ninja class that isn't complete crap, just once.
As far as kits are concerned, they were great back in the day, but I typically like to sample a little of everything. It's pretty common for one of my PCs to have four or six classes by the time we're in high level play, and typically they're a lot of fun. (Yes, I know that there are droves of DMs that want to prevent that style of play; I tend to think they're meddlesome ***holes. Why should the dude behind the screen have a problem with my character concept when it makes me happy?)
Then again, I've made a conscious effort to play single-classed characters in PFRPG to try out some of the high level abilities. So I might could be persuaded to give kits a shot. Not as the only option though.
|
|
I'd also like to see a Ninja class that isn't complete crap, just once.
It's a prestige class but the Ninja Spy from the Oriental Adventures guide is pretty amazing. It's what my wife uses for her ninja character (with the base class of rogue). It's pretty cool prestige class and way better then the ninja core class in my opinion.
A lot depends on what classes from 3.x you are talking about. I think most of WotC supp. classes can be used (more or less) 'as is' for Pathfinder. When you get to 3pp things get complicated, because many of those classes need to buffed up a bit. For me the the list of classes include.
Mystic (Dragonlance)
Archer (a combo of 3 arrows for the King and S.S. version)
Knight (R&R Excaliber it really needs to be updated to Pathfinder standard but its by far the best concept for a Knight that I've seen, IMO of course)
Tinker and Runemaster (from WoWC RPG and it works fine as is, no updating needed, as far as I can see)
Shaman, Wicth, Cavalier, and Assissan all from G.R. with a just a little boost work fine (also whats nice about the first two is that their are a lot of versions of both that you can get a very large spell list if you find the books, example Mongoose came out with a version of both classes, while I perfer G.R. take on the class itself, the added spells are welcomed.
That's my standard list, I have others, and allow almost anything on my table and only ban it if its way over powered, but I do have to sit down and put the work in to updating the classes. Heck since they're OGL maybe I can even put together a PDF supp for sale with an update/change to make them Pathfinder compatable.
As to the Wizards classes I had my share of problems with some. I came to the conclusion that many of the classes were in reality
a. playtest for 4e.
b. made intentionly with copyright thinking behind them. An Archer can't be copyrited, but a Duskblade can. Yeah I know there's a lot of excptions to this, so it wasn't the only reason, but still.
C. most of thier classes, outside of the OA and a few of the early complet books classes, may have used classic names like Knight and Crusader, but really didn't have a univesal feel to them, instead you got a lot of powercreep without an intersiting concept behind the class. eample take Wizards Knight and the one I mentioned above, both in theory had a high magic game world concept, but one was built with the intention of giving players a classic Knight feel, but Wizards seemed to say 'hey power gamers look at this new toy!'.
In either case, the bigger isssue isn't should their be more core classes, (their going to be) but if any of the older compaies will update their older classes (like my above list hint hint) to P.F. standared, or if it falls to newer companies will they do as good a job in a much smaller market. Not to be negative but while I think Pathfinder support will be good stuff, I think it'll be massively less then anything duding 3.x
TTFN DRE
|
Dragonlance already has. Well some. Mostly the unique once, like mystic.
Personally, I don't want more base classes. Well not many. I would rather see more concept put into classes. If you want a ninja, take rogue or monk and dress like a ninja. For a knight, cleric, fighter, or paladin combo.
A few things I would like to see are favored souls with bloodline like abilities. Or just straight bloodlines. Paladins that are any good or any evil. A dread necromancer. And that's about it.
Anything else I can think of, I'd really prefere just taking an existing class and switching out some fluff, possibly trading a feature or something, but not a new class.
|
|
Dragonlance already has. Well some. Mostly the unique once, like mystic.
Personally, I don't want more base classes. Well not many. I would rather see more concept put into classes. If you want a ninja, take rogue or monk and dress like a ninja. For a knight, cleric, fighter, or paladin combo.
Anything else I can think of, I'd really prefere just taking an existing class and switching out some fluff, possibly trading a feature or something, but not a new class.
Agreed only new class I want to see is Blackguard everything else should be able to be handled in existing classes or in really out of the way cases a prestige class (but again not to many of them)
Honestly, I'd like a few new base classes, but mostly I'd like to see alternate builds of existing base classes.
For example, if a class is wholly unique from the existing base classes (Warlock for example, or Marshall, or Healer) then I'd like them to be new classes. Something that's got a different flavor/feel/ability tree should be a base class.
Something that is a merge of two other classes, or very close to an existing class should be an alternate class tree.
For example, Ninja. This is really a 'merging' of a monk and a rogue, so, it should just be a merging of the two classes as an alternate build of one of them (probably the Monk). Replace the monk's Monk Feats and Unarmed Damage progression with Trapfinding and Sneak Attack, for example, update the skills list, give him 6pts per level, and open up his weapon proficiencies. A Scout would be a Ranger, replace his favored enemy with a variant sneak attack, boost his skill pts to 6, add trapfinding, etc.
This keeps the base classes to a minimum of uniqueness and explodes out the possibilities as well. I really liked the alternate class abilities they started putting in towards the end of 3.5 (WoTC that is). I think it's a wonderful way to go to tailor the base classes. A new base class should be introduced when adding something unlike existing classes, and alternate abilities and tree progressions for classes that are similar to existing classes (or are two classes merged).
I personally really preferred the 2E method of doing things over the 3.X Prestige Class concept. In 2E (as I'm sure many of you will remember) you still chose your base class normally and then applied subkits. You could be a fighter > cavalier or a cleric > shaman for example. You didn't have to wait to get into the PrC, you started off at 1st level as that subkit. I don't know why its not still done that way, as the entire concept seemed "cleaner" to me.
1) Choose a class.
2) [Optionally] Choose a sub-class.
3) Done.Neat.
As opposed to:
1) Choose a class.
2) Make sure you have all of the attribute requirements you might later need to get into the PrC you really want to play.
3) Make sure you choose the right feats and skills so that you don't have to wait even longer to get the PrC you really want to play.
4) Advance several levels, not playing the character you really want to play.
5) Choose the Prestige Class you really wanted to play.
6) Advance in that class a few levels and then realize your spell progression blows.
7) Drop the PrC.
8) Done!Ugh.
Agreed.
I think (pure speculation) the goal was that a player had to earn a prestige class.
At least for me, I say if you want to be a Mystic Theurge, you cannot do so by merely meeting the requirements. You need to find someone or some academy/temple etc., and get a little training. Some way to initiate you into the PrC.
No, that's not by the book.
It just seems to me that it's wierd for a rogue to level up as a rogue for a handful of levels then all of a sudden announce "Hey, I'm not a rogue anymore, I'm a shadowdancer now."
Especially if none of the PCs (rogue included) have ever met a shadowdancer, or seen one, or talked to one, or even heard that there was such a thing in the course of the game.
Why even call them "prestige" classes if they just fall into your lap?
But then they didn't make any such rule (except for a couple specific PrCs) so anyone can be anything at any time they decide they qualify.
Wierd.
For me, I like my interpretation, but then the 3.x guys screwed it up with all the prerequisites.
Now a player has to have a great deal of "system mastery" to qualify for what he wants when he wants it.
Nothing worse than meeting a shadowdancer that will train you, only to find out you fail to meet a requirement, and it will take you 4 levels to get what you need - if only you had known about that requirement you would have leveled differently...
So yeah, those prerequisites screw up the idea of meeting someone and simply saying "Hey, teach me to do what you do", unless you plan way in advance for it or you get very lucky.
I've always been satisfied with players deciding to enter prestige classes on the fly because THEY invented personal techniques to do so. Most of the people I game with aren't playing social animals as PCs. Our characters are often as likely to stab someone as thank them for helpful advice, so teachers are out, and somewhere along the line it's not surprising that they might think of a colorful new ability in line with their goals; like a rogue learning to access deeper mysteries of the shadows in which he spends the majority of his time.
I (kind of) understand when players disdain multiple base/prestige classes for their characters. I'm aware that it's a semi-popular play style. I just don't understand calls for other players to do the same. Are people thinking that fewer pages devoted to prestige classes will give them more pages devoted to fluff and spells? Why hope that other people won't get the parts of the game that they like?
|
|
i promise I will read this later... completely...
but as the OP pointed... 3.5 already went quite crazy about it... and every RPG company of D20 has 1 or a dozen new classes...
my question... is so really necessary to have this many classes?
wouldn't it better if the core classes could be customizable to acept new concepts?
right now, and i feel now more than before the core classes are focused into a niche that traps them giving them little flexibility... yes they have feats adn prestigue classes...
actually the most flexible classes are 2... rogue and cleric... most of us love the rogue, and many hate the cleric for this versatility
where they get it? well cleric is easy: decent spells & domains... with a good com,biantion you can do a lot of things... not as well as people say, but pretty well...
rogue? easy skill points and good abilities... specially skill points
2nd edition solved this using kits, sort of class avriants applicable at 1st level... the problem they were not balanced...
but it worked well in general... just taking a few things from the class that were not relevant for a concept and giving others that filled what was needed
people would argue saying that there is now prestigue classes... but why do I have to travel 1/4 or 1/2 of my career so I can have the necesarry requisites to cover my concept?
stuff
I've always thought the classes were all equally malleable, but then I'm a big fan of prestige classes. I also like mixing base classes, so I don't ever feel pigeon-holed into fighter. I might take three or four levels of fighter and one or two of rogue in order to qualify for x prestige class while still expanding my role a little bit. *shrug*
Rogue skill points aren't all that exciting, I don't know why everyone raves about them.
Anyway, they already did some of that "remove option A and replace with variant B" in a few WoTC books. You could even use more than one, as long as they didn't cost the same basic ability, and completely change the face of a class. Might be sort of what you're looking for.
Again, traveling 1/4 of your career to cover concept is unnecessary. You need a +5 BaB to enter x prestige? You can tweak with fighter, barbarian, ranger, paladin right out of core; and several other core classes from supplements. And at fifth level you can have a substantially specialized character who still qualifies for x prestige class. Thank god for lots of base classes! ;)
Again, traveling 1/4 of your career to cover concept is unnecessary. You need a +5 BaB to enter x prestige? You can tweak with fighter, barbarian, ranger, paladin right out of core; and several other core classes from supplements. And at fifth level you can have a substantially specialized character who still qualifies for x prestige class. Thank god for lots of base classes! ;)
Uhm,
May I point out that if the requirement is +5 BAB, then yes, you must spend a minimum of 1/4 of your career to make the prestige class? With a fighter BAB progression, you can't take that PrC until level 6. So it cost's five levels to get there, minimum. 5/20 = 1/4.Not saying PrC's are bad, just pointing out that your argument actually doesn't negate what was said, it backs it up.
[...]but I must concede to the game could use a few more options.
I agree. More options is always good.
And that's why I'm actually in favour for LESS base classes. ^^
I'm probably quite abit old school regarding D&D, so I'm biased on this. But I think that the player should think of their characters are people with certain ablities in which they are good as much as possible, and not as characters of a class. In theory, a fighter can be so many things. A dwarven guard, an elven fencer, a knight, a samurai, a viking, an archer, a brigand, and so much more. I'm strongly in favor of customizing a fighter character by skills, feats, and equipment. Making each of these archetypes a distinct class seems to shoehorn the players into certain archetypes and discourages them from making their own character from all the options open to them. You can always make more classes, but then you end up with the exact same thing that WotC did and brought us 800 Prestige Classes. (No joke, that's the length of the list of PrCs in their own books on their website.)
Back in the old Complete Guide to Thieves, you had Swashbucklers, Pirates and Ninjas next to each other as differnt ways to play a thief. AD&D had the class kits, but with skills and feats, you don't need those anymore.
I think you really NEED only four classes. Fighter, Thief, Priest, and Wizard. Start with that and you can make any archetype by combining these classes.
I still keep Barbarians, Bards, Druids and Rangers in my games as I think it's much simpler than designing a lot of feats to emulate these classes. And yes, I kind of got used to them, of course.
But it starts with the paladin. If you had a paladin and a fighter/cleric in a novel or a movie, how could you tell the difference? Both can fight in heavy armor, turn undead, cast some divine spells. The Paladin has a stronger horse, but smiting, lay on hands, cure disease and such things can all be done with a cleric spell. Or the monk: I think you can make better martial artists with a fighter/rogue, if you just add a few feats that allow greater unarmed damage and better AC when wearing no armor. And you probably end up with a martial artist that is even better than a monk. And sorcerer: As an NPC, it's just a wizard with more spells per day.
I think that having a few base classes and then offering customization by feats is the way to go. Pathfinder allready increased the number of feats substantially. If you have a concept in mind, that is really something different from the other classes, like a monk or a psion, make a base class for it. But I think you really don't need a Ninja class, if you can have a rogue/monk? What is a ninja? A martial artist who is also highly trained in stealth and spying.
It's generally accepted that beguilers are a very well designed class. But if both rogue and sorcerer would have been well designed, I don't think it would be neccessary to have it.
Nope.
My argument was that there are several classes that have a full base, so you don't have to stick to fighter, and that having more base classes increases your ability to shop around for an interesting combination.
But I think you really don't need a Ninja class, if you can have a rogue/monk? What is a ninja? A martial artist who is also highly trained in stealth and spying.
Actually, if you want a martially trained stealther, you'd want a fighter rogue. Monk would just get his tail handed to him.
I know where you're coming from on the multiple roles can be filled by a single class thing, I agree actually. I just don't see it as bad to have a specific class dedicated to blurring the line. It doesn't stop someone from making a stealthy fighter and calling it a ninja. It just means that you have the opportunity to create a class that is completely in tune with your idea of what a "ninja" is, rather than taking things piecemeal from several classes. I fail to see what having more base classes takes away from the original core classes. It's not going to stop you playing just core if that's your thing. Maybe when spell lists are involved it could become irritating, I don't really touch that sort of thing.
Classes like duelist, ninja, or barbarian could easily be simulated by another class that CALLS itself a duelist, ninja or barbarian. But they each have the potential to introduce special abilities that are otherwise unavailable to your standard fighter/rogue/etc. and that can be lots of fun to fine tune a character.
Sometimes, I don't want ten extra feats, I just want to add my intelligence to my AC or something. Extra classes give new options that aren't available to others. Sure, you could use a kit; but functionally that's just a new base class.
Would love to see a pathfinder variant for the Warmage.... the class has seen nearly as much use in my groups game as wizards have...its and excellent and well nigh unparalelled damage slinger and trumps the sorceror nearly every time...as a matter of fact it tends to be the preferred multiclass mage in my group...of course our group is larger that most...we tend to have 6 players or more so the group usually has room for that nicheless character....
As to prestige classes we maintain house rules that keeps down the Abuse of Prestige classes...
Rule 1 No you can't have 3 Prestige classes...we only allow 1 10 level Prestige class to a character... As for 5 and 3 level Prestige classes...we allow a character to have 2 of them as long as they fit the character, the story and the campaign
Rule 2 You must apply for or be recruited by those who train the Pristige Classes.... Having an Order of Eldritch Knights who secretly watch and then recruit a perspective member adds more to the story, more to the character and make the class Prestigious
Rule 3 If it doesn't fit your campaign....Don't allow it....though as a GM I try to maintain a degree of openmindedness and even handedness sometimes the edict must be laid down.... Most players when you explain why a certain thing doesn't fit into your world are willing to accept it...and some of those who don't are willing to at least argue HOW they might fit in...and of course if their idea sounds good...USE IT... making the players happy is PART of the job as well as long as it doesn't disrupt the game and story line
See I've never seen it as my character (or my players' characters) as saying, "Oh I'm not a fighter, I'm a level 3 dwarven defender" or "Hey I'm multiclassed thank you!"
This is not OoTS or Goblins. When a NPC asks what class I am (or my players are) the usual responses are "I'm a treasure seeker" "I'm The Heir of *BLAH* and sorcerer of the Third Order", "I'm Sir *BLAH BLAH BLAH* of the Order of the Silver Hair".
Now something of their stats might be derived from the response, but I don't answer (and don't expect to hear) "I'm a 3rd level paladin with 2 levels in bard".
Classes don't exist in my world. Not that players don't build their characters with classes, but I don't say "Who's playing the fighter". I don't limit access to prestige classes because you can't find anyone that teaches "Prestige classes". These are abilities that the character has been training on and learning their entire life. It's only at this point however when that training has come to bear and now they can do something new.
It's rather Pretentious of anyone to say, "The only way to learn something is through this society." After all someone had to figure out how to do whatever it is in the first place, and someone could stumble (or learn on their own) the means to do so again and it still be a good story (and make sense)... In fact maybe the PC is the first person in the world to have those abilities, and is working to establish a school to train others in them.
I don't see the classes as jobs ("Welcome to McFighter's can I get your order?") but more of life training, that the characters have been doing. IF the character has been developing on a certain path I don't stop them from following it.
Just like I don't let them tell me, "There are no white dragons that can breath fire!"
See I've never seen it as my character (or my players' characters) as saying, "Oh I'm not a fighter, I'm a level 3 dwarven defender" or "Hey I'm multiclassed thank you!"
This is not OoTS or Goblins. When a NPC asks what class I am (or my players are) the usual responses are "I'm a treasure seeker" "I'm The Heir of *BLAH* and sorcerer of the Third Order", "I'm Sir *BLAH BLAH BLAH* of the Order of the Silver Hair".
Now something of their stats might be derived from the response, but I don't answer (and don't expect to hear) "I'm a 3rd level paladin with 2 levels in bard".
Classes don't exist in my world. Not that players don't build their characters with classes, but I don't say "Who's playing the fighter". I don't limit access to prestige classes because you can't find anyone that teaches "Prestige classes". These are abilities that the character has been training on and learning their entire life. It's only at this point however when that training has come to bear and now they can do something new.
To some extent, I agree. In my worlds, usually, there are 'Guards', 'Pikemen', 'Swordsmen', 'Bodyguards', etc who are all really fighters (possibly with another level or two of something else). There are mages (wizards), priests/acolytes/initiates (clerics), thieves/adventurers/experts/special ops (rogues), sorcerers (sorcerer), monks/masters (monks), clansmen/barbarians/primitives (barbarians), musicians/entertainers/bards (bards or rogues), paladins/holy warriors/divine champions (paladins or fighter/clerics), sages/holy ones/hermits (rogues or favored souls). Guide/Explorer/Ranger (ranger). Druid/Nature Guardian/Wildlorist (Druid).
Some classes are so iconic they don't get other names (warmages are warmages, warlocks are warlocks).
Some classes are both classes and titles. Any given Knight might be an actual Knight class, or he might be a Fighter with an RP'd code of honor. A swashbuckler might be a swashbuckler or a rogue or a bard.
It's rather Pretentious of anyone to say, "The only way to learn something is through this society." After all someone had to figure out how to do whatever it is in the first place, and someone could stumble (or learn on their own) the means to do so again and it still be a good story (and make sense)... In fact maybe the PC is the first person in the world to have those abilities, and is working to establish a school to train others in them.I don't see the classes as jobs ("Welcome to McFighter's can I get your order?") but more of life training, that the characters have been doing. IF the character has been developing on a certain path I don't stop them from following it.
Depends. If a PrC is an ordered classs, then you are D*** skippy someon has to induct you (For example, A PrC of a Knight's order, or a King's Spy (the king better accept you as his spy)). If the Prestige Class is more along the lines of a specialist in a certain area, that's different. An Arcane Archer is just someone who specializes in mixing his arcane and archery. A Knight of the Rose Order however, has to be inducted into the order, trained, etc.
On a side note, I also insist when someone multiclasses, they have to be trained their first level in some way. For example, Sorcerer's have to undergo a ritual to awaken their magical potential (if they start at level 1 as sorcerers, they are 'natural' talents that didn't need a ritual). A wizard needs to apprentice to a wizard to learn the basics. A druid needs to apprentice to a druid. A fighter needs someone to show him how to swing all those weapons and how to don that armor and move in it. A rogue needs someone to show him out to find the traps, pick locks, etc. Once they have that first level, they can pick it up on their own.
You are right in that someone had to pick it up the first time, but you are wrong if you think anyone can just 'figure it out'. If you think that way, remember how long it took blacksmiths to develop from bronze to damascus steel? Hundreds of years. On the other hand, once one person figured out the trick to make steel, they could teach everyone they wanted to in a few weeks how to do it, unlike the years and years they put into figuring it out. If someone wants to figure out how to be a rogue from scratch, let them, but then they hand in their character while he goes off for 10 years to teach himself.
Just like I don't let them tell me, "There are no white dragons that can breath fire!"
Uhm,
Per SRD, there aren't. The only way to do it per the rules is they get the feat that lets them substitute energy types. Which requires a pretty old dragon to meet the prereqs. It's fine if you want to say all dragons can breath any energy they want, but if you do that, you're changing the physics/laws of the world, and the players should be aware of that ahead of time (if anyone has the right skill). But per RAW, a juvenile or young adult white dragon breaths cold and only cold.
Well, he could be a Half Red, Half Green, Half Black, and Half Blue White Dragons. . .
Or a Dragon only Prestige Class in Draconomicon that actually gets more Breath Weapons types.
It could happen. I just say this for fun. . .
haha,
If he *were* a half-blue white dragon, then he'd only get his electrical breath once per day (unless he took the feat to have it 1d4 rounds). However, I'm not sure I'd allow a half-blue white dragon. I mean, to the best of my knowledge, the dragon type is determined by the mother dragon, not the father. So a white mother lays white eggs, blue mother lays blue, etc. Otherwise you could end up with wierd things like half-metallic half-chromatic dragons (which really confuses the whole metallic vs chromatic thing).But with the prestige class, I think that's got high entry requirements (don't have book in front of me). So again, it's not something you're going to see at low/medium levels.
It's rather Pretentious of anyone to say, "The only way to learn something is through this society." After all someone had to figure out how to do whatever it is in the first place, and someone could stumble (or learn on their own) the means to do so again and it still be a good story (and make sense)... In fact maybe the PC is the first person in the world to have those abilities, and is working to establish a school to train others in them.
AMEN.
If a PrC is an ordered classs, then you are D*** skippy someon has to induct you (For example, A PrC of a Knight's order, or a King's Spy (the king better accept you as his spy)).
What's in a name? I can call a prestige class "Order of the Benevolent Muckrakers Initiate"; doesn't mean other people might not develop the same abilities to rake muck independently.
Steel was invented multiple places, accidentally and generally not in any large quantities. It was hit or miss, and was the result of someone doing the same thing they always did (forging iron) and occasionally getting lucky with what was a process more akin to cooking than modern manufacture. (As in it was as much art as science)
Damascene steel is a particularly humorous example, as it wasn't actually true steel. (Which is why you're very unlikely to see any similar steel with the signature wavy pattern produced today)
In my opinion, this underscores our disagreement. You're looking at prestige classes and steel creation the same way: Something that was deliberately worked towards and discovered through toil that can then be passed on to others with significantly less work.
I also see them the same way: Something that was discovered in a moment of inspiration while doing something similar but different. Which through repetition, trial, and error came to be reproduced more frequently and could be considered a true skill.
I have no idea how to reconcile these points of view, but I'll point out that steel is considered to have been "discovered" (reliably produced) in 1856; long after many, many people had seen it first hand through their own work.
|
|
I could stand behind the Warmage, I just forgot that on my list. Personally, I would like to see Prestige Classes that are iconic for the base classes, one or two min. Than I would like almost all combinations (that are not redundent) of the core base classes cover. Cleric/Rogue, Wizard/Fighter, Rogue/Monk, things like that. No Druid/Paladins, Fighter/Barbarians, or things of that nature.
I don't want to see any race specific ones. Or
Albino Red Dragon -- it's white and it breaths fire. Standard red dragon, just a different color.
|
|
Rule 1 No you can't have 3 Prestige classes...we only allow 1 10 level Prestige class to a character... As for 5 and 3 level Prestige classes...we allow a character to have 2 of them as long as they fit the character, the story and the campaignRule 2 You must apply for or be recruited by those who train the Pristige Classes.... Having an Order of Eldritch Knights who secretly watch and then recruit a perspective member adds more to the story, more to the character and make the class Prestigious
Rule 3 If it doesn't fit your campaign....Don't allow it....though as a GM I try to maintain a degree of openmindedness and even handedness sometimes the edict must be laid down.... Most players when you explain why a certain thing doesn't fit into your world are willing to accept it...and some of those who don't are willing to at least argue HOW they might fit in...and of course if their idea sounds good...USE IT... making the players happy is PART of the job as well as long as it doesn't disrupt the game and story line
Excellent rules.