I'm starting a campaign set in a homebrew world, using the PFRPG rules. Ive got a player interested in playing a warlock. Are there any changes that need to be made to the class to fit it to Pathfinder?
|
I'm starting a campaign set in a homebrew world, using the PFRPG rules. Ive got a player interested in playing a warlock. Are there any changes that need to be made to the class to fit it to Pathfinder?
I think the boards ate my first reply.
Short answer: as a medium BAB class warlocks get a d8 hit die under PFRPG rules.
I would also consider the fact that the some spells have changed, so the coresponding spell like abilities for the warlock may need to be tweeked to match.
Most of the abilities of a warlock are actually spelled out, if I remember correctly there were less than a handful every "rank" that were the "see X spell" (fly, spider climb come to mind right off the bat). I'd be more worried about the possible interaction of the eldritch blast with things that might have changed, there were some odd things with the mechanics of it. I got the impression they were made more complicated than they needed to be from what our groups player said, but you'd probably want to look at the errata and do a google search for the details if you are unfamiliar with the rules.
Short answer: as a medium BAB class warlocks get a d8 hit die under PFRPG rules.
You have also to change a couple of skills to convert them to PFRPG (Jump is now part of the Acrobatics skill, and Concentration will be changed completely in the Final Version - although in the Beta, it's included in Spellcraft)
However, keep in mind that since the new Wizards and Sorcerers are more powerful than before (and the Warlock itself was not so powerful and versatile even in 3.x, IMHO), it will be weaker than such classes. (Detect Magic at will is an example... a Wizard has this from 1st level, if he memorizes it as one of his Cantrips, and a Sorcerer who knows it - almost a must - has it at will, too)
If power gap is present, I would recomend the possiblity of making the Eldritch Blast an attack action. This way you can apply feats like manyshot, shot on the run, etc...
Thanks dudes. Anything else to note?
I forgot, you can reshape the blast at a certain level cant you ?
Yeah that may not work if that is true, if it can turn into say a cone then it would be broken.
|
|
I forgot, you can reshape the blast at a certain level cant you ?
Yeah that may not work if that is true, if it can turn into say a cone then it would be broken.
Yes, Eldritch Cone is one of the higher level blast shapes.
You could allow the Manyshot feat with the caveat that it has to be an unshaped blast...or you could define a new blast shape invocation, Fork Blast, that would do the same thing. I would lean towards the latter.
I made a Pathfinder version of the Warlock to give it a little extra pizazz. I plan on designing specific entities for this class to make pacts with. So, for example, instead of having a generic Fey bloodline like the Sorcerers have, the Pathfinder Warlock will make a pact with Oberon, Puck, or Titania.
Pathfinder Warlock
BAB: +3/4
Good Saves: Will
Hit Dice: 1d8
Class Skills: Acrobatics, Appraise, Bluff, Craft, Disguise, Fly, Intimidate, Knowledge arcana, Knowledge planes, Knowledge religion, Profession, Sense Motive, Spellcraft, Use Magic Device.
Skill Ranks Per Level: 4 + Int modifier
Warlocks are proficient in all Simple Weapons, Light Armor, but no shields.
LEVEL ABILITY
1. Eldritch Blast 1d6, Hex Pool, Least Invocations, Pact, Warlock's Curse.
2. Hex, Detect Magic
3. Eldritch Blast 2d6, Pact Defense 1
4. Hex, Deceive Item
5. Eldritch Blast 3d6, Arcane Sight
6. Hex, Lesser Invocations
7. Eldritch Blast 4d6, Improved Warlock's Curse, Pact Defense 2
8. Hex, Pact Ward 1, Two Eldritch Blasts
9. Eldritch Blast 5d6, Baleful Luck
10. Hex, Pact Resistance
11. Eldritch Blast 6d6, Greater Invocations, Pact Defense 3
12. Hex, Imbue Item
13. Eldritch Blast 7d6, Greater Warlock's Curse
14. Hex, Greater Arcane Sight
15. Eldritch Blast 8d6, Pact Defense 4, Three Eldritch Blasts
16. Hex, Dark Invocations
17. Eldritch Blast 9d6, Mindblank
18. Hex, Pact Warding 5
19. Eldritch Blast 10d6, Pact Defense 5, Dire Warlock's Curse
20. Hex, Greater Pact Resistance
Eldritch Blast (Su). As standard warlock's eldritch blast, but supernatural instead of spell-like.
Hex Pool (Su). A Warlock has a Hex Pool equal to his Charisma bonus (minimum 1) multiplied by his class level. His Hex Pool is replenished each day at dawn. The Warlock spends points from his Hex Pool to power his Warlock's Curse and Hex Power abilities.
Least Invocations (Sp). At 1st level, the warlock gains the ability to use least invocations. In addition to the normal number of invocations a standard warlock gets, a Pathfinder Warlock gains a bonus eldritch shape or eldritch essense invocation each time he gains a new level of invocations (at levels 1, 6, 11, and 16).
Pact (Su). Each Pathfinder Warlock makes a pact with some kind of otherworldly entity. Depending on the kind entity the warlock is bound to influences his Pact Defenses, Pact Wards, and Pact Resistances. Each Pact also grants the Warlock a bonus class Skill.
Warlock's Curse (Su). As a swift action, the Warlock can target an opponent within 60 feet with his Warlock's Curse. The Warlock must spend at least 1 point from his Hex Pool to activate this power; the duration of the Warlock's Curse is 1 round per point spent from the Hex Pool. The opponent is allowed a Will save with a DC of 10 + 1/2 the Warlock's class level + his Charisma modifier to avoid the Warlock's Curse. If the opponent fails the Will Save, the opponent takes a -2 luck penalty to its Ability Checks, AC, Attack Rolls, Damage Rolls, Caster Level Checks, Saving Throws, and Skill Checks for the duration of the Warlock's Curse.
At 7th level, the luck penalty increases to -4. At 13th level, it increases to -6, and at 19th level, it increases to -8.
Hex (Su). The Warlock is adept at using the power of luck to hinder his enemies and aid himself. At 2nd level, and every 2 levels thereafter, the Warlock selects one of the following abilities. Using a Hex Power is an immediate action unless otherwise stated.
Hexed Ability. The Warlock can force an opponent to re-roll an ability check by spending 1 point from his Hex Pool, or the Warlock can re-roll his own ability check by spending 2 points from his Hex Pool.
Hexed Attack. The Warlock can force an opponent to re-roll an attack roll by spending 2 points from his Hex Pool, or the Warlock can re-roll his own attack roll by spending 4 points from his Hex Pool.
Hexed Magic Damage. The Warlock can force an opponent to re-roll a spell's, spell-like ability, or supernatual ability's damage roll by spending 3 points from his Hex Pool, or the Warlock can re-roll his own spell's, spell-like ability's, or supernatural ability's damage roll by spending 6 points from his Hex Pool.
Hexed Weapon Damage. The Warlock can force an opponent to re-roll a weapon's damage roll by spending 2 points from his Hex Pool, or the Warlock can re-roll his own weapon damage roll by spending 4 points from his Hex Pool.
Hexed Save. The Warlock can force an opponent to re-roll a saving throw by spending 2 points from his Hex Pool, or the Warlock can re-roll his own saving throw by spending 4 points from his Hex Pool.
Hexed Caster. The Warlock can force an opponent to re-roll a caster level check by spending 3 points from his Hex Pool, or the Warlock can re-roll his own caster level check by spending 6 points from his Hex Pool.
Hexed Skill. The Warlock can force an opponent to re-roll a skill check by spending 1 point from his Hex Pool, or the Warlock can re-roll his own skill check by spending 2 points from his Hex Pool.
Hexed Reaction. The Warlock can force an opponent to re-roll an initiative check by spending 2 points from his Hex Pool, or the Warlock can re-roll his own initiative check by spending 4 points from his Hex Pool. This use of Hex Power does not take an action; it occurs prior to actions being taken.
Hexed Prowess. The Warlock can force an opponent to re-roll a Combat Manuver Check by spending 2 point from his Hex Pool, or the Warlock can re-roll his own Combat Manuver Check by spending 4 points from his Hex Pool.
Detect Magic (Sp). At 2nd level, the Warlock can use Detect Magic at will as a spell-like ability.
Pact Defense (Su). At 3rd level, depending on the type of Pact the Warlock made, he gains DR 1/-, DR 2/cold iron, DR 2/silver, DR 2/magic, DR 2/good, DR 2/chaotic, DR 2/evil, DR 2/evil, DR 2/adamantium, DR 2/piercing, DR 2/slashing, DR 2/bludgeoning, or Natural Armor +1. This benefit is multiplied by the increases in the Pact Defenses at levels 7, 11, 15, and 19.
Deceive Item (Ex). At 4th level, the Warlock can take 10 on Use Magic Device skill checks.
Arcane Sight (Sp). At 5th level, the Warlock's Detect Magic ability improves. The Warlock can use Arcane Sight at will as a Spell-like ability.
Pact Ward (Su). At 8th level, depending on the type of Pact the Warlock made, he gains the ability to spend points from his Hex Pool to Ward himself. As a free action, he can spend 1 Hex Point and gain Fast Healing for 1 round equal to the value of Pact Ward, gain an energy shield that does 1d6 points of damage per point of the Ward for 1 round, gain a deflection bonus to AC equal to the amount of the Ward for 1 round, etc.
Two Eldritch Blasts (Su). At 8th level, the Warlock can use a full round action to use 2 eldritch blasts in the same round. The second eldritch blast takes a -5 penalty to its attack roll. Both eldritch blasts must have the same shape and essence, if any. They can target the same or different opponents.
Baleful Luck (Su). At 9th level, when using his Hex Power against an opponent, the Warlock applies a luck penalty equal to his Charisma bonus (if any) to his opponent's reroll. When using his Hex Power to benefit from a re-roll himself, the Warlock may spend 1 additional point from his Hex Pool to add his Charisma bonus (if any) as a luck bonus to the results of the reroll.
Pact Resistance (Su). At 10th level, depending on the Pact the Warlock made, he gains energy resistance 10 to two energy types or energy resistance 20 to one energy type. Certain Pacts may provide a bonus against a certain type of special attack, such as paralysis, petrification, or poison.
Imbue Item (Ex). At 12th level, the Pathfinder Warlock gets the same ability as the standard Warlock ability to use the Use Magic Device skill to enchant magic items.
Greater Arcane Sight (Sp). At 14th level, the Warlock can use Greater Arcane Sight as a spell-like effect at will.
Three Eldritch Blasts (Su). At 15th level, the Warlock can use a full round action to use 3 eldritch blasts in the same round. The second eldritch blast takes a -5 penalty to its attack roll and the third eldritch blast takes a -10 penalty to its attack roll. All three eldritch blasts must have the same shape and essence, if any. They can target the same or different opponents.
Mindblank (Sp). At 17th level, the Warlock gains the benefits of the Mindblank spell. He can re-activate it as a standard action if it is somehow dispelled or suppressed.
Greater Pact Resistance (Su). At 20th level, the resistances from the Pact Resistance ability double.
I made a Pathfinder version of the Warlock to give it a little extra pizazz. I plan on designing specific entities for this class to make pacts with. So, for example, instead of having a generic Fey bloodline like the Sorcerers have, the Pathfinder Warlock will make a pact with Oberon, Puck, or Titania.
Pathfinder Warlock
This looks cool. Did you playtest it? How did it turn out?
This looks cool. Did you playtest it? How did it turn out?I made a Pathfinder version of the Warlock to give it a little extra pizazz. I plan on designing specific entities for this class to make pacts with. So, for example, instead of having a generic Fey bloodline like the Sorcerers have, the Pathfinder Warlock will make a pact with Oberon, Puck, or Titania.
Pathfinder Warlock
No playtest yet. I haven't even designed the different pact entities yet. I figure 3 of each major kind: 3 fey, 3 infernal, 3 abyssal, 3 celestial, 3 aberrant, 3 draconic. I figure each of the 3 per kind of pact would fill a different kind of role. For example, Puck would be a trickster, Titania would be insightful, Oberron would be imperious. Stuff like that.
No playtest yet. I haven't even designed the different pact entities yet. I figure 3 of each major kind: 3 fey, 3 infernal, 3 abyssal, 3 celestial, 3 aberrant, 3 draconic. I figure each of the 3 per kind of pact would fill a different kind of role. For example, Puck would be a trickster, Titania would be insightful, Oberron would be imperious. Stuff like that.This looks cool. Did you playtest it? How did it turn out?I made a Pathfinder version of the Warlock to give it a little extra pizazz. I plan on designing specific entities for this class to make pacts with. So, for example, instead of having a generic Fey bloodline like the Sorcerers have, the Pathfinder Warlock will make a pact with Oberon, Puck, or Titania.
Pathfinder Warlock
It does look powerful... faster damage progression, Hex ability in addition to regular stuff. That's my only concern. What is your reasoning for the power level you settled on, VS. the other classes?
A lot of the clerics, druids, sorcerers, and wizards in Pathfinder have the supernatural ability to use an energy ray of some kind that does 1d6 +1/2 their class level. So it's more powerful at 2nd level, and supernatural, so it bypasses SR.
Also, domains, bloodlines, and school specializations give out a lot of neat bonus abilities, some of which are as powerful as an invocation.
Also, I think I heard the 4th edition warlock gets a curse-like ability (I don't, because I still play 3.5/Pathfinder), so I added the Hex ability that I incorporated into my personal version of the Pathfinder Hexblade. It gives the warlock a little something extra to do, is pretty flavorful, but isn't overpowering because it only makes things harder to do.
|
I'd be a bit wary of changing the Warlock too much for a Pathfinder campaign. The class as it stands is balanced against many of the Pathfinder Beta class. My experiences with the Warlock class have shown it to be very effective when compared to other 3.5 classes, particularly the wizard and cleric, which are typical high end classes. (Please note, this is my experience; yours may vary).
The Warlock's key ability is its ability to consistently deal non-typed damage with a status effect (save required) via ranged touch attack. As the Warlock rises in level, his damage increase is indeed moderate, but his hit frequency will increase significantly against all but the most prepared opponents, thereby increasing the overall damage. His BAB is increasing, while the majority of his opponent's touch AC's are dropping.
Sure, the Warlock lacks the nuke capabilities of the Wizard or even the Cleric - but that's not what the class is designed for. The Warlock is designed to apply roughly the same amount of damage every round, and have a chance of inflicting a status effect. Tack on some excellent standing abilities (flight, invisibility, etc.) and you've got a rather effective class.
From a conversion standpoint, raising the HD to d8 is consistent with other classes, and adjusting the skills list is a necessity. You might want to take a look at his magic item creation abilities as well. I don't think you really need to do much else.
I will be honest first thing and say I dislike the entire warlock class.
I think that the class is unnecessary and far too powerful.
I was of the opinion that pathfinder intentionally left out the warlock because of the brokenness of the class, however I am freely admitting I could be wrong on that part.
If I had NO choice than to allow a warlock in my game for whatever reason his eldritch blast would be a standard attack action, not a ranged TOUCH.
I truly and will forever HATE! the untyped damage that they do. EVERY other spell out there from any other spell casting class has some sort of protection against it, fire,acid,holy, whatever but not the warlock. Mr. You cant save versus anything I do is something that should be very carefully watched.
I have been on the receiving end of a DM that thought warlocks were so uber as to be demi gods walking and when we almost beat his favorite class he ALWAYS got away or healed and then killed us all or something so thats where alot of this bitterness is coming from.
The way warlocks just enchant items on the fly is broken in and of itself. I could go on but I will stop ranting now. I will close by saying warlocks can be fun for the player but become very, very problematic for the DM and are very easily a one man party and the rest of the guys type character.
I will be honest first thing and say I dislike the entire warlock class.
I think that the class is unnecessary and far too powerful.
I was of the opinion that pathfinder intentionally left out the warlock because of the brokenness of the class, however I am freely admitting I could be wrong on that part.
If I had NO choice than to allow a warlock in my game for whatever reason his eldritch blast would be a standard attack action, not a ranged TOUCH.
I truly and will forever HATE! the untyped damage that they do. EVERY other spell out there from any other spell casting class has some sort of protection against it, fire,acid,holy, whatever but not the warlock. Mr. You cant save versus anything I do is something that should be very carefully watched.
I have been on the receiving end of a DM that thought warlocks were so uber as to be demi gods walking and when we almost beat his favorite class he ALWAYS got away or healed and then killed us all or something so thats where alot of this bitterness is coming from.The way warlocks just enchant items on the fly is broken in and of itself. I could go on but I will stop ranting now. I will close by saying warlocks can be fun for the player but become very, very problematic for the DM and are very easily a one man party and the rest of the guys type character.
Wasn't intentionally left out, it is not OGL.
Our groups conclusion was the warlock was more a "sorcerer" than the actual sorcerer class, just like the scout was more a "ranger" than the ranger class.
The class was meant to fill a specific role that the other casters in the game cannot and has appropriate drawbacks, the most obvious being the lack of utility. As for the damage being untyped... Minor globe of invulnerability stops it dead in its tracks unless you have some of the higher level invocations (as do any defenses that rely on an ability's spell level - read the errata and FAQ's) and you have to beat SR too. I want to say some of the invocations even change the type so that it is fire/cold/etc. but don't quote me on it. As for no save, the vast majority of spells that require some attack roll don't allow for saves either so it is par for course there as well. PFRPG has basically given the craft anything you want ability to casters with the Arcane Bond class ability, so warlocks being able to do it, not so much a problem in my eyes. Crafting in 3.5 was done for your self due to the XP hit and crafting willy nilly because you could didn't happen as it kept you from leveling. And as to how you have encountered and your experiences with warlocks, that is a problem with the DM not the class, and they were likely not going by the rules from the sound of it.
That being said the Reserve feats are probably far more broken as they were SU abilities, all of them and gave a huge bump to an already powerful set of classes. We've only had 2 characters use the warlock class and neither time were they "broken", I mean I guess if you are doing a dungeon crawl adventure they could outshine others but that tends to not be the majority of games (at least from the posts around here). Back to back combats, they don't run out of "bullets" but then again that is pretty much what they do so I see little to complain about you know?
|
Several of the later classes, the Beguiler, Duskblade and Warlock chief among them, get called out as 'broken' quite often.
Having played all three of them, they each have something that they do well, but none of them, no matter how optimized, would ever have a chance in hell of making me not play a Cleric or Druid, if given the chance.
Ooh, a Warlock can cast his same darn laser beam every round. Whoopy. Who wants to do the same thing every round for 20 levels, while the Wizard is busting out massive area effect spells, teleporting the party around, conjuring up Efreeti to fluff his pillow or dotting the dragon's eye with maximized twinned Scorching Death? It's a one-trick pony, and the second that trick gets boring, you've got a character that you suddenly loathe to play.
Ooh, a Duskblade can shoot his wad and blow most of his prepared spells to do some amazing alpha-strike death-blow once per day, and then reverts to being a Fighter with no feats. Rah. Might as well buy a Fighter a once / day Horn of Blasting or something, and get the same effect *and* a character that isn't special-needs-boy for the other 14,399 combat rounds in the day.
And the Beguiler? Wow. Couldn't stand it. So limited that an encounter that involves undead, or plants, or constructs, leaves them in the corner sucking their thumb. Unless you *know* that undead, which are one of the most common monster types in modules, are not going to play a part, you might as well try to optimize a Commoner. Indeed, if you go the Char Op forums, where twinks are born, not made, you will probably find more threads on optimizing the various NPC Classes than Beguilers...
These three classes are niche. They might be really, really good at one specific thing, or in one specific encounter, but the game is not one specific encounter. it's a series of encounters, spread throughout the adventure, and if the character is over-specialized deadweight for the rest of the adventure, the player is gonna get frustrated and go back to the classes that always have a variety of options and don't have obvious 'kryptonite' encounters like undead or flying mobs that the Duskblade's Arcane Strike can't reach or whatever.
The Warlock is a perfectly reasonable class, and unless the party has no need for Clerics, Druids, Sorcerers or Wizards, is still going to have to abide by whatever 'adventuring day' the rest of the party needs to function. His uber-power to shoot Eldritch Blasts all the live long day isn't worth a fart in the wind if the rest of the party has camped so that the Cleric can pray up some more healing spells. He can sit there blasting the ground muttering 'MY magic didn't run out!' but it's not gonna get him any experience points.
I'd say gain one new evocation per level, topping out at 20 know instead of 12, in addition to the Hit dice adjustment. Per haps a bonus feat as wizards get with the option for meta-spell like ability feats.
There once was talk about a desire to combine the warlock and sorcerer together. Since they fit together thematically and the result would be quite different than the wizard.
I, personally, loved the idea and have been working on doing just that for my house rules for a while now.
I'm using the Pathfinder sorcerer bloodlines as a base - different blasts, different invocations, etc.
It's a fun project... but totally fueled by my opinion that the two classes cover the same role - an innate spellcaster that serves as a contrast to the wizard's "learned spellcaster"
If you think they are different enough.. then it's a fine class on its own and just needs to have its skills altered to fit PFRPG I think.
I will be honest first thing and say I dislike the entire warlock class.
I think that the class is unnecessary and far too powerful.
I was of the opinion that pathfinder intentionally left out the warlock because of the brokenness of the class, however I am freely admitting I could be wrong on that part.
If I had NO choice than to allow a warlock in my game for whatever reason his eldritch blast would be a standard attack action, not a ranged TOUCH.
I truly and will forever HATE! the untyped damage that they do. EVERY other spell out there from any other spell casting class has some sort of protection against it, fire,acid,holy, whatever but not the warlock. Mr. You cant save versus anything I do is something that should be very carefully watched.
I have been on the receiving end of a DM that thought warlocks were so uber as to be demi gods walking and when we almost beat his favorite class he ALWAYS got away or healed and then killed us all or something so thats where alot of this bitterness is coming from.The way warlocks just enchant items on the fly is broken in and of itself. I could go on but I will stop ranting now. I will close by saying warlocks can be fun for the player but become very, very problematic for the DM and are very easily a one man party and the rest of the guys type character.
I don't agree with everything you say but with the main point I do. The class sucks, if for no other reason than WotC basing all 4th ed classes on its "you can do something every round-blast" rubbish. I hate it!
Personally I would tell your player to stop living in the past and try one of the classes in the Beta playtest, afterall there are plenty of excellent choices.
Several of the later classes, the Beguiler, Duskblade and Warlock chief among them, get called out as 'broken' quite often.
I didn't so much think they were broken as they made other concepts obsolete (or alternatively, were that concept 'turned up to 11').
Warlocks are more of a Sorcerer than Sorcerers.
Beguilers are better Illusionists than Illusionists.
Thrallherds are better Enchanters than Enchanters.
Warmages are better Evokers than Evokers.
Scouts are more of a Ranger than a Ranger.
And so on. What was inevitably traded off in order to make them better at their focus was endurance, versatility and/or utility. So outside of their field of competences, they were useless (or after their brief nova, they were useless.)
As was discussed in the 'My problem with Will saves' thread, after a certain amount of this kind of specialization, you enter a certain kind of mutually assured destruction with the DM. That is, if the DM goes after your weaknesses, even at tbe rate the game expects, he risks making the game unfun for both you (since you suck) and the rest of the table (since they're down a party member). If he plays only to your strengths, then you either rapidly dominate everything, or face things of 'inappropriate' CR and gain XP and wealth at an accelerated rate. Sure, the DM could scale back the XP tables, but doesn't that show how far things have deviated from RAI?
This does apply to the base classes as well, such as Fighters with a tanked Will save, casters who only prepare blasting or spell-resistance spells, Rogues who peter out after the surprise round, Clerics who nova their combat buffs, and so on. But those are examples of choices being made. A Warmage simply has no other kinds of spells to prep.
Several of the later classes, the Beguiler, Duskblade and Warlock chief among them, get called out as 'broken' quite often.I didn't so much think they were broken as they made other concepts obsolete (or alternatively, were that concept 'turned up to 11').
Warlocks are more of a Sorcerer than Sorcerers.
Beguilers are better Illusionists than Illusionists.
Thrallherds are better Enchanters than Enchanters.
Warmages are better Evokers than Evokers.
Scouts are more of a Ranger than a Ranger.And so on. What was inevitably traded off in order to make them better at their focus was endurance, versatility and/or utility. So outside of their field of competences, they were useless (or after their brief nova, they were useless.)
As was discussed in the 'My problem with Will saves' thread, after a certain amount of this kind of specialization, you enter a certain kind of mutually assured destruction with the DM. That is, if the DM goes after your weaknesses, even at tbe rate the game expects, he risks making the game unfun for both you (since you suck) and the rest of the table (since they're down a party member). If he plays only to your strengths, then you either rapidly dominate everything, or face things of 'inappropriate' CR and gain XP and wealth at an accelerated rate. Sure, the DM could scale back the XP tables, but doesn't that show how far things have deviated from RAI?
This does apply to the base classes as well, such as Fighters with a tanked Will save, casters who only prepare blasting or spell-resistance spells, Rogues who peter out after the surprise round, Clerics who nova their combat buffs, and so on. But those are examples of choices being made. A Warmage simply has no other kinds of spells to prep.
This is a poignant analysis.
I like the "mutually assured destruction" analysis - it cuts right to the heart of the issue.
If a player deliberately creates a character that is way above the curve in one direction, then way below the curve in another direction, then some of the time he will dominate, steal the spotlight, and irritate everyone else at the table (other players don't want to sit and watch one guy do all the things they wished their own characters could do, but can't, and the DM doesn't enjoy seeing his lovingly designed encounters ripped to shreds by an artificial superman) - the rest of the time he will complain that encounters are too hard, SOS spells ruin his fun, and the DM is out to get him.
One way, no fun for all, the other way, no fun for the player (and maybe also for the rest of the players as they face many encounters a man short).
Nobody wins.
Seems to me that it's much better for everyone to accept that this is a game with a vast array of rules, mechanics, exceptions, and loopholes. Much better just to say "yeah, if I want, I can find an exploit or loophole or combination of mechanics that gives me a 'win button' but I'm just not going to do it - anyone can do it so I have nothing to prove".
And then everyone on both sides of the DM screen should agree to stay at or near middle-ground so nobody has to experience the "mutually assured destruction".
I had a warlock in my party at one point in time. I don't think they are grossly overpowered, but I do think that, in the grand scheme of things, there isn't anything other than the "baseline" mechanical stuff that needs to be modified, i.e. HD matching BaB.
If a player deliberately creates a character that is way above the curve in one direction, then way below the curve in another direction, then some of the time he will dominate, steal the spotlight, and irritate everyone else at the table (other players don't want to sit and watch one guy do all the things they wished their own characters could do, but can't, and the DM doesn't enjoy seeing his lovingly designed encounters ripped to shreds by an artificial superman) - the rest of the time he will complain that encounters are too hard, SOS spells ruin his fun, and the DM is out to get him.
One way, no fun for all, the other way, no fun for the player (and maybe also for the rest of the players as they face many encounters a man short).
Nobody wins.
Seems to me that it's much better for everyone to accept that this is a game with a vast array of rules, mechanics, exceptions, and loopholes. Much better just to say "yeah, if I want, I can find an exploit or loophole or combination of mechanics that gives me a 'win button' but I'm just not going to do it - anyone can do it so I have nothing to prove".
And then everyone on both sides of the DM screen should agree to stay at or near middle-ground so nobody has to experience the "mutually assured destruction".
I have to say I disagree with parts of this. Certain characters are going to be better at certain things than others, that is just a pure mechanical certainty in the game. A simple matter of making a "better choice" than someone else when building a character will inevitably end up with that character "stealing the spotlight." This is just considering core rules with no loop hoops used. I build a combat character, I had better be taking the spot light from the social character in a fight. The players role in game is to create a character he/she wants to "play" with/as, basically fulfill a concept that they have imagined (which is where the majority of the "extra classes" come in, they fill concept design niches that are basically impossible to do via core rules). As an adventurer they are supposed to be the best at what they do and excel at things, IE take the spotlight. Every character should shine at what they do. Saying otherwise is basically a contradiction to the whole point of the game in my eyes. People don't play this game to be yet another "one in the crowd" or to be equal with everyone else.
The DMs role in game is to provide the back drop and make sure each of the characters can use their abilities and create situations in which each and every character can shine. This is even something Paizo has written about and "subtly" designed in their published products (if you don't believe me look at RotRL AP and a certain side bar about an encounter and Druids). If a character is taking the spotlight repeatedly that isn't a problem with the character, there is also a problem with the scenarios you are running the group through. Your "lovingly crafted encounters" are probably playing to the character who is outshining the others strengths. Saying that a character is "too strong in certain areas" and ruining everyone else's fun is a plain old cop out I'm sorry. Create encounters that will play to others strengths to balance it out, placing the blame on a characters shoulders is BS, plain and simple. The rationale is flawed, you say the character stealing the spotlight is ruining it for everyone. I could just as easily point out that lousy DMing is what allows for the character to steal the spotlight (don't take it personally, was just using it for arguments sake ;) in the first place. "Artificial Superman" isn't a valid build until late in the game when spell casters can do everything (mechanically by the game rules, no loop holes), and in honest-to-gosh reality the vast majority/responsibility of maintaining a "fun" game falls squarely and solidly on the DM's shoulders.
Obviously a character should have strengths and weaknesses. However, when those strengths and weaknesses become too polarized, there is a problem.
Also, I disagree with your assessment that the additional base classes allowed for new concepts that didn't exist before (I don't think you need a Ninja class to make a ninja). Certainly, this was true in some cases, like Binders or Truenamers, or psionics. However, as I said above, a lot of the later base classes were an existing concept turned up to 11. There is no reason a Warmage concept couldn't have been played as an Evoker.
Obviously a character should have strengths and weaknesses. However, when those strengths and weaknesses become too polarized, there is a problem.
Also, I disagree with your assessment that the additional base classes allowed for new concepts that didn't exist before (I don't think you need a Ninja class to make a ninja). Certainly, this was true in some cases, like Binders or Truenamers, or psionics. However, as I said above, a lot of the later base classes were an existing concept turned up to 11. There is no reason a Warmage concept couldn't have been played as an Evoker.
Additional base classes were needed to allow for concepts that weren't possible via core classes, doesn't mean all additional classes were needed...Nor did I suggest as much.
|
|
Additional base classes were needed to allow for concepts that weren't possible via core classes, doesn't mean all additional classes were needed...Nor did I suggest as much.
In one sense, something that many of the new core classes suffered from was being *very* tightly designed. A Warlock was an infernal pact person, and absolutely couldn't be a Feylock or Angelock or Djinnlock or Illithilock or Dracolock or whatever, because of the alignment restrictions and fiendish-themed invocations provided.
The Binder would be *perfect* to create a kind of voodoo houngan concept, based on the dieties of a setting and not a bunch of 'dead gods,' but that wasn't the direction they chose to go.
The Totemist would be *sweet* if applied to a draconic shaper, who manifested powers related to the abilities of dragons, or an elemental / genie shaper, who tapped into those sorts of powers, instead of the extremely odd 'magical beasts' theme, which includes tons of monsters that have no real logical connection or unifying thematic elements.
Many of the new core classes felt very overspecialized and niche, compared to a Cleric (who could be radically different in play, depending on god, spells, domains and channeling type chosen) or a Fighter (who could be nothing like another Fighter in the party, unlike, say, two Samurai, who would be virtual clones of each other, constructed very restrictively around the same weapons and combat styles).
Then again, to completely contradict myself, other core classes seemed to be utterly themeless. The Factotum seemed like an interesting idea, but was flavorless to the point of near invisibility.
In Golarion, a Shoanti Spirit-Speaker could call up the souls of specific pre-selected 'ancestral spirits' (who might not actually be blood ancestors, but cousins, siblings, spouses or even offspring that preceded them into the afterlife!) that allow them certain abilities or skills. Call up aunt Whatshername, the Witch-Woman of the Fens, and gain her sorcerous knack. Call up centuries-dead Warchief Nuknuk, and rage like a Barbarian for the day. But that sort of flavor didn't get applied to the Factotum, and it ends up being a cass that can ape the abilities of other classes, 'just because.'
Similarly, a Gebbite Deathwalker could collect the skulls of the fallen and tap into the 'shadow of the soul' that remains and can be contacted via Speak With Dead (but isn't actually connected to the persons long-departed soul), and tap into the knowledges and class traits of the skulls he carries. As time goes on (and levels accrue), he might 'trade up' and tap into the abilities of more and more potent fallen adversaries (or go raid the tomb of champions who have the traits he seeks to be able to use), unlike the Shoanti 'Factotum,' who is actually cultivating and strengthening his connection to blood kin, who may actually be *gaining power in the afterlife* through this connection, so that even if Warchief Nuknuk was only a 5th level Barbarian (and the legends about him a teensy bit exagerrated), by the time that the Shoanti Spirit-Speaker hits 10th level, and could channel the abilities of a 7th level Barbarian for the day, the spirit of Chief Nuknuk has 'advanced' through the daily remembrances and recognition that he is receiving because of the Spirit-Speaker's daily reflections.
This sort of neat 'flavor' stuff seems to have been left out of some classes (like the Warmage and Factotum), and then was applied a little too strongly to others (like the Samurai or Warlock). As a result, the classes end up being less *generally* useful both mechanically (too tight a focus) and in accessibility (since it is so much harder to make a Samurai that breaks out of the mold, than it is to just make a Fighter with a katana and call him a Samurai).
|
|
In one sense, something that many of the new core classes suffered from was being *very* tightly designed. A Warlock was an infernal pact person, and absolutely couldn't be a Feylock or Angelock or Djinnlock or Illithilock or Dracolock or whatever, because of the alignment restrictions and fiendish-themed invocations provided.
FYI, I've done about 70% of the work adapting the infernal-pact warlock from Complete Arcane into a fey-pact warlock for PFRPG, and one of my players is playtesting it in my campaign. If there is interest I can clean up the document and post it to Pathfinder Portal (or somewhere).
FYI, I've done about 70% of the work adapting the infernal-pact warlock from Complete Arcane into a fey-pact warlock for PFRPG, and one of my players is playtesting it in my campaign. If there is interest I can clean up the document and post it to Pathfinder Portal (or somewhere).
I'd be interested in seeing it.