So we've heard 2/3 of what's going into the Advanced Players Handbook for classes. I was wondering what other classes/niches they could see as full on classes rather then prestige classes? Here are some ideas to get the ball rolling:
Animist: A shapeshifting warrior type that draws power/inspiration from one particular animal type (i.e. Bears, Caninines, Large Cats, Raptors, etc.). I like Shifters from Eberron, what can I say.
Mystic: I liked the Shaman from Oriental Adventures but most people are familiar with the spirit shaman. It fit somewhere between Monk, Druid, and Cleric.
Inquisitor: A lot less "The Spanish...", a lot more Van Helsing. Moderate Divine Caster (Bard Spellcasting). Uses Knowledge to fight the unnatural and a nod to the Archivist Class.
Roundhead: specialized in beating up on Cavaliers! Hey, some one had to make the joke!
These are just some archetypyes I could see being full classes, not necessarilly suggestions on what should be made as full classes. What do you think could make it as a class?
Your "inquisitor" sounds a lot like a cleric, but badass.
The obvious response here is that clerics CAN be badass. =p
That said, a variant with more of a rough-edged-loner feeling (no healing, more combat powers, and like you said an occasional nod to the archivist) might find some real traction.
I like the idea of Shamen.
As an old Runequest gamer they are sooooo cool.
Commanding Spirits was their "thing", being able to see in both the spirit and material plane at the same time, bound Fetch, etc.
Don't know how that would translate though :(
|
These are just some archetypyes I could see being full classes, not necessarilly suggestions on what should be made as full classes. What do you think could make it as a class?
If you take the Warlock from Complete Arcane, and boil it down to its essentials, what you have is an arcanist who wields spell-like abilities instead of spells. I have long thought that you could take this concept and build it up to something interesting, that might or might not resemble the Warlock.
I believe that there could be real niche for nimble melee specialist build (generally referred to as the "Swashbuckler") that could really shine with a combination of high BAB, high dodge AC / reflex saves, good precision damage, high mobility and tactical control features (taunt and pull, multiattack groups, enrage or intimidate opponents, etc.). Think Cyrano de Bergerac hopped up on cat's grace.
|
I believe that there could be real niche for nimble melee specialist build (generally referred to as the "Swashbuckler") that could really shine with a combination of high BAB, high dodge AC / reflex saves, good precision damage, high mobility and tactical control features (taunt and pull, multiattack groups, enrage or intimidate opponents, etc.). Think Cyrano de Bergerac hopped up on cat's grace.
Or Zorro.
|
|
I believe that there could be real niche for nimble melee specialist build (generally referred to as the "Swashbuckler") that could really shine with a combination of high BAB, high dodge AC / reflex saves, good precision damage, high mobility and tactical control features (taunt and pull, multiattack groups, enrage or intimidate opponents, etc.). Think Cyrano de Bergerac hopped up on cat's grace.Or Zorro.
HERE I AYAM!!!! :-D
Your "inquisitor" sounds a lot like a cleric, but badass.
The obvious response here is that clerics CAN be badass. =p
That said, a variant with more of a rough-edged-loner feeling (no healing, more combat powers, and like you said an occasional nod to the archivist) might find some real traction.
Actually, I was thinking of something that was closer to Bards and Rangers then Clerics. People who use knowledge, skills, and a bit of faith to fight the supernatural rather then pulling out their god and smacking you with it.
|
|
Actually, I was thinking of something that was closer to Bards and Rangers then Clerics. People who use knowledge, skills, and a bit of faith to fight the supernatural rather then pulling out their god and smacking you with it.
Hehe, the cleric just turned into a bard and started singing Godsmack...
Actually, I was thinking of something that was closer to Bards and Rangers then Clerics. People who use knowledge, skills, and a bit of faith to fight the supernatural rather then pulling out their god and smacking you with it.Hehe, the cleric just turned into a bard and started singing Godsmack...
I snickered.
Giving the cleric bardic spell progression and making him a little tougher in melee isn't a huge change by itself. I think you'd find that the core of the concept lay in changing the spell list, and probably throwing in a lot of utility spells that make him good at hunting down foes or getting out of sticky situations.
(though, to be fair, you said "divine", not clerical. Maybe that was my assumption to begin with)
Would you see him as having "mark" or favored enemy as well?
I heard blackguard is going to made into a full base class. Isn't that going to be one of the others?
These are just some archetypyes I could see being full classes, not necessarilly suggestions on what should be made as full classes. What do you think could make it as a class?If you take the Warlock from Complete Arcane, and boil it down to its essentials, what you have is an arcanist who wields spell-like abilities instead of spells. I have long thought that you could take this concept and build it up to something interesting, that might or might not resemble the Warlock.
I believe that there could be real niche for nimble melee specialist build (generally referred to as the "Swashbuckler") that could really shine with a combination of high BAB, high dodge AC / reflex saves, good precision damage, high mobility and tactical control features (taunt and pull, multiattack groups, enrage or intimidate opponents, etc.). Think Cyrano de Bergerac hopped up on cat's grace.
My big problem with the Warlock type class since it came out was that it seemed to horn in on Sorcerer's niche and pushed them from you have magic in your blood from mysterious and spooky sources, possibly even Dragons to you have Dragonblood and we're moving all the rest of the spooky to Warlocks, deal. I really like the fact that Sorcerers took this back in PFRPG (especially the Arcanist and Destined Bloodlines, so you don't even have to be spooky). How did you invisoin the stripped down Warlock to work?
For that matter, how would people see making normal Warlocks and Sorcerers different?
One thing I've wanted to see for a while, which is similar to the Swashbuckler so they probably wouldn't fit in the same game, is a varient of the Monk that focuses on weapons, probably one in particular. The Monk variant would have scaled down Unarmed damage but would get flurry (Longsword, Spears, etc), two weapon fighting (Scimitars), or rapid shot (bows) depending on the weapon, something akin to Ancestral Daisho so you can enchant your chosen weapon as you go, and the ability to do things like stunning blow through your weapon.
A gish class focused more on melee than support, maybe like the HexBlade beefed up a bit. As interesting as they were, when they did make it into melee, they were second rate as far as throw down ability.
A mystical weaponmaster would be pretty sweet.
One thing I don't like about the 3.P fighter (and it's a minor gripe) is the focus on a specific weapon or kind of weapon.
In 3.5, I always thought Weapon Specialization should be available to everyone. Meanwhile the fighter should get powers that let rock with a wider range of weapons, reflecting his superior training.
|
|
My big problem with the Warlock type class since it came out was that it seemed to horn in on Sorcerer's niche and pushed them from you have magic in your blood from mysterious and spooky sources, possibly even Dragons to you have Dragonblood and we're moving all the rest of the spooky to Warlocks, deal. I really like the fact that Sorcerers took this back in PFRPG (especially the Arcanist and Destined Bloodlines, so you don't even have to be spooky). How did you invisoin the stripped down Warlock to work?
For that matter, how would people see making normal Warlocks and Sorcerers different?
I haven't worked it all out, I'm just spitballing.
However, there is certainly an opportunity for an arcanist that is not a spellcaster, but brings magic to the table, that can synergize well with a melee class. Imagine a class of arcanist that allowed you to have mage armor and true strike as spell-like abilities; now imagine that class multiclassed with a rogue. Perhaps with always-on darkvision.
|
A mystical weaponmaster would be pretty sweet.
One thing I don't like about the 3.P fighter (and it's a minor gripe) is the focus on a specific weapon or kind of weapon.
In 3.5, I always thought Weapon Specialization should be available to everyone. Meanwhile the fighter should get powers that let rock with a wider range of weapons, reflecting his superior training.
Agreed. I like a fighter who can pick up any type of weapon and figure out a way to use it. Even the most obscure exotic weapons.
The Man-at-Arms in Iron Heroes gets "wildcard feats", which are feats that he can pick on the fly (remembering an obscure bit of training, or perhaps just improvising).
What you end up with are Men-at-arms who carry around a polearm, a scimitar, a battleax, a greatsword, a fistful of throwing hammers and a heavy crossbow.
If he needs to hold a line, he wildcard's some Combat Reflexes-type feats and hauls out the polearm. If he's fighting a lot of mooks he wildcards Cleave and Power Attack and cleans house with the battleax; if he can't get at the enemy he wildcards projectile feats and plays archer.
It was a really cool mechanic to reward warriors that don't specialize.
As for the warlock vs. sorcerer, I don't think that vancian casting should be the only manifestation of magic in any given setting. I think it's a very restrictive and specialized way to represent magical powers.
A sorcerer might view a warlock as a kindred spirit or as a crude arcane brute. But roll-wise they'll be very different because one has access to a wide range of specialized options (even if it isn't as wide as a wizard's) while the other has only a handful of simple magic powers.
If I could have what I wanted.......
* A caster class that defies the run of the mill vancian casting (I've seen several, I'm sure Paizo is more than competent to continue the trend)
* A Nimble fighter.
* A Psionic class
* A Class that's a skill monkey, without dipping into spellcasting (bards and Rangers are ou skill masters but seem to need to back it up with spellcasting)
* A tactical fighter
* An 'Adventurer' Generic class.
Batts
Agreed. I like a fighter who can pick up any type of weapon and figure out a way to use it. Even the most obscure exotic weapons.
Yeah! And be fully effective even with weapons that don't weigh 600 pounds (goes off to gripe about Vital Strike some more).
|
|
The Man-at-Arms in Iron Heroes gets "wildcard feats", which are feats that he can pick on the fly (remembering an obscure bit of training, or perhaps just improvising).
What you end up with are Men-at-arms who carry around a polearm, a scimitar, a battleax, a greatsword, a fistful of throwing hammers and a heavy crossbow.
If he needs to hold a line, he wildcard's some Combat Reflexes-type feats and hauls out the polearm. If he's fighting a lot of mooks he wildcards Cleave and Power Attack and cleans house with the battleax; if he can't get at the enemy he wildcards projectile feats and plays archer.
It was a really cool mechanic to reward warriors that don't specialize.
I like this. I really like the idea of a fighter with dozens of different weapons strapped on his legs, arms, and back.
Actually, I was thinking of something that was closer to Bards and Rangers then Clerics. People who use knowledge, skills, and a bit of faith to fight the supernatural rather then pulling out their god and smacking you with it.Hehe, the cleric just turned into a bard and started singing Godsmack...I snickered.
Giving the cleric bardic spell progression and making him a little tougher in melee isn't a huge change by itself. I think you'd find that the core of the concept lay in changing the spell list, and probably throwing in a lot of utility spells that make him good at hunting down foes or getting out of sticky situations.
(though, to be fair, you said "divine", not clerical. Maybe that was my assumption to begin with)
Would you see him as having "mark" or favored enemy as well?
Curses! It ate my post!
Okay here is the summary, cause I'm not writing it all again: 1) Divine Bard variant is good to have, havent seen it done.
2) Inquisitor= BAB: Moderate HD: d8 Skill Points: 4 or 6 + Int Magic: Divine with a spell progression akin to Bard Special Abilities: Provides buffs against monsters to a group due to knowledge. Think Van Helsing from Bram Stoker's book, Dracula (or the movie because Anthony Hopkins is always fun).
The one thing that I liked from the Book of Nine Swords came from the Champion or Crusader class (i.e. the fighter plus fighter spells and a d12 hit die), can't remember the name. It allowed the class to switch any weapon specific feat to another with 1 hour of practice with a weapon. I was going to add that to Fighters but never got the chance because 4thEd came out and split the gaming group.
I would add character class along the lines of a Dragon Shaman or a Marshall.... a leader type who grants buffs without singing, I love the Auras of both of these classes, and despite people thinking a Bard is the Same....nyet....not the same flavor at all....I'm talking and Odysseus, a Boudicca, someone who inspires warriors through deed and command not singing and dancing
I believe that there could be real niche for nimble melee specialist build (generally referred to as the "Swashbuckler") that could really shine with a combination of high BAB, high dodge AC / reflex saves, good precision damage, high mobility and tactical control features (taunt and pull, multiattack groups, enrage or intimidate opponents, etc.). Think Cyrano de Bergerac hopped up on cat's grace.
Here here!!!
1. Nimble fighter with lots of movement-based powers.
2. Skill-based magician. Possibly a spell-using skill monkey. Think truenamer-beguiler, possibly with some Knowledge-based buffing a la archivist.
I would like a holy warrior not bound by alignment
I would like a shaman who has abilities based on spirits witha little spell casting thrown in
I would like a gish with a fighter who can enchant his weapong
I believe that there could be real niche for nimble melee specialist build (generally referred to as the "Swashbuckler") that could really shine with a combination of high BAB, high dodge AC / reflex saves, good precision damage, high mobility and tactical control features (taunt and pull, multiattack groups, enrage or intimidate opponents, etc.). Think Cyrano de Bergerac hopped up on cat's grace.Here here!!!
1. Nimble fighter with lots of movement-based powers.
2. Skill-based magician. Possibly a spell-using skill monkey. Think truenamer-beguiler, possibly with some Knowledge-based buffing a la archivist.
I really liked the Beguiler but I think the Enchantment and Illusion school where hamstrung. First you had plenty of monsters that where just immune. I think that a construct ordered to attack someone who walks through a door would attack an illusion or the sound of screaming and smell of blood would draw a zombie. They also tend to be viewed as a save or die effect. PCs get pissed when they're dominated and a DM's encounter can be derailled by a Charm Monster. One game I played in I was swinging a base 17DC for an Enchanter, yet every time I busted out things like Charm Monster against a Giant or something I knew had poor will saves, the monsters kept getting miracules rolls. I caught the DM lying about the rolls a number of times, but I didn't want to ruin everybody else's fun even though the game sucked for me.
I haven't really seen if PFRPG addresses this, but I kinda doubt it, so I'm kind of leary of Beguiler style classes, myself. Though, if done right, I'd still try to play one.
Class bloat didn't break Pun Pun. Polymorph and related abilities broke Pun Pun.
The keystone to that tactic was an ability possessed by a race of snake-monsters in an obscure FR supplement which allowed them to freely and permanently grant abilities to any scaled creature. Fine for a villainous race, not at all intended for PCs.
Pun Pun used some shapeshifting class to do this, so as to pull it off at low level rather than waiting until he actually got polymorph, but a wizard could have done the same thing. And the Omniscifier, which "defeated" Pun Pun, had nothing to do with new classes IIRC. He exploited an infinite loop with non-core spells to grant himself +infinity to any skill check.
|
Divine Champions of other alignments...(aka Anti-paladins...)
Back when I was playing EQ, I created a Shadow Knight rip-off, which I just modified the paladin, death touch instead of lay on hands, corrupting touch to cause disease, smite good, etc. Chaotic and Lawful champions wouldn't be too diffucult to create as well...
I'd like to see a good take on the "Pact" class, possibly allow the pacts to just be feats or class alternates which you take, instead of a full-blown class.
I'd like to see an elemental School added to Wizardry. In addition to other schools, temporal and convert the runelords Seven Deadly sin schools to PFRPG...that would be sweet.
Some Arcane/Warrior cross with a new name that can dominate so the stupid term "gish" can be left behind once and for all and anyone who even mentions it when not referring to the githyanki gets a funny look.
AEG had a class in their Mercenaries book that was an Arcane Warrior called a Myrmidon. Sure a Myrmidon had nothing to do with magic, but at least its better then Hex, Spell, or Dusk Blade. Honestly I think Warlock would be a better name for this kind of class, as the name refers to a magic user and it begins with War.
So we've heard 2/3 of what's going into the Advanced Players Handbook for classes. I was wondering what other classes/niches they could see as full on classes rather then prestige classes? Here are some ideas to get the ball rolling:
Animist: A shapeshifting warrior type that draws power/inspiration from one particular animal type (i.e. Bears, Caninines, Large Cats, Raptors, etc.). I like Shifters from Eberron, what can I say.
Mystic: I liked the Shaman from Oriental Adventures but most people are familiar with the spirit shaman. It fit somewhere between Monk, Druid, and Cleric.
Inquisitor: A lot less "The Spanish...", a lot more Van Helsing. Moderate Divine Caster (Bard Spellcasting). Uses Knowledge to fight the unnatural and a nod to the Archivist Class.
Roundhead: specialized in beating up on Cavaliers! Hey, some one had to make the joke!
These are just some archetypyes I could see being full classes, not necessarilly suggestions on what should be made as full classes. What do you think could make it as a class?
Personally, I hope they're a bit strict about what is or isn't a new class. Giving us several new base (if not core) classes to work with will be fun, but I'm hoping it means they'll slow waaaay down on base classes after this (yes I'm aware of the difference between core and base, but it doesn't prevent bloat).
The problem with core classes versus base classes is that, as Jason said, they have to do something conceptually and mechanically new and different in order to justify having a new class. I'd say, even then, what they're doing has to be mechanically interesting enough to develop over 20 levels and conceptually broad enough that it shouldn't be a PRC. (Pretty much, other than the monk and the barbarian, all of the base classes can be taken in multiple different directions).
Anyway, here's my personal opinion, more specifically:
Animist-This sounds like a melee PRC with an animal companion and wildshape. It wasn't particularly well-done by wizards, and it sounds like a really great idea for a prestige class, but I don't really see how this is a 20 level base class.
Mystic-Shamany thing-This is a really popular class for people to do, but I just never liked it. I remember looking at the OA book and going "this is a druid with some monk stuff" and looking at the complete divine book and saying "this is a variant druid." So I guess I'm curious, mechanically and conceptually, what makes this so different from the existing crazy mystics in the woods, or an eccentric cleric?
Inquisitor: I like this idea. It sounds like witch-hunters from the Warhammer setting. Right now, there are no mid-level divine casters (IE bard progression), and I like skill-heavy characters. I also thought the archivist was very very cool, and would be well served by being a bit de-clericed (too bad we can't just use the dark knowledge system, it was solid). Of course, I also wouldn't mind a decent rogue/cleric PRC, as converting the arcane trickster just doesn't do the concept justice.
One class I wouldn't mind seeing is a nonmagical or semimagical tinker class.
I don't really understand the call for a gish class. That's a concept that's already really well covered, especially with the boosts to Eldritch Knight.
|
|
Some Arcane/Warrior cross with a new name that can dominate so the stupid term "gish" can be left behind once and for all and anyone who even mentions it when not referring to the githyanki gets a funny look.AEG had a class in their Mercenaries book that was an Arcane Warrior called a Myrmidon. Sure a Myrmidon had nothing to do with magic, but at least its better then Hex, Spell, or Dusk Blade. Honestly I think Warlock would be a better name for this kind of class, as the name refers to a magic user and it begins with War.
The term 'warlock' means 'oath-breaker', though it is also used as a title by male witches.
|
I don't really understand the call for a g*** class. That's a concept that's already really well covered, especially with the boosts to Eldritch Knight.
While despising the term the other posters are using for a fighter/mage, I can understand the interest in something beyond the Eldritch Knight. It's not very flavorful, for one thing. Even the Mystic Theurge has more interesting class features. Just diverse training, a few combat feats, and spellcasting advancement isn't all that interesting, if you ask me. Functional, yes, but not flavorful. If there were other precursor abilities before Spell Critical, or a way to enhance one's sword, it would be more interesting.
The Spellblade in Tome of Secrets is more along the lines of what I'm thinking, but that's lacking somewhat, too. What I can't really say for certain right now, but it just doesn't feel quite "right" either.
I don't really understand the call for a gish class. That's a concept that's already really well covered, especially with the boosts to Eldritch Knight.
Clearly, those making said call feel that it isn't.
The Eldritch Knight is a patch. Even moreso than most PrCs (and I think that all of them are basically patches, at least in function. For example, having a barbarian PrC would basically be writing a fighter patch that allows the fighter to fill that roll).
And there's nothing wrong with that. For some concepts, a "patch" to allow an existing class to fill a roll works fine. Be it a feat chain, spell chain, PrC, or even class variant or replacement levels. However, at some point a concept becomes popular, different, and/or iconic enough to deserve its own full-blown progression right alongside the fighter and the wizard.
Obviously, where this line sits will vary with who you ask, depending on how much they favor a given concept, and also depending on what they feel makes something "different" or "iconic".
I don't really understand the call for a gish class. That's a concept that's already really well covered, especially with the boosts to Eldritch Knight.Clearly, those making said call feel that it isn't.
The Eldritch Knight is a patch. Even moreso than most PrCs (and I think that all of them are basically patches, at least in function. For example, having a barbarian PrC would basically be writing a fighter patch that allows the fighter to fill that roll).
Well, many people feel that it is. I would say if people aren't able to come up with a class that is mechanically and conceptually different, There's no reason to throw a class in just to have another class.
See, I don't really agree that the EDK is a patch at all. It's a multi-class character. Call it gish, fighter/mage, whatever you want, What people are typically describing is a wizard and also a fighter, and that is exactly what the eldritch knight allows. While not the most exciting roleplaying concept, one of the purposes of PRCs has always been to allow for multiclass combinations. So, I pretty much see this as doing exactly what it should. But, frankly, I think the idea that prestige classes are patches is a bit silly. I see them as a combination of roleplaying (hence the prestige factor) and abilities that allow you to take your character in a specific interesting direction. I know a lot of people just view them as a building block of character creation, but I've always held to the idea that they're character-defining.
I don't really understand the call for a g*** class. That's a concept that's already really well covered, especially with the boosts to Eldritch Knight.While despising the term the other posters are using for a fighter/mage, I can understand the interest in something beyond the Eldritch Knight. It's not very flavorful, for one thing. Even the Mystic Theurge has more interesting class features. Just diverse training, a few combat feats, and spellcasting advancement isn't all that interesting, if you ask me. Functional, yes, but not flavorful. If there were other precursor abilities before Spell Critical, or a way to enhance one's sword, it would be more interesting.
The Spellblade in Tome of Secrets is more along the lines of what I'm thinking, but that's lacking somewhat, too. What I can't really say for certain right now, but it just doesn't feel quite "right" either.
What term? Gish? Gish Gishity Gish Gish ?(hehe).
In all seriousness though, I do see how the EDK is boring. The thing is, it already gets so many goodies, that I can't possibly imagine it getting anything more. And, spells are pretty darned interesting.
I don't know what the spellblade from TOS does, as I've never seen TOS, so I'm not sure what you mean. If it's something like what the hexblade used to get, or the Complete Warrior Arcane Strike, then I'd rather see it made into a feat or feat chain, so other characters who do both fighting and arcane magic (IE the bard)can get some love as well. But I do see why you feel the need for a more interesting arcane swordsman.
|
|
I'd like to see some sorta racial paragon class. Not racial levels, but full twenty levels where one's racial abilities are expanded to the fullest.
That's a great idea, it would be a sort of throwback to Basic...it sure would make NPCs easy to create for various races...it's a 4th level dwarf. There's a 20th level Elf.
And that could later be exapnded to created base monster classes as well. Watch out those epic-level kobolds are cleaver trapmasters...
I'd like to see some sorta racial paragon class. Not racial levels, but full twenty levels where one's racial abilities are expanded to the fullest.That's a great idea, it would be a sort of throwback to Basic...it sure would make NPCs easy to create for various races...it's a 4th level dwarf. There's a 20th level Elf.
And that could later be exapnded to created base monster classes as well. Watch out those epic-level kobolds are cleaver trapmasters...
yeah, I used to love the old paragon classes.
Rather than new base classes, I'd MUCH rather see ways to expand the roles of existing classes to take their place, through variant class features, new rogue talents, etc. Don't add a swashbuckler class -- add variant fighter class features to make a swashbuckler out of a fighter! Unearthed Arcana was worth its weight in gold for things like the druidic avenger, the battle sorcerer, the bardic sage, and the prestige paladin.
|
|
Rather than new base classes, I'd MUCH rather see ways to expand the roles of existing classes to take their place, through variant class features, new rogue talents, etc. Don't add a swashbuckler class -- add variant fighter class features to make a swashbuckler out of a fighter! Unearthed Arcana was worth its weight in gold for things like the druidic avenger, the battle sorcerer, the bardic sage, and the prestige paladin.
Not a bad idea. I liked the class kits of 2nd edition.
Rather than new base classes, I'd MUCH rather see ways to expand the roles of existing classes to take their place, through variant class features, new rogue talents, etc. Don't add a swashbuckler class -- add variant fighter class features to make a swashbuckler out of a fighter! Unearthed Arcana was worth its weight in gold for things like the druidic avenger, the battle sorcerer, the bardic sage, and the prestige paladin.
Yes. This. +1 this. I don't know if I'd want to see quite so much swapping out as we saw in UA, but variant class features are nice (and considering the relatively minor tweaks most of these classes would require, sooo much easier).