Hey folks! This is (I believe) my first post on the Paizo boards.
Anyway, I was very excited about Pathfinder, have the Core book and have flipped through the Bestiary and will probably be converting my 3.5 game completely, but there are a few things that I've wondered whether there were "fixes" or adjustments others have made.
For starters, I HATE 2+Int/lvl skills, especially on classes with Int as a dump stat. Aside from parity between 3.5 and Pathfinder, what reason is there to maintain this relic? More skills does NOT, in most cases, result in more power for a character, but gives characters more tools to use, particular outside of combat.
Yes, the favored class mechanic helps a little in this regard, but it means that only certain combos will ever be particularly skillful, which I dislike. I've come up with a few different solutions over the years for this issue, but was wondering what others have done, if anything.
Moving on, while I find that the Paladin's Mercies are interesting, I dislike the lack of bonus feats on the paladin class. Especially since they tend to have more limited/focused melee ability than most other classes (short-duration buffs, and limited-use abilities). They just feel like the least customizable of the classes in a lot of ways, AND really beg to take both martial-type feats, and healing-type feats.
For the Rogue, I read their higher-tier (lvl 10+)of bonus abilities to read that any of them may be swapped for a bonus feat with no limitation, unlike the lower tier. Is that the case? And if so, does anyone feel that perhaps rogues now gain TOO many bonus feats, as they gain almost as many as fighters in addition to their other class abilities (Weapon Focus, Finesse, Bonus feat, then a bonus feat every other level potentially from 10 on).
Have all the changes attained any semblance of balance between the martial classes and the spellcasting classes at higher level?
Hi, welcome to Paizo.
Firstly, you are on the totally wrong board. This is for playtesting the new base classes for the Advanced Player's Guide, PFRPG General Discussion is what you want, maybe it'll get moved.
-I agree that I would like more skills, and it is a relic. The best advice really is too just homebrew it, all characters get a minimum of 4+Int skills.
-The paladin is one of the most powerful classes, in the right circumstances they can be devastating, thier not totally overpowering, but probably on the strong side of balanced, more feats would make them totally over the top.
-I'm okay with the rogue getting feats, like the fighter he's entirely mundane, he loses hit dice, and base attack bonus to get sneak and some nifty class features, but getting the extra feats helps him keep either combat relevance, or really master his skills.
-I'ts more balance, the skew still shifts from melee advantage-roughly equal-spellcaster advantage as you go up in levels, but attempts were made, and its certainly a bit better than 3.5.
It couldn't have been changed too much more without loss of backwards compatibility, which was against the design goals.
Skills got a huge boost in PF. Where before you would need spot, listen, and search, now you only need perception. Likewise with balance and tumble, now being merely acrobatics. Concentration comes free. Even more, non-class skills are actually useful now.
That said, 2+int skills/level is hardly gimped. If a player chooses to have 8 intelligence, there is a cost in doing so. They may offset this with their favored class, or by being human, but that's up to them.
Also keep in mind that skills don't need to be maxed out. One can split their skills.
For starters, I HATE 2+Int/lvl skills
Really more a preference than a bug... :P
especially on classes with Int as a dump stat. Aside from parity between 3.5 and Pathfinder, what reason is there to maintain this relic?
Jason (Bulmahn - the guy who is responsible for the core rules) didn't think it needed to be fixed.
Personally, while I wouldn't have minded a general increase of skill points, I don't think it's that much of a big deal.
Yes, the favored class mechanic helps a little in this regard, but it means that only certain combos will ever be particularly skillful, which I dislike.
Well, only certain classes are skilled. Favoured classes boost that for single-classed characters, for everything equally (note that everyone can choose their favoured class freely now. Half-elves get to choose two).
One important observation: While you don't get more skill points, they often are worth more now: One rank of Stealth will give you the equivalent of a rank of Hide and a rank of Move Silently.
Moving on, while I find that the Paladin's Mercies are interesting, I dislike the lack of bonus feats on the paladin class. Especially since they tend to have more limited/focused melee ability than most other classes (short-duration buffs, and limited-use abilities). They just feel like the least customizable of the classes in a lot of ways, AND really beg to take both martial-type feats, and healing-type feats.
And they totally rock without extra feats. Other classes have abilities that are best described as a list of bonus feats. Fighters, rangers, and so on.
The Paladin's abilities work best as unique class abilities. And they work really well. In fact, more than a few people consider them overpowered.
As for customisation: They do get to choose their mercies. Not a big deal, but it's something. They also don't get to choose their auras because they just get them all.
And, one of the things I like: While they don't get martial bonus feats, they're not really restricted to one style of fighting. You can keep on using sword'n'board or use a large big greatsword, but it also works really, really well for two-weapon fighting and ranged attacks. The smite bonus to attack will counter-act the two-weapon penalty, and the damage bonus will apply to each attack with each weapon.
For the Rogue, I read their higher-tier (lvl 10+)of bonus abilities to read that any of them may be swapped for a bonus feat with no limitation, unlike the lower tier. Is that the case? And if so, does anyone feel that perhaps rogues now gain TOO many bonus feats, as they gain almost as many as fighters in addition to their other class abilities (Weapon Focus, Finesse, Bonus feat, then a bonus feat every other level potentially from 10 on).
Sure, take those bonus feats. Lose out on great stuff like crippling strike or improved evasion. The fighter still does get more feats. And he has exclusive access to some feats. And he can qualify to many feats a lot earlier.
Plus, fighters get some class abilities of their own now.
Fighters are not about to be upstaged by rogues. Seriously: want a juggernaught of martial destruction? Fighters outdamage rogues 11 times out of 10. And they can own rangers, barbarians and paladins, too, especially since you consider that fighters just do - no x/day power, no "only good against enemy X", all the power, all the time.
Have all the changes attained any semblance of balance between the martial classes and the spellcasting classes at higher level?
The jury is still out, but there are people complaining that casters rule. There are also people complaining that PF is 3e Melee Edition. One definition balance is all sides whining equally. ;-)
Between only needing a single rank to get an extra +3 in a class skill, and the combination/elimination of skills.....I personally think there's plenty of an increase of skills for everyone. Even my int 7 human cleric is liking his 3 skill points per level very much :).
As per rogues taking extra feats instead of talents, no can do, more than one combat and one general feat.
page 68, rogue talents: A rogue cannot select an individual talent more than once.
That text is included in the description for Rogue Talents, but NOT for Advanced Talents. Also, the wording for the bonus feat for the advanced talents implies that it may be taken repeatedly.
On the skills front, I'm looking at elf fighters, half-orc paladins, halfling clerics, etc... who will be getting 1 skill point per level in most cases. And, while many skills got folded together, they were, oddly, the skills that the classes with many points per level would be taking, essentially giving Rogues, Rangers, Druids and Barbarians more skill points, while not really benefiting the 2/lvl classes at all.
My initial idea in 3.5 had been to grant the 2/lvl classes 1 extra point/level and to assign one skill (usually a choice between 2 knowledge skills core to the class) that would always be leveled for each level in that class. For example, a wizard would gain 3/lvl +full ranks each level in 1 knowledge skill, chosen at level 1. A cleric could choose between Religion and Planes, etc... Don't recall what I gave sorcerers and fighters just got 4/lvl.
Never made sense to me that a barbarian, who can't even READ, has more skills per level than fighters (likely to train, rather than learn through intuition/life experience), paladins (likely to be trained), clerics (likely to be trained), and wizards (who are the most likely to be studious yet who have a lower point/lvl as a balance vs. their higher Int, which also seemed silly).
That text is included in the description for Rogue Talents, but NOT for Advanced Talents. Also, the wording for the bonus feat for the advanced talents implies that it may be taken repeatedly.
I know. I still don't see why this is bad. You are giving up advanced talents for this. You don't get any special deal with those feats. You still must meet all prerequisites.
The fighter still has more feats than the rogue(and he gets them on top of his class abilities), the fighter gets some exclusive stuff (and pretty much all of it rocks), and the fighter has the strong BAB, which means combat feats will be available to him a lot earlier (example: no rogue that doesn't multiclass or go epic can ever get Pinpoint Targeting, which is a really great feat. Fighters can get it at 16th, Rangers at 10th (!!!))
On the skills front, I'm looking at elf fighters, half-orc paladins, halfling clerics, etc... who will be getting 1 skill point per level in most cases.
Elf fighter: 2 base +1 favoured class, means 3. Elves get a bonus to Int and Dex, which means it is not unlikely that they even get another point for int. If they get higher int to go Combat Expertise and follow-ups (which kinda makes sense for an elf fighter), it's even more. On the other hand, to get 1 skill point only, you'd need to get int 7 (to be raised to 9 by the elf Int bonus) and choose a favoured class that you'll never take levels in. A full-time elf fighter will have fighter as a favoured enemy unless you cheat yourself on purpose.
The others aren't as extreme (as it can often make sense to play them really, really stupid, and the game won't give you a nasty bonus to ruin that), but still, you'll need to go with a really low ability score and make an intentionally bad choice in favoured class.
Never made sense to me that a barbarian, who can't even READ, has more skills per level than fighters (likely to train, rather than learn through intuition/life experience)
I don't see the ability to read (which is something all pathfinder barbarians are capable of, by the way) or whether you learn in a school as opposed to in life as relevant to the number of base skill points you get.
In fact, fighters go to fighter school, where they just learn how to put sharp things into soft things that scream and bleed (the only skill they really learn, and it's not even a skill in this game - you'll need to play HOL for that). Barbarians grow up apart from civilisation (let's just assume that the barbarian in question is not just a barbarian in class levels, but also in culture - not always the same!) need several skills to survive. They need to learn not just to kill enemies for their XP, but also how to hunt and prepare foot, how to live off the land, and so on.
wizards (who are the most likely to be studious yet who have a lower point/lvl as a balance vs. their higher Int, which also seemed silly).
Not really. It's no balance thing. It's "this class isn't really about skills so they only get 2+). The fact that their Int helps them out is just a lucky coincidence for them.
Look at sorcerers. They don't get more than 2+, either (and their int usually sucks). And bards get 6+ even their int is usually not bad, and they get some extra perks in the skills department.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
1) 2+Int/lvl skills, especially on classes with Int as a dump stat.
2) I dislike the lack of bonus feats on the paladin class.
3) For the Rogue, I read their higher-tier (lvl 10+)of bonus abilities to read that any of them may be swapped for a bonus feat with no limitation,
4) Have all the changes attained any semblance of balance between the martial classes and the spellcasting classes at higher level?
1) I don't see this as a problem in 3.p, since you don't pay double for ranks, the number of skills have been greatly decreased (like Tumble/Jump/etc is now Acrobatics.)
2) Paladins got a great boost, they are a desirable class now. They don't need an even higher boost like bonus feats, but remember 3.p get more feats for levels than 3.5 characters.
3) You can't take a given talent more than once, so you can't take the "Feat" talent twice. So your feat is a non-issue.
4) Yes, pretty much the goal (as I remember them saying) was to improve martials to be similar in power to spellcasters.