You are right, Deadly Performance is rather focused. However, I have no problem with a military commander having such a frightening presence that his enemy drops dead from sheer terror. Nor do I have a problem with a priest censuring his foe with a holy proclamation that strikes him dead on the spot.When you say, look at the capstone - it's not awesome combat prowess, it's not magic amazement, and it's not even something that blends well with either. It's a performance, Deadly Performance, now ... you want to have a military commander ... I don't know, YELL so loud at the enemy he has a heart attack ... WTF!?!?!?
It's D&D and so suspension of disbelief abounds, but some things are just too far wide of the mark and need redesigning to work right.
I can absolutely see someone playing a "Military Commander" Bard as R. Lee Ermey in Full Metal Jacket, doing just this. Yell at the enemy until they 'off' themselves...
THAT would be fun.. :)
|
Um, yeah. They totally can. We have the term CoDzilla for a reason you know.You may not like it and it may not fit your ideal but the bard is a solid F/M class. Medium BAB, Light armor, ok weapons 6 levels of spell , decent buffs. Solid all aroundBy that logic, clerics and druids make AWESOME f/m. They have all that the bard has...only 9 levels of spells. Yeah I could re-work either of those to be a fighter/mage too...You being too simple.
That is in reference to power...nowhere does that refer to clerics or druids being a fighter/MAGE. Yes you can take a sledgehammer to the rules to make either class into one...but without doing so, you really can´t...as there is the divine fluff tied to a bunch of mechanics. Some of the fluff which can not be changed without changes to the mechanics. Yes I realize that other then all the divine stuff, the druid and cleric is what gish players pretty much drool over. Well I guess the summoner makes for a good druid analogy for the arcane side at least.
|
|
You are right, Deadly Performance is rather focused. However, I have no problem with a military commander having such a frightening presence that his enemy drops dead from sheer terror. Nor do I have a problem with a priest censuring his foe with a holy proclamation that strikes him dead on the spot.When you say, look at the capstone - it's not awesome combat prowess, it's not magic amazement, and it's not even something that blends well with either. It's a performance, Deadly Performance, now ... you want to have a military commander ... I don't know, YELL so loud at the enemy he has a heart attack ... WTF!?!?!?
It's D&D and so suspension of disbelief abounds, but some things are just too far wide of the mark and need redesigning to work right.
I can absolutely see someone playing a "Military Commander" Bard as R. Lee Ermey in Full Metal Jacket, doing just this. Yell at the enemy until they 'off' themselves...
THAT would be fun.. :)
And it would really only fly in a funny game. As a DM if somebody pulled that in one of the more serious games I run, I would be highly annoyed...then again for funny games, I allow all sorts of crazy stupid stuff since that´s what they are there for.
And it would really only fly in a funny game. As a DM if somebody pulled that in one of the more serious games I run, I would be highly annoyed...then again for funny games, I allow all sorts of crazy stupid stuff since that´s what they are there for.
Sure, I'd not be able to resist the occasional FMJ quote, but in all seriousness, I wouldn't make that a habit. I was just sayin that playing the type of character that Ermey did would be fun. :)
|
|
And it would really only fly in a funny game. As a DM if somebody pulled that in one of the more serious games I run, I would be highly annoyed...then again for funny games, I allow all sorts of crazy stupid stuff since that´s what they are there for.
But would you allow Kratos to point out the enemy commander and declare 'I am your DEATH.' and have the poor sod keel over from fright?
What about the Pope waving his staff and admonishing the heathen 'You are in God's house, sinner, and you cannot stand against his righteousness!' and having the infidel struck dead instantly?
|
|
Sure, I'd not be able to resist the occasional FMJ quote, but in all seriousness, I wouldn't make that a habit. I was just sayin that playing the type of character that Ermey did would be fun. :)And it would really only fly in a funny game. As a DM if somebody pulled that in one of the more serious games I run, I would be highly annoyed...then again for funny games, I allow all sorts of crazy stupid stuff since that´s what they are there for.
You maybe able to...but trust me, once it gets started, it´ll spread through out the table...at least with a bunch of geeks who have nothing better to do then memorize classic movie lines and play D&D/PF ;) .
|
|
And it would really only fly in a funny game. As a DM if somebody pulled that in one of the more serious games I run, I would be highly annoyed...then again for funny games, I allow all sorts of crazy stupid stuff since that´s what they are there for.But would you allow Kratos to point out the enemy commander and declare 'I am your DEATH.' and have the poor sod keel over from fright?
What about the Pope waving his staff and admonishing the heathen 'You are in God's house, sinner, and you cannot stand against his righteousness!' and having the infidel struck dead instantly?
Once again only in silly games as both of those would incite many hours of jokes at our tables. Although the second one less so then the first I do admit...and I have had a player do pretty good with a priest who was straight bard...gave inspiring sermons as they fought. Worked pretty well in fact. I don´t subscribe to the bard HAVE to be minstrels...I´m just saying they don´t fit what a lot of gish players want because of spell list mostly...but also because of wasted mechanics in many cases as well. That and many gish players want the fighter/wizard more then a fighter/sorcerer. The bard can be shoehorned as a fighter/sorcerer...but it fails utterly as a fighter/wizard. Naturally, they are more rogue like then fighter though.
That is in reference to power...nowhere does that refer to clerics or druids being a fighter/MAGE. Yes you can take a sledgehammer to the rules to make either class into one...but without doing so, you really can´t...as there is the divine fluff tied to a bunch of mechanics. Some of the fluff which can not be changed without changes to the mechanics. Yes I realize that other then all the divine stuff, the druid and cleric is what gish players pretty much drool over. Well I guess the summoner makes for a good druid analogy for the arcane side at least.
I think the point was being made that ultimately they are spell-casters that can fight. There are many ways of building a cleric or a druid into a melee-oriented character that can challenge the best fighter. The bard has problems doing so due to his more restricted spell-list, lack of direct combat oriented spells, etc.
The bard works as one kind of fighter/caster, the cleric is another and the druid can make a third, but these aren't the kind that is being asked for. There is another type of magic-enhanced fighter that is being requested by a large number of players.
You maybe able to...but trust me, once it gets started, it´ll spread through out the table...at least with a bunch of geeks who have nothing better to do then memorize classic movie lines and play D&D/PF ;) .Sure, I'd not be able to resist the occasional FMJ quote, but in all seriousness, I wouldn't make that a habit. I was just sayin that playing the type of character that Ermey did would be fun. :)And it would really only fly in a funny game. As a DM if somebody pulled that in one of the more serious games I run, I would be highly annoyed...then again for funny games, I allow all sorts of crazy stupid stuff since that´s what they are there for.
lol.. sounds like my family game group :)
|
|
lol.. sounds like my family game group :)You maybe able to...but trust me, once it gets started, it´ll spread through out the table...at least with a bunch of geeks who have nothing better to do then memorize classic movie lines and play D&D/PF ;) .Sure, I'd not be able to resist the occasional FMJ quote, but in all seriousness, I wouldn't make that a habit. I was just sayin that playing the type of character that Ermey did would be fun. :)And it would really only fly in a funny game. As a DM if somebody pulled that in one of the more serious games I run, I would be highly annoyed...then again for funny games, I allow all sorts of crazy stupid stuff since that´s what they are there for.
Sounds like I´d like your family hehe :) .
My problem w/a Bard class (straight) to accomplish this is that I don't see the fighter/mage(I HATE "gish" myself for many of the same reasons presented by the developer, but mostly ... I'm NOT talking about githiyanki even remotely!) hopping around the battle-field, SINGING as he fights or casts spells.
"I'll stab you,
you can't beat me,Killing me's a fantasy..."
Remember, some people gripe about cheese.Also, remember 3.5 compatable....
Swiftblade, Abj Champ and spellsword are great in certain combinations.
Abj. Champ is the only one that's really "cheesy" though. Spellsword is actually pretty weak outside of a dip, and Swiftblade is really well made.
|
|
You know if I could use the spellsword and abjurant champion, I would...and if those are allowed, most likely so is somatic weaponry...and I´d be all set for my prefered build of fighter 1/wizard 6/spellsword 5/AC 5/EK 3. Hell, may take 9 levels of EK for extra feats by doing fighter 1/wizard 5/ek 1/spellsword 5/EK 8...I do like shield slam. And if I´m gonna shield slam, might as well do TW rend. Course my spellsword build suck for even longer then the normal EK build. I usually have to wait til level 12 to come into my own. And I´m worse at high level as no 9th level spells (being 4 CL behind and all)...so basically...not a very good build overall :P. But I like it.
Abj. Champ should be nuked from obit...twice.
It's to easy to get into full bab, full casting built around a spell that NOT a abjuration spell. You gain a nifty power at every level but 3rd. You give up nothing but gain everything.
It's everything a PRC should not be.
Abj. Champ should be nuked from obit...twice.Why? Never found it to be OP...now the incantrix and haluraa elders on the other hand....
Abj. Champ is one of those no brainer PrCs - the pre-requesites are more or less automatically taken anyways, and you lose nothing in going down the class; it's just a flat out power upgrade.
I agree that it's not overpowered at all. Pure casters who want to be defensive have Initiate of the Seven Vales. It's pretty good for fighters who want a little bit of magic to back them up - a sort of counterpart to the new Arcane Archer, or an alternate Duskblade if you will.
I've always seen it more as Gish Spackle then anything else. You have your fighting class, your casting class, your PRC to mix the two together with a little "cool" something extra, and - what's this, got levels left unspent? We can just put a little Abj. Champion in there.
I guess my issue with it lies in the requirements - or rather, lies in the lack of requirements. It's just too much of a no brainer.
The old problem with AC was when wizards who were single-classed took it for 5 levels, starting at 10th. They had all the spellcasting of a 20th level wizard at the end with better hp, better saves, plus a few extra abilities over a 20th level wizard. Under Pathfinder you lose a little more, so it might not be as bad, but it's still easy enough to see why people would go Wiz 15/AC 5.
|
|
The old problem with AC was when wizards who were single-classed took it for 5 levels, starting at 10th. They had all the spellcasting of a 20th level wizard at the end with better hp, better saves, plus a few extra abilities over a 20th level wizard. Under Pathfinder you lose a little more, so it might not be as bad, but it's still easy enough to see why people would go Wiz 15/AC 5.
Except the seven veils is a better PrC for a straight caster who wants more survivability. And the AC was only so for elf wizards. Others had to burn a feat. All in all, it was gish speckle. It was a way for wizards to fix something they have been messing up since 3rd ed first came out.
|
|
It's to easy to get into full bab, full casting built around a spell that NOT a abjuration spell. You gain a nifty power at every level but 3rd. You give up nothing but gain everything.
It's everything a PRC should not be.
And it was made as a 5 level PrC because all the other gish PrC had the exact OTHER problems...so it was a way for us gish fans to shore up our characters. I had issues with the fact that it was a hot fix for an issue the have known about for ages but was too busy making clerics and druids into unholy terrors to worry about however. It does serve it´s purpose though.
I think people who really hate on Abj. Champ do so because they put a whole lot of stock in AC.
AC...really isn't that important.
Especially for casters.
Sure, it also increased your HP, but again, not to the point where it made a huge difference.
For a pure caster, there were a lot of much, much better PrCs.
I just wish Abj. Champ had better requirements :B
If it was 10 levels you gave up some casting level and had better requirements I would not have an issue with it myself. It's just to damned good and a no brainer.
Simply put if a wizard10/PRC 5 is straight up better then a wizard 15...the PRC is to damned good.
If it was 10 levels you gave up some casting level and had better requirements I would not have an issue with it myself. It's just to damned good and a no brainer.
Simply put if a wizard10/PRC 5 is straight up better then a wizard 15...the PRC is to damned good.
But the comparison isn't wizard 15 vs wizard 10/PrC 5.
The comparison is wizard x/PrC x versus wizard x/PrC x.
In this case? There's way better PrCs for a wizard.
Now, this has changed in Pathfinder, where wizards actually get stuff in their base class. But in bog standard 3.5? There was simply no reason to ever stay as a straight wizard. Not because PrCs were "too good," but because straight wizard didn't give anything.
|
|
If it was 10 levels you gave up some casting level and had better requirements I would not have an issue with it myself. It's just to damned good and a no brainer.
Simply put if a wizard10/PRC 5 is straight up better then a wizard 15...the PRC is to damned good.
Then you should have issues with a LOT more then just the AC as pretty much ANY caster PrC that gives full casting was better then straight wizard. I don´t think that is an issue with the PrC but an issue with the wizard base class. PF does do a pretty good job there.
|
|
Now, this has changed in Pathfinder, where wizards actually get stuff in their base class.
Until level 8, where the only thing you get until 20th is an increase in the bonus you got at first level. Eleven dead levels you have very little reason to stick with instead of jumping at a full casting PRC.
|
|
Now, this has changed in Pathfinder, where wizards actually get stuff in their base class.Until level 8, where the only thing you get until 20th is an increase in the bonus you got at first level. Eleven dead levels you have very little reason to stick with instead of jumping at a full casting PRC.
I don´t know...the universalist bonus is quite good for staying wizard...a bonus level on insta metamagic every 2 level. You use to take entire PrC for something like that :) .
Oh I do have issues with a damned lot of PRC as they are too damned good. PRC became "What powers can I get on top of a straight class to make me down right better"
PRC became rocket tag. This is just the one that came up here..and I do find it damned bad. Not the ideal as a whole , but how it was done...that and ya know being built around the wrong damned spell.
That would also not be allowed as written.
Mr. Fishy is pretty sure it was decided by certain people, that casters were super heroes and fighter were mere motals. So are you trying to build a better hybrid? What the bard isn't good enough for you?
In my current campaign, my wife is playing a Dwarf Bard. Her bard uses perform: comedy but doesn't do stand-up. She's just a b%@*%. She's changed the name of "Inspire Courage" to "Berate" and she's specializing in demoralizing. She's REALLY good at it. I make her actually berate the other players at the table. It's amusing as hell.
Charm person is called Pimping, Charm Monster is called Big Pimping, Dominate is called Strong Pimp Hand.
Does she refer to the party as her "stable of b~$@$es".
Why seeker, what is wrong with a cleric prestige class that gives all martial weapon proficiencies, stronger turning and healing and more, and full spellcasting for only a d6 HD? :)
Although I don't think it would be overpowered in Age of Worms. It might be the only class that could survive. XD
never played that one. My group did stap with no caster however ..which was fun. And Wotc put out some very, very questionable things
PRC became rocket tag.
LOL!!! Man - I've got nothing to contribute here, but that's hilarious! Never heard it before and I almost had to clean the monitor!!!
I've known a few complain about a few powers of different PrC's here and there, but nothing on the level here. But THAT statement will become my measuring tool for PrC's I think now - "is it playing rocket tag? If so - may be overpowered."
lol
"rocket tag"
Yeah, but they're no Mongoose. ;)
never played that one. My group did stap with no caster however ..which was fun. And Wotc put out some very, very questionable things
Valid point. I think wotc lost sight of what a PRC was really, and just started going "how bad ass can we make this?"...which I think started with the ECS.
|
|
Mr. Fishy is pretty sure it was decided by certain people, that casters were super heroes and fighter were mere motals. So are you trying to build a better hybrid? What the bard isn't good enough for you?
Does the bard have vanican spellcasting? Nope? NEXT!
Seriously, there are quite a few of us who like the fighter wizard...key being WIZARRD.
While true that Wotc set the bar pretty high at time. Mongoose took that bar, smelted it down and built an altar on the tallest peck they could find and frolicked naked around it with great gusto. So munchkins would have a new level to aspire to.
"And lo they looked at the altar of the Munchkin lords and were thus ashamed, and they hung their heads and wept. For they truly did not understand the true meaning of munchkin. "
|
|
Y'know cold napalm,
It sounds like Ruamathai Battlemage is the right class for you- it gets spell channeling as part of an attack:
Channel Spell (Su): As a free action, a Raumathari battlemage can cast a spell through his melee weapon (usually his sword) as he attacks with it. He gains an attack bonus equal to the level of the channeled spell for that attack only. The channeled spell counts against the battlemage's normal daily limit. The maximum allowable spell level and number of times per day this ability can be used increase as noted in the table.
It focuses on Bastard Sword so you can use it as an arcane focus no worries!
Here's a rough Build
Char Lvl Class BAB Fort Ref Will Feats/Special
1 Ftr1 1 Weapon Prof: Bastard Sword, H-Combat Casting, Weapon Focus: Bastard Sword
2 Wiz1 1
3 Wiz2 2 Arcane Strike
4 Wiz3 2
5 Wiz4 3 Arcane Armor Training
6 Wiz5 3 Extend Spell
7 EK1 4 Power Attack ,feat
8 Rum1 4 Sword Focus, Channel Spell 1
9 Rum2 5 Arcane Armor Mastery, Battle spell (silent)
10 Rum3 6 Channel spell 2
11 Rum4 7 F, Battle Spell (Still)
12 EK2 8
13 EK3 9 Wpn Spl
14 EK4 10 Critfocus
15 EK5 11 F,f
16 Ek6 12
17 EK7 13 Gtr Wpn Focus
18 EK8 14 Staggering Crit
19 EK9 15 Feat, feat
20 EK10 16 Spell CriticalBAB 16, 9th level casting, 2 free channels, spell crit, med armor casting.
Cheers.
Also not core PF. Using 3.5 splat books I have listed my preferred build...which is actually quite bad...but I enjoy the build anyways :) .
Charm person is called Pimping, Charm Monster is called Big Pimping, Dominate is called Strong Pimp Hand.
Does she refer to the party as her "stable of b*#~!es".
No, but everyone's name is pretty much "a***ole" which is just great.