|
bards FTW!I'm surprised there are so many Bard lovers.
I was under the impression that the Bard was the "Black Sheep" of all the classes.It's been a while since I played a Bard, but I remember it as being a mediocre experience. The next time I roll up a character, I'll have to try the Bard again and see what all the fuss is about.
Skills, Combat and Spells. There's nothing a Bard can't do.
In combat you won't shine in the same way other classes do, but you'll never be short of something to do.
|
I've always been a big fan of melee-classes that had a bit extra too them. Straight-up fighter-types are a bit too much one-trick ponies, so I tend towards:
Paladins
Clerics
Rangers
Oddly enough, I also lean towards religious, faith-based character types, despite the fact that I'm a dyed-in-the-wool agnostic.
Fighters and Barbarians - I share the love equally!
Actually,my favorite D & D class is the magister from Arcana Evolved.
My favorite Pathfinder class,on the other hand is the witch. Aside from the fact that it renders the mystic theurge PrC obsolete- How can you not like a class which has cackling as an optional class feature?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I haven't had the chance to play it, but I'm going with the Paladin.
"It has been said that one could travel the world, the ocean, and the stars themselves until time itself is a memory and never find an honest man. Perhaps this is so. Tremble evil doers, for an honest man has found you."
Paladin - I love the divine champion/right hand of god idea (ever since 1E, and really love the PF version)
That said, I also love the PF Rogue (love skills and versatility), and the PF Alchemist (created my own for 2E and loved the flavor and role).
I have to say that rangers are my favs. I have made so many rangers over my adventuring career ... Druids are pretty awesome too.
Well, that is difficult for me. Favorites are the kind of thing that can change from day to day for me. That said, there are those classes that I have traditionally played and character concepts that are always win me over. I have yet to play Pathfinder since the omega PH came out and even then I did not play a Pathfinder class in the beta Pathfinder campaign my group ran. (I played a Rune Warrior from Monte Cook's Book of Experimental Might and it was a blast.)
I have traditionally played Monks, Rangers, specialist-type Wizards, and Sorcerers more than anything else. If I were to choose any Pathfinder classes to play from now they would be in the following order:
1. Alchemist - I love this concept. I even created classes for it or been the guy who wanted to play the alchemist turned assassin in 2e.
2. Summoner - For me it is about the relationship between the eidolon and the summoner that draws me more than anything. I can't help but think of the intelligent summoned frogs and/or dogs and the summoner in Naruto or the characters from Fate Stay Night when I think of this class.
3. Inquisitor - I have always loved the "Slayer" and holy inquisitor concepts done up not as self-righteous zealots, but in a more heroic mean - as if they were called to it by circumstances and a higher power rather than their ego.
4. Witch - I love how much more authentic this feels to the myths I have grown up with rather than what has been presented with all the other witch classes I have seen.
5. Sorcerer - I love what Pathfinder has done with this class. I loved it when Monte Cook created his Witch class for Arcana Evolved and I feel that this is the spiritual descendant of that class. I like playing the mutant heroes of a fantasy setting or someone with a dark or mysterious heritage they may or may not heed the calling of in their blood.
6. Oracle - I really like this concept and would like to give it a whirl.
7. Monk - I have always loved this concept and always will, even if the execution over the past editions never quite lived up to what I wanted.
8. Ranger - This is the first class I ever really liked a lot back in the early 80s and it still holds some sort of fond mystique for me when I think of playing a ranger.
Monk
I just love the class. I am yet to play Bard, Druid and Wizard. I suspect Ill like the Druid a lot as well. While I have never really wanted to play as a Bard...
Monk. The love for the class is great in me.
Nude drawing class.
What?
I have so many loves....
In no order,
Fighter (so many different options, Spring Attack/Vital Strike FTW)
Druid (who says wildshaping druids lost out in PF)
Sorcerer (love the bloodlines)
|
|
I don't think it's a difference in quality between core and non, but difference of quality between individual classes. Some classes are written to be boring. (Fighter and 3.0 Ranger, I'm looking at you.) Much as I am a proponent of mechanics being reflavored, the classes flavor can make it very attractive despite the dullness of features. (Monk, anyone?) But good class features can make up for it as well. (I love my Scout.)
Paladin. I love the role-playing opportunities that being a paladin presents.
That said, I'll play the Cleric in a pinch.
Vendor - Fantasiapelit Tampere
|
Now THIS is hard.
When I played a fighter in RotRL, it was very funny. I like power-type fighter more than combat expertize-types.(He used a big honkin' halberd.)
I like wizards, especialy Illusionists,Conjurers and Necromancers. I'm gonn a make necromancer for our CotCT-campaign, nad I'm excepting great things from him.
Cleric. Cleric is my favourite class. I like clerics versatility and domains, spells are nice and they can fight pretty good. Clerics are great, and I love them~~
Even if the model is a 300 lb black man?Nude drawing class.
What?
You really need to screen your classes before you sign up, man.
It's like playing a paladin and not knowing about the code and alignment restrictions. "What do you mean, I'm not allowed to torch an orphanage for fun? Who says? What god? Oh..."
the bard is gaining followers cuz it was largely ignored by most people, mostly due to party need. now people are giving them a go and finding out that they are fun to play.plus its like being a dungeon crawling rock star, and nothing is cooler than that!
Plus, you know that bards are the real heroes. The dusty wizards, dumb fighters and over-pious clerics might help, but it's really the bards that save the day, day in, day out. Don't believe me? Listen to any ballad sung in any tavern.
|
Monk and Paladin. In that order.
As far as the newer classes go, I love the summoner.
I kinda like the witch, it fits in more with the traditional mythic idea of a witch like Granny Weatherwax (Pratchett's Discworld) and Circe the witch that turned Odysseus's sailors into pigs and tried to seduce him. I actually invented a character class years ago as a spotty teenager playing Ed.1, so a girl who wanted to play could play it (She adamantly didn't want to be a magic-user/wizard). My attempt at the class was OK, but Paizo's new witch rocks. :)
I hear a lot about newer classes, mostly the Summoner, but aside from mentions on the forum I haven't heard of these. So as it seems there are some new PFRPG base classes that I don't even know of, which books can I find these? (not only Summoner but all new classes written for PFRPG, except for prestige classes, I know where to find those)
|
|
I hear a lot about newer classes, mostly the Summoner, but aside from mentions on the forum I haven't heard of these. So as it seems there are some new PFRPG base classes that I don't even know of, which books can I find these? (not only Summoner but all new classes written for PFRPG, except for prestige classes, I know where to find those)
There's a free Advanced Pathfinder Players Guide play test final document you can download here. Its about 50 pages and contains the classes we've been mentioning. Can't wait for the book to come out. I think its August 2010.
|
|
bards FTW!I'm surprised there are so many Bard lovers.
I was under the impression that the Bard was the "Black Sheep" of all the classes.It's been a while since I played a Bard, but I remember it as being a mediocre experience. The next time I roll up a character, I'll have to try the Bard again and see what all the fuss is about.
Bards are a fun class, it would be my third choice if my preferred niches were already filled. And the bard lets me play a specialized "multi-class" supporting both of my preferred classes. Not a bad deal, really, and bards always have something to do in pretty much any situation.
I hear a lot about newer classes, mostly the Summoner, but aside from mentions on the forum I haven't heard of these. So as it seems there are some new PFRPG base classes that I don't even know of, which books can I find these? (not only Summoner but all new classes written for PFRPG, except for prestige classes, I know where to find those)There's a free Advanced Pathfinder Players Guide play test final document you can download here. Its about 50 pages and contains the classes we've been mentioning. Can't wait for the book to come out. I think its August 2010.
Beautiful, thanks a big fat bunch for that! I already fell in love with the witch and the summoner even before reading the classes.
They all seem very nice and unlike most of the 3.5 classes that came out after the core books these are actually more than just specialized classes that could as easily be emulated with another class and the right feats.
Okay, I gotta get to the printer and see how the "whole printing a document on both sides of the paper and still getting the order right" thing worked when I last did it.
I cannot get the stupid printer to work, so no good night lecture for tonight. *sigh* maybe tomorrow...
I think I'll always love the Paladin. Ready and true, always ready for the good fight, always something clawing at your back and trying to always set an example. Gives a reason to play for more than just cause.
Although I'm loving playing a rogue that is not the "thief" but a treasure hunter.
|
|
All time favorite? Definitely the bard. I played a level 1 river-dancing bard at a PFS game yesterday and it was a blast.
Close runners up are Rogue, Wizard, Sorcerer and Oracle (in no particular order).
Least favorite: Barbarian (purely flavor reasons, I might try one and reflavor rage as an "intense trance" or something to see if that works for me)
EDIT: I did swap tables at one point because another table had 3 rogues. The guy asking about the swap saw his options at our table and was all "*sigh* I guess we'll take the bard." Good thing they did, the grappling hook and rope I had (and was the only one who had a hook) saved our butts at least once.
|
|
Least favorite: Barbarian (purely flavor reasons, I might try one and reflavor rage as an "intense trance" or something to see if that works for me)
A berserker who enters 'the zone' at will in combat, instead of being based off of a lack of emotional control, could be pretty neat. Indeed, if the GM was okay with such a notion, it would be a perfectly sensible rationale for a group of elite *lawful* 'barbarians.'
100% less Krusk, 100% more Tetragrammaton Cleric John Preston.
|
|
Least favorite: Barbarian (purely flavor reasons, I might try one and reflavor rage as an "intense trance" or something to see if that works for me)A berserker who enters 'the zone' at will in combat, instead of being based off of a lack of emotional control, could be pretty neat. Indeed, if the GM was okay with such a notion, it would be a perfectly sensible rationale for a group of elite *lawful* 'barbarians.'
100% less Krusk, 100% more Tetragrammaton Cleric John Preston.
As a person who has entered "the zone" in more than one case (and losing awareness of that which was not my goal while doing so) I can totally see a trance-like rage as a possibility. All up to the DM, of course, so I'd never even try it in PFS, but definitely could be fun.
|
|
Unless I missed it reading through the list, I guess I'll be the first to say this:
Duelist ... I just think it's cool ^_^. Pathfinder reducing Elaborate Defense and giving them armor kind of sucked as my duelist runs around without a shirt on, but I've managed to correct that with monk levels anyway so all is well that ends well (especially with how awesome the monk is this time around).
Cleric, probably; that's always been a favourite of mine, going back to AD&D and Basic D&D. Although alchemists are pretty cool. :-)
I don't know that I really have a 'favorite'.
Over my 25+ years of D&D I have played more Rangers and Thief/Rogues than anything else.
My favorite all time favorite individual character was my Fighter/Devish (Later RetConned to Swordsage/Dervish).
My current favorite character is an Elven Wizard (Universalist).
The class I most look forward to playing is the Inquisitor.
If I absolutely had to pick one class I would likely go with Rogue, but...
Duelist ... I just think it's cool ^_^.
I'm playing a duelist right now and it #%&*ing rocks!
I can't wait to gain a few more levels in duelist and see how it holds out.
I don't think it's a difference in quality between core and non, but difference of quality between individual classes. Some classes are written to be boring. (Fighter and 3.0 Ranger, I'm looking at you.) Much as I am a proponent of mechanics being reflavored, the classes flavor can make it very attractive despite the dullness of features. (Monk, anyone?) But good class features can make up for it as well. (I love my Scout.)
This pretty much covers it.
As far as non-core, Binder (3.5, Tome of Magic) is my all-time favorite class ever. Hence the username.
I don't think it's a difference in quality between core and non, but difference of quality between individual classes. Some classes are written to be boring. (Fighter and 3.0 Ranger, I'm looking at you.) Much as I am a proponent of mechanics being reflavored, the classes flavor can make it very attractive despite the dullness of features. (Monk, anyone?) But good class features can make up for it as well. (I love my Scout.)This pretty much covers it.
As far as non-core, Binder (3.5, Tome of Magic) is my all-time favorite class ever. Hence the username.
The Binder is an AWESOME class that should only be played by great ROLEplayers who possibly have an acting degree. We loved the binder but no one thought they had the skill to RP it properly.
The Binder is an AWESOME class that should only be played by great ROLEplayers who possibly have an acting degree. We loved the binder but no one thought they had the skill to RP it properly.I don't think it's a difference in quality between core and non, but difference of quality between individual classes. Some classes are written to be boring. (Fighter and 3.0 Ranger, I'm looking at you.) Much as I am a proponent of mechanics being reflavored, the classes flavor can make it very attractive despite the dullness of features. (Monk, anyone?) But good class features can make up for it as well. (I love my Scout.)This pretty much covers it.
As far as non-core, Binder (3.5, Tome of Magic) is my all-time favorite class ever. Hence the username.
The first person in my group to play a Binder set the bar very high with Lucas Penrith: an Abyssal Heritor who refused to take Ignore Special Requirements and very often purposely failed his Binding checks so he would suffer the Influence. He also intentionally never binds the same Vestige twice in a row. He's currently level 12 and making his way through a Shadovar Floating Fortress, and possesses Woundhealer, Sword of Mercy. If this campaign ever has reason to go to Sigil he's a shoo-in for the Sensates.
He's been followed up by a Rokugani Scorpion Clan courtier (who unfortunately died) and an amnesiac Hellbred (who hasn't been around long enough to pass him up; I DM more often than I get a chance to play so I only got a chance to actually play this class within the past couple of months).
Love the class. LOVE it.
My very first character was an (AD&D) Dwarven Fighter.
Our DM let us roll 3d6 for each attribute - no relocation - and I rolled a 18 followed by 00 as the first rolls in my now more than 20 year long weekly (A)D&D career.
However the last years I shifted from Fighter/Paladin to (still ever and always Dwarven) Cleric. I just wish combat healing would be more effective - I love playing the healer.