Adept, Aristocrat, Commoner, Expert, Warrior - Available?

[Sunphoenix72]

Can a Pathfinder Society legal for organized play character take a non-adventurer class instead of an adventuring class with a level advancement? It does not say ANYWHERE that Non-adventuring classes are not available for organized play or regular non-pathfinder Society game-play. If they are not available... might I ask why not?

[Mark Garringer]

Sunphoenix72 wrote:

Can a Pathfinder Society legal for organized play character take a non-adventurer class instead of an adventuring class with a level advancement? It does not say ANYWHERE that Non-adventuring classes are not available for organized play or regular non-pathfinder Society game-play. If they are not available... might I ask why not?

It does not say, because it is not required. By definition they are not allowed insomuch as they are listed in the Creating NPC chapter of the core rule book. This means they are for NPCs, not PCs.

Further they are not Base, Core or Prestige classes, they are NPC Classes. Nor are they listed under Chapter 13 of the Guide.

And probably belongs in the Rules Forum not the PFS Forums because this is only tangentially related to PFS in that you want to do it for a PFS character. It's not legal under the Core Rule system in the first place.

EDIT: Replaced 'implication' with 'definition.'

[Sunphoenix72]

Well, that seems a little circular. A lot of things can be misconstrued by 'implication', by that same reasoning one could say... "Since NPC's are NPCs they cannot take PC classes..." which would be a silly implication. I just wanted to know why they are not available... is it a game balance issue... I don't see how that is possible as 'non-adventurer' classes do not really have any class abilities {except maybe the Adept}?

My reason for the question is in the Pathfinder Gamemastery Role-playing Guide in chapter 9 on page 289 the Noble 'Knight' is listed as Aristocrat 2 / Paladin 6. I really wanted to make a character like that. The only real things I'm getting out of taking an Aristocrat class is the class skills and proficiency with all shields.

So why must I take a level of Rogue to get a expanded selection of skills {something I'd really rather not do for a paladin character} or take a level of fighter just to get proficiency with all shields {yes I know I could take a feat to change that}, when a level of Aristocrat does that by itself? In fact that's ALL a level of Aristocrat will do for a character or at least my character.

[Gorbacz]

Because if NPC classes would be allowed, PFS would have the following problem quickly: somebody clueless turining up with his Aristocrat 4/Expert 3 at a table and leading to both him being disappointed (because he can't contribute anything in combat, which is, let's face it, a major part of PFS epxerience) and the other players being disappointed, because instead of a valuable PC they have to drag along a useless NPC-level character.

[Doug Miles]

Sunphoenix72, you may not like the answer but you have been given an answer. There's more than one way to skin a cat. Take a look at some of the traits available, a lot of them grant a Class skill in addition to other bonuses. That way you don't have to sacrifice combat effectiveness for flavor.

[LazarX]

Sunphoenix72 wrote:

My reason for the question is in the Pathfinder Gamemastery Role-playing Guide in chapter 9 on page 289 the Noble 'Knight' is listed as Aristocrat 2 / Paladin 6. I really wanted to make a character like that. The only real things I'm getting out of taking an Aristocrat class is the class skills and proficiency with all shields.

So why must I take a level of Rogue to get a expanded selection of skills {something I'd really rather not do for a paladin character} or take a level of fighter just to get proficiency with all shields {yes I know I could take a feat to change that}, when a level of Aristocrat does that by itself? In fact that's ALL a level of Aristocrat will do for a character or at least my character.

The only thing the Paladin is missing as far as arms and armor proficiency are Tower Shields which you would not be using any way if you are mounted. As for the skills, bards and rangers offer a skill set or you could just settle for getting the skills your paladin class allows you. Quite frankly if you're looking to play a nobletype character I can't see why a straight class Paladin won't do the job for you. Pathfinder is very generous when it comes to cross-class skills.

What exactly would be missing from just going straight pally? Thing to keep in mind is that the Gamemastery examples are templates.... they aren't the only "one true way" to create each example.

[Sunphoenix72]

Well, actually... I got my answer. Something I did not consider - Gorbacz has a valid point.

You are correct ... my intention was for flavor. The character's history is being of minior nobility in Korvosa... I thought it a no-brainer to take a level of Aristocrat to make it somewhat official. Alas it seems I can't do it... no biggie.

But I'm NOT taking a level of Rogue... just to get more class skills ... its COMPLETELY out-of-character for Asherick.

Guess I'll have to just content myself with a level of fighter... get more hit-points, an additional feat and BaB... {sigh!} :)

EDIT: Hey...thats a great Idea LazarX...Bard! Didn't consider that either... Thx!

[IkeDoe]

just curious - APG classes aren't available in PFS yet? (I was thinking about the knight)

[Gorbacz]

Sunphoenix72 wrote:

Well, actually... I got my answer. Something I did not consider - Gorbacz has a valid point.

You are correct ... my intention was for flavor. The character's history is being of minior nobility in Korvosa... I thought it a no-brainer to take a level of Aristocrat to make it somewhat official. Alas it seems I can't do it... no biggie.

But I'm NOT taking a level of Rogue... just to get more class skills ... its COMPLETELY out-of-character for Asherick.

Guess I'll have to just content myself with a level of fighter... get more hit-points, an additional feat and BaB... {sigh!} :)

EDIT: Hey...thats a great Idea LazarX...Bard! Didn't consider that either... Thx!

I'm sure you can find Traits that will help you achieve your vision. There are dozens of PFS-legal Traits out there made with helping people flesh out their characters in mind.

And yes, APG is pretty much entirely PFS-legal, the new classes in particular.

[Morgen]

Remember you don't need to take levels of Aristocrat to be an Aristocrat. That's just an npc class that's set up to help in making those types of characters easier for the GM.

You define your character, what class levels you take simply help define what abilities it has. Just because you do or don't take levels of a class doesn't force you to define your character a certain way. An oracle, cavalier or cleric could call themselves a paladin, a group of nobles might not have levels of aristocrat at all, etc.

Don't get roped up into what the class names are, look more at what the classes actually do and how that helps your character become what you want it do become.

[Doug Miles]

Taking a level of Fighter or Paladin doesn't preclude you from saying your character is a noble from Korvosa. There are lots of nobles that don't have class levels in Aristocrat. Even if you had a level of Aristocrat it wouldn't give you any in-game advantages. ANYONE can create a character with a background of nobility. That's just what it is, a background. Even the players who earned noble titles in the Grand Convocation at PaizoCon '09 don't have any mechanical advantage over untitled characters. Your role-play at the table speaks much louder than any class ever will. There are players that know nothing about their deities, like clerics of Pharasma who animate dead. Make whatever class you want to play, and ACT like a noble. Otherwise it is pointless. All the ranks in Knowledge (Nobility & Royalty) are not going to make your PC recognized as a noble, it is going to be your role-play that stands out.

If it helps any, explain to us which class skills you are hunting for and we can help you find what you need. There are probably more resource books out there than you are aware of. The boards are a great place to discover valuable little nuggets of knowledge without having to delve into a growing number of supplemental books.

EDIT: Good work Morgen, you beat me to the punch.

[Sunphoenix72]

Thanks Morgan and Doug. I know that role-play is more important to a character background and any 'defined' ability. I've always played "Ashe" as a noble, responsible, aristocrat who just happens to be a Paladin Sword of IOMEDAE. I have played in Scenarios where... there were NO Npc's killed... save monsters, as Ashe has 'Sacred Touch' and stabilized them all just so he could turn the villains over to the local authorities for legal punishment... sometimes to the annoyance of other players.

I was not really looking for a 'in-game' benefit from taking the class. I merely wanted the class purely for the title's sake of being an Aristocrat.

I think I will take a level of Bard... as that gets me the skills selection I'm really looking for and there are many 'Nobles' portrayed in the Pathfinder world, notably Asherick's own sovereign, the not-so-popular, beautiful, but cruel Queen Ilosa Arabasti is a Aristocrat 2 / Bard 4!

I think Bard will do what I want.

Oh, and in answer the Paladin's 12th level ability is... meh {just another mercy... which at that point I'll either have the mercy or a scroll/potion to do the same, and not cost a Lay On Hands}... so I got a level to burn... I figured I'd make it interesting.

Ashe's traits are all already very appropriate for him - {Faith} Sacred Touch, and {Faction: Andoran} Indomitable. Though I could take the feat additional traits...

[Kerney]

Doug Miles wrote:

Taking a level of Fighter or Paladin doesn't preclude you from saying your character is a noble from Korvosa. There are lots of nobles that don't have class levels in Aristocrat. Even if you had a level of Aristocrat it wouldn't give you any in-game advantages. ANYONE can create a character with a background of nobility. That's just what it is, a background.

For example.

[Sunphoenix72]

For example.

Oh. My. What a truly disturbing... and disturbed young woman! It's WONDERFUL!!! Great character! :)

Asherick has done - 'Among the Living' and with his "Sacred Touch" was able to save a lot of the Taldor Nobility there... not all but far more than would have survived.

He also loves Opera {so do I actually}, and he could not bear to see those unfairly slain have their last example of the art be such a terrible farce as the production of 'Victory' put on the in House of the Immortal Sun.

Yes, even Taldori deserve protection and justice from those faithful to IOMEDAE's path of righteousness. Justice must defend and avenge the innocent as well as the avarice or its not really "just".

[Rogue Eidolon]

Sunphoenix72 wrote:

For example.

Oh. My. What a truly disturbing... and disturbed young woman! It's WONDERFUL!!! Great character! :)

Asherick has done - 'Among the Living' and with his "Sacred Touch" was able to save a lot of the Taldor Nobility there... not all but far more than would have survived.

He also loves Opera {so do I actually}, and he could not bear to see those unfairly slain have their last example of the art be such a terrible farce as the production of 'Victory' put on the in House of the Immortal Sun.

Yes, even Taldori deserve protection and justice from those faithful to IOMEDAE's path of righteousness. Justice must defend and avenge the innocent as well as the avarice or its not really "just".

Apropos of little in this discussion except perhaps anecdotal evidence, I realised by reading this thread that I played with Sunphoenix72 at Gencon '10 in City of Strangers Part II--he roleplays his character incredibly vividly, following the Paladin Code loudly and openly even in some sketchy situations in Kaer Maga, keeping his own actual written chronicle of his journeys and every ally and enemy (PC or NPC) he comes across. He's likely the best realised character our group of four has encountered among people we've met in PFS scenarios. For instance, my cleric got into a theological argument with Ashe over whether his chivalrous gentility (striking women for nonlethal damage, etc) was necessarily sexist with respect to Iomedae's egalitarian teachings (she told him he should think about Erastil).

So at least from some random person who played with him, I think Ashe already showed an air of nobility and paladinhood. Bard would be a good multiclass for him--he's already a loud spokesman (would he focus in oratory perhaps?).

[Sunphoenix72]

Ah Yes!!! I Remember that group ...in particular with fondness!

Karnath.... THE DESTROYER!!! = human, male - Barbarian
Zan = Gnome, male sorcerer

Your Character... {I believe}
Lasair Alante' = human, female, Cleric [SHELYN]

My Favorite - the little killer who still amazes me and I still tell of her lethality to those who dare discount the small folk...
Natani Copperlock = Halfling, female, Rogue {levels in dangerous!}

Wendel = Human, male Alchemist {heh... the pyromanic!}
Tabitha = Human, female, Cleric [SARENRAE]

Great Game...glad to hear from you!!!

...and Yes Ashe is still only striking to subdue on female villains! LOL!

Actually captured ...alive the villainess from Scenario 55# - The Infernal Vault!

Hope to see you and your crew with you next year! :)

IOMADAE's Blessing be with you - "For Victory, for the Heart!"

Good Hunting!

[Gabrielle d'Apcher]

Morgen wrote:

Remember you don't need to take levels of Aristocrat to be an Aristocrat...

You define your character, what class levels you take simply help define what abilities it has.

*Gabi sighs*

"Tell that to all the boys who expect me to spring traps for them..."

-Gabrielle d'Apcher, Aristocrat4

[Jaepayg]

im new to pathfinder, my friend mentioned adept, commoner, expert etc. as the classes to choose from but i dont understand what he means please explain or sne me a message. Thank you very much :)

[Paz]

Jaepayg wrote:

im new to pathfinder, my friend mentioned adept, commoner, expert etc. as the classes to choose from but i dont understand what he means please explain or sne me a message. Thank you very much :)

Those are NPC classes; they are not legal for PFS play.

The classes you can choose to play in PFS as standard are here. Owning other books, e.g. Ultimate Combat, opens up a few other classes.

[Vinyc Kettlebek]

PFS FAQ wrote:

Are NPC classes legal for play?

No. Standard character generation rules apply. NPC classes are for NPCs and not available to be chosen by a PC.

PFS FAQ

[nosig]

if you check the thread on convention Boons you'll see that "they" are considering a Boon to allow you to take a level (or more?) in NPC classes such as the Expert.

This is something I would really enjoy, and look forward to...

(edited to add link)

The link thingie

check the part that says:
Pathfinder Handicap: You can play a character with NPC class levels. The desire for this boon might be a little on the low side, but a few folks were clamoring for it.

Still in brain storming stage - but I'm "clamoring"

[Jaepayg]

he said he wanted us to pick one for backstory, and to give us a chance. Also im gonna end up playing an oracle and haven tfigured out what mystery or curse to take so far im leaning towards Tounges, and life. also what should i take for the back story as an oracle, i was thinking aristocrat or expert. Thanks again

[Eric Clingenpeel]

If you're playing PFS you can't just add any old class as "backstory". Currently the NPC classes are illegal for PFS. Make sure you've read the Guide to Pathfinder Organized Play as what your friend suggested is a big no-no.

[Vinyc Kettlebek]

Jaepayg wrote:

he said he wanted us to pick one for backstory, and to give us a chance. Also im gonna end up playing an oracle and haven tfigured out what mystery or curse to take so far im leaning towards Tounges, and life. also what should i take for the back story as an oracle, i was thinking aristocrat or expert. Thanks again

NPC classes do not evolve into core classes, so there is no point in selecting one for your pre-adventuring life. If you're a level 1 Oracle you spent your youth developing all the class features that Oracle grants you. All you have to do with your back story is to figure out where you were raised, a rough framework of your family life, and what jobs/education you had before joining the Pathfinder Society.

Now I'm not too sure about what your GM means when he says he will be giving you a chance if you select one. Back stories are great and they help to develop a personality for your character, but the campaign staff - Mike and Mark have said repeatedly in other threads that back story does not grant any mechanical bonuses to game play.

[Michael Brock]

Jaepayg, are you referring to a home game ran by your GM or a PFS organized play game? I have a suspicion you are asking questions about a home game.