I thought i would start a new thread about this, after the APG came out some ideas i had were presented in the book so i thought i would see what base class ideas everyone had that didn't get created.
so what base class ideas would you like to see in the future from Paizo for pathfinder?
here are a few of my ideas.
1. A nonmagic healer
2. A Commando scout type class (high skill stealth armor wearing combat class)
3. Another unarmed base class
4. A leader silver tongue charisma based class
1. A nonmagic healer
The improvement to the heal skill makes this a little better with any class, but I agree there's nothing that equals magical healing. On the other hand, I'm not sure there should be.
2. A Commando scout type class (high skill stealth armor wearing combat class)
Rogue, ranger, fighter with a shadowdancer dip?
3. Another unarmed base class
Fighter can do kind of okay with improved unarmed strike.
4. A leader silver tongue charisma based class
Rogue, bard, cavalier/herald?
I thought i would start a new thread about this, after the APG came out some ideas i had were presented in the book so i thought i would see what base class ideas everyone had that didn't get created.
Off topic a bit maybe, but I'd rather more archtypes and keep it light on new base classes. Mostly, I think it's well covered. When they bring out their versions of psionics and so on, then I can see a new set of base classes...
well i am in the other camp of people that want as many "well balanced and thought out" base classes as they can come up with. so for me the more the better so long as the class makes sense.
1. A nonmagic healerThe improvement to the heal skill makes this a little better with any class, but I agree there's nothing that equals magical healing. On the other hand, I'm not sure there should be.
2. A Commando scout type class (high skill stealth armor wearing combat class)Rogue, ranger, fighter with a shadowdancer dip?
3. Another unarmed base classFighter can do kind of okay with improved unarmed strike.
4. A leader silver tongue charisma based classRogue, bard, cavalier/herald?
i get what you are saying but when a class is made based for a build it ends up a lot better than when you make do with what exists. there is a big difference between a unarmed base class and a fighter who specializes in unarmed combat.
Cheers for more archtypes.
Jeers for more base classes.
ok, so i want to talk about new base classes, so if you don't want more base classes than please don't post on this thread, it doesn't help
Possibly the Noble class (Aristocrat with class abilities).
Runecarver or Vikti.
Can't think of anything else.
i would love to see a base class that is based on altering their bodies
i would love to see a base class that is based on altering their bodies
I did start working on one of those once but ran into trouble trying to balance it properly.
I called it the 'Astral Avatar', which was basically a playable Eidolon.
that is exactly what i was thinking of, if it used the same edilon point system it would be pretty cool.
It started out using the Eidolon evolution points system, but I later changed it to have 'aspect slots' from levels 1 to 4, gaining more slots and higher level slots as it progressed. I think it worked better to balance out the availability of powers as well as encourage having low level utility powers for breadth of ability rather than dumping it all into one focus.
But that was huge amounts of work and there was very little interest in the class so I stopped working on it.
to be honest i really want to see more full combat classes
Since Pathfinder has rules for guns, a gun-slinger base class would be pretty cool. Something that can make ammo a bit easier and cheaper.
yeah, i totally agree, guns are present in the pathfinder world but they have always been put in the game as a side note. i think a base class based on using guns would be awesome.
so what base class ideas would you like to see in the future from Paizo for pathfinder?
Something simillar to the Dragon shaman. A class with similar abilities to their auras. I liked the concept of The Dragon shaman but it was bit weak. Giving it full BAB and lot of skills and cool abilities.
Fighter can do kind of okay with improved unarmed strike.
Wrong. They actually do far better than OK with improved unarmed strike.
A fighter with improved unarmed strike, weapon training unarmed strike, Weapon Specialization unarmed strike, Two-Weapon Fighting, Double Slice, Weapon Focus, Improved Critical, Power attack, etc etc. will out damage any (core) monk you can create. A fighter can also pick stuff like Penetrating Strike, disruptive etc.
Fighters using improved unarmed strike make monks look a joke. Say but true.
That's doing okay compared with your usual weapon fighter. Comparing damage output of an armed fighter with an unarmed fighter and a monk is like a rocket launcher, assault rifle, and a BB gun.
Also, something that is along the lines of a witch hunter. Something made specifically for shutting down enemy casters.
A mechanic class Kind of like the summoner but with a construct-type eidilon, Go a little bit steampunk. Could be done as a variant summoner?
An Animal Transmuter class - responsible for the mixed species like owlbears, centaurs, minotaurs etc. that litter the world. - could be done as a variant summoner?
A Shapechanger class - gets to wildshape into only one type of animal. Could be done as a variant ranger?
Also, something that is along the lines of a witch hunter. Something made specifically for shutting down enemy casters.
+1 when the APG was coming out i was really hoping that the Inquisitor was going to be this, i like the class but it was not what i was hoping it would be.
A melee combatant that can do area effects. Kind of like how the dervish moves and attacks 1 creature per square of movement. Sort of like a lightning bolt that does dagger + sneak attack damage.
Possibly doing interesting things with Lunge and Whirlwind Attack.
Possibly incorporated into a 3.5 Scout or Swashbuckler-like class.
Also, a Seeker-like class that combines detective, journalist, and scientific inquiry. Maybe a little philosopher, seeker of truth, added in for zest.
|
The base classes that made sense from 3.5. I know they were not OGL, so they'd have to be disguised or tweaked enough to make them legal.
1. The Scout.
2. The Swashbuckler (I would think that would be in public domain. If they can have a cavalier, why can't they have a swashbuckler).
3. Spirit Shamen
4. Favored Soul (I know the Oracle is sort of close, but not the same).
5. Ninja (actually a pretty weak class, but there will always be people who want to play a ninja).
Response the 1st - Scout is now an Archetype of Rogue which is pretty sweet, I might add. Multi with ranger and you're gtg.
Response the 2nd - I'm unfamiliar with this class, but I know they have a duelist prestige along with a free-hand fighter archetype. Dunno if that applies...
Response the 3rd - Druid archetypes
Response the 4th - Ahh how I miss the FS. Spontaneous cleric was awesome.
Ninja - SO many ways you could pull this off with core already.
None, tbh.
No offense but this thread is going open up a big can of worms. There is a lot of less is more people on these boards, and any suggestion of new classes is going to end in them pounding us with whining about class bloat (or another fabricated concept). Personally I think the game can handle about another four to six more base classes and be about right.
Since I was a big fan of the hexblade a warrior class with a paladin/ranger spell progression and major debuffing abilities would suite me fine.
No offense but this thread is going open up a big can of worms. There is a lot of less is more people on these boards, and any suggestion of new classes is going to end in them pounding us with whining about class bloat (or another fabricated concept). Personally I think the game can handle about another four to six more base classes and be about right.
Actually, posts like this are more likely to open said can of worms.
Archetype vs. Base class folks will probably never see eye to eye, but it doesn't need to devolve into name calling.
No offense but this thread is going open up a big can of worms. There is a lot of less is more people on these boards, and any suggestion of new classes is going to end in them pounding us with whining about class bloat (or another fabricated concept). Personally I think the game can handle about another four to six more base classes and be about right.Actually, posts like this are more likely to open said can of worms.
Archetype vs. Base class folks will probably never see eye to eye, but it doesn't need to devolve into name calling.
Fair enough, if it's any consolidation I really like archetype too, I just think there is room for both. To each his own.
|
|
To be perfectly blunt, I think people need to learn to deal with opposing schools of thought. If this opens a can of worms, that's the fault of those that take offense, not the one's who posed the opinion.
If they wanna troll let 'em troll.
Me? I've got cookies to keep me happy :D
Back on topic, I can understand each side to a degree, but have to lean toward the school that "less-is-more", as it was stated. The Archetypes bring a nice array of variety needed to accomplish alot of concepts (admittedly not all very optimally). I almost think Summoner was an un-needed addition to the list, where a summoning/calling subschool would have been just fine. Keeping things simple means less material to memorize/buy, and more time spent having fun with the game.
Not to say some people would/wouldn't have fun with more, was just a turn of phrase.
Fair enough, if it's any consolidation I really like archetype too, I just think there is room for both. To each his own.No offense but this thread is going open up a big can of worms. There is a lot of less is more people on these boards, and any suggestion of new classes is going to end in them pounding us with whining about class bloat (or another fabricated concept). Personally I think the game can handle about another four to six more base classes and be about right.Actually, posts like this are more likely to open said can of worms.
Archetype vs. Base class folks will probably never see eye to eye, but it doesn't need to devolve into name calling.
Don't get me wrong, I greatly enjoy making base classes, turning concepts into (hopefully) blanaced mechanics. I have made a few for my own use as a DM in my own world, which are campaign specific.
I just think from an "official" standpoint, less is more.
But yes, to each their own :)
I would like to see (although it wont happen) an arcane archer as a core class. I would also like to see a gunmage type class (although you can do the same thing with arcane archer with gm discretion) but it would probably be a prestige class. Just my 2cp.
I would like to see (although it wont happen) an arcane archer as a core class. I would also like to see a gunmage type class (although you can do the same thing with arcane archer with gm discretion) but it would probably be a prestige class. Just my 2cp.
PrC's in PFRPG perplex me...
On the one hand, I'm overjoyed to see base classes have enough meat to them to want to play them for 20 levels...And at the same time the PrC's seem a little lacking...
But do I really wish for the PrC's to get beefed up? Then won't we be in the same boat as we were in 3.5?
If there is ever a pathfinder second edition I think prestige classes should just be eliminated and replaced by archetypes.
ZangRavnos said
"I almost think Summoner was an un-needed addition to the list"
Hey, I like the summoner, what's with all the hate. People please stop the hating on the poor disenfranchised summoner.
i think if pathfinder came out with 4 to6 new base classes ever year or so i would be happy, so long as the classes are well rounded and balanced.
i think there are things you just cant get with an archetype that you can get with a fully developed base class.
|
|
Hey, I like the summoner, what's with all the hate. People please stop the hating on the poor disenfranchised summoner.
And to that I say...Go here
*offers plate* Cookies?
Non Combative, Non Spellcasting Scholar Type... Kind of like a Dr. Who style of Character... Someone who talks their way out of situations and knows everything... Not the race, but the Class mind you :) Able to know lots of languages, able to talk monsters, and people out of attacking... Inspiring Heroics from friends and scaring oponents :)
|
Non Combative, Non Spellcasting Scholar Type... Kind of like a Dr. Who style of Character... Someone who talks their way out of situations and knows everything... Not the race, but the Class mind you :) Able to know lots of languages, able to talk monsters, and people out of attacking... Inspiring Heroics from friends and scaring oponents :)
Bard - Casting + MacGyver?
Yeah but no spellcasting, bardic lore, lots of skills, McGuiver, etc... Lots of Captain Kirk Oratory :)
I want psionic base classes. Also, I was a big fan of the binder from ToM and the Incarnum stuff. Something like that would be fun. I really enjoy variant magic systems.
I want psionic base classes. Also, I was a big fan of the binder from ToM and the Incarnum stuff. Something like that would be fun. I really enjoy variant magic systems.
Me too, I'm looking forward to the words of power rules.
I'd prefer to see no more classes. Let the core ones do the job.
The expanding amount of rules and additional abilities is bound to break the game like so many before it.
I'd prefer to see no more classes. Let the core ones do the job.
The expanding amount of rules and additional abilities is bound to break the game like so many before it.
i am very excited to see what other new class concepts pathfinder comes out with. with the Magus coming out in the ultimate arcane book i am really interested in what class the ultimate combat will come out with.
I'll comment on stuff I find here, let's see if I find anything left after that.
Generally, I like the way Paizo handles base classes: In order to deserve a whole new base class, it must be a niche that isn't filled yet. That means not just one nice new game mechanic, but a role, a flavour, that cannot be represented well enough with current rules.
Everything that is just a minor tweak is an archetype, nothing more. In some cases, this might call for some more archetypes beyond those we got in the APG.
A mechanic class Kind of like the summoner but with a construct-type eidilon, Go a little bit steampunk. Could be done as a variant summoner?
I'd totally do that as a summoner archetype. In fact, just do it: Say that instead of an eidolon, you get a pet mech, switch things around a bit (instead of outsider, it's a construct, do the usual changes for exchanging the creature type, explain everything away as "being built that way".
Instead of the summoning ritual, the thing requires directions from you and will shut down if you lose consciousness (maybe one of the evolutions - except we call them designs now - is that it can work in a very limited capacity when you're out, like a trained animal maybe).
Of course, the rest of the class abilities will feel weird.
An Animal Transmuter class - responsible for the mixed species like owlbears, centaurs, minotaurs etc. that litter the world. - could be done as a variant summoner?
Not a variant summoner, the basics are too different I'd say. I'd do this with feats and/or spells instead of a class. Or just a research rule, like the one that is used to create new spells.
A Shapechanger class - gets to wildshape into only one type of animal. Could be done as a variant ranger?
I'd do that as archetype, yes. Maybe PrC. But something that only turns into one animal? Way too boring to blow a whole class on it, if you ask me. Let it be an animal totem ranger, or a variant druid (there are animal shamans in the APG that let you perform things better when dealing with your favourite animal type, which includes summoning and wildshaping). Maybe even a barbarian variant that transforms into the totem animal when raging.
1. The Scout.
I don't see the sense in such a class, honestly. It's nothing but an archetype - in fact, the APG has an archetype for the rogue that basically lets you sneak attack after moving, which emulates that skirmish ability pretty well. Add stuff like Vital Strike to the mix, and I don't see why we need a whole new class for something that is part minor tweaks to existing classes and part systemic problem (the whole move and still do decent damage thing, which you can fix with Vital Strike, maybe strengthening it a bit, and with that archetype).
2. The Swashbuckler (I would think that would be in public domain. If they can have a cavalier, why can't they have a swashbuckler).
They can have a swashbuckler, of course. They just can't really go ahead and make the exact same swashbuckler wizards did before. They could make a class that picks up the swashbuckler concept, they juist couldn't reprint the CW one.
But beyond that, I don't think we need this. I'd say we have a fighter, rogue or fighter/rogue here, maybe with duellist levels.
Add the proper archetype and we have everything we need.
3. Spirit Shamen
The spirit shaman had indeed one interesting mechanic: a mix of spells known and unlimited spell list. But that alone should not make a new class, and the rest doesn't strike me as deserving of its own class.
Make the spirit part a druid archetype, and maybe have a generic magic variant where everyone gets to use magic like this.
Arcana Evolved does this, by the way: spellcasters decide on what spells they're going to use for that day, getting a number of spells-known-slots, if you will, and sorcerer-like spell slots to use the stuff.
I can see all classes in PF doing magic that way:
Divine spellcasters will retain access to all spells as potential spells known (oracles would be the same),
Wizards and Witches would still have to add stuff to their spellbooks/familiars.
Sorcerers and the rest would gain a new mechanic similar to spellbooks. Sorcerers would probably have magic coursing through their veins (and do specific rituals with expensive materials to gain new magic), bards would have magic songbooks etc.
The spells-known-day and spell-slots-day numbers would be changed, of course, to reflect the new happening, and everything that builds upon these things would have to be modified, but it could work. It would be an alternative system, though, and a systemic change, not one class's new gimmick to justify its existence.
4. Favored Soul (I know the Oracle is sort of close, but not the same).
The favoured soul was boring. It was basically an excuse to have a divine spellcaster with spontaneous magic. It deserves a cleric variant (spontaneous spellcasting cleric) at best.
5. Ninja (actually a pretty weak class, but there will always be people who want to play a ninja).
People wanting to play a ninja doesn't justify there being a ninja class (the monk is enough Eastern intrusion). Let them play rogue, monk or rogue/monk and write NINJA in big, fat, stealthy letters onto their sheet.
It's the same way I solve the problem that there is no assassin class (not counting the evil only PrC).
This is a very important point to make: Class names should not limit what people call themselves. That's why having a ninja class just so people can say they're ninjas, or archmage PrCs just so people can claim to be an archmage, doesn't make sense.
I'm not sure how I want the whole Oriental/Tian Xia class thing solved, but it should be a consistent approach:
That means either all the nice concepts get their own, orientalised base classes, or they're all just archetypes - or maybe even just some text about how the classes work in the Far East, what archetypes and class choices make most sense, and so on.
Beyond ninja, there are samurai and shugenja, and maybe even more (sohei, wu jen, maho-tsukai, courtier,...)
1. A nonmagic healer
Against. There's only so much you can do without magic. Without centuries of advances and discoveries in medicine and medical technology, or an Igor's art, which borders on the supernatural, anyway, non-magical healing is something for common people with common problems, not for adventurers and their extraordinary problems.
I could see a feat or two expanding upon non-magical healing, but I don't think a non-magical healer class would fit Pathfinder's image.
2. A Commando scout type class (high skill stealth armor wearing combat class)
We have enough options for that. There's fighter, ranger, rogue, and mixes between these three. Add some archetypes and I think the need to fill this niche is not nearly big enough to warrant its own base class.
3. Another unarmed base class
I would say that fighters, barbarians and monks got that angle covered. Maybe rogues, too.
Again, add archetypes and it looks quite good. Maybe a feat Greater Unarmed Strike (which requires Improved Unarmed Strike and lets you deal more base damage with unarmed attacks, maybe 1d6 for medium-sized characters) feat.
It is certainly true that fighters can make this one work surprisingly well. You might only get 1d3 as damage die, but with weapon training and similar feats, this can become quite nice. And you have ideal starting conditions for all sorts of combat manoeuvres and/or TWF.
4. A leader silver tongue charisma based class
I must say that the cavalier does fill that niche at least somewhat, but see my ideas below.
My ideas
Things I wouldn't mind seeing as a base class:
The noble would be an expert at the core (d8 HD/Medium BAB, strong Ref and Will, 6+ skill points), and get some genteel/rakish fighting (formal duelling with a rapier, as befits a gentleman), some commander's power (both over allies and over enemies - nobles are used to be in charge and order other people around), some well-rounded education (nobles of course get excellent education, and being in charge of a noble house will hone administrative abilities) and finally some social abilities (courtly intrigue, and the nobles' social dance can be more dangerous than a dragon's lair, after all).
Basically a courtier, rake and leader all rolled into one.
Unlike the artificer attempts I've seen before, I wouldn't make this one do pseudo-magic. Instead, I'd come up with something else.
Part of it would be playing McGyver/The A Team (i.e. using parts at hand to come up with innovative and surprising contraptions tailored to the problem at hand), but there would be more permanent inventions as well.
Probably something vaguely like the alchemist - getting a couple of basic tools (like the alchemist gets his bombs and his mutagen, and, in a way, his extracts) and then being able to choose from a number of inventions to either improve these basic tools or learn new tricks altogether.
A clockwork companion might be part of the deal. I think of three basic types:
Bodyguard: much like a shield guardian golem; much like typical animal companions or eidolons - something that works more or less independent of its creator to attack)
Vehicle: could look like a mount, maybe something similar to an apparatus of the crab, could be like an armoured cart - something the artificer uses for moving around, to get where he wants them to go)
Device: This is something the artificer will carry. A doomsday device and/or super weapon. Not really walking around like the others, but something with a considerable "whoopdicity", like a clockworke gonne.
Of course, people will want to make tanks (i.e. vehicles with big weapons), which i think will either be Vehicle with weaker weapons mounted (which would be created using the general invention abilities, but not as powerful as a Device), or a Device mounted on a basic cart or something (again, something created using general invention abilities, which would be less powerful than a full-blown Vehicle)
So this class would look and feel like a mix of summoner, alchemist and some new ideas thrown in.
What we don't have is a class completely focussed on changing shape.
This class would get shapeshift as an ability, and get it on first level.
Shapeshifters could stay in other shapes more or less all day (though this would at least start as a weakened version of the shapes, without full benefits of what a polymorph user would get. Access to the full power might be limited, at least at first.)
Shapeshifters would get access to all possible shapes available to druids and wizards, and maybe to some the rest can't do right now.
Shapeshifters would get additional powers (probably mostly from a list to choose from, like many other classes in Pathfinder) which would allow them to gain more characteristics of their form, to mix and match forms and gain a limited mix of powers from all forms.
For example, you might be able to become a huge, flying bear with tentacles.
For example, you might gain some of the magic/spell-like/supernatural abilities your form possesses, in a limited fashion. Turn into a gold dragon and breath weakening gas or a blue dragon and electrify the clouds. Turn into a demon and teleport yourself. Turn into an azata and gain some limited access to clerical magic (mabe as a spell-like ability).