It's a 3.0 class, but Pit Fighter from Legend & Lair's 'Cityworks' needs a bit of beefing up (I did for my own game). It's basically a half-barbarian class who has exotic weapon proficiencies left and right.
Also from the same book is another class I really like the concept of, which is the 'Acrobat'. It needs some serious beefing up, but I love the concept of a dex based fighter that uses a staff, but has a monk's AC bonus progression in light armor.
Hexblade is awesome as an idea. Inquisitor sooooooort of stole some its thunder, but I think a conversion could be real cool. Will need some rewriting to keep up with the power of the new base classes in PF.
A good Swashbuckler would be cool, but the one from 3.5 was terrible.
Same for Samurai.
Spellthief has always been a favorite of mine, but again would need major rewriting.
Beguiler could probably be converted pretty straight up.
I liked the Basiran Dancer from Kingdoms of Kalamar.
Was like a bard/monk. Very fun.
I am unfamiliar with Factotum...
The Factotum was first published in WotC's 2007 Dungeonscape.
I am unfamiliar with Factotum...The Factotum was first published in WotC's 2007 Dungeonscape.
I never liked the Factotum. Mainly it was the alignment thing. You had a class that usually ended up being evil at level 20. WTF? You play your lawful neutral guy for 20 levels, and then bang, as soon as you hit level 20 you become evil? Unless you played good the entire time (which is somewhat at odds with the class itself) you ended up being evil. If you did play good, you become neutral at level 20. I hate classes that force you to change alignment. It would be like playing a fallen paladin class that had you be good for the first 5 levels, neutral for the next ten, and then evil for the last five. That sort of thing should be based on character actions, not class abilities.
I never liked the Factotum. Mainly it was the alignment thing. You had a class that usually ended up being evil at level 20. WTF? You play your lawful neutral guy for 20 levels, and then bang, as soon as you hit level 20 you become evil? Unless you played good the entire time (which is somewhat at odds with the class itself) you ended up being evil. If you did play good, you become neutral at level 20. I hate classes that force you to change alignment. It would be like playing a fallen paladin class that had you be good for the first 5 levels, neutral for the next ten, and then evil for the last five. That sort of thing should be based on character actions, not class abilities.
Where does the alignment change come in? There's no mention of any sort of forced alignment change at all in the character description or abilities. In fact, the 20th level abilities are just bland advancements of previous abilities.
Duskblade.
Archivist.
Duskblade.
Archivist.
Archivist was awesome.
Duskblade has already been remade, it's being called Magus now.
Ok, I'm looking for peoples opinions on what the best, non-standard classes from 3.5 are to bring into Pathfinder.
I know that any classes CAN be converted, but I just wanna see what people think are most worth it.
I'm looking for classes
- that easily balance with other Pathfinder classes
- aren't excessively redundant with other classes (Favoured Soul & Oracle)
- have good flavorMy personal first two choices are
Dread Necromancer (Heroes of Horror)
- I know there were a lot of Necromancers, I just always preferred this one
Artificer (Eberron)
- actually, pretty much everything from that setting is good for me, lol
I like those two. I also like the scout, and the archivist.
Factotum. Pathfinder needs the Factotum.
This one also. I think it is underrated.
This is going to sound strange, as it was an underpowered 3.5 class, but the Scout from Complete Adventurer could actually be better in Pathfinder thanks to things like Deadly Aim, as well as getting more feats.
I also agree the Factotum was under rated.
A scout with shot on the run, and improved skirmish with maxed move silently and hide was annoying*. Take 1d8+Xd6, and the enemy vanishes. My DM had us fight a few of them at once.
*Of course the terrain was a factor.
This is going to sound strange, as it was an underpowered 3.5 class, but the Scout from Complete Adventurer could actually be better in Pathfinder thanks to things like Deadly Aim, as well as getting more feats.
I also agree the Factotum was under rated.
A scout with shot on the run, and improved skirmish with maxed move silently and hide was annoying*. Take 1d8+Xd6, and the enemy vanishes. My DM had us fight a few of them at once.
*Of course the terrain was a factor.
Add swift hunter, mostly full BAB, and greater manyshot.
Take that 1d8+xd6+ Y(strength)+Z (total magic bonuses per arrow)... and multiply it by four.
EDIT: of course... since this is a conversion thread that's not worth a whole lot, with PF and it's pushing manyshot into the full attack *grumble*
I had one of those builds. It still works for standard attacks though.
When I first heard about the manyshot change it killed my 3.5 version too.There is the chronocharm from MiC that allows you to move up to half your speed as a swift action, but it is only once per day.
I never liked the Factotum. Mainly it was the alignment thing. You had a class that usually ended up being evil at level 20. WTF? You play your lawful neutral guy for 20 levels, and then bang, as soon as you hit level 20 you become evil? Unless you played good the entire time (which is somewhat at odds with the class itself) you ended up being evil. If you did play good, you become neutral at level 20. I hate classes that force you to change alignment. It would be like playing a fallen paladin class that had you be good for the first 5 levels, neutral for the next ten, and then evil for the last five. That sort of thing should be based on character actions, not class abilities.Where does the alignment change come in? There's no mention of any sort of forced alignment change at all in the character description or abilities. In fact, the 20th level abilities are just bland advancements of previous abilities.
Bah, there's so many 3.5 classes, I can't keep them straight. There was a class that had 'Dark Knowledge' abilities, and when you hit 20th level, you dropped alignment one step towards Evil. Can't remember what it was now.
Bah, there's so many 3.5 classes, I can't keep them straight. There was a class that had 'Dark Knowledge' abilities, and when you hit 20th level, you dropped alignment one step towards Evil. Can't remember what it was now.I never liked the Factotum. Mainly it was the alignment thing. You had a class that usually ended up being evil at level 20. WTF? You play your lawful neutral guy for 20 levels, and then bang, as soon as you hit level 20 you become evil? Unless you played good the entire time (which is somewhat at odds with the class itself) you ended up being evil. If you did play good, you become neutral at level 20. I hate classes that force you to change alignment. It would be like playing a fallen paladin class that had you be good for the first 5 levels, neutral for the next ten, and then evil for the last five. That sort of thing should be based on character actions, not class abilities.Where does the alignment change come in? There's no mention of any sort of forced alignment change at all in the character description or abilities. In fact, the 20th level abilities are just bland advancements of previous abilities.
The archivist had dark knowledge, but there was no requirement for an alignment change. Not even the dread necromancer which turned you into a lich required you to be evil. Probably mixed a few classes together, it happens.
I did not know about the quicksilver boots, and I have not introduced the belt of battle as a DM* because if I use it players will die, and I don't want them to use it against my bad guys if I feel guilty about using it against them.
*They don't know about many of the really nice items in the book, like the armband of **
**My brain just died. It is the armband that allows you to avoid an AoO once per day.
PS:Those boots are nice. I just looked them up.
The problem I'm seeing while reading this thread is that most, if not all, of the classes people are piping up about have already been adopted by pathfinder in the form of alternative class features or base classes. I'm not saying they're perfect matches, but they're pretty dang close.
Beguiler/Spellthief = Sandman Bard
Duskblade = Magus
Scout = Skirmisher Ranger // Rogue
Dread Necromancer = Necromancer Wizard
Archivist = Archivist Bard
Hexblade = Witch + Eldritch Knight
I'm a huge fan of the Beguiler & Dread Necromancer, so don't misinterpret me. I just don't think there's enough of a mechanical/thematic difference between the original classes and their pathfinder versions to warrant an official release, you know? I suppose that's why we can always houserule. :D
I did not know about the quicksilver boots, and I have not introduced the belt of battle as a DM* because if I use it players will die, and I don't want them to use it against my bad guys if I feel guilty about using it against them.
*They don't know about many of the really nice items in the book, like the armband of **
**My brain just died. It is the armband that allows you to avoid an AoO once per day.
PS:Those boots are nice. I just looked them up.
Armband of Elusive Action.
And I missed those boots too - nice!
The problem I'm seeing while reading this thread is that most, if not all, of the classes people are piping up about have already been adopted by pathfinder in the form of alternative class features or base classes. I'm not saying they're perfect matches, but they're pretty dang close.
Beguiler/Spellthief = Sandman Bard
Duskblade = Magus
Scout = Skirmisher Ranger // Rogue
Dread Necromancer = Necromancer Wizard
Archivist = Archivist Bard
Hexblade = Witch + Eldritch KnightI'm a huge fan of the Beguiler & Dread Necromancer, so don't misinterpret me. I just don't think there's enough of a mechanical/thematic difference between the original classes and their pathfinder versions to warrant an official release, you know? I suppose that's why we can always houserule. :D
I think that thematically you can get close to the classes as you've described above, but I believe that for some people (myself included) if the mechanics disallow a central conceit of the class (such as "a rogue in PF can never have a full attack skirmish like a scout in 3.5") then the class itself isn't represented.
What constitutes a classes "central conceit" is defined by individuals themselves, or by consensus. I think there's a consensus here that the scout is not adequately represented.
YMMV, of course.
The problem I'm seeing while reading this thread is that most, if not all, of the classes people are piping up about have already been adopted by pathfinder in the form of alternative class features or base classes. I'm not saying they're perfect matches, but they're pretty dang close.
Beguiler/Spellthief = Sandman Bard
Duskblade = Magus
Scout = Skirmisher Ranger // Rogue
Dread Necromancer = Necromancer Wizard
Archivist = Archivist Bard
Hexblade = Witch + Eldritch KnightI'm a huge fan of the Beguiler & Dread Necromancer, so don't misinterpret me. I just don't think there's enough of a mechanical/thematic difference between the original classes and their pathfinder versions to warrant an official release, you know? I suppose that's why we can always houserule. :D
I think that thematically you can get close to the classes as you've described above, but I believe that for some people (myself included) if the mechanics disallow a central conceit of the class (such as "a rogue in PF can never have a full attack skirmish like a scout in 3.5") then the class itself isn't represented.
What constitutes a classes "central conceit" is defined by individuals themselves, or by consensus. I think there's a consensus here that the scout is not adequately represented.
YMMV, of course.
Since you basically said what I was going to say, uh +1.
Duskblade.
Archivist.Archivist was awesome.
Duskblade has already been remade, it's being called Magus now.
I beg to differ, no full base attack, you just have a Battle Sorcerer that casts like a wizard.
I say do a Duskblade. It is probably the best class WotC made after the core.
P.S. Key problem here is that the Duskblade actually was decent with TWF and with whirlwind attack. So till I see the final magus, and see it works with TWF as decent as a Duskblade, I will keep my sentiment.
I've always been a fan of the Marshal. Of course, with the APG, it could simply be an archtype of the cavalier.
|
This is going to sound strange, as it was an underpowered 3.5 class, but the Scout from Complete Adventurer could actually be better in Pathfinder thanks to things like Deadly Aim, as well as getting more feats.*highfive* My favorite class ever.
I am playing one now in a Forgotten Realms campaign. I love it, but I keep wishing it was pathfinder so I could have a few more feats to go along with my skill monkey status.
It really is a fun class to play, and I don't even think it would need much adjustment to work perfectly in PF.
Another vote for the scout here. I'd also like to add an honorable mention for the marshal, which looks like a pretty nifty class, actually but had two things going against it: 1) a nondescriptive name, and 2) being in The Miniatures Handbook at a time when there was something of a miniatures backlash going on.
If the class had been called "captain" and come out in, say, Complete Warrior, it would have been a hit.
-The Gneech
mdt wrote:
Necroluth wrote:
mdt wrote:
I never liked the Factotum. Mainly it was the alignment thing. You had a class that usually ended up being evil at level 20. WTF? You play your lawful neutral guy for 20 levels, and then bang, as soon as you hit level 20 you become evil? Unless you played good the entire time (which is somewhat at odds with the class itself) you ended up being evil. If you did play good, you become neutral at level 20. I hate classes that force you to change alignment. It would be like playing a fallen paladin class that had you be good for the first 5 levels, neutral for the next ten, and then evil for the last five. That sort of thing should be based on character actions, not class abilities.
Where does the alignment change come in? There's no mention of any sort of forced alignment change at all in the character description or abilities. In fact, the 20th level abilities are just bland advancements of previous abilities.
Bah, there's so many 3.5 classes, I can't keep them straight. There was a class that had 'Dark Knowledge' abilities, and when you hit 20th level, you dropped alignment one step towards Evil. Can't remember what it was now.
The archivist had dark knowledge, but there was no requirement for an alignment change. Not even the dread necromancer which turned you into a lich required you to be evil. Probably mixed a few classes together, it happens.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The base class that you are probably mixing in here is the Mountebank, from the Dragon Compendium. He was a herald of a power in the lower planes. On page 45 there was the 20th level power titled Aspect of the Damned. It stated that the PC bargained for power has finally run its course, and the price was now being collected. The Mountebank gains the Half-fiend template if it didnt already have it, alignment shifts to evil if it wasnt already, gets transported to the Outer Planes, and becomes a NPC.
As far as i can tell, its the only core or base class that couldnt have an epic progression, 'cause the only way to continue the character as a PC, was to somehow get out of the contract, which the book tells the DM that it should be an quest in and of its self to break the contract.
The Mountebank had a similar feel as if it was a psudo-cleric/warlock. I actually like it, except for the forced NPC shift.
On the topic of my favorite base class though; warlock.
I liked the eldritch blast, and the powers that could alter it.
I saw that it's already mentioned, but I liked playing Hexblades.
Easy to break stuff with it, but a Pathfinder update could fix some of that.
Scout
Dragon Shaman
Marshal
Hexblade (though needs a serious power-increase)
Shugenja (as per "Oriental Adventures", not as per "Complete Divine")
Marshal (from Miniatures Handbook; could be done as an Archetype on Cavalier, as mentioned above)
Are my top 3, in that order.
The Genius Guide:War Master is basically a PF upgraded Marshal with the bells and whistles, for those of you looking for something along the vein it had.
My personal first two choices are
Dread Necromancer (Heroes of Horror)
- I know there were a lot of Necromancers, I just always preferred this one
Agreed with the Dread Necromancer. Still wanna play one of those. :)
Also, the Warmage. It's a well-built class that, IMO, would convert pretty easily.
My only problem with the warmage was his spells never got updated after he was produced. I'm hoping Paizo doesn't do the same thing with the Mage/Summoner/etc base classes.
My only problem with the warmage was his spells never got updated after he was produced. I'm hoping Paizo doesn't do the same thing with the Mage/Summoner/etc base classes.My personal first two choices are
Dread Necromancer (Heroes of Horror)
- I know there were a lot of Necromancers, I just always preferred this one
Agreed with the Dread Necromancer. Still wanna play one of those. :)
Also, the Warmage. It's a well-built class that, IMO, would convert pretty easily.
It has been said that all their core and base classes are 100% supported equally after they are printed. Though this is rumor as I can't provide links.
I like the Eberron Artificer. While I don't really want to convert the blade magic stuff, I like the whole concept of the Swordsage.
|
For non-core, it's the Dread Necromancer, and perhaps the Archivist. Both were awesome. I toyed with the Binder, Beguiler and Duskblade, but none of them really fit my playstyle.
The Oriental Adventures Shaman was balls-to-the-wall amazing, particularly with the Nature domain. I wanted the Sohei to be amazing, but it let me down. Bad Sohei!
For core, it's Cleric and Druid. I'm pretty sure that I've never cast Divine Favor or Righteous Might, and I rarely bother with Wild Shape, so I'm not a CoDzilla contender, but I do love the classes. :)
Bah, there's so many 3.5 classes, I can't keep them straight. There was a class that had 'Dark Knowledge' abilities, and when you hit 20th level, you dropped alignment one step towards Evil. Can't remember what it was now.
Sounds like you might be thinking of the Death Master, from the Dragon Compendium?
It was never an official class, being all Dragon-y goodness (like the intriguing Battle Dancer), but it definitely turned evil, after awhile (assuming it didn't start that way, and, really, how many people enter a class of explicit Orcus-worshippers expecting to keep their hands clean?). :)
Factotum. Pathfinder needs the Factotum.
+1 i miss it so
Dragon Shaman
Marshal
Ardent
|
|
Duskblade.
Archivist.Archivist was awesome.
Duskblade has already been remade, it's being called Magus now.
I beg to differ, no full base attack, you just have a Battle Sorcerer that casts like a wizard.
I say do a Duskblade. It is probably the best class WotC made after the core.
P.S. Key problem here is that the Duskblade actually was decent with TWF and with whirlwind attack. So till I see the final magus, and see it works with TWF as decent as a Duskblade, I will keep my sentiment.
Might i suggest that you check out the Vanguard from Super Genius Games - it is very much a Duskblade type of class.
Hexblade is awesome as an idea. Inquisitor sooooooort of stole some its thunder, but I think a conversion could be real cool. Will need some rewriting to keep up with the power of the new base classes in PF.
A good Swashbuckler would be cool, but the one from 3.5 was terrible.
Ill have to disagree here. I absolutely hated the hexblade, but I was in love with the swashbuckler. He had style and his abilities were really good for 3.5. Would need some updating now.
|
Ill have to disagree here. I absolutely hated the hexblade, but I was in love with the swashbuckler. He had style and his abilities were really good for 3.5. Would need some updating now.Hexblade is awesome as an idea. Inquisitor sooooooort of stole some its thunder, but I think a conversion could be real cool. Will need some rewriting to keep up with the power of the new base classes in PF.
A good Swashbuckler would be cool, but the one from 3.5 was terrible.
The 3.5 Swashbuckler was one of the worst pieces of class design, ever. Right up there with Samurai and Truenamer. A Warrior was miles ahead of him, really.
|
|
The 3.5 Swashbuckler was a Fighter with class features instead of feats. Not very impressive.
Edit: Dammit G, stop agreeing with me! :P
I'm kind of trying to stop agreeing, but apparently we can't stop here, it's the BAT COUNTRY !
Ahem.
Anyway, Swashbucket is light armor only, you have your feats chosen for you, they're craptastic for the most part, and you're almost as MAD as a monk is, if not worse.