If you cannot guess what the fighter is.. then you probably wouldn't be able to go with the theme of it, while improving on it both thematically and mechanically.
So how can I make him better in his theme?
Nothing?
He's a wimp.
Make him a sword wielding Dhampir Inquisitor and then we'll talk.
Sword wielding.. Ha! Jeweled Knuckles all the way.. until you get the possibility sword. (Older dragon magazine) Then he could wield a sword.
But seriously, The Dhampir is more an an arcanist I'd say. He has no use for gods and had to learn his spells.
Sword wielding.. Ha! Jeweled Knuckles all the way.. until you get the possibility sword. (Older dragon magazine) Then he could wield a sword.
But seriously, The Dhampir is more an an arcanist I'd say. He has no use for gods and had to learn his spells.
Don't need a god to be an inquisitor. Or a cleric for that matter. Thoguh the cleric bit I admit always bothered me.
He could be a magus though I cna see that.
Point blank & Rapid, Trip & Disarm,
Throw that stake and holy water.
He's a wimp.
Make him a sword wielding Dhampir Inquisitor and then we'll talk.
No, not inquisitor. Alucard is most definitely a magus.
Point blank & Rapid, Trip & Disarm,
Throw that stake and holy water.
imp trip and Disarm are coming as quickly as possible.
The sad thing is that you cannot both get heirloom weapon and prehensile whip.
I'll be making a few "alucards" here soon. Just as soon as I figure out how to make one who can easily duel wield guns.
What was the point of Weapon Finesse with this character? With Strength = Dexterity they get no benefit from it.
If I was going to do a slayer, I'd make them a monk rather than a fighter.
Dex has to keep increasing for one to keep up with TWF, and for two, I forgot the racial bonus on the character, which would go into dex.
It is also a requirement of serpent lash.
Believe me, I'd much rather have it be like 4e where I could use weapon finesse with my weapon because its a property of the weapon itself and have the requirement removed on serpent lash.
That makes sense, then, but I'd still go monk in preference.
Call me crazy, but gods have I been wanting to run a Castlevania campaign, set in fictional 16th century Europe, everyone plays one of the various vampire-killing bloodlines...
Anywho, I'd probably say Ranger, Paladin, or Inquisitor would be a better fit for a Belmont. Any of those would let you do the undead-hunter thing better, and give you some minor access to divine spells. Also the old 3.0 prestige class Lasher from Sword & Fist would be excellent for a whip user, and I'm sure I've seen a Pathfinder or at least 3.5 conversion for it somewhere.
Problem is, that in order to use a whip and use it well, you need a lot of feats.
Inquisitor would have to wait till level 3 to be prof with whips. Ranger would get some of the TWF feats pretty easily, but still wouldn't have the feats for much more (You need TWF for easy use of the sub-weapons.). Paladin, Ironically, is the worse belmont. Belmonts aren't actually that LG. More of CG truthfully. But then of course there is the lack of feats even more for a paladin.
If there was some rules somewhere, that said "You can give up Medium, heavy armor, shields, and all these martial weapons to gain X amount of character points" or something like that, then Belmonts could be better served with a freedom paladin.