Is anyone else in the same boat as me? As soon as I saw the Archaeologist archetype in UC, I immediately want to make a human archeaologist with the prehensile whip trait ;-)
But is giving up all Bardic performances a worthwhile trade off to the Archaeologist's luck ability?
You still have spells, but you lose the main ability to buff, which seems pretty key to playing an effective bard. (I haven't played a Bard in PF yet, so I might be missing some nuances from 3.5)
But is giving up all Bardic performances a worthwhile trade off to the Archaeologist's luck ability?
If there is another bard in the group it's worthwhile. Also while Luck directly replaces Performance, they get a bundle of other abilities. If you wanna play a Caster Rogue it's a good route.
Bards don't need to be the buffer. Archeaologist sounds like a ton of fun. Especially the rogue tricks.
Is anyone else in the same boat as me? As soon as I saw the Archaeologist archetype in UC, I immediately want to make a human archeaologist with the prehensile whip trait ;-)
But is giving up all Bardic performances a worthwhile trade off to the Archaeologist's luck ability?
You still have spells, but you lose the main ability to buff, which seems pretty key to playing an effective bard. (I haven't played a Bard in PF yet, so I might be missing some nuances from 3.5)
I think the archaeologist is to use a bard chassis to make a skillmonkey class with some spells, rather than a party support class. Luck makes the bard better at boosting himself and making him contribute to the party in a different way. It reminds me, very loosely thematically speaking, of the factotum from Dungeonscape.
If your bard concept is to be party buffer, then I wouldn't play an archeologist. Although of course you can still boost the party with spells.
If your concept is to play up the other aspects of the bard--a skilled jack of all trades with some cool tricks up his sleeve, then the archeologist works very well.
I haven't seen the archeologist in action so I don't know if it's underpowered or overpowered, but it's a different role than a traditional bard plays. And this isn't the only bard archetype that does this--some archetypes play up the bard's magic (magician) or combat ability (arcane duelist) for example. It certainly looks like fun, anyway.
Is anyone else in the same boat as me? As soon as I saw the Archaeologist archetype in UC, I immediately want to make a human archeaologist with the prehensile whip trait ;-)
But is giving up all Bardic performances a worthwhile trade off to the Archaeologist's luck ability?
You still have spells, but you lose the main ability to buff, which seems pretty key to playing an effective bard. (I haven't played a Bard in PF yet, so I might be missing some nuances from 3.5)
First: The best race I found for this, hands down, is Half Elf because it allows you to actually scale Archaeologists luck via racial favored class. That helps some, IMO.
Second: I'm not sure I disagree with you on the power level of the class. I've found myself having a hard time building and Archaeologist I really like, though at the same time I love the class as a spellcasting alternative to a rogue. Thats probably what I'd run one for.
Did you want to play a bard, but the party doesn't have a rogue, and you're worried about traps? Then archaeologist is your answer.
I think it's a good trade off, it just dramatically changes the roll of the class. As an aside, having worked in archaeology for a few years, and been friends with a number of archaeologist/anthropologists, I can say they missed a very key feature of the character type...alcoholism. They need something along the lines of the drunken brute archetype rules if you REALLY want to get the feel of REAL (as in not Harrison Ford) archaeology.
I love the fact that it lets me play a skill monkey without having to deal with either sneak attack or bardic performance every time. Bardic performance can work for certain concepts, but not for most of them that I would actually want to try, and I thoroughly dislike sneak attack at every level of it's existence. It's just not how I enjoy participating in combat.
I made the switch from archivist to archaeologist.
Like most archetypes, it is slightly weaker than the vanilla version of the same class.
The campaign is known to be trap-heavy, and I was looking for ways to play a more trap-focused PC without changing to Rogue outright. Since my character concept actually is an archaeologist (only a little bit of the Jones method) this arch was exactly what I needed.
Yes, Archaeologists luck is not as good as Bardic Performance. Nevertheless, you are still eligible for Spellsong and Harmonic spell, though the latter loses a little bit of punch when used with Archaeologist's Luck.
Personally, I think that they could just add the terms "slightly weaker but more specialized" to describe the entire archetype concept. I'm quite happy with them serving that role, but people who are looking for an edge in power should avoid archetypes in 90% of cases. I would much rather not see archetypes that reflect an increase in power over the base class, so they ought to be slightly weaker, more specialized, or at best equivalent (but equivalencies are rare).
PS - Archivist arch is full of traps that look good until you read the fine print, much like bardic performance in general.
EDIT: Here's my Archaeologist PC, btw.
I think this guy would be a great social monkey too. Awesome bardic social abilities with spells, and then rumormonger or any other rogue social tricks? Awesome!
It reminds me, very loosely thematically speaking, of the factotum from Dungeonscape.
Factotum is a class I always wanted to try, but never did. Dungeonscape was my favourite of the late 3.5 books.
Actually, my biggest gripe about the archaeologist arch is that they don't also get improved uncanny dodge...
Just made one for a PbP game, here's hoping I get accepted so I can report back how the archetype runs...
I love the Archaeologist! It's a great adventuring archetype in general that reminds me a little bit of the Freelancer job from Final Fantasy III. The only thing I don't understand is why they don't get Disable Device as a class skill. It makes no sense whatsoever.
I made a 7th level two-weapon fighting (whip and short sword) half-elf Archaeologist/Trapper NPC for my GM. His disarm bonus is insane. It makes me want to play one so I can be a kickass battlefield controller.
I was looking at the Archaeologist bard on the PFSRD and I noticed something. It says for Archaeologist's Luck that you get it for 4 + Charisma rounds per day, just like Bardic Performance. Unlike Bardic Performance it does not say this limit increases by 2 per level of bard. Is this a typo or is it intended this way? I hope its just a typo because otherwise that really weakens the archetype. Even if its not I'd like to play one, it just seems like a perfect class for your stereotypical adventurer.
I was looking at the Archaeologist bard on the PFSRD and I noticed something. It says for Archaeologist's Luck that you get it for 4 + Charisma rounds per day, just like Bardic Performance. Unlike Bardic Performance it does not say this limit increases by 2 per level of bard. Is this a typo or is it intended this way? I hope its just a typo because otherwise that really weakens the archetype. Even if its not I'd like to play one, it just seems like a perfect class for your stereotypical adventurer.
It's intentional I believe.
Lingering Performance effectively makes it (4+mCha)*3.
It's intentional I believe.
Lingering Performance effectively makes it (4+mCha)*3.
Ok, I'd definitely want to play a Half-Elf or Human then (then again I usually do anyway). Half-Elf gets an extra round of performance as a favored class bonus and Human gets a bonus feat you can spend on Extra Performance or Lingering Performance.
I'm not sure it is worth picking your race around Archaeologist's luck alone.
Anyway, that clause that says arch luck is basically bardic performance for all intents is pretty sweet. You retain some of the bard's best options, like the ability to disguise spell casting.
|
Is anyone else in the same boat as me? As soon as I saw the Archaeologist archetype in UC, I immediately want to make a human archeaologist with the prehensile whip trait ;-)
But is giving up all Bardic performances a worthwhile trade off to the Archaeologist's luck ability?
You still have spells, but you lose the main ability to buff, which seems pretty key to playing an effective bard. (I haven't played a Bard in PF yet, so I might be missing some nuances from 3.5)
Evil Lincoln pretty much nailed it when discussing archetypes, but lets look at what you get and lose.
Archaeologists luck is not as good as bardic performance, but it does make you "ok" in a combat role.
To me gaining the Rogue features is better than what you lose from bard (Disable device and Uncanny dodge vs versatile performance and well versed), but it is at least a wash.
Now the other stuff. Trap sense you get without losing anything, which is a nice thing. Rogue talents are basically feats, and again you get this with no trade off. Same with evasion.
So the deal is actually Archivists luck, rogue talents every four levels, including advanced rogue talents, trap sense and evasion in exchange for losing bardic music.
Sounds like a fair trade to me.