Number of Base Classes in the game: Too many? need more?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

301 to 303 of 303 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>

SmiloDan wrote:
Dabbler wrote:
Problem was most of those classes seemed to be 'filler' material or else deliberately gimped. I think the big advantage of the APG was that it took the best of these concepts and rolled them up into a simple and easy system of archetypes that demanded few new actual classes.
My point exactly. Well, I really like the warlock and the Complete Adventurer classes. And I like the idea of the warmage: a spontaneous caster with a pre-selected list of tightly thematic spells. It's a nice pre-cursor to the beguiler and dread necromancer, and presumably would have eventually lead to some specialty casters based on abjuration (exorcist/de-buffer/counterspeller), conjuration (summoner/transporter/creator), divination (sage/savant/seer), and transmutation (buffer/shapeshifter/transmogrifer).

Yes, there were some good ideas in there, a few good executions of those ideas (Scout and Warlock stand out), but overall not much thought seemed to have been applied.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Dabbler wrote:
SmiloDan wrote:
Dabbler wrote:
Problem was most of those classes seemed to be 'filler' material or else deliberately gimped. I think the big advantage of the APG was that it took the best of these concepts and rolled them up into a simple and easy system of archetypes that demanded few new actual classes.
My point exactly. Well, I really like the warlock and the Complete Adventurer classes. And I like the idea of the warmage: a spontaneous caster with a pre-selected list of tightly thematic spells. It's a nice pre-cursor to the beguiler and dread necromancer, and presumably would have eventually lead to some specialty casters based on abjuration (exorcist/de-buffer/counterspeller), conjuration (summoner/transporter/creator), divination (sage/savant/seer), and transmutation (buffer/shapeshifter/transmogrifer).
Yes, there were some good ideas in there, a few good executions of those ideas (Scout and Warlock stand out), but overall not much thought seemed to have been applied.

Yeah, I really like the scout and warlock. Scouts are very dynamic combatants, have lots of useful skills, and really fun class features. I like playing characters that run around and do interesting things, as opposed to standing still and just getting full attacks in. I played a scout that used a combination of archery, hand axe, and longspear & spiked gauntlets, so every fight was different.

I also like the warlock. They have great staying power, have fun magic powers, and they don't require a lot of book keeping and resource management decisions. They don't end battles quickly, but they can keep going and going and going.

The spellthief is interesting, but I never got to play one beyond 1st or 2nd level--the combo of Combat Expertise, Improved Feint, and reach from a longspear was very effective at those low levels.

I currently have a slightly pathfinderized 3.5 ninja PC, and it's very fun. The only thing I don't like about it is the late acquisition of evasion and its relative lack of customization. But I play a whisper gnome with the Dark Creature template from the Tome of Magic, which gives a racial Hide in Plain Sight ability, so that helps with the Sudden Strikes. But I like how the Sudden Strike ability gels well with the Law of Conservation of Ninjitsu.

301 to 303 of 303 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Number of Base Classes in the game: Too many? need more? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion