I figured since the Ultimate Combat has been out for a while i might start this old discussion up again.
What Class Concept do you feel you can not get with the classes (and Archetypes) that exsit in Pthfinder?
What things do you want your characters to be able to do that can not be done with your current options?
What Classes do you feel still need to be made?
something that can change it's abilities at the beginning of the day or that can use a very diverse set of abilities but only a few times per day.
(aka factotum or chamaeleon or master masks, but no point regeneration encounter based)
I think one thing that doesnt exist that I would love to see is a class that focusses on altering their own body perminantly. giving them selves abillities through their alterations.
I really liked the Factotum (though never got to run it/see it in play), a 'dabbler' PC. Somebody who could prep his dabbling every day, at the expense of power, would be neat, but I'm not sure this is a character concept so much as a mechanics concept.
Conceptually, through a mix of feats/multiclassing, I think you could build one. This would be a neat PrC, maybe amplifying abilities from all sorts of areas.
Wasn't there a PrC in 3.x that required SA +1d6, 1st level divine, 1st level arcane, & some fighter req (armor or martial?)? Forgot everything else about it though...so maybe PrC isn't the way to go. :O
I liked the (NPC) Dungeon Lord PrC from Mr. OOtS & Dungeonscape.
(concept, the mechanics were...different)
Expand it to include non-dungeons, like a patch of forest or pirate ship, that the "Dungeon Lord" can be connected with/have control over.
Could be a template too, scaling bonuses/DC w/ HD or CR.
I'd like to see a Witch/Martial Artist like in Chinese movies/lore.
(Though, yes, Witch & Martial Artist could multiclass...maybe a PrC?)
I like the concept of luck (like Matt in "Wheel of Time" & a couple Marvel heroes) being a major power. Thought the luck feats in 3.x were...okay, but...not. This may need a whole class, though maybe a PrC could pull it off. Rogue & Fighter archetypes maybe?
Scaling a luck hero to be functional both in 15-minute/day campaigns & 24-hour attrition campaigns might be tough.
Replenishing luck pool?
On a similar note, 'uncontrollable powers' would be neat, like the Chaos Mage (or the kid from the D&D cartoon), but I'm not sure how much demand there is, and I'd like something for non-casters too (though likely magical).
Admittedly, it'd be low on the totem pole of "PCs I want to play", but you asked, and it could be hilarious for an NPC sidekick.
Meta-archetypes? These would be archetypes that could be tagged onto several classes, affecting common traits (for better & worse) to achieve balance.
Ex. Chaotic Caster: Roll for caster level +1d6-3. (Feat?)
Lucky Combatant: Lose 1 h.p./level to gain ??? or maybe -1 to all saves to gain +1d6 1/hour or make 1 save/day automatically.
(Mechanics just examples, not for specific consideration.)
Energy/Force Shaper: (Green Lantern being the most famous example, but seen throughout fiction/comics) Increase hardness by level. Increase damage along the lines of bombs. Hmm...
Gymkata?
"Anybody see a pommel horse nearby?"
;)
Thanks for the opportunity to brainstorm,
JMK
I think that brainstorming is very important. as long as we are not preventing brainstorming then everything that comes from this thread is usefull.
It's "useful", not "usefull", and anyway, all of your ideas suck!
Wait, no, we're not supposed to belittle each other's ideas. It's brainstorming. Ridicule is phase 2, no?
Hm... no belittling people that are not next to me but can read what I write... this is new on the internet. Needs some getting used to. I'll try.
Things I can see working as classes:
Those are the things I could see. Frankly, other than the shapeshifter, those would just be nice ideas, all of them can probably be done pretty well with what we have. Except the stuff depending on concepts that aren't in the game at all.
The swashbuckler. Yes, this can be done fairly well with the available classes, prestige classes and archetypes, and I don't miss it too much, but I wouldn't get mad if this was tackled as its own class.
I would like to see a fighting class that focuses on maneuvers. Trip, being arguably the most powerful, and grapple, get a little love from existing character builds, but disarm, bull rush, overrun, and sunder see very little use by PCs.
I had originally seen this character type themed as a gladiator - don't just kill your opponent in a single blow, dominate him and make a show of it! I could see a swashbuckler theme working just as well.
While it's arguable that a Fighter can already do this, the feat and attribute investment is too high. Combat Expertise (a generally useless feat) and Power Attack act as prerequisites, and then each maneuver requires a feat just to be usable without provoking AOO. That's 8 feats and a 13 INT just to start trying.
Swashbuckler is overdone, a class or useful archetype (Free Hand Fighter sucks tragically) that emphasizes one-weapon style in general would be very nice. Perhaps something that focuses more on accuracy and defense instead of accuracy and damage, or perhaps mastery of combat maneuvers.
…though that does remind me that the best archetype/class to use Combat Maneuvers is the Fighter’s Lore Warden (who can rack up a CMB of +33 without feats, or positive ability modifier, at level 20).
i would like to see a non-caster class that has most of its class features based around enhancing their own weapon. more so even than anything the Magus could do.
|
The swashbuckler. Yes, this can be done fairly well with the available classes, prestige classes and archetypes, and I don't miss it too much, but I wouldn't get mad if this was tackled as its own class. I would like to see a fighting class that focuses on maneuvers. Trip, being arguably the most powerful, and grapple, get a little love from existing character builds, but disarm, bull rush, overrun, and sunder see very little use by PCs.
I had originally seen this character type themed as a gladiator - don't just kill your opponent in a single blow, dominate him and make a show of it! I could see a swashbuckler theme working just as well.
While it's arguable that a Fighter can already do this, the feat and attribute investment is too high. Combat Expertise (a generally useless feat) and Power Attack act as prerequisites, and then each maneuver requires a feat just to be usable without provoking AOO. That's 8 feats and a 13 INT just to start trying.
Something tells me you'll love the Lore Warden from the Pathfinder Society Field Guide (full archetype available on the messageboards with a quick search).
Dont forget, just because it is possable to do something with what exists doesnt mean you actually are doing well at it. and just because it is possable to do something with what exists doesnt mean something new couldnt do better.
A martial caster that has casting progression for Arcane spells similar to how the Paladin and Ranger have. I've seen few 3rd party class that have this though.
|
Like many posters, I think a swashbuckler with full BAB would be great. As a fighter archetype, I would suggest replacing some bonus feats with some Rogue Tricks or Hunter’s Tricks or Evasion or Skill Focus Acrobatics.
I would like to see (and play) the world’s simplest Gish. There should be a trait that allows a non-arcane character to take Arcane Strike. You could call it Good Only at This and limit the player to +1.
For various reasons, Pathfinder will never have a Warlock. However, I have wondered what would happen if a D6 blast progression replaced the fighter’s bonus feats? Or, similarly, could you have a monk blaster?
Thanks,
Kodger
A true, dedicated shapeshifter class. Druid is nice, but focused mostly on spells. Other casters have a variety of spells, but they don't have the duration to be used for anything but a brief combat.
For those of you who want an arcane sorta-caster like the Paladin or Ranger, check out my Hexblade conversion for Pathfinder. Tell me what you think, even if you don't like it!
The link is here: witchblade
Master Arminas
Oh? And Kodger, here is the link to my Pathfinder Warlock: warlock
If you are interested.
MA
I would want more for the non-magic wielders. Just something other the more caster hybrids. Like a class that has social abilities as its focus. As per the Noble or Leader suggested above. Swashbuckler would be cool too.
I for one miss the beguiler class for 3.5. Rogue meets sorcerer with an an emphasis on illusion. Unless I'm mistaken, this doesn't exist. And don't mention the arcane trickster PRC, it blows. Maybe a rogue archtype that gives spell spontaneous casting at the expense of sneak attack or some such.
I'd also LOVE to see a dedicated necromancer, and some necromancy based spells that aren't just about corpses. Where's the love for the aging spells? And we NEED some necromancy related feats failing a new class/archtype.
I'd also like to see a wizard or magus archtype focusing on item creation and the use of wands. Maybe introduce a better pc-friendly part construct?
Finally, it'd be intense to have a shadow dancer that's an archtype for the rogue/ninja. I'd like it to focus on shadow jump, have hips at like 6-10th level, and drop the shadow spells.
|
|
I for one miss the beguiler class for 3.5. Rogue meets sorcerer with an an emphasis on illusion. Unless I'm mistaken, this doesn't exist. And don't mention the arcane trickster PRC, it blows. Maybe a rogue archtype that gives spell spontaneous casting at the expense of sneak attack or some such.
Shadow bloodline.
I'd also LOVE to see a dedicated necromancer, and some necromancy based spells that aren't just about corpses. Where's the love for the aging spells? And we NEED some necromancy related feats failing a new class/archtype.
Super Genius Games's Death Mage.
I'd also like to see a wizard or magus archtype focusing on item creation and the use of wands. Maybe introduce a better pc-friendly part construct?
Any wizard may focus on item creation, also Arcanirium Crafter wizard subschool.
Wand Wielder magus arcana for a magus focusing on the use of wands.Finally, it'd be intense to have a shadow dancer that's an archtype for the rogue/ninja. I'd like it to focus on shadow jump, have hips at like 6-10th level, and drop the shadow spells.
You can already have HIPS at 6th level with the Shadow Dancer prestige class, and the Chameleon archetype provides you with nifty class features, including a form on HIPS limited on terrain.
Shapeshifter- I agree about this one.
Psion-a strait up Psion class and Psionic archtypes for all the other classes, psionic sorcerer bloodline, psionic based mystery,etc.
Shaman-cha based spontanius caster versioin of the Druid but with totem animal spirit abilities.
Monster themed class-not shapeshifting but can learn special abilities from monsters like blue mage from final fantasy but at least average combat ability.
Tarzan/Jungle girl- a unarmored(like a monk but uses cha instead of wis for AC) fighting with 1d12 hp, fighter attack bonus, good fort and ref with nature/survival/jungle theme abilities.
Martial art archtypes for all classes.
Feat for adding dex to damage with light weapons.
Feat for monks to add wis to damage instead of str.
Ways to get more skill points/class skills through feats, archtypes, an alternate starting class backage, etc.
Ways to add spells to class list that fit themes like nature/plant spells for Fey Sorcerer bloodline, elemental spells for prper elemental Oracle Mysteries, Holysmite,Searing Light, Holy Aura, Prayer, Aid, Dealay Poison, etc. to Celestial Bloodline, Disrupt Undead to Cleric/Oracle list, Ray of frost, Mage Hand, etc. to Witches spell list.
I feel i have to point out that stating that you can already pull of a concept with what exists doesnt really help with brainstorming. I think that also most people throwing out a concept that might be possable with existing material probably wants something more than what can already be done.
A cleric whose appreciation and link with their god comes from intellectual understanding instead of faith and willpower. Basically, an INT based cleric. Too bad the names "Theologian" and "Cloistered Cleric" are already taken.
Inquisitor archetypes that don't inquisit. I love the class, but the mechanics push pretty hard towards a monster/heretic hunter hybrid, which doesn't fit well with most gods and concepts. The existing archetypes help, but I really want something that is more "adventuring cleric" than "Torquemada van Helsing." Caydenite holy swashbucklers, Norgorber's divine thieves, and Calistria's sacred... ahem... "escorts" will thank you.
Mountless Cavaliers. I like the Challenge, Order, and Tactician concepts, but dislike having to leave poor Sir Horsey sitting in the cold outside most dungeons. Other times, I don't want to bog down play with another creature, or just can't work a mount into my concept (Sir Dolgrin the Dwarf does not ride!). Pathfinder Core seemed to understand that pets weren't always desirable, and gave every class that got one an alternate option.
Also, a lot of stuff people have mentioned. Shapeshiftings specialists, luck based characters, and white-haired kung-fu witches. Good stuff.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Arhtypes for Mountless Samurai/Cavalier.
Bloodline Feats- feats for Sorcerers thaat enhance, grant special abilities, skills, spells, etc. that are themed to each bloodline. Ex: lowlight vision, darkvision, DR, spell like abilities, additional class skills, bonuses on saves, incresed energy resistance, longer duration with claws, more damage with bloodline ray attcks, etc.
A spontanius caster(Cha) archtype for the Magus.
A feat that lets you use Cha instead of Wis for Monk AC and maybe Ki uses and stunning fist DC.
I would also love a class based around shapshifting and mimmicing monsters abilities.
I would like to see a Mad Scientist style class. Artificers (both the Eberron and one that I saw in a 3rd Party PF supplement) don't really do it for me.
I like Binders, thoght they were a bit erratic. I wouldn't mind seeing a quality take on them.
A Mystic class that crosses monk and cleric/druid like the Shaman from the 3.0 Oriental Adventures. I'd do them as a 6 level caster progression though.
Something I originally pitched as a Summoner archetype a while back was some one who had a magic weapon rather than monster, which got more powerful as the character progressed.
I would like to see a Mad Scientist style class. Artificers (both the Eberron and one that I saw in a 3rd Party PF supplement) don't really do it for me.
I like Binders, thoght they were a bit erratic. I wouldn't mind seeing a quality take on them.
A Mystic class that crosses monk and cleric/druid like the Shaman from the 3.0 Oriental Adventures. I'd do them as a 6 level caster progression though.
Something I originally pitched as a Summoner archetype a while back was some one who had a magic weapon rather than monster, which got more powerful as the character progressed.
I always loved the idea of a class that enhanced their own weapon as the main concept of the class. that being said i dont like the idea of that class being a caster.
|
|
Arhtypes for Mountless Samurai/Cavalier.
I always loved the idea of a class that enhanced their own weapon as the main concept of the class. that being said i dont like the idea of that class being a caster.
You might both be interested in this archetype.
bard variant named Jester.
Alchemists variants that arn't dumb.
more witch variants and the deity spell lists.
For any that are interested, I have made a full 20-level assassin class, posted here: assassin To some degree, it is based on the original AD&D Assassin class, not the prestige class of the same name. It also borrows a lot of influence from film and fiction.
Any feedback, critiques, and criticisms would be most valued and appreciated.
Master Arminas
A dilettante 'Elf' class. One with half baked abilities from Ranger, Druid and Sorcerer. Totally unfocused and marginally incompetent at any specific thing, yet versatile enough that the Multi-classers will have their little corner of the world.
Now that I have the Magus to model from, I might just knock this one out.
A Jester Archtype for Bards would be nice.
More Oracle curses.
More spellless archtypes for Rangers.
More Sorcerer bloodlines.
More Oracle Mysteries.
Something I originally pitched as a Summoner archetype a while back was some one who had a magic weapon rather than monster, which got more powerful as the character progressed.I always loved the idea of a class that enhanced their own weapon as the main concept of the class. that being said i dont like the idea of that class being a caster.
I agree, it was just the lazy way of putting it into play. Evolutions points to cover enhancements and build (two handed, double weapons, etc) where convienent. Also it was also a way to explain why their super cool weapon was not powerful all the time.
The ability to make a bad weapon or fighting style good.
Case in point, take the crossbow fighter. It is marginally better than a fighter specializing in the crossbow. It does not come close to making the crossbow good, or make a remotely viable pc. It does not make up for the weaknesses of the crossbow.
The two weapon fighter suffers this from a lesser extent as well.
I want a dedicated shapeshifter class also. If it can be done in a way that makes it non-daunting, great. I always hated in D&D having to wade through monster stat blocks, remembering which stats do/dont change, and what abilities I do/dont get.
I also want a dedicated arcane blaster. I find arcane blasting to be largely awful in D&D 3.0/3.5 & Pathfinder. In first edition, a wizard could do 10d6 to a Giant or a Dragon, each of which might have 75 - 95 hp. But still 10d6 was decent. Now, a Dragon might have 100 to 150 hp or more, be resistant/immune to fire, and have massive spell resistance. So it is pretty frustrating. Sure, if you dont care about direct damage, Wizards are one of the most powerful all-arounders. But I do care about damage and I dont care about utility. Warlocks and Warmages never quite did the trick. Warmage was terrible in particular ... give up all versatility for +5 damage. It was still based on crappy wizard evocation spells.
If I could just design a top damage archer, but my GM just changed my special effects to arcane damage, I would be happy with that. But it would be nice to have an official ruleset for it.
I want a martial arts class that doesnt have to be lawful in alignment. If it also doesnt have to be mystical/meditative/esoteric like the monk, then all the better. But I dont want it to be a weak monk substitute. I still want to be as good or as bad as a monk at punching dragons or giants in the knees. :)
Animation,
Try this warmage. It is still a work in progress, so any suggestions you care to offer would be appreciated. I think it might serve really well if you are looking for a an arcane damage dealer.
Master Arminas
I want to see another Occultist Class or two.
The The Warlock and the Binder were great examples. They used magic that was totally out of the ordinary, and fit into old party roles that magic users usually didnt fit into.
I'm a little sick of magic having such a "clean" feeling. The Witch does a good job, what with her skinmagic and poisonous frogs, but it's still not enough.
Speaking of magic, I'd like to see a new magic system or three, and not one that simply replicates the current one in it's basic building blocks.
A class with construct specific abilities and their own handmade construct companion. Think arcane druid for machines, sans a wild shape equivalent of course, as that would be unfitting.
An archtype for bards that grant wild empathy, resist nature's lure, woodland stride, etc. but keeps all bardic music ability.
More options for Sorcerers when they level.
Prestige classes like the Dragonic desciple but for Fey, Celestial, etc.
|
I feel i have to point out that stating that you can already pull of a concept with what exists doesnt really help with brainstorming. I think that also most people throwing out a concept that might be possable with existing material probably wants something more than what can already be done.
While true, and get for Paizo's bottom line. Should an RPG be spoon feeding 'imagination' to everyone constantly? I really can't see why the idea of using what we have, and I put forward the core class are enough, and the application the one thing that makes an RPG and RPG - imagination.
How many Splat Books you think filled with minor variations on existing can people envision being enough?
Not trying to say peoples ideas/wants are bad, just it's impossible for Paizo to generate every concept as a completely separate rule. With PF/3e the multi-classing system makes all concepts nearly possible. I'll admit there isn't much in the way of psionic classes, but they seem to have fallen out on main-stay since 1e AD&D.
Gish = Fighter/Mage (easy)
Shape Shifter = Let the player be a Doppelganger
Necromancer = Either Cleric or Mage specializing in necromancy
etc.
|
Something tells me you'll love the Lore Warden from the Pathfinder Society Field Guide (full archetype available on the messageboards with a quick search).
It's a pretty fun looking archetype, but it might start losing steam around the mid levels where your AC can't keep up anymore (and max DEX to armor doesn't increase because they get swapped out). I've been tinkering with it since it was released, and I'm still not sure how to build it to 15 (about the end for most APs).
Cad archetype is interesting as well, since I think Dirty Trick has the potential to be the best of all Combat Maneuvers since nobody is immune to it. But the same problem these archetypes losing steam.
Which is why I'm a huge fan of Dawnflower Dervish.
I feel i have to point out that stating that you can already pull of a concept with what exists doesnt really help with brainstorming. I think that also most people throwing out a concept that might be possable with existing material probably wants something more than what can already be done.While true, and get for Paizo's bottom line. Should an RPG be spoon feeding 'imagination' to everyone constantly? I really can't see why the idea of using what we have, and I put forward the core class are enough, and the application the one thing that makes an RPG and RPG - imagination.
How many Splat Books you think filled with minor variations on existing can people envision being enough?
Not trying to say peoples ideas/wants are bad, just it's impossible for Paizo to generate every concept as a completely separate rule. With PF/3e the multi-classing system makes all concepts nearly possible. I'll admit there isn't much in the way of psionic classes, but they seem to have fallen out on main-stay since 1e AD&D.
Gish = Fighter/Mage (easy)
Shape Shifter = Let the player be a Doppelganger
Necromancer = Either Cleric or Mage specializing in necromancyetc.
While i understand what you are saying, my point is that there is a vast difference between the flavor of a characte and the class abilities they can use. my greatest point is that unless you build a new class towards a dedicated concept (just as all the classes are built towards a dedictated concept even when including all options all classes have) you will never truly get that character you want. it is too easy to come up with a class combanation that gets you something like what you want but you have a slew or class features not wanted for the character and it may take many levels before you get the feel you are looking for. if you look at all of the existing classes you get the basic feel of that class from first level. that is what i want with all character ideas, is to get the flavor from level 1.
|
|
my greatest point is that unless you build a new class towards a dedicated concept (just as all the classes are built towards a dedictated concept even when including all options all classes have) you will never truly get that character you want.
This is completely true. But as long as you are playing a game designed and written by somebody else you will likely never truly have what you want. The only answer is to make your own class and not based on rules existing from somebody else as they will always provide restrictions on your concept.
I guess I'm more accepting, perhaps because OD&D/AD&D was uber-restrictive, that I have to work with what I have. I have no issues with Core-Only, what is in the book presents the 'laws of nature' sort of. A class based system like D&D/PF is the worse system possible to create the perfect concept in. An open skill based system like Hero or BRP would make more sense. 2e AD&D filled tens of splat-books with Kits (read as Archetypes) but they still didn't cover every possible concept, and no matter how many APG's Paizo produce they won't either.
But I respect greatly those who are making their own classes/archetypes it isn't easy. The Witch class in the APG, for example, for me isn't witchy at all, so in PF I can't get my idea of a Witch by playing a witch... Hmmmm.
S.