In need of a new class to play


Advice


So I have played my druid up untill level 11 now. I play it as a melee druid, I don't like cooky-cutter-builds. I enjoy it much, I am on par with damage compared to our fighter, but I want something else.

we already have a wizard, clerc, fighter, sorc-dragon disciple and a misfit paladin with an identity crisis...

To make things worse, i don't want to play something we use I our other storyline; monk, ranger, sorc, oracle, rogue.

I thought I liked the rage prophet, but it does not get good reviews on these boards.
I thought about a bard, simply because nobody else seems to want to play it haha.
I thought about a magus and then I realised I always seem to pick a hybrid class....

so... any suggestions?

Grand Lodge

Yeah try out a bard. They're amazing.

Failing that, it doesn't look like you have a full arcane caster, so a witch or wizard would be a good call. Maybe a summoner as well.

Dark Archive

Yeah, your party could use a rogue. A bard, inquisitor, ninja or ranger could hold the job.

Dark Archive

Exocrat wrote:

Yeah try out a bard. They're amazing.

Failing that, it doesn't look like you have a full arcane caster, so a witch or wizard would be a good call. Maybe a summoner as well.

They actually have a wizard in their party.


Hard to say without knowing what you are looking for. If the cleric, fighter and paladin are all going melee, a ranged bard would be a great addition.

Or if you want personal combat prowess with versatility, I'd say inquisitor or magus (what's wrong with hybrids?). An alchemist bomber would be good, too.

Liberty's Edge

Go Bard or Inquisitor. Both are awesome, fill the skill-monkey role, and can definitely aid the party in a very direct and fun manner. Both also work as either melee or ranged characters, whichever your party requires.


witch would perhaps be nice, you won't feel any cookie-cuttery, but your party will notice a bump in their powerlevel.
Hexes are really nice in combat, and you can use your spells for healing or roleplaying, (something most wizards or clerics can't).
As you've played wizard and cleric, it's perhaps too similar.

In that case, Gunslinger if your GM is on board.
Edit: on the other hand an alchemist can be very roleplay-heavy, doesn't feel like a hybrid, and well yes, you can nova, but you don't have to.


My first instinct was to say Barbarian. But I'm biased. The pieces of advice I have for you are (in order):

1)Play something that you are interested in. Games are meant to be fun. If you don't enjoy it then you're wasting your time.

2)Play something that doesn't detract from your group's experience. You don't want to kill your buddies' enjoyment.

3)Play something that complements the group's capabilities. The longer you all live, the longer you play the character you enjoy.

That being said, try out the rage prophet if that's what caught your eye first. There's something to be said for gut instincts and the internet is usually the last place you should look for to gain affirmation. In your shoes, I would go with a Bard. They look like fun and their party buffs get more mileage out of a larger group like yours. But don't forget about archetypes! You say "cookie-cutter builds" but with archetypes, you're no longer looking at just a Monk. You've got a grappling monk, an archer monk, a martial art styles fusion monk, etc. The same goes with any class. Believe it or not, I find an archer rogue more interesting than an archery Ranger.


Blave wrote:

Hard to say without knowing what you are looking for. If the cleric, fighter and paladin are all going melee, a ranged bard would be a great addition.

Or if you want personal combat prowess with versatility, I'd say inquisitor or magus (what's wrong with hybrids?). An alchemist bomber would be good, too.

Well, I guess I like to have options (and after Bestiary 3, my druid has OPTIONS!). That's probably the reason I usually take a class which can melee and cast.

a bard seems a challange to me, but I guess I don't know how to "play" it. I buff the group? can I use ranged (treantmonk guide)?

All guides on the magus tell me to use shocking grasp, I don't want to be a one trick pony :D


Twig wrote:
a bard seems a challange to me, but I guess I don't know how to "play" it. I buff the group? can I use ranged (treantmonk guide?

Treantmonks guide is a great start. Just remember that it's core only, so you'll have to check the other books for nice stuff.

Bard's aren't hard to play. Especially not ranged ones. Just throw down a buff spell in the first round of combat (most likely good hope since the Wizard or Sorc should have haste covered), activate bardic performance (inspire courage most of the time) and keep full-attacking every round. You're party's damage output will increase SIGNIFICANTLY and you don't even have to be near the front line. If only full attacking is too boring, sling a spell or two every now and then. And go human for the favored class bonus if you want (even) more versatility.
Oh, and you are a crazy skill monkey, too.

Quote:
All guides on the magus tell me to use shocking grasp, I don't want to be a one trick pony :D

Well it IS by far the most commonly used Magus spell. And while I'd recommend to use it, it's far from being your only spell. The Magus has a pretty solid spell list and should be a very nice addition to the wizard and sorc.

Liberty's Edge

Twig wrote:
Well, I guess I like to have options (and after Bestiary 3, my druid has OPTIONS!). That's probably the reason I usually take a class which can melee and cast.

Bard and Inquisitor are both good choies, then. They tend to have quite a few options available. Bards are a bit less versatile than Druids in combat (though still pretty flexible), but their out-of-combat options with skills and spells are just ridiculous.

Twig wrote:
a bard seems a challange to me, but I guess I don't know how to "play" it. I buff the group? can I use ranged (treantmonk guide)?

Well, at it's most basic, you use Round 1 of serious encounters to start your Inspire Courage (and, as of 7th level when it becomes a Move Action to start your performance, cast Good Hope or maybe Haste if your Wizard isn't doing that already), and you maybe take another round to cast, well, something like Greater Heroism or Haste, but that's rare.

Mostly, you either attack or cast an illusion or mind control spell of some sort on the enemy, your choice. Or cast a cool/useful utility spell such as Glitterdust, Dispel Magic, Feather Fall, or some healing spell. Y'know, either attack stuff, or back-up caster stuff. It's pretty basic, really.

It's also a lot of fun realizing how nasty your buffs really make your entire party. I mean +5 to everyone's hit and damage (including your own)? On top of all other bonuses? That's just fun.

And yeah, the ranged build is probably slightly better than the melee build, especially starting at 11th level or so. Treantmonk's guide is a pretty good outline of how to build one, too.


bard it is, now to sift to all the bard builds, archtypes, spells, etc

thanks for the advice!

The Exchange

Twig wrote:

bard it is, now to sift to all the bard builds, archtypes, spells, etc

thanks for the advice!

Arcane Duelist is a beautiful thing. Many also like the archeologist, but I like melee much more than what archaeologist gives me at first glance.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

If you like to have options, arcane duelist is really good for the bard. You can get in there and fight some, you have a great selection of buffs and bard spells, and a ton of skills to fall back on. If there is any class that has lots of options, its the bard.

Liberty's Edge

Just to be clear: The standard Bard is awesome, there is no need to take any Archetype. Arcane Duelist is cool, but by no means required.


You want something different then try the Rage Prophet. It's not the best mechanics wise but it has a ton of flavor and I think would a be a blast to play.


Bard is great, but I would play an alchemist... you can do pretty much anything you want with the archetypes; melee, ranged, skill monkey, etc.


Alchemist or Bard dawg.


Gotta put in a vote for Bard! A good set of buffs will catapult your crew to fame and fortune... and then you can sing about it! ;)


I'm not a fan of the arcane duelist, solely because at 5th level you need your weapon in hand to be able to cast a spell normally. If you don't have it in hand, and want to cast something, you need to make a DC 20 + spell level concentration check or else lose it. And for a class with a ton of spells applicable in social situations (where swinging a weapon around might not be the best idea), that kinda hurts. A lot.


Play Bard. Take Lingering Performance and Harmonic spell (and see how they interact. Cue: Buff stacking). Win at face-jobs, and try out an outrageous accent. And get a cool hat, it's all about the hat.


Archaeologist Bard or standard witch. Both very fun to play.


If your DM is wont to take away weapons and such, definitely avoid Arcane Duelist. Otherwise, it's pretty awesome.

Count another vote for Bard from me. And another vote for an awesome hat and outrageous accent....actually...I recommend switching accents or mixing and matching them up. Never admit to where you're truly from. Lie until you're believed.


I'm going to throw another vote in for the alchemist. You can focus them on one thing, but they remain incredibly versatile. Also, you get to play a mad scientist if you so choose, and their PrC literally gives them another alignment, so it is like playing two characters.


inquisitor, they are a full bag of tricks, rp is awesome and are pretty good ranged characters.


I vote for standard bard. Or at least, avoid any archetype that replaces inspire courage. A lot of people underestimate inspire courage, but it really is THAT good. Tally up sometime all the damage it causes both through the damage bonus, and by making attacks hit that would otherwise miss. It can be crazy good.


A lot of people also overestimate the necessity of inspire courage.

The Exchange

Cheapy wrote:
I'm not a fan of the arcane duelist, solely because at 5th level you need your weapon in hand to be able to cast a spell normally. If you don't have it in hand, and want to cast something, you need to make a DC 20 + spell level concentration check or else lose it. And for a class with a ton of spells applicable in social situations (where swinging a weapon around might not be the best idea), that kinda hurts. A lot.

That's why Sword Cane is nice. I wave around a walking stick in public, but as a swift action have a sword in hand! Unfortunately, it costs a feat, but Half-Elves bypass this easily.


My vote is for Gunslinger or possibly Cavalier. I say Gunslinger because...well, they're pretty much one of the newest classes to the game and, consequently, don't really have cookie cut builds. Much like a Druid, they can be made to fill in the various holes you may be lacking (i.e. go pistol if you need to get up in it, go rifle to just blast from a further distance, etc).

I'm likewise suggesting Cavalier...again because there seems to be absolutely no cookie cutter way to go about building one. They're like bards, except a fair bit more combat oriented. In fact, there doesn't even exist one of those Treantmonk style guides to the class yet. They also seem like they can be made to any kind of role you want them to fill.


is it possible to make a "primary" healer Bard?

i'm stuck in my head with a cleric with healing domain and a oracle with a life "domain" (can't recall what they are called)

our cleric (with healing domain) is going to play a ranger, we are in dire need of something heal'ish


Best healer is one who lowers incoming damage. Best way to lower incoming damage is to kill the bad guy. Yes a bard can fill this role and heal between fights as well as any healer can. Also at one point you get a nice recovery dance to save spells between fights.


Rylar wrote:
Best healer is one who lowers incoming damage. Best way to lower incoming damage is to kill the bad guy. Yes a bard can fill this role and heal between fights as well as any healer can. Also at one point you get a nice recovery dance to save spells between fights.

Then fighters are the best healers of the game.

Sczarni

Crysknife wrote:
Rylar wrote:
Best healer is one who lowers incoming damage. Best way to lower incoming damage is to kill the bad guy. Yes a bard can fill this role and heal between fights as well as any healer can. Also at one point you get a nice recovery dance to save spells between fights.
Then fighters are the best healers of the game.

There is a 9 page thread on this topic. Don't derail.

I am with everyone else on the Bard choice. I love me some bards!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rylar wrote:
Best healer is one who lowers incoming damage. Best way to lower incoming damage is to kill the bad guy. Yes a bard can fill this role and heal between fights as well as any healer can. Also at one point you get a nice recovery dance to save spells between fights.

In my experience, this doesn't work. You really do need to heal in combat*. Maybe not every combat, but there will be enough that you'll regret not having it. I'm not sure a Bard can keep up with the healing, but I suppose it's possible.

*Yes, yes I know there's a whole thread on this trying to explain what people mean by "not healing in combat" but essentially what it says is "You shouldn't heal in combat, unless you need to".


ossian666 wrote:
Crysknife wrote:
Rylar wrote:
Best healer is one who lowers incoming damage. Best way to lower incoming damage is to kill the bad guy. Yes a bard can fill this role and heal between fights as well as any healer can. Also at one point you get a nice recovery dance to save spells between fights.
Then fighters are the best healers of the game.

There is a 9 page thread on this topic. Don't derail.

I am with everyone else on the Bard choice. I love me some bards!

Yes mom.

Twig wrote:

is it possible to make a "primary" healer Bard?

i'm stuck in my head with a cleric with healing domain and a oracle with a life "domain" (can't recall what they are called)

our cleric (with healing domain) is going to play a ranger, we are in dire need of something heal'ish

So, to answer your question: it depends.

If your group can benefit a lot from a bard (archers, two weapon fighters, a bit less two handed fighters) AND your GM does not mind combat going out fast, then a bard can help the combat ending fast and thus prevent damage.
If you DM fugdes with dice in order to get a more interesting fight OR if he adjust the encounters to have more monsters since you kill them very fast OR if the other PCs are worthless and beyond salvation even with a bard in your group (like a finesse monk, vanilla sword&board and spring attacking rogue) then your bard will not make them machines of destruction and your fights will last a lot more than if you played a dedicated blaster or a fighter.

So, evaluate what you have on the table and whom you are playing with, THEN decide what class works best as a healer.

For example, enemies are meant to be able to take a (hundred) punch: a buffer would not do much, a debuffer would be better.

In my opinion a buffing cleric/oracle of life with the occasional debuffing is the best healer in the game, since they can 1) make your enemies go down faster 2) protect their allies debuffing enemies 3) give emergency healing when needed 4) heal out of combat.
Bards can do 1 well, 4 as well as anyone with access to CLW wands, 2 barely and can't do 3.


Something slightly crazy you might consider, if you're digging the bard idea, is battle herald. If you're not familiar, it's the cavalier-bard hybrid prestige class. You do have to deal with a weaker mount and challenge, but you get some really cool abilities related to barding it up while also being a powerful combatant. You can also overcome the mount with horse master or boon companion and I feel like most DMs could be convinced to make your battle herald levels count for your challenge. Give it a look. I totally dig it.


Consider any class with access to the Heal spell as a primary healer.... they will be the only ones as you progess in levels that will be able to keep anyone up when IN combat.... once combat is over, any class that can use/UMD a cure light wounds wand is fine. I completely agree with the above statement made by Jodokai, the thread about not healing boils down to "dont heal in combat unless you need to, in which case, if you don't you are all dead." It will really depend on your group whether you need a healer that has access to the Heal spell, or just a CLW guy. Another thing that may help bring down damage by large amounts is if you can provide solid miss chance in favor of your party via buffing or debuffing. Witches are awesome at this sort of thing, but both bards and alchemists (maybe?) can fill the role in some respects.


Best status healer in the game: Saving Finale. Give someone another saving throw as an immediate action with a first level spell. One of the better preventatives is Good Hope. +2 morale to all saving throws with a third level spell that also boosts combat capabilities.

You have three martials, one of which is a Paladin. Lay on Hands should give you adequate in combat healing given that you have enough martials to juggle your front line. Especially if the wizard uses summons.


i adore bards, so many ways you can go with them. i have 2 for PFS another for a home game (stalled atm) and am starting another home game which will have me playing a rogue, but my back up will be another bard.

but if you are interested in Rage Prophet then go for it! I think you should try to build one up and lets all try to give you advice on it.

Dark Archive

Just play Bard man, C'mon!!!

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / In need of a new class to play All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.