Base (10) + 4 (Mage Armour) + 4 (Shield) + 1 (Dodge) + 5 (CHR from Oracle of Law) + 4 Natural (Eidolon) + 2 Def (Shield of Faith) = AC 30
and that without Expertise and partial defence and other evolutions
With only one level in synthesist, you can only get a +2 natural armor, and even than will cost you an evolution point. And you don't have a lot of evolution points, so spend your evolution there and you cut into your budget for Str bonuses and natural weapons, making your offense even worse. You mentioned "magical damage", which I assume means you spent another evolution point to let your natural weapons bypass DR/magic, so after that and the natural armor, you only have one evolution point left, which presumably gets sunk into some cheap natural weapon.
And that's with three buff spells active, two of which only last 1 minute. With 20 Cha, you have 3 summoner spells per day and 5 oracle spells per day, so in particular Shield can be used only twice per day and Mage Armor only once. Better hope you only have two encounters per day, both of which give you time to buff beforehand, and they take place during the same hour. A single wand would devour pretty much your entire WBL at this point, so using wands to get around the daily limits isn't a real option. You mentioned "cures", but your few 1d8+1 cures need to share slots with Shield of Faith, and you have no Channel Energy, so your healing power is rather unimpressive.
When you don't have Shield or Shield of Faith active and you correct the natural armor score, you're left with an AC of 22. Not bad, but no more than any sword-and-board fighter would have by that point.
With only two Summoner spells known, Mage Armor and Shield, you don't have Lesser Rejuvinate Eidolon known, so you have no way to restore the temporary hit points your Eidolon suit provides. They're lost first and you have no way of recovering them, so they basically stop existing permanently as soon as someone lands a blow on you. Which means you don't have the usual Synthesist advantage of extra hit points, and with only 13 Con, you're looking at a mediocre ~14.5 hit points.
Spending 17 points to buy a starting 18 in Cha can't have been healthy for your other scores. Better hope Con wasn't one of the ones you dumped to pay for that 18 - otherwise, falling unconscious could outright kill you.
None of this is even getting into whatever drawbacks two curses are imposing. One doesn't progress at all and one progresses at half-speed, so good luck getting anything decent out of them.
e: And yet, still a fine argument against Synthesists and 3.x multiclassing.
even if the synthesist had the ability to benefit from cure spells. it would still be inferior to the baseline summoner. which is highly limited in spell versatility to battlefield control and buffing.
even if the synthesist had the ability to benefit from cure spells. it would still be inferior to the baseline summoner. which is highly limited in spell versatility to battlefield control and buffing.Even if it isn't the most overpowered thing in the game it's still broken in that it violates all sorts of otherwise ironclad guidelines. The most obvious is the violation of the polymorph rules for physical stats, but it also inherits all the eidolon construction exceptions to the universal monster rules.
It could be weaker than the rogue and I'd call it broken for violating the polymorph rules and universal monster rules. Just because the specific can override the general doesn't mean that there are not general rules that should be sacrosanct.
it does have lots of exceptions, but it is still not the most powerful thing in existence.
one can hypothetically argue that the ton of exceptions are a feature of the class and not a bug
the book is called the "Advanced Player's Guide" Not "Second Core Rulebook".
the book is called the "Advanced Player's Guide" Not "Second Core Rulebook".And the first CRB was big enough!
my issue with the advanced player's guide is when people try to use it as a second core rulebook and find difficulty in playing classes that were designed for "advanced" players. in other words, classes that newbies should be wary of.
though i would have personally, if i designed the CRB and APG, moved the wizard, monk, cleric, and druid, to the latter, and moved the oracle and inquisitor to the former.
the book is called the "Advanced Player's Guide" Not "Second Core Rulebook".
And the first CRB was big enough!
my issue with the advanced player's guide is when people try to use it as a second core rulebook and find difficulty in playing classes that were designed for "advanced" players. in other words, classes that newbies should be wary of.
though i would have personally, if i designed the CRB and APG, moved the wizard, monk, cleric, and druid, to the latter, and moved the oracle and inquisitor to the former.
Even if all those classes were available to start you would have had to listen to the high pitched screaming of those people who would have bemoaned the fact that all the 3.5 core classes were not in the PFCRB and accused Paizo of being money grubbing splat book planning fiends :D
Kind of what the 4E PHB generated but louder given the people who went with 4E were looking for change...
Well, they definitely got the change in 4E didn't they?
==Aelryinth
You know what's really OP?
Gnomes.
Especially gnomes that take eight levels in paladin, four in bard, and then go mystic theurge.
Though the ones that take all their levels in Expert or Commoner are even more OP.
any class can wreck combat
but what of the ones that can wreck noncombat scenarios?
those cannot be measured in DPR alone.
Well, they definitely got the change in 4E didn't they?==Aelryinth
That's why I'm here. DDN is looking like a reversal of that move so far. We'll see how that goes...
With only one level in synthesist, you can only get a +2 natural armor, and even than will cost you an evolution point.
Well, assuming he isn't using the base Aquatic body type which gets +4 at first level.
And all of the other body types get +2 from the get-go too.
Huh, so they do. Why doesn't that bonus show up in the chart under Armor Bonus?
Huh, so they do. Why doesn't that bonus show up in the chart under Armor Bonus?
No clue, I didn't even know they did that until like 3 hours ago when I asked my Summoner (level 5) player why his AC was so high, and he was like "Mage Armor, Shield" and I was like 'Okay, and?", "Oh and +8 Natural Armor" and I was like WTF how do you even have more than 6 (since he bought the Improved Natural Armor evolution twice) and he was like "Uhhh...I don't remember" and then I spent 5 minutes finding why and it turned out it was legit.
Yar. I personally don't have any trouble with the class itself, it's just so damned hard to keep track of everything and make sure it's on the level sometimes because everything is spread out all over the place.
Though I have less of a problem with my Summoner player than the Barbarian player who keeps gypping himself out of attack bonuses and save values because he forgets to add in everything and I have to go back in and say "Bro, you're a Barbarian. Are you SURE your Fort save is only +3 at level 5?"
Though to be fair his Fort save was somewhat low by the end of today's session because he got Con damaged so hard by Deathblade poison he ended up at 6 Con.
I don't think anyone is arguing that the Summoner could have (and probably should have!) been written better.
JJ has made the same point, which is why he doesn't let them into his games.
The only two "classes" which are broken are the master Summoner, due to the fact it's super-power, and a HUGE spotlight hog, and the Synthesist. Now true, if done right a Synthesist is actually slightly less powerful than a regular summoner. But they are never done right, thus they are "broken" due to poor and confusing mechanics. Not to mention the math is always wrong.
The regular summoner suffers from that to a lesser extent. We have had lots of threads where a DM bemoans the super-eidolon in his game, and every single time it has turned out the eidolon was built wrong.
I actually have no problems with the power disparity between Wizards and Fighters. To me, it's a "feature" not a bug. Reason being, in low levels, a fighter outdoes a wizard. And, most playing is done at those levels. VERY few games ever get to the point where the Wiz gets 9th level spells.
This is one of the things that makes 4th ED rather boring (it does have some good features, mind you)- the classes are TOO balanced, there's actually little difference between them.
I like how that tier system puts Rogues at a higher tier than Rangers.
Tiers don't rank power so much as they rank flexibility. The rogue can do several things, whilst the fighter only one.
I like how that tier system puts Rogues at a higher tier than Rangers.Tiers don't rank power so much as they rank flexibility. The rogue can do several things, whilst the fighter only one.
But the Ranger can do everything the Rogue can, and then some.
But the Ranger can do everything the Rogue can, and then some.I like how that tier system puts Rogues at a higher tier than Rangers.Tiers don't rank power so much as they rank flexibility. The rogue can do several things, whilst the fighter only one.
Not traps, unless it's certain archetypes and in general tiers don't consider archetypes.
No doubt that now with certain Bard & Ranger archetypes, the Rogue has lost most of his somewhat unique niche.
He can do traps too, just not magical traps.
Thankfully, he has an Animal Companion for that.
And even if he couldn't, he's got nearly as many skill points, fights better, has a built in piece of cannon fodder/meat shield, has some neat bonuses in and out of combat with his Favored stuff, and has spells. He is without a doubt more versatile than the Rogue in any case.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, sure, ranger is actually effective in combat, has the benefit of whatever his companion can do, gets bonuses to a bunch of skills involving Favored stuff, has a smattering of other abilities like Wild Empathy, and can cast spells... but can he disarm magical traps? No matter how many different things you can do, the only thing that measures versatility is whether you can disarm magical traps.
On a related note, I think fighters should be higher tier than wizards. Fighters are more versatile because they get reduced penalties in heavy armor.
From playing a summoner in PFS, I think people tend to overstate Summoner power. My 4th level Summoner is in awe at the damage From playing a summoner in PFS, I think people tend to overstate Summoner power. My 4th level Summoner is in awe at the damage that the 5th level barbarian pumps out, and the reliability with which he does it. Admittedly the battles haven't been set up well for Pounce, but even getting four attacks at +5 for 1D6+5/1D4+5, most of which miss the big bad, doesn't seem overpowered. Maybe it'll be different when I get Rend, but that still doesn't make up for the eidolon's lack of hit points.
Eidolons look good on paper, but a lot of my Eidolon's power comes from very specific circumstances that are hard to pull off. From playing a summoner in PFS, I think people tend to overstate Summoner power. My 4th level Summoner is in awe at the damage that the 5th level barbarian pumps out, and the reliability with which he does it. Admittedly the battles haven't been set up well for Pounce, but even getting four attacks at +5 for 1D6+5/1D4+5, most of which miss the big bad, doesn't seem overpowered. Maybe it'll be different when I get Rend, but that still doesn't make up for the eidolon's lack of hit points.
Eidolons look good on paper, but a lot of my Eidolon's power comes from very specific circumstances that are hard to pull off. that the barbarian pumps out, and
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
What do you think are the most powerful or broken classes in Pathfinder? explain why you think so.
There is no such thing as a broken class... only broken games. Any and Every class can be the catalyst for a broken game if allowed to do so. Its the job of the DM to make sure this doesn't happen. If you police your players its impossible to create a broken class.
What do you think are the most powerful or broken classes in Pathfinder? explain why you think so.There is no such thing as a broken class... only broken games. Any and Every class can be the catalyst for a broken game if allowed to do so. Its the job of the DM to make sure this doesn't happen. If you police your players its impossible to create a broken class.
i disagree, i don't think even if you tried you could make a broken martial class.
honestly the only close to broken class, is the "master summoner". If you use it with the eidelon, it's fine, but if the player realizes that the eidelon is actually a nusiance, then the class can quickly spiral out of control.
What do you think are the most powerful or broken classes in Pathfinder? explain why you think so.There is no such thing as a broken class... only broken games. Any and Every class can be the catalyst for a broken game if allowed to do so. Its the job of the DM to make sure this doesn't happen. If you police your players its impossible to create a broken class.i disagree, i don't think even if you tried you could make a broken martial class.
honestly the only close to broken class, is the "master summoner". If you use it with the eidelon, it's fine, but if the player realizes that the eidelon is actually a nusiance, then the class can quickly spiral out of control.
There are no broken classes so yes... it is impossible to create a broken martial class. There are DM's who dont know how to handle some martial classes... if you disagree, I will simply point you at the treasure trove of threads where DM's are complaining they can't handle so in so martial class. Usually there is a thread a few post down complaining about how weak the same class is.
There are no bad classes. Just bad DM's who dont have control of their game. Now are there weak classes? That might be a valid question.
What do you think are the most powerful or broken classes in Pathfinder? explain why you think so.There is no such thing as a broken class... only broken games. Any and Every class can be the catalyst for a broken game if allowed to do so. Its the job of the DM to make sure this doesn't happen. If you police your players its impossible to create a broken class.i disagree, i don't think even if you tried you could make a broken martial class.
honestly the only close to broken class, is the "master summoner". If you use it with the eidelon, it's fine, but if the player realizes that the eidelon is actually a nusiance, then the class can quickly spiral out of control.
There are no broken classes so yes... it is impossible to create a broken martial class. There are DM's who dont know how to handle some martial classes... if you disagree, I will simply point you at the treasure trove of threads where DM's are complaining they can't handle so in so martial class. Usually there is a thread a few post down complaining about how weak the same class is.
There are no bad classes. Just bad DM's who dont have control of their game. Now are there weak classes? That might be a valid question.
and in all those cases, the person post the build, and there is nothing wrong the class. and then people post a myraid of suggestions to easily deal with situation.
The master summoner however is not easily dealt, with, and it's not the players fault either, the class is flat out overpowered and when used corectly (meaning you do what the class says, and summon stuff) it is broken.
magic circle/protection from (X) is available from the get go. Any class feature that is stopped absolutely cold (barring a successful dispel check) by a 1st level CRB spell is not "broken".
first it doesnt work against neutral summon creatures like elementals, and they can summon A LOT of elementals. second it means you can't attack back. this not to mention the summoner could cast dispel magic. the class is broken period (when used as intended), nothing you can do about it, i've seen it in three games, with other players who were all optimized, we were the pips, and i have yet to hear a single situation, where it just didnt completely dominate, everything once the summoner realizes the eidelon is just a hinderance. too much offense, too much defense, it can pretty much counter anything you throw, totally destroys the concept of action economy, it is literally a one man army, that can do just about anything.
I just want to be clear, the class, can be just fine, if the summoner keeps and uses his eidelon, but the minute he puts it away, it's done. And you can't really blame the player for making use of his best class ability and it's not the player's fault that his class has the ability to overcome pretty much any impedment, like the aforementioned circle of protection against,quite easily.
and in all those cases, the person post the build, and there is nothing wrong the class. and then people post a myraid of suggestions to easily deal with situation.
The master summoner however is not easily dealt, with, and it's not the players fault either, the class is flat out overpowered and when used corectly (meaning you do what the class says, and summon stuff) it is broken.
And in every "Summoner OMFG OP!" thread I have seen the same holds true. People give a myraid of suggestions on how to deal with them.
I dont want to turn this into ANOTHER summoner thread, but the only issue I have with the Master Summoner is his action economy. Not because its over powered, but because it bogs down combat to a crawl. Simply dont allow the Master Summoner archtype. Summoner's are fine. Even that archtype is fine if you have a player that has his summons written out and he is on top of his game when it comes to keeping a brisk pace.
and in all those cases, the person post the build, and there is nothing wrong the class. and then people post a myraid of suggestions to easily deal with situation.
The master summoner however is not easily dealt, with, and it's not the players fault either, the class is flat out overpowered and when used corectly (meaning you do what the class says, and summon stuff) it is broken.
And in every "Summoner OMFG OP!" thread I have seen the same holds true. People give a myraid of suggestions on how to deal with them.
I dont want to turn this into ANOTHER summoner thread, but the only issue I have with the Master Summoner is his action economy. Not because its over powered, but because it bogs down combat to a crawl. Simply dont allow the Master Summoner archtype. Summoner's are fine. Even that archtype is fine if you have a player that has his summons written out and he is on top of his game when it comes to keeping a brisk pace.
I said the summoner class is fine, and it is. it' the master summoner that is specificly overpowered.
slowing down the game is the least of the problems, the problem is that they can overwhelm any encouter with sheer numbers and they have near unlimited utility.
I also said, that if the master summoner keeps out his eidelon the class is fine.
I have to say that druid is the most OP. At really early levels, your animal companion is a monster. At mid lvls, your wildshape/spells/summoning carry you through most encounters. At high lvls you wildshape for defence and mobility while your spells and summons are your go to combat options. Out of all the classes I've played, only the druid has been able to deliver at every stage in a campaign with zero to no optimization needed.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
i find this post ironic1.) Why is this in Conversions?
2.) Fighter. It's been proven to me that Fighter can do anything. All you need is the right traits, a good amount of Feats and ranks in UMD and you can fight better than any martial and cast spells better than a caster.
And true.
But then, any class can be made broken by a skilled player with the will to do so.
my cr5 warrior/10 says you are discriminating against him!
==Aelryinth
I have to say that druid is the most OP. At really early levels, your animal companion is a monster. At mid lvls, your wildshape/spells/summoning carry you through most encounters. At high lvls you wildshape for defence and mobility while your spells and summons are your go to combat options. Out of all the classes I've played, only the druid has been able to deliver at every stage in a campaign with zero to no optimization needed.
this isn't overpowered, that is being effective, all classes should be able do this, many cannot, but being able to do it, is not overpowering.
Pathfinder is very well balanced, with the exceptions being the master summoner at one end, and the monk/rogue at the other.
There is no such thing as a broken class... only broken games. Any and Every class can be the catalyst for a broken game if allowed to do so. Its the job of the DM to make sure this doesn't happen. If you police your players its impossible to create a broken class.I do police my players; I don't let them take broken classes. I completely fail to understand why you would play a game with this elaborate system of CRs and levels and XP if you didn't believe that it mattered.
I can't tell from your response if you agree or disagree with me lol. You say you police your game ... so your doing exactly the right thing... hence there shouldn't be a broken class.
I will give a perfect example.
I had a 3.5/Pathfinder mix game. High power. High Min/Max. I told them to bring it on. I had a cleric who took my PF conversion Paladin Prestige class. He had a 3.5 feat that let him memorize wizard spells(Sword of the Arcane Order). He was a full Cleric caster, with Paladin abilities, and he could memorize wizard spells. I was ok with all of it. Had no issue... except for one thing. He had really REALLY good AC. It was hard to hit him.
Now I could have complained or thrown crazy fights that completely out played his CR and made it hard on the rest of the party ... or... surprise surprise... I talked to the player.
I said something like this "Hey man. Your AC is getting pretty high. I realize the party just came into a lot of gold and is heading back to town. I know you want to beef up your armor. Could you do me a favor and add armor abilities for now instead of straight + enhancements. Do that for a few levels and the mobs will have a chance to catch up in BAB to your AC and then you can add straight bonuses again.
He said something like "Yeah cool man. There are some sweet qualities I wanted to add anyways like shadow and stuff."
It was that simple. I talked to the player. We came to a compromise. And we kept playing. I could throw stuff at the party that could still have a chance at hitting him without also auto hitting everyone else. I still threw some grapples and touch attacks... but I didn't have to rely JUST on those.
Police your game. Talk to your people. Most classes will be fine.
What do you think are the most powerful or broken classes in Pathfinder? explain why you think so.Unfortunately, broken can mean many things. (So can overpowered, but the name helps define it.)
Broken can mean poorly designed. I would consider the monk and summoner broken, but the first is only overpowered under very specific scenarios (certain archetypes, certain non-core stuff, and very high point buy). The summoner gums up the game. Mind you, so can a druid, and I'm playing one! Mechanically, the summoner just seems to take one of the worst parts of the game and make it even worse than before. While the summoner is powerful, I don't think it's as powerful as a wizard.
the summoner is OK, the Master Summoner is not, a wizard can't really compare to the master summoner.
"There are broken things in 3.5's utterly massive amount of splatbooks and extra material" is in no way equal to "Pathfinder has broken classes".
At the same time "Some people can break a class (any class)" is not equal to "Some classes are broken". The system lends itself to rewarding min-maxing. This is fine if everyone is doing so and you adjust challenge accordingly.
The "broken" classes comes from when someone is better at optimizing than the rest of the players.
Well, I take that back. Rogue is kind of broken in the sense that it doesn't work correctly. But there are no "Supar OMG so OP without even trying" classes that aren't that way through virtue of having spells in this game. And since 3/4 of the classes have spells...they're not really "broken".