Redeemer Paladin This archetype changes the standard Paladin's code to permit adventuring with Evil allies. The changes to Smite Evil are also presented as optional, so they don't actually weaken the ability any. Monstrous Rapport and Pact of Peace are weaker than Detect Evil and Aura of Resolve, but that's a small price to pay for a less restrictive code.
The Pathfinder Paladin has no 'Code vs. adventuring with Evil'. Previous versions did, yes. The Pathfinder version does not. You may get looked at funny, you probably have to be careful your 'buddy' isn't setting you up for a fall, but there is no 'Code' which says you cannot adventure with a member of 'Team Evil'.
(You are giving me Charisma to saves? Here, have a language!).
That archetype is an example where the package often beats individual trades. Planar Ally is a pretty great spell, after all. One that the paladin wouldn't normally get.
Redeemer Paladin This archetype changes the standard Paladin's code to permit adventuring with Evil allies. The changes to Smite Evil are also presented as optional, so they don't actually weaken the ability any. Monstrous Rapport and Pact of Peace are weaker than Detect Evil and Aura of Resolve, but that's a small price to pay for a less restrictive code.The Pathfinder Paladin has no 'Code vs. adventuring with Evil'. Previous versions did, yes. The Pathfinder version does not. You may get looked at funny, you probably have to be careful your 'buddy' isn't setting you up for a fall, but there is no 'Code' which says you cannot adventure with a member of 'Team Evil'.
Pathfinder even goes out of its way to subtly show that its acceptable under the right circumstances in its art. Seelah, the iconic paladin, has joined up with Setiyel, the Lawful Evil iconic magus, on several occasions.
Redeemer Paladin This archetype changes the standard Paladin's code to permit adventuring with Evil allies. The changes to Smite Evil are also presented as optional, so they don't actually weaken the ability any. Monstrous Rapport and Pact of Peace are weaker than Detect Evil and Aura of Resolve, but that's a small price to pay for a less restrictive code.
As mentioned, the Code isn't really changing there. That archetype is a case of not giving up much for what you get. When you're not giving up much, you don't have to gain much in order for it to be a reasonable trade-off.
A Paladin already has Good Fort and Will Saves, and CHA to all Saves, so losing Aura of Resolve's Immunity to Charm Spells isn't that big of a deal... Your allies MAY miss the Morale bonus vs. Charm if they don't have equivalent bonuses to Saves (Rage, Inspire Courage, other bonuses which also apply for non-Charm effects), but I wouldn't say that Aura of Resolve is better than what you get in return, certainly not for many groups. Otherwise, you're just giving up Move Action creature-specific Detect Evil. Unless you were planning on playing a Scan-and-Smite style Paladin (which clearly is against the roleplaying approach intended for this archetype), that's not really a significant loss, and it's not really that a huge of a loss, regardless of personality/roleplaying.In return, you get Lesser Geas, which is something a normal Paladin couldn't get close to doing, at the same level a Sorceror would get it ...and a skill bonus and combat option (non-lethal) that help facilitate certain role-playing approaches (also useful when you need to take an enemy alive, or for Dominated/Confused/etc allies or innocents).
Overall, not some amazing power-up, but it's not overly gimping you either.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There seems to be a group of people who simply don't understand the dislike for racial archetypes. I'll try to explain, but first:
Yes. We know that all of these classes are perfectly playable and that many of the types of characters they represent can be pulled off just fine using RP.
The point is that from here on out, Paizo has little reason to make, say, another pirate-themed gunslinger archetype. We are all aware that we can play a standard gunslinger out of the box, slap her on a ship, and call her a pirate. That is not the point.
The point is that these archetypes often give unique abilities that suit a certain flavor of character, and just as often that flavor of character does not make sense being restricted to a specific race. Why can only HUMAN gunslingers take an archetype that gives them a parrot familiar, causing every other race in the game to jump through hoops to acquire one. Why can only GNOME gunslingers tinker with their firearms in order to make ridiculous inventions.
I accept the argument that often these archetypes are more common to a specific races. Surely dwarven forgemasters are more common than elven ones because blacksmithing is such a time-honored dwarven tradition. I get that. We get that.
The problem is in flat-out saying, You must be this sort of character to take this archetype. And yes, we get that your GM can say otherwise. But there are GMs who are over cautious. And there is Pathfinder Society. And there are all sorts of little caveats that will convince a GM not to let you "break the rules" even 90% of these archetypes work just find without these restrictions.
It is retrogressive game design. Pathfinder did away with racial restrictions on the Arcane Archer literally several months before this book was released. It doesn't make sense from many angles. It doesn't make sense from a game mechanics angle, in that the magic items don't have racial restrictions to use them and the spells don't have racial restrictions to use them. It doesn't make sense from a flavor perspective in that the justification is that the races "jealously guard these secrets." Humans jealously guard the secrets of being wild children? Or buccaneers? Only half-elven witches figure out how to draw their arcane powers from a tome instead of a psychotic talking cat? That's ridiculous.
There are a handful of archetypes and options that make sense being restricted. The number one example is the Drow Caravan Sniper, which is designed to allow a drow fighter more uses of their racial spell-like abilities and eventually learns to use their racial familiarity weapon to fire their racial spell-like abilities at the enemy. THAT archetype is perfect. THAT archetype matches drow flavor to a tee, and it has a strong, mechanical reason why only drow can take that archetype. None of the other archetypes have anything like that.
So, THAT (which wasn't the original problem posed in the thread AFAIK, and many people have in fact argued exactly that they suck and aren't worth playing) is not really a problem with Racial Archetypes as such, but a problem with specific Racial Archetypes whose flavor you don't think should be restricted Racially, right?
I'm not going to argue that you can't find such cases, but you or I or anybody is ALWAYS going to have some quibble with some specific piece of crunch made by Paizo, they can't ever make everybody happy there. Almost any Human Racial Archetype is probably going to be kind of dubious on that level just because Humans are mostly "nothing special", and even 'Bloodline' related factors should plausibly also be available to Half-Elves, Half-Orcs, and Planetouched with Human ancestors. But then again, there's OODLES of Race-specific Feats that don't directly tie into an existing Racial Ability, including for Humans.
Perhaps they are letting themselves go with assumptions of setting that justify such sort of racial associations, but if they want to do so, there's nothing illegitimate about that. Paizo's setting in fact does come with many associations with races, and race-specific archetypes are part of that, regardless of whether they directly interact with racial abilities. Only if you are playing in a setting where Paizo's setting and assumptions are exactly enforced, do such restrictions possibly matter, otherwise you can change them to suit your needs. If you are playing under Paizo's exact assumptions, well, that's their game world, where apparently there just don't happen to be Dwarves with the Buccaneer Archetype, or Halflings with the Stonelord Archetype. In many cases it isn't some hard block on character concepts, as much as just meaning you achieve a similar if not mechanically identical result via other options (classes, feats, items, etc), mechanical details are abstractions to begin with, so some difference there shouldn't prevent a concept from being used.
|
There seems to be a group of people who simply don't understand the dislike for racial archetypes. I'll try to explain, but first:
Yes. We know that all of these classes are perfectly playable and that many of the types of characters they represent can be pulled off just fine using RP.
The point is that from here on out, Paizo has little reason to make, say, another pirate-themed gunslinger archetype. We are all aware that we can play a standard gunslinger out of the box, slap her on a ship, and call her a pirate. That is not the point.
The point is that these archetypes often give unique abilities that suit a certain flavor of character, and just as often that flavor of character does not make sense being restricted to a specific race. Why can only HUMAN gunslingers take an archetype that gives them a parrot familiar, causing every other race in the game to jump through hoops to acquire one. Why can only GNOME gunslingers tinker with their firearms in order to make ridiculous inventions.
I accept the argument that often these archetypes are more common to a specific races. Surely dwarven forgemasters are more common than elven ones because blacksmithing is such a time-honored dwarven tradition. I get that. We get that.
The problem is in flat-out saying, You must be this sort of character to take this archetype. And yes, we get that your GM can say otherwise. But there are GMs who are over cautious. And there is Pathfinder Society. And there are all sorts of little caveats that will convince a GM not to let you "break the rules" even 90% of these archetypes work just find without these restrictions.
It is retrogressive game design. Pathfinder did away with racial restrictions on the Arcane Archer literally several months before this book was released. It doesn't make sense from many angles. It doesn't make sense from a game mechanics angle, in that the magic items don't have racial restrictions to use them and the spells...
*nod nod*
Exactly my point here. Gunslinger is one of the biggest ones I see that isn't very 'racially oriented' in its things.
(Though my complaints with archetypes is more than just race.. but thats something for another thread)
OP: Short answer: No.
You should just read the book. There's tons of great stuff in there.
Also, as someone else said, there is a big difference between sub-optimal and suck.
I personally like the half-orc arch-type hateful rager, which trades rage powers for favored enemy.
I've also seen people use skulking slayers to good effect.
It gives up being a celestial dire tiger, celestial alliosaurus, Huge elemental, and quickwood(60 foot reach!). Those are some pretty big sacrifices in my mind. While gaze is good so is the utility. You definitely give up some marshal and some poison power when being a nagaji's racial archetype. It's one of the better ones but it's NOT more powerful than the base druid.
Are you suggesting that the naga aspirant is limited to the naga form? If so, I don't believe this to be true. Nothing in the description states that you are limited to the naga form at 6th level and beyond:
"Naga Shape: At 6th level, the naga aspirant can use her wild shape ability (gained at 4th level, as normal) to assume the form of a true naga. This effect functions in a similar manner to a shapechange spell with the following exception. The druid's true naga form is unique, representing her personal evolution. When taking naga form, the nagaji's body transforms into that of a large serpent, though she keeps her own head. The naga aspirant loses her limbs and her size increases by one category, granting her a +4 size bonus to Strength and Constitution, a –2 penalty to Dexterity, and a +2 enhancement bonus to her natural armor bonus. She gains a +10 enhancement bonus to land speed and a bite attack that deals 1d6 points of damage. She can cast verbal spells in this form, but cannot cast spells with other components without metamagic or feats such as Natural Spell.
This ability otherwise works like and replaces wild shape."
It's the last line that I think confuses things, but, when you read the description it's not written in a way that is suggesting that the naga form is the only form available to the aspirant. I think the last sentence is just a wonky way to say that this form is in addition to all other forms available to the Druid--since before level 6 they were limited to standard wild shaping.
|
|
Just chiming in that scarred witch doctor is hilariously overpowered.
Con as your casting stat??? Yes please, mash that con.
You also get a pretty cool mask and great flavor to play as. could not really ask for more
And for the low low price of 1 level in sorcerer /any/ race can be it.
Yay Orc Bloodline~
I don't like the idea of race restricted class options. Never did. We're worlds ahead of where things used to be (paladins being a human only class, for example), but race-based archetypes as a concept itself bugs me and is what "sucks" for me.
However, fortunately in my home games I can simply say whether the archetypes are available or not, and if they're available, then they can be available to everyone as appropriate.
As for the actual design... most of the ARG archetypes seem as decent as any other... and there are non-ARG archetypes that are way worse (e.g., geisha, cloistered cleric).
|
I like the concept of race specific archetypes. Races differ from each other in many aspects be it cuisine, work ethnics, moralities, religious practices, ext. Why would they not be taught differently then others? Why would an elf, born and raised in the forest, know the same style of warfare and training as a dwarf, born and raised in an underground city? Why would an orc paladin, normally shunned by society for its monstrous physique, have the same ethnics and moralities as a human paladin, normally famed for killing off monsters like savage orcs? Each race is brought up differently from one an other so why would there teachings be any different?
Most classes are fine at pretty much everything with no special need for archetypes.
You could make a 2-weapon fighter without 2-weapon archetype.
Exactly but the 2-Weapon Warrior Archetype makes them a little bit better at that.
And at the Magic Items not having Racial Restrictions... Look again Quite a few give either extra effects or only work for a given race or give a reduced effect not of that race.
Also my party routinely has a Geisha Hireling/Cohort/etc. to help out the party... They are a bit iffy in a Dungeoneering Campaign but pretty good in a Social Campaign.
|
|
Most classes are fine at pretty much everything with no special need for archetypes.
You could make a 2-weapon fighter without 2-weapon archetype.
Exactly but the 2-Weapon Warrior Archetype makes them a little bit better at that.
And at the Magic Items not having Racial Restrictions... Look again Quite a few give either extra effects or only work for a given race or give a reduced effect not of that race.
Also my party routinely has a Geisha Hireling/Cohort/etc. to help out the party... They are a bit iffy in a Dungeoneering Campaign but pretty good in a Social Campaign.
The geisha still sucks. She would be /so/ much better if you could do the 10 minute tea party.. and any time during the next day activate the bonus.
Just chiming in that scarred witch doctor is hilariously overpowered.
Con as your casting stat??? Yes please, mash that con.
You also get a pretty cool mask and great flavor to play as. could not really ask for more
And for the low low price of 1 level in sorcerer /any/ race can be it.
Yay Orc Bloodline~
And with one feat humans can be any racial archetype ever. Yay Racial Heritage!
The geisha still sucks. She would be /so/ much better if you could do the 10 minute tea party.. and any time during the next day activate the bonus.Most classes are fine at pretty much everything with no special need for archetypes.
You could make a 2-weapon fighter without 2-weapon archetype.
Exactly but the 2-Weapon Warrior Archetype makes them a little bit better at that.
And at the Magic Items not having Racial Restrictions... Look again Quite a few give either extra effects or only work for a given race or give a reduced effect not of that race.
Also my party routinely has a Geisha Hireling/Cohort/etc. to help out the party... They are a bit iffy in a Dungeoneering Campaign but pretty good in a Social Campaign.
The Tea Ceremony is best for Social Campaigns or Campaigns where you can Prep for combat or can effectively use the longer duration. Such as a Raid on an Enemy Camp.
Plus in a Kingdom Building based Campaign they can be pretty troublesome do to the way they are focused.
And with one feat humans can be any racial archetype ever. Yay Racial Heritage!Just chiming in that scarred witch doctor is hilariously overpowered.
Con as your casting stat??? Yes please, mash that con.
You also get a pretty cool mask and great flavor to play as. could not really ask for more
And for the low low price of 1 level in sorcerer /any/ race can be it.
Yay Orc Bloodline~
and my lawbringer aasimar can get that feat with an alt racial trait, put whats left over from point buy into wisdom, dip a level of monk, and tank his brains out.
Yay scion of humanity