|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Paladin is a divine class, with full BAB and d10. So you already had what you were asking for since the beginning.What divine class has d12s?Gosh darn it. I want my d10HD and Full BAB.
Other than that, we are good.
** spoiler omitted **
Rage Prophet :)
Okay, so it's an archetype, but it's still at d12.. For a moment. LOL.
It also has an Alignment Restriction and very specific concept, so no, not really.
|
This class looks like a dipfest for life oracles. They get weapon focus for free (so if they need melee threat, it helps), a free feat, some flexible utility spell slots, and best of all Healing Blessing. Since it doesn't say the ability only works with spells from the Warpriest spell slots, the Life Oracle with life link can swift action cure light wounds himself (and with a certain revelation, get more out of the spell), instead of 2 paladin levels for swift action LoH. I think the blessings should be changed to only work on the warpriest spell slots, to remove some of the dipfest from the equation.
It also looks like a possible dip for a Paladin of (insert god with exotic weapon here) because they (rightfully so) get deity's favored weapon proficiency, and the other cool stuff (Furious Focus and Weapon Focus in the same dip, or for 1h builds, combat reflexes or bodyguard chain). I think the warpriest should have less in they way of being an awesome dip class, and more really great class features later on.
I agree with the weapon training notion, with the deity's favored weapon, but I think it should also have the progression that Myrmidarch Magi and Sohei Monks have, instead of full fighter, so it doesn't step on the fighter's toes.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, Contributor
|
But I do think if you gave weapon training for favored weapon only, that would address the gap quite well and fit the flavor and hybrid intent.
Do people think that would be too much, or not enough?
Like this idea, and I'm generally in favor of abilities that encourage warpriests to use their deities' favored weapons.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It also has an Alignment Restriction and very specific concept, so no, not really.Paladin is a divine class, with full BAB and d10. So you already had what you were asking for since the beginning.What divine class has d12s?Gosh darn it. I want my d10HD and Full BAB.
Other than that, we are good.
** spoiler omitted **
Rage Prophet :)
Okay, so it's an archetype, but it's still at d12.. For a moment. LOL.
+ 1000 000
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Paladin is a divine class, with full BAB and d10. So you already had what you were asking for since the begining.What divine class had d12s?Gosh darn it. I want my d10HD and Full BAB.
Other than that, we are good.
** spoiler omitted **
Rage Prophet :)
Okay, so its an archetype, but it still has d12.. For a moment. LOL.
So is ranger.
|
|
Ok, I can totally undesrtand that people consider ranger to be better but this statement can not be. At level 20 with autocrit with a 15-20/x3 shoudl be much better at DPR.
That was a hyperbole. Still, you have significantly better DPR at the cost of the same non-combat utility as a commoner with a 9 Int. It isn't really worth the tiny damage gained*. YMMV.
Ok so the DM gives teh ranger an advantage (or using other words, the ranger advantage is a DM fiat thing), does the DM give the fighter an advantager (like never targeting his will save)?
Umm, no. Because a really good GM will give a hint as to a wise favored enemy for the ranger to take due to the campaign, so to give him the best possible advantage. The GM will still target the fighter's will save. And the ranger's will save. And the pretty much every other martial's will save. The solution? Aasimars and tieflings. Because outsider immunities.
Ok so the DM gives teh ranger an advantage (or using other words, the ranger advantage is a DM fiat thing), does the DM give the fighter an advantager (like never targeting his will save)?
This kind of logic is why DPR discussions are dumb.
FE is a thing. It exists. As a Ranger, I expect to get to use it.Saying that "you can't always count on targeting your FE" is just dodging around the point. A GM could also sunder the Greatsword Fighter's weapon and then never let them find a Greatsword again. Rapiers and daggers everywhere!
No, I don't expect to always see FE in action. But I do expect to use it, and it shouldn't be utterly ignored just because it won't always be a factor.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm trying to see what suggestions people have for the warpriest and to see if there is anything I need to look for while I get one of my players to run it through the Serpent's Skull game I just started. Can we drop the fighter vs ranger argument? It doesn't add to the discussion in any way.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
After reading through this one I think there is a place for a different Holy Warrior and I would like to see this one done this way.
It looks good except get rid of its spells. Give him all the domains of his chosen god. Including all the domain abilities and all the domain spells and he is limited to just those spells. This puts the Warpriest into a niche not covered by any of the other holy warrior classes thus far. Making the Warpriest becoming the embodiment of his god the characters focus.
Maybe you make him a spontaneous caster with all of the domain spells be his spells known.
Then you could modify his other powers to improve his domain abilities.
Can we drop the fighter vs ranger argument? It doesn't add to the discussion in any way.
+1
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's been mentioned before but I want to +1 that my expectations for this class were more along the lines of a divine Magus than a Paladin for all alignments.
For those that believe that the Warpriest isn't especially good at combat, would that help? I haven't played a WP, yet (and may not; it's my least favorite of the playtest classes) but I'll try in the near future to make some specific recommendations by altering some of the existing WP mechanics and post them here.
|
|
I did a character and limited playtest HERE, if anyone is interested. Went with a fairly simply build along the same lines as one of my other characters, and in general, I found I agree with a lot of the issues that are brought up here.
|
It's been mentioned before but I want to +1 that my expectations for this class were more along the lines of a divine Magus than a Paladin for all alignments.
For those that believe that the Warpriest isn't especially good at combat, would that help? I haven't played a WP, yet (and may not; it's my least favorite of the playtest classes) but I'll try in the near future to make some specific recommendations by altering some of the existing WP mechanics and post them here.
I too would like to see a divine magus class, but maybe that's better saved for an archetype. However, when I think of a warpriest I think of the class found in Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay (and the now defunct MMO); a divine character who wears medium armor and wields two-handed weapons. Her spells are buffs for the party and some healing. She's not a good as the paladin in combat, nor as good as the cleric in healing, but if you need someone to do a little bit of both she'll fill that spot nicely.
Scorpion Whips do lethal damage and can do damage to creatures wearing armor as well. If you are proficient in Whips you are proficient in Scorpion Whips. My inquisitor uses a scorpion whip. They are not useless.
Scorpion Whips do lethal damage and can do damage to creatures wearing armor as well. If you are proficient in Whips you are proficient in Scorpion Whips. My inquisitor uses a scorpion whip. They are not useless.
Yeah, but you need the Adventurer's Armory to use a good scorpion whip.
|
|
Favoring your deity's favored weapon would be great if the weapon list was balanced. If the worst simple weapon, or at least the worst simple weapon used as a favored weapon, were one feat away from competing with martial weapons it'd be fine.
Most of your concerns are good points, but I wanted to add one more to the pile: What if your character legitimately disagrees with their deity on weapon choice? I'd like to see a Warpriest of Sarenrae who runs around with a greataxe because that weapon best fits what they want, and I want them to not be mechanically penalized for it. Same deal with an Iomedae follower who specializes in polearms.
This is something a Paladin can do at no mechanical penalty. Their class features work equally well with all weapons (whether the weapon itself benefits from that feature is a separate matter entirely), and the result is Paladins get a nice bit of weapon variety so they're not all alike even if they share a deity. By this same token I don't want to see every single Warpriest of Desna running around with Starknives.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I was trying to build a war priest for Pathfinder Society and I noticed that it is really cool to get a bonus combat fear 1st level, but most combat feats have a +1 BAB prerequisite. Just an FYI.
Combined with the extreme "dippability" of the class as currently written, the +1BAB requirement for so many combat feats has caught the eye of the lead designer. The final draft should address this issue.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Favoring your deity's favored weapon would be great if the weapon list was balanced. If the worst simple weapon, or at least the worst simple weapon used as a favored weapon, were one feat away from competing with martial weapons it'd be fine.Most of your concerns are good points, but I wanted to add one more to the pile: What if your character legitimately disagrees with their deity on weapon choice? I'd like to see a Warpriest of Sarenrae who runs around with a greataxe because that weapon best fits what they want, and I want them to not be mechanically penalized for it. Same deal with an Iomedae follower who specializes in polearms.
This is something a Paladin can do at no mechanical penalty. Their class features work equally well with all weapons (whether the weapon itself benefits from that feature is a separate matter entirely), and the result is Paladins get a nice bit of weapon variety so they're not all alike even if they share a deity. By this same token I don't want to see every single Warpriest of Desna running around with Starknives.
That's a toughine. On the one hand, it's more fighter-like to use a variety of weapons effectively. On the other hand, it really fits to be the NAME OF WEAPON of DEITY. Earlier, I suggested burning a feat to get a second favored weapon of choice; is that too high a tax? Is it okay being a longsword warpriest who uses a starknife as a backup ranged weapon option, at the cost of a feat, basically?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, that's not really okay. All those bonus combat feats are not likely to stick around because Paizo is going to offset their fix to the class's fundamental issues by removing them. They're not going to leave this class as it is. It's almost universally derided. They're going to choose to give in to one side or the other. Either the warpriest will get spell combat or move to the Paladin/Ranger chassis. In either case they'll recalculate the balance and the bonus...
Do you have a quote? Because I would actually be very surprised if Paizo went through all effort, and then gave us the all-alignment paladin, or a magus with cure spells.
Also, I should say that if favored weapon remains as-is, I don't think that would be terrible; perhaps only the more martial deities produce any number of warpriests.
Okay, so by the time I finish writing this, there will be fifteen posts that weren't there when I started but here goes:
Alignment, Hit Die/BAB, Skills fine, let's keep going.
Proficiencies now that Favored Weapon is included, good to go.
Spells, Orisons, Spont. Casting still fine. Let's keep moving.
Blessings I'll hit these later....
Bonus Feats addressed. Let's move them back a level to help WPs actually use their first bonus feat for something other than Improved Initiative and keep everybody who needs Martial Weapon Proficiency: All from dipping WP.
Focus Weapon I'm okay with this... but can we allow any weapon with which the WP has WF count?
Channel Energy here's the first big change. Drop it. Add in a Magus-style "arcana" mechanic (or Rogue talent, or Alchemist discovery, or...) and offer "Channel Energy" back as an option. These options could be fueled by a "divine pool" in the fashion of the Magus' arcane pool or a Monk's ki pool. I'll call the arcana analog "miracles." Feel free to change this to be less inane if you end up using it.
Sacred Weapon another big change. First, use the "divine pool" rather than the 1 round/day/WP level and have each use last for a minute. Remove alignment-dependent enchantments (possibly add them back as miracles). Allow the total, adjusted enchantment value exceed +5.
Sacred Armor see Sacred Weapon.
Aspect of War honestly, I don't care. I play PFS and even if I didn't, how often would I play to 20th?
To follow at some time in the future: 1)a review of Blessings, 2)a few proposed miracles, and 3)maybe an actual review of Aspect of War.
Do you have a quote? Because I would actually be very surprised if Paizo went through all effort, and then gave us the all-alignment paladin, or a magus with cure spells.
No, that's not really okay. All those bonus combat feats are not likely to stick around because Paizo is going to offset their fix to the class's fundamental issues by removing them. They're not going to leave this class as it is. It's almost universally derided. They're going to choose to give in to one side or the other. Either the warpriest will get spell combat or move to the Paladin/Ranger chassis. In either case they'll recalculate the balance and the bonus...
Indeed. It'd be such a waste of what they've done so far.
Solution to the silly favored weapon problem.
War Dedication: At 1st level a Warpriest gains Weapon Focus in any martial or simple weapon. His choice is forever considered to be his Favored Weapon and cannot be changed. A Warpriest alternatively may select his Deity's Favored Weapon and receive Weapon Focus for that weapon instead.
Do you have a quote? Because I would actually be very surprised if Paizo went through all effort, and then gave us the all-alignment paladin, or a magus with cure spells.
No, that's not really okay. All those bonus combat feats are not likely to stick around because Paizo is going to offset their fix to the class's fundamental issues by removing them. They're not going to leave this class as it is. It's almost universally derided. They're going to choose to give in to one side or the other. Either the warpriest will get spell combat or move to the Paladin/Ranger chassis. In either case they'll recalculate the balance and the bonus...Indeed. It'd be such a waste of what they've done so far.
Solution to the silly favored weapon problem.
War Dedication: At 1st level a Warpriest gains Weapon Focus in any martial or simple weapon. His choice is forever considered to be his Favored Weapon and cannot be changed. A Warpriest alternatively may select his Deity's Favored Weapon and receive Weapon Focus for that weapon instead.
I like that.
Sure. Or let them change it by meditating once every 24 hours.
Sure. Or let them change it by meditating once every 24 hours.
That would work too. A period of prayer and blessing of the weapon. Requires holy water or unholy water too.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Favored weapons are basically empty fluff. They originated in the 3.5 incarnation of the Golarion setting when their only significance was that clerics of the war domain got to use them. That means only Gorum, Iomedae, Rovagug, and Urgathoa's favored weapons actually had any mechanical significance whatsoever when they were set out. And all of them are okay if not outstanding martial weapons that can be wielded two handed.
Not true. Some spells like Spiritual Weapon get different abilities based off of favored weapon, in this case the crit stats.
All in all, though, I think that the best fix for that is too keep the Deity's favored Weapon, and change the way the class abilities work so that they apply to all weapons that you have Weapon Focus for. Since you get it for free for your Deity's Favored Weapon, you can automatically use it. But, if you want to you can take Weapon Focus: _____, normally or through Bonus Feats, and also use the selected Weapon. Another thematic and cool side affect is that they could add that the Deity's favored Weapon counts as a (un)Holy Symbol, too.
That, in my opinion, would really serve both schools of thought, allowing the Favored Weapon to be important, but allowing the option to broaden your choice of arm, too. If that's what you want, a Great Axe Warpriest of Sarenrae, for example, you would probably look to take Weapon Focus Greataxe anyway.
|
|
War Dedication: At 1st level a Warpriest gains Weapon Focus in any martial or simple weapon. His choice is forever considered to be his Favored Weapon and cannot be changed. A Warpriest alternatively may select his Deity's Favored Weapon and receive Weapon Focus for that weapon instead.
My only issue with that is that it doesn't solve the problem for a character that wants to take an EWP as their chosen weapon, assuming it's not the one that is already their Deity's Favored Weapon.
War Dedication: At 1st level a Warpriest gains Weapon Focus in any martial or simple weapon. His choice is forever considered to be his Favored Weapon and cannot be changed. A Warpriest alternatively may select his Deity's Favored Weapon and receive Weapon Focus for that weapon instead.My only issue with that is that it doesn't solve the problem for a character that wants to take an EWP as their chosen weapon, assuming it's not the one that is already their Deity's Favored Weapon.
Then go with the meditation and have it altered as suggested earlier in the thread. Bonus points if it switches weapon dependent feats (EG. Weapon Focus, Improved Crit) to that weapon.
|
|
I'm not sure if anyone has touched on this yet, but I feel it may benefit the warpriest to qualify for the fighter only feats. Even if they don't qualify for them as rapidly, the fact that they could at all would be exceptionally beneficial to the class. I understand part of the warpriest appeal is to be utility, and feel that this would greatly increase their utility while not overpowering them in the least.
Repost #453
- Nix channeling as a base ability
- Spell freaking Combat
- Sacred Pool ability that dictates a reservoir of class abilities to choose from, called Blessings (of which channel energy is listed)
- half level counts as Fighter for feat purposes
[/thread]
|
|
My question would be then what the point in nixing the channel is. Leaving the warpriest's channel intact could be a good thing, although I will admit it's difficult to make it have any sort of worthwhile DC on it, meaning for offensive purposes it's not going to be THAT good. Maybe if it ran off wisdom like their spellcasting, but I doubt that's something Paizo would consider. The warpriest is currently pretty MAD, but I won't say I know of a particularly effective way to fix that. Unless, as master marshmallow suggested, channel was simply taken away. 'Course removing channel would basically make it a requirement that they get some major compensation. It's an extremely useful ability.
Leaving the warpriest's channel intact could be a good thing, although I will admit it's difficult to make it have any sort of worthwhile DC on it, meaning for offensive purposes it's not going to be THAT good. Maybe if it ran off wisdom like their spellcasting, but I doubt that's something Paizo would consider. The warpriest is currently pretty MAD
This is my main reason for nixing it, rather than switching what dictates it.
|
|
My question would be then what the point in nixing the channel is. Leaving the warpriest's channel intact could be a good thing, although I will admit it's difficult to make it have any sort of worthwhile DC on it, meaning for offensive purposes it's not going to be THAT good. Maybe if it ran off wisdom like their spellcasting, but I doubt that's something Paizo would consider. The warpriest is currently pretty MAD, but I won't say I know of a particularly effective way to fix that. Unless, as master marshmallow suggested, channel was simply taken away. 'Course removing channel would basically make it a requirement that they get some major compensation. It's an extremely useful ability.
I think it's 3 things really. 1.) because it's not a class feature at first level, it's going to be hard to keep up with it for Feats and Traits, or Favored Class Bonuses. 2.) its another option that is competing for the very limited action economy the class has. It kind of also implies that this class will be at least partially a bandaid/healbot, which, personally, I don't think it should be. And 3.) to cut down on MAD. While it's not required, it is irksome to have a class feature that you are forced to be garbage at and also having it is sort of a trap option for people that are just coming to the class. It would, in my opinion, and I think for those that want it cut, just better gone entirely or better Wis based.
My question would be then what the point in nixing the channel is. Leaving the warpriest's channel intact could be a good thing, although I will admit it's difficult to make it have any sort of worthwhile DC on it, meaning for offensive purposes it's not going to be THAT good. Maybe if it ran off wisdom like their spellcasting, but I doubt that's something Paizo would consider. The warpriest is currently pretty MAD, but I won't say I know of a particularly effective way to fix that. Unless, as master marshmallow suggested, channel was simply taken away. 'Course removing channel would basically make it a requirement that they get some major compensation. It's an extremely useful ability.
Ah, yes. Another change I would make.
Fighter Training (Ex): Starting at 10th level, a Warpriest counts 1/2 his total Warpriest level as his fighter level for the purpose of qualifying for feats. If he has levels in fighter, these levels stack.
|
|
Also, I should say that if favored weapon remains as-is, I don't think that would be terrible; perhaps only the more martial deities produce any number of warpriests.
While your fluff/story logic seems reasonable to me, I'd point out warriors of various martial deities who might, for solid martial reasons, decide their deity's favored weapon is not the best fit for them. Milani is a good example: Morningstars are excellent backup weapons but I would not build a character around using them as a main choice. Not saying you can't, not saying it wouldn't be viable, but I wouldn't do it.
I would reasonably expect Milani followers to pick up some other weapons, ones they might even use more often than the morningstar, because they know how to fight well. Same deal with Iomedae followers.
My question would be then what the point in nixing the channel is. Leaving the warpriest's channel intact could be a good thing, although I will admit it's difficult to make it have any sort of worthwhile DC on it, meaning for offensive purposes it's not going to be THAT good. Maybe if it ran off wisdom like their spellcasting, but I doubt that's something Paizo would consider. The warpriest is currently pretty MAD, but I won't say I know of a particularly effective way to fix that. Unless, as master marshmallow suggested, channel was simply taken away. 'Course removing channel would basically make it a requirement that they get some major compensation. It's an extremely useful ability.Ah, yes. Another change I would make.
Fighter Training (Ex): Starting at 10th level, a Warpriest counts 1/2 his total Warpriest level as his fighter level for the purpose of qualifying for feats. If he has levels in fighter, these levels stack.
This allows them to take Weapon Spec at 8th level, Greater Weapon Focus as 16th, and Greater Weapon Specialization at 24th. You can also pick up Critical Mastery at 28th level, Disruptive at 12th, Spellbreaker at 20th, and Penetrating Strike at 24th. Then there's Greater Shield Focus as 16th and Greater Shield Specialization at 24th.
This allows them to take Weapon Spec at 8th level, Greater Weapon Focus as 16th, and Greater Weapon Specialization at 24th. You can also pick up Critical Mastery at 28th level, Disruptive at 12th, Spellbreaker at 20th, and Penetrating Strike at 24th. Then there's Greater Shield Focus as 16th and Greater Shield Specialization at 24th.My question would be then what the point in nixing the channel is. Leaving the warpriest's channel intact could be a good thing, although I will admit it's difficult to make it have any sort of worthwhile DC on it, meaning for offensive purposes it's not going to be THAT good. Maybe if it ran off wisdom like their spellcasting, but I doubt that's something Paizo would consider. The warpriest is currently pretty MAD, but I won't say I know of a particularly effective way to fix that. Unless, as master marshmallow suggested, channel was simply taken away. 'Course removing channel would basically make it a requirement that they get some major compensation. It's an extremely useful ability.Ah, yes. Another change I would make.
Fighter Training (Ex): Starting at 10th level, a Warpriest counts 1/2 his total Warpriest level as his fighter level for the purpose of qualifying for feats. If he has levels in fighter, these levels stack.
I assume that you're being funny to point out that it doesn't help much. If that's the case, I agree but feel that it is on-par with the Magus, which seems, really, like the exact standard to which the Warpriest should be measured.
|
|
Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing their warpriest levels count as fighter levels period for the aforementioned feats. They get blessings, access to up to sixth level spells, fighter feats, and some kind of divine knockoffs of weapon and armor training. They are missing out on domain powers, perfect BAB progression, actual weapon/armor training, bravery, etc. I'd think it fair to allow them to just qualify based on straight level, given their BAB progression not being equal to that of a fighter or paladin. On the other hand, perhaps giving them full BAB progression instead of fighter feat access would be wise. Reason being, they're already MAD as all get out. They will never measure up to a paladin or fighter (usage of spells such as righteous might notwithstanding), but their casting gives them utility. Paladins gain this obscenely long list of special abilities, and their spellcasting honestly isn't that much weaker than a warpriest's.
|
|
It has been noted a few times that these classes will count as their parent classes for the purposes of qualifying for feats. So every level of Warpriest counts as a fighter level for the purposes of feats. Let's move beyond this in our discussions.
I personally like the idea of a Magus-style divine warrior, but I don't think that is what is intended for it to be. I think the idea is for the Warpriest to be a pinch healer and a front-liner.
|
|
Ah, I am a bit late to the party. My mistake. If they DO count for those feats, all is well. ... And yeah, I will admit a divine magus would be amusing. That being said, I would still like to see their channel changed somehow. They'd make excellent DPR (probably still slightly below paladins and the like overall) if it were possible to get a higher channel DC without cannibalizing other stats, primarily due to this wonderful feat known as channel smite. A little extra oomph on the DCs would make it a splendid tool for those utilizing negative energy.
replace channel with lay on hands.
Done and done.
Also have sacred weapon go minute per level, minutes can be separated.
Also include a class feature (level 10 maybe) to put both sacred weapon and sacred armor on at the same time.