An interesting option but cleric buffs typically scale with caster level - at level 1 the cleric and the warpriest would get the same bonus from, say, divine favor (also a luck bonus) but at level 3 the cleric would get a +2 bonus, level 6 a +3 bonus and so on.
Calling upon the strength and wisdom of a deity, you gain a +1 luck bonus on attack and weapon damage rolls for every three caster levels you have (at least +1, maximum +3).
Level 3 you still have a +1.
Count me also as wanting this class to be Wisdom-based, as they are already wanting Strength and maybe Dexterity. Basing channel energy off uses of another (Wisdom-based) ability, in the way a paladin's postive energy channel plays off lay on hands, is still my preferred approach.
An interesting option but cleric buffs typically scale with caster level - at level 1 the cleric and the warpriest would get the same bonus from, say, divine favor (also a luck bonus) but at level 3 the cleric would get a +2 bonus, level 6 a +3 bonus and so on.
Calling upon the strength and wisdom of a deity, you gain a +1 luck bonus on attack and weapon damage rolls for every three caster levels you have (at least +1, maximum +3).Level 3 you still have a +1.
Argh, that's what I get for going off memory instead of looking up the spell description - I could have sworn it was +1 with an additional +1 per three caster level. Thanks for the correction :)
For those unaware, there was a podcast last night by Know Direction with Jason Bulmahn as a guest and they talked about the Advanced Class Guide and the playtest and spoilered some of the upcoming changes to the classes.
There is a thread with mine, and others', notes here: Podcast Notes.
Argh, that's what I get for going off memory instead of looking up the spell description - I could have sworn it was +1 with an additional +1 per three caster level. Thanks for the correction :)An interesting option but cleric buffs typically scale with caster level - at level 1 the cleric and the warpriest would get the same bonus from, say, divine favor (also a luck bonus) but at level 3 the cleric would get a +2 bonus, level 6 a +3 bonus and so on.
Calling upon the strength and wisdom of a deity, you gain a +1 luck bonus on attack and weapon damage rolls for every three caster levels you have (at least +1, maximum +3).Level 3 you still have a +1.
No problem mate. It validates that idea though a bit more. 4th level the Warpriest pulls ahead then again at 7th. The Cleric would only break even with the Warpriest at certain points with the Warpriest ahead on other points. Not to mention it caps at 9th level with everything after that just being better. Comparable to Divine Power which gets up to a +6 at 18th level. This ability would be comparable but capping at 16th level. Now if it were a Sacred Bonus and stacked with Divine Favor THAT could be REALLY great.
Food for thought.
Sacred would definitely amp it up, but I'm guessing Jiggy chose Luck specifically to make using Divine Favor and Holy Power less attractive?
Thanks for posting the podcast notes Tels! Interesting reading, can't wait to take a look at the revised class :)
I would like to see this class stay a prepared caster, I can feasibly see them switching the casting stat to CHA, but would prefer they didn't.
On the Arcane side of things we have the Bard and the Magus, one spontaneous 6/9 caster based on one stat, and a prepared 6/9 caster based on another.
I would like to see some parallelism here with the warpriest being to the Inquisitor what the Magus is to the bard.
I feel it will need it's own spell list, and some kind of spell combat is almost necessary for this class.
The Inquisitor called, he says hi. ;)
Plus there aren't wisdom based spontaneous casters.
Yeah I'm dumb. I've actually played an Inquisitor too. @_@
|
An interesting option but cleric buffs typically scale with caster level - at level 1 the cleric and the warpriest would get the same bonus from, say, divine favor (also a luck bonus) but at level 3 the cleric would get a +2 bonus, level 6 a +3 bonus and so on.
Calling upon the strength and wisdom of a deity, you gain a +1 luck bonus on attack and weapon damage rolls for every three caster levels you have (at least +1, maximum +3).Level 3 you still have a +1.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the number of spell levels you have access to does not influence your caster level. The warpriest has spells from level 1 and continues to gain them as it goes, never skipping progression. It simply has slower progression. As a result of this, it would still be considered as having full caster level progression, would it not? At no point does it say that it does not increase in caster level. Likewise, it does not state it is at a disadvantage in terms of caster level. Only getting up to 6th level spells does not a reduced caster level make.
The paladin suffers from a reduced caster level as a result of not getting spells until it has a few levels already under its belt. Warpriest has no such weakness.
|
Count me also as wanting this class to be Wisdom-based, as they are already wanting Strength and maybe Dexterity. Basing channel energy off uses of another (Wisdom-based) ability, in the way a paladin's postive energy channel plays off lay on hands, is still my preferred approach.
Reducing the Multiple Attribute Dependency was suggested by Jason in looking to replace Channeling.
I do really like the blessings tying into the God that they serve. Extra flavor for a character is nice.
The real problem is that a cleric is a excellent spell caster (second only to wizard) and a decent melee as well. The paladin is an excellent melee (defensively the best), decent spell casting (reduced spell levels ftw), and excellent support abilities. The inquisitor is great on skills, a decent spell caster, and a decent melee as well.
The WARpriest needs to be an excellent offensive melee below fighters and barbarians with decent spell casting to fit in. Otherwise, the other divine classes overshadow it. Currently, a paladin is simply better at fighting and healing.
An interesting option but cleric buffs typically scale with caster level - at level 1 the cleric and the warpriest would get the same bonus from, say, divine favor (also a luck bonus) but at level 3 the cleric would get a +2 bonus, level 6 a +3 bonus and so on.
Calling upon the strength and wisdom of a deity, you gain a +1 luck bonus on attack and weapon damage rolls for every three caster levels you have (at least +1, maximum +3).Level 3 you still have a +1.Correct me if I'm wrong, but the number of spell levels you have access to does not influence your caster level. The warpriest has spells from level 1 and continues to gain them as it goes, never skipping progression. It simply has slower progression. As a result of this, it would still be considered as having full caster level progression, would it not? At no point does it say that it does not increase in caster level. Likewise, it does not state it is at a disadvantage in terms of caster level. Only getting up to 6th level spells does not a reduced caster level make.
The paladin suffers from a reduced caster level as a result of not getting spells until it has a few levels already under its belt. Warpriest has no such weakness.
I meant the Cleric still has a +1 from Divine Favor at level 3. It has a minimum bonus of +1, but only grants you a +1 for every 3 caster levels you have. Maximum +3. So at level 6 it goes up to +2 and caps at level 9, same as a Warpriest.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am going to remind folks here one last time to knock off the sniping and personal attacks. I am seeing way too many posts that are getting flagged or deleted by staff. If it keeps up, some folks are going to get a time out.
I blame the Skald. Clearly, his Raging Song has piped out of his own thread.
Though that makes me think- as much incense as the Warpriest discussion raises, maybe one of his abilities should be (or be renamed) Passion of the Faith?
So the podcast Tel referenced stated that the names of the classes are locked in except the warpriest and the bloodrager as these names are portmanteus, but they haven't really thought of anything better. So let's brainstorm a little, maybe we can come up with some good alternate names for the Warpriest? Looking up some synonyms I found a few names to get us started:
Templar
Crusader
Champion
Visionary
Devotee
Zealot
(Knight) Militant
What do you think? Do you have a better suggestion? Post it here!
Calling it the Godsword might be a little misleading for any warpriest that either doesn't have a deity or who follows a goddess.
I like templar also.
Unfortunately, as far as names go we already have the "Low Templar" prestige class, and plenty of prestige classes with "Champion" in them.
I would have voted Crusader if it weren't a cleric archetype already, or maybe that's what I'm aiming for~
Yeah I'm dumb. I've actually played an Inquisitor too. @_@The Inquisitor called, he says hi. ;)
Plus there aren't wisdom based spontaneous casters.
Ooooooooor
You could give the Warpriest Arcanist style casting mechanics. That way she could ready her buffs and cast them like a spontaneous caster but also not completely throw away the utility of her Cleric heritage.
I also just want to see what an arcanist style chart looks like in 6 levels.
I'd still prefer Crusader (1st) or Templar (2nd), but Warpriest has kind of grown on me, so I wouldn't be horribly disappointed if it stays as is.
The "it's already the name of an archetype/prestige class" argument doesn't really hold a lot of weight, I don't think: witness the classes that already duplicate such names (Skald, f'rinstance), not to mention archetypes that duplicate each other (Buccaneer- gunslinger and bard, etc.).
Personally, I wish there were more name duplication in such instances, myself. I'd love to have a Buccaneer Wizard. I think it gets to a saturation point where you just simply run out of words in the Thesaurus to describe an archetype that fills the same niche but with/for a different class. Then you either start making up names, using names from other languages, or just ending up with some really odd, out of the depths of obscurity names.
What the class needs is more ways to do damage with a weapon in combat.
This would definitely help. What about using channeling to buff damage? That might feel too much like Smite Evil though...
1. d10 Hit Die
This. Keep the middle BAB, raise the hit die.
So long as the class has the ability to heal, there will be people expecting you to spend the entire combat standing behind them and curing them each round instead of, you know, having fun. Short of removing healing capability altogether, nothing they can do with the class's design can help with this.
What about the ability to heal passively? Like, they can activate a power as a free action a certain number of times per day, and it slowly regens everyone in a radius around the Warpriest?
|
|
There's nothing wrong with "warpriest" as a name. Hell, it was a prestige class in 3.0 D&D (in the Defenders of the Faith paperback splat; I just dug out my old copy to look at it, in fact). It isn't made up out of whole cloth, here.
Oh dang, I'm not the only one that caught this? I am surprised, I will admit. Surprised as well as impressed.
I can't say I would be able to think of anything more fitting than warpriest. They better reflect what a paladin (historically speaking) would have been than the paladin class, but I somehow don't see them swapping the two names. Thus, warpriest seems good to me. Well, unless it were simply called templar.
|
There's nothing wrong with "warpriest" as a name. Hell, it was a prestige class in 3.0 D&D (in the Defenders of the Faith paperback splat; I just dug out my old copy to look at it, in fact). It isn't made up out of whole cloth, here.Oh dang, I'm not the only one that caught this? I am surprised, I will admit. Surprised as well as impressed.
I've been at this a while, yeah. ;)
I am going to remind folks here one last time to knock off the sniping and personal attacks. I am seeing way too many posts that are getting flagged or deleted by staff. If it keeps up, some folks are going to get a time out.I blame the Skald. Clearly, his Raging Song has piped out of his own thread.
Though that makes me think- as much incense as the Warpriest discussion raises, maybe one of his abilities should be (or be renamed) Passion of the Faith?
Faithful Passion sounds nice. Could be a Will bonus.
I like the names Champion, Templar, and Zealot.
But Warpriest I dig even though its a portmanteau.
Naw, Zealot implies a disconnect for whats appropriate.
Templar is nice, or Hospitaler (since theyre supposed to heal as well)
I think Templar would be a perfect fit since y'know, Templars weren't all good >=)
Zealot might make a lot of sense if the Favored Weapon is super strict Kryzbyn.
Using a super strict me as a weapon isn't a good idea.
Using a super strict me as a weapon isn't a good idea.
I dunno, I have a pretty good strength score. Do you have an 18-20 crit? I bet you do at least a D8!
Using a super strict me as a weapon isn't a good idea.
I'm fairly certain you atleast have the Deadly property.
Templar and Crusader have become RPG cliches. Warpriest is fine.
Heh, flattery! :)
That's alot like how the ordained champion PrC worked. Burnt spell slots for bonuses.
The Ordained champion isn't a bad place to be, come to think of it. Its smite thing was fun, ad it had the same "too many feats" thing going, although 3.5 feats where always worth having more of, regardless of how much BaB you had (with enough splatbooks, that is).
One of my favorite characters ever was in fact a cleric/fighter/ordained champion/prestige paladin. It was a blast, and If I can make something like him I'd totally play a warpriest.
Im saddened by the fact that there isn't a power called zeal... If ever a class should have the touch of the zealot, its a fighter/cleric.
The Ordained champion isn't a bad place to be, come to think of it. Its smite thing was fun, ad it had the same "too many feats" thing going, although 3.5 feats where always worth having more of, regardless of how much BaB you had (with enough splatbooks, that is).
One of my favorite characters ever was in fact a cleric/fighter/ordained champion/prestige paladin. It was a blast, and If I can make something like him I'd totally play a warpriest.
I liked Cleric 3/Church Inquisitor 1/Ordained Champion 1/Prestige Paladin 1/Ordained Champion +2/Fist of Raziel 2/Contemplative 1/Fist of Raziel +8/Church Inquisitor +1
Gets BAB +18 (with fractional BAB), CL 18, War Domain, Inquisition Domain, and 3 other domains of your choice (I like Law, Knowledge, and Spell, substituting Law and Knowledge for their respective Devotion feats, then taking Domain Spontanaeity (Spell Domain).) Take Holy Warrior, Awesome Smite, and DMM: Persist.
The Ordained champion isn't a bad place to be, come to think of it. Its smite thing was fun, ad it had the same "too many feats" thing going, although 3.5 feats where always worth having more of, regardless of how much BaB you had (with enough splatbooks, that is).
One of my favorite characters ever was in fact a cleric/fighter/ordained champion/prestige paladin. It was a blast, and If I can make something like him I'd totally play a warpriest.
I liked Cleric 3/Church Inquisitor 1/Ordained Champion 1/Prestige Paladin 1/Ordained Champion +2/Fist of Raziel 2/Contemplative 1/Fist of Raziel +8/Church Inquisitor +1
Gets BAB +18 (with fractional BAB), CL 18, War Domain, Inquisition Domain, and 3 other domains of your choice (I like Law, Knowledge, and Spell, substituting Law and Knowledge for their respective Devotion feats, then taking Domain Spontanaeity (Spell Domain).) Take Holy Warrior, Awesome Smite, and DMM: Persist.
Mine was decidedly less casty and more fightery(Read: less powerful). Cloistored cleric1(for the aditional domain)/Fighter2/CC+1/Ordained Champion1/Prestige Paladin3/Ordained Champion+3 was as far as I got. 3rd level spells, but the DM ruled Battle Blessing to work with my spells, so it wasn't really an issue. Practised Spellcaster took care of the CL.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Obviously to make this viable we just need a lot of full BAB PrCs to go dipping around in while leaving the actual class empty. I welcome our new useful and tasteful PrCs!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Obviously to make this viable we just need a lot of full BAB PrCs to go dipping around in while leaving the actual class empty. I welcome our new useful and tasteful PrCs!
I quite agree with you. But the character was fun, and if the warpriest can do something like what he did, while losing the paladin-ness and gaining more of the warrior aspect, (preferably without being shoe-horned into a combat style, hint hint) I'd love to play it. Swift (or nearly swift) action spells make low level cleric spells both viable and powerful. Standard action low level cleric spells aren't worth my time in combat. Out of combat, sure, but if I wanted to play a character who makes himself viable warrior by buffing beforehand I'd play a cleric, and be better off for it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Obviously to make this viable we just need a lot of full BAB PrCs to go dipping around in while leaving the actual class empty. I welcome our new useful and tasteful PrCs!
If I could have made that character with 20 levels in a base class, believe me, I would have. Requirement juggling sucks and is the worst part of making characters for 3.5.
Obviously to make this viable we just need a lot of full BAB PrCs to go dipping around in while leaving the actual class empty. I welcome our new useful and tasteful PrCs!I quite agree with you. But the character was fun, and if the warpriest can do something like what he did, while losing the paladin-ness and gaining more of the warrior aspect, (preferably without being shoe-horned into a combat style, hint hint) I'd love to play it. Swift (or nearly swift) action spells make low level cleric spells both viable and powerful. Standard action low level cleric spells aren't worth my time in combat. Out of combat, sure, but if I wanted to play a character who makes himself viable warrior by buffing beforehand I'd play a cleric, and be better off for it.
I played a similar character, but they were a rogue as a base, and through RP dedicated themselves to the god of theft and murder (it was a homebrew campaign). He was more sneaky/stabby than casty, he also had a level of ranger for tracking his prey...
Was hella fun using the same devine spells to confound inquisitions that they used to try to make me tell the truth...Great fun was had.
Obviously to make this viable we just need a lot of full BAB PrCs to go dipping around in while leaving the actual class empty. I welcome our new useful and tasteful PrCs!If I could have made that character with 20 levels in a base class, believe me, I would have. Requirement juggling sucks and is the worst part of making characters for 3.5.
Oh I know, you should see some of my wizard and cloistered cleric builds, lots of PrC names in them. Of course even going straight wizard or cloistered cleric is pretty darn powerful. PrCs were hard to turn down because you lost nothing and gained quiet a bit. In pathfinder its too much in the other direction imo, but that's another topic.
Btw, your name always makes me hungry...
I like playing with a 3.P variant that works like this:
- All PrCs have a minimum HD requirement usually (but not always) equal to the highest number of skill ranks it requires - 3 (=to the highest ranks for PF-native PrCs). Exceptions are those PrCs where entry is primarily restricted by a high BAB, spellcasting, or feat chain requirements and not by skill ranks.
- All other PrC requirements are gone, unless the class meaningfully advances, modifies, or utilizes that prerequisite. (e.g., it wouldn't make sense to enter Master of Many Forms without wildshape.) Fluff requirements are left up to DM adjucation, but I personally don't think fluff requirements are appropriate for setting-neutral PrCs.
IMO, it doesn't imbalance things any worse than they already are: The best builds to use for each PrC don't change much under this variant (and the ones that do are the crappy ones that need the help anyway), you're just free to deviate from that build more.
Oh right, Warpriest. I still think my Bonded Spells idea is a good one:
Bonded Spell (Su): A Warpriest's connection to their deity is so strong, that the power of the divine does not fade from them so easily. Beginning at 2nd level, once per day, a Warpriest may bond with a spell with a range of personal or touch with a duration of 1 hour/level: The spell is cast on the warpriest with a duration of 24 hours. A bonded spell cannot be easily dispelled: Unless the caster level check to dispel the spell succeeds by 10 or more, the effects are only suppressed for 1d4 rounds, as if the effect were that of a magic item. At 6th, 10th, 14th, and 18th level, the Warpriest may bond with an additional spell each day. At 7th level, a Warpriest may bond with a spell with a duration of 10 minutes/level. At 11th level, he may bond with a spell with a duration fo 1 minute/level. At 15th level, he may bond with a spell with a duration of 1 round/level.
|
Should that be "range of personal or touch with a duration of 1 hour/level, ", or is it only spells specifically with a duration of Hour/Lvl?
If as written, that seems pretty much useless, as off the top of my head the only spells that I can think of are Magic Vestment and Greater Magic Weapon, (both of which basically are already effectively 24 hours for most adventuring days) and something that the Warpriest can not utilize until 7th and then 10th level.
If we where to go this route, I would honestly just allow it for any Warpriest spell that is not instantaneous or Discharged when used (such as Produce Flame or Inflight Light Wounds) .
Should that be "range of personal or touch with a duration of 1 hour/level, ", or is it only spells specifically with a duration of Hour/Lvl?
If as written, that seems pretty much useless, as off the top of my head the only spells that I can think of are Magic Vestment and Greater Magic Weapon, (both of which basically are already effectively 24 hours for most adventuring days) and something that the Warpriest can not utilize until 7th and then 10th level.
If we where to go this route, I would honestly just allow it for any Warpriest spell that is not instantaneous or Discharged when used (such as Produce Flame or Inflight Light Wounds)
It only works specifically with a duration of 1 hour/level. The ability improves to work with stronger buffs (that have shorter durations) as the Warpriest advances in level (at level 15, they can walk around with Freedom of Movement, Divine Power, and Righteous Might all day). There aren't really any good spells on the cleric list for the Warpriest to use with this ability at 2nd level when they get it, but I wrote the ability assuming that some of the new spells printed in the ACG would be compatible.
|
|
Not trying to be a jerk, then, but the ability seems very useless then. You get it at 2nd level, but cant actually use it at all until about 7th level, and then at 15th levelish, it starts to finally become useful, (it's auto-outside of the level for PFS play, and if you are lucky you might get it for the very, very end of most AP's, maybe).
For the most part, in an adventuring day, once they started getting spells that are Hour/Level, those spells are already pretty much up for the effective adventuring day. A Cleric is already casting those for a min of 5 and 7 hours, where the Warpriest starts out casting them at 7 and 10 hours min already.
On the other hand, if it applied to spells like Bull's Strength, that would be more useful. Or even boosted a spells duration by one increment could work, too. 1 Min or Round/Level -> Min/Level -> 10 Mins/Level -> Hour/Level -> 24 Hours.
