My understanding is he wants Favored Weapon to work with any weapon with which you are proficient if you don't worship a God, instead of only working with simple weapons.
Basically, it makes it more advantageous to 'not' worship a God, than to worship a God, which kind of flies in the face of Clerics.
A Cleric can worship a God, or worship an Ideal. If he worships a God, his domains are limited, but he gains proficiency in the Gods weapon. If he worships an ideal, he gains flexible domains, but doesn't gain a bonus weapon of any sort.
Conversely, if a Warpriest worships a God, he gets proficiency and Focused Weapon with the Gods chosen weapon. If he doesn't worship a God, he gets Focused Weapon with any simple weapon instead.
He wants it expanded...
I'm not sure he does. But I most certainly do.
The thing is, on the cleric, there's no incentive to actually use the favored weapon, regardless of wether you worship the god or not.
In short, I don't really care if I'm using my god's favored weapon or not, except for flavor. I like flavor. But sometimes, my flavor doesn't adhere to the favored weapon of the god. If I'm playing a cleric, and my concept says I need a greatsword, I spend a feat on to get martial weapon proficiency, and rock on.
When attempting to do that as warpriest, I'm told to play a cleric instead, because the martial weapons I'm ostensiably trained to use don't work with my class features. I regard this as a problem, but YMMV, and it certainly has been shown to do so.
Basically, it makes it more advantageous to 'not' worship a God, than to worship a God, which kind of flies in the face of Clerics.
first, i disagree with the sentiment that worshiping a specific deity should be necessarily more advantageous. more importantly though, not worshiping a deity is hardly a disadvantage for clerics unless they want to be battle clerics... the exact role the warpriest is attempting to fulfill. honestly, i'd prefer if focus weapon was for any simple or martial weapon, or your deities favored weapon (players choice rather than being automatic by virtue of having a deity).
I see at as incredibly similar actually.
That's because your comparing feats instead of class features like weapon training, and not just feats, but whole lines. Just grabbing power attack and deadly aim though won't devour a whole line and your weapon training between the two will only be one off. Grabbing rapier as your third option was also just be one less. Keep in mind some styles take more investment than others, thf taking just power attack to be good at hitting things hard, and TWF requiring at least 3 feats to use at all, and bows are... My gosh. Some feats can even be used with many different kinds of weapons, your power attack works with your earthbreaker, greatsword, and greataxe all just as well! And they still work with one handed weapons too, though with a penalty. Feat choice also happen to be a variable so I don't like using it as an example.
You can say that the fighter is equally good with other weapons, but that is not usually the case.
No, I didn't say that. I said he could use them relatively as well.
So, when you make your choices, you have to deal with the fact that some are not as optimal as others. You may really like one particular weapon style... or perhaps you are emulating a trope that you read about or a weapon set that seems cool (like a single rapier). Saying "well you made that choice" is fine, but then I can say the same thing about a Warpriest choosing his deity.
Actually I talked about that in my post. Its not the same. The warpriest is compromising his choice in deity and roleplay. The fighter is not.
Also, quit telling me what I'd like. I'll tell you what I like if you ask, but just inferring it is bad mojo and means your misrepresenting me and misdirecting any discussion.
You can say that the fighter is equally good with other weapons, but that is not usually the case. Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Specialization, Weapon Finesse, Improved Critical all focused on using a Rapier, then switching to a Greatsword with a low strength and no feat support... I see this as very similar to a Warpriest switching to a secondary weapon that is not their Favored Weapon.
well, the equivalent would actually be telling the fighter that his class features only work with simple weapons. so he can take all the feats he wants to improve his greatsword, but his weapon training class feature can only ever apply to simple weapons so... not that.
TBH the real problem is that for the Warpriest to work as a class it needs something, anything, to be attractive as an alternative for a Cleric. Sacred Weapon and combat feats aren't cutting it.
Why not drop the weapon focus bonus feat at 1st level, and expand the sacred bond with weapons to any weapon wielded by the warpriest? This solves two "problems":
1) Warpriest being to powerful for a single level dip for many characters.
2) Now we don't feel penalized for deity choice and favored weapon.
If you want weapon focus, spend your own feat on a weapon of choice!
well, i assume the goal was to give the free weapon focus to help slightly mitigate the 3/4 base attack bonus.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hey, we're on this weapon thing again. How many times is this now?
Yeah, you're right. Sorry. The only thing I can say is that it's an issue I care honestly care about, as I'd love to play a warpriest without that restriction. With it? Not so much.
I'll just go away now.
Back to my far too slow-paced pbp playtest of the slayer. There's a class that works.
Yeah, you're right. Sorry. The only thing I can say is that it's an issue I care honestly care about, as I'd love to play a warpriest without that restriction. With it? Not so much.
I'll just go away now.
Didn't say to leave, just lampshading. Thread is for input anyway.
Hey, we're on this weapon thing again. How many times is this now?Yah, probably my fault this time.
Shun!
And darn, wanted a count!
I understand that, but it can still be mitigated by spending the regular bonus feat if you choose to start specializing in a weapon. Two bonus feats, a 1st level spell, and, suppose darknesss and trickery are chosen, spending a swift and move action in one round to get a mirror image and 20% concealment is a POWERFUL level dip. Oh, orisons too.
true... but i'm also a proponent of pushing the first bonus feat back at least one level so you have a +1 BAB when you get it which would help with the dip issue some.
Hey, we're on this weapon thing again. How many times is this now?Yah, probably my fault this time.Shun!
And darn, wanted a count!
Well, depending on how you qualify them, either once (that spanned 46 pages of this thread, and a few pages of others), 6-8, (same thing).
:)
*Shudders*
We really should get out more.
I see at as incredibly similar actually.That's because your comparing feats instead of class features like weapon training, and not just feats, but whole lines. Just grabbing power attack and deadly aim though won't devour a whole line and your weapon training between the two will only be one off. Grabbing rapier as your third option was also just be one less. Keep in mind some styles take more investment than others, thf taking just power attack to be good at hitting things hard, and TWF requiring at least 3 feats to use at all, and bows are... My gosh. Some feats can even be used with many different kinds of weapons, your power attack works with your earthbreaker, greatsword, and greataxe all just as well! And they still work with one handed weapons too, though with a penalty. Feat choice also happen to be a variable so I don't like using it as an example.
You can say that the fighter is equally good with other weapons, but that is not usually the case.No, I didn't say that. I said he could use them relatively as well.
So, when you make your choices, you have to deal with the fact that some are not as optimal as others. You may really like one particular weapon style... or perhaps you are emulating a trope that you read about or a weapon set that seems cool (like a single rapier). Saying "well you made that choice" is fine, but then I can say the same thing about a Warpriest choosing his deity.Actually I talked about that in my post. Its not the same. The warpriest is compromising his choice in deity and roleplay. The fighter is not.
Also, quit telling me what I'd like. I'll tell you what I like if you ask, but just inferring it is bad mojo and means your misrepresenting me and misdirecting any discussion.
Okay, let me try this again. What I am trying to communicate is that the fighter who is choosing to use a rapier, choosing a high dexterity over a high strength, choosing light armor over heavy armor, and choosing to focus his feats on that rapier, is making those choices for roleplaying reasons. These are sub-optimal choices, mechanically speaking, that fulfill his roleplaying concept. i am attempting to draw an analogy here that say that the Warpriest who chooses a Deity with an underpowered favored weapon is also making a sub-optimal choice, mechanically, that fulfills his roleplaying concept (choice of deity).
Perhaps the better example is to discuss other features that are more simple to understand in this sort of analogy like Wizard Schools, Sorcerer Bloodlines, Oracle Mysteries, etc. but either way, same idea. Choice made for roleplaying reasons... mechanical consequences... not all choices are equally optimal.
Probably the best analogy here is to say that Cleric's pick a deity, and based on that choice are forced into a set of domains. They may not like those domains, and some Deities may have domains that they feel are weaker than others. Instead of domains, the warpriest is forced into a weapon type based on his choice of deity. This is all opinion, but I do not see that as any less fair than the choice that a Cleric has to make.
P.S: I never told you what you like. I was speaking in a conversational tone using an impersonal 'you'. As if to say "You may like a one-handed rapier wielding fighter who uses weapon finesse, but that is a sub-optimal choice". That sentence is not specific to you, I could also phrase it as "Some may like a one-handed rapier wielding fighter who uses weapon finesse, but that is a sub-optimal choice". The 'you' in these cases could be replaced with "one", "some", "some players", "people", "a man" etc etc. But, nonetheless, I apologize for not making that clear.
Hey, I have an idea!
Let warpriest cast divine spells while using a shield, kind of like how Bards are able to cast their spells while using a weapon and shield.
If nothing else, it will help balance warpriests whose favored weapons are one-handed.
Probably the best analogy here is to say that Cleric's pick a deity, and based on that choice are forced into a set of domains. They may not like those domains, and some Deities may have domains that they feel are weaker than others. Instead of domains, the warpriest is forced into a weapon type based on his choice of deity. This is all opinion, but I do not see that as any less fair than the choice that a Cleric has to make.
but if a cleric chooses not to worship a deity, they don't lose a primary class feature. the weapon proficiency is just a bonus for the cleric. if the warpriest chooses not to worship a deity, they should just be a cleric, fighter, paladin or some combination thereof.
The thing is, on the cleric, there's no incentive to actually use the favored weapon, regardless of wether you worship the god or not.
In short, I don't really care if I'm using my god's favored weapon or not, except for flavor. I like flavor. But sometimes, my flavor doesn't adhere to the favored weapon of the god. If I'm playing a cleric, and my concept says I need a greatsword, I spend a feat on to get martial weapon proficiency, and rock on.
When attempting to do that as warpriest, I'm told to play a cleric instead, because the martial weapons I'm ostensiably trained to use don't work with my class features. I regard this as a problem, but YMMV, and it certainly has been shown to do so.
Hey, I have an idea!
Let warpriest cast divine spells while using a shield, kind of like how Bards are able to cast their spells while using a weapon and shield.
If nothing else, it will help balance warpriests whose favored weapons are one-handed.
Divine casters can already do that actually. None of the divine casters incur spellcasting failure.
Okay, let me try this again. What I am trying to communicate is that the fighter who is choosing to use a rapier, choosing a high dexterity over a high strength, choosing light armor over heavy armor, and choosing to focus his feats on that rapier, is making those choices for roleplaying reasons. These are sub-optimal choices, mechanically speaking, that fulfill his roleplaying concept. i am attempting to draw an analogy here that say that the Warpriest who chooses a Deity with an underpowered favored weapon is also making a sub-optimal choice, mechanically, that fulfills his roleplaying concept (choice of deity).
Perhaps the better example is to discuss other features that are more simple to understand in this sort of analogy like Wizard Schools, Sorcerer Bloodlines, Oracle Mysteries, etc. but either way, same idea. Choice made for roleplaying reasons... mechanical consequences... not all choices are equally optimal.
Probably the best analogy here is to say that Cleric's pick a deity, and based on that choice are forced into a set of domains. They may not like those domains, and some Deities may have domains that they feel are weaker than others. Instead of domains, the warpriest is forced into a weapon type based on his choice of deity. This is all opinion, but I do not see that as any less fair than the choice that a Cleric has to make.
But the real problem is that it manages to clash with the flavor of characters I want to make. The fighter doesn't take class features away from you for picking a rapier over a greatsword. It may be less powerful, but all your class features work.
The cleric desn't take class features away from you for picking a god with a favored weapon and domains. The ones you get might be worse than others, but they're all there, regardless of what weapon you chose to wield.
The warpriest does so.
Take a rapier wielding pious assasin of Asmodeus, who takes down slaves who's run from their chains.
He could be expressed as a warpriest with a splash of ranger, rogue, slayer or maybe vivisectionist.
Except he couldn't, because then he'd be unable to use what I regard as one of his three main class features.
There are other ways to express the concept, of course. Blackguard(based off of slayer or ranger), Inquisitor and cleric with a dip comes to mind.
But I'd like the warpriest, as a base class, to be able to encompass as many character concepts as possible. Because that's one of the goals of a base class.
Hey, I have an idea!
Let warpriest cast divine spells while using a shield, kind of like how Bards are able to cast their spells while using a weapon and shield.
If nothing else, it will help balance warpriests whose favored weapons are one-handed.
Yeah, this really needs to happen. As it stands, a warpriest with a one-handed weapon as their favored weapon are pretty much forced to be two-handing with it, or follow Sarenrae and use Dervish Dance.
'Priests with light weapons are screwed, currently, because they can't two-hand their dagger.
The reason they can't just default to a shield in the off-hand or TWF is that somatic or material components can't be used if you are holding something in both hands. Such as two light weapons, or a weapon and a heavy shield.
Just a second on the topic of the Fighter.
The Fighter loses a lot for switching weapons. Part of the Fighter's "class features" are the Fighter Only feats, Weapon Focus, Weapon Spec, GWF and GWS. Add in the lowered Weapon Training now.
Thats +3 Attack and +5 Damage. That's pretty painful. And the disparity grows as you get higher level between your other choices than your main weapon. Likely your sidearms don't have as powerful an enchantment.
I think its important to mention that the Warpriest doesn't get a mitigating feature that the Fighter does for switching weapons.
|
Hey, I have an idea!
Let warpriest cast divine spells while using a shield, kind of like how Bards are able to cast their spells while using a weapon and shield.
If nothing else, it will help balance warpriests whose favored weapons are one-handed.
Yeah, this really needs to happen. As it stands, a warpriest with a one-handed weapon as their favored weapon are pretty much forced to be two-handing with it, or follow Sarenrae and use Dervish Dance.
'Priests with light weapons are screwed, currently, because they can't two-hand their dagger.
The reason they can't just default to a shield in the off-hand or TWF is that somatic or material components can't be used if you are holding something in both hands. Such as two light weapons, or a weapon and a heavy shield.
I just want to point that you do not hold either a Buckler or a Light Shield, and you can cast while wielding a weapon and using one of those. A Heavy and Tower Shield, however, you can not.
Just a second on the topic of the Fighter.
The Fighter loses a lot for switching weapons. Part of the Fighter's "class features" are the Fighter Only feats, Weapon Focus, Weapon Spec, GWF and GWS. Add in the lowered Weapon Training now.
Thats +3 Attack and +5 Damage. That's pretty painful. And the disparity grows as you get higher level between your other choices than your main weapon. Likely your sidearms don't have as powerful an enchantment.
I think its important to mention that the Warpriest doesn't get a mitigating feature that the Fighter does for switching weapons.
Yep, and that's a big difference. He does not, however, lose anything for choosing to go with a different weapon in the first place.
The warpriest does. He either loses the RP code and dogma of the god the player wanted by picking another one for the favored weapon, or he loses access to sacred weapon and weapon focus.
|
|
I just want to point that you do not hold either a Buckler or a Light Shield, and you can cast while wielding a weapon and using one of those. A Heavy and Tower Shield, however, you can not.
you can but it requires :
Create Reliquary Arms and Shields
its not a bad feat for a dwarven crafter cleric.
well, with luck we will have the revised class tomorrow, or soon. :)
Hoping for good news.
I just want to point that you do not hold either a Buckler or a Light Shield, and you can cast while wielding a weapon and using one of those. A Heavy and Tower Shield, however, you can not.you can but it requires :
Create Reliquary Arms and Shields
its not a bad feat for a dwarven crafter cleric.
Erm... You have a free hand thing going on if you use a buckler or light shield. Anyone can use a consecrated weapon/sanctified shield and that qualifies as a divine focus too, no need to expend a feat.
|
|
I am actually of the opinion that your weapon should count as your holy symbol if it your deity's favored weapon.
That said, there was an idea to have each blessing be tied to a wweapon or weapons. I could be convinced that was the right way to go, so you have a few options to use, but not ANY weapon and that would still make them tied to the deity.
hey riddic went ham on b!@+%es using daggers, dont tell me that its not cool enough for a warpriest :P
I think if we asked Vin Deisel what class Riddick was he wouldn't say warpriest.
Pathfinder hasn't got much love for daggers either unfortunately.
|
Cannibalize the strength score to get a really high dex without having to sacrifice INT, WIS, CON, or even CHA. After that you grab weapon finesse, two-weapon fighting, etc. and have a deity whose favored weapon is a dagger. From there, place the agile property on both daggers. Sure, it takes a while to get a full head of steam, but it could be fairly nasty. Your damage output will not be equal to Thwak Bashington, but it will permit you to crank out numbers that most would deem acceptable. The down side here is that you do not have a free hand to grab your focus, but there are workarounds for that as well. Want more? Shocking, flaming or what have you on the weapon as well, though I'd suggest just getting +1, agile, +2, + 3, +4 instead if we're going by the current warpriest setup. You don't have enough of your sacred weapon bit to rely too heavily on it, though you can use it to add certain qualities equivalent to flaming or what have you anyway, so it balances out.
This is for the person that wanted to see an example of a warpriest that could dish out damage with daggers. :P Still not optimal, but you could definitely do some damage. One can also take into consideration benefits conferred by certain blessings, and how well they may contribute to two-weapon fighting, depending on various factors.
Not an argument, but I'm curious. I'm also not suggesting that this will be the way it's handled, (and lets assume that both are balanced and reasonably flavored and mechanically sound options). How do people feel about these to options?
1.) The Warpriest is kept with the Deity's Favored Weapon as the only Focus Weapon option (outside of Feats), but an Archtype option is also included that focuses on trading out the Focus Weapon for a single one of your choice.
2.) The Warpriest is changed so that it's Focus Weapon is general, but an Archtype option is included that focuses on boosting the Deity's Favored Weapon (only) as the Focus Weapon.
Which option, keeping all things and the different sides and PoV's in mind, which overall do you think is a better option? In both cases, both sides are pretty evenly allowed without making the other compromise. As a player of a different class with a Warpriest in your party, or against an enemy Warpriest, what would you think? Or if you are a Cleric, or Fighter, (or similar class like Inquisitor), how do you feel about Favored Weapon? Which, in general, do you think is the better route, both for what you would want, but also for the potential abuse either might allow?
Honestly, I'd be fine with either, but I'd prefer the 2nd option. Like others, I think the base class should be as inclusive as possible. Also, I think the second option offers more clear choices of class features to remove (like martial weapon proficiency for instance) to enable something like a bolstered favored weapon.
At this point I'll just be glad when the revised playtest comes out so we can hopefully move on from the great favored weapon debate!
I have solved the Weapons issue. Plus people want more damage and channel so far socks. Fixed.
I posted similar ccomments in another thread and got a bit of positive feedback.
How do you guys feel about my solution to the Favored Weapon issue.
Class Features:
Channel Energy:Amend text to uses per day= 3+WIS Modifier, DC based off Wisdom.
Sacred Zeal:At 3rd level a War priest's favor with his god allows him to use his channel class feature in new ways. A Warpriest may expend a use of Channel Energy to do the following:
Self Lay On Hands-as a swift action, The Warpriest may expend a use of channel energy to Heal himself equal to his channel dice, similar to the Paladin class feature. He must have 1 free hand to do this or touch himself with the hilt of his Deities Favored weapon.
Sacred Fire: A Warpriest may expend a use of Channel Energy as a swift action to empower his weapon with a SACRED DAMAGE bonus to his attacks. This ability lasts a number of rounds equal to the number of his channel dice and does damage equal to the number of dice rolled.
For example, a Warpriest with 4d6 channel dice could expend a use of channel to add 4d6 SACRED DAMAGE to his weapon for 4 rounds.
This ability cannot be used in conjunction with the channel smite feat.
Sacred Boon:A Warpriest may burn a use of smite to grant an ally within 30ft a bonus to a skill check, AC, save or attack equal to your channel dice. This ability lasts the same number of rounds as the number of dice.
For example, A Warpriest with 2d6 channel dice can grant a Sacred Bonus of +2 to Any one of skills, AC, Saves or Attack rolls to an ally for 2 rounds.
Using this ability is an immediate action that can be used to save a friend from a failed save,check, missed attack or being hit. The bonus is added AFTER the check is made and if the bonus is enough to change the result it can turn failure into success.
Sacred Weapon:Ammend the Sacred weapon ability. Sacred Weapon can be used with ALL weapons that belong to the FIGHTER WEAPON GROUP that the deities Favored Weapon belongs to.
For example. A Warpriest of Shelyn may use Sacred Weapon with Glaives and Any weapon in the
bardiche, bec de corbin, bill, glaive, glaive-guisarme, guisarme, halberd, hooked lance, lucerne hammer, mancatcher, monk's spade, naginata, nodachi, ranseur, and tiger fork
Sacred Weapon Training:A Warpriest reveres his Deities favored weapon and similar weapons above all others. While he is not so narrow minded as to disadvantage himself with only that single weapon, he trains mostly with weapons of that kind.
At level 6 he gains WEAPON TRAINING as the fighter class feature, with whatever weapon group the Warpriest's Favored Weapon belongs to.
For example, a Warpriest of Pharasma would gain weapon training with the Close Weapon Fighter weapon group.
At 12th and 18th level, the bonus to attack and damage increases by +1. They do not gain any new weapon groups and this ability can be improved by items like Duelist Gloves.
*This ability replaces the bonus combat feat and weapon focus feat currently gained at level 1.
Domains:At 1st level, a Warpriest selects two Domains offered by his god and receives all domain powers as a cleric would (Including Domain spells up to level 6). A Warpriest can select inquisitions instead of Domains but cannot mix the two. This choice is made at 1st level and cannot be changed unless the Warpriest changes deity and receives an Atonement spell cast by a Higher level Cleric or Warpriest of his new god.
* This is mostly to save space, Ensures future support. And frankly domains are better.
SpellsA Warpriest has access to healing spells just like a cleric and can lose any prepared spell to spontaneously cast CURE or INFLICT spells as a cleric. He receives a Bonus Domain slot and may prepare a spell granted by his domains in that slot.
Warpriest's, however are Beings of War, as such they use the INQUISIOR SPELLIST
Done. Now play that! That's a WARPRIEST.
Better use of channel.
Action Economy.
Can pile on the damage in limited fashion.
Gets a Reduced Weapon Training. (Fighter-y feeling)
I got rid of Blessings which take up valuable page space and lack previous support for domains which are flavorful and already supported.
He still is encouraged to use certain kinds of weapons but not locked specifically to one only.
Definitely feels like a better combatant. Getting limited weapon training and dumping the front loaded feats. So no more level dipping.
His channel class feature is actually something you would want to use now.
Sacred Fire is like a mini smite that works on everyone for a limited time and adds nothing to his to hit, but when he connects he his HARD.
Sacred Boon also let's him have some limited party support.
His ability to self Lay on hands will make him better stand on the front line with only d8 HP.
I tried this and it felt way more combat oriented.
Didn't up the skills since this is a holy warrior and neither Fighter, Cleric OR Paladin for that matter get more than 2 skills per level.
Since the class no longer relies on CHA much he has ability points to spend elsewhere.
|
|
hey riddic went ham on b!@+%es using daggers, dont tell me that its not cool enough for a warpriest :PI think if we asked Vin Deisel what class Riddick was he wouldn't say warpriest.
Pathfinder hasn't got much love for daggers either unfortunately.
irelivent, you dont need to play a specific class to play a cool concept. my warpriest walks out into the fry with daggers and shreds NPC's like riddick does.
I just want to point that you do not hold either a Buckler or a Light Shield, and you can cast while wielding a weapon and using one of those. A Heavy and Tower Shield, however, you can not.Hey, I have an idea!
Let warpriest cast divine spells while using a shield, kind of like how Bards are able to cast their spells while using a weapon and shield.
If nothing else, it will help balance warpriests whose favored weapons are one-handed.
Yeah, this really needs to happen. As it stands, a warpriest with a one-handed weapon as their favored weapon are pretty much forced to be two-handing with it, or follow Sarenrae and use Dervish Dance.
'Priests with light weapons are screwed, currently, because they can't two-hand their dagger.
The reason they can't just default to a shield in the off-hand or TWF is that somatic or material components can't be used if you are holding something in both hands. Such as two light weapons, or a weapon and a heavy shield.
I find it a bit confusing that you strap the light shield to your arm, but you grip it with your hand too.
Anyway, one thing I find very annoying with melee casters (or any caster using a weapon) is the “no rod + weapon + casting”. This is especially problematic to the 4/9 and 6/9 casters that lack the high level slots to quicken spells such as divine favor or Divine power.
The Arcane Duelist solved this beautifully with the Arcane Bond class feature.
I’ve said it before and say it again: I really like a feat that lets you bond with a Rod so you don’t have to hold it to activate it. And you should be able to spend XX minutes to bond with another rod. Or just a feat that let you use any rod you are carrying.
Would be very helpful to the Warpriest, Inquisitor, Magus, Bard, Paladin, Ranger, Hunter and Bloodrager.
Hey, were did ciretose go? Has he been 'timed out'?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One of the reasons I want to play a warpriest is the opportunity to play a divine warrior that doesn’t come with the Healbot role stamped on his forehead.
As soon as you have “I can heal others” powers as a class feature people start expecting you to be a healer, even if you have made it perfectly clear you won’t be the party healer.
So I for one really hope they remove Chanel energy from the class.
I really dislike teamwork feats, but we got the Preacher archetype so I guess I'll try the class one of these Days ;)