So, when this book was announced I got really excited because I was hoping for something new - whenver a book came out for 3.5 it would usually provide some type of 'new' option - not just an upgrade to an existing option. Warlocks, Incarnum classes, Factotum, etc.
And that was also how I felt when earlier PF books were released - the Magus was genius, Summoner felt unique, Oracle provided a spontaneous divine class, etc. The classes introduced prior to this point provided 'new' options.
So when I read through the playtest for the advanced class guide I immediately felt discouraged by it. These options are not 'new' they're just variations (and many times in my opinion improvements) on existing classes/play styles.
And then I read the post, "The point of Hybrids" and it kind of makes me understand the goal a bit better. It's not trying to replace existing play styles, it's trying to make new playstyles available by combining things that previously were not easy to combine.
So that's an idea I can get behind but I have one major problem with the execution - in my opinion, many of these new hybrid classes lean too heavily towards one class, then beef it up with new features. The arcanist doesn't feel like a wizard/sorceror hybrid to me, it feels like a better wizard. If the goal is to combine ranger and rogue then do so, but combine them in some way that makes them distinct, not just a mash-up of class features.
Anyways, so I have some thoughts on the classes, based off of my understanding of what is trying to be accomplished, I've tried to keep my thoughts and concerns as constructive as possible:
Arcanist:
The goal(as I understand it) - Create an arcane caster somewhere between spontaneous and prepared, able to plan ahead for the day like a wizard does, but able to modify that plan on the go like a sorceror.
My concern - It's too close to wizard, and in my opinion better. No, they don't get a school, but they do get the ability to change their spell list every day, and that's a big deal.
Thoughts/Fix - I honestly think this class shouldn't make it to level 9 spells. I'm not saying give it the bard progression or anything, but this class is a combination of two classes and it 'balances' that by taking away the features that aren't important. Yes, bloodlines are good. Favored schools are good. Spells are better. If you really want to create a hybrid of the wizard and sorceror who isn't just 'better' then drop the spells a bit.
Give the class a favored school and/or bloodline, drop the maximum spell level known to 6 or 7, and pump up the spells per day. This would make it distinct from its parent classes.
Bloodrager:
The goal - Create a barbarian that is able to call upon magical might during times of rage by replacing rage powers and trap sense for spells and bloodline powers.
My concern - While I think the tradeoff in power (giving up rage powers and trap sense for spells and bloodlines) is fairly equivalent the problem that arises is action economy. You have a limited number of times per day you're in a rage and now in that limited time you have spells you can cast that prevent you from attacking. You gave this class spells, but made using them kind of impractical. So basically what we have is a barbarian who sometimes stops attacking to cast spells.
Thoughts/Fix - What made the magus work was that it put the action economy of being a melee caster at the forefront of it's design (or so it seemed to me). If the purpose of this class is to cast while raging then give him the ability to do that - Maybe he can cast and attack during a charge? Maybe hitting a target allows him to cast a spell quicker than normal (hit an opponent with standard, spell that would normally be standard action to cast becomes move action). Attack and cast at the same time.
Brawler:
The goal - Create a non-mystical martial combatant specialized in unarmed combat
My concern - This class has a lot going on, but it's not very focused. It wants you to focus on maneuvers, but it also wants you to focus on unarmed attacks, and for some reason your unarmed attacks become magical even though you're not mystic. Too much monk, not enough fighter.
Thoughts/Fix - Let him have heavy armor if he wants, you're trying to design a boxer, if a boxer wants to have s%%#ty dex let him, hell encourage it. Lose the AC bonus in light armor, what's it even doing on a non-mystic low Will class? Lose the Brawler strike thing too, it feels to me like something Monks had so it just had to be ported over. You know what I would like to see that would make the Brawler actually distinct from any other class?
Give them the ability to use the bonuses of magical equipment without having to hold the weapon. He takes a +2 flaming weapon, holds it in his hand, and the glow slowly moves from the blade to his hand - he puts the weapon back in its scabbard and as long as it stays on him his fist now acts as +2 flaming. How would that work lore wise - off the top of my head I don't know, maybe he's so good at martial combat that he simply knows how to steal the effect for himself temporarily, but either way does it make any less sense than him just arbitrarily doing magic damage?
This would make the class distinct amongst others and would give the party a member who could actually benefit from all that random equipment that's always being rolled.
Hunter:
The goal - Create an animal companion focused druidic warrior.
My concern - Truth be told I kind of like this class, the only concern I have here is that it doesn't really shine anywhere. Not a great warrior, not the best caster, just a guy with an animal companion... but the problem there is why play this when you could play a summoner? Different spell list? This class gets teamwork feats for themselves and their animal, but they're not a great combatant. Summoner gets evolution points, Hunter gets teamwork feats that they share with their
animals that probably won't benefit them that much.
Thoughts/Fix - Again, I actually like this class, I think it's a very good divine 'jack of all trades' with the moderate spell list and the medium attack bonus. The only thing I can think of that would make this class better (without being too better) would be to replace the teamwork feats with the ability to share feats with your animal companion.
You want him to share a teamwork feat with him? Good take one and share it. You want to take dodge so that both you and your animal companion have it? Good take that one.
Investigator:
The goal - Combine the rogue and the alchemist to create a character class that knows the inner workings of everything - from the anatomy of the people around them (sneak attack) to the finer arts of alchemy.
My concern - This class is trying to find it's own identity, but instead it just combines the best features of two different classes out proceeds to outclass them in every way. Is there any reason to ever play a Rogue instead of an Investigator? Is there any reason other than liking bombs to play an Alchemist instead of an investigator. Nearly full SA, a very good talent tree that includes the entire assortment of alchemist discoveries and rogue talents, the ability to supercharge skill checks greater than any other skill monkey, extracts, and more. Not only is that a lot of good stuff that causes the 'parent' classes to get left behind, it's also too much for a class trying to have an identity of its own.
Thoughts/Fix - I feel like this class wanted to be the Factotum from 3.5s Dungeonscape, but instead of doing anything interesting like that it just piles class features on top of one another. Drastically reduce, or outright eliminate the SA, and replace it with things befitting a class called 'Investigator'. Make him better at boosting his allies, give him the ability to make two standard actions in a round from time to time - hell, have him identify weak spots on enemies so that he can grant SA to his entire team. Maybe give him the ability to navigate the battlefield easier - let him avoid attacks of opportunity.
This class has a lot going on and I think that's a good thing, especially for a class called "Investigator", but I wish that fewer of those features were just copy/past of other classes - give him his own identity.
Shaman
The goal - Create a divine caster with a familiar and hexes. Also, ghosts?
My concern - I don't even really understand what this class is trying to do, if you wanted an Oracle with hexes why not just build that? At the very least including the familiar as well as the spirit is a bit much.
Thoughts/Fix - Not really a lot to say on this one, it feels more like an archetype than a full class to me. At the very least I would say drop the familiar, though if you want to keep the 'must commune with the familiar to prepare spells' do so, but with the spirit instead.
Skald
The goal - Bardbarian
My concern - Raging Song is only going to be good for some party compositions.
Thoughts/Fix - Make the song do something beneficial for party members that don't want to rage.
Slayer
The goal: Create a deadly class that takes all of the most lethal potential of the rogue, ranger, and assassin to deal the most damage possible.
My concern - The goal was achieved. Seriously, this class doesn't replace Rogues because it doesn't do the whole 'skill monkey' thing, but for any other purpose - yeah, why Play Rogue? And Ranger?
You know what the most common complaint I hear about ranger is? I wish there was a good ranger variant with no spells - here it is, and it, in my opinion, completely outclasses Rangers.
Thoughts/Fix - I feel like the simple version of this class would have been a ranger archetype where the combat style and spells were replaced with sneak attack. I think that would have been more balanced, and I feel like it would have been simpler.
At the very least I think the favored target thing should be tweaked to be more in line with similar existing features - make it more like the inquisitors judgement, or the rangers favored enemy, or smite.
Swashbuckler
The goal - Finally - a high dex martial combatant that doesn't rely on Sneak attack.
My concern - If you want to make a high dex/int martial character viable then do it and stop dancing around it so much. I feel like this class is screaming, "I want INT to AC in light armor" and, "I want DEX to damage", but that's too simple. Instead we have to get weapon finesse, but not really (and not at level 1 - build a high dex character, suck for a level, then hit level 2 and watch your accuracy increase by 25%) and 'nimble'.
Thoughts/Fix - Drop swashbuckler finesse, we don't need a special name for it. Then give us weapon finesse at level 1 - it's going to be a cornerstone requirement for most builds of this class, why put it off until level 2? Give us DEX to damage, make it certain weapons only if you're worried about abuse. Finally - give INT to ac in light or no armor. If you're worried about people dipping then stipulate that it only applies in certain situations - rounds where you make attacks with rapiers or something.
Seriously, the goal of this class is so clear cut and defined - the goal is obvious - why dance around it so much when it could be so much simpler?
Warpriest
The goal - If the paladin is a combination the fighter and cleric with an emphasis on fighter, this is the same combination, but with an emphasis on cleric.
My concern - Trying to recreate the wheel, if the goal of this class is to combine fighter with a divine caster class (specifically cleric) why not go off of a similar base - the Magus. The magus combined casting with melee well, this class doesn't. It gives you spellcasting, it gives you blessings, it gives you sacred weapons and armor... it's all good ideas, but it could have been done better - more like Magus.
Thoughts/Fix - Give them some kind of action economy fix so that they can combine their casting with their melee, not cast some times and do melee other times.
Thread closed. Please post your comments in the respective thread for each of the ACG classes, otherwise we'll end up with a hundred parallel discussion threads. Thanks!