It seems that these characters are all gestalt characters, as such are not suitable for play with core classes.
For those unaware a Gestalt was a variant rule created for use when a party was underpowered or there were few players. When levelling up one selects two classes and takes the best attributes of both and gains both of the classes powers. These classes are distinctly gestalt and the key thing to note about the Gestalt rules was that they are not designed for use with core play. I would not recommend anyone play this unless everyone is playing an advanced class.
Arcanist : Interesting concept of both prepared and spontaneous spellcasting, but makes current arcane casters redundant. As this class is simply the sorcerer with the versatility unique to wizards and the added ability to enhance their spells with points.
Bloodrager : A class that particularly frustrates me as it currently contains two capstone abilities, both the sorcerer bloodline up to 20th level and the Might rage of a 20th level barbarian...sorry guys I don't think Trapsense is a valid trade off for Spellcasting and six bonus feats.
Brawler : Not overpowered but very uninspired. There is a monk, the fighter who can specialize in unarmed combat, and the pugilist.
Hunter : I actually rather enjoy the concept of the hunter, what would be cool is if there was something different from the animal companions.
Investigator : A great idea but 9d6 sneak attack is way to much damage for someone with most of the kit from alchemist and rogues, with Inspiration points also thrown into the mix.
Shaman : A great mix of witch and oracle, but kind of unfair to not give them a curse also
Skald : a good mix of barbarian and bard.
Slayer : Fantastic and masterful, all the other classes should be like this.
Swashbuckler: Same as the brawler, there is a gunslinger and a fighter to specialize in firearm combat. Its very uninspired as a base class.
Warpriest : A really great combat cleric, an idea might be having something that protects as well as heals. Like those that are healed by a warpriest get sanctuary for 1 round, or something. I also can't believe I'm saying this but the cleric needs a capstone, Level 20 is the most boring level in the cleric.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
These classes are quite different from gestalt in both power and flavor. Gestalt doesn't mix classes, it allows you to take the best progressions (saves, HP, etc.) of two classes as well as both sets of discrete abilities and use it all.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd agree they're not as powerful as a straight gestalt, but these classes are a halfway point between the base and gestalt. The problem is that for most of these classes they are a more powerful form of their two parts.
What about classes like the bloodrager? A straight barbarian has trapsense and 1d12hd instead of 1d10. While the bloodrager gets the entire sorcerer bloodline, a second 20th level capstone, and 4th level spells.
Where is the insentive to play a straight barbarian?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Blood ragers also lose rage powers and wint get stuff like pounce, are more multistat dependent and will have less hp from loer HD.
Is this about the bloodrager? The normal barbar gets pounce, come and get me and superstition and others the blood rager is stuck with low level spells and blodline powers. I dont undestand the problem.
And for the others try them out and get back to us;)
Oops sorry I forgot rage powers on the previous list. The M.A.D is definitely something to consider, but it would be the case if you attempted to multiclass.
I see what you are saying with the rage powers, but even that does not equate to having the entire bloodline. I mean imagine a half orc, orcish bloodline blood-rager. MAD becomes almost mute when your strength could go from 8 Strength at level 1 to 26 without items or boosts at level 15.
8 at level 1 +6 from inherent bloodline bonus + 6 from power of the giants + 6 from greater bloodrage.
---
ammendment
"Hello Darling"
I agree with you entirely, my opinion is one taken from the express P.O.V of synergy with existing gameplay. I am in the perspective of looking at the existing base classes and seeing how they've combined two. IMO they haven't balanced them with the other base classes, they have made them as powerful as each other. But with only a few exceptions they've made some of their bases redundant.
I ask why play an oracle or witch instead of the shaman? To which the answer is often, the new class is more powerful. An oracle without a curse but an ability that works as a mystery and full spellcasting.
or
Why play a Sorcerer or Wizard instead of the Arcanists? same deal, more versatility with more casts per day and the ability to bolster my spells. Sure I lose my bloodline capstone but I gain a different one
Oops sorry I forgot rage powers on the previous list. The M.A.D is definitely something to consider, but it would be the case if you attempted to multiclass.
I see what you are saying with the rage powers, but even that does not equate to having the entire bloodline. I mean imagine a half orc, orcish bloodline blood-rager. MAD becomes almost mute when your strength could go from 8 Strength at level 1 to 26 without items or boosts at level 15.
8 at level 1 +6 from inherent bloodline bonus + 6 from power of the giants + 6 from greater bloodrage.
Bloodragers dont get the bloodline powers., they get specific blood rage powers. That makes a rather large difference in your above statemtn.
In my playtest, the bloodrager (draconic) actually was outperformed by the barbarian built to similar concept(beast/dragon totem). The bloodrager really missed out without access to those rage powers.
---
ammendment
"Hello Darling"
I agree with you entirely, my opinion is one taken from the express P.O.V of synergy with existing gameplay. I am in the perspective of looking at the existing base classes and seeing how they've combined two. IMO they haven't balanced them with the other base classes, they have made them as powerful as each other. But with only a few exceptions they've made some of their bases redundant.
Some of the classes are at the top of the power curve, but isnt the same as not being balanced with the existing classes. Balanced means being somewhere on the scale between rogue/monk and druid/summoner/wizard. With the exception of maybe the arcanist, these all fall on that scale.
I ask why play an oracle or witch instead of the shaman? To which the answer is often, the new class is more powerful. An oracle without a curse but an ability that works as a mystery and full spellcasting.
Curses actually balanced themselves out long term. They came with both a drawback and a benefit. Someone chooses to play an oracle because of the theme and concept, but it isnt mechanically inferior to the shaman. Not to metion, the mysteries are very different then the abilities of the shaman. You pick the one that fits what you want your character to be able to do.
Why play a Sorcerer or Wizard instead of the Arcanists? same deal, more versatility with more casts per day and the ability to bolster my spells. Sure I lose my bloodline capstone but I gain a different one
Because some of the wizard school powers are pretty awesome? And because people who played sorcerors did it because they dont want spell books/want to be charisma based, not because the sorceror was mechanically superior to the wizard. That hasnt changed with the arcanist. But I do agree the arcanist is my biggest personal question mark in this book. Though with the announced major revision, maybe it will be more interesting. Otherwise I can simply not allow it in my game.
The rest of the classes though are not explicately superior to all the other classes. They may be better then SOME of the base classes, but that doesnt make them unbalanced, as some of the base classes are underpowered compared to the rest (rogue/monk). Insisting all classes be compared to the weakest classes to dermine balance isnt balance, its creating more underpowered classes.
It seems to me most of these new classes are in line with most of paizo's creations, (inquisitor, alchemist, witches etc). Somewhere in the middle of the herd. That is balanced.
@ Kolokotroni
For the barbarians out-performing the bloodragers, I didn't state that a barbarian "can't" out perform a bloodrager. However finding a class with 2 capstone abilities regardless of it's source seems over powered. As mentioned previously it has the potential for serious abuse as stated with the orc bloodrager. The aforementioned Bloodrager was also made with the lowest strength stat without racial penalty, with some creative building and colorful equipment a character that could tear a building in half with their bare hands doesn't seem unreasonable.
I should also give my thoughts some context, in terms of players I do tend to look at the ones on my table who are the power gamers, munchkins and min-maxers. Which does give me a skewed perspective at times, however looking at the abusive players I find the holes that need patching. I view this system in terms of what it offers to the table, and at present it's just a way around multi-classing. With the exception of the Slayer, Hunter, and Warpriest, which are quite good and add a new element to gameplay.
I respect that there are other gamers who like myself believe in the value of good story and roleplay over the cookie cutter min-max characters. Taking the perspective that the oracle's curse added flavor to the oracles RP, then it should stand to reason that removing it takes that element away. It was something you suffered early game but grew into it's benefit, the Shaman lacking that just seemed unfair given the Oracle mysteries and the Shaman's Spirit powers are not that dissimilar.
I wholeheartedly agree about the arcanist with you, that most choose the sorcerer to avoid the nonsense of running with a spell book. However the powers being sacrificed are not really that much in comparison to the ability to spellcast in a combined manner as well as gaining the use of Blood-points.
Lastly I agree, the middle of the herd would be a nice place but it doesn't mean that outliers shouldn't be nerfed or culled. It's not my believe that all of the classes overshadow their predecessors, only that some have a much higher potential, and unlike characters like the inquisitor, witch, oracle etc... these aren't so much "new" classes with new content more so than repackaged reasons to not need to multi-class utilizing abilities already provided by existing feats and powers to mesh multiple classes at a fraction of the original cost.
A wizard with Eldritch Heratige is a pretty close fit to the arcanist, but why waste 3 or 4 feats when you could just take the arcanist and get them for free?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@SUZ, orc bloodline isn't selectable by bloodragers, no sorcerer bloodlines are. Bloodragers have their own specific bloodlines and powers.
@SUZ, However finding a class with 2 capstone abilities regardless of it's source seems over powered.
Capstones should never factor into class comparisons because the majority of people will never use them. If you do ever get the play your character at 20th its invariable for only a short period of time, long enough to feel godly before everyone gets bored and wants to start a new campaign.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
@SUZ, However finding a class with 2 capstone abilities regardless of it's source seems over powered.Capstones should never factor into class comparisons because the majority of people will never use them. If you do ever get the play your character at 20th its invariable for only a short period of time, long enough to feel godly before everyone gets bored and wants to start a new campaign.
um, i seem to be misquoted here
Hey Suz
I can see your point with 2 cap stones but i dont think it is gonna have a lot of impact. Cap stones are already totally out of balance IMOP.
Personally i kind of like the oracle curses and is at the moment trinh to get one of them for my magus.
Is your half ork BL taking eldrich heritage orc to get those powers? If yes then remember that a normal barbarian can do that as well.
But the orc bloodline is really an il concived thing if you ask me.
I agree Darling,
To those who say "don't worry about it cause people don't play games that high level for long"
I say that's a terrible excuse not to balance it. That's like saying bugger the game its good enough and sod to anyone that wants to play it at 20. I've had games with content that lasted 6-8 months after they hit 20, for the most part yes we all wished there were epic level rules rather than the mythic stuff, but that's a separate gripe.
@Christos, The R.A.W doesn't exclusively say that sorcerer bloodlines can or can't be selected. The RAW states "A bloodrager must pick one bloodline upon taking his first level of bloodrager. Once made, this choice cannot be changed." Which implies heavily sorcerer bloodlines are not off the table by not excluding the sorcerer ones or stating that only the ones introduced by the bloodrager may be used. (See above for context)
I will also point out the Bloodrager also gains Arcane Armor Training and Arcane armor Mastery at level 1. The feats and even the Magus don't grant the removal of spell failure from medium armor till at least level 7.
Note : This post was a broad statement on how the classes are partway between Gestalt and the current base/core classes. I wasn't really counting on writing up a full analysis on any classes, but am happy to talk about it, as we continue I would like the participants of the conversation to bare in mind that the topic isn't these classes "can't" work. But that they have been unrealistically swung towards the upper end of the power scale as an attempt to remove the need to multi-class further from the game.
Combining two classes is a balancing act, and at the moment you cant give 75% from two classes and make it equal 100% no matter how you slice it you still get 150%. (and I am going to keep stating Hunter, Slayer and Warpriests are exceptions. Those are well made)
I agree Darling,
To those who say "don't worry about it cause people don't play games that high level for long"
I say that's a terrible excuse not to balance it. That's like saying bugger the game its good enough and sod to anyone that wants to play it at 20. I've had games with content that lasted 6-8 months after they hit 20, for the most part yes we all wished there were epic level rules rather than the mythic stuff, but that's a separate gripe.
@Christos, The R.A.W doesn't exclusively say that sorcerer bloodlines can or can't be selected. The RAW states "A bloodrager must pick one bloodline upon taking his first level of bloodrager. Once made, this choice cannot be changed." Which implies heavily sorcerer bloodlines are not off the table by not excluding the sorcerer ones or stating that only the ones introduced by the bloodrager may be used. (See above for context)
I will also point out the Bloodrager also gains Arcane Armor Training and Arcane armor Mastery at level 1. The feats and even the Magus don't grant the removal of spell failure from medium armor till at least level 7.
Note : This post was a broad statement on how the classes are partway between Gestalt and the current base/core classes. I wasn't really counting on writing up a full analysis on any classes, but am happy to talk about it, as we continue I would like the participants of the conversation to bare in mind that the topic isn't these classes "can't" work. But that they have been unrealistically swung towards the upper end of the power scale as an attempt to remove the need to multi-class further from the game.
Combining two classes is a balancing act, and at the moment you cant give 75% from two classes and make it equal 100% no matter how you slice it you still get 150%. (and I am going to keep stating Hunter, Slayer and Warpriests are exceptions. Those are well made)
The problem is unlike the warpriest a Sorcerer's Bloodline and a Bloodrager's bloodline are both called bloodlines, where as the warpriest doesn't get abilities called domains.
There's nothing that says that they can't and they have the same name, so my assumption is that they can, and I'm asking to be proven wrong.
It doesn't work because the abilities don't line up. Bloodragers don't get bloodline arcana, for instance. And the bonus spells are at completely different levels, since they have different spell lists and spell progressions.
I'm a 17th level bloodrager and I take a primal bloodline (to pick a category that didn't appear in the playtest.)
What bonus spells do I get? What benefits do I get when I rage?
Arguing that because they are both 'bloodlines' is like trying to claim Monstrous Humanoids are also subject to charm person because they're still humanoids.
edit: also arguing RAW on classes that are still being adjusted (hence the playtesting) rings pretty hollow, the classes are far from their "official" status.
So what wait till it's official then point it out? The RAW and RAI is an argument as old as the game itself. It won't stop people trying, alpha and beta test is to hone in on those so they can be buffed out before it hits shelves.
I think its really silly to try to balance a class at level 20 when Casters can gib the party with an impossible save. When you hit 20 you either end the campaign or die. Or the GM is pulling punches and letting you feel awesome when your fighting foes who SHOULD know everything about your party and is gearing up specifically to kill you.
It also says a lot of how misguided your analysis is. Why don't you check some of the discussions and see whats up?
Warpriests actually have the worst of the lot, Battle Clerics are far far superior.
Bloodragers are hardly superior to Barbarians, even with the two capstones. They're also a lot less survivable due to lack of Superstition.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So point out the slip up, don't run around shouting OP at what is clearly deliberate misreading. There's a big difference between "hey devs it would probably be best if you insert the word bloodrager in front of bloodline, it would be best for clarity" and "this class is SO OP! Look at what you can do with this obvious misreading of the ability. Clearly this class is unsuitable in terms of regular play."
@ Scavion, please see my previous post about the opinion that level 20 shouldn't matter. I could see some of the other discussions or alternatively I could express and justify my opinion in the hopes that something might be picked up. I accept your personal opinion on high level game-play, but you should accept it isn't the only opinion and level 20 gameplay may be short for some but not all.
@christos, perhaps read my post more carefully, I did no such thing as saying these classes are OP. I have expressed areas of concern and given props where they are due. The statement "Class is unsuitable in terms of regular play" comes from a direct quote on utilizing the gestalt system which was the topic of conversation. You are perhaps right about the text being written for the bloodrager, but before you get on your soap-box to try and defend the unfinish material re-read why I previously posted.
"Note : This post was a broad statement on how the classes are partway between Gestalt and the current base/core classes. I wasn't really counting on writing up a full analysis on any classes, but am happy to talk about it, as we continue I would like the participants of the conversation to bare in mind that the topic isn't these classes "can't" work. But that they have been unrealistically swung towards the upper end of the power scale as an attempt to remove the need to multi-class further from the game."
If you want to defend the system all the power to you, but don't expect me to indulge any attempts at provocation at the opinions I express unless you actually want to discuss the topic at hand which are that these classes are located, power wise, between the core and gestalt. If you don't know or have simply never come across the term I am sure you can google enough information about it.
Power balance is completely out of whack at 20th level. You talk about power scale, but thats the only place where the Bloodrager really gets good. From 16 to 20th level. A level range no one in PFS or anyone who plays the Adventure Paths gets to. Maybe 17th if your lucky. Before then a Barbarian is solidly better. After that its debatable with the Barbarian coming out on top in defenses. Which is the most important aspect of high level play.
How do you balance a Heavens Oracle "I come back to life no matter what in 7 days" immortality against Weapon Mastery?
Investigator is the only sort of gestalt but I believe a full Alchemist can match him in a utility role and can easily best him at combat. I'm fairly certain it was built to give people an option to play a functionally well designed rogue-like.
With the Shaman getting the Druid list, its actually much weaker than it was before. And before it was only on par with the Cleric.
The Slayer is actually worse than the Ranger in all aspects of play except possibly in combat and only if the Ranger doesn't buff and even then the Ranger matches him.
The Skald has major issues unless hes built with the perfect party to accept his buffs. Has survival issues.
Hunter has major issues, tied with the Warpriest on being the weakest class in the book, only slightly better than a Rogue combat wise due to spells. I feel like you only read the concepts then dubbed them gestalts when gestalt was clearly a rule variant on increasing power level.
If you'd read the discussion threads we've already mapped out where these classes stand for the most part.
@ Scavion
I apologize if this seems too direct.
1. PFS supports gameplay up to level 12, they are not a base-line for exploring what is available from the content to it's entirety as the highest level of PFS gameplay only results in just over 50% of any available content from any class.
2. If the Adventure Paths barely take you into 16th level then you imply that Paizo has only made just over 75% of the content available to fans with their published adventures. This I know is completely untrue and will not accept your slander towards the great adventure path writers. At the end of each of the final adventure path books you will find a section called "Continuing the Campaign" Which has been in all the adventure paths, with the exception of the first print of Rise of the Runelords (anniversary edition however does have a continue the campaign section). I accept not everyone is able to write or run modules that aren't written for them, and I don't hold that against them. But I also don't accept the opinion that there is "nothing to do" or that the adventure ends because the book says so. These beliefs spawn from the unimaginative and to lay blame at others feet is insulting to say the least.
3. I would dispute defense being the most important thing at highest level, again in a very "base" sense you are correct however at higher levels as some may tell you. Saves are out of line, your spells and powers fail 75% of the time while you maintain only a marginal chance of resisting the higher level abilities. I guarantee you when staring down a CR 20 you aren't just worried about it throwing a punch.
4. As for the Oracle, it functions as reincarnate works as follow, aside from not participating for 3 in game days (10 including mature date), you require your soul to be free, your body to remain in some shape or form, for the body to not have already been raised as an undead, you must then eliminate their racial adjustments and roll on a table for a brand new race, take 2 permanent negative levels. Its not as simple as you are immortal, you are changed and are weakened with the possibility that your body could be defiled and ruin your return entirely. So it has it's balance because of the nice bonus to your saves and fear immunity, if it wasn't balanced then they would simply be true resurrection.
Weapon Mastery allows all crits to automatically confirm, and increase their crit modifier by 1. To boot they can't be disarmed. This is on par with the Oracle for the simple fact that I guarantee the Fighter will use his capstone far more than the oracle with use theirs. While it doesn't provide "so called" immortality, it serves the purpose as a high powered class ability to fit the class it was designed for. Besides a 1d12 x4 weapon that auto confirms crits is not something to be taken lightly. Don't forget at level 20, a cleric could also just bring back the fighter with True Resurrection rendering your immortality point mute.
5. The Investigator we can actually agree on, the "only" issue I had was that they had 9d6 sneak attack. This for me steps on the rogue and the alchemists toes in terms of skills and combat, 3.5 had a class called the Factotum which was powerful enough both in skills and combat without needing to be at the top of either.
6. The druid vs cleric spell list is a catch 22, in the right game the druid spells are formidable and gain many bonuses and uses. Enough to outstrip a cleric, but without those conditions the reverse is true. The thing about the shaman isn't a balance thing more so than a flavor thing. The curse was a powerful element to the RP in the oracle and removing it takes away that bit of flavor.
7.The slayer was interesting because it involved the stalking element of gameplay, the ability to identify and specially hunt a quarry. It also made a versatile version of the ranger and it's ability. Just so we're clear the ranger matching a slayer for strength, is a good thing which is why (saying this for the third time now) the slayer is a good class.
8.The Skald has been introduced to the plight of the bard, it is what buff sticks go through, try playing a bard and then come talk about survival issues.
9. The hunter's merit is a different type of gameplay all together. It opens up gameplay with teamwork feats and an animal companion. A truly self sustaining survivalist, with the animalistic buffs.
Conclusion : PFS has 0 influence on my impression of the content because chances are its not even going to be available for Society play anyway. Also that it would be best to compare the classes by the subtypes of the class, rather than "who can kick who's ass". Assume all you wish, I am following the threads on the individual classes and at this point I am providing constructive criticism not just on the individual classes but the theme of the new arriving book and it's place within the pre-existing content.
If we talk about how you feel about my impressions and what I dubbed it then my impression is that you are the kick the door down gamer who doesn't think outside what you personally like, with no regard for others or for expanding your knowledge or opinions. You playtest by having a shin kicking contest with either a monster or a player and claim yourself to be learned on the matter, when you have clearly failed to even compare the classes even remotely to the existing base classes. Instead I hear excuses like "There's no point PFS and adventure paths don't go that high" which is just plain ignorant. My opinions are expressed from comparisons between the classes not just who's tougher.
If you read my posts properly you would see I have stated that;
"they are a halfway point between gestalt and base classes"
If you think I am incorrect, then why gloss over my questions like
1. Why does the bloodrager get Arcane Armor Training and Arcane Armor Mastery at level 1, when the feat and the Magus class ability only allow them to use it at level 3 and 7?
2. What about the Swashbuckler and the Brawler being a waste of class combination by offering little to nothing new or unique to the role?
3. What is wrong with asking for "new" classes rather than a frankenstien class devised for the express purpose of discouraging multiclassing?
@Christos
Bloodrager Bloodlines are near identical to the core Sorcerer bloodlines, without the text stipulating the difference they potentially can select and use sorcerer bloodlines despite losing out on a few spells.
I'd agree they're not as powerful as a straight gestalt, but these classes are a halfway point between the base and gestalt. The problem is that for most of these classes they are a more powerful form of their two parts.
What about classes like the bloodrager? A straight barbarian has trapsense and 1d12hd instead of 1d10. While the bloodrager gets the entire sorcerer bloodline, a second 20th level capstone, and 4th level spells.
Where is the insentive to play a straight barbarian?
The incentive to play a Barbarian is the Barbarian is better at what it does. The Blood Rager class has flavor and is interesting but you give up a lot for spells in my opinion. It's a good class but does not shut out the Barbarian and that I think is good thing.
I would argue that the hunter plays exactly like a druid. Or rather, there's nothing to deffirentiate him from the druid, he's just focusing on things that are normaly beneath the druid to focus on.
Conclusion : PFS has 0 influence on my impression of the content because chances are its not even going to be available for Society play anyway. Also that it would be best to compare the classes by the subtypes of the class, rather than "who can kick who's ass". Assume all you wish, I am following the threads on the individual classes and at this point I am providing constructive criticism not just on the individual classes but the theme of the new arriving book and it's place within the pre-existing content.If we talk about how you feel about my impressions and what I dubbed it then my impression is that you are the kick the door down gamer who doesn't think outside what you personally like, with no regard for others or for expanding your knowledge or opinions. You playtest by having a shin kicking contest with either a monster or a player and claim yourself to be learned on the matter, when you have clearly failed to even compare the classes even remotely to the existing base classes. Instead I hear excuses like "There's no point PFS and adventure paths don't go that high" which is just plain ignorant. My opinions are expressed from comparisons between the classes not just who's tougher.
Odd. I just searched your name in Class Discussion and Playtest Feedback. I can't find any posts from you.
Nothing of what I've said is a "who can kick who's ass" statement. I've simply made comparisons to similar classes as to which was simply more effective in a broad area of expertise. I've run numbers and had the discussions within the threads. I've run three playtests with the classes and I'm halfway through the fourth.
And the reason I'm very frustrated with what you've said is when you make a blanket statement like this,
It seems that these characters are all gestalt characters, as such are not suitable for play with core classes.
For those unaware a Gestalt was a variant rule created for use when a party was underpowered or there were few players. When levelling up one selects two classes and takes the best attributes of both and gains both of the classes powers. These classes are distinctly gestalt and the key thing to note about the Gestalt rules was that they are not designed for use with core play. I would not recommend anyone play this unless everyone is playing an advanced class.
Which I know is just flat out untrue. We already know effectiveness wise, that most of the ACG classes are either worse, or at least on par in extenuating circumstances with the hybrids that make it up. Only the Arcanist right now looks a bit overpowered but its a full caster and its easier to tone down than to tone up which most of these classes are in dire need of. Otherwise they'll sit in the garbage bin where no one plays them.
There's playtesting in order to get a feel for how classes run in actual play, and there's careful analysis and comparison to known baselines in order to evaluate a class. This isn't either of those things. The abstract idea that a hybrid is intrinsically overpowered isn't really grounded in practice. In fact, it's incredibly far from the case that "you cant give 75% from two classes and make it equal 100% no matter how you slice it you still get 150%." There are LOTS of ways to slice it such that you get way more than or way less than that amount. That's why the Mystic Theurge is so poor; because 75% of a Wizard and 75% of a Cleric (even with some additional stuff thrown in!) is a lot less than 100% of either. Similarly, combinations that cover key weaknesses can make things more than the sum of their parts, but for the most part combining things results in something where the versatility doesn't compensate for the loss of focus.
Theorycraft and playtest align perfectly on the notion that not only are the ACG playtest classes NOT overpowered (although the Arcanist is very good, and might need reeling in), some of them probably could use a little goosing. They're perfectly suitable for use alongside regular classes, because they've been designed that way, and are in no way meaningfully comparable to gestalt.
|
I play gestalt(and sometimes triple gestalt) characters in home games all the time. These new classes don't come close to actually playing like gestalts. Most of them feel like poor multiclasses, prime examples are the hunter and warpriest. I fighter/cleric or cleric/paladin and a ranger/druid have far more power and versatility than either of these new classes.
I've played a barbarian/sorcerer before and the bloodrager isn't as power full as a real gestalt version. The blood casting does make it a nice hybrid though.
Besides the blood focus and the capstone, the arcanist plays like how we have house ruled wizards for years. They don't pick up a second set of spell slots like a gestalt wizard/sorcerer would.
The brawler is doesn't have as good as flurry as as many feats or class abilities as a fighter/monk. The martial maneuvers is the only thing I find interesting about it.
Besides inspirations, keen recollection, and their capstone, the investigator has nothing a alchemist/rogue wouldn't have, and the gestalt would have more of it.
I'm not sure a gestalt version of the shaman could be made just using paizo material. It has hexes but its more like an oracle than a witch. It also uses the cleric spell list. And its kinda like a druid with the spirit familiar.
The skald is just a weaker bard since it seems its main class feature can't help everyone and actually prevents others from using their abilities. It is not a real barbarian bard hybrid, let alone a gestalt barbarian/bard.
A gestalt ranger/rogue has more abilities and more powerful versions of those than the slayer gets. I do like how the slayer can change their favored target, but using a move action for it seems like to much of a penalty for a class that has to maneuver to use flanks to use some of its class abilities.
The swashbuckler is not any where bear being a gestalt fighter/gunslinger. It has abilities not in either 'parent' class and the similar abilities it does get aren't as powerful as what you would get from a gestalt combo.
TL;DR The new classes come nowhere close to the power or versatility of actual gestalts.
@voska66,
A barbarian is a combat class so is the Bloodrager, the difference between them does not decrease the Bloodrager's abilities in combat by enough to counterweight the combat gain.
Rage power would (I say this conditionally) balance the Bloodline powers, with the exception of a second 20th level ability and with the exception of a few power builds from either side.
Both Barbarian and Bloodragers gain the same rage bonus the entire level, but a Bloodrager gains access to magus spells which is a really combat heavy spell list. These spells are a heavy boost to the combat effectiveness of the Bloodrager and while being able to range as a full barbarian puts the Bloodrager ahead IMO.
I agree in part, there are people who want to play a Barbarian because that is exactly what they want to play, but if another person on the table plays a Bloodrager, I feel throughout the entire game the Barbarian will feel underpowered. Despite barbarians being as kickass as they are.
@Ancient Spark,
1. A very interesting perspective for the magus and it's armor training one that I greatly respect. The ability to negate armor spell failure is one that currently does and should take time to acquire, the reason being is what happens when a Wizard/Sorcerer takes 1 level of Bloodrager and 19 levels of Wizard. Suddenly you are staring down a 9th level arcane spellcaster with Mithril fullplate with the offensive output of a spellcaster and defense akin to your front line fighters. As I said I love your thinking though a different perspective on the playtest is really refreshing for me and definitely gets me to re-evaluate my perspective, sincerely, thank you for that.
2.Firstly, talk of the single sword combat is a little mute because a swashbuckler also uses a gun, and that is no single sword combat it is the same as two weapon fighting or changing to a two handed weapon mid combat depending on the gun. However to indulge, what you say about me and single sword martial combatants is for the most part I find myself either dual wielding, carrying a shield, or two handed weapon (Magus being an exception). I did play around with the idea of an Aldori swordlord once, but no game has arisen for me to use it. The challenge of building a single class that specializes in a single speciality is one that is difficult, but that is what multiclassing is for, even prestige classes allow players to carve their own unique style from the base classes. The Samurai/Cavalier, Fighter, Paladin/Inquisitor, Ninja, , the Duelist, the Aldori swordlord and scores more classes lend themselves to doing not just physical damage but the graceful and tricky combat. A gunslinger with Bravery, Weapon finesse and Bonus feats is bland, a gunslinger is a "fighter class" it would probably of worked better as an archetype as opposed to a new class.
I entirely agree with the Brawler and it's CMB/CMD based combat, I also understand that without the monks unarmed strike progression any unarmed combat is pointless. But like with the swashbuckler this could have easily been an archetype.
3. Another very insightful point, I would like to clarify something firstly. I don't think frankensteining is bad, fire bad, but frankensteining has it's place. You are also very right, how can I lay claim to that without going into the classes to show the "new" content against the recycled content.
-Arcanist- Blood-focus (new) - Spells/ Feats/ School Supremacy (old)
-Bloodrager- (all old) with a very minor alteration to Rage to allow spellcasting and even more minor changes to existing sorcerer bloodlines to allow better synergy with a barbarian.
-Brawler - Martial Maneuvers (new) - all other powers (old or available as feats)
-Hunter - Animal focus (new) Hunter tactics (new) all other powers (old) *Note hunter adds enough new gameplay with teamwork from the animal companion.
-Investigator - Inspiration (new) All other powers (old)
*note only issue is with 9d6 sneak attack, which should be reduced to 6 or 7d6.
- Shaman - All (new) with exception of Hexes
- Skald - Raging song (new) Spell Kenning (new), all other powers old *Note Skald is the right balance of frail skill jockey and combatant.
- Slayer - All old with slight variation, but the variation is interesting enough to stand on it's own two feet.
- Swashbuckler - All old or attained by feats
- Warpriest - All old
A great portion of each of these class abilities already exist as either class features from the base classes or as feats that are given for no cost to these new classes. The Slayer, The Hunter, The Shaman and to a far lesser extent the Skald are the only classes that play differently. The rest are almost a carbon copy of one of their parts with a bunch of extras stapled onto it. I mean look at 3.5 you would struggle to find 2 base classes that are exactly alike, that for me is a sign of a true base class.
You used the Magus as an example and it is a perfect example, the Magus class has little to no resembalnce to either a Wizard or a Fighter, same thing with the Gunslinger/Oracle/Alchemist/Witch/Cavalier and Summoner. These are what base classes are and should be.
@ Arae, I do agree with you secretly Arae, but I would like to see what an animal companion specialist would look like and how far you can take it. As Arae says it carries sooo much in common with the druid and ranger that it might as well be an archetype as well.
@Scavion, I never actually said I posted on these threads only that I followed them, and the blanket statement was a sarcastic response to the one you presented me. You assume a great deal about me as a person and have made statements to that affect, I don't know you or the context you speak from nor do you know mine, it was simply to prove a point.
I do apologize if you are frustrated, it is not my intention but allow me to ask, are you playtesting the classes hybrids against the advanced classes, the base classes against the advance classes or the advanced class against itself?
My opinions are based on base classes against the advanced, because the advanced are suppose to be "base classes" not the equivalent of a multi-classed character. You are aware you can multiclass the advanced classes as well right? Bloodrager + Wizard as mentioned above.
@ Joyd, You are correct the playtest is to feel how the classes run and it does require careful comparison and analysis. Your example is however set in the wrong direction, a Mystic Theurge is a prestige class not a base class nor is it designed to replicate or replace levels of both simultaneously, but the new base classes are. If I understand your example that would be a level 15 Wizard + 15 Cleric would not make a level 30 character, which is correct, but it would be far more powerful than a level 20 Wizard or cleric despite being at first glance "weaker".
@ Joyd and DragoDorn - To clarify I am no longer going as far as to say they "are" gestalt characters, I admitted the exaggeration in my earlier post. However I believe firmly these classes (with aforementioned exceptions) do exist in a space between what I feel Base Classes are sitting in, and the Gestalts. If you are making base classes that's what they need to be gauged against not against the hybrids that made them.
Also Triple Gestalt, man that toon must have been chunky ^_^. Thus far I have DMed 6 or 7 different gestalts in 3.5 and played a handful. My favorite Gestalt was a Dragon-shaman/Barbarian with Dragon Disciple/Frenzied Berserker prestige classed. Wrath of Tiamat was awesome.
@
Finally, I understand low to mid gameplay is what a lot of people do see, and I respect that what I say is pro-multiclass. The reason is there is a great deal of joy to be had customizing your own class something I think some people take for granted. These classes are definitely stronger than if you multi-classed no doubt, but is that a good thing?
You think taking one level of Bloodrager gets your wizard Arcane Armor Mastery?
A bloodrager can cast bloodrager spells while wearing light armor or medium armor without incurring the normal arcane spell failure chance.
Such a passage is true for all classes.
Not spells from your Wizard Slots.
I don't think you'll be convinced. But I will say for certain that Rage Powers remain quite better than what the Bloodrager gets in exchange. Unless you believe 6 spells at level 10 is overpowering a Pouncing Spell Sundering Barbarian. Especially since by the time the Bloodrager gets those spells, they're quite useless for combat and only good for buffing.
And I'm not saying against one another because thats silly. I'm saying the average success rate of throwing a 3rd level spell DC at 10th level is quite low. Especially when most Bloodrager only have a 14 Charisma.
While multiclassing can be quite rewarding, the idea for these classes were to take a concept and make it viable from level 1. Most folks don't like waiting 5 or 6 levels to see their character concept finally come together.
@Scavion,
hmm true enough, I do stand corrected on the example I gave previously. With that in mind the arcane armor thing seems less unbalanced but I agree with Ancient Spark in that Magus' should have gotten the same.
Assuming level 10, pounce gives you the ability to do a full attack after a charge which is 2 attacks at (+10/+5) with whatever weapon you are holding, assuming with a rage active is quite nice for damage. Lets assume a top barbarian with a Greatsword is (2d6 + 13 strength dmg "18+2race+2level+4rage)which deals potentially 60 damage to a single target in a round. However a 10d6 fireball will do that in an area, Haste grants 3 attacks on every subsequent turn in a full round with the same damage output, both options that put the 2 attacks you get from pouncing at not really "that" far ahead of even the most basic of Bloodragers, especially given pounce is only attained through one specific rage power tree. Where as every Bloodrager can get Fireball and Haste.
As for your final statement it is sad but true, most people do want everything from their character off the get go. I find the "waiting" section to be character building both as a player and as a DM watching players grow. As a story evolves so do the characters, an example of one person who wanted to make Thor as a character wished to fly have Mjolnir and whoop frost giants. Not being able to do that didn't make him dislike the character or the concept, rather it made him even more eager for the content and more adventurous to gain those levels.
@Scavion,
hmm true enough, I do stand corrected on the example I gave previously. With that in mind the arcane armor thing seems less unbalanced but I agree with Ancient Spark in that Magus' should have gotten the same.
Assuming level 10, pounce gives you the ability to do a full attack after a charge which is 2 attacks at (+10/+5) with whatever weapon you are holding, assuming with a rage active is quite nice for damage. Lets assume a top barbarian with a Greatsword is (2d6 + 13 strength dmg "18+2race+2level+4rage)which deals potentially 60 damage to a single target in a round. However a 10d6 fireball will do that in an area, Haste grants 3 attacks on every subsequent turn in a full round with the same damage output, both options that put the 2 attacks you get from pouncing at not really "that" far ahead of even the most basic of Bloodragers, especially given pounce is only attained through one specific rage power tree. Where as every Bloodrager can get Fireball and Haste.
The difference is that fireball is subject to the most common resistance/immunity in the game and is on average dealing 30 points of damage before allowing a saving throw.
The Actual damage of our top tier Barbarian for a Falchion wielder is 2d4(avg 4)+15(Str 18+2Race+2Point+4Enhance+4Rage) +9PowerAttack+3Witchhunter(Most stuff at high levels can toss a spell or has spelllikes)+4WeaponEnhancement(+2Furious)=35 Dmg Avg with epic potential spikes of 70 damage with a crit.
His to Hit is no worse off Power Attacking with Reckless Abandon and his AC is no worse because of the Beast totem.
Combine this that hes so much more durable with a d12 hit die and Superstition resistances and you see the Barbarian has quite the niche as a top tier martial. Tops it off with Sundering Walls of Force.
The Bloodrager is good. Probably even matches it in other places at high levels, but I highly doubt it overtaking the Barbarian.
He also has DR 5/- because Invulnerable Rager is amazing.
@Scavion,
The idea behind the comparison is the control, so feats/items/potions shouldn't really be included in the calculation. Witch hunter is also conditional on opponent. But if you want to talk power attack, Bloodragers also have a full BaB progression so they can use it as well, and all the same items.
You are correct about the saving throw but a fireball covers an area that can occupy anywhere from 1 to 44 targets within that area, and even dealing 1/2 damage you are distributing that damage across an area, making the potential total damage to the encounter far greater than that of a barbarian. To a single target, when the barbarian is kitted out to min max damage, perhaps not when they save, but not by far.
Also doesn't really bring into question Haste or the scores of other heavy combat spells readily available.
Also don't forget d12 vs d10 for hit die is not that big of a sacrifice. the average hp per level is 6 and 5, and which is 20 hitpoints at level 20. How many times have you been hit at 20 and gone, damn I wish I had a d12 instead of a d10. Fighters, Paladins and Rangers are not weak because they use d10s.
Why sunder a wall of force when you can just as easily dispel it?
DR 5/- is impressive yes and only available to 1 archetype, not that different to DR10/adamantine from Stoneskin how many creatures end up packing adamantine weapons in your games?
@Suz. You think bloodlines from bloodragers and sorcerers are nearly the same, that gives me the svere impression that you only skimmed them. You may want to take a second look. As it is it still doesn't justify saying that you could pick any old sorcerer bloodline and the quote i shared reflects that.
@ Christos.
The rules as written still say to choose a bloodline, aside from a slight difference in a few of them and more favored feat selection, there is no reason why existing sorcerer bloodlines could not be applied to the Bloodrager. There is no restriction in the rules at all.
In regards to their similarity;
Abberant - Bloodragers get staggering strike instead of acidic ray, Abnormal reach is the same as long limb, unusual anatomy is the same as unusual anatomy, Aberrant resistance is the same as Abberant resistance, And abberant form grants and extra 1/- on your existing DR instead of giving you a DR/-
Abyssal - Claws are the same as claws, Demonic bulk and abyssal bloodrage grants a higher bonus than Strength of the Abyss. Demonic resistance is the same as demonic resistance and sure demonic aura and demonic might are different
Celestial - Only difference is Angelic attack
Destined - Pretty much cut and pasted with added buffs for the Bloodrager.
I have never said they are "identical" just that they are very similar, too similar to rule them out as a completely different and isolated feature. Not that the changes have been balanced out with the existing bloodlines for example;
Arcane Bloodline (which comparing the two the Bloodrager not surprisingly walks away with a great deal more firepower getting a stacking Disruption ability at level 1) Gaining free buffs when entering a rage including Blur, resist energy, eventually haste and displacement even Transformation/Beast-shape and Form of the dragon which are level 6 spells 2 levels higher than the Bloodragers can even cast.
But the majority of them are not that far from the sorcerer bloodlines, so aside from no restriction to Bloodrager Bloodlines, and a clear distinct similarity to the Sorcerer bloodlines I don't feel like my point is dis proven at all.
I believe you might want to go back and put all the bloodlines side by side, don't just look at their names but read how the powers work.
Bloodrager : Abnormal Reach (Su): At 4th level, your reach increases
by 5 feet
Sorcerer : Long Limbs (Ex): At 3rd level, your reach increases by 5 feet whenever you are making a melee touch attack. This ability does not otherwise increase your threatened area. At 11th level, this bonus to your reach increases to 10 feet. At 17th level, this bonus to your reach increases to 15 feet.
I have justified why, but I still can't hear anything as to why not? Why can't someone choose a sorcerer bloodline? Where in the rules does it say that they are not an option?
It seems that these characters are all gestalt characters, as such are not suitable for play with core classes.
For those unaware a Gestalt was a variant rule created for use when a party was underpowered or there were few players. When levelling up one selects two classes and takes the best attributes of both and gains both of the classes powers. These classes are distinctly gestalt and the key thing to note about the Gestalt rules was that they are not designed for use with core play. I would not recommend anyone play this unless everyone is playing an advanced class.
[Emphasis mine]
These Hybrids may look superficially similar to Gestalt, but they are not gestalt. They do not have the saves, Hit Dice, BAB nor class feature "best-combinations" of gestalts.
Also, there is some terminology confusion here for me.
Core and Base (and Alternate) Classes derive from the Core Rulebook, the APG, UM and UC.
What do you mean by "advanced class"?
Regardless of the power levels of the hybrids themselves, what leads you to conceive that the stated aim of the Hybrid concept might be to create Gestalt power classes? Or to put it another way - do you think the developers have somehow goofed and created 10 gestalt power-level classes not on par (or a little above or below) the extant Core, Base and Alternates?
@Scavion,
The idea behind the comparison is the control, so feats/items/potions shouldn't really be included in the calculation. Witch hunter is also conditional on opponent. But if you want to talk power attack, Bloodragers also have a full BaB progression so they can use it as well, and all the same items.
You are correct about the saving throw but a fireball covers an area that can occupy anywhere from 1 to 44 targets within that area, and even dealing 1/2 damage you are distributing that damage across an area, making the potential total damage to the encounter far greater than that of a barbarian. To a single target, when the barbarian is kitted out to min max damage, perhaps not when they save, but not by far.
Why sunder a wall of force when you can just as easily dispel it?
DR 5/- is impressive yes and only available to 1 archetype, not that different to DR10/adamantine from Stoneskin how many creatures end up packing adamantine weapons in your games?
Feats/items/potions shouldn't be included in the calculation? So effectively nothing that keeps a martial from scaling into the later points of the game? More than half the CR10 enemies have spell-like or spells. I think its reasonable to assume you'll have the bonus more often than not. Sure Bloodragers can use Power Attack but they won't have the same To Hit mods as Barbarians. Reckless Abandon lets our Barbarian swing as if he didn't even have the penalty.
How often do you fight encounters that have more than 6 enemies? Actually, how often do you fight encounters with large numbers of enemies at high levels? And how often do you fight encounters where all these enemies ball up perfectly for your fireball? And they're not resistant or flat out immune to fireball? And if your party is relying on the Bloodrager's subpar offensive casting to handle large groups of enemies there is a serious problem. In fact I'd go so far as to say Fireball is a relative waste on the Bloodrager. Especially since you only have 2 spells known at 10th level, though you can only cast 1 a day.
Because dispelling the Wall of Force is about twice as difficult as just sundering it. Surge of Strength and you have an almost 100% chance of success.
Stoneskin is a 4th level spell and Bloodragers get it by 13th so not applicable in our current comparisons. Even if it was, you get it for about 2 hours while the Barbarian gets his permanently all the time for DR 6/-.
And our Barbarian is toting a +4 higher saves than your Bloodrager, +7 if hes Human.
@Oceanshieldwolf
I couldn't think of another name for the classes to distinguish them :P When I mean "base classes" I speak of the Core and Base Classes and the new classes in the "advanced classes"
The feelings you have towards the hybrids are the same as me, that if their goal was to create "gestalt inspired" classes than the classes are great and work really well balanced with one another. As Gestalts they would be perfect for low number groups in order to allow for full party role coverage and versatile gameplay.
However from what I've read on the blogs and other forums discussions the intent was to create a series of unique base classes that combine aspects of multiple classes to create new and unique gameplay. This gives me the impression that the intent was to make a series of new classes akin to the core and base classes.
I think the "goof" as it were, comes from the idea that making a base class that combines 2 existing classes with the majority of the content coming from those classes is somehow "new and unique". As it stands is there really that much more "new" content?
@Scavion
No those things should not, because they are entirely circumstantial given they are not unique to any class, anyone can take them or equip themselves. It is a variable that distorts the strength and weaknesses of the comparison, for martial classes feats are taken as versatility and power in combat. Taking in mind both Barbarian and Bloodrager possess the same amount of feats (excluding the Bloodline feats which again is circumstantial) we extrapolate using the non-variable existing material to get a base comparison.
"More than half the CR10s have spells or spell-like abilities" not a blanket statement I'd readily agree with given the majority contain Supernatural abilities not Spell or spell-like. It is still entirely conditional not on the ratio of monsters available in Pathfinder but the ratio within the game you are in. Good luck using a Witch Hunter in the Mana Wastes for example.
How often do we encounter large group combat? Well that again is entirely conditional, for me I play a great deal of Pathfinder content including Ultimate Campaign, as well as custom games involving large military movements, swarms of demons, the orcish hordes. Hell I even put my group on the back of a giant beast where large parasites were massing to eat my group. How about you? but I digress however you want to slice it 10d6 in a 20ft radius even if 2 or 3 are in that area it still means it has a higher damage output than the 2 attacks a Barbarian gets.
Your build is also nonsensical, 5 rage powers at level 10. Superstitious, Witch Hunter, Beast Totems 1/2/3 and Strength Surge is one too many. If you want to have the shin kicking contest, don't try to build the biggest and the best and pit it up against the biggest and the best. Maybe look at the Barbarian and go hmm, if I don't build it this VERY SPECIFIC way I might actually be doing a lot less damage than the Bloodrager who doesn't need to do anything apart from select 1 spell. Seriously how much of your build needs to be in perfect sequence for you to even compete with a fireball spell.
Dispel requires 1d20 + your CL against a DC 11 + spell caster level. This is no easier or harder than any sorcerer or wizard to dispel, given it does not involve stats. And because they've failed to give the Bloodrager a -3 to it's caster level like the paladin they get full CL.
Also at 10th level both Barbarian and Blood Rager have Dr 2/- I assumed you were talking about 20 because that's when barbarians get DR 5/-
I haven't built this "Bloodrager" so how you are +4 higher than something I haven't made kinda brings into question what exactly you're looking at. Especially given Barbarians and Bloodrager have the exact BAB and save progression.
Your build is also nonsensical, 5 rage powers at level 10. Superstitious, Witch Hunter, Beast Totems 1/2/3 and Strength Surge is one too many. If you want to have the shin kicking contest, don't try to build the biggest and the best and pit it up against the biggest and the best. Maybe look at the Barbarian and go hmm, if I don't build it this VERY SPECIFIC way I might actually be doing a lot less damage than the Bloodrager who doesn't need to do anything apart from select 1 spell. Seriously how much of your build needs to be in perfect sequence for you to even compete with a fireball spell.Dispel requires 1d20 + your CL against a DC 11 + spell caster level. This is no easier or harder than any sorcerer or wizard to dispel, given it does not involve stats. And because they've failed to give the Bloodrager a -3 to it's caster level like the paladin they get full CL.
Also at 10th level both Barbarian and Blood Rager have Dr 2/- I assumed you were talking about 20 because that's when barbarians get DR 5/-
I haven't built this "Bloodrager" so how you are +4 higher than something I haven't made kinda brings into question what exactly you're looking at. Especially given Barbarians and Bloodrager have the exact BAB and save progression.
Extra Rage Power. A feat that the Bloodrager can't take. One of the best feats a Barbarian should take, aside from Power Attack and Raging Vitality. Humorously, you pit a chance of 60 from a fireball, literally a miniscule chance of that happening and cite that as what the Barbarian has to compete with. Realistically, you'll get on average about 30 points of damage subject to a saving throw, resistance, SR per target. And something the Bloodrager can only do once per day.
From BAB, Strength Surge, and a solid strength score (Most Barbarians can get a 26 at the very least by 10th level), you have a 0% chance of failure to Spell Sunder a 13th level caster's spell. And our Barbarian can do this however many times he needs to though only once per rage.
The Invulnerable Rager has DR 5/- at 10th level.
Superstition. A bonus against pretty much every meaningful saving throw.
And I haven't even gotten into Rage Cycling yet, which benefits the Barbarian many times more than the Bloodrager.
As another bonus, the Barbarian can allocate his stats better since you have to put some points into Charisma if you even want to cast. So the Barbarian will either have more hit points, DEX, or Wisdom.
|
Suz,
I am avoiding the wall of text that you seem to post with almost everyone you make thus far in this thread. I have the gist of it for the most part and will not comment on them except for the ones you have made about PFS and the Adventure Paths and even "playtesting" these classes.
First, PFS while it only goes up to 13th level officially (with the Eye's of Ten scenario's) Also goes well beyond 13th level WITH modules and Adventure Paths as well officially. Just NOT with scenario's.
Second, How could you possibly play test all the classes you have touched on to 20th level and even with the Adventure Paths currently out there? I know of two AP's that go to 18th level and one that will be going to 20th level. If you have play tested to the levels that you made comments about in being able to play test the classes from the Advanced Class Guide then I would be impressed as most if not all of us could not have achieved that in the little time they have been out.
Just designing/building the classes to 20th level is NOT playtesting the classes at all. Knowing the math and the rules really well does not make up for playing the character.
Now, what I am saying here is I have not played any of the characters so hence I am not commenting on their power and or balance. Simply because I would like to be fair about it. After all the developers DID ask us to be fair about the play test and actually PLAY them in the game and not just make a bunch of characters and make power statements like your in the first posting.
PFS, is actually the prefect place to play test these classes because they can be brought up fairly fast with the experience point progression that it has is really fast. Not to mention that it is a lot of fun too. You might want to do some research the next time before you comment on whether a venue is viable for playtesting or not before you make them again.
@Scavion,
Very well you seem to be stuck on this 1 build of barbarian which includes predetermined feats being able to compete with a bloodrager. Once again you are still missing the specific customization you require to pull it off.
A damage of 10-60 (5-30 if saved) from fireball to all creatures in a 20ft radius to compared to 15-30 per strike on a single opponent seems to continually elude you as to which would do higher damage. If 2 creatures exist in the radius that damage dealt in that round becomes 20-120(10-60 if saved) again with a third person becomes 30-180 (15-90 if saved) etc etc. In terms of SR they have a full CL get it into your skull they have the same ability to dispel/counter/overcome SR as any full fledged spellcaster. At level 10 that's twice a day not including a potential bonus spell from stat block. Fireball is also just the tip of the iceberg, Shining Cord, Lightning Bolt, Blink are all spells that give a Rager an edge.
Again dispel magic is not that difficult either, with Haste active a Bloodrager can potential dispel a force wall and still attack in the same round. (why you chose to compete over who can destroy a force wall is beyond my reasoning)
Again you are specializing the barbarian further, so with this 1 specific build toting this 1 specific archetype, when the moon is at the peak during the winter solstices coldest night and the stars alight just so perhaps the Barbarian is not too far from the Blood rager? this seems to be a theme I sense from you.
If you want to compare rage powers vs bloodline powers you get superstition Blood ragers can even potentially use Dispel Magic as a counterspell to negate spell and spell-like all together. The difference then is I don't even have to make a save, and don't forget your saves only work while raging. Bloodragers have spells all the time.
Forget rage cycling when I can get Monstrous Physique on a Hasted creature that has rage and Bull strength tied to it. Yes they all stack
+4 Size from Monstrous Physique +4 Rage +4 Enhancement Bonus, so after +12 to my strength you really think your barbarian's +10 to sunder is really going to make "that" much difference?
You are correct about MAD, but with the ability to buff one's abilities the MAD is severely lessened. A Barbarian needs STR, DEX and CON. A Blood rager really just needs DEX, CON, CHA as I have stated above even with the base 10 attribute in STR a Bloodrager has enough buffs to boost itself up to at least 22 and thats without racial or level advancement points. Hell an Orcish Bloodline gets another +2 Str and 1/2 level morale bonus to Attack, damage and will saves. Even if this beast just hits something it could devastate it without min maxing.
Sorry dude, try as you might there isn't any way you are convincing me that your one barbarian build would disprove how much further ahead the bloodrager is on all levels without so much as a need to pick a Bloodline. Maybe if you took the time to look at the data rather than jumping up and down on your soap box you'd realize "Hmm maybe this is far too specific a way to stay in the game against a bloodrager. I mean this guy is only comparing my ENTIRE SETUP to a single spell." What about the other barbarians who don't wish to use that build what? tough luck? reroll your barbarian and use this 1 and only build?
Once again a reminder I am in this thread to talk about Gestalts, not pander to your fanatical believe that what exists is flawless. Get the message, this is a playtest and the numbers don't lie. However your ridiculously circumstantial evidence does. Count the ratio of Sorcerer abilities and the Barbarian Abilities this class uses, then figure out what percentage of them come from each (50% barbarian and 50% sorcerer? more or less?) Then actually LOOK at the numbers and figure out for yourself if they actually add up.
|
|
Also to be fair. This is almost 6-8 months of playtesting of these classes and we are barely in the first month. There are going to be some adjustments and redesigning of the classes based on how we PLAY them and test them and then comment on the forums about how they played.
So I would suggest actually PLAYING them before commenting to much as they asked us to do.
Suz you did comment on another not having played the classes.. have you? and if so how could you have done so to 20th level and all of them that you have commented on?
Maybe I missed that in the walls of text you are posting? and if so I WILL apologize.
@Deanoth
No quite allright, I understand wall posts are not easy to digest. You are right there is time to go through and 90% of what I said is comparative data on the RAW rules between base classes and the new ones.
I am currently midway through several playtests, the first with a bloodrager and the second with an investigator. The Bloodrager is still maintaining a far greater power over both 1-15th level Barbarian and a 1-15th level Sorcerer. Still continuing the playtest before I post in detail on my findings.
The investigator is interesting as a skills/combat class but only gone 1-5 against the rogue and alchemist.
@Scavion,
A damage of 10-60 (5-30 if saved) from fireball to all creatures in a 20ft radius to compared to 15-30 per strike on a single opponent seems to continually elude you as to which would do higher damage. If 2 creatures exist in the radius that damage dealt in that round becomes 20-120(10-60 if saved) again with a third person becomes 30-180 (15-90 if saved) etc etc. In terms of SR they have a full CL get it into your skull they have the same ability to dispel/counter/overcome SR as any full fledged spellcaster. At level 10 that's twice a day not including a potential bonus spell from stat block. Fireball is also just the tip of the iceberg, Shining Cord, Lightning Bolt, Blink are all spells that give a Rager an edge.
Its cute because you can only do it once per day or twice to spike over the Barbarian's damage output on a chance in an incredibly specific situation.(loads and loads of enemies tightly balled up) I'm just pointing out that you get 1 or 2 tricks a day that goes through 3 layers of defense.(SR,Resistance/Immunity, and a really easy saving throw. With a poor saving throw the average CR 10 Creature has a +9 which means for the Bloodrager it has a 13/20 chance of success. Meanwhile our Barbarians routinely puts out his 70 points of damage with a far better success rate that also spikes in damage. You keep pointing out all these other spells, but the Bloodrager only knows 2 at 10th and can only cast 1, or 2 if he has a 16 Charisma, which I highly doubt as that would give Barbarians even more of an edge with their ability scores.
Again dispel magic is not that difficult either, with Haste active a Bloodrager can potential dispel a force wall and still attack in the same round. (why you chose to compete over who can destroy a force wall is beyond my reasoning)
Haste doesn't grant you additional action, I don't know how your getting to cast and attack in the same round, looks like another case where you've gotten the rules wrong. And look! Thats both your spells known and both your spells blown while our Barbarian can keep on trucking throughout the rest of the day.
If you want to compare rage powers vs bloodline powers you get superstition Blood ragers can even potentially use Dispel Magic as a counterspell to negate spell and spell-like all together. The difference then is I don't even have to make a save, and don't forget your saves only work while raging. Bloodragers have spells all the time.
Except when they run out because they get an incredibly few amount. And the Superstitious Save has a better success rate than your Dispel which wastes your actions, has a greater failure rate, and which you can only do once or maybe twice per day. Which you then can't cast anything else.
Forget rage cycling when I can get Monstrous Physique on a Hasted creature that has rage and Bull strength tied to it. Yes they all stack
+4 Size from Monstrous Physique +4 Rage +4 Enhancement Bonus, so after +12 to my strength you really think your barbarian's +10 to sunder is really going to make "that" much difference?
For one encounter that blows all your spell casting of third level and your spells known. So do you have Fireball or Monstrous Physique? Or Dispel Magic and Haste? Schrodinger Bloodrager is a powerful foe indeed! Always chose the right things for the job despite having limited spells known! You only get 2 spells known at 10th level so which is it? Spell Sundering can be used as many times as you have rage rounds if you end the rage after each round. Found a magic trap that the Rogue is too scared to disable? Spell Sunder. Trapped in a wall of force? Spell Sunder. Ally dominated or Hold Personed? Spell Sunder it for him. Invisible foe? Spell Sunder ignores the miss chance and ends the spell.
You are correct about MAD, but with the ability to buff one's abilities the MAD is severely lessened. A Barbarian needs STR, DEX and CON. A Blood rager really just needs DEX, CON, CHA as I have stated above even with the base 10 attribute in STR a Bloodrager has enough buffs to boost itself up to at least 22 and thats without racial or level advancement points. Hell an Orcish Bloodline gets another +2 Str and 1/2 level morale bonus to Attack, damage and will saves. Even if this beast just hits something it could devastate it without min maxing.
Have you even read the playtest? The Bloodrager has completely different bloodlines. And the Bloodrager doesn't even get access to the Orc Bloodline unless he gets Eldritch Heritage. AND even if you did have it, Touch of Rage ends before your next turn so you actually wouldn't even get to use it. So heres another case where you've gotten the rules wrong. And if you lower your Strength you are literally useless for half the day except the one portion of the day you go full nova.
Once again a reminder I am in this thread to talk about Gestalts, not pander to your fanatical believe that what exists is flawless. Get the message, this is a playtest and the numbers don't lie. However your ridiculously circumstantial evidence does. Count the ratio of Sorcerer abilities and the Barbarian Abilities this class uses, then figure out what percentage of them come from each (50% barbarian and 50% sorcerer? more or less?) Then actually LOOK at the numbers and figure out for yourself if they actually add up.
Basically all this has proven is that in extremely specific scenarios you have exactly the right spells which (Which you don't actually because you have an incredibly limited amount) allow you to burst over the Barbarian once or twice a day while hes perfectly functional throughout the whole day. And that you don't read whats actually there properly.
Heck I avoided Come and Get Me which is on par with Spell Sunder in the power department.
@both Scavion & Ancient Spark,
As I have repeatedly mentioned to you both this discussion is about the advanced classes being in a category above base classes. Not a contest of who would win when pitted up against each-other. I have admitted multiple times to a cursory look at each of the classes with the playtest to follow, so I accept my mistake with the swashbuckler with no excuses. As mentioned above I am currently playtesting the Bloodrager along side a Barbarian a Sorcerer and a Gestalt Barbarian Sorcerer.
The blood-rager is not an argument, I have said this repeatedly a barbarian requires a very specific build gained from rage powers and feats in order to get to a high enough damage output to compete with a mid-level spellcaster. The Bloodrager without the need to select feats or bloodlines can go toe to toe for damage/utility with this build of barbarian, if the barbarian shouldn't take the build then the Bloodrager wins out by more for each power you don't choose from your build.
Again as mentioned before RAW, there is no rule saying you can't choose sorcerer bloodlines. Have a good read of the Bloodline class feature "A bloodrager must pick one bloodline upon taking his first level of bloodrager. Once made, this choice cannot be changed." It does not say Bloodrager Bloodline only. If you doubt it further read the flavor text of the bloodlines which is copy and pasted from the sorcerer's, I am in the boat of "when you are copy and pasting text it's the same thing"
I also don't know where you are getting level 12 for casting fireball either. It clearly says the first 3rd level SPD comes at lvl 10. And from the Magus spell-list fireball is available.
And if you want to talk party composition requiring another party member's character taking a specific spell just for you? Then all the more I believe that there is a very Limited type of gameplay occurring on your end. If any class doesn't have access to their entire array of abilities at character creation then what is the point? Just make the base class give you the one build and be done with it, there is no point NOT choosing Superstitious or Beast Totem or Come and Get Me. Balance is about that, the ability to pick any combination of powers/feats and be able to wield it with the same efficiency as any other base class with the same role.
In terms of how my playtest is going?
I have stating three half orcs identically with a 20 point buy, given the two barbarians exactly the same gear and equipment. Levels 1-5 were identical, despite the rage powers having two claws 1d6 + str (Abyssal BL) was doing more damage a round than 2d6 + 1/2 str. From 5-10 Demonic Bulk automatically gave enlarge person when raging putting the Barbarian further behind, not just in STR but CMB/CMD as well. 10-15 Abyssal Bloodrage increaded the strength of the rage further and the higher level spells have left the Barbarians damage against multiple targets in the dust, against single targets the Barbarian "CAN" on occassion do as much damage as the BR, but being Large, the BR has a greater reach and is now wielding a 3d6+1/2 str Greatsword, and is making the same number of attacks as the Barbarian.
I intend to share my results in detail on the completion of my 1-20 playtest on another thread and I invite you all to discuss the Bloodrager in detail.
@Ancient spark
There is a reason why there aren't full BaB casters, even the Magus is 3/4 which is suppose to be the warrior gish.
Combining Spontaneous and Prepared spellcasting is "new" adding Chocolate topping to Milk and making chocolate milk is not making something new its combining two existing things. Its not "new" Witches Hexes are new, Alchemist Bombs are new, the Gunslinger deeds are new, this alternate method of spellcasting is not new.
For the Swashbuckler I did mention "slight variations to existing content" As you stated for the most they are gunslinger deeds repackaged. If you want a swashbuckler like this take levels of Duelist Prestige class or the Aldori sword-lord.
Your final comment I agree on, I know they are working hard on it and that they are making progress. I don't think negatively on Paizo or it's writers, or even this content its a beta test, I have also done alpha testing before for many games in the past as well. The goal of the Alpha-testers is to push the class to the limits and see where they stand and what breaks. Hense why I am taking my time before posting threads on the actual classes.
@Scavion, I have repeatedly told you one build against another build a playtest does not make and I told you in my previous post I am not further engaging in a shin kicking contest of "who can build better" I figured maths would be a simple explanation for you but apparently it is not.
Lastly, if any Gestalt players have any comments on game-play or even people who have compared the full base and core classes (not multiclassed and not if you are a power-builder/min-maxer/munchkin) against these new classes then I would greatly like to hear your opinion on their play.
|
Hola @ Everyone,
I am kinda inclined to agree with Suz on the strength of the new classes. Not just with the bloodrager though, lets be honest comparing a Bloodrager to a Barbarian? Is like comparing Godzilla to Gamura, it's not hard to see the Barbarian is the favored child of Pathfinder it has been said on more than one occasion.
But compare it to a sorcerer or the magus, the bloodline powers for the Bloodrager's bloodline abilities is, in a just a carbon copy of the sorcerer one except with MORE to it. The output on a full BAB spellcaster with rage and bloodline powers dwarfs the Magus entirely. While there might be a reason to continue playing a barbarian there isn't a reason to play the magus anymore.
I am probably going to get crucified for this, but I do have a problem with the Paizo writers, they are getting really lazy. All of their new content was taken almost directly from 3.5, Magus is a Warmage, Witch is a Hexblade, Oracle is a Favored Soul, etc. Which I never had an issue with because that added a flavor to it. But these new classes seem like a clumsy attempt at reinventing the wheel. I'd much rather a book with more modified 3.5 classes than these amalgamations, I like multiclassing as well and I don't want to fork out $40-50 for a book whose purpose seems to further simplify the game for people not willing to explore the versatility of the existing content.
Correct me if I'm wrong though, did anyone else get the feeling when 4e died, Paizo took Mythic from 4e (tiers, point systems, entirely self sustaining characters)and brought those 4e gamers into the fold along-side the existing 3.5 migrants? I mean who else but the 4e generation validate having epic/mythic/legendary powers from level 1? or even a class that combines the best elements of two classes and remove the sacrifices made during multiclassing as a good idea?
As a 3.5 migrant, these classes give the impression of pandering to those 4e guys while the older 3.5 tolerate it. I would much rather see another Advanced Player Guide come out with the 3.5 adaptions than these advanced classes.
LET THE CRUCIFIXION BEGIN! careful I'm a biter though
Again as mentioned before RAW, there is no rule saying you can't choose sorcerer bloodlines. Have a good read of the Bloodline class feature "A bloodrager must pick one bloodline upon taking his first level of bloodrager. Once made, this choice cannot be changed." It does not say Bloodrager Bloodline only. If you doubt it further read the flavor text of the bloodlines which is copy and pasted from the sorcerer's, I am in the boat of "when you are copy and pasting text it's the same thing"
In addition, the bloodrage gains additional bloodrage powers at 1st level, 4th level, and every four levels thereafter. The bloodrage powers a bloodrager gains are based on his bloodline.
You don't get the benefits of the Bloodline unless it's a Bloodrager Bloodline. You don't get Sorcerer Bloodlines period but if your that intent on believing you can then you don't benefit from it at all because only Sorcerers have it in their table for getting those powers. The Bloodrager gets "Bloodrager Powers." He doesn't get Bloodline powers. He gets "Bloodrager Powers." And this is without the OBVIOUS designer intent for the Bloodrager to only use Bloodrager bloodlines. And you call me the munchkin when you're the one who is continuously making rule mistakes.
The blood-rager is not an argument, I have said this repeatedly a barbarian requires a very specific build gained from rage powers and feats in order to get to a high enough damage output to compete with a mid-level spellcaster. The Bloodrager without the need to select feats or bloodlines can go toe to toe for damage/utility with this build of barbarian, if the barbarian shouldn't take the build then the Bloodrager wins out by more for each power you don't choose from your build.
It's very much an argument because you seem to believe being able to cast 1 3rd level spell a day at 10th level means the Bloodrager is better than the Barbarian the whole day at everything when it is so clearly untrue as I have proven.
It is obviously clear to anyone whose seen a well-built Barbarian that the Bloodrager is hardly a "category above" the base and advanced classes. And this stands true for most of the base classes, especially the Slayer whose only on par with a Ranger unbuffed and only when hes not fighting his favored enemies. Otherwise the Ranger is far better and has more uses.
Suz sorry if i sound rude but you need to try out the new classes after Reading them over again carefully. It dosent matter if you want to talk gestalts or whatever if you continiue to only have read the headlines in the books.
The SW dosent use a gun.
The BL blodlines are not the sorcerer blodlines.
Haste havent given an extra ration since 3.0
You can not dispel a Wall of force
And the list gods on
The comparaison of raw data is not in any way usefull if the dara is flawed.
I will come back and read about your tests but reread the rules, ok?