Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Hello.
I am new to the Pathfinder forums and the Pathfinder meta. Something I have already picked up on is the heartburn some of the classes in the game give Gms. It has made me think about how I play and GM. While I don't ban anything, I have thought what I would consider an ideal group, and its fairly conventional. I am guilty that same way.
So, I had an idea. What if the often discouraged stuff was actually presented as the standard/ideal? Here is what I want to do. I am going to create 4 pregen characters, and apply them to a traditional adventure path. Not Runelords, but maybe Crimson Throne. I won't run it as the world saying, "look at these misfits." Instead, the world will react as if they are like the four traditional pregens in the back of these adventure paths.
To do this, I want to poll everyone on a list of classes they feel best represent some categories.
Most Often Banned for Flavor (list 4)
This group is those Gms most often ban because they don't represent whatever the vision of pathfinder is. This would be things like gunslingers (don't like guns) or ninjas (dont like it in fantasy).
Most Banned for Power (list 4)
This is for those classes that Gms freak out about. Multiclass and Prestige classes are welcome. There is only one pregen character that had this feature, and I feel more are welcome.
Played Least Often (list 4)
For those non prestige classes people just never want to play.
Also, please share what you think of the project.
For Flavor-I think it would be Gunslinger, Ninja, Samurai, and Alchemist.
I would say Monk, but I hear less about it being banned than Ninja and Samurai. Presumably because it is much harder to do a hand to hand fighter with the other base classes than it is to emulate a Ninja or Samurai. And Alchemists get bashed for the same things that Gunslingers do, just to a lesser extent.
For Being Over Powered-Summoner, Wizard, Cleric, Druid. Mostly for being Summoner and the big 3 full spellcasting classes.
Least Played would vary wildly from table to table. From my experience it would have to be Monk, Bard, Summoner, Alchemist.
I stuck to just base classes, otherwise Least Played would be filled completely with regional and circumstancial Prestige Classes that no one even thinks of playing.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Also, the banned for power can include archetypes.
Just one post so far, but I am leaning new pregen to gunslinger, samurai, alchemist, and summoner.
You are very unlikely to see many prestige classes in Banned for Power. By and large, prestige classes are suboptimal. There are a few specific builds that are pretty nice, but the 3.5 "everybody's gotta have a prestige class" are long over.
But if you really want a classic feel, make a pregen fighter, rogue, wizard, and cleric. Done!
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
blahpers wrote: You are very unlikely to see many prestige classes in Banned for Power. By and large, prestige classes are suboptimal. There are a few specific builds that are pretty nice, but the 3.5 "everybody's gotta have a prestige class" are long over.
But if you really want a classic feel, make a pregen fighter, rogue, wizard, and cleric. Done!
The prestige is only explicitly mentioned because I am talking about making new pregens, and prestige is so rare there, it may be overlooked.
I guess I didn't make it clear, but the whole point is to not have the classic feel. Think about looking at the artwork with the pregen characters in the adventure paths. GMs then turn around and say gunslingers, ninjas, or summoners are not allowed because they don't match the vibe classically associated with the game. This classic feel biases players against things that are perfectly aligned with the design philosophies of the game.
So, imagine instead of your early experiences with the game being with the cleric, fighter, rogue, wizard, it is with the elven alchemist, half-orc samurai, halfling gunslinger, and aasimar summoner. How does perception of the game change? That is the project I'm working on.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
BobTheCoward wrote: Hello.
I am new to the Pathfinder forums and the Pathfinder meta. Something I have already picked up on is the heartburn some of the classes in the game give Gms. It has made me think about how I play and GM. While I don't ban anything, I have thought what I would consider an ideal group, and its fairly conventional. I am guilty that same way.
So, I had an idea. What if the often discouraged stuff was actually presented as the standard/ideal? Here is what I want to do. I am going to create 4 pregen characters, and apply them to a traditional adventure path. Not Runelords, but maybe Crimson Throne. I won't run it as the world saying, "look at these misfits." Instead, the world will react as if they are like the four traditional pregens in the back of these adventure paths.
If unicorns were the dominant race instead of Humans, the world would be reshaped to fit them, there certainly wouldn't be chairs in most dwellings as we understood them and the entire concept of circular stairs would be dismissed as rubbish.
The point that I'm making is that what is considered "standard" depends on the world. Characters exist because of their background. If the Samurai is considered the warrior ideal, that's because the game would be set in a Japanese flavored culture.
If you just stick four deliberately oddball characters in a standard setting, and say "Bam! you're the standard ideal", it'd be a rather strange fit if the setting itself was not changed to reflect that. One would have to ask why are these classes the "ideal" if they don't fit that well into the setting in which they are placed?
From what I've seen...
Most Banned for Flavor:
Gunslinger
Ninja
Alchemist
Summoner
Most Banned for Power:
Am Barbarian (I understand that his mad Profession: Engineer skills are often considered broken and intimidate GMs)
Summoner (Synthesist) (aka Am Barbarian’s mighty steed)
Gunslinger (especially the double-dip mixed archetypes)
Any builds created around Antagonize (especially pre-Errata)
Most Banned in General (bonus round):
Anti-paladin
Assassin
Psionic Classes
The other 3PP Classes (listed separately as folks seem to like the Dreamscarred Psionic stuff)
Non-Prestige Classes Played Least Often:
Rogues (because everyone can do it better)
Monks (because those who like them seem to think they should be better and those who don't have been convinced not to try them)
Rogues (because it needed to be said twice)
Medium-sized Cavaliers with steeds (because trying to squeeze your Large-size horse through a small-size corridor is only funny when you're telling the story at the bar later, not while you are being chased by hundreds of morlocks)
What you think of the project:
Schadenfreude - much like whiskey, it's not just for breakfast anymore.
-TimD
I only ban third party stuff so I really don't have a list for them.
Least played for my groups has been -
Druid - nature stuff tends not to be a big part of my games
Bards - because bard
Rangers - Fighters are better archers and rogues are better twfers
Paladins - Most folks I know don't like the follow the code or lose your abilities clause.
As far as banned for flavor I'm curious why people ban ninja and samurai sure you can say "they're oriental and I play a western setting" but really nothing says they have to be oriental. Mechanically samurai are just lordly warriors with an honor code which sounds a lot like western knights and a ninja is just an assassin/spy/sabatoeur as opposed to the rogue which is more theif/scoundrel setup. I regularly reskin both classes, I currently use samurai to class a very hide bound domain centurion flavored NPC for example.
|
