So we are starting a new Pathfinder game with 5 players and a DM. Three of the players are new to the Pathfinder game, but familiar with RPG games. We are only allowed to use the Core Rulebook and the Advanced Players Guide. We have a homegrown game and our DM loves randomness so we are all going to have to roll for our stats (which usully means we will be better off that a point by system). We will be able to arrange our stats however we like.
I know that the other four in our party are going to play the following:
Barbarian (new but a very good Warmachine player and tatically sound)
Oracle (new to PF but played a 3.5 druid - wants a healer build)
Sorcerer (the other experienced player)
Zen Archer (brand new - loves the idea of a kung fu archer)
+Me as the undecided fifth (kinda leaning toward a rogue/fighter TWF type build)
What do you think is the best fit?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First, let me say I don't believe ANY class is absolutely necessary. However:
The "classic" setup is cleric (healer), fighter (tank), rogue (trapfinder), wizard (artillery).
In your group, the barbarian fills the traditional fighter role, the oracle fills the traditional cleric role, and the sorcerer fills the traditional wizard role. That leaves rogue...
I think a rogue/fighter would be just fine. That would round out all the traditional roles, particularly if you went rogue early.
However, more important than filling any role is playing a class you would enjoy, because enjoying the game is the most important part. If you WANT to play a fighter/rogue, do that. If not, do something else.
You could split the difference and go ranger. TWF, gives you a scout, and you can pick up trap finding with the trapper or urban ranger archetypes.
Crypt Breaker Alchemist.
I agree on skill monkey ranger, you will never feel useless.
Urban archetype gives you Trapfinding, and you maintain your already good combat prowess.
For Core and APG only, the switch hitter is gonna be your best bet, effective in almost all scenarios.
Agreed, avoid playing something just because "it's needed." However, your group doesn't have an "Intelligence" based character, which means it's going to miss out on "Knowledge check" opportunities and so forth. If you've never tried an alchemist, I endorse it as something just a tad different.
Great suggestion, since alchemists are easy to specialize into various combat roles (melee, tank, ranged, AoE debuffing, buffing, healing, etc). And since they have 4+int, and it is usually best to put about a 14 in INT, so you will likely start with 6 skill points per level, and gain more as you get stat boosting items.
Another option might be an inquisitor, since they get their wisdom bonus on knowledge checks related to tactical info on enemies. They have 6+int skill points, and they also have plenty of of capability as a partial caster with combat potential. They also get decent scaling bonuses on a couple of social skills and survival when tracking.
I agree with the others. With a tank, healer, and high-octane artillery covered (Sorcerer + Zen Archer? Great!), a mobile-fighter type, someone that can charge in and lockdown spots as needed, keeping people away from the ranged folks, would support the group well. That can be done a number of different ways:
Rogue/Fighter
Ranger
Alchemist
Bard
Inquisitor
I think any of these choices would work well for your party.
Thank you all so much for the advice. I'm leaning towards the rogue/fighter build even more now after a conversation with the DM about being roughly a 50/50 role play vs. combat.
I need to read some more about the alchemist though. I'm very familiar with the Core Rulebook, but not as much with the APG.
One interesting, underrated thing I remember about alchemist was the fact that they can get a tentacle.
While normally, yes, a secondary natural attack is not worth much. But if it is your only natural attack, then it is treated as primary and gains 1.5x strength and power attack damage. While this might be nice for some build though (reach using long spear?), we must again ask why is it a good ability considering the fact that it is only one natural weapon (and it becomes junk once you get any other natural attacks, including the feral mutagen, so it is not a very viable offensive tool)
Its value relies upon the fact that the tentacle has the grab property. That allows a free grapple attempt after a successful hit, and you get +4 to grapple checks. And since alchemists are INT casters, they can easily have the ability scores to get the prerequisite to good grapple feats. Combined with a decent BAB and a rage like ability to increase their strength (as well as access various buff spells), and an alchemist might make a fairly decent grappler.
But this is just me spitballing ideas. I am somewhat doubtful it would be a strictly necessary role for this party. I mostly added this to provide another example of how flexible alchemist is when it comes to picking a specialization.
Thank you all so much for the advice. I'm leaning towards the rogue/fighter build even more now after a conversation with the DM about being roughly a 50/50 role play vs. combat.
I need to read some more about the alchemist though. I'm very familiar with the Core Rulebook, but not as much with the APG.
The few skillpoints the fighter gets will be bad if you want to be a skillmonkey. And it is combining one class that is good in combat but has little out of combat with a class that is the opposite.
You might want to consider urban ranger instead of fighter.