Knee-jerk reactions from the Advanced Class Guide


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

51 to 100 of 905 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
The Exchange

Kudaku wrote:
Wrath wrote:

Hehe, I knew I was missing something.

Think I'll keep running them my way, but glad I was informed of that. It's amazing how many times I've read that but completely left that part out. Talk about failed perception check.

Cheers

No worries! For what it's worth I think I actually prefer your way of running Golems. They tend to be really disappointing fights if played straight against smart groups.

Yeah, I took the orders from the masters bit and extrapolate that into a concept of programming. The higher the CR the more complex the programming and the more capable I make my golems in combat. My group like them that way. Don't know how it would be taken in society play but I never GM that way.

Some things I also do have the damage terrain with missed attacks. It makes them seem more awesome and can be deadly in pillars rooms etc.

Pits are also bypassed by high level golems by the fact they,re hands overcome hardness so effectively they decrease climb dc's to something with hand holds. Their hands quite literally dig into the walls if the pit as they try to climb. Tha ones only for high level golems though. Don't think that works on create pit though as I'm not sure what the walls are made of in that spell range.

Finally, I tend to make my golems as something essential to destroy in order to progress. They often contain an essential component built into them that the players need, be it a mechanical component or the elemental essence trapped within.

By varying things in this way, it's allowed me to keep golems viable and complex and keeps my players on their toes in coming up with new tactics to destroy them or take them out.

None of which is relevant to this thread but thought I'd share.

Unfortunately, some of that is negated by the not capable of complex tactics part.

Cheers.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I just made a 4th-level character with 40-foot reach and a Rainbow Wizard with a penchant for slaying demons. :D

Check out my Crazy Character Gallery for more upcoming ACG characters.

Archmage Joda wrote:
So, just a question on my part: Is the Arcanist in the actual book substantially different from the playtest version?

Substantially? From what I can recall from the playtest, no not really. All the basic mechanics are the same. You learn spells like a wizard, have limited spells slots per day, less slots to prepare spells in, and start each day with 3 + 1/2 class level in arcane reservoir points with a maximum allowed of 3 + class level in arcane reservoir points (which you can get by sacrificing spell slots, magic items, absorbing enemy attacks, etc).

Lots of fun arcane exploits that didn't show up in the playtest though.

Dark Archive

Ravingdork wrote:
I just made a 4th-level character with 40-foot reach.

Would an aberrant bloodreacher of this sort by well-served as a combination with an AoO / lockdown / gatling chain-tripper type build with a high Dex and Combat Reflexes, or is that more of a reactive-based build / potential trap?

I'm not real up on the viability of AoO builds, or AoO maneuver based builds, so sometimes what seems like a decent idea in my noggin turns out to be rubbish in play...


Out of curiosity, is there an archetype that swaps the Witch's familiar for a spellbook? I doubt it, but I like to hope.


Exocrat wrote:
Cerberus Seven wrote:


Can't coup de grace it, they're immune to anything requiring a Fort save unless it works on items as well. Since you can't CdG a park bench or a tank, I'm pretty sure that means golems and other constructs are immune too.

The auto-crit portion of a CDG works but not the save or die portion.

Yes, that's what I meant. Sorry, wasn't specific enough.

@ RavingDork: holy f@*#, that degree of reach is actually legal. Damn ACG, you crazy.

@ Zhayne: not in the ACG, no.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Anything good for the Fighter? Hows that Brawler damage with using close weapons? Slayer get anything different? SOMEONE TELL ME ABOUT THE NEW COMBAT FEATS, FOR THE LOVE OF PETE!


Athaleon wrote:
With the sheer number of classes, archetypes, and class-features-via-feats that now exist, I wonder if a classless system isn't the way to go for rules-heavy systems.

I'd love a classless system whereby you could just build your character from a list or lists of choices. I had really hoped there would be this option as part of the ACG, just like the race builder in ARG. But having said that, I'm liking what I read and hear from the ACG so far.


magnuskn wrote:
lemeres wrote:

Looking at the Swashbuckler's precise strike, I realized that it is meant as a platform that makes 1weapon/1handed, sword and board, and throwing builds viable with its precise strike damage on top of their 'not really' weapon training.

And while I have heard a person or two worrying about ACG classes being overpowered.... I honestly find Swashbuckler more balanced than the gunslinger it was based off of. Getting rid of guns and making it salvage some overlooked styles makes it fit in a lot easier into most games without the GM having to worry about Cthulu's touch AC.

I am playing a playtest version Swashbuckler at lvl 14 at this moment and he seems to be very balanced. Gets screwed over by concealment and immunity to precision damage a lot, but otherwise very good. Panache really works well as a waning and waxing resource, much better than grit did.

Too bad that the Student of War, which can remove precision damage immunity, has no synergy with the Swash... well, mostly because SoW uses Int for AC so Dex is not that useful to them. Perhaps for a Inspired Blade...


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Trying to build a 9th-level brawler and it is increasingly reminding me of the rogue, in that it's supposed to be a combat class, but it seems to be failing to do anything better than other combat classes out there.


Secret Wizard wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
lemeres wrote:

Looking at the Swashbuckler's precise strike, I realized that it is meant as a platform that makes 1weapon/1handed, sword and board, and throwing builds viable with its precise strike damage on top of their 'not really' weapon training.

And while I have heard a person or two worrying about ACG classes being overpowered.... I honestly find Swashbuckler more balanced than the gunslinger it was based off of. Getting rid of guns and making it salvage some overlooked styles makes it fit in a lot easier into most games without the GM having to worry about Cthulu's touch AC.

I am playing a playtest version Swashbuckler at lvl 14 at this moment and he seems to be very balanced. Gets screwed over by concealment and immunity to precision damage a lot, but otherwise very good. Panache really works well as a waning and waxing resource, much better than grit did.
Too bad that the Student of War, which can remove precision damage immunity, has no synergy with the Swash... well, mostly because SoW uses Int for AC so Dex is not that useful to them. Perhaps for a Inspired Blade...

Huh, this is actually a pretty interesting prestige class. I haven't the slightest idea how one would build into it, though... I wouldn't want it unless I was starting at level six and could build around the idea of using Intelligence for AC.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Soluzar wrote:
This book convinces me more and more that we need a revised and updated Core Rulebook to update some of the classes and clean up the rules a bit.

Preach on, brother!


Human Fighter wrote:
Will no one give me the light at the end of the tunnel? I just want to know of combat feats and fighter things. PRECIOUS COMBAT FEATS, I MUST HAVE THEM!

I know your pain. It sucks having to wait until Thursday just to find out the new options for my two characters. I'm especially interested in the Temple Champion archetype for the Paladin.

Edit: Err... there was a post there.


12 people marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:
Trying to build a 9th-level brawler and it is increasingly reminding me of the rogue, in that it's supposed to be a combat class, but it seems to be failing to do anything better than other combat classes out there.

Speaking of which, I started reading the 'Designing your own class' area of the ACG. Stumbled across this fun little tidbit:

Skills wrote:
In terms of skill points, most classes get only 2 per level (plus the character’s Intelligence modifier). A few classes get 4 or even 6, but this is a bonus that should be kept in mind when designing other elements of the class. Only the rogue gets 8 per level, and you should have a very good reason for giving a class a similar number (as this infringes on the rogue’s role as the most skilled class).

C'mon Paizo, the rogue hasn't been the most skilled of the base classes since, what, 2007? Or did you guys forget about Bardic Knowledge, Lore Master, Versatile Performance, and Jack of All Trades all in the same CRB package?


Suichimo wrote:
Human Fighter wrote:
Will no one give me the light at the end of the tunnel? I just want to know of combat feats and fighter things. PRECIOUS COMBAT FEATS, I MUST HAVE THEM!

I know your pain. It sucks having to wait until Thursday just to find out the new options for my two characters. I'm especially interested in the Temple Champion archetype for the Paladin.

Edit: Err... there was a post there.

I came to my senses and deleted the super begs, but it shall live on through you. I just want to know what I can do for my fighter to make it less awful, because I love my awful fighter so much.


Zhayne wrote:
Out of curiosity, is there an archetype that swaps the Witch's familiar for a spellbook? I doubt it, but I like to hope.

Not that I know of. If why you're asking is to avoid the "I just kill the familiar" problem then try Bonded Witch . I honestly don't see why it's half elf only though and as long as it's not PFS you could probably convince your DM to allow it on any race.


Ravingdork wrote:
I just made a 4th-level character with 40-foot reach

Nice! That's actually almost identical to my PFS playtest bloodrager in basic build (I used a dorn dergar though for one-handed reach and the other hand for the closer squares). Shouldn't it be 30 ft reach, though (20 ft. for a Large creature's reach weapon +5 aberrant +5 spell), or was I missing something when I played him?


Cerberus Seven wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Trying to build a 9th-level brawler and it is increasingly reminding me of the rogue, in that it's supposed to be a combat class, but it seems to be failing to do anything better than other combat classes out there.

Speaking of which, I started reading the 'Designing your own class' area of the ACG. Stumbled across this fun little tidbit:

Skills wrote:
In terms of skill points, most classes get only 2 per level (plus the character’s Intelligence modifier). A few classes get 4 or even 6, but this is a bonus that should be kept in mind when designing other elements of the class. Only the rogue gets 8 per level, and you should have a very good reason for giving a class a similar number (as this infringes on the rogue’s role as the most skilled class).

C'mon Paizo, the rogue hasn't been the most skilled of the base classes since, what, 2007? Or did you guys forget about Bardic Knowledge, Lore Master, Versatile Performance, and Jack of All Trades all in the same CRB package?

Wait... Don't most classes get 4 skill points per level? Even then a lot of the ones that are stuck with 2+ have reason to stack int.

lemme tally (not using alt classes or advanced classes)

-2+
8 (3 of which use int as a casting stat)
-4+
7
-6+
3
-8+
1

So in reality the majority of classes have more than 2+ skill points per level even though 2+ is the largest category. 2 of the 2+ classes actually end up with more skill points than Rogues..... and 1 of them (the Magus) ends up with more like 5ish skill points per level.

In the 2+ category Paladins, Fighters, Summoners, and Sorcerors are the only ones who don't have class reasons to bump int for more skill points. Of those Paladins and Fighters are the only ones who don't have full casting or highly mutable class features to make up for their lack of skill points.

TL;DR 2+ skill points per level is not a good balance point for classes.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
I just made a 4th-level character with 40-foot reach
Nice! That's actually almost identical to my PFS playtest bloodrager in basic build (I used a dorn dergar though for one-handed reach and the other hand for the closer squares). Shouldn't it be 30 ft reach, though (20 ft. for a Large creature's reach weapon +5 aberrant +5 spell), or was I missing something when I played him?

Breakdown:

+ 10 feet from enlarge person spell
+ 05 feet from the aberrant bloodline ability
+ 05 feet from long arm spell
------------------------------------------------------
= 20 feet total

Then double the reach for using a reach weapon.


All I want to know is if there is a brawler with rage.


The closest seems to be Mutagens+Beastmorphs in one archetype.

Advanced Class Origins may be different though!

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
I just made a 4th-level character with 40-foot reach
Nice! That's actually almost identical to my PFS playtest bloodrager in basic build (I used a dorn dergar though for one-handed reach and the other hand for the closer squares). Shouldn't it be 30 ft reach, though (20 ft. for a Large creature's reach weapon +5 aberrant +5 spell), or was I missing something when I played him?

Breakdown:

+ 10 feet from enlarge person spell
+ 05 feet from the aberrant bloodline ability
+ 05 feet from long arm spell
------------------------------------------------------
= 20 feet total

Then double the reach for using a reach weapon.

Hm, yeah. I'm building this sort of character for one of my next PFS numbers, and I'd been calculating it as RE suggests:

+ 10 ft. large size
+ 05 ft. abnormal reach
+ 05 ft. long arm spell
+ 10 ft. large reach weapon
-----------------------
= 30 ft.

I take it you're keying your calculation on the following text?

Reach Weapon wrote:
A reach weapon is a melee weapon that allows its wielder to strike at targets that aren't adjacent to him. Most reach weapons double the wielder's natural reach, meaning that a typical Small or Medium wielder of such a weapon can attack a creature 10 feet away, but not a creature in an adjacent square. A typical Large character wielding a reach weapon of the appropriate size can attack a creature 15 or 20 feet away, but not adjacent creatures or creatures up to 10 feet away.

But I probably wouldn't go with your interpretation here, since longarm and Abnormal Reach do nothing to increase the size of the weapon itself. You're still wielding a large-size reach weapon, which only reaches an extra 10 ft.

Thoughts?

:-)

Sovereign Court

I think Joe M.'s interpretation makes more sense. Of course, 30ft reach is nothing to sneeze at either.


Ascalaphus wrote:
I think Joe M.'s interpretation makes more sense. Of course, 30ft reach is nothing to sneeze at either.

Yeah, 30 ft reach is really awesome regardless. That's the range of Point-Blank Shot and several special abilities, plus in dungeon environments with a lot of twists and corridors, you often are as good as a ranged character at attacking distant enemies.

I am also with Joe on this one (I guess obviously, but might as well say it directly). If an ogre with a spear was a bloodrager with those two abilities, I'd think they would still get two +5 increases, like the abilities say. Has this come up for ogres with Lunge and the like?

The Exchange

Another vote for Joe and 30 is cheese enough. Funny to whack an archer that thinks they are safe. Could lunge be thrown in?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:
Trying to build a 9th-level brawler and it is increasingly reminding me of the rogue, in that it's supposed to be a combat class, but it seems to be failing to do anything better than other combat classes out there.

That's because the progression should've been something like... human, gorilla, rhino, ..., Rhino, the Thing, Hulk.

In the game, where magic reigns supreme, classes extending mundane abilities should become superheroes, not +1 item users.

Apologies for this derail... it's just that seeing yet another class with fighter issues is really vexing.

Regards,
Ruemere


Ravingdork wrote:


EDIT 3: The Spell Sage wizard archetype can cast bard, cleric, AND druid spells in addition to his normal allotment!

OK, what's the catch? This seems like it would be overpowered even if it traded every class feature the Wizard got AND got Stunted Spellcasting.


Ravingdork wrote:
Trying to build a 9th-level brawler and it is increasingly reminding me of the rogue, in that it's supposed to be a combat class, but it seems to be failing to do anything better than other combat classes out there.

The last time my friends and I looked at the class it just seemed like a combination of the lamest qualities of both the fighter and monk.


Cerberus Seven wrote:


Skills wrote:
In terms of skill points, most classes get only 2 per level (plus the character’s Intelligence modifier). A few classes get 4 or even 6, but this is a bonus that should be kept in mind when designing other elements of the class. Only the rogue gets 8 per level, and you should have a very good reason for giving a class a similar number (as this infringes on the rogue’s role as the most skilled class).

C'mon Paizo, the rogue hasn't been the most skilled of the base classes since, what, 2007? Or did you guys forget about Bardic Knowledge, Lore Master, Versatile Performance, and Jack of All Trades all in the same CRB package?

Unfortunately they never noticed that. Just like when they say fighter are the best at combat.

Grand Lodge

deuxhero wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:


EDIT 3: The Spell Sage wizard archetype can cast bard, cleric, AND druid spells in addition to his normal allotment!
OK, what's the catch? This seems like it would be overpowered even if it traded every class feature the Wizard got AND got Stunted Spellcasting.

It's once per day starting at level 2, plus additional uses at 6, 11, and 16;

it costs 2 prepared spells of the level you want to cast;

casting time for the spell is 1 round per spell level plus normal casting time if 1 round or longer;

replaces arcane school

Example: Level 5 wizard casts good hope - this would take 3 rounds and consume two prepared level 3 wizard spells.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Nicos wrote:
Cerberus Seven wrote:


Skills wrote:
In terms of skill points, most classes get only 2 per level (plus the character’s Intelligence modifier). A few classes get 4 or even 6, but this is a bonus that should be kept in mind when designing other elements of the class. Only the rogue gets 8 per level, and you should have a very good reason for giving a class a similar number (as this infringes on the rogue’s role as the most skilled class).

C'mon Paizo, the rogue hasn't been the most skilled of the base classes since, what, 2007? Or did you guys forget about Bardic Knowledge, Lore Master, Versatile Performance, and Jack of All Trades all in the same CRB package?

Unfortunately they never noticed that. Just like when they say fighter are the best at combat.

It sounds like politicians reciting the party line to me, really. PF's official stance is that rogues are best skilled and fighters are best combatants, and darn it, that's what they're going to say.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Zhayne wrote:
Nicos wrote:
Cerberus Seven wrote:


Skills wrote:
In terms of skill points, most classes get only 2 per level (plus the character’s Intelligence modifier). A few classes get 4 or even 6, but this is a bonus that should be kept in mind when designing other elements of the class. Only the rogue gets 8 per level, and you should have a very good reason for giving a class a similar number (as this infringes on the rogue’s role as the most skilled class).

C'mon Paizo, the rogue hasn't been the most skilled of the base classes since, what, 2007? Or did you guys forget about Bardic Knowledge, Lore Master, Versatile Performance, and Jack of All Trades all in the same CRB package?

Unfortunately they never noticed that. Just like when they say fighter are the best at combat.
It sounds like politicians reciting the party line to me, really. PF's official stance is that rogues are best skilled and fighters are best combatants, and darn it, that's what they're going to say.

Even when it drives us all crazy.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:
I think Joe M.'s interpretation makes more sense. Of course, 30ft reach is nothing to sneeze at either.

Yeah, 30 ft reach is really awesome regardless. That's the range of Point-Blank Shot and several special abilities, plus in dungeon environments with a lot of twists and corridors, you often are as good as a ranged character at attacking distant enemies.

I am also with Joe on this one (I guess obviously, but might as well say it directly). If an ogre with a spear was a bloodrager with those two abilities, I'd think they would still get two +5 increases, like the abilities say. Has this come up for ogres with Lunge and the like?

Bardiche with enlarge person, Abnormal Reach, longarm, Lunge.

= 173 squares threatened on your turn
= 126 squares threatened when not your turn

Combine this with the fantastically fun fortuitous weapon property, courtesy of the ACG ...

*bwahahahahahaha!*

Calculations:
05 ft. large space
10 ft. large reach
10 ft. large reach weapon
05 ft. Abnormal Reach
05 ft. longarm
05 ft. Lunge
-----------------------
Covered: 40 ft. radius
Threatened: that minus 15 ft. radius (your own space plus large reach weapon "donut hole")

Reaching back to high school geometry, that's going to be:
40 x 40 x 3.14 covered
- 15 x 15 x 3.14 not threatened
---------------------------
4,317.5 square feet threatened

4,317.5 square feet
÷ 25 square feet (= 5x5) to approximate grid
---------------------------
= 173 squares threatened on your turn (approximately, since the grid probably does a few things to this around the edges)

Since Lunge disappears when your turn ends, that drops us down to [...]
= 126 squares threatened when not your turn (approximately, since the grid probably does a few things to this around the edges)


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Joe M. wrote:

Thoughts?

:-)

Just that I think you're mistaken. :-D

Silver Crusade

Ravingdork wrote:
Joe M. wrote:

Thoughts?

:-)

Yeah. I think you're wrong.

OK. Reasonable people may disagree.

Back to our regularly scheduled knee-jerk reactions!

:-)


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Reasonable people might also agree. :-D

Silver Crusade

Ravingdork wrote:
Reasonable people might also agree. :-D

Also a possibility!

I'll start a thread in Rules on this topic later tonight/tomorrow if someone else doesn't get around to it first. Seems worth adding to the FAQ queue. (Though I'll bet Mark's got it on his personal list now, can't hurt to talk it out and grab the flags in a dedicated thread.)

:-)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

So does Bounty Hunter's Dirty Trick do nothing until level 3?

Could they design this archetype to be anymore clunky?


Feat Question -

Any chance there's a new feat in the ACG that will use the DEX modifier for weapon damage then STR?

Getting so tired of having to go use the Dervish Dance Feat if I want to make a DEX based melee type. Hoping with the Swashbuckler class they will fix this oversight.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Matt2VK wrote:

Feat Question -

Any chance there's a new feat in the ACG that will use the DEX modifier for weapon damage then STR?

Getting so tired of having to go use the Dervish Dance Feat if I want to make a DEX based melee type. Hoping with the Swashbuckler class they will fix this oversight.

Not only did they not do that, they screwed up so badly Paizo has already told us about Fencing Grace, which does that only for rapiers, coming in Advance Class Origins.

Hence this thread

Liberty's Edge

Matt2VK wrote:

Feat Question -

Any chance there's a new feat in the ACG that will use the DEX modifier for weapon damage then STR?

Getting so tired of having to go use the Dervish Dance Feat if I want to make a DEX based melee type. Hoping with the Swashbuckler class they will fix this oversight.

The Slashing Grace Feat makes a one-handed slashing weapon count as piercing for class abilities and allows Dex-to-damage with it. This makes the Feat primarily useful only to Swashbucklers given the lack of finesseable one-handed slashing weapons (Swashbucklers can use any one-handed piercing weapon with Dex, so it works for them). That's it.

Now, Jason Bulmahn has also stated that in Advanced Class Guide Origins, there will be a Feat called Fencing Grace allowing Dex-to-damage on rapiers, which is more generally applicable. He's even posted full details of said Feat. You should be able to find it around here somewhere.

9mm wrote:

Not only did they not do that, they screwed up so badly Paizo has already told us about Fencing Grace, which does that only for rapiers, coming in Advance Class Origins.

Hence this thread

This is not exactly an unbiased summary of what actually happened. The link is quite useful, though.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cerberus Seven wrote:

Speaking of which, I started reading the 'Designing your own class' area of the ACG. Stumbled across this fun little tidbit:

Skills wrote:
In terms of skill points, most classes get only 2 per level (plus the character’s Intelligence modifier). A few classes get 4 or even 6, but this is a bonus that should be kept in mind when designing other elements of the class. Only the rogue gets 8 per level, and you should have a very good reason for giving a class a similar number (as this infringes on the rogue’s role as the most skilled class).

This actually made me LOL! I mean... Seriously, Rogues are not even in the Top 5 most skilled classes anymore!

Zhayne nailed it:

Zhayne wrote:
It sounds like politicians reciting the party line to me, really. PF's official stance is that rogues are best skilled and fighters are best combatants, and darn it, that's what they're going to say.


Ravingdork wrote:
Trying to build a 9th-level brawler and it is increasingly reminding me of the rogue, in that it's supposed to be a combat class, but it seems to be failing to do anything better than other combat classes out there.

Does it at least succeed at punching things in the face really hard? Or should I be sticking with my MOMS 2 / Brawler Fighter (rest) build for that?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Third Mind wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Trying to build a 9th-level brawler and it is increasingly reminding me of the rogue, in that it's supposed to be a combat class, but it seems to be failing to do anything better than other combat classes out there.
Does it at least succeed at punching things in the face really hard? Or should I be sticking with my MOMS 2 / Brawler Fighter (rest) build for that?

Brawler gets the following, UAS damage increase, flurry, the ablity to temparorly give you feats you qualify for, minor manuver bonuses, AC boost, and a really bad Save or Lose 5/day at 20th. oh and Awesome blow so late you'll never notice it.


I... will take that as a stick with my other build for it. :)

Pity though, I thought that the Brawler would have hit that sweet spot of face punching I was hoping for. Maybe an archetype down the line will shore that up though. I'm sure full BAB helps a bit and that I could wait for dragon style & dragon ferocity if I did a larger level build, but meh...

Perhaps a Brawler / Bloodrager (abberant) and have an unarmed fighter with reach that can hit sort of hard.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Third Mind wrote:

I... will take that as a stick with my other build for it. :)

Pity though, I thought that the Brawler would have hit that sweet spot of face punching I was hoping for. Maybe an archetype down the line will shore that up though. I'm sure full BAB helps a bit and that I could wait for dragon style & dragon ferocity if I did a larger level build, but meh...

Perhaps a Brawler / Bloodrager (abberant) and have an unarmed fighter with reach that can hit sort of hard.

Remember you can combine master of many styles with the Brawler(class) now. I made a pretty decent avatar type character using Suli Elemental abilities and the elemental fist style chains. Picked up the first two of each for WIS to damage and used martial flexibility to pick up the third feat in those lines situationaly. You can also just take Efreeti Style, Shaitan Style, Djinni Style, and Marid style and use martial flexibility to pick up the second set of feats whenever you need the elemental resistances. The Brawler counts as a monk for elemental fist attempts so you end up with plenty a day.

This gets really crazy if you make him mythic.

Edit: Although I admit I used the Suli's Monk favored class bonus to increase the damage. Speaking of which. Did the new classes get their own favored class bonuses?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Chaotic Fighter wrote:


Edit: Although I admit I used the Suli's Monk favored class bonus to increase the damage. Speaking of which. Did the new classes get their own favored class bonuses?

yes they did.


9mm wrote:
Chaotic Fighter wrote:


Edit: Although I admit I used the Suli's Monk favored class bonus to increase the damage. Speaking of which. Did the new classes get their own favored class bonuses?
yes they did.

Oh goodie. Hope they're good.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

My first attempt at a hunter.

Chaotic Fighter wrote:
Remember you can combine master of many styles with the Brawler(class) now.

What? How? Did I miss that part?

Chaotic Fighter wrote:
Speaking of which. Did the new classes get their own favored class bonuses?

Yes. Every new class is covered for every core race.


Ravingdork wrote:
Chaotic Fighter wrote:
Remember you can combine master of many styles with the Brawler(class) now.

What? How? Did I miss that part?

Chaotic Fighter wrote:
Speaking of which. Did the new classes get their own favored class bonuses?
Yes. Every new class is covered for every core race.

Good to know. And yes. You did miss it. Any class can have a bastard hellspawn with any other class.


Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ravingdork wrote:

My first attempt at a hunter.

Chaotic Fighter wrote:
Remember you can combine master of many styles with the Brawler(class) now.

What? How? Did I miss that part?

Chaotic Fighter wrote:
Speaking of which. Did the new classes get their own favored class bonuses?
Yes. Every new class is covered for every core race.

Is the Sugliin you are referencing the 3.5 version? Or is there a new one printed somewhere I've missed or the ACG?

Also, parent classes have been removed. There was a blog post about it, but there are no rules preventing you from going Fighter/Monk/Brawler.

51 to 100 of 905 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Knee-jerk reactions from the Advanced Class Guide All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.