Well, I was messing around with a lightning warrior that I wasn't really happy with before the eldritch scion showed up.
And the Brawler is my favorite. I like wrestlers, grapplers, and fist fighters, so this class is fantastic. And the Mutagenic Mauler is just icing on the cake. Bane was always my favorite Batman villain.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Civ V
Just about everything in there an OK answer?
Because excluding a couple of unexciting bits of gristle, it's all actually quite fun looking stuff.
Captain Andoran (brawler with a shield archetype).
I'm in a gestalt campaign, Brawler(Mutagen mauler)/Bloodrager with dragon bloodline(Planning on going dragon diciple, already worked out with GM that it does effect bloodrager levels), I was a Kobold, but for all my bonus strength I could have been anything.
What are you excited to play? What characters cropped up? Anything really catch your fancy?
I had a level 3 Ranger, Level 1 Sorcerer that I just started. We started at four and the campaign has been through a couple sittings.
Anyways, I was allowed to change to a Bloodrager as they are somewhat similar in the build. I wanted Sorcerer Level only for Shield Spell, and True strike, and Bloodrager gives me exactly that. Plus I had sorcerers Draconic Bloodline, and was able to keep that with bloodrager.
I'm interested in seeing how this all turns out.
This discussion has become utterly massive, I am startled.
The ACG is a solid book, adds a lot of play possibilities for characters. Personally I really like the Brawler and Arcanist. That said my group just started Iron Gods, I was inspired to play a cleric.. Sorry I added nothing to the thread. Cheers.
Seeing the Swashbuckler made me want to play a Dervish Dancer. Given the fact there are so many issues with the book I won't have to wait for the same kind of character! (Not a poke at Zolanoteph and the Bard hate thread) :)
POSTED MY POST IN WRONG THREAD
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At some point, I wanna play a half-orc green dragon-bloodline bloodrager. With toothy and caustic saliva to go along with that.
All of the green!
If I ever get to play instead of GM, I'd love to do a verminous hunter who doesn't use an animal companion. It's most likely less powerful than having the companion, but being able to call upon the powers of the insect world to grant me powers directly sounds nifty.
What are you excited to play?
God, just about everything! I mostly play PFS, so I'll probably skip the skald since its going to usually be worse at a table than a bard, but I need to look at the archetypes more closely.
I'm not particularly thrilled with the bloodrager(even though I'm playing one), not because I don't like the class, its mostly a style thing. I don't play Barbs either so that is not surprising.
I'm pleasantly surprised with the hunter, brawler and swashbuckler. The hunter in particular I thought was going to be bunk, but now that I have a firm understanding on the class I really dig it. I thought the Swashy was gonna be OP, but I think they nerfed him in all the perfect places.
The slayer and war priest stayed solid choice. The arcanist is possibly more broken than the playtest one.
My favorite though id the Investigator. Either they gave him a major face lift, or I missed something in the play test because he's amazing now. I think this is my new favorite class and I'm making at least one in society, may make 2 because I think they're that amazing.
What characters cropped up? Anything really catch your fancy?
Both Fighter Archetypes. I think the mutagen one actually is really good for the fighter. I hope they FAQ the mutagen to level 3 though so they make it PFS legal, I think thats a mistake but if not I'll be sad.
Druid/Slayer Archetype. I for one love wild shape, but I know lots of people are turned off by it and now they have a good alternative.Both Inquisitor Archetypes are to die for! Already made the hunter one in PFS and am loving him.
Pummeling feat line (assuming it ends up affecting unarmed strike only, otherwise I think its too strong. If it does Monks(and Monk Hybrids/Multi) just became serious contenders.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wow, I have nothing to add except that it's refreshing to see a thread that is NOT bashing the ACG.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A Martial Master Mutagen Warrior. I'm curious to just how useful spont feats can be. My biggest issue when playing a fighter is that my tactics could only be so complicated, I always felt limited. With spont feats, I would have all of Pathfinder material to make use of.
Flavor-wise I'm still constructing an appropriate back story. A lot of that will depend on setting.
Not to be a stick in the mud, but DND..
I'm gonna agree with this guy, it inspired me to play 5e.
Slayer has allowed me to rebuild the stealthy assassin character I tried to make as my first character. He was a rogue back when they couldn't even sneak attack the undead. It was a dark time.
I have built up a shaman--trying to figure out archetype--and a camel riding, grappling Wild Child Brawler. Fun!
Civ V
I was going to answer "a rogue", but I can't top this. : D
With the addition of Undersized Mount, I can now create a Halfling that rides a bald eagle into combat.
The most Murkan PFS-legal character will now be mine.
Gestalt Swashbuckler (Daring Infiltrator)/Inquisitor (Sanctified Slayer), Gestalt Fighter (Phalanx Soldier)/Rogue (Underground Chemist), Gestalt Slayer/Sorcerer, Gestalt Magus/Arcanist... Seriously, the ACG is amazing. :D
I've wanted to play a warpriest, preferably for WotR, since the first playtest.
I've been having fun with using the ACG classes for bad guys in my RoW game. For example, a buffed up L12 or so Triaxian draconic-bloodline bloodrager made a nice miniboss during a certain siege in RoW book 4.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I still want to make my One Punch Man using Brawler and a MoMS dip.
I also want to do a melee cheerleader type using the Brawler Exemplar archetype. Thinking of a combat capable version of Will Ferrel's Spartan Cheerleader, but with all of the silliness still there.
The last idea would be to create a swashbuckler Mysterious Avenger: The Dandy Hobo.
Mongrel Mage. The first full Sorcerer I've ever wanted to play.
Mongrel Mage. The first full Sorcerer I've ever wanted to play.
It seems to me that most bloodlines have 9th level powers not 7th, so how does that work out?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bubbling under: a gnomish skald. The character claims to be a priest of a made-up god and the raging song is just a bunch on "quotations" of said gods miracles and teachings. They are so infuriating that most who has to listen start raging.
High dex dwarven Daring Champion who gracefully tears you apart with a heavy pick.
Slayer/Horizon Walker who gains massive bonuses against [u]everything[/u].
Bolt Ace with a 2 level dip into alchemist for two extra arms who gives out a hail of light crossbow shots.
Mongrel Mage. The first full Sorcerer I've ever wanted to play.It seems to me that most bloodlines have 9th level powers not 7th, so how does that work out?
Well it's an editing error that I can happily ignore. Ability is gained at 9th and grants 9th level bloodline powers.
Swashbuckler
ACG has inspired a couple of character concepts I might use in other games I plan on being in. Speaker for the Past Shaman sounds fun, and I might try a Spirit Guide Shaman if my character croaks in a Mummy's Mask game I'm in. I've also been thinking of the Temple Guardian Paladin, since I don't exactly think spellcaster when I think of Paladins.
Been also considering an Inspired Blade Swashbuckler as another PFS character, mostly cause I had an Elf Swashbuckler stated out before the book came out. Glad I haven't played that one yet. And to round out my PFS ideas yet to be played, I have a vanilla Brawler yet to be played. And I have named him Captain Eagle..
Black Crusade.
I saw mention of playing Popeye the Sailor by using the mutagen using Brawler archetype and reflavoring the mutagen into spinach.
I'm actually enthused by the Hunter that does not have an animal companion and the Hunter that can evolve it's animal companion.
I can finally play a proper Captain Andoran.
It think the Warpriest succeeds in as a fightn' cleric. I have some cheese builds in mind.
I love that they included an Investigator that didn't use extracts. I want to make one that's completely useless in a fight.
I'm all over the spontaneous magus archetype.
Swashbuckler
For all the complaints, I think it says something when people still really want to play the class that the community says is the worst of the book. I still want to play the swashbuckler, even as written in the book.
|
Arcanist for making the flavor on D&D wizards finally work for me. Slayer for being the combat assassin. Bloodrager for being so damned metal.
Hunter's also the first pet class we might actually use, which opens up some options. So honorable mention there.
As a GM I'm looking forward to arcanists (switching out spells to counter the PCs, but more flexibility in combat with less bookkeeping? Sold!) and warpriests (all those swift actions).
Cheers!
Landon
|
The Hunter is probably going to be my next character, just because the pet dynamics are awesome. It's just such a fun class and really brings the Animal Companion up a level from "cool class feature" to "dynamic partner you can focus an entire build around".
Bolt Ace will definitely show up as a character I play at some point, as will the Daring Champion and Vanguard. Ecclesitheurge probably closes out the list of things I'm really interested in at #5.
|
I'm actually really stoked for the hunter. In the playtest I had completely written it off, but now I find it really coll. I probably will just go a reach weapon build without archetype rather then powergaming the evolutions (and divine hunter would be awesome if it didn't give up the teamwork fights, yes I can go inquisitor but I don't want to).
My other picks would be the Daring Champion cavalier, and the Shaman.
I'll still wait for the FAQs to come out before rolling a hunter at the least, we need to figure out how the skimirsher tricks work.
|
|
I'm actually really stoked for the hunter. In the playtest I had completely written it off, but now I find it really coll. I probably will just go a reach weapon build without archetype rather then powergaming the evolutions (and divine hunter would be awesome if it didn't give up the teamwork fights, yes I can go inquisitor but I don't want to).
My other picks would be the Daring Champion cavalier, and the Shaman.
I'll still wait for the FAQs to come out before rolling a hunter at the least, we need to figure out how the skimirsher tricks work.
Yeah, the Skirmisher tricks are a rough one, and it's going to continue to be rough no matter how they fix it now that it's reduced to FAQ/errata fix. If it goes off the Skirmisher uses per day, it'll be absolutely terrible. Skirmisher Tricks are a sub-par replacement for spells to begin with, but at least they're normally on a fully advancing PC with a reason to boost his WIS. If they work as Handle Animal Tricks (as seems to be the case) they're potentially pretty strong, but limited by available tricks, normal Handle Animal requirements, and the fact that only about half the list will be valid options since the AnC obviously doesn't have an AnC of its own and generally won't be able to use a ranged weapon (unless it's a gorilla with boosted INT or some cool pet with a spit attack).
Hmmm... That got me thinking about a Hunter with a llama using its spit attack with Trick Shot. It made me smile.
Honestly I think the people going "OMG, it can rattle off all these free action debuffs" are missing the fact that these debuffs have to be delivered by a creature whose BAB tops out at +12 with no Favored Enemy to boost it up, whose owner has to invest in the Handle Animal skill and not dump CHA, and that the debuffs are competing with valuable trick real estate. Most players are going to want their pet combat trained with attack trained twice so it will attack unnatural creatures and it's pretty much essential that it know the "Flank" command, which is already 8 of its tricks. Every Skirmisher trick you decide to teach your pet is going to have to be a valuable and carefully considered choice, and it should have a big impact on performance. At the lower levels it's probably going to edge out something important if you grab too many, and it requires more of your resources to be reliable, and at higher levels your pet needs the boost just to stay competitive. It's the heart of the Hunter class and needs to be basically the nature magic equivalent of the eidolon. Which is not to say that the Hunter's AnC is actually on the same power level as an eidolon even with unlimited Skirmisher tricks (it's not) just that it's the focus of the class in much the same way the eidolon is the focus of most Summoners.
Will be starting Iron Gods later this month. Was going to try a Empiricist Investigator Android interested in his origins.
|
|
I'm actually really stoked for the hunter. In the playtest I had completely written it off, but now I find it really coll. I probably will just go a reach weapon build without archetype rather then powergaming the evolutions (and divine hunter would be awesome if it didn't give up the teamwork fights, yes I can go inquisitor but I don't want to).
My other picks would be the Daring Champion cavalier, and the Shaman.
I'll still wait for the FAQs to come out before rolling a hunter at the least, we need to figure out how the skimirsher tricks work.
Yeah, the Skirmisher tricks are a rough one, and it's going to continue to be rough no matter how they fix it now that it's reduced to FAQ/errata fix. If it goes off the Skirmisher uses per day, it'll be absolutely terrible. Skirmisher Tricks are a sub-par replacement for spells to begin with, but at least they're normally on a fully advancing PC with a reason to boost his WIS. If they work as Handle Animal Tricks (as seems to be the case) they're potentially pretty strong, but limited by available tricks, normal Handle Animal requirements, and the fact that only about half the list will be valid options since the AnC obviously doesn't have an AnC of its own and generally won't be able to use a ranged weapon (unless it's a gorilla with boosted INT or some cool pet with a spit attack).
Hmmm... That got me thinking about a Hunter with a llama using its spit attack with Trick Shot. It made me smile.
Honestly I think the people going "OMG, it can rattle off all these free action debuffs" are missing the fact that these debuffs have to be delivered by a creature whose BAB tops out at +12 with no Favored Enemy to boost it up, whose owner has to invest in the Handle Animal skill and not dump CHA, and that the debuffs are competing with valuable trick real estate. Most players are going to want their pet combat trained with attack trained twice so it will attack unnatural creatures and it's pretty much essential that it know the...
Yea, the skirmisher tricks are most likely going to be limited in a way similar to the ranger. I personally know one of the Paizo developers (not naming since I asked in confidence/not an official ruling) that it will most likely have some kind of 1/2 level+wis mod thing. As for limited number of tricks, I'm probably going to make mine a human and take Eye for talent and give it the +2 int (and made the every 4 level int boosts too, I just like the idea of a pet smarter than the barbarian). Late game , yes it's going to be weak, but it's going to be pretty strong early game, which is the majority of PFS play. If you decide to go melee style w/ a reach weapon even the lack of BaB will be somewhat made up for by the stacking of feats like outflank and a couple others.
My other thought, since the hunter is fairly front-loaded (access to all skirmisher tricks, the hunter bond) all at level one, I could make a Nature oracle (probably kitsune for flavor) and have the AC progress through that, though I will take a significant spell level progression hit, you actually won't lose out greatly on the hunter stuff by going full caster while still having access to skirmisher tricks at no cost (depending on use/day ofc)
