Well, I posted this a while ago as an example of exploiting the Warpriest to do TWF - I'm not trying to validate a whole class here or anything, but it's an example of playing to some of the WP's unique strengths for a flavor-focused build:
Charge is a two-handed power-attacking katana, plain and simple - with typical gear, at level 9, lets say: 4.5+3, +2wepspec, +10str, +6powak, +4divfav = 29.5.
On a full attack, the 1-handed katana drops from 29.5 to 24.5 and ab drops by 2. The payoff is two unarmed strikes: 4.5+3, +10/7str, +2powak, +4divfav = 23.5/20.5. Average damage potential becomes 92, where the two-handed katana would have been 59 - though of course you would have more resources to spend on it.
AB is 7 points lower than a comperable raging barbarian (-3bab,-2twf,-2str)... until you add +4divfav and +2sacwep. With the fact that power attack is costing one less point for the warpriest, the difference is cancelled out; Power Attack is also far more optional on the Warpriest.
Assuming my maths is reasonably correct, that's a WP dropping the kind of full-attack bomb a Magus uses Shocking Grasp Spell Combat for.
Because of static damage bonuses, the Warpriest is also singularly good at fighting while using a shield - or using bonus feats to fight with the shield.
Well, I posted this a while ago as an example of exploiting the Warpriest to do TWF - I'm not trying to validate a whole class here or anything, but it's an example of playing to some of the WP's unique strengths for a flavor-focused build:
Charge is a two-handed power-attacking katana, plain and simple - with typical gear, at level 9, lets say: 4.5+3, +2wepspec, +10str, +6powak, +4divfav = 29.5.
On a full attack, the 1-handed katana drops from 29.5 to 24.5 and ab drops by 2. The payoff is two unarmed strikes: 4.5+3, +10/7str, +2powak, +4divfav = 23.5/20.5. Average damage potential becomes 92, where the two-handed katana would have been 59 - though of course you would have more resources to spend on it.
AB is 7 points lower than a comperable raging barbarian (-3bab,-2twf,-2str)... until you add +4divfav and +2sacwep. With the fact that power attack is costing one less point for the warpriest, the difference is cancelled out; Power Attack is also far more optional on the Warpriest.
Assuming my maths is reasonably correct, that's a WP dropping the kind of full-attack bomb a Magus uses Shocking Grasp Spell Combat for.
Because of static damage bonuses, the Warpriest is also singularly good at fighting while using a shield - or using bonus feats to fight with the shield.
I'll throw a Magus comparison up momentarily, because now I'm interested. Are you assuming average damage when all attacks hit, or did you grab the average AC of an enemy for that?
I'll throw a Magus comparison up momentarily, because now I'm interested. Are you assuming average damage when all attacks hit, or did you grab the average AC of an enemy for that?
Rather than trying to predict AC, I just put up 'average damage potential' as how much they can do if everything hits, and then separately check how their attack is comparing to a standard raging Barbarian to get a sense of whether they can live up to their potential. I think it's both simpler and more generally illuminating than trying to go into hypothetical enemies.
When comparing it to a Magus, I just figured backwards from the WP's 92: -30ish Grasp = 60, so Dervish Dance Magus has to deal 20 damage per attack or 15 per attack hasted to get 60 from his weapon. So pretty comparable I think.
This isn't really optimized either; you could grab free Improved Unarmed with a different deity or use a Cestus among other things. How awesome would a Bastard Sword & Cestus Ragathiel Warpriest be?
Or, if you don't follow Undone's logic... then I'm still back to trying to figure out how to build a capable Warpriest. I want to love it but I haven't found anything to /make/ me love it yet.
How do you define capable? For the vast majority of players (i.e. the people who aren't us arguing on the forums) a Rogue is perfectly capable. If your baseline is the raw damage of a Fighter or the versatility of a Cleric, then you're going to be disappointed. If you're looking for something in between, then you might be able to find something you like.
At level 7, my Warpriest can do:
+13/13 (1d6 + 12, x2) with one spell (Divine Favor)
+14/14/14 (1d6 + 12 x2) with two spells (Divine Favor + Channel Vigor)
+14/14/14 (3d6 + 12 x2) with two spells (Divine Favor + Channel Vigor), one Blessing, and Sacred Weapon (assuming an evil target not resistant or immune to one energy type other than acid)
And add +1 damage to each attack for every size the target is larger than Small.
That's versus:
+16/11 (2d6 + 21, 19-20x2) for a 22-str Barbarian with a +1 Furious Greatsword
The Barbarian hits harder. I hit more often and I get more full attacks off. I also get hit less because I'm at range and my AC is likely way higher (29 if I throw up Shield of Faith).
I can also select the energy damage I'm adding with Sacred Weapon to target a specific energy vulnerability (as I did in the last PFS scenario I played).
If we get hit with a Haste, the Barbarian blasts by me on damage, but now I can use the +4 ranged option from Channel Vigor to switch to:
+18/18/18 (3d6 + 12 x2)
So even against the ridiculous threshold of a raging barbarian, I'm doing competitive damage, if not equal. And I can heal, clear negative conditions, and cast utility spells from scrolls and wands as needed.
And to compare apples to something closer to apples, a fighter archer looks something like:
+13/13/8 (1d8+10, x3) (with double damage on the first shot).*
Again, the archer will win in the end, but I'm in the same ballpark.
And I'm using a sling.
*I'm sure I'm missing some things here, I don't usually play archers so I add to throw one together
Rita the Kensai
Human, Dual Talent; Pragmatic Activator & Wayang Spellhunter
10
16/18+1
14
16/18
9+1
7
1. Weapon Focus: Wakizashi(Kensai bonus feat), Weapon Finesse
3. Arcane Accuracy, Slashing Grace: Wakizashi
5. Extra Arcana: Flamboyant Arcana, Intensify Spell
6. Arcane Deed: Precise Strike
7. Extra Arcane Pool
9. Spell Blending (pick two level 2 or lower spells; Mage Armor & False Life could be nice), Empower Spell
Not really optimal-- to me the 9th level Arcana is the toughest one so that's a throw-in, and Empower Spell is more for down the line when it's more worthwhile to spend 3rd-level spell slots on attacking. Presume basically the same setup as the Warpriest above for items.
Rita has three major options, depending on range. At long range, she's going to caste a buff or control spell (more likely a buff, for Haste) and take the time to buff up her sword(adding one of the elemental buffs, along with a +2; we'll assume that, like any good Magus, it's a +1 Keen Spell Storing weapon). She'll move closer, but take her time about it.
At a range of 35' or less, she's going to buff her weapon (if she hasn't already, if she has she'll use Arcane Accuracy for a +4 to hit), 5' step as needed, then declare Spell Combat and use Bladed Dash.
The spell will give her one attack, dealing 3.5 + 3.5 (elemental buff) + 3 (weapon enhancement) + 6 (dex) + 9 (Precise Strike), for an average of 25. Then she gets her full attack off, dealing two more attacks at the same output, for another 50 damage, netting 75. If she doesn't like the enemy she'll take the time to discharge her Spell Storing weapon, adding 9d6 damage to that from its Intensified Shocking Grasp, bring the net up to 106.5.
Alternately, she'll already be in their face and will decide to break out Shocking Grasp directly. She declares Spell Combat, leads with the Grasp and casts via Spellstrike. That's 25 off her weapon and another 31.5 off of her spell. She can then full attack, for 50 damage, putting her at that same 106.5 damage. If she hasn't already discharged the Spell Storing weapon, she can do so now for another 31.5 damage, for 138 total damage. Note that this is done with a +4 to-hit off Arcane Accuracy.
Across the two rounds Rita will total to 213 damage, discharging one first level spell, one second level spell, and she'll need to recharge her spell storing weapon after the battle for another first level spell. Even as a Kensai, and assuming Int is never built past 18 (unlikely), she'll have three more first-level spell slots and three more second-level spell slots. This is also ignoring crits: Rita is critting on 15-20, and thanks to the Kensai has at least a +4 to confirm crits.
To-hit is looking at 6 BAB + 6 Dex + 3 weapon +1 WF -2 Spell Combat, for a +12. However, this is increased when using Shocking Grasp against metal targets (+3 for that attack) or when using Arcane Accuracy (+4). AA will be used frequently, pretty much being dropped only when Rita is feeling confident about her hit rates or when she uses her Opportune Parry & Riposte ability (which nets another 25 damage). If she is feeling confident about hit rates, she'll either save the arcane point (though she has a lot, thanks to her favored class bonus and Extra Arcane Pool she's at 12 or more) or spend one on Precise Strike, adding another 9 damage to each attack for +27 more damage across her three hits.
The Warpriest pulls ahead in a scenario where the starting range is beyond 35 feet but within his charge range, because he'll get an extra turn of full-attacks before Rita closes the distance-- but in that time she'll be supporting her party, and herself, by casting Haste or Fly or the like.
Rita also has out of combat utility. Her UMD score is going to be high, and works off Int due to Pragmatic Activator. At the least, it's a 16, more if she buffed her Int. She'll carry a Wand of CLW and use it to heal the party as needed between fights.
redward wrote:
kestral287 wrote:
Or, if you don't follow Undone's logic... then I'm still back to trying to figure out how to build a capable Warpriest. I want to love it but I haven't found anything to /make/ me love it yet.
How do you define capable? For the vast majority of players (i.e. the people who aren't us arguing on the forums) a Rogue is perfectly capable. If your baseline is the raw damage of a Fighter or the versatility of a Cleric, then you're going to be disappointed. If you're looking for something in between, then you might be able to find something you like.
Capable, to me, means "keeps up with and contributes to the party". In general I tend to favor flexible characters who can do more than one thing, and am more than willing to sacrifice to get that. But my problem thus far in putting a Warpriest together is that I'm either not keeping up or not contributing. A Warpriest can function well enough on their own as a damage dealer... if they buff themselves and not the party. Or they can buff the party... but that takes them out of dealing damage for the round, and if they're not dealing damage then yeah-- why am I not playing a Cleric for the same spells but sooner.
I'm perfectly willing to go suboptimal for my own entertainment-- my first character concept was a Magus 12/Dragon Disciple 8. Though she moved on from that after a closer reading of DD informed me of some problems with that plan, she's still feeling her Draconic roots. My second character was an Orc Barbarian who charged, overran, and smashed faces... all for the greater good, as he was NG (only because I'm not allowed to play a LG Barbarian), and sent postcards to the children back home that he used to play with. His name was Garthork, but he preferred to go by Smashums, because that was what the little wereboar kid called him (and Smashums in turn called him Lil' Smasher). Looking over Smashums he's solid-- Barbarian + Beast Totem can't possibly be bad right? But he's far from optimized, which is fine because Smashums is awesome and his game plan of "run everything over" is also hilarious.
But a character who has problems keeping up in both damage output and party support, despite being designed to fill both of those roles... that's what I call not capable.
I hadn't factored in the new Flamboyant Precise Strike, which is a huge deal; it basically makes the fact that the Magus is running what should be a somewhat weak weapon setup totally irrelevant, which actually bugs the crap out of me on the one hand and makes me like the Magus even more on the other. You may not have posted a totally optimal build, but you're using *the* Magus build right down to the new and somewhat absurd "+9 weapon damage for a song" option. I also hadn't factored Spell Storing, as it's a resource that's somewhat limited. Working that in with Admonishing Ray (+Favor) it's 92+36nonlethal.
I would actually say that whatever the supposed intent, the Warpriest by design is a bruiser, plain and simple. Only its not so simple, because true to the idea of a Cleric/Fighter hybrid, you need to work those bonus feats into something beyond picking up some little +1s and 2s to make it worthwhile.
I mentioned Magus just as a relative full-attack damage comparison, but the original build posting was more about how a Warpriest with TWF could perform compared to a conventional martial like a generic greatsword Barbarian. In that regard I'd say the build can do fairly well; if you're even able to keep up with - let alone possibly out-do - a generic two-hander Barbarian's full attack, I wouldn't say the build has a problem keeping up in damage. I could come up with something better focused on milking all the possible advantages out of the TWF concept, but I'll just leave it as a general idea of what can be done and go to bed.
-Yeah, I went cookie-cutter. I didn't want to post the Magus I'm actually using, because a combination of rolls instead of point-buy and a GM who's been exceedingly generous on one hand and cackling to himself on the other means that I have a hilariously powerful Magus and am still giddily terrified. It still has some of that-- Kensai, the Shocking Grasp build, and Precise Strike is still in there, but the Dex-to-damage stuff is missing. About half of the stuff in the one I'm using is the same as Rita and her cookie-cutter nature, but past about level 5-7 it broadens out and I have /no/ clue what 'the' Magus would even use.
-I really consider Spell Storing to just take up another first-level spell slot for any caster that likes getting in your face, which makes me adore it for the Warpriest too. For a pure martial it's a limited resource because they have to get the party wizard to throw a spell into it. For a Magus or Warpriest or battle Cleric/Oracle or the like, it's awesome because they can just recharge it themselves after the fight. Honestly, my plans involve carrying around no less than three Spell Storing weapons, by also having two +1 Spell Storing Spiked Gauntlets (possibly packing different spells, like emergency Vampiric Touches or some such).
-Precise Strike is kind of obscene. It's beautiful and ridiculous, but it really helped hammer home the Magus' utility and, in my opinion, helped shift their role. Magi really don't need to depend on Shocking Grasp for damage because, well, they can already at least stay in the game. They're still going to lag behind, because if nothing else a Swashbuckler/Daring Champion will have full BAB + Precise Strike + probably Power Attack (and +Challenge for the Daring Champion). But they're not going to lag behind nearly as badly, even while supporting their party.
Now, the Magus is burning through more resources than your Warpriest. We're talking one Arcane Pool Point for the weapon, probably with another point per round, one second-level spell to close distance, and probably a first-level spell every round of combat (though of course, Rita can switch to cantrips to conserve ammo and still deal 75 damage/round via Arcane Mark). Plus the spell to recharge Shocking Grasp. So, using these strategems the Warpriest has a longer adventuring day than the Magus, as Rita would be worn down after four or so encounters unless she has Pearls of Power or the like. Still, a combat endurance of four encounters is sort of what I aim for, so I'm okay with that. The Warpriest also has a higher to-hit, outside of Arcane Accuracy, so there's that.
The Warpriest would benefit vastly from gaining a more specialized spell list, preferably with some spell level discounts so it gets personal-range combat buffs like Divine Power at the same level as clerics.
A number of spell discounts roughly equivalent to that of the bard, yes, to the level of the summoner, no thanks. Giving him the paladin spell list is nearer to giving him the equivalent of the summoner spell list than the equivalent of the bard spell list.
I suspect that the summoner is the main reason why later classes get very little in the way of specialized spell lists. Giving a 3/4 BAB arcane spellcasting class a 9 levels spell list masquerading as a 6 levels spell lsit was a bad move.
I understand your concern, but I'm not entirely sure it's warranted. The Hunter got the ranger spell list added to the druid list, which turned out great. It's still not my cup of tea, but I think it's a much better class than it was in the play test.
That said, I agree with you in that I think the best solution is to do the same thing that was done with the bard, the magus, and the inquisitor - go through the various spell lists, pick appropriate spells, and draw up a custom spell list with spell level discounts where appropriate. That is however a rather daunting project for a homebrewer, so filing the name off the (anti)paladin list and calling it a day strikes me as a a decent compromise as long as the GM is willing to step in and adjudicate on how the various rules conflicts would work out.
I'm not sure how the 'Linear'-ness of a Warpriest is worse than playing all sorts of other 'smack them up the head' characters. The unique trimmings it gets allow for some interesting melee build options, like a rather hurtful TWF Warpriest of Shizuru I posted a bit ago elsewhere. I like the fact that if you ask 'how can I exploit these class features to do a concept I couldn't do as well with another class' you get a lot to think about. A big pile of feats and some unique class abilities is a big invitation to get creative.
Worse? Not inherently. A lack of flexibility is not, in and of itself, problematic. When all you have is a hammer, everything might look like a nail... but when it's a big enough hammer, everything /is/ a nail.
But when the Warpriest is being touted as flexible, and compared unfavorably to the Magus' "specialization"? Yeah that's a problem.
While I agree the cleric's sacred summons are largely terrible vs non evil opponents since he has to full round the good summons (Lions, earth elementals, tigers) early on. Hound archons are pathetic compared to the small earth elemental from the level 2 list. To make summoning a big enough hammer you have to be a wizard conjurer.
kestral287 wrote:
The problem is, though, that if you follow Undone's logic (and note that he's told us he has a character with all four of those summon feats at 9th level, so he practices what he preaches), then the Warpriest needs to devote an insane amount of resources to going off, and that doesn't happen until level ten, and doing it requires an insane feat investment that doesn't leave room for a lot of creativity.
Read again. I have a 9th level reach cleric with the summoning feats, and combat reflexes. The WP doesn't "Go off" Like a magus blowing his spells on shocking grasp which only has like a near 0 chance of actually doing something in a lot of games. Try running a magus in WotR AP, half of the season 5 PFS games or general high level play where SR is high and monsters resist all elements.
kestral287 wrote:
Or, if you don't follow Undone's logic... then I'm still back to trying to figure out how to build a capable Warpriest. I want to love it but I haven't found anything to /make/ me love it yet.
Because you're comparing identical styles. I'm able to use a lance by 3rd. My archery will always be ahead of yours. The sacred fist + MoMS build will be way ahead thanks to pummeling dragon and later quickened blood crow strike.
kestral287 wrote:
Basically: the problem is that we have one player who's massively pushing for how awesome the Warpriest is, based on its (admittedly solid) summoning tricks... and while yes, those tricks are good, they take a huge investment to pull off, in feats and in time both.
You could just not invest anything in it and get quickened high level magic. SM 8 has heal on it's list along with a bunch of other goodies. Quickened 6-7th level magic like greater dispel.
But of course that would be looking at more than a damage perspective. Additionally I'd pretty much never take summon good monster on a WP the feat does functionally nothing a summoning ring doesn't do better which means you're looking at SF Conj, Augmented summons, Evolved summon monster. The proof to me you've not even READING the abilities is that you keep harping on, superior summons which the WP cannot even utilize. As to your above build I thought we were using base class builds, isn't that the point? If not then I could just start using the SF/MoMS build I actually use more because I love it. Not even going into pummeling lances/falcatas/Bows which are silly damage wise to the point of being so OP they laugh at DPR calculations.
I'd love to see how a magus fares without his shocking grasp/snowball spam since it wouldn't work well against the enemies you really care about (SR, Resistances, Immunities) devils, demons, exct.
Erm... Not quite sure what you're getting at, Snowball works great against devils and demons. They only have Cold Resistance 10, and Snowball doesn't care about spell resistance.
I do think that one advantage the WP has over the inquisitor and cleric are the bonus feats - if you're making a divine martial that uses a particularly onerous and feat-intensive combat style (dex-based TWF for example) then the warpriest is probably the better choice.
1. My apologies on misreading Cleric as Warpriest. I've seen you discuss the Reach Warpriest before in your guide, and as this was a discussion on the Warpriest I assumed instead of reading more closely.
2. "Go off" is used in the sense of becoming a viable character; given that most of your examples for what makes the Warpriest awesome is based on the summons, and that doesn't happen until level ten, level ten would be when the Warpriest is able to go off. The full-out cookie-cutter Magus I posted above, as a comparison, would go off at level six, with Precise Strike, Dex-to-hit/damage, and Intensified Shocking Grasp. Barbarians go off from the start and /really/ go off at ten when they can get Greater Beast Totem. etc, etc.
3. Breaking SR isn't exactly difficult, that's what Spell Pen/Greater Spell Pen is for. And I'm not sure why the assumption is that a Magus would cast Shocking Grasp on something with Resist Electricity X unless they're hitting really high over X anyway. That 'high level play' against monsters resistant to their nova trick is when the Magus just shrugs and drops a Save-or-Die. It's not difficult, given the minimal investment the Magus puts into Shocking Grasp.
That said, I'm honestly not sure I can name a monster off-hand who can resist all four of the classic elements, let alone all six total elements. But that's neither here nor there.
4. I'm honestly trying to understand /your/ style. I frankly don't care about the Sacred Fist; I dislike it on general principle (I dislike Monks. It's a me thing). I'm also not sure what 'style' you think I'm using? I've yet to actually build a Warpriest. And I've honestly never built a Cleric either; poked at them for a long time but never really had the inspiration. Oracles are awesome though.
5. Been a long time since I read Superior Summoning. Got it crossed with the Sorcerer extra summon trick in which one required you to be summoning more than one monster.
6. I don't particularly care what Warpriest archetypes you want to discuss, besides the fact that I have a personal distaste for the Sacred Fist (and I don't like the Champion of the Faith either, if we're putting all the cards on the table-- but that's because I've already built a Paladin, thank you very much). That said, I'm not the guy you're in that 5/10/15 build contest with.
7. You'd really trade a precious ring slot for a feat on the grossly feat-overladen Warpriest? If I was packing the Law Blessing, I'd seriously consider Summon Good Monster; there's some pretty awesome LG stuff on that list.
8. Challenge accepted. Give me a level to build, a terrain, and a CR-appropriate monster to solo.
While I agree the cleric's sacred summons are largely terrible vs non evil opponents since he has to full round the good summons (Lions, earth elementals, tigers) early on. Hound archons are pathetic compared to the small earth elemental from the level 2 list. To make summoning a big enough hammer you have to be a wizard conjurer.
Hound Archon:
LG Medium outsider (archon, extraplanar, good, lawful)
Init +4; Senses darkvision 60 ft., detect evil, low-light vision, scent; Perception +10
Aura aura of menace (DC 16), magic circle against evil
Defense
AC 19, touch 10, flat-footed 19 (+9 natural; +2 deflection vs. evil)
hp 39 (6d10+6)
Fort +6, Ref +5, Will +5; +4 vs. poison, +2 resistance vs. evil
DR 10/evil; Immune electricity, petrification; SR 15
Offense
Speed 40 ft.
Melee bite +8 (1d8+3), slam +8 (1d4+1) or mwk greatsword +9/+4 (2d6+3), bite +3 (1d8+2)
Spell-Like Abilities (CL 6th)
Constant—detect evil, magic circle against evil
At Will—aid, continual flame, greater teleport (self plus 50 lbs. of objects only), message
Statistics
Str 15, Dex 10, Con 13, Int 10, Wis 13, Cha 12
Base Atk +6; CMB +8; CMD 18
Feats Improved Initiative, Iron Will, Power Attack
Skills Acrobatics +9, Intimidate +10, Perception +10, Sense Motive +10, Stealth +13, Survival +14; Racial Modifiers +4 Stealth, +4 Survival
Languages Celestial, Draconic, Infernal; truespeech
SQ change shape (beast shape II into any small to large "canine")
Lantern Archon:
LG Small outsider (archon, extraplanar, good, lawful)
Init +4; Senses darkvision 60 ft., low-light vision; Perception +4
Aura aura of menace (DC 13)
Defense
AC 15, touch 11, flat-footed 15 (+4 natural, +1 size; +2 deflect vs. evil)
hp 13 (2d10+2)
Fort +4, Ref +3, Will +0; +4 vs. poison, +2 resistance vs. evil
DR 10/evil; Immune electricity, petrification
Offense
Speed fly 60 ft. (perfect)
Ranged 2 light rays +3 ranged touch (1d6)
Spell-Like Abilities (CL 3rd):
At Will—aid, continual flame, detect evil, greater teleport (self plus 50 lbs. of objects only)
Statistics
Str 1, Dex 11, Con 12, Int 6, Wis 11, Cha 10
Base Atk +2; CMB –4; CMD 6
Feats Improved Initiative
Skills Diplomacy +5, Fly +14, Knowledge (planes) +3, Perception +4, Sense Motive +5
Languages Celestial, Draconic, Infernal; truespeech
SQ gestalt
vs
Small Earth Elemental:
N Small outsider (earth, elemental, extraplanar)
Init –1; Senses darkvision 60 ft., tremorsense 60 ft.; Perception +4
Defense
AC 17, touch 10, flat-footed 17 (–1 Dex, +7 natural, +1 size)
hp 13 (2d10+2)
Fort +4, Ref –1, Will +3
Immune elemental traits
Offense
Speed 20 ft., burrow 20 ft., earth glide
Melee slam +6 (1d6+4)
Special Attacks earth mastery
Statistics
Str 16, Dex 8, Con 13, Int 4, Wis 11, Cha 11
Base Atk +2; CMB +4; CMD 13
Feats Improved Bull Rush, Power Attack
Skills Appraise +1, Climb +7, Knowledge (dungeoneering) +1, Knowledge (planes) +1, Perception +4, Stealth +7
Earth Glide (Ex) A burrowing earth elemental can pass through stone, dirt, or almost any other sort of earth except metal as easily as a fish swims through water. If protected against fire damage, it can even glide through lava. Its burrowing leaves behind no tunnel or hole, nor does it create any ripple or other sign of its presence. A move earth spell cast on an area containing a burrowing earth elemental flings the elemental back 30 feet, stunning the creature for 1 round unless it succeeds on a DC 15 Fortitude save.
Earth Mastery (Ex) An earth elemental gains a +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls if both it and its foe are touching the ground. If an opponent is airborne or waterborne, the elemental takes a –4 penalty on attack and damage rolls. These modifiers apply to bull rush and overrun maneuvers, whether the elemental is initiating or resisting these kinds of attacks. (These modifiers are not included in the statistics block.)
Non-Evil enemies are going to be taking a 10 point penalty to all damage rolls against both Archons most likely. Both can Cast Aid at will. Both Archons can understand you no matter what language you speak, so if you summon them you can actually have them do something besides attack the nearest thing. Lantern Archon looks weak, but 2 pew-pews that overcome all DR, Resistance, and Hardness is pretty cool, and if all else fails, just hovering right behind you constantly "healing" you (or the party) with Aid is pretty freaking amazing.
Looking at the Medium Earth Elemental (Warpriest 10/Cleric 7/Oracle 8). . .
Medium Earth Elemental:
N Medium outsider (earth, elemental, extraplanar)
Init –1; Senses darkvision 60 ft., tremorsense 60 ft.; Perception +7
Defense
AC 18, touch 9, flat-footed 18 (–1 Dex, +9 natural)
hp 34 (4d10+12)
Fort +7, Ref +0, Will +4
Immune elemental traits
Offense
Speed 20 ft., burrow 20 ft., earth glide
Melee slam +9 (1d8+7)
Special Attacks earth mastery
Statistics
Str 20, Dex 8, Con 17, Int 4, Wis 11, Cha 11
Base Atk +4; CMB +9; CMD 18
Feats Cleave, Improved Bull RushB, Power Attack
Skills Appraise +1, Climb +10, Knowledge (dungeoneering) +2, Knowledge (planes) +2, Perception +7, Stealth +3
Yah, I'm still thinking I would take the Archons over this, even against non-Evil enemies. But, at this point, everyone but the Warpriest is summoning either something better, or a small horde of Archons and not just 1. Archons, both the Lantern and the Hound variety are probably going to do more damage, take a whole heck of a lot more of it, and can do a great deal of stuff outside of combat. Not so much for the Earth Elemental, though being able to speak Terran is basically a prereq that helps. Hopefully you don't ever encounter anything that flies though. Wouldn't be good. Archns can be used as meat shields if needed, help with crowd control outside of the basics of Summon Monster, and can do other things besides attack the nearest enemy (unless you know Terran).
Also, please keep in mind these are the base versions, and not the Augment Summons versions. So, we have just knocked out the whole Warpriest is awesome because of summoning BS.
While I agree the cleric's sacred summons are largely terrible vs non evil opponents since he has to full round the good summons (Lions, earth elementals, tigers) early on. Hound archons are pathetic compared to the small earth elemental from the level 2 list. To make summoning a big enough hammer you have to be a wizard conjurer.
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **...
Having actually summoned earth elementals 1d4+2 earth elementals does 1d6+11 (+7 20 str, +3 PA, +1 EEMastery) at a significantly high to hit bonus on all attack rolls and not just the primary.
Archon lazers don't go through hardness FYI, and if you want aid yes they are better but small earth elementals are by far and away the strongest choice for a very long time.
At level 7 given the choice between 1d4+2 earth elemetals and 1 hound archon or 1d3+1 lantern archons I'd pick the elementals every single time for action economy and assurances they can only kill 1/round.
Hound archon isn't even a very good level 4 summon against evil monsters. Against evil you want the celestial lion almost every time.
Beckett: The 'Warpriests are awesome because of summoning' mantra is coming off their alignment-based blessings (+Plant and Animal but those are generally inferior, I think). The level 10 ability gives you a scaling Summon spell that works as a standard action, and with a feat can be made swift. You only get one monster, and it has to be of a certain alignment. So the Warpriest isn't really going to be working off the smaller lists; they're rolling at Summon Monster V to start. If a Warpriest really wanted to they could take the actual spell for the small ones... but that's kind of silly.
And having actually summoned both myself in a real life actual game, I still disagree with you.
Sure Celestial Lion is great too. But, (well if you actually follow the rules) it's probably not going to be doing much Charge -> Grab + Pounce + Raking. You can't communicate with it. It appears and moves to attack the nearest thing, then continues to do so. Celesial Template does not give it an Int, so it can't speak or understand anything, which means you don't control it at all.
Picking multiple creatures "just for action economy" is a trick that both can do, but, again, everyone has the advantage over the Warpriest in that they will have better list options to choose from, getting spell levels faster. You might also be overlooking that the Warpriest Blessings that grant that power specify "This ability can summon only one creature, regardless of the list used. For every 2 levels beyond 10th, the level of the summon monster spell increases by 1". They can only summon one creature each time they use this ability, and even Superior Summoning is not going to help that.
Superior Summoning:
You can summon more creatures.
Prerequisites: Augment Summoning, caster level 3rd.
Benefit: Each time you cast a summoning spell that conjures more than one creature, add one to the total number of creatures summoned.
Warpriest is still doing almost the exact same thing the Cleric/Oracle/Druid can, just at later levels. Warpriest can not Swift Action it until level 10, while the others can Standard Action it as soon as they get access to the spell. And if that's your main trick, by the time the Warpriest can do it, so can everyone else through Rods or other Feats.
Beckett: The 'Warpriests are awesome because of summoning' mantra is coming off their alignment-based blessings (+Plant and Animal but those are generally inferior, I think). The level 10 ability gives you a scaling Summon spell that works as a standard action, and with a feat can be made swift. You only get one monster, and it has to be of a certain alignment. So the Warpriest isn't really going to be working off the smaller lists; they're rolling at Summon Monster V to start. If a Warpriest really wanted to they could take the actual spell for the small ones... but that's kind of silly.
Undone: Still waiting for that challenge. Xp
True, I was covering this in my reply (above) and didn't see your post. But, what I've trying to say is that a "battle cleric" is doing the "earth elemental army" thing 2 levels before the Warpriest even can. Even if they dip in Fighter, which is very possible for a "batte cleric", but not required, they are either still doing it a level earlier, (and with more spell slots for other things), or at worst the same dang level the Warpriest can using spells. I'm just not seeing how the Warpriest has any advantage here whatsoever.
And having actually summoned both myself in a real life actual game, I still disagree with you.
Sure Celestial Lion is great too. But, (well if you actually follow the rules) it's probably not going to be doing much Charge -> Grab + Pounce + Raking. You can't communicate with it. It appears and moves to attack the nearest thing, then continues to do so. Celesial Template does not give it an Int, so it can't speak or understand anything, which means you don't control it at all.
Picking multiple creatures "just for action economy" is a trick that both can do, but, again, everyone has the advantage over the Warpriest in that they will have better list options to choose from, getting spell levels faster. You might also be overlooking that the Warpriest Blessings that grant that power specify "This ability can summon only one creature, regardless of the list used. For every 2 levels beyond 10th, the level of the summon monster spell increases by 1". They can only summon one creature each time they use this ability, and even Superior Summoning is not going to help that.
** spoiler omitted **
Warpriest is still doing almost the exact same thing the Cleric/Oracle/Druid can, just at later levels. Warpriest can not Swift Action it until level 10, while the others can Standard Action it as soon as they get access to the spell. And if that's your main trick, by the time the Warpriest can do it, so can everyone else through Rods or other Feats.
You misunderstand. I was discussing the sacred summons vs academy graduate feat for wizards as to why sacred summoning reach clerics are less of an issue in terms of damage output since they don't really do summoning all that well it's more a way to clog the map than it is for raw damage because everything you can sacred summon is largely just another body with SLA's. Very little with SS has any combat prowess. Law and Good are such good domains because they get all the best of each except the elementals which you've long since outgrown by the time you get the ability. The earth elemental army is pretty unimpressive as a full round action.
Quote:
True, I was covering this in my reply (above) and didn't see your post. But, what I've trying to say is that a "battle cleric" is doing the "earth elemental army" thing 2 levels before the Warpriest even can. Even if they dip in Fighter, which is very possible for a "batte cleric", but not required, they are either still doing it a level earlier, (and with more spell slots for other things), or at worst the same dang level the Warpriest can using spells. I'm just not seeing how the Warpriest has any advantage here whatsoever.
You're missing the point. The point is the cleric is restricted to summoning sucky monsters like the lantern or hound archon without even more feats or waiting a turn and losing an action and leaving himself open to "Oh wow my spell was canceled by damage". The wizard, druid, and master summoner are the true summoning classes.
The problem is that you're assuming too much. If my lance build takes all lance feats till 11th then at 12th starts summoning significant monsters (Let's say animal blessing) like a base dire tiger as a swift action in addition to just HAPPENING to have either full lance, flurry, or bow attack which does a ton of damage.
EDIT: The more I look at the class I think that the class was designed around the assumption that at high level they have at least 1 summoning blessing since nearly every single deity from core can get one.
Um. Given that the only requirements for the (good) summon blessings are your god having an alignment, is that not a given that you're likely to be able to take the alignment-based blessings?
Um. Given that the only requirements for the (good) summon blessings are your god having an alignment, is that not a given that you're likely to be able to take the alignment-based blessings?
There are a few (Pharasma) that have no alignment and not the animal or plant domain.
This should be in the Homebrew / Suggestions forum.
Yeah, this is getting kinda homebrew-y.
Ultimately the answer from a balance perspective is that the Warpriest needs no changes. And from a design perspective, the Inquisitor spell list might be better, but still have al ot of issuesl
You're missing the point. The point is the cleric is restricted to summoning sucky monsters like the lantern or hound archon without even more feats or waiting a turn and losing an action and leaving himself open to "Oh wow my spell was canceled by damage". The wizard, druid, and master summoner are the true summoning classes.
The problem is that you're assuming too much.
I don't see how. I responded to assertions you made, and it seems that instead you try to change the goal posts. Above are the stats for the UNMODIFIED Summons, and both Lantern and Hound Archons are awesome. Maybe not if you just want straight damage, but like I said, being able to cast Aid at will is freaking amazing. Being able to control them regardless of your languages, is fantastic when it comes to summoned creatures. DR 10/Evil is even better against non-evil creatures. The ability to change into any Large "canine" nets them an additional +4 size bonus to your Strength, a -2 penalty to your Dexterity, and a +4 natural armor bonus. At the cost of 2 Feats, they are a Standard action to cast and gain Die Hard and don't vanish when they hit 0 HP, (and can "heal" themselves.
Undone wrote:
If my lance build takes all lance feats till 11th then at 12th starts summoning significant monsters (Let's say animal blessing) like a base dire tiger as a swift action in addition to just HAPPENING to have either full lance, flurry, or bow attack which does a ton of damage.
You're missing the point. The point is the cleric is restricted to summoning sucky monsters like the lantern or hound archon without even more feats or waiting a turn and losing an action and leaving himself open to "Oh wow my spell was canceled by damage". The wizard, druid, and master summoner are the true summoning classes.
The problem is that you're assuming too much.
I don't see how. I responded to assertions you made, and it seems that instead you try to change the goal posts. Above are the stats for the UNMODIFIED Summons, and both Lantern and Hound Archons are awesome.
We have vastly different definitions of awesome. Those two are SLA's on a stick which while not bad are not close to comparable to a dire tiger even if there are ~4 of them. They're better than nothing but when it comes to summons the combat varient can be casting aid 2 or 3 times or putting out 40-80 points of damage and kill it in 1 or 2 turns.
DM Beckett wrote:
Maybe not if you just want straight damage, but like I said, being able to cast Aid at will is freaking amazing.
Again SIGNIFICANTLY different definitions of amazing. To me getting 1d8+3 temp HP pales in comparison to 30+ damage.
DM Beckett wrote:
Being able to control them regardless of your languages, is fantastic when it comes to summoned creatures. DR 10/Evil is even better against non-evil creatures. The ability to change into any Large "canine" nets them an additional +4 size bonus to your Strength, a -2 penalty to your Dexterity, and a +4 natural armor bonus. At the cost of 2 Feats, they are a Standard action to cast and gain Die Hard and don't vanish when they hit 0 HP, (and can "heal" themselves.
Control is nice... out of combat or if you need utility. You don't need to command them to "Charge, Pounce, Rake, Grab" they keep going to the next enemy. Did I mention templated summon monsters get DR X opposed alignment with 11 HD being the sweet point.
DM Beckett wrote:
Undone wrote:
If my lance build takes all lance feats till 11th then at 12th starts summoning significant monsters (Let's say animal blessing) like a base dire tiger as a swift action in addition to just HAPPENING to have either full lance, flurry, or bow attack which does a ton of damage.
And where is that exactly?
At 12th the summon increases in strength and continues to do so forever. Additionally quickening an 8th level spell at high levels is equal to either hundreds of thousands of gold from two or more rods or unable to be replicated 12th level magic equivalent.
Ultimately my point is this.
The WP does have some weaker levels (Level 1 is literally dirt terrible. You have nearly no class features that actually function.) Level 17+ Are rough if you're with 9th level casters but you can at least contribute to combat and get a lot of free magic.
The WP does incredible damage far in excess of the cleric.
The WP Scales much better than the paladin in the extreme thanks to summoning blessings.
The WP does more damage than the inquisitor at high levels thanks to summons and early on thanks to bonus feats and fighter feats.
The WP has the 3rd best type of saves in the game after Paladin/Monk and as a wisdom based caster your all important will save will be higher.
The WP has the best type of bonus feats in the game.
The WP also has an archetype which fixes the singularly major problem that the WP actually had and gives it effective full BAB.
Lastly as to a side note on this thread Mystic past life lets you actually pull some spells off the lists. What ~5 spells besides LOR and holy sword would you want to pull off?
The WP does have some weaker levels (Level 1 is literally dirt terrible. You have nearly no class features that actually function.) Level 17+ Are rough if you're with 9th level casters but you can at least contribute to combat and get a lot of free magic.
Agreed.
Undone wrote:
The WP does incredible damage far in excess of the cleric.
Citation needed.
Undone wrote:
The WP Scales much better than the paladin in the extreme thanks to summoning blessings.
Citation needed.
Undone wrote:
The WP does more damage than the inquisitor at high levels thanks to summons and early on thanks to bonus feats and fighter feats.
Citation needed.
Undone wrote:
The WP has the 3rd best type of saves in the game after Paladin/Monk and as a wisdom based caster your all important will save will be higher.
You're forgetting about the Divine Protection Oracle, which will annihilate the Warpriest in the saves department. Warpriest saves will be on par with the inquisitor and cleric, and the inquisitor pulls ahead with Stalwart.
Undone wrote:
The WP has the best type of bonus feats in the game.
The WP also has an archetype which fixes the singularly major problem that the WP actually had and gives it effective full BAB.
I'm not convinced Combat feats are the best type of bonus feats, but I do agree that Sacred Fist solves a lot of WP problems.
Undone wrote:
Lastly as to a side note on this thread Mystic past life lets you actually pull some spells off the lists. What ~5 spells besides LOR and holy sword would you want to pull off?
That's a race feature, not a class feature. It would be nice to play a Warpriest with thematically appropriate spells without being shackled to an alternate racial trait that's extremely frequently banned.
The WP does incredible damage far in excess of the cleric.
Citation needed.
Until you post a DPR calculation it's basically Schrodinger cleric. Come up with a build otherwise the inferior feat access of a cleric loses to the WP in terms of damage.
Kudaku wrote:
Undone wrote:
The WP Scales much better than the paladin in the extreme thanks to summoning blessings.
Citation needed.
Undone wrote:
The WP does more damage than the inquisitor at high levels thanks to summons and early on thanks to bonus feats and fighter feats.
Citation needed.
See above.
Kudaku wrote:
Undone wrote:
The WP has the 3rd best type of saves in the game after Paladin/Monk and as a wisdom based caster your all important will save will be higher.
You're forgetting about the Divine Protection Oracle, which will annihilate the Warpriest in the saves department. Warpriest saves will be on par with the inquisitor and cleric, and the inquisitor pulls ahead with Stalwart.
You're completely right the cleric is 100x better than the oracle though since it can abuse sacred geometry better which is clearly the direction we should go. That feat should be allowed in the discussion with leadership, sacred geometry, dazing spell, and crafting feats.
I mean yes the oracle is horribly OP when we allow sacred geometry and leadership too. I don't know too many people who would allow that feat and PFS doesn't allow it either.
Kudaku wrote:
Undone wrote:
The WP has the best type of bonus feats in the game.
The WP also has an archetype which fixes the singularly major problem that the WP actually had and gives it effective full BAB.
I'm not convinced Combat feats are the best type of bonus feats, but I do agree that Sacred Fist solves a lot of WP problems.
Ok, so they're the best feats pre 10thish. After that metamagics/spell feats take over. Crafting feats are always the best but aren't exactly available in all games.
Kudaku wrote:
Undone wrote:
Lastly as to a side note on this thread Mystic past life lets you actually pull some spells off the lists. What ~5 spells besides LOR and holy sword would you want to pull off?
That's a race feature, not a class feature. It would be nice to play a Warpriest with thematically appropriate spells without being shackled to an alternate racial trait that's extremely frequently banned.
I agree with this. I feel the WP having something like an archetype which trades something like 1 blessing or sacred weapon/armor for other classes spells. I'd love an archetype which makes the WP arcane (There's even a good god for it in our magic god).
So in a competition between an Archon and a Dire Tiger, the Dire Tiger is doing, at best, 10 damage a hit to the Archon, and the average is 3 (for the claws) and 5 (for the bite). Oh, and I guess another 3 for the rakes. So even assuming all attacks hit, the Tiger is doing on average 17 damage to the Archon. Remember, having DR/alignment isn't enough, you need an alignment subtype (which Celestial/Fiendish doesn't provide) and their Smite doesn't bypass DR.
The Dire Tiger also has an AC so low the Hound Archon hits it on a 9, despite being two summon monsters lower.
Its not so much about them fighting each other as how much use they can be when Summoned. Being able to direct the Archons is huge. The ability to fly, cast spells, use tactics, and be used both in and out of combat is all good. The Dire Tiger can be nice in combat, in the right circumstances, but I wouldnt count too much on getting to maximize its potential all the time. It appears where you designate and attacks. From there, it continues to just attack regardless of what you try to tell it.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
kestral287 wrote:
At level 10 the Human Magus has seven feats, and sank one into a build requirement. At level 10 the Human Warpriest using the FCB has ten feats, and sank /six/ of them into the build you're suggesting-- Spell Focus (Conjuration), Augmented Summoning, Superior Summoning, Summon Good Monsters, Quicken Blessing, Weapon Focus. Note that among those six, three are totally useless until level 10 (but you have to have taken the first of them at level 6 via Human FCB to get them all online in time). Spell Focus isn't exactly of a lot of use to you either since a lot of your spells are buffs and thus lack saves.
I don't really consider Augment Summoning, and it's Spell Focus prerequisite to be needed at all. Sure it gives your summons a buff, but the main importance of those summons especially as levels rise is their presence. The Augment is nice, but it's really an unneeded luxury if you're not going to take advantage of the spell focus feat. And weapon focus in the god's chosen weapon is free. Summon Good Monsters is the really useful one if you're running a good caster.
Until you post a DPR calculation it's basically Schrodinger cleric. Come up with a build otherwise the inferior feat access of a cleric loses to the WP in terms of damage.
*Shrug*. Schrödinger's Cleric seems a reasonable match for Schrödinger's Warpriest.
Undone wrote:
You're completely right the cleric is 100x better than the oracle though since it can abuse sacred geometry better which is clearly the direction we should go. That feat should be allowed in the discussion with leadership, sacred geometry, dazing spell, and crafting feats.
I agree (and have several times stated) that Divine Protection is an abomination of a feat. However it's found in a core-line rules book, the same book as the Warpriest - it's not unreasonable to take it into consideration, especially when making blanket statements about "the best saves in the game". You haven't explained why a warpriest's saves would be better than a cleric or inquisitor - all three classes need the same ability scores, and near as I can tell the warpriest doesn't get any class features that improve their saves.
Undone wrote:
Ok, so they're the best feats pre 10thish. After that metamagics/spell feats take over. Crafting feats are always the best but aren't exactly available in all games.
Personally I prefer the bonus feats available to the magus, though the fact that WPs get more of them and can treat his level as his BAB is definitely handy for making unusual builds - Vital Strike for example.
Undone wrote:
I agree with this. I feel the WP having something like an archetype which trades something like 1 blessing or sacred weapon/armor for other classes spells. I'd love an archetype which makes the WP arcane (There's even a good god for it in our magic god).
I'm not sure I see the point in an arcane archetype (seems to step on the toes of the magus), but I think an archetype that tweaks the spell list would be a welcome addition. The Forgepriest is a good indicator here - he adds some pretty decent spells to his spell list.
He still runs smack dab into the Fervor limitation with Keen Edge, Versatile Weapon and Mage's Sword though.
So in a competition between an Archon and a Dire Tiger, the Dire Tiger is doing, at best, 10 damage a hit to the Archon, and the average is 3 (for the claws) and 5 (for the bite). Oh, and I guess another 3 for the rakes. So even assuming all attacks hit, the Tiger is doing on average 17 damage to the Archon. Remember, having DR/alignment isn't enough, you need an alignment subtype (which Celestial/Fiendish doesn't provide) and their Smite doesn't bypass DR.
The Dire Tiger also has an AC so low the Hound Archon hits it on a 9, despite being two summon monsters lower.
Oh, plus the Lantern Archon flies.
What tigers are you looking at ?
http://paizo.com/prd/monsters/tiger.html
Even a regular tiger does 10.5 on 4 claw attacks and 13 on the bite with no modifications. On a charge you get all 5 at +12 without augmented summons. Dire tigers are even more silly at +20 on a charge.
Additionally you should want your summons to die, if they died that means the target completely WASTED turns killing it.
Quote:
When they get made into Warpriests.
I consider spell combat and spell strike significantly more complex than fervor.
Quote:
I don't really consider Augment Summoning, and it's Spell Focus prerequisite to be needed at all. Sure it gives your summons a buff, but the main importance of those summons especially as levels rise is their presence. The Augment is nice, but it's really an unneeded luxury if you're not going to take advantage of the spell focus feat. And weapon focus in the god's chosen weapon is free. Summon Good Monsters is the really useful one if you're running a good caster.
The only feat required for the WP to be an incredible summoner is quicken blessing. Consider for a moment comparing summon a monster as a swift to any other swift action you can take. Short of using a quicken rod to quicken something super high level I doubt you can find such an efficient action.
Quote:
I agree (and have several times stated) that Divine Protection is an abomination of a feat. However it's found in a core-line rules book, the same book as the Warpriest - it's not unreasonable to take it into consideration, especially when making blanket statements about "the best saves in the game". You haven't explained why a warpriest's saves would be better than a cleric or inquisitor - all three classes need the same ability scores, and near as I can tell the warpriest doesn't get any class features that improve their saves.
So what you're telling me is we should all play charisma based casters so we can abuse leadership and divine protection along side sacred geometry. There are some feats in the core assumption we can reasonably ignore. Given that divine protection is the single largest defensive feat in the game and leadership is the single biggest offensive feat in the game it's not unreasonable to throw both out.
As to the saves the cleric and inquisitor and druid share the WP's status on them. The 3rd best saves in the game are fort/will wisdom based caster.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kudaku wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
Kudaku wrote:
The Warpriest would benefit vastly from gaining a more specialized spell list, preferably with some spell level discounts so it gets personal-range combat buffs like Divine Power at the same level as clerics.
A number of spell discounts roughly equivalent to that of the bard, yes, to the level of the summoner, no thanks. Giving him the paladin spell list is nearer to giving him the equivalent of the summoner spell list than the equivalent of the bard spell list.
I suspect that the summoner is the main reason why later classes get very little in the way of specialized spell lists. Giving a 3/4 BAB arcane spellcasting class a 9 levels spell list masquerading as a 6 levels spell lsit was a bad move.
I understand your concern, but I'm not entirely sure it's warranted. The Hunter got the ranger spell list added to the druid list, which turned out great. It's still not my cup of tea, but I think it's a much better class than it was in the play test.
The Paladin spell list has a problem that the Ranger list did not. It's built assuming a lawful good caster, which may be a problem giving these spells to neutral, chaotic, and evil warpriests.
The Warpriest would benefit vastly from gaining a more specialized spell list, preferably with some spell level discounts so it gets personal-range combat buffs like Divine Power at the same level as clerics.
A number of spell discounts roughly equivalent to that of the bard, yes, to the level of the summoner, no thanks. Giving him the paladin spell list is nearer to giving him the equivalent of the summoner spell list than the equivalent of the bard spell list.
I suspect that the summoner is the main reason why later classes get very little in the way of specialized spell lists. Giving a 3/4 BAB arcane spellcasting class a 9 levels spell list masquerading as a 6 levels spell lsit was a bad move.
I understand your concern, but I'm not entirely sure it's warranted. The Hunter got the ranger spell list added to the druid list, which turned out great. It's still not my cup of tea, but I think it's a much better class than it was in the play test.
The Paladin spell list has a problem that the Ranger list did not. It's built assuming a lawful good caster, which may be a problem giving these spells to neutral, chaotic, and evil warpriests.
As long as they have a [good] descriptor, the evil warpreists won't be able to cast them without UMD (alignment) check, but I can see the issues with the neutral warpriests.
The Paladin spell list has a problem that the Ranger list did not. It's built assuming a lawful good caster, which may be a problem giving these spells to neutral, chaotic, and evil warpriests.
I made this exact point in the post Diego quoted earlier, though he left out that section since it wasn't relevant to his point. The full post reads as follows:
Kudaku wrote:
The Warpriest would benefit vastly from gaining a more specialized spell list, preferably with some spell level discounts so it gets personal-range combat buffs like Divine Power at the same level as clerics.
However I'm not sure giving it complete access to the inquisitor or paladin spell lists is the way to go. The paladin list heavily favors Good-aligned warpriests (and the anti-paladin list heavily favors Evil-aligned warpriests) so neutral warpriests get kind of shafted, while the Inquisitor list has a lot of 'bloodhound' or sneaky spells that doesn't really make sense for the rather less subtle Warpriest.
Christos later suggested that warpriests get both the paladin and the anti-paladin lists, and that neutral warpriests of neutral deities make a choice of paladin or antipaladin at first level and are treated as that alignment for the purposes of spells they cast. I think that's a good houserule as long as the GM is willing to step in and arbitrate on the corner spells, but it's probably a bit too vague for an official change.
Ok well here's a WP which isn't particularly optimized over the top he's just a generic archer WP. Human is probably more optimal but I felt like "Why not halfling".
A divine commander would do significantly more.
Spoiler:
As expected he's weaker earlier because he's an archer so his average damage is decent while his individual hits are bleh. At level 10 he's edging in on the DPR Olympic numbers (Which you can bump up if you wanted to). Level 15 damage is a bit on the soft side for round 1 (Still enough to kill anything equal level in round 1 which you will with your init bonus) but round 2 is over 300 a round.
To hit: +12/+12
Damage: 1d6+8/1d6+8
Both increase by 1 if you use sacred weapon uses you can also use other spells but that's the base line.
This is a pitiful level for this build, at 6th it get's many shot at 7th it get's haste. A better build at this level is lancing but I am trying to use the base WP only. That said +11 vs AC 18 (Standard at level monster) means you average a modest 15 damage a round (70% chance to hit, 11.5 average damage twice) Not great but as I said a very bad level for archers in general. They're not doing much more than level 3 until level 6.
This is much better for this WP because the base WP doesn't lend itself well to lancing. As a result average damage against a CR 10 is (19.475/hit for the first 4 hits averaging 77 with an additional 15.375 damage from the last iterative for) 92.375 average damage a round using only 1 buff without the 19-20x3 crit range being factored in which adds 12.3 average damage for an actual DPR of 104.675. However sacred weapon can add 2d6 at this level for a whopping 31 bonus damage a round for 134.575 average damage a round on turn 2. assuming you can find 2d6 which do damage (holy, flaming, frost, shocking?). The longer the fight goes the more buffs a WP can afford to throw up and the more damage he'll do. If you add the destruction blessing it's 22.75 more damage, and the good blessing is 15.9 more damage. You've got plenty of buffs to go further down the line but there's very high damage potential. You're also one level away from summons.
11) Quicken Blessing
WP12) GWS Bow
13) Augmented summons
15) Evolved Summons
WP15) Improved Precise shot
240,000g
+5 Seeking Long bow 72,000
Bracers of falcons aim 4,000
+6 Dexterity belt 36,000
+4 Wisdom headband 16,000
+1 Mithral chainshirt 2,100
Cracked Pale green ioun stone 4,000
Jingasa of the fortunate warrior 5,000
+1 tome of dex 27500
Boots of Speed 12,000 <Free action really sells this>
166,500 spent. I'm really not interested in purchasing more items such while you could add more these are the more core items he'd have from early upgraded. It's easy to add more damage. You can easily hit a high AC point using this.
Charging Celestial Dige Tiger W/Augment summons
Melee 2 claws +22 (2d4+10 plus grab), bite +22 (2d6+10/19–20 plus grab), Gore (Evolved summons) +22 (1d8+10)
Special Attacks pounce, rake (2 claws +22, 2d4+10)
Your to hit vs CR15s is on a 2 for all but the last iterative which is a 7 and the tiger hits on an 8. Average damage is 129 factoring crits round 1. Average damage on the dire tiger is 59.475 while not smiting. Smiting is worth 58.8 DPR for 118.275 on round 1 with no self buffs comming to a modest round 1 DPR of 247.275. I'm not really optimizing this very much which is why it's not really extremely high but it's pretty average for the level and again this is only the round 1 DPR. Your DPR goes up by leaps and bounds every round. Round 2 sacred weapon 4d6 adds 79.8, Round 3 Destruction blessing adds 39.9 more DPR. That's probably why I like WP's the most. As the fight goes on you've got an increasingly high chance to win because your damage goes up and up and up even if you were caught off guard.
As to this thread I wouldn't be opposed to giving the WP some unique 2nd, 3rd, and 5th level spells. The level 1, 4, and 6 spells are actually really good and don't need more spells. They need some good spells which are able to be fervored with short durations for level 2 desperately though.
To do a healer's job the warpriest would need early access to the level>2 non-cure healing spells (ie. heal, breath of life, neutralize potion, and anything with remove or restore in the name) The paladin gives some early access to the lower level stuff, but it doesn't help with the higher. Inquisitor doesn't help at all.
To do a martial's job the warpriest needs full BAB, a non-resource self buff equivalent to full BAB, or 3.5 persistent spell and divine metamagic.
As a misguided paean to the fifteen minute workday it's far too effective as is.
Ok well here's a WP which isn't particularly optimized over the top he's just a generic archer WP. Human is probably more optimal but I felt like "Why not halfling".
(...)
To hit: +12/+12
Damage: 1d6+8/1d6+8
Both increase by 1 if you use sacred weapon uses you can also use other spells but that's the base line.
Only had time to look over the level 5 character, but I'm having some trouble making these numbers add up for the baseline.
Ok well here's a WP which isn't particularly optimized over the top he's just a generic archer WP. Human is probably more optimal but I felt like "Why not halfling".
(...)
To hit: +12/+12
Damage: 1d6+8/1d6+8
Both increase by 1 if you use sacred weapon uses you can also use other spells but that's the base line.
Only had time to look over the level 5 character, but I'm having some trouble making these numbers add up for the baseline.
Ok well here's a WP which isn't particularly optimized over the top he's just a generic archer WP. Human is probably more optimal but I felt like "Why not halfling".
(...)
To hit: +12/+12
Damage: 1d6+8/1d6+8
Both increase by 1 if you use sacred weapon uses you can also use other spells but that's the base line.
Only had time to look over the level 5 character, but I'm having some trouble making these numbers add up for the baseline.
Ok well here's a WP which isn't particularly optimized over the top he's just a generic archer WP. Human is probably more optimal but I felt like "Why not halfling".
(...)
To hit: +12/+12
Damage: 1d6+8/1d6+8
Both increase by 1 if you use sacred weapon uses you can also use other spells but that's the base line.
Only had time to look over the level 5 character, but I'm having some trouble making these numbers add up for the baseline.
I'm guessing you added Point Blank Shot for another +1/+1.
Would you mind adding breakdowns for the attack modifiers?
It's as above but with PBS and divine favor.
Then your damage should be 1d6+5, not 1d6+8?
I'm fairly sure I calculated it with sacred weapon action by accident but your incorrect. Deadly aim is -2 at level 4 when you take it as a WP bonus feat. If you also for example take dazing assault at level 12 the DC uses level=bab for the purposes of DC.
Be aware i spent like 25 minutes making it so there may be mistakes.
I'm fairly sure I calculated it with sacred weapon action by accident but your incorrect. Deadly aim is -2 at level 4 when you take it as a WP bonus feat. If you also for example take dazing assault at level 12 the DC uses level=bab for the purposes of DC.
Be aware i spent like 25 minutes making it so there may be mistakes.
If you're using that interpretation of the Bonus Feat feature your damage should be 1d6+7 and your to hit should be +11, not 1d6+8 and +12. Accidentally adding Sacred Weapon would explain that.
I'm not trying to call you out or anything, but this is why it's handy to have attack roll and damage breakdowns - it's much easier to follow your modifier progression. :)
I'm fairly sure I calculated it with sacred weapon action by accident but your incorrect. Deadly aim is -2 at level 4 when you take it as a WP bonus feat. If you also for example take dazing assault at level 12 the DC uses level=bab for the purposes of DC.
Be aware i spent like 25 minutes making it so there may be mistakes.
That seems like a fairly broad interpretation of the bonus feats. I think the BAB clause is fairly clearly intended to be in the context of meeting prerequisites.
I'm fairly sure I calculated it with sacred weapon action by accident but your incorrect. Deadly aim is -2 at level 4 when you take it as a WP bonus feat. If you also for example take dazing assault at level 12 the DC uses level=bab for the purposes of DC.
Be aware i spent like 25 minutes making it so there may be mistakes.
That seems like a fairly broad interpretation of the bonus feats. I think the BAB clause is fairly clearly intended to be in the context of meeting prerequisites.
Now that the ACG FAQs have started rolling in, I'm hoping that an answer to this particular issue will be forthcoming.
I'm fairly sure I calculated it with sacred weapon action by accident but your incorrect. Deadly aim is -2 at level 4 when you take it as a WP bonus feat. If you also for example take dazing assault at level 12 the DC uses level=bab for the purposes of DC.
Be aware i spent like 25 minutes making it so there may be mistakes.
That seems like a fairly broad interpretation of the bonus feats. I think the BAB clause is fairly clearly intended to be in the context of meeting prerequisites.
Now that the ACG FAQs have started rolling in, I'm hoping that an answer to this particular issue will be forthcoming.
I also hope this because I think this is their way of compensating the WP for lost BAB progression. It's not great compensation but it helps.
