Classes that are still needed


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

251 to 300 of 409 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

Buri Reborn wrote:
Brain in a Jar wrote:

Could you explain further?

What's missing?

Anzyr is right. Magus is built entirely on the one-handed wonder. It is not a good general martial and general caster mix. It's a blaster/longsword(/other one-handed blade) character. See the difference? Give me the versatility of a wizard and the fighter. Look at the class I made and compare it to the magus. As is, I don't even care about spell combat. I want to focus on spell strike and utility. That neuters a magus from being competent in even what it does do. That's not even trying to make it do other things.

I just didn't understand what was missing in context to your response.

Blade Adept

It's still focused on one-handed weapons but at least it covers utility and Spell Strike.

Here is a full caster that can get Spell Strike and is a good general caster/martial type character. That should fit what you are seeking. Maybe.

Otherwise Eldritch Knight with Spell Storing weapons/armor is another way to get general martial/caster.


Brain in a Jar wrote:

I just didn't understand what was missing in context to your response.

Blade Adept

It's still focused on one-handed weapons but at least it covers utility and Spell Strike.

Here is a full caster that can get Spell Strike and is a good general caster/martial type character. That should fit what you are seeking. Maybe.

Otherwise Eldritch Knight with Spell Storing weapons/armor is another way to get general martial/caster.

If the arcanist were in general something that could survive in melee, that would do. However, it's not and the archetype doesn't add anything that would make it that.


Brain in a Jar wrote:
Buri Reborn wrote:
Brain in a Jar wrote:

Could you explain further?

What's missing?

Anzyr is right. Magus is built entirely on the one-handed wonder. It is not a good general martial and general caster mix. It's a blaster/longsword(/other one-handed blade) character. See the difference? Give me the versatility of a wizard and the fighter. Look at the class I made and compare it to the magus. As is, I don't even care about spell combat. I want to focus on spell strike and utility. That neuters a magus from being competent in even what it does do. That's not even trying to make it do other things.

I just didn't understand what was missing in context to your response.

Blade Adept

It's still focused on one-handed weapons but at least it covers utility and Spell Strike.

Here is a full caster that can get Spell Strike and is a good general caster/martial type character. That should fit what you are seeking. Maybe.

Otherwise Eldritch Knight with Spell Storing weapons/armor is another way to get general martial/caster.

No accuracy booster. Less then 3/4th BAB for much of it's career. Limited weapon focus. Requires a dip to meet EK prestige class prerequisites. Requires a Prestige Class in the first place. EK prestige class is sorely lacking in actual class features.

I think that about sums it up.


Buri Reborn wrote:
Brain in a Jar wrote:

I just didn't understand what was missing in context to your response.

Blade Adept

It's still focused on one-handed weapons but at least it covers utility and Spell Strike.

Here is a full caster that can get Spell Strike and is a good general caster/martial type character. That should fit what you are seeking. Maybe.

Otherwise Eldritch Knight with Spell Storing weapons/armor is another way to get general martial/caster.

If the arcanist were in general something that could survive in melee, that would do. However, it's not and the archetype doesn't add anything that would make it that.

I've played the Blade Adept before and it works fine.

[If it helps for comparison i play using 20 Point Buy and we play pre-made Pathfinder Adventure Paths.]

I used my feats and equipment to protect myself and tailored my spells to aid in what i was doing. Mainly defensive spells and i kept decent utility through scrolls, wands, etc. Plus with things like Dimensional Slide i could enter and leave combat at my choice quite easy.

Magus is easier for melee fighting but i wanted more spells and access to Wizard spell list.


Brain in a Jar wrote:

I've played the Blade Adept before and it works fine.

[If it helps for comparison i play using 20 Point Buy and we play pre-made Pathfinder Adventure Paths.]

I used my feats and equipment to protect myself and tailored my spells to aid in what i was doing. Mainly defensive spells and i kept decent utility through scrolls, wands, etc. Plus with things like Dimensional Slide i could enter and leave combat at my choice quite easy.

Magus is easier for melee fighting but i wanted more spells and access to Wizard spell list.

Perhaps. I model survivability currently off my current 16th level group in Rise where my GM tends to crit insanely often. So, critting giants, basically. I sincerely doubt any build I make with a d6 HD taking ASF failures (because, frankly, a swift for Arcane Armor feats is stupid) would last a single round up close. I'd be nervous with d8 HD classes.


Buri Reborn wrote:
Brain in a Jar wrote:

I've played the Blade Adept before and it works fine.

[If it helps for comparison i play using 20 Point Buy and we play pre-made Pathfinder Adventure Paths.]

I used my feats and equipment to protect myself and tailored my spells to aid in what i was doing. Mainly defensive spells and i kept decent utility through scrolls, wands, etc. Plus with things like Dimensional Slide i could enter and leave combat at my choice quite easy.

Magus is easier for melee fighting but i wanted more spells and access to Wizard spell list.

Perhaps. I model survivability currently off my current 16th level group in Rise where my GM tends to crit insanely often. So, critting giants, basically. I sincerely doubt any build I make with a d6 HD taking ASF failures (because, frankly, a swift for Arcane Armor feats is stupid) would last a single round up close. I'd be nervous with d8 HD classes.

Yeah i wouldn't recommend Arcane Armor Training, for a Blade Adept. I mainly used Mage Armor, Shield, Mirror Image etc.

But yeah i wouldn't like my chances with my Blade Adept against a giant either.

I mainly used him to mix it up in combat with certain things where i could rely on my spell defenses. Otherwise i'd stay back and blast or use battlefield control.


Anzyr wrote:
EK prestige class is sorely lacking in actual class features.

I don't understand this complaint. The actual class features are full BAB and spellcasting.


Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Rhedyn wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
EK prestige class is sorely lacking in actual class features.
I don't understand this complaint. The actual class features are full BAB and spellcasting.

I think it's more of a boring thing. Sure, 3.5 Abjurant Champion is hella-overpowered, but ignoring the full BAB, full caster levels part, it had pretty interesting class features.

Essentially, Abjurant Champion allowed you to auto-Extend Abjuration spells you cast and add your Abjurant Champion level to the AC given by the Shield spell. Also, you can quicken any abjuration spells of a spell-level equal to half your Abjurant Champion level. For a capstone, you get to treat your BAB as your caster level for all spells if desired.

A lot of that is already too strong to be on a full BAB full caster level PrC, but it's something exciting at the very least. It would be nice if EK had a couple extra feat prereqs and some more flavorful additions.


Rhedyn wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
EK prestige class is sorely lacking in actual class features.
I don't understand this complaint. The actual class features are full BAB and spellcasting.

Neither of those class features really helps with the whole "blends martial prowess and magic" thing though. At best they are the bare minimums of such a concept. Spell Critical is the only thing that kinda helps and by itself is not enough.


The magus is a bladesinger replacement. The de facto replacement for a F-MU is Fig 1/Wiz 5 or 6/EK X.


Anzyr wrote:
Rhedyn wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
EK prestige class is sorely lacking in actual class features.
I don't understand this complaint. The actual class features are full BAB and spellcasting.
Neither of those class features really helps with the whole "blends martial prowess and magic" thing though. At best they are the bare minimums of such a concept. Spell Critical is the only thing that kinda helps and by itself is not enough.

"Eldritch knights blend the abilities of fighting classes and spellcasters, hurling magic at the enemy one moment and hewing down their opponents with steel the next."

They can do both.

"against heavily armed and armored opponents they may level crippling spells, while opposing spellcasters meet their ends on an eldritch knight's blade."

They do not do both at the same time.

Unlike many classes, EK actually delivers on it's description.


Anzyr wrote:
Rhedyn wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
EK prestige class is sorely lacking in actual class features.
I don't understand this complaint. The actual class features are full BAB and spellcasting.
Neither of those class features really helps with the whole "blends martial prowess and magic" thing though. At best they are the bare minimums of such a concept. Spell Critical is the only thing that kinda helps and by itself is not enough.

Here is the full description. It never claims to blend the abilities together.

"Role: Eldritch knights blend the abilities of fighting classes and spellcasters,"

Since right after that it describes how they "blend" together.

"hurling magic at the enemy one moment and hewing down their opponents with steel the next. They are just as comfortable fighting in the thick of combat as they are casting spells at foes while remaining safely behind their compatriots. Their versatility makes them valuable allies when the nature of an upcoming battle is unclear."

Everything stated in this role is true.


For general arcane magic martial types I have a few too many martial options.

Rogue Genius Games has the Dragonrider which even without it's mount does okay enough, but I also get a kick out of the sorcerer archetype that makes Sorcerers into 6/9 casters with 3/4 BAB. Both are not as potent as the Magus in raw damage but they've been pretty versatile not terribly weak. Also for RGG are the Magus arcana that allow Magi to TWF and go sword and board by charging spells into their weapons and armor.

From Drop Dead Studios there is Spheres of Power which switches spells with at will magic abilities. I took a Mageknight for a test drive twice and there is really no end to the possible flavors of the thing ranging from a Paladin-like holy warrior to a kind of martial Warlock or even a Bender-martial.

Kobold press has the Battle Scion, which is probably the more boring option on the list but gets the job done and having the full sorcerer/wizard list for 4 levels of spells is more powerful that I imagined when a spellbook is involved.

Purple Duck Games put out a series of prestige classes that function as 20 level base classes, one of which is the Eldritch Knight. It has 3/4 BAB and all 9 levels of casting plus some bonus feats. I thought it was insanely overpowered but it really has no realistic way to get as much armor aside from spells so for the most part it comes off as a buff wizard with less tricks and some combat feats.

So far in this thread I haven't seen a concept that hasn't been handled by a third party product that I'd rate very well. The only thing that comes close is the 1/2 BAB divine caster, which I'm confused about what's being asked there. I get the mechanical hole but what concepts is it hoping to pull off. My assumption is that people want a cleric that relies on casting more than normal like a Wizard and while there may be argument that the Cleric is too martially focused to make a true straight caster character I think that the general concept produced by a 1/2 BAB divine caster can be produced with cleric/oracle archetypes and alternate classes.

Rite Publishing put out a Divine Channeler which seems like a cleric with more channeling and domain spells but fewer cleric list slots but with the right domains the divine Channeler is a fine 'straight caster' Its not 1/2 BAB but it gets the concept done.

Spheres of Power is kinda cheating since it doesn't have spells in the traditional sense but that system allows you to make whatever kind of caster you want. 1/2 BAB, 3/4 BAB, Full BAB, pick a chassis and throw some spheres on it and you got something.

One thing I haven't tried but looks okay enough on d20pfsrd.com was Flaming Crab's Priest base class. I think I can cover pure caster cleric with the options I have so I never felt compelled to buy it but it looks like a nice 1/2 BAB cleric.

One thing that can be steered that way but is only kinda-sorta the concept is the Priest from Glen Taylor Games. I have too many classes in my games so I never got to actually play it or see it being played but it's $1 and looks pretty good


Rhedyn wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Rhedyn wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
EK prestige class is sorely lacking in actual class features.
I don't understand this complaint. The actual class features are full BAB and spellcasting.
Neither of those class features really helps with the whole "blends martial prowess and magic" thing though. At best they are the bare minimums of such a concept. Spell Critical is the only thing that kinda helps and by itself is not enough.

"Eldritch knights blend the abilities of fighting classes and spellcasters, hurling magic at the enemy one moment and hewing down their opponents with steel the next."

They can do both.

"against heavily armed and armored opponents they may level crippling spells, while opposing spellcasters meet their ends on an eldritch knight's blade."

They do not do both at the same time.

Unlike many classes, EK actually delivers on it's description.

Honest doesn't mean good at role though. A Fighter 19/Wizard 1 can do all of that description. As above the issue is competence, and the Eldritch Knight is not competent at doing both of those things.


Anzyr wrote:
Rhedyn wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Rhedyn wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
EK prestige class is sorely lacking in actual class features.
I don't understand this complaint. The actual class features are full BAB and spellcasting.
Neither of those class features really helps with the whole "blends martial prowess and magic" thing though. At best they are the bare minimums of such a concept. Spell Critical is the only thing that kinda helps and by itself is not enough.

"Eldritch knights blend the abilities of fighting classes and spellcasters, hurling magic at the enemy one moment and hewing down their opponents with steel the next."

They can do both.

"against heavily armed and armored opponents they may level crippling spells, while opposing spellcasters meet their ends on an eldritch knight's blade."

They do not do both at the same time.

Unlike many classes, EK actually delivers on it's description.

Honest doesn't mean good at role though. A Fighter 19/Wizard 1 can do all of that description. As above the issue is competence, and the Eldritch Knight is not competent at doing both of those things.

That's just your opinion.

In my opinion it functions just fine and is competent.

So is one of us wrong?

Or is it just about preference?

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game, Maps, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

IMO; Several peoples complaints are like getting handed a bowl of ice cream with chocolate and sprinkles and refusing it because it doesn't have a cherry on top.


Imbicatus wrote:


The same can be said of any class post CRB.

Just using APG classes:

Alchemist: Wizard with stunted magic + bombs
Cavalier: Fighter with a horse, or a Paladin without a god.
Inquisitor: Paladin/rogue
Oracle: Stunted cleric
Summoner: Super specialized sorc with a pet
Witch: Single class theuruge/PC Adept

Cavalier I get, but all the classes you mentioned are all pretty damn unique in their presence.

An Alchemist doesn't really play like a Wizard at all for example. They wear armor and can mix it up in melee with relative ease. They have limited support ability through Infusion and can acquire interesting battlefield control modifications to their Bombs which provide a solid ranged damage option when whatever specialized focus you built for is not a good move at the moment.

Many many folks say the Alchemist is one of the best designed classes in the game for damn good reason. It feels unique in it's mechanics and it's mechanics realize the concept in a fun way.

Inquisitors feeling sort of like a Paladin Rogue is probably intended seeing as how playing an actual Paladin Rogue would likely end up with GMs trying to get you to Fall. Not to mention you can be different alignments and have tons of different motivations. The Inquisitor spell list also have a bunch of Arcane utility spells mixed in like Invisibility that makes it's spell list interesting instead of having a Paladin's list of KILL EVIL STUFF/healing. The Inquisitor is also one of the most positive classes for using whatever weapon you like for flavor since it has lots of solid static bonuses.

And the rest all have their fair arguments.

A Warpriest doesn't bring anything new to the table and it even messes up the Any Alignment Paladin archetype by demanding MADness. Blessings are Domain Powers repackaged without the extra spell slots. Tacking on free Quicken spells and calling it fine isn't meaningful(I'm looking at you too Magus). It plays just like a Cleric in that you buff up and fight. Buffing quicker hardly is a concept we needed for Holy Warrior Who Casts Spells and Fights stuff when we had a Paladin, Cleric, Inquisitor and Oracle filling those roles as well.


Brain in a Jar wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Rhedyn wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Rhedyn wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
EK prestige class is sorely lacking in actual class features.
I don't understand this complaint. The actual class features are full BAB and spellcasting.
Neither of those class features really helps with the whole "blends martial prowess and magic" thing though. At best they are the bare minimums of such a concept. Spell Critical is the only thing that kinda helps and by itself is not enough.

"Eldritch knights blend the abilities of fighting classes and spellcasters, hurling magic at the enemy one moment and hewing down their opponents with steel the next."

They can do both.

"against heavily armed and armored opponents they may level crippling spells, while opposing spellcasters meet their ends on an eldritch knight's blade."

They do not do both at the same time.

Unlike many classes, EK actually delivers on it's description.

Honest doesn't mean good at role though. A Fighter 19/Wizard 1 can do all of that description. As above the issue is competence, and the Eldritch Knight is not competent at doing both of those things.

That's just your opinion.

In my opinion it functions just fine and is competent.

So is one of us wrong?

Or is it just about preference?

It's my preference that a class exists that blends magic and martial abilities. It's not my opinion that the EK is not competent at that. That is simply a statement of fact. It has one ability that blends the martial and magic abilities, over 10 levels. Competency can be measured and 1 ability over 10 levels does not measure up.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

A "Beastmaster" class with fighter HD/BA, good fort and ref saves, 4+Int skill points, and a magical beast companion. As for the companion it could turn regular animal companions into magical beast, has actual magical beast made into companions(griffins, manticores, etc.), or build your own. The class would have extraordinary, supernatural, and spell like abilities like a lay on hands ability that works only on animals and magical beast, the ability to revive the companion, etc. It would have a wild empathy ability that works on magical beast(Int1-2) without penalty as well as animals and the class could get charm and domination abilities that only work on animals and magical beast. Maybe the class could get various monster abilities like natural attacks, energy resistance, immunities(disease, poison, petrification, etc.), wings, tail, natural armor, etc. Maybe some of your abilities could work on vermin or an archetype for that. Also an archetype that creates a "Dragonrider", "Dragon Trainer", or "Dragon Master" would be awesome.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Anzyr wrote:
Brain in a Jar wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Rhedyn wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Rhedyn wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
EK prestige class is sorely lacking in actual class features.
I don't understand this complaint. The actual class features are full BAB and spellcasting.
Neither of those class features really helps with the whole "blends martial prowess and magic" thing though. At best they are the bare minimums of such a concept. Spell Critical is the only thing that kinda helps and by itself is not enough.

"Eldritch knights blend the abilities of fighting classes and spellcasters, hurling magic at the enemy one moment and hewing down their opponents with steel the next."

They can do both.

"against heavily armed and armored opponents they may level crippling spells, while opposing spellcasters meet their ends on an eldritch knight's blade."

They do not do both at the same time.

Unlike many classes, EK actually delivers on it's description.

Honest doesn't mean good at role though. A Fighter 19/Wizard 1 can do all of that description. As above the issue is competence, and the Eldritch Knight is not competent at doing both of those things.

That's just your opinion.

In my opinion it functions just fine and is competent.

So is one of us wrong?

Or is it just about preference?

It's my preference that a class exists that blends magic and martial abilities. It's not my opinion that the EK is not competent at that. That is simply a statement of fact. It has one ability that blends the martial and magic abilities, over 10 levels. Competency can be measured and 1 ability over 10 levels does not measure up.

This is something I've been wondering about for a while. Whenever something is said to be "not competent", what's the bar we measure against? I'm not talking about EK specifically, but the larger scheme of things. And I know some classes (fighter) are criticized for "lacking solutions" and "lacking narrative power". Even a wizard two levels behind should meet THAT bar. :)


Kalindlara wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Brain in a Jar wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Rhedyn wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Rhedyn wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
EK prestige class is sorely lacking in actual class features.
I don't understand this complaint. The actual class features are full BAB and spellcasting.
Neither of those class features really helps with the whole "blends martial prowess and magic" thing though. At best they are the bare minimums of such a concept. Spell Critical is the only thing that kinda helps and by itself is not enough.

"Eldritch knights blend the abilities of fighting classes and spellcasters, hurling magic at the enemy one moment and hewing down their opponents with steel the next."

They can do both.

"against heavily armed and armored opponents they may level crippling spells, while opposing spellcasters meet their ends on an eldritch knight's blade."

They do not do both at the same time.

Unlike many classes, EK actually delivers on it's description.

Honest doesn't mean good at role though. A Fighter 19/Wizard 1 can do all of that description. As above the issue is competence, and the Eldritch Knight is not competent at doing both of those things.

That's just your opinion.

In my opinion it functions just fine and is competent.

So is one of us wrong?

Or is it just about preference?

It's my preference that a class exists that blends magic and martial abilities. It's not my opinion that the EK is not competent at that. That is simply a statement of fact. It has one ability that blends the martial and magic abilities, over 10 levels. Competency can be measured and 1 ability over 10 levels does not measure up.
This is something I've been wondering about for a while. Whenever something is said to be "not competent", what's the bar we measure against? I'm not talking about EK specifically, but the larger scheme of things. And I know some classes (fighter) are criticized for "lacking solutions" and "lacking narrative power"....

In this case the bar is being set against classes that actually blend magic and martial abilities, namely the Magus and Warpriest. Being 2 levels behind a Wizard is a poor bar, when primarily your power of "mixing martial and magic abilities" is "I'm only 2 levels behind a normal Wizard."


Anzyr wrote:
It's my preference that a class exists that blends magic and martial abilities.

They already do. You just don't like their mechanics. Which is fine by the way.

Anzyr wrote:
It's not my opinion that the EK is not competent at that. That is simply a statement of fact.

No that's your opinion.

A fact about the EK wold be that it has a Full BAB progression.

Anzyr wrote:
Competency can be measured and 1 ability over 10 levels does not measure up.

That's not true. It has a few class abilites to gain.

It has x3 Bonus Feats, Diverse Training, and Spell Critical.

That and Full BAB with a decent casting progression and a D10 hit dice.

The EK never claims to blend anything other than your options. It offers a way to get 9th spells and a decent BAB progression. If you don't like that then EK isn't suited for you. That's fine you can have that opinion.

But your opinon doesn't equal fact.

Anzyr wrote:
In this case the bar is being set against classes that actually blend magic and martial abilities, namely the Magus and Warpriest.

Okay.

Can either of those classes get 9th spells?

The reason the EK is viable is versatility. A person can play alot of options using this prestige.

Magus is great but it does lack certain things and the same goes for EK.


Brain in a Jar wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
It's my preference that a class exists that blends magic and martial abilities.

They already do. You just don't like their mechanics. Which is fine by the way.

Anzyr wrote:
It's not my opinion that the EK is not competent at that. That is simply a statement of fact.

No that's your opinion.

A fact about the EK wold be that it has a Full BAB progression.

Anzyr wrote:
Competency can be measured and 1 ability over 10 levels does not measure up.

That's not true. It has a few class abilites to gain.

It has x3 Bonus Feats, Diverse Training, and Spell Critical.

That and Full BAB with a decent casting progression and a D10 hit dice.

The EK never claims to blend anything other than your options. It offers a way to get 9th spells and a decent BAB progression. If you don't like that then EK isn't suited for you. That's fine you can have that opinion.

But your opinon doesn't equal fact.

Anzyr wrote:
In this case the bar is being set against classes that actually blend magic and martial abilities, namely the Magus and Warpriest.

Okay.

Can either of those classes get 9th spells?

The reason the EK is viable is versatility. A person can play alot of options using this prestige.

Magus is great but it does lack certain things and the same goes for EK.

That's not my opinion. Only one of those class features actually lets the class make use of both martial prowess and spells. It is behind 3/4th BAB classes in accuracy (most of whom also have accuracy boosters that the EK lacks) for a big chunk of it's career. Since those two things are facts, I'd say what you consider to be my opinion is merely a fact that you do not like.

Scarab Sages

Brain in a Jar wrote:

A fact about the EK wold be that it has a Full BAB progression.

...
That's not true. It has a few class abilites to gain.

It has x3 Bonus Feats, Diverse Training, and Spell Critical.

That and Full BAB with a decent casting progression and a D10 hit dice.

The EK does not have full bab. It has full bab for 10 levels, making the equivalent of a 3/4 BAB class without accuracy enhancers.

It has the accuracy of a single class rogue, except the Rogue is ahead for the first half of your career.

Any 3/4 BAB caster will be ahead due to in-class buffs such as judgments, inspire courage, studied target, studied combat, mutagen, arcane pool, Wild Shape and so on.

You do have spells to enhance this, but arcane buffs for accuracy are inferior to divine ones and have higher spell levels.

The three bonus feats are a joke, and Diverse training doesn't do enough. The only real class feature the EK gains is Spell Critical.


EK is behind 3/4 BAB at levels 4, 6, 7, and 8

4 out of 20 levels.

A rogue only wishes that it had the EK's buffs, to-hit, and damage.


Imbicatus wrote:
The only real class feature the EK gains is Spell Critical.

Well, that and casting Power Word Kill in mithral plate while fending off enemies with a reach weapon.

Scarab Sages

Rhedyn wrote:

EK is behind 3/4 BAB at levels 4, 6, 7, and 8

4 out of 20 levels.

A rogue only wishes that it had the EK's buffs, to-hit, and damage.

Ignoring the rogue, it's far behind a Bard, Inquisitor, Warpriest, Alchemist, Investigator, Magus, Cleric, or Druid.

Each of those classes have either better combat buffs than are on the wizard list, in-class accuracy+dmaage boosters that make it full-BAB or better, or both.

And even if a rogue only has a better BAB at four levels, a rogue has a better BAB at four levels. You can make a combat-optimized rogue using the elf FCB to have chill touch available every fight, delivering touch-attack sneak attacks. Such a rogue would perform better in combat than an EK in most situations.

Scarab Sages

RJGrady wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
The only real class feature the EK gains is Spell Critical.
Well, that and casting Power Word Kill in mithral plate while fending off enemies with a reach weapon.

If you are fighting something with 100 or less HP that isn't immune to mind-effecting, compulsions, or death effects, and doesn't have SR, then you deserve to waste a 9th level spell to kill it.

That doesn't mean it's an ability worth bragging about.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

278 posts and no mention of the Binder. I mean, I know it saw conversion from a third-party company, but how often does stuff like that really see play in most groups?


Imbicatus wrote:
a rogue has a better BAB at four levels.

I must warn you. A rogue has better BAB than a wizard at 18 levels!

ROGUES OP! WIZARD USELESS!


Neurophage wrote:
278 posts and no mention of the Binder.

That may be because Occult Adventures has a Binder conversion as the Medium.


Imbicatus wrote:
RJGrady wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
The only real class feature the EK gains is Spell Critical.
Well, that and casting Power Word Kill in mithral plate while fending off enemies with a reach weapon.

If you are fighting something with 100 or less HP that isn't immune to mind-effecting, compulsions, or death effects, and doesn't have SR, then you deserve to waste a 9th level spell to kill it.

That doesn't mean it's an ability worth bragging about.

Anything has 100 or less hit points if you hit it enough. Balors aren't immune, and I'm willing to give it a couple of tries.


Rhedyn wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
a rogue has a better BAB at four levels.

I must warn you. A rogue has better BAB than a wizard at 18 levels!

ROGUES OP! WIZARD USELESS!

This argument hurts my brain. Wizards do a lot of melee in your games eh? I guess fighters throw a lot of magic around too.

Scarab Sages

Xethik wrote:
Axolotl wrote:
I may be totally alone in this, but I would like to see a d6 9 level bard. I've never really believed the bard performance mechanic, and miss the concept of bards from legends as being great healers and enchanters--not melee'ers.
A Druid archetype to replicate the older Bard from 1e would be quite interesting. That or a Fochlucan Lyrist PrC from 3.5 minus the ridiculous BAB that was supposed to make up for multiclassing.

There is a Bard archetype that adds druid spells - Voice of the Wild.

It's still only 6th level casting, but it's interesting.

Another option would be the Urban Druid with the charm domain. You don't get performance, but you get a good dose of enchantment, bonuses to skills, at will alter self, immunity to enchantments, and full casting.

Scarab Sages

Trogdar wrote:
Rhedyn wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
a rogue has a better BAB at four levels.

I must warn you. A rogue has better BAB than a wizard at 18 levels!

ROGUES OP! WIZARD USELESS!

This argument hurts my brain. Wizards do a lot of melee in your games eh? I guess fighters throw a lot of magic around too.

The point of a EK is to do fighting and magic. They do magic okay, but they suck at fighting, and they gave up being very good at magic for the privilege to do so.

An EK isn't that much better at fighting than a single class wizard with racial proficiency in a martial weapon, and gave up multiple caster levels, school abilities, and bonus magic feats to get a +2 to effective bab over a transmuter wizard.

No one is saying that an EK cant cast and fight. They just are not that great at it.


Assuming you take Fig 1 to qualify for EK, at the least you get martial weapons proficiencies and a bonus feat, which at worst is Improved Initiative.


Imbicatus wrote:
Trogdar wrote:
Rhedyn wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
a rogue has a better BAB at four levels.

I must warn you. A rogue has better BAB than a wizard at 18 levels!

ROGUES OP! WIZARD USELESS!

This argument hurts my brain. Wizards do a lot of melee in your games eh? I guess fighters throw a lot of magic around too.

The point of a EK is to do fighting and magic. They do magic okay, but they suck at fighting, and they gave up being very good at magic for the privilege to do so.

An EK isn't that much better at fighting than a single class wizard with racial proficiency in a martial weapon, and gave up multiple caster levels, school abilities, and bonus magic feats to get a +2 to effective bab over a transmuter wizard.

No one is saying that an EK cant cast and fight. They just are not that great at it.

I'm aware, I was just pointing out how rediculous that statement was.


Did you really just claim that a rogue would do better in combat than a tier 1 full caster? Because it really looks like you just did.

Edit: In response to this (should have quoted)

"And even if a rogue only has a better BAB at four levels, a rogue has a better BAB at four levels. You can make a combat-optimized rogue using the elf FCB to have chill touch available every fight, delivering touch-attack sneak attacks. Such a rogue would perform better in combat than an EK in most situations."

Scarab Sages

EMR wrote:
Did you really just claim that a rogue would do better in combat than a tier 1 full caster? Because it really looks like you just did.

At mid levels, using chill touch via major magic for touch sneak attacks, with a valet familiar outflank buddy sharing your sneak attacks, yes.

And if you are relying on full casting, then all of the resources you spend on EK are wasted.


Imbicatus wrote:
EMR wrote:
Did you really just claim that a rogue would do better in combat than a tier 1 full caster? Because it really looks like you just did.

At mid levels, using chill touch via major magic for touch sneak attacks, with a valet familiar outflank buddy sharing your sneak attacks, yes.

And if you are relying on full casting, then all of the resources you spend on EK are wasted.

As opposed to the Eldritch Knight blinding an entire encounter with pyrotechnics or glitterdust before beating the crap out of everything as an enlarged unhittible monstrocity.

Yeah... Rogue has nothing on the EK.

Scarab Sages

EMR wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
EMR wrote:
Did you really just claim that a rogue would do better in combat than a tier 1 full caster? Because it really looks like you just did.

At mid levels, using chill touch via major magic for touch sneak attacks, with a valet familiar outflank buddy sharing your sneak attacks, yes.

And if you are relying on full casting, then all of the resources you spend on EK are wasted.

As opposed to the Eldritch Knight blinding an entire encounter with pyrotechnics or glitterdust before beating the crap out of everything as an enlarged unhittible monstrocity.

Yeah... Rogue has nothing on the EK.

Save or sucks with the low DCs you have for devoting build points to STR and less access to higher level spells because you are a full spell level behind? Good luck.


Neurophage wrote:
278 posts and no mention of the Binder. I mean, I know it saw conversion from a third-party company, but how often does stuff like that really see play in most groups?

I think this is why the at length talk of more castier clerics and more fightery wizards but not cleric or magus, causes a disconnect with me. My list once I thought about it includes;

Non-magic magician.

A non casting monster morph or blue mage.

Monster tamer/capturer

Buff guy. Not a guy on berserker rages or a good fighter, just a guy that lifts weights so much he has super powers.


Imbicatus wrote:
EMR wrote:
Did you really just claim that a rogue would do better in combat than a tier 1 full caster? Because it really looks like you just did.
At mid levels, using chill touch via major magic for touch sneak attacks, with a valet familiar outflank buddy sharing your sneak attacks, yes.

Bwuahahahahaha!

I can't even take this seriously.
Imbicatus wrote:
And if you are relying on full casting, then all of the resources you spend on EK are wasted.

This may be a valid point. It depends on how much you value "being competent at melee, not great but workable" over being a full wizard that must use minions, blasting, or a martial for damage because you are far outside the competent melee range.


Rhedyn wrote:


Imbicatus wrote:
And if you are relying on full casting, then all of the resources you spend on EK are wasted.
This may be a valid point. It depends on how much you value "being competent at melee, not great but workable" over being a full wizard that must use minions, blasting, or a martial for damage because you are far outside the competent melee range.

One reason why I'm more willing to take third party archetypes that bring Magus out of the one handed crit fisher paradigm than go Eldritch Knight. I feel like full casting is the main reason to do it and at that point I'd rather go full wizard. That and despite the most optimal means of Magus being Shocking Grasp+Spellstrike once you stray away from that Magus feels much more like a gish that EK.

That said, Exactly what do people want out of an Arcane battle-caster? Magus and it's linear playstyle seems like a product of Eldritch Knight's Spell Critical class feature but he has a ton of stuff on top of that. I'm not trying to be critical of the desire for a proper arcane battle-caster I just have no idea what that actually entails.


I don't speak for anyone else but I liked the EK before it got nerfed by the SLA FAQ reversal. You could pick the limited spell-list and strong action economy of the Magus or the wide spell-list and poor action economy of the EK. Of course, now the EK is too far behind on the Fightery bits for the cost on the Wizardly bits to be worth it.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

what i really want to see is a 1/2 prepared arcane caster and/or alchemist, with full BAB.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

One thing about comparing class abilities and stuff that always annoys me is that they tend to compare individuals instead of members of team.

For example, someone upthread compared a glitterdusting EK who then went stabbity-stabbity to a rogue, and in most (many?) parties, the rogue would also be going stabbity-stabbity against the blinded opponent.

I think a lot of roles really depend on the party size and make up. If the party is just a cleric, a rogue, and a EK, then that EK is really doing a lot to help the party. In a party with a bard, a magus, a wizard, a barbarian, and a paladin, an EK (cavalier/sorcerer) might not be as useful. But YMMV.

EDIT:

A skill-based magic-user. A class that can eventually access ALL spells.


Malwing wrote:
Rhedyn wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
And if you are relying on full casting, then all of the resources you spend on EK are wasted.
This may be a valid point. It depends on how much you value "being competent at melee, not great but workable" over being a full wizard that must use minions, blasting, or a martial for damage because you are far outside the competent melee range.

One reason why I'm more willing to take third party archetypes that bring Magus out of the one handed crit fisher paradigm than go Eldritch Knight. I feel like full casting is the main reason to do it and at that point I'd rather go full wizard. That and despite the most optimal means of Magus being Shocking Grasp+Spellstrike once you stray away from that Magus feels much more like a gish that EK.

That said, Exactly what do people want out of an Arcane battle-caster? Magus and it's linear playstyle seems like a product of Eldritch Knight's Spell Critical class feature but he has a ton of stuff on top of that. I'm not trying to be critical of the desire for a proper arcane battle-caster I just have no idea what that actually entails.

Oddly, I think the point of EK is at super low levels you are basically a fighter. At mid to high levels, your melee is just something you are better at than most wizards. Wearing armor and having arcane armor training give you a decent boost to AC (mithral breast plate+5 for +11 or celestial fullplate for +12) until the highest levels when you can afford good bracers and being polymorphed into a dragon all the time.

Full wizard BAB is just too low to make use of potential melee options. EKs stay within spitting range.

Scarab Sages

Rhedyn wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
EMR wrote:
Did you really just claim that a rogue would do better in combat than a tier 1 full caster? Because it really looks like you just did.
At mid levels, using chill touch via major magic for touch sneak attacks, with a valet familiar outflank buddy sharing your sneak attacks, yes.

Bwuahahahahaha!

I can't even take this seriously.

*shrug* Then don't. Carnivalist rogue with a valet familiar shares teamwork feats and sneak attack dice with the familiar. With outflank plus paired opportunists they both have a +4 to attack and will gain attacks of opportunity on a crit.

At that point you are basically a touch attack hunter with sneak attack.

It's an extremely powerful build despite being on a rogue chassis. It's not as good as a hunter or sacred huntmaster, but it's much stronger than the sum of its parts.


Actually said this before, but it's probably gotten lost by now. Eldritch Knight has this problem of a low start and a steep climb. So when it was effectively adjusted to start earlier by the previous SLA FAQ, it was not too shabby if you got in that way, with the right other components of a build (which by the way was not entirely race-dependent -- you could do it with Diviner Wizard Scryer Sub-School). It then climbed in power with level until it could be a bit overpowered in the upper levels (9 level spellcasting delayed by just 2 or 3 levels, combined with near-full effective BAB). With the latest SLA FAQ nerf, now it has to start at 7th or 8th level at the earliest, which gives you a valley of being rather behind in BOTH your spellcasting and BAB (effectively 5/8 for several levels), before finally catching up to be okay -- not great, but okay -- in its upper levels, most of which are beyond PFS and some are even beyond a normal Adventure Path. So a single-class replacement is in order, that would be 3/4 BAB (and d8) with 6/9 spellcasting, but using a broader spell list than the Magus -- it should be a blend of Fighter and Wizard (and/or Sorcerer, by way of archetype) that is different than the Magus(*), since both have their place; it could be a Magus archetype, but it would need to be a Magus archetype that changes enough to let it work properly with two-handed weapons.

(*)Likewise, I don't have to hate the Shaman to wish for a different Oracle/Witch hybrid, sticking more closely to the Oracle Mysteries and Witch Hexes. That said, I would have liked to have made Witch Patrons into more than a line of bonus spells in the first place . . . .

EDIT: Another way to go (if you want a spontaneous casting hybrid) is Arcane Duelist Bard, although the spell list doesn't really fit with what I want (Bardic Performance including Rallying Cry partially makes up for this, and some Bardic Masterpieces might even help although I haven't looked into this enough), and the way Arcane Bond works coming in at 5th level is just weird (effectively giving you a vulnerability and a restriction at 5th level, since your Arcane Bond has to be your weapon, although on the plus side this means that you can enchant it without needing a feat). On the other hand, I see nothing in Rules as Written that would keep the Arcane Duelist Bard from working properly with a two-handed weapon, apart from needing a dip or a feat to get proficiency with a good one.

251 to 300 of 409 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Classes that are still needed All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.