Been out of the loop, jumping back in, what have I missed?


Advice


So after having a year or so of absence from Pathfinder, a new group is forming, and I am taking up the mantle of GM once more. No doubt I have missed a lot that has released. Last thing I recall reading up on before were hybrid classes. I feel that as a GM, I should know all the different tools and assets that might be presented in front of me, and want to know what new things I should read up on and be informed about.

I have noticed some "unchained" classes, are these replacements to the standard ones? Optional alternative for them? What are they exactly?

I'm also seeing a little bit about Occult classes. First thing I spotted was Kineticist, which brings back memories of imbalance from D&D 3.5... anything I should be worried about?

Overall, if anyone is kind enough to help me back into the groove of whats new, I would greatly appreciate it!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Unchained are optional classes, but really, the Monk and Rogue are better in every way to the rather terrible Core versions. The summoner is better in that it is less broken than the core also, but I certainly still wouldn't allow one in game. The Barbarian, it has a bit more utility at the cost of a weaker, though easier to track and understand rage.

Kineticist is... not good. Some people are trying to make it decent, but it's like if you took a warlock except it had to punch itself in the face repeatedly to do anything. Also all those wounds from punching themselves in the face don't go away until they rest. The rest of Occult classes are solid, though Medium and Spiritualist are considered rather poor.

As for the hybrids, they are all quite good, beware the Arcanist though, it's arguably superior to even the Wizard in its Tier 1 status.

Grand Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

A lot of older stuff got errata. Stuff that did not need it.


Heretek wrote:

Unchained are optional classes, but really, the Monk and Rogue are better in every way to the rather terrible Core versions. The summoner is better in that it is less broken than the core also, but I certainly still wouldn't allow one in game. The Barbarian, it has a bit more utility at the cost of a weaker, though easier to track and understand rage.

Kineticist is... not good. Some people are trying to make it decent, but it's like if you took a warlock except it had to punch itself in the face repeatedly to do anything. Also all those wounds from punching themselves in the face don't go away until they rest. The rest of Occult classes are solid, though Medium and Spiritualist are considered rather poor.

As for the hybrids, they are all quite good, beware the Arcanist though, it's arguably superior to even the Wizard in its Tier 1 status.

It's like the hellfire warlock, except that one 1) Actually got some serious boom in return for its punching itself in the face

2) there was an easy-to-use way to get off the hook, dealing with the ability damage.


And stuff that did need it too. (Titan Mauler Barbarian can actually use large greatswords now. Master of Many Styles is not a dip-only archetype now etcetc)
But Scarred with doctor got nerfed into unplayability (well it is decent, but all the flavor is gone - no longer casting off Con)

Kineticist may be sub-par, but oozes flavor and fun. The other occult classes are also nice in that regard. Especialy the psychic magic is interesting - using emotion and thought instead of verbal and somatic components. There also nice archetypes for other classes to get a little occult-ish.

Some of the hybrids are pretty much Class A + Class B (slayer and bloodrager for example), while some do pretty unique things (shaman, investigator), or have a nice new take on old stuff (hunter, swashbuckler, warpriest)


Ok, so far from what I'm reading/hearing, Unchained characters are what should often be used now due to balance reasons, although I'll have to look up more details in regards to the rogues since they use another new feature (Skill Unlocks). Also Summoners got nerfed into the ground in comparison with the unchained variant. Would you allow a summoner in your party now with the unchained version, or would it still be a no-go?

Occult Classes I think I'm a tad skeptical on for the time being. Will probably say no to them until I THOROUGHLY read up on all the fine details.

I'll be trying to locate all the errata changes that have been made since last I updated myself on knowledge (begins rolling D20 for knowledge history check).


I don't think you have much to worry about with the Occult classes, especially Kineticist. I'm not super familiar with the others, but the only one I've seen any kind of power complaints about is the Psychic, which is a full caster anyway. Unchained rogue is widely regarded as much better than the crappy core rogue, but unchained monk, barbarian, and summoner are mainly by preference. Summoner was certainly toned down, but I definitely wouldn't call it "nerfed into the ground".

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Courageous and Wild enchantments are nothing like they were.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Tyrantherus wrote:

Also Summoners got nerfed into the ground in comparison with the unchained variant. Would you allow a summoner in your party now with the unchained version, or would it still be a no-go?

It's now the only version allowed in PFS play. Having played a PFS APG Summoner to retirement, I'd say that the adjustments were badly needed. Home DM's who banned the original class should take a look at allowing the Unchained! variant.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

ARG got hammered.


Yet somehow mystic past life avoided it all.


I found the methodology used in that solo run to be highly problematic.

Mostly, I've got a 75% chance to succeed on this so I'll assume I always make it.

I've got to do 12 75% tasks in a row, so I'll just continue to assume I succeed at them all.

Sovereign Court

Tyrantherus wrote:
Ok, so far from what I'm reading/hearing, Unchained characters are what should often be used now due to balance reasons, although I'll have to look up more details in regards to the rogues since they use another new feature (Skill Unlocks).

Rogue - yes.

Monk - the Umonk is definitely better than the core monk, but you can do just as well with Core monk + archetypes as with the Umonk. Umonk works better for STR weapon builds, old monk + archetypes works better for Dex builds (my personal preference) or if you don't want to be a melee beatstick (Drunken Master/Sensei/Zen Archer/updated MoMS and a few others are all extremely viable).

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Why is Andrew's Sorcerer wearing four shades of rouge?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Why is Andrew's Sorcerer wearing four shades of rouge?

Because if it wore 50 shades of rogue, then someone would polymorph the rogues into Grays (Bestiary 5).


blackbloodtroll wrote:

Courageous and Wild enchantments are nothing like they were.

Oh give it a rest. "Oh noes! My magical armor that works while I polymorph still counts as armor! What a crazy unpredictable completely-against-the-rules nerf!".

(Courageous was taken out behind the woodshed though).

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

For Wild, the cost does not meet power level. It's really not worth it. Maybe a +2, but not a +3.

Also, all I said is that they were nothing like they were.

Don't be a dick.


Also, you must now present the DM with Doritos (or whatever their favoured brand of snack is) and at least a 1.75 litre bottle of their favourite soft drink before each game.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Soft drinks will kill you.

Bring beer.


blackbloodtroll wrote:

Courageous and Wild enchantments are nothing like they were.

I know that wild armor now gives you the ACP penalties (for some reason) but what happened to the Courageous weapons?


Bonus only applies to fear effects instead of all morale, like it used to. Since fear effects that you actually save against are rare, gg to this enhancement.

Sovereign Court

Casual Viking wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

Courageous and Wild enchantments are nothing like they were.

Oh give it a rest. "Oh noes! My magical armor that works while I polymorph still counts as armor! What a crazy unpredictable completely-against-the-rules nerf!".

In addition - some of us always ruled it the way the FAQ came out. (And +3 isn't that bad - especially if you're planning on mithril. Whether or not it's worth getting most of the time - it's undoubtedly better than most armor enchants.)

Courageous was a straight nerf rather than a real FAQ - though needed, it's probably too much.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
blackbloodtroll wrote:
A lot of older stuff got errata. Stuff that did not need it.

That's your opinion... others beg to differ.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
Tyrantherus wrote:

Also Summoners got nerfed into the ground in comparison with the unchained variant. Would you allow a summoner in your party now with the unchained version, or would it still be a no-go?

It's now the only version allowed in PFS play. Having played a PFS APG Summoner to retirement, I'd say that the adjustments were badly needed. Home DM's who banned the original class should take a look at allowing the Unchained! variant.

I have also played a Summoner to high level.

I hate Hate HATE HATE the Unchained Summoner.

Not rearranging the spell list. That was probably a good idea, and needed.

Not fiddling around with the Evolution list, the cost and level requirements. That was a good idea. Restrictions on what kinds of Eidolons can get what, little irksome, but alright I get it.

Not screwing around with the number of Evolution Points. I don't really think this was a big deal after fiddling with the Evolution list, but I can see where they're going and I get it.

The Eidolons themselves.

Linking the Eidolons to specific outsider types is boring. Heavily cuts down on the creativity in building a monster, which is one of the things I liked about the class. Pisses me off, but--

WHY IS EVERYTHING LINKED TO ALIGNMENT!? AREN'T THERE ENOUGH CRAP ALIGNMENT-SLAVE THINGS IN THE GAME ALREADY?

I just want to build a big damn clockwork automaton to do my bidding, it sounds like a Gnome thing to do. Why the hell does it have to be an Inevitable and force me to be Lawful while they're at it?

Really pissing on my "insane genius inventor" vibe Paizo. THAT is what pissed me off.


I agree ChainsawSam- The balancing of the class was fine, even useful. Also they made a few things more clear/strait-forward, but why did they mess with the flavor of the class? putting restrictions on their flavor is terrible.

Ty- I wouldn't worry about the occult classes. They are full of flavor, but aren't more powerful than other classes. I think the most potentially problematic class in the game is the core wizard. If you can handle that then you can handle the new classes. They are on the other hand full of flavor and fun, so I would definitely allow them (assuming they fit the flavor of your game).

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

CWheezy wrote:
Andreww made a thread where he solos a module designed for 4 level 17 characters as a level 18 sorc.

I've been unable to google this... link please?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
A lot of older stuff got errata. Stuff that did not need it.
That's your opinion... others beg to differ.

Some of it did, and some of it didn't.

Are there those that believe that every single errata, of the recent mass of errata, was absolutely necessary? I have not heard that extreme a view, yet.


Kurald Galain wrote:
CWheezy wrote:
Andreww made a thread where he solos a module designed for 4 level 17 characters as a level 18 sorc.
I've been unable to google this... link please?

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qj3u?Beastmass-2-Son-of-Beastmass#1


Pirate Rob wrote:

I found the methodology used in that solo run to be highly problematic.

Mostly, I've got a 75% chance to succeed on this so I'll assume I always make it.

I've got to do 12 75% tasks in a row, so I'll just continue to assume I succeed at them all.

Reading it again, he posts all his rolls, so I don't know what you are talking about

EDIT:
Maybe you mean stuff like this?

Quote:
It isn't ever coming out of daze during that time (it would need to roll 16 consecutive 17's or better)

I dunno if you know but 16 consecutive 17+ is obscenely unlikely

< 0.000001

Silver Crusade

So to get back on track... the main things I would suggest looking at are:

-Read of up on any newly released classes, including Unchained. Ban the ones that don't fit the game's setting, but all of them are balanced just fine with already existing classes.

-Read up on VMC (Variant Multi-Classing). It can provide a fun and interesting new way to make characters.

-If you feel like it, read through the wave of Errata that went through. It's a lot of reading, but it might prepare you to rule in one way or another if there is some confusion at the table.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Been out of the loop, jumping back in, what have I missed? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.