I'm sleep-deprived and trying to figure this out. I basically want to figure out which Paizo classes don't get selectable abilities? Abilities you only get to pick one or two of don't count, nor do spells and bonus feats, because they're too general. I want things specific and integral to the class, like rogue talents, alchemist discoveries, et cetera. Cavalier orders are out (you only get one), domains are out (you get two, at most) and so are deeds (you get a whole bunch, but they ain't selectable). Any input warmly welcome. :)
Cheers,
- Gears
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Off the top of my head:
CRB: Bard, Druid, Ranger, Sorcerer, Paladin, Wizard, Cleric, Monk, Fighter (All but the rogue and the barbarian)
ACG: Skald, Hunter, Swashbuckler, Brawler, Warpriest
Other: Inquisitor, Gunslinger, Summoner, Cavalier
Don't know Occult stuff too well, so not sure if there is anything from that.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Your distinctions are completely arbitrary. Spells known or bonus combat feats are not valid, but Rogue and Investigator Talents, usually considered worth less than a feat each, are ok?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Spells known are a class ability you have to pick. Bonus feats are class abilities you have to pick. In fact, if the class has you make a choice that you'll have to live with, it should qualify by your accounting. Ethereal.
Which kind of means you have to make choices on class abilities with all classes. Core monks get some of the fewest choices since I believe they get only 2 or 3 bonus feats. Otherwise all core monks get the exact same abilities from leveling.
Thanks for the list, Snowblind. Seems pretty darn spot on. :)
I'm a bit torn on the summoner. Since I feel the eidolon is such a huge part of the class, I'm tempted to consider its evolutions equivalent to discoveries, revelations, etc., but I also at the same time realize they aren't quite the same.
It's curious, because that list probably contains some of my absolute favorite classes (bard, druid, paladin, monk, inquisitor) as well as some of my least favorite ones (cavalier, cleric, gunslinger, wizard). I had been thinking it might turn out they would all be classes I despise or love. Interesting!
@Kahel: I totally get what you're saying, but I'm looking for classes lacking what I consider a very distinctive type of class feature. I mean, I can't be the only one who feels that rage powers, rogue talents, alchemist discoveries and oracle revelations are all the same "kind of thing", whereas a bard's spells known doesn't belong to that category of class features, right? It's hard to put into words, but Snowblind seemed to get exactly what I meant. They're, like, emblematic of one class (sometimes two, with hybrid classes), they're not feats or spells, they're usually doled out every other, every third or every four levels or so, and there's usually an Extra Blank feat to get more of them.
I do agree it's very arbitrary and subjective though, as the teapot man said. Still, it's interesting that both Snowblind and I seem to instinctively feel that favored terrains and favored enemy options somehow don't fit it, even though they could be argued to fulfill all the criteria.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd say Cleric is the class with the least customization potential in the whole game. It doesn't even have to choose which spella to learn. It doesn't help that Domains give you half their stuff at 1st level and most of them are pretty "meh" anyway. :/
Clerics are definitely the most boring class to build. Druids and Paladins have it pretty bad too, but at least they get something new or a significant improvement to an existing ability nearly every level.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Lemmy: I totally agree with you on clerics. And generally I feel like I tend to gravitate more towards classes with more customization options. Which makes my love of bards and druids quite incongruous, but there you go. I basically wanted to compile this list because I figured it would end up being a list of my least favorite classes, but it really is a mixed bag. In my home group, I've been preaching the gospel that customizability is almost always better design than set-in-stone abilities, but I think that's too broad a generalization. There's something about just playing an awesome swashbucklin' vanilla bard that is hard to beat, in my book.
"The minstrel boy to the war has gone/
In the ranks of death you'll find him/
His father's sword he hath girded on/
And his wild harp slung behind him"
:)
Cheers,
- Gears
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, yeah, with hybrid classes and archetypes and everything, very few things are "unique" to a single class anymore. The point was rather to track down which classes don't get any meaningfully selectable abilities at all outside of spells and bonus feats, whether these originated with some other class or not.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Spells known are a class ability you have to pick. Bonus feats are class abilities you have to pick. In fact, if the class has you make a choice that you'll have to live with, it should qualify by your accounting. Ethereal.
Which kind of means you have to make choices on class abilities with all classes. Core monks get some of the fewest choices since I believe they get only 2 or 3 bonus feats. Otherwise all core monks get the exact same abilities from leveling.
A single spell known is a relatively minor pick compared to an entire rage power. That, and the fact that you can eventually switch it out, so even a poor choice can be redacted (or you can game it with something like color spray, that sucks after a few levels but kills early on).
Feats...yeah, I accept those as selectible class features personally, but I can see why they didn't want something that wasn't drenched in the class' colors. I would still count style bonus feats personally, since prereq free feats give the class something distinctive (you often go ranger or slayer if you want str based TWF).
Yeah, that's a good point. A ranger's bonus feats definitely feel closer to rage powers than, say, a gunslinger's bonus feats. Fighter-only combat feats do too, but since the fighter isn't restricted to selecting only fighter feats as bonus feats, I'm not sure it's fair to include that class feature as a whole.
Also, I suppose wizards might actually be bumped off Snowblind's list due to Arcane Discoveries, although there are rather a small number of them.
There is also advanced weapon training to think about for fighters now. A bit of a revisionist thing, but it is still one of their greatest abilities now.
I can see writing off original weapon training, since you would usually get 1, maybe 2 groups you really use. At all. But now you can switch that out for things like warpriest damage dice, boosts to saves, skills, etc. All sorts of nice little goodies.
Sure, a bit few and far between usually, but there is basically an "extra advanced weapon training" feat, and grabbing that is worth it.
|
Don't know Occult stuff too well, so not sure if there is anything from that.
For Occult stuff there's Medium (who gets some daily choices, but that's not the same thing) and Spiritualist, who just has none of these.
And I'd agree with others that Fighter probably doesn't count any more due to Advanced Weapon Training. Especially since it will soon have Advanced Armor Training as well.
Also, as noted, Skalds get Rage Powers. Unchained Monks also get selectable powers, for the record. And Arcane Discoveries probably should count for Wizard. Eidolon options counting for Summoner also makes sense.
If bonus Feats from a specific list (rather than just a type of Feat like Teamwork or Combat) count, that drops Core Monk, Ranger, and Sorcerer as well.
That makes the list:
CRB: Bard, Druid, Paladin, Cleric,
APG: Antipaladin, Cavalier, Inquisitor
ACG: Brawler, Hunter, Swashbuckler, Warpriest
UC: Gunslinger, Samurai
OA: Medium, Spiritualist
|
|
Kineticists constantly have to make meaningful choices as they level. Unless you're spending gold on retraining, once you make a choice it's permanent as a kineticist. Which means that unless the GM is allowing retraining, all choices are permanent. Everything from what element you select at level 1 to each infusion and utility talent matters greatly. And no two people need have an identical build, even with the same elements.
|
|
That's a one-time choice, though. Not nearly the same vein as talents or discoveries.Woah, wait, Druid?
+1 spell/day vs full-leveled Animal Companion?
Is that meaningless?
Yeah, this isn't about quality, power, or choices like Domains. It's about choices you make every few levels. Druid has one choice at level 1 and then never again.
Off the top of my head:
CRB: Bard, Druid, Ranger, Sorcerer, Paladin, Wizard, Cleric, Monk, Fighter (All but the rogue and the barbarian)
ACG: Skald, Hunter, Swashbuckler, Brawler, Warpriest
Other: Inquisitor, Gunslinger, Summoner, Cavalier
Don't know Occult stuff too well, so not sure if there is anything from that.
Bards get masterpieces now.
|
|
I'd have to disagree that spells aren't a meaningful choice. Especially for spontaneous casters. Spontaneous casters can't swap out spells very often. So generally speaking, once they select a spell they always know that spell. And when they can swap out a spell, they can only do so for one spell. Beyond that, retraining costs are incurred. Which is true for everyone else who has to make important choices.
I'll agree that a wizard or cleric's spell choices aren't quite as meaningful as those of a sorcerer, oracle, or bard though.
Similarly I'll have to disagree that bonus feat choices aren't meaningful. These are permanent choices which can drastically affect your build. Depending on what feats that fighter took for his bonus feats, his role in combat can change in extreme ways. Being a master tripper means you had to devote attribute points and many feats to this goal. Specializing in one weapon means you're less effective with other weapons. Two handed, one handed, sword and board, or two weapon fighting all have heavy feat investments to maximize their potential. Plus requiring the right attributes to qualify for the feats.
|
Kineticists constantly have to make meaningful choices as they level. Unless you're spending gold on retraining, once you make a choice it's permanent as a kineticist. Which means that unless the GM is allowing retraining, all choices are permanent. Everything from what element you select at level 1 to each infusion and utility talent matters greatly. And no two people need have an identical build, even with the same elements.
That's exactly why the kineticist is not on Deadmanwalking's OA list...
I'll concede fighters on account of advanced weapon training + fighter-only feats, but I'm really not sold on having things like weapon training, favored enemy, favored terrain, etc., count. Stuff that basically just adds identical numbers, and you just get to pick what weapon/enemy/terrain to add them to/against. I know this is crazy arbitrary, and I'm not trying to argue I'm "right", but those things don't feel like they fit, somehow.
As for bonus feats, and again, this is obviously just 100% subjective, I don't think picking off a predefined list is enough. If you're able to skip prereqs, that's enough for me, but just giving me a limited list of bonus feats doesn't cut the mustard.
I think it seems like from OA we have...medium, spiritualist, and that's it. Psychics get phrenic amps, mesmerists get tricks, kineticists are all about selectable abilities, as are occultists.
Also, I suppose the term "meaningful" was perhaps a bit of a poor choice of words, as it seems rather loaded. My only point was I feel that feats and spells are too general, too widely available to too many different classes, to count. So it's not about being "meaningful" as such, but rather about being "class-unique to a meaningful degree". Now, I know everyone and their aunt can get access to rage powers via archetypes, domains and just being buddies with a skald, but the ground breaker rage power is still not as widely available as most spells. Also, with spells being often quite easy to swap out and such, that just makes them feel less similar to these kinds of class features (revelations, discoveries, focus powers, etc.), at least in my view.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, basically. I mean, I think weapon training by itself doesn't count, because the choices are so limited and same-y, but as soon as you add advanced weapon training into the mix it totally qualifies.
Like, selecting an oracle revelation that gives you scaling fire resistance is fine, because the revelation class feature provides a bunch of other flavorful options aside from that one revelation. A hypothetical class feature which simply gives you 5 points of energy resistance every four levels, and the only choice it provides you with is that you get to pick what energy type to apply it to each time, would not qualify, if that makes sense.