| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I can't be the only one who's ever ended up in this position. You've found a class, maybe an archetype, with a feature that you'd kill to use. It suits your interests, or maybe it'd have perfect synergy with the character you have already built for multiclassing. But its not a level one feature. Maybe it's not even a level two feature. Maybe gaining that feature would mean putting levels and levels into that insufferable class just for that one ability.
Alas, so many wonderful possibilities, killed by reluctance!
For me, my distaste holds for the Vigilante. This is a flashy, flavorful class, don't get me wrong. But its highly specialized at best and gimmicky at worst. A lot of the social talents don't mesh well with home games, and I can't see how'd they work in a society game. Many have to do with a Vigilante's renown in a specific location, which seems impossible to achieve in Society games that seem to take place in a different location for every adventure. And the need for secrecy between changing forms is particularly inconvenient. Telephone booths and other private places to change can't be terribly plentiful in a setting like Golarion. This class would seem to only do well in a campaign tailored for the use of Ultimate Intrigue's unique set of rules.
So why would I want any part of it?
The answer lies in an archetype, the newly introduced Agathiel. I can almost make a case for playing this archetype. From level one to three, I could almost make a Wilfred like character, which sounds hilarious. The Agathiel has a surprisingly high bonus to having a man in a dog suit fool people into thinking he's a dog. From level four onward, I can make Wishbone, keeping my equipment but getting to be a dog, with no time limit.
But I can't bring myself to work with the other half of the class and what it entails. Picking out social talents is necessary for the class, but finding relevant ones feels like a chore. The level four transformation may not have a time limit, but it is a polymorph effect, and therefore can be disabled by an antimagic field. There's a good chance my character will not be informed about the incoming field, and if they are, they'll need to find an excuse for an animal in a superhero suit to remove itself from the party and then another excuse to where this mild mannered humanoid came from all of a sudden. Neither of Which is conducive to keeping a secret identity, making this archetype a liability onto itself.
I cannot simply pick the parts I want and tack them into a class I want. To get the features as early as possible, I'd need to suffer through four levels of vigilante in a row. I refuse. And so that feature is simply beyond my patience level.
Multiclassing isn't any easier outside of that specific example. Wild shape is at the earliest, level four, end of discussion. And there's no way around this. You may think you're clever, take four levels of a class you want, one level of druid, shaping focus feat. But that's not how shaping focus works. If you try this, you'll end up having to wait until level eight for a level four wild shape, and then you'll need to wait another level for the feat to get it at full power. And the druid specifically has oodles of restrictions. You can't multiclass with paladin, since they have to be Lawful Good, and Druids have to be some sort of neutral. A monk-druid would have to play lawful neutral. A cleric Druid would be highly limited in deity choice. A fighter, Barbarian, Ranger, or any other combat heavy class would find themself unable to use metal armors or shields. Wild shape isn't something you can really multiclass for the sake of.
Pet features suffer when muticlassed unless the other class also gains a pet at an equally early level. Eidolons don't seem to benefit at all from multiclassing, as summoners are the only class that uses them (of course, eidolons can suffer a missed level or two).
Combing two different kinds of spellcasters requires additional book keeping in most situations. Arcane spellcasters suffer armor penalties that divine casters do not. Even if both classes use the same sort of spell, if one is spontaneous and the other isn't, the spells will have to be recorded separately, or some system will need to be devised to mark what spells were received from what class. And the advancement of caster levels will be stunted.
Multiclass advancement stuttering is another downside. The second you take a level in a different class is the second you bar yourself from the level twenty ability of either class. For some combinations, Advancement stuttering also prevents you from improving your BAB and other scores.
Frankly, and a friend of mine will disagree with me on this, I think the hybrid classes are one of the best innovations in the game. They solve my problem of multiclassing reluctance by combining features from two classes into one playable class that advances normally. Archetypes occasionally do similar work, the feral child more or less combining features from the Ranger, Monk, and Barbarian and injecting it into the druid is one of the most complex ones that come to mind.
What both of the above have working against them are the specific combinations offered. There are only so many options. Pathfinder is a finite game, not every possible combination has been explored, after all.
Maybe I'm just not the type who can delay gratification. But I'm curious about the thoughts of others. Anybody else find themselves in this pickle? Anyone have a feature they love stuck levels deep in a class they can't stand? I'd like to hear some.
I am disgusted at your reluctance to take Social Grace + Entrepeneur + Renown stuff to be the most famous circus "dog" in Golarion.
Also Feign Innocence for puppy eyes.
I recall a 3.5 product by Dreamscarred Press that turned classes and prestige classes into a build-it-yourself point system. Complete Control, I think it was called. Someone should harp on them to get that updated into Pathfinder.
Back on topic tho:
- Love the Vigilante's Mad Rush talent. I don't hate the rest of the class, just wish I could use it on another class.
- Love Samurai's Resolve and Weapon Expertise, not too hot on Samurai.
- Looooooooooooooveeeeeeee GRIT! But I don't care for ranged builds particularly or Finesse builds, and the Sleuth Investigator is not as martially potent as I may have wanted.
Keep in mind, OP, that you can ignore the dual identity portion of the class as long as you don't mind losing out on things like scrying resistance. Alternatively, there's the Nameless One feat if you want to have only one identity and still have divination resistance.
|
One suggestion I saw for incorporating the Vigilante's secret identity into Society play was simply to reveal it to the other members of the party, but not the general public. They're Pathfinders; they should be able to keep a secret. Also renown can be reset to a new location after 1 week. With the time between scenarios undefined, who's to say I haven't already been in this town spreading my renown? Of course that doesn't work when the Venture Captain puts us on a boat to where the adventure really is....
But back on topic, personally I like having a pool of something, whether that's ki, inspiration, panache/grit/luck, phrenic points, etc, etc... But I really prefer having a recharge ability of some type. I like the variety of phrenic and panache recharge options, and don't even mind too much having to spend a feat if necessary to get one (Recovered Rage, among others). But I hate that the Arcanist's recharge methods consumes slots or items, and there's no (PFS legal) way to recharge ki.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ki leech through Qinggong Power at 10th level is PF legal.
Casting an evil spell is not an alignment infraction in and of itself, as long as it doesn't violate any codes, tenents of faith, or other such issues.
Committing an evil act outside of casting the spell, such as using an evil spell to torture an innocent NPC for information or the like is an alignment infraction. Using infernal healing to heal party members is not an evil act.
I can't possibly define what every evil act could be. That is why I rely on GM discretion. But simply casting an evil descriptor spell is not an evil act in and of itself.
Ki leech through Qinggong Power at 10th level is PF legal.
Casting an evil spell is not an alignment infraction in and of itself, as long as it doesn't violate any codes, tenents of faith, or other such issues.
Committing an evil act outside of casting the spell, such as using an evil spell to torture an innocent NPC for information or the like is an alignment infraction. Using infernal healing to heal party members is not an evil act.
I can't possibly define what every evil act could be. That is why I rely on GM discretion. But simply casting an evil descriptor spell is not an evil act in and of itself.
Who or what are you quoting, here, out of curiousity?
and if used courtly hunter archetype?
Off topic, but how is casting an [evil] spell not an Evil act? If it isn't ... well, then what's the point other than to keep those deriving spell lists from Good domain deities from using them? *facepalm*
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Off topic, but how is casting an [evil] spell not an Evil act? If it isn't ... well, then what's the point other than to keep those deriving spell lists from Good domain deities from using them? *facepalm*
It is.
And thankfully they finally put into print in Horror Adventures that YES, by the rules, casting an aligned spell is an aligned act.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Off topic, but how is casting an [evil] spell not an Evil act? If it isn't ... well, then what's the point other than to keep those deriving spell lists from Good domain deities from using them? *facepalm*
That was the only point. All it did and all it was supposed to do was designate which spells could and couldn't be used by certain divine casters. And if an individual game or an individual campaign setting wanted to take that and run with it further, they could take that step at that point.
You see, way back in olden days, Pathfinder was a setting-neutral game system. It was touted as being "backwards compatible", so as to facilitate all the not-Golarion games that gaming groups might want to continue playing, using the new Pathfinder rules system in place of the 3.5 material they were using. Part and parcel of being a setting-neutral game system is not confusing material that only applies to one setting, such as Golarion, as needing to be applied all across the board. For instance, even before Horror Adventures, it was a rule in Golarion that casting aligned spells were aligned actions (Faiths of Righteousness, Champions of Corruption, one of those books). But that only applied to Golarion and that was fine. Trying to make Golarion's material apply to settings other than Golarion is about as nonsensical as trying to claim that Storm and Thor of Marvel Comics are evil for casting lightning, just because Emperor Palpatine of Star Wars casts lightning and is evil.
Now, though, the game appears to be in some sort of misguided limbo, and I have no idea what the hell the designers are trying to accomplish. Were they ever trying to make the setting-neutral game they advertised, or were we grossly misinformed? It's akin to Paizo advertising a truck and then producing a giant paperweight. Is it a fine paperweight? Sure. Are there some in the customer base who only ever wanted a paperweight and so are not disappointed by this setting-neutral game being dominated by the material of one single campaign setting? Probably. Is the giant paperweight, in fact, the only thing Paizo wanted to be making in the first place? Oh, who even knows?
It doesn't change the fact that I was advertised a truck, that I bought into this game expecting a truck, and that what the game is becoming:
And thankfully they finally put into print in Horror Adventures that YES, by the rules, casting an aligned spell is an aligned act.
is in complete contradiction to that. "Casting an evil-aligned spell is an evil-aligned action" only comes into play once the individual campaign setting has been chosen. A setting-neutral game system does not choose that first. So making "evil-aligned spellcasting evil-aligned actions" a rule all across the board the way Horror Adventures will apparently be doing is the same thing as deciding that casting lightning is evil before we've even answered the question "Are we playing in Star Wars?"
Cart. Horse. They do go in a certain order. And I wish the designers would figure it out.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Casting an evil-aligned spell is an evil-aligned action" only comes into play once the individual campaign setting has been chosen.
The Pathfinder game makes lots of assumptions about the individual campaign setting. The whole fire-and-forget spellcasting concept is a big example.
This particular assumption is one you don't like, and (probably) wasn't explicitly there until now. Like most such assumptions, it can be avoided or worked around, even more easily than fire-and-forget spellcasting can.
[And, as a side note, thank you to the 3PPs, and occasional Paizo material, which help me avoid fire-and-forget spellcasting: psionics, spheres of power, the kineticist, strange magic, and I'm sure there are more I'm forgetting. I love alternate magic systems.]
Who or what are you quoting, here, out of curiousity?Ki leech through Qinggong Power at 10th level is PF legal.
Casting an evil spell is not an alignment infraction in and of itself, as long as it doesn't violate any codes, tenents of faith, or other such issues.
Committing an evil act outside of casting the spell, such as using an evil spell to torture an innocent NPC for information or the like is an alignment infraction. Using infernal healing to heal party members is not an evil act.
I can't possibly define what every evil act could be. That is why I rely on GM discretion. But simply casting an evil descriptor spell is not an evil act in and of itself.
PFS rules on evil spells.
|
|
is in complete contradiction to that. "Casting an evil-aligned spell is an evil-aligned action" only comes into play once the individual campaign setting has been chosen. A setting-neutral game system does not choose that first. So making "evil-aligned spellcasting evil-aligned actions" a rule all across the board the way Horror Adventures will apparently be doing is the same thing as deciding that casting lightning is evil before we've even answered the question "Are we playing in Star Wars?"
Cart. Horse. They do go in a certain order. And I wish the designers would figure it out.
No. Alignment is universal throughout the Pathfinder game system, not just specific to a setting.
It was in the Core Rulebook, and it was in the 3rd Edition Core Books for DnD, and the 2nd, and I'm pretty sure the first.
Look, this thread is heading down a road of becoming a moral absolutism vs. relativism debate that should go to another thread.
What is inarguable is the fact that casting ki leech is not an evil action in PFS, as per the ruling I quoted, so @Nomadical has a PFS legal way to regain ki through the qinggong power.
Whether you agree with the ruling or not should go into a thread in the PFS forum.
Look, this thread is heading down a road of becoming a moral absolutism vs. relativism debate that should go to another thread.
What is inarguable is the fact that casting ki leech is not an evil action in PFS, as per the ruling I quoted, so @Nomadical has a PFS legal way to regain ki through the qinggong power.
Whether you agree with the ruling or not should go into a thread in the PFS forum.
Although having to wait through half or more of the game to be able to do so probably isn't going to make people feel better about the limited ability to recharge (versus panache, etc)
|
I have considered dipping Vigilante for some of my characters. If you take the Avenger version, you get the only class besides Paladin with full BAB and a good Will save. Unfortunately, every archetype for vigilante trades out Avenger, which is incredibly frustrating.
If you're just dipping though, you're probably only taking 1 social talent. In PFS, I'd leave the social persona off-screen and just keep the vigilante persona for the whole scenario. In that case though, most of the social talents don't help you much, except... "Companion to the lonely". It's in inner sea intrigue. You spend an hour making out with the party sorceress, and you can reroll a number of skill checks or will saves per day equal to her charisma mod. Actually with any willing person and you use whatever the higher charisma mod is, but it's likely to be the sorceress.
The other reason I was considering the dip was to get the "Nothing can stop me" vigilante talent. Smash through things while you're moving. But it's Avenger only. Now, there are ways for other classes to take Stalker talents, but no way for others to get Avenger talents.
So yes, the vigilante is very frustrating to look at.
I have considered dipping Vigilante for some of my characters. If you take the Avenger version, you get the only class besides Paladin with full BAB and a good Will save. Unfortunately, every archetype for vigilante trades out Avenger, which is incredibly frustrating.
Have I got some good news for you then: the Psychometrist archetype doesn't give away its specialization. Admittedly Psychic Senstivity isn't really worth a Social Talent, but many of the implement powers are well worth the few Visilante talents you'd give up, especially Transmutation (re-setable Bane on your weapons. Or ghost touch. Or Seeking. Etc.)
|
|
I have considered dipping Vigilante for some of my characters. If you take the Avenger version, you get the only class besides Paladin with full BAB and a good Will save. Unfortunately, every archetype for vigilante trades out Avenger, which is incredibly frustrating.Have I got some good news for you then: the Psychometrist archetype doesn't give away its specialization. Admittedly Psychic Senstivity isn't really worth a Social Talent, but many of the implement powers are well worth the few Visilante talents you'd give up, especially Transmutation (re-setable Bane on your weapons. Or ghost touch. Or Seeking. Etc.)
There's also the Wildsoul from Ultimate Intrigue, Agathiel from Spymaster's Handbook, and Faceless Enforcer from Path of the Hellknight. None of those switch out Specialization.
|
I thought multiclassing was just leveling up in another class, not chopping off the level 20 cap for your original class.
example: I could either be a Rogue 2 or Rogue 1/Cleric 1= only lvl 19 in rogue or cleric.
I thought it was unlimited class lvls.
Example: Rogue 20/Cleric 20
Answers? Now I'm all confused.
Indeed, if only there were some way to surpass that...
Also if anyone has directions from Albuquerque...
Admittedly Psychic Senstivity isn't really worth a Social Talent
Well, it unlocks the feats Psychic Adept and Psychic Disciple, allowing you to pick up knacks and level 1 spells without being a caster. And with caster level equal to character level.
|
Indeed, if only there were some way to surpass that...
There is. The CRB has rules for level 21+.
That said, my group plays that you get all unique class abilities, but for common abilities (e.g. BAB, saves, HPs, skill points, et cetera) you get the best 20 levels worth of classes you have. So, for example, a 15th level Wizard / 10th level Fighter would have a +15 BAB... as if they were a 10th/10th Wizard/Fighter... the 20 levels yielding the highest bonus for that stat. It's kind of like the gestalt rules (e.g. a 20th/20th multiclass Fighter/Wizard has exactly the same abilities & stats as a 20th level gestalt Fighter/Wizard), but you build in to it over time and can have as much variation in classes as you want.
|
|
Nope, sorry.
You only get 20 levels altogether as the game stands now.
But it says in the Core Rulebook that you can:
Multiclassing/Prestige Classes: The simplest way to progress beyond 20th level is to simply multiclass or take levels in a prestige class, in which case you gain all of the abilities of the new class level normally. This effectively treats 20th level as a hard limit for class level, but not as a hard limit for total character level.I'm scratching my head right about now.
|
|
Nope, sorry.
You only get 20 levels altogether as the game stands now.
But it says in the Core Rulebook that you can:
Multiclassing/Prestige Classes: The simplest way to progress beyond 20th level is to simply multiclass or take levels in a prestige class, in which case you gain all of the abilities of the new class level normally. This effectively treats 20th level as a hard limit for class level, but not as a hard limit for total character level.
I'm scratching my head right about now.
Huh, interesting.
*scratches head*
*shrugs*
Ok, Thelia, I've seen you post about this here and there so I'll let you in on the way it works. Technically, yes, there's no limit whatsoever to characterlevel. However Paizo has thus far never really supported play beyond 20th level. Consequently most people don't go beyond 20th, if they even reach that point at all. One important benefit, imo, of capping levels is it forces you to make meaningful decisions for your character.
|
|
However Paizo has thus far never really supported play beyond 20th level.
Well... in Into the Darklands they had Kortash Khain as a Cleric 6 / Wizard 6 / Mystic Theurge 10.
That said, Into the Darklands was v3.5 rules and subsequent texts have capped him at 20th level. Some of the devs have also said that they don't plan to explore higher levels, 'epic', or even their own mythic system further.
|
|
However Paizo has thus far never really supported play beyond 20th level.Well... in Into the Darklands they had Kortash Khain as a Cleric 6 / Wizard 6 / Mystic Theurge 10.
That said, Into the Darklands was v3.5 rules and subsequent texts have capped him at 20th level. Some of the devs have also said that they don't plan to explore higher levels, 'epic', or even their own mythic system further.
Yeah, Mythic Realms now have him sitting at Cleric 5/Sorcerer 5/Mystic Theurge 10/Hierophant 6
Ok, fine :p There has been minimal support, but mostly on the level of adventures and npcs and such, little to none for pcs.
But you still can (if your GM is nuts) go beyond lvl 20 by multiclassing as stated by the CRB.
Yes
I write into my house rules that there are no level limit. It almost never comes up, so it is fine.
Back to the original topic, I love the Vigilante archetype quite a bit. GMs I've encountered when I've attempted to generate one for the games I'm a player in tend to have the same issues you do, and for these issues I've proposed the same "fix":
Keep vigilante identity and social identity the same individual. No alignment difference, no costume changing, nothing. The rest of the party will certainly be developing their own notoriety, and I may as well have my character be among this.
The rules for Vigilante mostly support this, with only some exceptions. Most social talents only function while you're in your social identity, but very few vigilante effects only apply in your vigilante identity! Doing vigilante stuff in your social identity lets onlookers discover the connection, but if it's not one you were even bothering to keep secret, there's no problem at all.
Vigilante's Hidden Strike and Lethal Grace. Vigilant is just a very confused and mediocre class, and I'd rather just give their talents away to other martials.
Sorcerer Bloodline Arcanas. Bloodline arcanas are really cool, the sorcerer honestly isn't. Outside of an OP archetype sorcerer really has nothing left going for it with the Arcanist being allowed to exist.
Cavalier's Mount. Just give me a fighter archetype where it replaces bravery and/or armor training.
Samurai's Resolve
Hmmm...
|
Contributor
|
I kind of feel like this with martial versatility. It's a good mechanic, but I wish it could be built into more archetypes, since it's so meh for me as the main class feature for the brawler.
The fighter desperately needs martial versatility. Unfortunately, I can't justify giving up access to advanced weapon training for it...
|
|
I kind of feel like this with martial versatility. It's a good mechanic, but I wish it could be built into more archetypes, since it's so meh for me as the main class feature for the brawler.The fighter desperately needs martial versatility. Unfortunately, I can't justify giving up access to advanced weapon training for it...
Personally, a fighter only feat that gave access to Weapon Training 1 and could be taken multiple times (with staggered progression) as long as the base class couldn't take it (Special: You cannot take this if you have gained the weapon training class feature from your class), and you're golden as well as saving a few archetypes which suffer from it, although it'd have to be balanced a bit better so it didn't just super stack with the 'not quite weapon training' class features that already bar you from taking AWTs.