|
How about no new classes. Seriously, please?How about LOTS of new classes, and then if you don't happen to like them you don't use them. That way everyone wins.
I play and gm lots of pfs, so I don't get a choice. And I don't mind if people enjoy them (oddly other than the classic Summoner, I make it a point not to play the same class twice), it's just that 30 some classes are hard to keep up with.
Also, many are, very simular. I don't see why a brawler couldn't be an unchained monk archetype (free choice of alignments, the feat choices replacing ki, and so on).
Finally, after a certain point, it just seems like a cynical way for paizo to cash in rather than the quality game I fell in love with, and that bothers me.
When I don't like a topic, like you are acting like, I make one negative statement and hide the topic. If enough people hide the topic, the devs notice. Otherwise, you are outvoted.
You don't have to buy any more class books in pdfs or dead tree. You can not allow any classes you choose at your table or PBP topic, for any reason. You can also start a topic about not allowing similar classes anymore, that I can hide.:)
This game could really benefit from some sort of Barbarian Loremaster. Or maybe a Druid Gunslinger.
|
|
I can't make sense of that post.When I don't like a topic, like you are acting like, I make one negative statement and hide the topic. If enough people hide the topic, the devs notice. Otherwise, you are outvoted.
You don't have to buy any more class books in pdfs or dead tree. You can not allow any classes you choose at your table or PBP topic, for any reason. You can also start a topic about not allowing similar classes anymore, that I can hide.:)
I said I wanted no more classes, politely. Another person told me I didn't have to buy more books or use them. I politely explained why this option didn't quite work for me.
He decided my on topic comment was unpopular and that I should not post, go into a corner, and shut up.
At least that's my translation.
What? Neither of you know how to hide a topic so you don't have to look at it?
Guy is just repeating his objections to this topic over and over. How is that saying "What other Hybrid classes would you like to see?"
I didn't say anything about any corner till just now. As I said no such thing, maybe that's a strawman argument.
I have long wanted to play an Android Druid for that EXACT reason.Or how about the Transformer, who specializes in transforming others>Surely "Transformer" should be a racial Shifter archetype for the Android?
BEAST WARS
|
BEAST WARSI have long wanted to play an Android Druid for that EXACT reason.Or how about the Transformer, who specializes in transforming others>Surely "Transformer" should be a racial Shifter archetype for the Android?
Well now that theme song is stuck in my head forever, again.
(Silverbolt totally was a Paladin multiclass though.)
Or Knight/Cavalier/Samurai.BEAST WARSI have long wanted to play an Android Druid for that EXACT reason.Or how about the Transformer, who specializes in transforming others>Surely "Transformer" should be a racial Shifter archetype for the Android?Well now that theme song is stuck in my head forever, again.
(Silverbolt totally was a Paladin multiclass though.)
Or Man/Bear/Pig.
I'm super duper serial...
|
|
Or Knight/Cavalier/Samurai.BEAST WARSI have long wanted to play an Android Druid for that EXACT reason.Or how about the Transformer, who specializes in transforming others>Surely "Transformer" should be a racial Shifter archetype for the Android?Well now that theme song is stuck in my head forever, again.
(Silverbolt totally was a Paladin multiclass though.)
Or Man/Bear/Pig.
I'm super duper serial...
I mean, if it's a flying pig, you're not too far off his look and abilities.
The new Shifter class might open up some possibilities ;)
The new Shifter class might open up some possibilities ;)
Maybe. It really depends on what directions it goes. If its another class with 'grows claws' for rounds/day it's just going to be sad. Even traditional wildshape would be somewhat unengaging (as wildshape tends to be a tertiary add-on to classes that do a dozen other things).
It really needs to have a wide variety of utility abilities and some combat perks that at least equal stuff you can buy off the shelf at level 1.
One class I'd like to see is an arcane wilderness class. Something like the 1e ranger, with spells and so on, but none of the circumstantial bonuses that clutter up the current ranger (you can be competent if you're fighting the right enemy in the right terrain and a dog actually does most of the work and if you chose a correct group of weapon feats to limit yourself to)
At will claws that did monk unarmed damage would be balanced with the monk. An at will wild shape built onto a barbarian//monk chassis would be pretty sweet. Maybe even 6+ skill points to give it a good selection of social, movement, and wilderness skills.
Maybe:
Full BAB, Good Fortitude & Reflex, d10 Hit Dice.
Skills: Acrobatics, Bluff, Climb, Craft, Disguise, Escape Artist, Handle Animal, Heal, Intimidate, Knowledge nature, Perception, Perform, Profession, Ride, Sense Motive, Sleight of Hand, Stealth, Survival, Swim.
Skill Ranks per Level: 6 + Intelligence modifier
Maybe instead of shifting at will, its daily limit on shifting is based on the CR of the creature it turns into.
So at 1st level, it could turn into a CR 1/3 critter 3 times per day, a CR 1/2 critter twice per day, a CR 1 critter once per day, or a CR 1/2 critter once and a CR 1/3 once per day.
There would also be a list of Known Shapes, which would be a number of forms of a particular creature type equal to your ranks in the appropriate Knowledge skill (+3 if it is a class skill for you).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
How about no new classes. Seriously, please?
I'd like a couple new martial classes personally, or good spell-less archetypes for some 6-level casters like Investigators.
|
|
I had an idea for a Western Martial Artist. A Monk/Ranger, of sorts.
No, not a Brawler. This is not a boxer, this is not a wrestler. This is a Martial Artist, with the same dedication to physical and mental mastery as a Monk, the same emphasis on technique and without all of the Eastern baggage. Now, I don't have anything against the Monk, personally, but the fact that all martial artists in fiction have to be Asian REALLY gets my goat. It trivialises one culture while ignoring the martial heritage of every other culture on earth, because EVERY culture has at least one martial art all of its own, and many have several.
This would be a stylistic specialist. She could pick up a longsword (known as a greatsword in this game) and use it in the same way a Monk uses his body. She would be a master of a specific weapon or set of weapons: Rapier and Dagger, Armoured Longsword, Sword and Buckler etcetera and so on. Heck, even the Thunder and Fang Earthbreaker/Klar style or specialising in Starknife because Earth isn't the only planet with cool weapon styles.
The key thing is, she knows how to use a particular weapon to attack, parry, feint, riposte and can take down anyone by studying how THEIR styles work, which is where the Ranger comes in. She'd Analyse her opponent's personal style throughout combat and get better at countering it for each turn spent fighting it (though there's a level-based cap to that for obvious reasons). It wouldn't be a free study like the Slayer; it'd be more challenging but more rewarding, since you actually have to enter regular combat to accomplish it.
A resource pool too, though instead of Ki it would be Focus, and Extraordinary rather than Supernatural. Standard extra attack shenanigans, but also reducing attack penalties and providing your weapon temporary bonuses through mundane means (such as gaining a scaling version of something like Bane after reaching the Analysis cap and spending points, simply because you know the opponent that well).
Honestly, yeah, it'd infringe upon the Fighter's niche, which is the main rule not to do when it comes to designing classes BUT the defence here is that the Barbarian, Vigilante, Slayer, Ranger and Gunslinger already collectively own that niche already, and I wouldn't be infringing much on any of them. What's the Fighter going to do, throw feats at me?
So... What do you guys think?
Nitro-Nina, I think the playtest version of the inquisitor had a cumulative scaling bonus that increased round by round, and it was dropped because it was a bookkeeping nightmare.
I had an idea for a Western Martial Artist. A Monk/Ranger, of sorts.
No, not a Brawler. This is not a boxer, this is not a wrestler. This is a Martial Artist, with the same dedication to physical and mental mastery as a Monk, the same emphasis on technique and without all of the Eastern baggage. Now, I don't have anything against the Monk, personally, but the fact that all martial artists in fiction have to be Asian REALLY gets my goat. It trivialises one culture while ignoring the martial heritage of every other culture on earth, because EVERY culture has at least one martial art all of its own, and many have several.
This would be a stylistic specialist. She could pick up a longsword (known as a greatsword in this game) and use it in the same way a Monk uses his body. She would be a master of a specific weapon or set of weapons: Rapier and Dagger, Armoured Longsword, Sword and Buckler etcetera and so on. Heck, even the Thunder and Fang Earthbreaker/Klar style or specialising in Starknife because Earth isn't the only planet with cool weapon styles.
The key thing is, she knows how to use a particular weapon to attack, parry, feint, riposte and can take down anyone by studying how THEIR styles work, which is where the Ranger comes in. She'd Analyse her opponent's personal style throughout combat and get better at countering it for each turn spent fighting it (though there's a level-based cap to that for obvious reasons). It wouldn't be a free study like the Slayer; it'd be more challenging but more rewarding, since you actually have to enter regular combat to accomplish it.
A resource pool too, though instead of Ki it would be Focus, and Extraordinary rather than Supernatural. Standard extra attack shenanigans, but also reducing attack penalties and providing your weapon temporary bonuses through mundane means (such as gaining a scaling version of something like Bane after reaching the Analysis cap and spending points, simply because you know the opponent that well).
Honestly, yeah, it'd infringe...
The problem with this in my opinion is that it's a "non-trade-off".
The Fighter himself is already specializing in the use of a specific weapon through feats, class features and equipment, so if this class got to be better than a Fighter with the same level of commitment required, the Fighter would feel cheated –– and viceversa.
|
|
Nitro-Nina, I think the playtest version of the inquisitor had a cumulative scaling bonus that increased round by round, and it was dropped because it was a bookkeeping nightmare.
Ah, that IS a good point. Hmm. Maybe it comes online fully after one round instead?
The problem with this in my opinion is that it's a "non-trade-off".
The Fighter himself is already specializing in the use of a specific weapon through feats, class features and equipment, so if this class got to be better than a Fighter with the same level of commitment required, the Fighter would feel cheated –– and viceversa.
This class is more specialised in a specific loadout than a specific weapon. No other class can actually make twf with two weapons in completely different weapon groups really that viable, so well-established styles like sword-and-dagger don't work as well, even though they should work BETTER than two-dagger or two-sword.
Plus, everyone specialises in a specific weapon in this game, and the Fighter doesn't even do it that well. This class wouldn't have the Fighter's feat options or versatility, which already makes it more friendly than the Vigilante which is better in both fields AND is an out-of-combat social god who gets to pretend not to be an adventurer when it's convenient.
I do, however, understand the concern. I'd try to make this one more tricksy than the Fighter, but very restricted weapon-wise.
|
A barbarian/inquisitor combo called the zealot. It would be a defense-based class.
BAB +3/4, 1d12 HD, Good Fort and Will, 4+ skills, maybe 4/9 divine caster, judgment-like defensive boosts, rage-like defensive stance and powers, paladin-like swift-action self-healing, maybe the ability to absorb allies' wounds, Con mod added to CMD, Bodyguard bonus feats, maybe a combo tank/martial battlefield controller.
I've been tinkering with a Paladin/Bloodrager called the Zealot, that boosts itself when it takes damage and can intentionally take damage through a feature called Flagellation. Taking on the wounds of allies is a cool twist that I should incorporate.
I've been tinkering with a Paladin/Bloodrager called the Zealot, that boosts itself when it takes damage and can intentionally take damage through a feature called Flagellation. Taking on the wounds of allies is a cool twist that I should incorporate.A barbarian/inquisitor combo called the zealot. It would be a defense-based class.
BAB +3/4, 1d12 HD, Good Fort and Will, 4+ skills, maybe 4/9 divine caster, judgment-like defensive boosts, rage-like defensive stance and powers, paladin-like swift-action self-healing, maybe the ability to absorb allies' wounds, Con mod added to CMD, Bodyguard bonus feats, maybe a combo tank/martial battlefield controller.
Cool. I was originally inspired by the vigilante playtest.
|
How about no new classes. Seriously, please?I'd like a couple new martial classes personally, or good spell-less archetypes for some 6-level casters like Investigators.
Spell-less bards, alchemists and / or inquisitors could be neat.
Heck, I'd be intrigued to see a spell-less *cleric,* who just channels energy for various effects (harmful, curative, condition-removing, condition-imposing, warding, etc.) or a spell-less druid who is more of a hybrid shifter/summoner, focused on wild shape and summon nature's ally/animal companion, instead of also casting spells.