What other Hybrid classes would you like to see?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

401 to 450 of 628 << first < prev | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | next > last >>

ChaiGuy wrote:

This may seem odd at first, but I'd like to see another class that is a hybrid of fighter / wizard. The Magus is themed as a fighter who augments their attacks with magic, it is very offensive heavy (hammer). This proposed class, perhaps called the Eldrich Knight (although there's already a fighter archetype of the same name) would focus on a fighter focusing magic to augment their defenses (anvil).

{. . .}

Last I heard, Eldritch Knight is used as the name of a Fighter archetype only in D&D 5th Edition, and in D&D 3.x/PF it is used as the name of a prestige class that gives the potential to do what you want, although not always the best option. But see below.

A few existing archetypes that come close to what you want:

Child of Acavna and Amaznen Fighter (renamed on www.d20pfsrd.com for legal reasons) has the d10 and full BAB you want, but you give up too much compared to what you get -- Bonus Combat Feats reduced to barely above that of a Magus, and you have to keep eating Swift Actions to cast spells with Somatic Components when wearing armor, AND you lose all ranks of Weapon Training, and only get 4/9 spellcasting in return.

Armored Battlemage Magus starts you off with Medium Armor (and gives you Armor Training) and later upgrades you to Heavy Armor, and has good Fortitude and Will Saves, and focuses on aughemting your defense, but it loses too much for what you get. You NEVER get Spell Combat, and cannot enhance your weapon (and the wording of the tradeout and of the Ghost Blade Magus Arcana suggests to me that you can't even take a Magus Arcana like Ghost Blade that gives you back a little bit of this ability). And you STILL don't get to use a shield. If Armored Battlemage let you use a shield without risking Arcane Spell Failure (as Skirnir does), and/or if it would let you still enhance your weapon (as Skirnir does), in return for Diminished Spellcasting (like on Skirnir), then it would be a worthwhile archetype. (If it didn't let you use a shield, but did let you enhance your weapon as well as your armor, even in exchange for Diminished Spellcasting, it might still be semi-worthwhile -- without Spell Combat, you might as well go for a two-handed weapon, preferably with Reach, and use multi-charge spells like Chill Touch and Frostbite, since you can still Spellstrike without Spell Combat while two-handing a weapon.) Also, Rules As Written with the current text, an Armored Battlemage only gets the concentration bonus when casting in Medium Armor, which means you nerf yourself when you upgrade to Heavy Armor; this is probably a typo, but that's the way things stand now, when read literally.

Myrmidarch Magus on the surface doesn't have as much of what you want, but on the other hand, it does a better job with what it does give you. Although this was formerly considered a bad archetype (and some people still think of it that way), you get both Weapon Training and Armor Training, which made it a LOT better when the Weapon Master's Handbook (especially) and the Armor Master's Handbook came out. Weapon Training means that your attacks lag only a little bit behind full BAB (except for being definitely slower on getting the Iteratives), and even with Diminished Spellcasting, you still get better spellcasting than Child of Acavna and Amaznen Fighter, and only slightly fewer Bonus Feats (which are also more versatile in what you can do with them), as well as 3 Magus Arcana (and the potential to get more using Extra Arcana). Unfortunately, you trade out both Spell Recall and Improved Spell Recall for Ranged Spellstrike, which is not very compelling, but even that can be pressed into service on a switch-hitter build if you get a way to convert ranged weapon attacks into Ranged Touch Attacks (for instance, dipping 1 level into Gunslinger before starting this switch-bhitter build; also see several posts following, including a few on the next page).


Thank you UnArcaneElection, for pointing out these options to me. I will be certain to look very closely at each of these options. The Myrmidarch Magus sounds spot on from your description. :}


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ChaiGuy wrote:

{. . .}

A class should also be evaluated on how it interacts with multi-classing with other classes and prestige classes. Are there any imbalanced options for the EK (hybrid fighter/wizard) that is apparent to anyone? Investigator could be worth considering, but it's probably not overly strong. Most of the big abilities come in later, making it a bad dip, but having a dip to increase the offense (like from barbarian) could become very strong. Barbarian would prevent the spellcasting, which would help balance that out.

If you use Bloodrager for your dip instead of Barbarian, Bloodrage only prevents spellcasting until you get the Mad Magic feat. Technically you can also get this for Barbarian, but the tax is much higher: At a minimum, you have to take a 2 level dip (if using an archetype, it must not trade out or restrict the 2nd level Rage Power), and then blow that Rage Power on Moment of Clarity, which is almost just a Rage Power Tax, before you can qualify for Mad Magic.


Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Derklord wrote:
WatersLethe wrote:
Has anyone mentioned Fighter/Witch? I realize the Hexcrafter Magus is sort of in that vein, but I'm talking more about a spell-less warrior with hexes.

You want to make a hybrid with a full caster that doesn't have spells? Seriously? The bloodrager was already stretching the hybrid concept! If you only want a single class feature, there is not the slightest reason to make it a whole class instead of an archetype.

With spells, it's basically a Hexcrafter. The witch's spell list is focused on offensive stuff and probably the worst spells list you could have on a gish. I also don't really see the Fighter connection.
How about a Bloodrager archetype that get's hexes instead of a bloodline?

I think it's perfectly okay to make a hybrid class that opts not to take spellcasting from one of the parent classes if that class also has other compelling class features. You're being awfully dismissive of a concept you can't adequately replicate with your off-handed archetype suggestions.

A fighter/witch hybrid without spells would heavily focus on Hexes, which are an incredibly strong class feature. The class would also require additional class features to support the melee application of hexes, which, as far as I'm concerned, go far outside the scope of an archetype.

I would envision a fighter/witch combining the weapon training of a fighter with hexes, allowing them to use a certain weapon group to apply hexes with increasing effectiveness. Likewise, armor training could be adapted to apply defensive hexes. Ideally, new hexes would be created for this class, just like how Shaman got new hexes. The fighter's bonus feat class feature could be adapted to use a list of hex feats as well. A good base will save would also be thematically appropriate, and a familiar that stores hexes would fit too.

Even if you insist that a hybrid of a spellcaster must use spells, there are other ways of implementing that rather than just making yet another 6th or 4th level spellcaster. For example, higher level fighter/witches might get a pool based on intelligence to apply a Curse spell instead of a hex with a melee attack.

Are you telling me that all is within the scope of a fighter or bloodrager archetype? I can already see a number of archetypes for a fighter/witch hybrid class too, including themes such as The Witcher, psychic fighters, shamanistic warriors, and oracles.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

I can see a fighter/witch archetype that trades out familiar for an oracle's curse and/or animal companion and/or shadow companion.


A fighter-witch does sound really cool to me.

Though, frankly, a witch-anything sounds really cool to me.


Considering the traditional triumverate of Witches (Maiden, Mother, and the Other One), and that the Witch class out of the box can already manage the supporter and debilitator role fairly well, there does seem to be a need for a Witch hybrid that is more of an active participant but is less magically adept as a result.

There's the Hexcrafter Magus and the Hexenhammer Inquisitor, but I would hope for something that's more full throat witchy honestly.


Just had a thought: Child of Acavna and Amaznen Fighter is an archetype that should have been done as a hybrid class or at least an alternate class. Even if it is thematically closer to Fighter, the ability replacements are sufficiently sweeping and yet irregular that the archetype text seems really clunky.


UnArcaneElection wrote:

Just had a thought: Child of Acavna and Amaznen Fighter is an archetype that should have been done as a hybrid class or at least an alternate class. Even if it is thematically closer to Fighter, the ability replacements are sufficiently sweeping and yet irregular that the archetype text seems really clunky.

I'm not even sure I understand that Archetype... I mean is it just me or is that essentially an npc class at first level?... I mean skill wise you are ~ a barbarian with different skills, less health... and no class features like fast movement or rage... and you still lack perception as a class skill, then second level you get... a single 0 level spell and maintain your bab... without any ability to increase the amount until 4 levels later... would it really be too much to let them get more than one 0 level slot depending on a stat modifier?


UnArcaneElection wrote:
ChaiGuy wrote:

{. . .}

A class should also be evaluated on how it interacts with multi-classing with other classes and prestige classes. Are there any imbalanced options for the EK (hybrid fighter/wizard) that is apparent to anyone? Investigator could be worth considering, but it's probably not overly strong. Most of the big abilities come in later, making it a bad dip, but having a dip to increase the offense (like from barbarian) could become very strong. Barbarian would prevent the spellcasting, which would help balance that out.

If you use Bloodrager for your dip instead of Barbarian, Bloodrage only prevents spellcasting until you get the Mad Magic feat. Technically you can also get this for Barbarian, but the tax is much higher: At a minimum, you have to take a 2 level dip (if using an archetype, it must not trade out or restrict the 2nd level Rage Power), and then blow that Rage Power on Moment of Clarity, which is almost just a Rage Power Tax, before you can qualify for Mad Magic.

I created a sample human bloodrager 1, EK (hybrid) 7 to test it a bit. Seems a bit strong, but I haven't compared it to a similar bloodrager or similar class at level. In short fervor + full plate + shield spell is really powerful (maybe too much), rage + fervor bull's str is crazy too.

human bloodrager 1, EK 7:
Human Bloodrager 1 (arcane), EK (hyb) 7

Str 18 (15+2 Racial, +1 lv 4), Dex 14 (16 belt), Con 14, Int 14, Wis 12, Cha 7 (20 point buy)

HD: 8d10+16+7 (fav class), average 71
AC 25, 23 (BR) (11 armor, 2 Dex, 1 Nat arm, 1 def, 10), Touch 13, FF 23
Saves Fort 11 (13 blood rage), Reflex 9, Will 10 (12 BR)
DR 2/- Adv arm training

L0 Det Mag, light, acid splash, mend, prestidigitation
L1 Long arm 2, shield 3
L2 Bull Str 3, Airwalk 1
L3 Fly

Equipment: +2 Full plate, +1 furious lucerne hammer, adamantine greatsword, +1 adaptive longbow (with arrows), ring prot 1, amulet nat armor 1, cloak of resistance 2, belt dex +2, spellbook + 1000g

feats: l1 weapon foc lucerne hammer, iron will (human), l3 power attack, and combat reflexes (B), l5 mad magic, l6 weapon spec lucerne hammer, l7 extra rage

Blood rage 12 rounds/day, (fervor) 5/day, armor training, advanced armor training: armored juggernaut, fast movement (supressed), bloodline arcane (weasel)

+1 furious lucerne hammer
14: 4 str, 8 BAB, 1 weapon focus, 1 enhance
2d6+9 (6 str, 2 w spec, 1 enh)

Rage: 18, 2d6+14 (9 str, 2 w spec, 3 enh)

Rage + Bull's str+ poweratt: 17, 2d6+26 (12 str, 2 weap spec, 3 enh, 9 power attack)


SmiloDan wrote:
MidsouthGuy wrote:

Gunslinger/sorcerer!

I've had this idea bouncing around in my head for a while now, and even have a name for it (Blackpowder Adept) but I have no idea how I would make it remotely balanced. So far I just have the general idea for the class. A Blackpowder Adept has a mystical connection to gunpowder, firearms and explosives. They can innately use magic to improve, alter, and repair gunpowder based weapons, and use gunpowder to augment other attacks such as causing a warhammer or fist to hit with the force of a gunshot.

The Powder Mage trilogy is a series of epic/flintlock fantasy novels written by American author Brian McClellan.

Powder Mages use magic to sense and ignite powder, alter the trajectory of bullets, and even consume gunpowder to rage and heal.

I just finished reading the first book and I have to say that Powder Mages need to be a thing in Pathfinder.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

MidsouthGuy wrote:
SmiloDan wrote:
MidsouthGuy wrote:

Gunslinger/sorcerer!

I've had this idea bouncing around in my head for a while now, and even have a name for it (Blackpowder Adept) but I have no idea how I would make it remotely balanced. So far I just have the general idea for the class. A Blackpowder Adept has a mystical connection to gunpowder, firearms and explosives. They can innately use magic to improve, alter, and repair gunpowder based weapons, and use gunpowder to augment other attacks such as causing a warhammer or fist to hit with the force of a gunshot.

The Powder Mage trilogy is a series of epic/flintlock fantasy novels written by American author Brian McClellan.

Powder Mages use magic to sense and ignite powder, alter the trajectory of bullets, and even consume gunpowder to rage and heal.

I just finished reading the first book and I have to say that Powder Mages need to be a thing in Pathfinder.

You know that's right!


Extremely late to the discussion here, but what Hybrids would I like to see next? None.

This is because three reasons.

1. The existing hybrids have already grabbed a lot of them, and in my opinion illustrate how some of them were already in the game. The Warpriest is mechanically very different, but in terms of theme, it's a paladin in all but name.

2.Archetypes already cover a lot. There's a lot of archetypes that throw other class' abilities onto other classes, like Vivisectionist throwing in Sneak Attack for the Alchemist

3. I'd like to see new classes with unique mechanics and new themes versus ones that are combinations of existing classes.


Saithor wrote:
The Warpriest is mechanically very different, but in terms of theme, it's a paladin in all but name.

*Looks for a way for paladin archetype which works for my most recent warpriest who was a "Noble warrior of a cannibal religion of plants and death who uses his powers to become more like his ghoul enders"*


Milo v3 wrote:
Saithor wrote:
The Warpriest is mechanically very different, but in terms of theme, it's a paladin in all but name.
*Looks for a way for paladin archetype which works for my most recent warpriest who was a "Noble warrior of a cannibal religion of plants and death who uses his powers to become more like his ghoul enders"*

Anti-Paladin?

Let me clarify. In the most basic terms of themes, the Paladin and Warpriest are the same, with both being the warriors entrusted with divine powers by their gods in order to go out and smash face, whether undead or halfling. The only thematic difference is that Warpriest finally covers the holes created by the Paladin/Anti-Paladin alignment restrictions. If those restrictions did not exist, would your character be thematically a Paladin, Warpriest, or both?


Saithor wrote:
Anti-Paladin?

Doesn't work as that, he's a noble warrior not evil at all. Plus if was an antipaladin he would have no ties to the deity at all, wouldn't have plant powers, and cannot take undead form anymore.

Quote:
Let me clarify. In the most basic terms of themes, the Paladin and Warpriest are the same, with both being the warriors entrusted with divine powers by their gods in order to go out and smash face, whether undead or halfling. The only thematic difference is that Warpriest finally covers the holes created by the Paladin/Anti-Paladin alignment restrictions. If those restrictions did not exist, would your character be thematically a Paladin, Warpriest, or both?

I disagree, paladins don't even need to believe in a single god. They get their power from Lawful Good, that's why they have powers for fighting evil rather than "Fighting the enemies of x deity", that's why they have "generic hero powers" rather than "I can trap my enemies with vines and use a dagger as good as a greatsword because it is my god's weapon".

Treating (anti)paladin as Warrior of a God character to me is rather stupid when you wont have any ties to your god at all unless you homebrew up an archetype which removes all the actual paladin stuff.... at which point, how it is a paladin?


Milo v3 wrote:

I disagree, paladins don't even need to believe in a single god. They get their power from Lawful Good, that's why they have powers for fighting evil rather than "Fighting the enemies of x deity", that's why they have "generic hero powers" rather than "I can trap my enemies with vines and use a dagger as good as a greatsword because it is my god's weapon".

Treating (anti)paladin as Warrior of a God character to me is rather stupid when you wont have any ties to your god at all unless you homebrew up an archetype which removes all the actual paladin stuff.... at which point, how it is a paladin?

Wait, they channel Divine Energy, right? Where does the energy come from if it's not from a god? *goes off to look it up*

Divine Spells wrote:
Clerics, druids, experienced paladins and rangers, inquisitors, oracles, the adept NPC class, the hunter hybrid class, the shaman hybrid class, and the warpriest hybrid class cast divine spells. Unlike arcane spells, divine spells draw power from a divine source. Clerics gain spell power from deities or from divine forces. The divine force of nature powers druid and ranger spells, and the divine forces of law and good power paladin spells. Divine spells tend to focus on healing and protection and are less flashy, destructive, and disruptive than arcane spells.

Okay, so Paladin's are humans with the in-born traits to manifest an ideal's energy in the real world. So they're sorcerers with swords.

I would just like to say that Divine spells not coming from gods is very confusing, since Divine is literally derived from Divinity.

Either way, your point stands, you were right. Although the two are still a little to close together in my mind.


A paladin is lawful good. Whether dedicated to a god or philosophy is a role play question. All those other knightly orders are archetypes of paladins. Anti Paladins and demon knights are not Paladins and thus need separate names.

A class that has fighter hit probabilities, HD, and cleric spells is a hybrid.


Hm would Vigilante hybrid well with anything, or since it already is highly variable in it's archetypes would that be pointless...?


Saithor wrote:
Either way, your point stands, you were right. Although the two are still a little to close together in my mind.

I don't blame you, even Paizo forgets now and then (the CRB actually forgets this twice, with two of their class features referring to gods despite the fact you don't need to worship a god). And it was even further muddied with Paizo releasing alternate codes of conduct for various gods... and I think there was a Paladin of Asmodeus somewhere.

It might have been a result of James Jacobs wanting cleric's to function the same way as they do in Golarion where they pulled away from "Divine power without deities", and they just missed a bit of text here and there.

Davia D wrote:
Hm would Vigilante hybrid well with anything, or since it already is highly variable in it's archetypes would that be pointless...?

Yeah, you can probably make an archetype or vigilante specialisation for most "hybrids". It's basically a hybrid class to begin with tbd.


M1k31 wrote:
UnArcaneElection wrote:

Just had a thought: Child of Acavna and Amaznen Fighter is an archetype that should have been done as a hybrid class or at least an alternate class. Even if it is thematically closer to Fighter, the ability replacements are sufficiently sweeping and yet irregular that the archetype text seems really clunky.

I'm not even sure I understand that Archetype... I mean is it just me or is that essentially an npc class at first level?... I mean skill wise you are ~ a barbarian with different skills, less health... and no class features like fast movement or rage... and you still lack perception as a class skill, then second level you get... a single 0 level spell and maintain your bab... without any ability to increase the amount until 4 levels later... would it really be too much to let them get more than one 0 level slot depending on a stat modifier?

I can understand it, all right -- it's just badly designed. Understanding WHY it was designed that way is another matter . . . .

Saithor wrote:
Milo v3 wrote:
Saithor wrote:
The Warpriest is mechanically very different, but in terms of theme, it's a paladin in all but name.
*Looks for a way for paladin archetype which works for my most recent warpriest who was a "Noble warrior of a cannibal religion of plants and death who uses his powers to become more like his ghoul enders"*

Anti-Paladin?

Let me clarify. In the most basic terms of themes, the Paladin and Warpriest are the same, with both being the warriors entrusted with divine powers by their gods in order to go out and smash face, whether undead or halfling. The only thematic difference is that Warpriest finally covers the holes created by the Paladin/Anti-Paladin alignment restrictions. If those restrictions did not exist, would your character be thematically a Paladin, Warpriest, or both?

Basic themes arguably so (aside from Paladin/Antipaladin being off the hook for obligate deity worship on Golarion while Warpriest isn't), but once you get past the lowest-resolution view, no. Paladins/Antipaladins are more like specialized Cavaliers with a strong divine component -- indeed, in 1st Edition AD&D Unearthed Arcana (but not 1st Edition before the release of Unearthed Arcana), Paladins were explicitly regarded as a sub-class of Cavalier (even though the class tables didn't match up any better then than they do now, apart from having less stuff total to be mismatched). Warpriests are more like divine equivalents of the Magus, although not enough so to gain a Spellstrike(*).

(*)Speaking of which, I'd like to see a Warpriest archetype that actually gets a Spellstrike without having to go VMC Magus, for Bad Touch goodness- er, I mean badness.

Milo v3 wrote:

{. . .}

Davia D wrote:
Hm would Vigilante hybrid well with anything, or since it already is highly variable in it's archetypes would that be pointless...?
Yeah, you can probably make an archetype or vigilante specialisation for most "hybrids". It's basically a hybrid class to begin with tbd.

Phantom Thief Rogue is an archetype that hybridizes with Vigilante.

Arguably, Brute Vigilante and Wild Soul Vigilante SHOULD HAVE BEEN hybrid classes of Vigilante with Alchemist(*) and Druid (respectively) instead of just Vigilante archetypes (which are excruciatingly bad and merely bad, respectively).

(*)Or Mutation Warrior Fighter, or better yet Mutagenic Mauler Brawler.


UnArcaneElection wrote:
M1k31 wrote:
UnArcaneElection wrote:

Just had a thought: Child of Acavna and Amaznen Fighter is an archetype that should have been done as a hybrid class or at least an alternate class. Even if it is thematically closer to Fighter, the ability replacements are sufficiently sweeping and yet irregular that the archetype text seems really clunky.

I'm not even sure I understand that Archetype... I mean is it just me or is that essentially an npc class at first level?... I mean skill wise you are ~ a barbarian with different skills, less health... and no class features like fast movement or rage... and you still lack perception as a class skill, then second level you get... a single 0 level spell and maintain your bab... without any ability to increase the amount until 4 levels later... would it really be too much to let them get more than one 0 level slot depending on a stat modifier?

I can understand it, all right -- it's just badly designed. Understanding WHY it was designed that way is another matter . . . .

But am I right in my understanding of its lvl 1 npc status?

and that at lvl 2 you might as well have dipped wizard or bard to get actual features on both lvls unless you really want a capstone(or that single BAB lost) or start out at a higher level?


^It's not quite that bad, but close. At least you get more skill ranks per level and more class skills. But yes, it is extremely dip-unfriendly, and it isn't much better if you're going 1 - 20 with it. Even Armored Battlemage Magus, which also gives up too much for what it gets, is better than this; and Myrmidarch, which is pretty close to a fair trade(*) ever since the Weapon Master's Handbook and Armor Master's Handbook came out, is even better.

(*)The main remaining bum deal on a Myrmidarch is trading out Spell Recall and Improved Spell Recall for a Ranged Spellstrike that you jump to go through hoops to make good, since you don't get a Ranged Spell Combat to go with it (Eldritch Archer gives you Ranged Spell Combat, but also gives you Ranged Spellstrike, making this archetype combination bad even though the individual components are good).


Quote:
But am I right in my understanding of its lvl 1 npc status?

Well you have more skill points and a better skill list than the Warrior, but yeah you don't have any class features at level 1 with that build.

The funny thing is that going purely by the numbers that's actually a very good trade. Which is sort of a testament to just how bad Fighter 1 actually is.


^Not really -- most Fighter archetypes (or Fighter with no archetype) give you a Bonus Combat Feat and proficiency with all martial weapons and shields (Child of Acavna and Amaznen trades out the Bonus Combat Feat and proficiency with two-handed weapons and Tower Shields, although the last is usually no great loss).


Oh right, forgot that the archetype loses most of your good weapons too, nevermind.


Just started a thread to find out if this exists in 3rd party or paizo stuff yet, but then i remembered seeing this thread pop up and thought i'd join the fun. Anyway, a rogue/witch hybrid with sneak and hexes sounds fun. Honestly though it's probably better suited to being a rogue or slayer archetype unless you also got other goodies such as sneak attack on your familiar like the carnivalist rogue.

Edit: Searching this thread reveals many others have had the same idea, glad i'm not the only one that wants this :)


WatersLethe wrote:
The class would also require additional class features to support the melee application of hexes, which, as far as I'm concerned, go far outside the scope of an archetype.

Compared to what some archetypes change/add (looking at you, Warlock!), I see this well in the scope of an archetype.

WatersLethe wrote:
You're being awfully dismissive of a concept you can't adequately replicate with your off-handed archetype suggestions.

I'm pretty sure I can do "spell-less warrior with hexes" as an archetype. For instance, as a Fighter archetype that gets Spell Strike and Spell combat, but only usable with hexes. Or as Barbarian archetype that allows the Barb to apply an offensive Hex as a intermediate action to a target he hits with an attack while raging. Or as a Rogue archetype that can select Hexes as an asterisk marked Rogue Talent. Or as a simple Fighter archetype that get's the Curse blessing from the Warpriest instead of the bonus feats at first and tenth level (no actual Hexes, but similar result). Or as a Slayer archetype that get's the Antipaladin's touch of Corruption instead of Studied Target and Cruelties instead of Sneak Attack (again, no actual Hexes, but similar result).

WatersLethe wrote:
I would envision a fighter/witch combining the weapon training of a fighter with hexes, allowing them to use a certain weapon group to apply hexes with increasing effectiveness. Likewise, armor training could be adapted to apply defensive hexes. Ideally, new hexes would be created for this class, just like how Shaman got new hexes. The fighter's bonus feat class feature could be adapted to use a list of hex feats as well. A good base will save would also be thematically appropriate, and a familiar that stores hexes would fit too.

Now see, this is stuff we can work with. Rather than just posting two class names and calling it a day, this is an actual concept that can be used as a basis for a constructive discussion.

Now, I still don't think this works as a hybrid class - the only hybrid class to completely loose spellcasting only had 4/9 to begin with, and this sounds pretty far removed from the Witch. Mechanically, it's closer to an Antipaladin, Domain Strike Cleric, Warpriest (Curse, Plant, Repose, or Void blessing), or even Hexcrafter spellstriking with curse spells. Flavorwise, I don't see anything traditional witch-y in there.

But, I do think that this could work as a regular class!
I see four possible versions of offensive hexes: As touch attacks, 1/round on an attack (like Stunning Fist or Domain Strike), always channeled through the weapon (like a Sneak Attack or weapon enchantments), or both at range and optionally channeled through the weapon (like Hexcrafter with a curse spell). Unless you want the hexes to be less direct debuffs and more AoE-y stuff like making the surrounding 10ft difficult terrain for a round.
Defensive hexes could be intermediate action activated, or long lasting but only a limited, scaling number can be active at the same time and takes a standard or full-round action to change/reactivate. For instance, at low level, you can either have a +X to AC, Y% chance to ignore sneak attack and crits, or Z number of "roll twice take higher" on saves. Later options could include a retributory effect with limited charges and permanent miss chance.

Archetypes could include nabbing rage powers, handing out hexes to allies, and being more maneuver focused.

ChaiGuy wrote:
Seems a bit strong

Well, there's a reason there is no full BAB class with 6/9 casting in Pathfinder. Of course, it depends on the exact spell list (for instance, fervor'd True Strike would be crazy), but I would strongly advise not breaking that design baseline in the first place.


Milo v3 wrote:
Davia D wrote:
Hm would Vigilante hybrid well with anything, or since it already is highly variable in it's archetypes would that be pointless...?
Yeah, you can probably make an archetype or vigilante specialisation for most "hybrids". It's basically a hybrid class to begin with tbd.

I have never really liked the Vigilante for that reason. The only really unique thing it has going for it is the social aspect...which is useless in the majority of games people play. If you play in a dungeon or wilderness campaign, that part of the character is practically useless.

One of my friends really likes it though. Because you can make a better fighter than an actual fighter out of it. But those are not hard to reach goalposts. If any class gets released next, it should probably be Fighter Unchained.


Derklord wrote:
WatersLethe wrote:
The class would also require additional class features to support the melee application of hexes, which, as far as I'm concerned, go far outside the scope of an archetype.

Compared to what some archetypes change/add (looking at you, Warlock!), I see this well in the scope of an archetype.

WatersLethe wrote:
You're being awfully dismissive of a concept you can't adequately replicate with your off-handed archetype suggestions.

I'm pretty sure I can do "spell-less warrior with hexes" as an archetype. For instance, as a Fighter archetype that gets Spell Strike and Spell combat, but only usable with hexes. Or as Barbarian archetype that allows the Barb to apply an offensive Hex as a intermediate action to a target he hits with an attack while raging. Or as a Rogue archetype that can select Hexes as an asterisk marked Rogue Talent. Or as a simple Fighter archetype that get's the Curse blessing from the Warpriest instead of the bonus feats at first and tenth level (no actual Hexes, but similar result). Or as a Slayer archetype that get's the Antipaladin's touch of Corruption instead of Studied Target and Cruelties instead of Sneak Attack (again, no actual Hexes, but similar result).

WatersLethe wrote:
I would envision a fighter/witch combining the weapon training of a fighter with hexes, allowing them to use a certain weapon group to apply hexes with increasing effectiveness. Likewise, armor training could be adapted to apply defensive hexes. Ideally, new hexes would be created for this class, just like how Shaman got new hexes. The fighter's bonus feat class feature could be adapted to use a list of hex feats as well. A good base will save would also be thematically appropriate, and a familiar that stores hexes would fit too.

Now see, this is stuff we can work with. Rather than just posting two class names and calling it a day, this is an actual concept that can be used as a basis for a constructive discussion.

Now, I still don't think this works as a hybrid class...

I would say that from this test that a hypothetical defense oriented (fighter/wiz) should be a d8 HD, with a 3/4 BAB, in addition to having the Arcane Armor casting of the Arcane Duelist Bard.

The bard archetype has light armor proficiency and shields at lv 1, Medium armor at lv 10 and Heavy at lv 16. This should bring the hybrid closer to reasonable power levels. I agree with the spell list being of the utmost importance, actually to make the comparison easier it's just for the best to say, give it the Bard list and see how it works.

Edit:

Revised Eldrich Knight Hybrid:
D8 hit die, 2 skills per level, good saves fort, will, 3/4 BAB

Weapon proficiencies: simple, martial
Armor proficiencies: As Arcane Duelist Bard

spells: Using Bard list, intelligence based

Lv 4 a fervor (warpriest) like ability to cast swift action buffs on himself. I chose a higher level since the sorc/wiz list is generally considered stronger than the cleric list and comparing when bloodragers get the ability to cast while blood raging.

full Armor training with a note that they can get advanced armor training options.

Bonus feats as a warpriest

Spell book and maybe familiar (the fighter archetype has one)

Archetypes:
one that gives the magus arcane pool for more limited armor selection (or other trade)

increased spell list with reduced armor selection

one with a sacred armor (warpriest) equivalent, perhaps no bonus feats and other trades.

Necromancer focused option with trades

I'll work on a new updated Bloodrager 1, EK (hybrid), as a note there was a mistake with the feat progression in the example. I'll probably eventually make a Bloodrager 1, Warpriest 7 to compare it to.


Saithor wrote:
Extremely late to the discussion here, but what Hybrids would I like to see next? None.

Agreed... have a tendency towards poor design. Combining classes leads to difficulties in getting balance right.

And for my 2 cents there are too many archetypes

I like Prestige Classes.... although I think the recent take on them leaves a lot to be desired... ie) PrC that can be taken by a wide variety of classes.

The problem with the excess of archtypes is that IMO they spoil opportunities for possible PrC and classes like ninja and samaurai, which serve as 'in depth archetypes' rather than brand new classes by themselves. Too many seem like they were written in a lunch break!!


I think the alchemist spell list is probably more suitable for the fight/wiz hybrid, I'll probably use that instead of bard for my test build.


UnArcaneElection wrote:

^Not really -- most Fighter archetypes (or Fighter with no archetype) give you a Bonus Combat Feat and proficiency with all martial weapons and shields (Child of Acavna and Amaznen trades out the Bonus Combat Feat and proficiency with two-handed weapons and Tower Shields, although the last is usually no great loss).

Warrior and Aristocrat also have Proficiencies with anything not an Exotic Weapon.


doc roc wrote:
Combining classes leads to difficulties in getting balance right.

6/10 of them are balanced pretty decently, with two of the four (Arcanist/Shaman) that are unbalanced being unbalanced because "All 9th casters are inherently unbalanced", and the other two (Brawler/Swashbuckler) are unbalanced because "all we can do is attack ".

Those balance issues aren't from combining classes. Those are just basic issues 3.5e & PF have had from that start that those two types of classes are innately unbalanced. If they were combining classes by gestalt and you get double the class features, sure then it'd be poorly balanced, but the ACG classes were built ground-up rather than gestalt.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ChaiGuy wrote:
I would say that from this test that a hypothetical defense oriented (fighter/wiz) should be a d8 HD, with a 3/4 BAB, in addition to having the Arcane Armor casting of the Arcane Duelist Bard.

Yes to 3/4 BAB and d8 HD, but I would probably use Magus armor progression (medium at 7th level, heavy at 13th level).

With the Alchemist list, fervored True Strike would be the signature ability. With the Bard list, it would probably be fervored Bladed Dash. Both actually sound interesting to play.

Milo v3 wrote:
two (Brawler/Swashbuckler) are unbalanced because "all we can do is attack ".

To elaborate, the main problem is that core Fighter and Monk are severely lacking defining class features, while Gunslinger is simply the worst designed class possible (focused on one not properly balanced gimmick, and the only actual class feature makes sure you don't need to spend more than a few levels in the class). Almost every Pathfinder class requires you to make character shaping choices daily, during level up, and/or during character creation. The only character shaping choices Fighter*, Monk*, Gunslinger, Brawler, and Swashbuckler make could also be made by a Commoner (skills, feats, which specific weapon to use, etc.).

Not only does this lack of character shaping choices make characters created with those classes often rather average, it also effects versatility and power level. That's because fixed class features are generally mediocre (or bad), while selectable class features (whch includes spells) have both good and bad options (this is a mandatory design principle to avoid having everyone with that class super powerful). As a result, you can make a Wizard good or bad by making good or bad character shaping choices, but you can't make a class good if there are no character shaping choices.
*) Fighter got such choices with AAT and AWT, while Monk got such choices with UnMonk's Ki Powers and Style Strikes.


The vigilante can be a mega class. Take any class, add civilian identity and quick change feats.

Judging by the title, if the existing class is lame, go ahead and suggest a hybrid substitute.


Derklord wrote:

{. . .}

Well, there's a reason there is no full BAB class with 6/9 casting in Pathfinder. Of course, it depends on the exact spell list (for instance, fervor'd True Strike would be crazy), but I would strongly advise not breaking that design baseline in the first place.

And this brings up the question of why (other than legacy compatibility) classes were designed with 3/4 BAB + d8 HD and 9/9 spellcasting. Arguably, the Cleric/Oracle list being weaker than the Sorcerer/Wizard list is supposed to compensate for that, but then by analogy a 6/9 truncated version of it should be fine on a full BAB + d10 class that wasn't very rich in non-spellcasting class features. (Besides, the Cleric/Oracle list isn't all THAT much weaker.)

Still, for making a proper Rage Prophet (Barbarian + Oracle) hybrid base class, I'd rather either cut back on BAB + HD or on spellcasting and get more class features. Probably better to cut back on spellcasting since Skald cut back on BAB + HD, and one thing we DON'T have yet is a spontaneous 4/9 divine caster, unless I missed an archetype of something that is normally prepared 4/9 divine. Although that route probably requires a whole new spell list, since truncating a 9/9 spell list to 4/9 without tweaks doesn't really cut it, and the Paladin/Antipaladin and Ranger spell lists just don't match up, whereas truncating the Cleric/Oracle spell list to 6/9 and going to 3/4 BAB comes close to matching up with what you get if you use the existing combination Barbarian 2/Oracle 3/Rage Prophet prestige class 10/Oracle +5.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Could you hack together a proper Barbarian/Oracle hybrid by using a modified version of the Bloodrager chassis? Seems like "replacing sorcerer stuff with oracle stuff" would make it work.

So that could probably be an archetype. An archetype that extensively rewrites the class, but those aren't unheard of (there are not one but two Spiritualist Archetyes that take away that Phantom and make you a a sorta-Magus).


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

The Barbarian/Oracle hybrid looks like it would involve turning the Rage Prophet prestige class into a full base class. Purple Duck Games did that with a bunch of prestige classes but apparently never got around to this one.


David knott 242 wrote:
The Barbarian/Oracle hybrid looks like it would involve turning the Rage Prophet prestige class into a full base class. Purple Duck Games did that with a bunch of prestige classes but apparently never got around to this one.

In full honesty, I dislike prestige classes and if a concept is sufficiently compelling (like the "Rage Prophet" is) I'd prefer it be something I can play from 1 to 20. Hopefully someone does that one; doesn't look like it would be too hard.


Before I make more test builds of the EK (hybrid), I think I'll take a moment to share my thoughts concerning the proposed spell lists and how they would effect the class. If others draw other conclusions, I would be more than willing to consider your thoughts as well, of course.

Bard spell list

Bard List:
I really like the increased versitility this would bring over the Alchemist list. L0 spells are great for versatility, and would be sorely missed when going with the Alchemist list IMO. This list has usefull control and enchantment spells that could definately be an option for dex to damage builds. I have been unable to find a good defensive level 1 spell making it harder for str based characters, but I imagine it would not be impossible. There is the 2nd level spell mirror image which I imagine would be a cornerstone of all EK builds, but especially the str based ones. Both str and dex builds would benefit greatly from access to utility spells (to cast or use from scrolls) such as see invisibility, fly ect.

Strenght based: Low levels, probably either all out offense having combat reflexes and a reach weapon. With an ability score spread of perhaps St 17, Dex 16, Con 12, Int 14, Wis 10, cha 7 (20 pt, racial bunus in str). These types of characters would have similar builds to str based bards, which I have seen in play (although it was a 25 pt campaign) and it did well. At low levels you'd hope that your AoO would weaken the enemies enough to compensate for your lower AC. Early feats would probably be well spent on increasing defense, such as toughness or dodge. Spells would also more likely to be spent defensively. At really early levels 1-2 you'd probably want a CLW on hand to take some burden off of (hopefully) your parties arm allowing them more freedom to use their spells to bolster the parties offense (say with bless).

Low level str builds may opt for more defensive builds in the early game, especially at lv 1-2 maybe even to 3, with a good one handed weapon and a heavy shield. This would give extra AC early, when it's most important, and saving spells for out of combat utility and healing. Later levels they could switch to 2 handed weapons with power attack.

Both str based options would quite likely take a bloodrager dip with the mad magic feat.

Dexterity based: They would seem to have a much easier time early, but their damage would be lagging in the later levels. They may even have the points to have a high enough int to get control and mind effecting enchantments to land. Dips in swashbuckler or a 3 dip in URogue would probably be likely. I'm curious how a rogue/EK hybrid/arcane trickster would fare (probably not too powerful I'd guess).

There may even be a build of high Int, mod dex/con (perhaps with an elf) that focuses on control spells, with ferverd defense spells for a tough controller build. It would be interesting to see how these would compare to other controller types. I'd imagine not great, with their 6/9 casting against the full casting of druids and witches or even caster bards (since they have better non melee abilities such as inspire courage they can fall back on).

Alchemist:

Alchemist List:
For now I'll say I think it would lead to a much stronger melee class, but have less options for control. The problem is if the control of the bard list workable or just a trap option for the class that would almost never be used. If the control aspect of the bard list could work for some builds it be the way to go, but I'm not entirely sure that be the case. This in short would lead to a more specialized class, but more viable within it's focus, and some of the Paizo classes are very focused, I see you there swashbuckler! :P

I'd build a EK (hybrid), dip fighter archetype (EK) and prestige into EK, but I don't think pathfinder can endure Eldrich Knightness of that magnatude. :P


PossibleCabbage wrote:

Could you hack together a proper Barbarian/Oracle hybrid by using a modified version of the Bloodrager chassis? Seems like "replacing sorcerer stuff with oracle stuff" would make it work.

So that could probably be an archetype. An archetype that extensively rewrites the class, but those aren't unheard of (there are not one but two Spiritualist Archetyes that take away that Phantom and make you a a sorta-Magus).

I thought about that, but the way Bloodrager is put together is really more specific to hybridizing Barbarian with Sorcerer -- I was thinking it might be better to back out and redo the hybridization process from Barbarian and Oracle, using the Rage Prophet prestige class as a guide.

PossibleCabbage wrote:
David knott 242 wrote:
The Barbarian/Oracle hybrid looks like it would involve turning the Rage Prophet prestige class into a full base class. Purple Duck Games did that with a bunch of prestige classes but apparently never got around to this one.
In full honesty, I dislike prestige classes and if a concept is sufficiently compelling (like the "Rage Prophet" is) I'd prefer it be something I can play from 1 to 20. Hopefully someone does that one; doesn't look like it would be too hard.

I like prestige classes that have prestige, where you are actually committing to an ideal and/or an organization with which they are associated, but not so much ones that are just kludgy ways of hybridizing classes. Rage Prophet falls into the latter category, and the concept deserves its own 1 - 20 base class.

Conversely, I don't like shoving prestige onto base classes (okay for an archetype but not for the whole class). Paladin and Antipaladin are examples of things that are base class but should be prestige classes, in the mold of the Hellknight prestige classes. Indeed, this is what Kirthfinder does with the Paladin (as did D&D 3.5 Unearthed Arcana, although strangely they didn't combine the concept with their own concept of Paladins of all 4 corner alignments).

* * * * * * * *

To expand upon what I posted yesterday:

Rage Prophet base class built as a d8, 3/4 BAB, 6/9 spellcaster

Pros:

  • A LOT easier to put the class together -- you can just truncate the Cleric/Oracle spell list to 6/9 and tweak the blending of Barbarian and Oracle class features to balance it (even though a tweaked spell list would be more ideal, it is not an absolute requirement). Likewise, Oracle Mystery spells could probably just be truncated to 6/9 and still work reasonably (if not optimally) well.
  • Gets more of the mystical feel of the Rage Prophet concept.
  • Mechanically, 6/9 spellcasting is a closer approximation of what you get by going Barbarian 2/Oracle 4/Rage Prophet 10/Oracle +4 (without blowing 4 feats on Favored Prestige Class/Prestigious Spellcaster) than 4/9 spellcasting would be. As such, this design of the hybrid class could almost completely replace the prestige class, from Oracle-centric builds (except for missing 7th level spells at character levels 19 and 20) to Barbarian-centric builds, although not doing an optimal job of the latter due to coming up short on BAB and hit points.

Cons:
  • Keeping the non-spellcasting class features balanced (when combined with the 6/9 spellcasting) means you won't be able to get very much of either one.
  • Yet another 6/9 spontaneous divine caster -- steps on the toes of the Inquisitor and (to a lesser extent) the Hunter.
  • Yet another 6/9 ragecaster -- steps on the toes of the Skald.

Rage Prophet base class built as a d10, 1/1 BAB, 4/9 spellcaster

Pros:

  • Restricting the spellcasting gives headroom to put in more non-spellcasting class features, which is especially important when when you are trying to put together 2 sets of these that are already fairly rich to start with.
  • Gets more of the rugged feel of the Rage Prophet concept.
  • Fills in a gap in the partial caster design space: Currently we don't have a 4/9 (and d10, full BAB) spontaneous divine caster (unless I missed an odd archetype of something else).

Cons:
  • A lot more work to put the class together. For starters, truncating the Cleric/Oracle list to 4/9 is a lot more severe than truncating it to 6/9, and enough changes are going to be needed that you really need a separate spell list. Some Oracle Revelations (as well as Mystery Spells) also might need to be modified to fit properly with the much lower level spellcasting.
  • Mechanically, 4/9 spellcasting is a closer approximation of what you get by going Barbarian 5/Oracle 1/Rage Prophet 10/Barbarian +4 than 6/9 spellcasting would be. This would be approximating only the Barbarian-centric end of the spectrum of Rage Prophet prestige class builds, and as such would not be able to replace the prestige class.
  • Yet another 4/9 ragecaster -- steps on the toes of the Bloodrager. Backing out and redoing the class hybridization from Barbarian and Oracle rather than building from Bloodrager could help mitigate this, although some Bloodrager innovations could reasonably be used as design guides.


UnArcaneElection wrote:

Rage Prophet base class built as a d10, 1/1 BAB, 4/9 spellcaster

Pros:

  • Restricting the spellcasting gives headroom to put in more non-spellcasting class features, which is especially important when when you are trying to put together 2 sets of these that are already fairly rich to start with.
  • Gets more of the rugged feel of the Rage Prophet concept.
  • Fills in a gap in the partial caster design space: Currently we don't have a 4/9 (and d10, full BAB) spontaneous divine caster (unless I missed an odd archetype of something else).

Cons:

  • A lot more work to put the class together. For starters, truncating the Cleric/Oracle list to 4/9 is a lot more severe than truncating it to 6/9, and enough changes are going to be needed that you really need a separate spell list. Some Oracle Revelations (as well as Mystery Spells) also might need to be modified to fit properly with the much lower level spellcasting.
  • Mechanically, 4/9 spellcasting is a closer approximation of what you get by going Barbarian 5/Oracle 1/Rage Prophet 10/Barbarian +4 than 6/9 spellcasting would be. This would be approximating only the Barbarian-centric end of the spectrum of Rage Prophet prestige class builds, and as such would not be able to replace the prestige class.
  • Yet another 4/9 ragecaster -- steps on the toes of the Bloodrager. Backing out and redoing the class hybridization from Barbarian and Oracle rather than building from Bloodrager could help mitigate this, although some Bloodrager innovations could reasonably be used as design guides.

Ever thought of using the Adept 0-5/9 progression?


I've thought of that, and something like that would be a consideration for a Pathfinder 2.0 or even a Pathfinder patch to prestige classes that advance spellcasting, but I didn't want to introduce yet another type of spellcasting progression when prestige classes(*) already have trouble balancing properly anything that isn't either a 9/9 spellcaster or a non-spellcaster.

(*)Some prestige clasaes I actually like, at least in concept, so I don't want to make base classes unfriendly to them more than is necessary.

Maybe the right thing to do would be to introduce 2 Rage Prophet base classes:

  • Raging Prophet for the d8, 3/4 BAB, 6/9 spellcaster
  • Prophetic Rager for the d10, 1/1 BAB, 4/9 spellcaster


UnArcaneElection wrote:

I've thought of that, and something like that would be a consideration for a Pathfinder 2.0 or even a Pathfinder patch to prestige classes that advance spellcasting, but I didn't want to introduce yet another type of spellcasting progression when prestige classes(*) already have trouble balancing properly anything that isn't either a 9/9 spellcaster or a non-spellcaster.

(*)Some prestige clasaes I actually like, at least in concept, so I don't want to make base classes unfriendly to them more than is necessary.

Maybe the right thing to do would be to introduce 2 Rage Prophet base classes:

  • Raging Prophet for the d8, 3/4 BAB, 6/9 spellcaster
  • Prophetic Rager for the d10, 1/1 BAB, 4/9 spellcaster

It isn't new, just not used with PC classes (and spontaneous casters). It is less powerful than 6/9 casting, but better than 4/9, and unlike 4/9, it come into play at 1st level.


SmiloDan wrote:
MidsouthGuy wrote:
SmiloDan wrote:
MidsouthGuy wrote:

Gunslinger/sorcerer!

I've had this idea bouncing around in my head for a while now, and even have a name for it (Blackpowder Adept) but I have no idea how I would make it remotely balanced. So far I just have the general idea for the class. A Blackpowder Adept has a mystical connection to gunpowder, firearms and explosives. They can innately use magic to improve, alter, and repair gunpowder based weapons, and use gunpowder to augment other attacks such as causing a warhammer or fist to hit with the force of a gunshot.

The Powder Mage trilogy is a series of epic/flintlock fantasy novels written by American author Brian McClellan.

Powder Mages use magic to sense and ignite powder, alter the trajectory of bullets, and even consume gunpowder to rage and heal.

I just finished reading the first book and I have to say that Powder Mages need to be a thing in Pathfinder.
You know that's right!

Have you considered looking at the Gun Mage from Iron Kingdoms as a base? Was produced for either 3.0 or 3.5, so would need a rework, but was a 20 level base class for that setting.


Guy St-Amant wrote:
UnArcaneElection wrote:

I've thought of that, and something like that would be a consideration for a Pathfinder 2.0 or even a Pathfinder patch to prestige classes that advance spellcasting, but I didn't want to introduce yet another type of spellcasting progression when prestige classes(*) already have trouble balancing properly anything that isn't either a 9/9 spellcaster or a non-spellcaster.

(*)Some prestige clasaes I actually like, at least in concept, so I don't want to make base classes unfriendly to them more than is necessary.

Maybe the right thing to do would be to introduce 2 Rage Prophet base classes:

  • Raging Prophet for the d8, 3/4 BAB, 6/9 spellcaster
  • Prophetic Rager for the d10, 1/1 BAB, 4/9 spellcaster

It isn't new, just not used with PC classes (and spontaneous casters). It is less powerful than 6/9 casting, but better than 4/9, and unlike 4/9, it come into play at 1st level.

I know, but prestige class design doesn't usually need to take NPC classes into account; it DOES need to take PC classes into account, but in practice usually doesn't do a very good job with any PC classes that are not 9/9 casters or non-casters.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

dysartes wrote:
SmiloDan wrote:
MidsouthGuy wrote:
SmiloDan wrote:
MidsouthGuy wrote:

Gunslinger/sorcerer!

I've had this idea bouncing around in my head for a while now, and even have a name for it (Blackpowder Adept) but I have no idea how I would make it remotely balanced. So far I just have the general idea for the class. A Blackpowder Adept has a mystical connection to gunpowder, firearms and explosives. They can innately use magic to improve, alter, and repair gunpowder based weapons, and use gunpowder to augment other attacks such as causing a warhammer or fist to hit with the force of a gunshot.

The Powder Mage trilogy is a series of epic/flintlock fantasy novels written by American author Brian McClellan.

Powder Mages use magic to sense and ignite powder, alter the trajectory of bullets, and even consume gunpowder to rage and heal.

I just finished reading the first book and I have to say that Powder Mages need to be a thing in Pathfinder.
You know that's right!
Have you considered looking at the Gun Mage from Iron Kingdoms as a base? Was produced for either 3.0 or 3.5, so would need a rework, but was a 20 level base class for that setting.

I don't have any Iron Kingdoms stuff.

It would be a Full BAB, d10, Good Fort & Reflex, 4/9 caster. It would probably draw some abilities from barbarians and alchemists, too, particularly rage/mutagens and infusions of gunpowder. The spell list would have to be really tight and focused, and there would be magical deeds, possibly consuming spell slots to power. Maybe Cha to AC?


Derklord: "Yes to 3/4 BAB and d8 HD, but I would probably use Magus armor progression (medium at 7th level, heavy at 13th level).

With the Alchemist list, fervored True Strike would be the signature ability. With the Bard list, it would probably be fervored Bladed Dash. Both actually sound interesting to play."

I agree that the Magus armor progression is better, and I have used in the newest version of the class. I also agree with your thoughts on the spells you mentioned. It is part of the reason why I have made the newest test builds with the Bard list since I think fervor true strike would focus the class too much on str based 2 handed weapons with power attack. I think the Bard list would make a more balanced class, with more variety of potential characters. This class seems to be more of a Magus/Warpriest hybrid, but I suppose that is neither here or there.

I have created a level progression chart to try to weed out dead levels. I have added an arcane pool (as the Magus) to fill in dead levels (a later starting level at 6). I have also moved all of the bonus feats down by 1 level, to help eliminate dead levels.

level progression:
L1: Weapon and armor proficiencies, spells
L2: Bonus Feat
L3: Armor Training
L4: 2nd level spells, Fervor
L5: Bonus Feat
L6: Arcane pool, extra Fervor
L7: 3rd level spells, Armor training, Medium armor casting
L8: Bonus feat, extra fervor
L9: (dead)
L10: Arcane pool, level 4 spells, extra fervor
L11: bonus feat, armor training, arcane pool can add special weapon abilities
L12: extra fervor
L13: Heavy armor casting, 5th level spells
L14: Bonus feat, arcane pool
L15: Armor training
L16: extra fervor, 6th level spells
L17: Bonus feat
L18: Arcane pool
L19: (dead)
L20: Capstone, extra Fervor

I have also created 2 test characters, a str based and an archer

str based half orc:
strength based EK (hybrid)
Half-Orc Eldrich Knight 7, racial sacred tatoo, traits: Fates Favored, reactionary
Str 19(start 15 + 2 racial, +2 belt), Dex 16 (start 15, +1 level 4), Con 14, Int 14, wis 10, cha 7

Feats: Toughness L1, Combat reflexes Bonus Level 2, Weapon focus lucerne hammer L 3, power attack B, weapon specialization Level 5, Iron will level 7.

Spells: L0 (5 spells), level 1: Heightened Awareness 2, Alarm 1, Feather step 1, Expeditious retreat 1
Level 2 spells: Bladed Dash 2, Mirror Image 2
Level 3: Good Hope 1, Cure Serious 1

Equipment: +2 lucerne Hammer, +1 Agile Breastplate, +1 Adaptable longbow, Belt of Str +2, Cloak of Resist +1, Ring of Protection +1, Amulet of Natural Armor +1

HP: 63 (7d8+28), Fort 10, Reflexes 8, Will 10
AC: 23 (7 armor, 3 Dex, 1 Deflection, 1 natural armor, 1 armor specialization Adv Arm Training), FF 20, Touch 14

+2 Lucerne Hammer
12 (5 BAB, 4 Str, 2 Enhancement, 1 weapon focus) 2d6+10(6 Str, 2 Enh, 2 w spec)
Power attack: 10 (2d6+16)

Archer:
Human EK hybrid Archer

Human Eldrich Knight (hybrid) 7
Str 14, Dex 21(16 start +2 racial, +2 belt, +1 lv 4), con 12, Int 14, wis 12, cha 7

Equipment: +2 Adaptable longbow, +1 mithral chainshirt, cloak res +1, Ring prot +1, Am Nat armor +1, Belt dex +2

Feats: Point Blank, Precise Shot, level 1, Weapon foc: longbow B level 2, Rapid shot level 3, Weapon Spec longbow B, Arcane strike Level 5, Deadly Aim Level 7

HP: 49 (7d8+14) Fort 7, Reflex 8, Will 7
AC 23 (6 Armor, 5 Dex, 1 Def, 1 Spec) FF 18 Touch 16

+2 Adaptable longbow
13 or [14] (5 BAB, 5 Dex, 1 W foc, 2 Enhance) [point Blank 1] 1d8+6 (2 Str, 2 Enh, 2 W spec)

Round 1: Good hope + activate arcane pool (enhancement to +3)
Round 2: Deadly aim + rapid shot + Fervored cat's grace (does not stack with belt dex 23) 12, 12 1d8+11
Round 3: Deadly aim + rapid shot + Arcane strike 12, 12 (1d8+13)

Spells: L0 (5 spells), L1 Feather step 1, Vanish 2, Heightened Awareness 2
Level 2: Cat's Grace 2, Invisibility 1, Glitterdust 1
Level 3: Good Hope


UnArcaneElection wrote:
Guy St-Amant wrote:
UnArcaneElection wrote:

I've thought of that, and something like that would be a consideration for a Pathfinder 2.0 or even a Pathfinder patch to prestige classes that advance spellcasting, but I didn't want to introduce yet another type of spellcasting progression when prestige classes(*) already have trouble balancing properly anything that isn't either a 9/9 spellcaster or a non-spellcaster.

(*)Some prestige clasaes I actually like, at least in concept, so I don't want to make base classes unfriendly to them more than is necessary.

Maybe the right thing to do would be to introduce 2 Rage Prophet base classes:

  • Raging Prophet for the d8, 3/4 BAB, 6/9 spellcaster
  • Prophetic Rager for the d10, 1/1 BAB, 4/9 spellcaster

It isn't new, just not used with PC classes (and spontaneous casters). It is less powerful than 6/9 casting, but better than 4/9, and unlike 4/9, it come into play at 1st level.

I know, but prestige class design doesn't usually need to take NPC classes into account; it DOES need to take PC classes into account, but in practice usually doesn't do a very good job with any PC classes that are not 9/9 casters or non-casters.

I thought we were talking into turning a PrC into a Base Class or two...

401 to 450 of 628 << first < prev | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / What other Hybrid classes would you like to see? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.