|
I was wondering if there was an Alchemist that replaces BOTH bombs and mutagen! Thanks! I feel like not having one of them is fairly different, but Alchemists are usually built one way or the other, right? So, no Mutagens? Be a bomber. No bombs? Be a mutagen imbibing melee character. But neither? Now THAT'S different.
Eldritch Poisoner replaces both if you want to be the best poisoner around (though some prefer going Toxicant/Vivisectionist for a more mundane feel with better sneaks and a less powerful poison). Pair with some VMC/EH Nanite Bloodline for fun and profit if it fits the theme and you can spare the Charisma... and if you're doing Path of War then it could be GODLY with the Steel Serpent discipline.
I wouldn't count this one - the key feature of the Thief/Rogue class has always been its peerless facility for skill use (they had skills and skill points before anyone else did!). Sneak Attack is a major feature, of course, but it's really secondary to their raison d'etre. You could say that the Phantom Thief is the opposite of what you're talking about; it doubles down on the class's primary feature.Some examples would be:
1. Phantom Thief, a Rogue without Sneak Attack
That leads to the question of identifying the key feature. It is easy to home in on a mechanically unique feature, such as sneak attack or rage, but sometimes the unique feature is incidental. A skald in my campaign has Spell Kenning, a powerful unique ability, but the essence of her class is the ragesong that combines bardic performance and barbarian rage. That skald's apprentice (leadership cohort) is a Spell Warrior Skald, an archetype that changes ragesong to weaponsong and replaces spell kenning with counterspelling. It changed the key aspect of the skald, but in a way that still seems to cross bard and barbarian, which was the point of the skald class.
Guide ranger - swaps out favored enemy for ranger's focus (basically pseudo-smite)
I played a ranger once who converted to the Guide archetype at 4th level when the Advanced Player's Guide was published. The character's backstory had him learning rangering by serving as a guide. Losing favored enemy did not seem like losing a key aspect. It was mostly flavor and sometimes a lucky guess. Losing Animal Companion, though the ranger had gained it just at that level, felt like a more significant step away from the Ranger class.
I have other examples among my PCs, but actually, PCs are complex and embrace many aspects of their class. My NPCs rely more on key aspects. In one game, I wanted to add a mysterious character who knew secrets about a haunted valley. Occultist seemed the perfect class. I wanted an NPC for a friendly brawl during a festival: Brawler. I statted out a potential ally who lead a double life: I swapped out his Rogue levels for Vigilante instead.
I agree with I'm Hiding In Your Closet. The skills and Dexterity of the Rogue are the key to the Rogue. If I build a rogue NPC, I am not planning on massive damage via sneak attack; instead, I want a character who will slip through the locked door unseen. The sneak attack is just an excuse to use those skills in combat ("I sneak up on him from a dark corner for a Sneak Attack.")
