What is the worst archetype?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

51 to 100 of 226 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

The crew in the game I ran also did the same. More because it was a big game and they all wanted to be pirates fighting crew against crew not single model vs single model.

I will not argue the rules were rough, but specialists in that area did better than most.


Slim Jim wrote:
OoV forfeits channeling, and hence cannot take Extra Channel (which is worth +4 daily LoH), and must sacrifice two LoH to gain each extra smite. This takes him right out of the primary "damage sponge" role if he's to ever even remotely dream about unloading eight smites in one day.

So I think you misunderstand a few things about Paladins and about OoV Paladins.

Furst up:

Prerequisites: Channel energy class feature.

Benefit: You can channel energy two additional times per day.

Special: If a paladin with the ability to channel positive energy takes this feat, she can use lay on hands four additional times per day, but only to channel positive energy.

This means Extra Channel effectively gives them 2 cannels that don't use up your LoH. Since Channel tends to be mostly useless for Paladins unless they have a Meditation Crystal to turn it into LoH, they're much better off taking Extra LoH instead. This isn't something the OoV Paladin loses, it's 100% an upgrade. You don't have to use it, but if you need it it's there.

The other part is about Aura of Justice vs Powerful Justice. AoJ is definitely better, but at level 11 (when you get it) you can use it twice per day if you don't plan on smiting yourself. PJ is less powerful, but only costs 1 use of smite, meaning you can use it 4 times per day. It also doesn't lock you out of smiting (or using Powerfjl Justoce again), it just means that using either of those abilities will cost you 2 LoH uses.

I agree the OoV Paladin isn't the best (and is probably a little overused) but if you're playing one you've still got a perfectly functional Paladin 99% of the time. You're still hard to kill (maybe harder since OoV really incentivises the Extra LoH feat) and you're still an amazing boss-killer. As a level 11 Paladin you have a pretty good chance of killing anything with a full-round attack anyway, so giving the buff to your allies may just be a waste of a Smite.

Not my favourite archetype, but definitely not the "worst".

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I've played an Oath of Vengeance paladin (gnome, fey foundling, charge feats, lance, boar divine bond) at low to mid levels. Kicked serious ass.

But regardless of archetype, who could resist the mental picture of the gnome riding his flying pig, orange hair whipping in the breeze?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Our Alchemist in our Skull & Shackles game got access to Siege Engineer via the alternate gnome racial trait "master tinker" which gives them proficiency with any weapon they have personally crafted. Siege Engineer after all asks only "proficiency with one siege engine". Just have to craft one 500gp ballista and you're in; no need for an archetype.


pauljathome wrote:
Cavall wrote:

It's a niche archetype that does well in siege games like Skull and Shackles.

When we played Skull and Shackles we tried the ship combat rules and quickly decided they totally sucked and from then on just got the PCs onto the other ship as quickly as possible and kicked NPC ass.

That was the first few books only so maybe the actual siege rules came into effect later. But I agree, fireballs, dim door etc are probably MUCH more useful

Not intentionally, but we ended up finding the same thing. The ship to ship combat rules we're rather boring. And taking down the other ship took wayyyyyyy toooooo long. So our tactic became: Ram the other ship and initiate hand to hand combat.


S&S ship combat taking so long that boarding is the only viable option has long been the consensus in my experience. Siege Mage as an archetype however truly shines as an NPC foe.

I'd like to nominate Counter-Summoner. It gives up awesomes abilities to hose a single school of magic. Conjuration is easily the best or second best school of magic and pretty bad to be hit with so that might be decent, except the ability doesn't actually work that well. Firstly it only works against actual spells, not SLAs. Secondly you have to make a dispel check, which requires you both win a spellcraft check (on a non-intelligence based class with 2 skill points a level) AND win a dispel check you're predisposed to fail since enemy casters will be higher level and, if they're focused on cojuration enough they won't stick to other schools after you try this once, will have stuff that gives an even higher CL!

The other abilities are pretty terrible too. Since only outsiders can be called, rarely coming to the prime material by any other method, and only a small list of creatures can be summoned (plus summons tend to have low enough duration you'll have witnessed the casting) this doesn't really do anything Knowledge (Planes) and a little guess work can do. The odds it even matters if a creature was called or wandering in through some other method is extremely low.

Weaken Summons is a terrible ability since it's worse (and less likely to work!) than just intimidating them.


There are also the Bracers of Celestial Intervention which allow you to trade in uses of Smite Evil for increasingly powerful Summoned monsters. With a high charisma and Oath of Vengeance, you can conjure up some seriously beefy monsters for 13 rounds of combat.

As a 10th level Paladin you have 4 uses per day of Smite, along with 5+Charisma (lets call it 5) uses of lay on hands for another 5 uses of Smite Evil from converting the lay on hands into smite evil. This lets you break out an Astral Deva 1/day to beat people up for you as a level 9 spell available VERY early. Add in some "Extra Lay on Hands" feats and you can do this even earlier, or more often.


Gray paladin, lose 50% of your class features for 33% of a feature that should be base line.


doomman47 wrote:
Gray paladin, lose 50% of your class features for 33% of a feature that should be base line.

There are lots of archetypes that are "worse" than Gray Paladin.


blahpers wrote:
doomman47 wrote:
Gray paladin, lose 50% of your class features for 33% of a feature that should be base line.
There are lots of archetypes that are "worse" than Gray Paladin.

And I would rather play several of those "worse" archetypes than play a gray paladin.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
MrCharisma wrote:
Slim Jim wrote:
OoV forfeits channeling, and hence cannot take Extra Channel (which is worth +4 daily LoH), and must sacrifice two LoH to gain each extra smite. This takes him right out of the primary "damage sponge" role if he's to ever even remotely dream about unloading eight smites in one day.

So I think you misunderstand a few things about Paladins and about OoV Paladins.

Furst up:

Prerequisites: Channel energy class feature.

Benefit: You can channel energy two additional times per day.

Special: If a paladin with the ability to channel positive energy takes this feat, she can use lay on hands four additional times per day, but only to channel positive energy.

This means Extra Channel effectively gives them 2 cannels that don't use up your LoH.
(Boldface start point expanded.)
Quote:
Since Channel tends to be mostly useless for Paladins unless they have a Meditation Crystal to turn it into LoH,
What? *No*....
Quote:
they're much better off taking Extra LoH instead. This isn't something the OoV Paladin loses, it's 100% an upgrade. You don't have to use it, but if you need it it's there.

That's not what it means. "(B)ut only to channel positive energy" is merely reminding the reader that paladins are only capable of channeling positive energy at all *and* that LoH is a type of positive energy healing, as clarified by FAQ (since it isn't explicitly written that way in the CRB).

The "normal" paladin with Extra Channel for four additional daily LoHs doesn't have to do anything out of the ordinary, or need crystals, etc.

Quote:
The other part is about Aura of Justice vs Powerful Justice. AoJ is definitely better, but at level 11 (when you get it) you can use it twice per day if you don't plan on smiting yourself. PJ is less powerful, but only costs 1 use of smite, meaning you can use it 4 times per day. It also doesn't lock you out of smiting (or using Powerfjl Justoce again), it just means that using either of those abilities will cost you 2 LoH uses.

Due to the supersponge damage-soaking abilities of the core class, I've always treated Smite as a "Break Glass in Case of Emergency" ability. I.e., If I can absorb, in my role as front-line tank and all-evil-come-hither-LG-aura-bug-zapper, twice the damage as the party barbarian without spending a nickel on consumables, I'm perfectly content to motor along dishing out only two-thirds of his damage. I save the smites for those mega-bosses built to TPK unless taken down very fast.

"Ok, everybody, you're now +9 to hit and +12 damage (+24 on your first hit) versus Mr. Colossal there, and can ignore his DR! Well, if you spend a swift-action to turn it on, that is. Or some of you could peel away and go after his sidekick Mr. Gargantuan. Whichever one you pick, you'll also be +9 Deflection AC versus them, because that's my bonus.

Quote:
As a level 11 Paladin you have a pretty good chance of killing anything with a full-round attack anyway

It's not whether I can kill it; it's whether or not everybody else can (and the job may well fall to them if an intelligent opponent takes great pains to avoid facing my PC, the obvious paladin with the goody-goody aura).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Slim Jim wrote:
MrCharisma wrote:

Prerequisites: Channel energy class feature.

Benefit: You can channel energy two additional times per day.
Special: If a paladin with the ability to channel positive energy takes this feat, she can use lay on hands four additional times per day, but only to channel positive energy.
This means Extra Channel effectively gives them 2 cannels that don't use up your LoH.

That's not what it means. "(B)ut only to channel positive energy" is merely reminding the reader that paladins are only capable of channeling positive energy at all *and* that LoH is a type of positive energy healing, as clarified by FAQ (since it isn't explicitly written that way in the CRB).

The "normal" paladin with Extra Channel for four additional daily LoHs doesn't have to do anything out of the ordinary, or need crystals, etc.

Ok here's the problem.

Theres is a very well defined difference between "CHANNELING" positive energy and "USING" positive energy. One is a class feature, the other is something that happens every time someone uses a wand of cure light wounds.. While a Paladin's LoH "uses" positive energy it is emphatically NOT "channeling" positive energy. So if you read Extra Channel again it says:

Quote:
... she can use lay on hands four additional times per day, but only to CHANNEL positive energy.

(Don't worry I recently discovered I'd been reading the Alchemist class wrong since it's inception.)

Now onwards ...

Slim Jim wrote:
MrCharisma wrote:
Since Channel tends to be mostly useless for Paladins unless they have a Meditation Crystal to turn it into LoH,
What? *No*....

You are absolutely allowed to disagree with that. It's the popular opinion here (and one I happen to agree with) but it is 100% a subjective statement so I really backed myself into a corner there.

Slim Jim wrote:
<Paladins are better as a damage sponge>

Paraphrased slightly there, but it shouldn't matter because I completely agree with you. I really do think a Paladin's defensive capabilities are the strongest parts of the class (I think Hospitaler is better than OoV, and it gives up half its smites AND Aura of Justice).

What I disagree with is your assessment of how the Oath of Vengeance Paladin changes that. If you build an OoV Paladin well you should be able to out-damage the Barbarian any time the combat focuses on one or two big baddies. It will play differently, but it's not better/worse, it's different ... well ok I said before I do think it's worse, but by no means "the worst".


3 people marked this as a favorite.

All archetypes that give you a Drake companion from Legacy of Dragons are pretty bad and disappointing... The Drake itself is the problem. It takes way too many class features and it takes way too many abilities to make it decent.

Biggest offenders are the Drakerider (cavalier) and Silver Champion (paladin), because the Drake becomes suitable to riding only by 13th level, for a Medium character.

Oh, and the Drake doesn't initially fly and needs abilities to be allowed as a mount... and it's Any Nongood, which probably the dumbest thing I've seen, not because drakes in Bestiaries aren't of Good alignments, but because the alignment isn't even changed for the Silver Champion.


"Channel Positive Energy (Su)

When a paladin reaches 4th level, she gains the supernatural ability to channel positive energy like a cleric. Using this ability consumes two uses of her lay on hands ability. A paladin uses her level as her effective cleric level when channeling positive energy. This is a Charisma-based ability."

I see no evidence that extra channel doesnt refer to this ability paladins gain at 4th level. Gaining 4 lay on hands that must be used to channel positive energy is clear to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that it refers to channel positive energy.


Cavall wrote:

"Channel Positive Energy (Su)

When a paladin reaches 4th level, she gains the supernatural ability to channel positive energy like a cleric. Using this ability consumes two uses of her lay on hands ability. A paladin uses her level as her effective cleric level when channeling positive energy. This is a Charisma-based ability."

I see no evidence that extra channel doesnt refer to this ability paladins gain at 4th level. Gaining 4 lay on hands that must be used to channel positive energy is clear to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that it refers to channel positive energy.

Sorry Cavall, you're correct, but that's not the misunderstanding here (and apologies for those who have been following/trying to follow the argument).

The argument is about the idea that taking the EXTRA CHANNEL feat would give you the ability to use Lay on Hands 4 extra times per day as a Paladin.

Paladins can take Extra Channel, and when they do instead of getting "2 extra uses of channel energy per day" they get "4 extra uses of Lay on Hands per day" with the caveat that those 4 uses can "only be used to channel energy" (effectively giving them 2 extra channels per day rather than 4 extra LoH uses). The feat is worded this way because of how Channel Positive Energy is written in the Paladin entry.

I will readily admit the feat could have been written better, but it doesn't allow 4 extra channels for 1 feat.


The problem with drakes seems to stem from a staggering misunderstanding about why the summoner class is considered so powerful, as the drake is basically built upon an eidolon chassis. The spiritualist has a similar issue. The problem is that the eidolon as a stand-alone class feature isn’t that powerful. And the summoner’s early spell access as a stand-alone class feature isn’t that powerful. Even the summon monster SLA as a stand-alone feature isn’t game breakingly powerful. But when you combine all of those options together in one, then you have a class that is generally agreed upon to be too powerful

But instead of understanding that issue, people miss the mark and figure the eidolon alone must be too powerful and so set the power bar much lower for any other companions that use its chassis, resulting in class options that are very underwhelming.


MrCharisma wrote:
Cavall wrote:

"Channel Positive Energy (Su)

When a paladin reaches 4th level, she gains the supernatural ability to channel positive energy like a cleric. Using this ability consumes two uses of her lay on hands ability. A paladin uses her level as her effective cleric level when channeling positive energy. This is a Charisma-based ability."

I see no evidence that extra channel doesnt refer to this ability paladins gain at 4th level. Gaining 4 lay on hands that must be used to channel positive energy is clear to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that it refers to channel positive energy.

Sorry Cavall, you're correct, but that's not the misunderstanding here (and apologies for those who have been following/trying to follow the argument).

The argument is about the idea that taking the EXTRA CHANNEL feat would give you the ability to use Lay on Hands 4 extra times per day as a Paladin.

Paladins can take Extra Channel, and when they do instead of getting "2 extra uses of channel energy per day" they get "4 extra uses of Lay on Hands per day" with the caveat that those 4 uses can "only be used to channel energy" (effectively giving them 2 extra channels per day rather than 4 extra LoH uses). The feat is worded this way because of how Channel Positive Energy is written in the Paladin entry.

I will readily admit the feat could have been written better, but it doesn't allow 4 extra channels for 1 feat.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding. It seemed like there was an argument that it wasnt used for this ability but 4 lay on hands in general which could be used as lay on hands and not specifically to channel positive energy at 2 uses a piece.

Which is not what the feat is saying. Perhaps you're right and I am simply not following.


Cavall wrote:
MrCharisma wrote:
Cavall wrote:

"Channel Positive Energy (Su)

When a paladin reaches 4th level, she gains the supernatural ability to channel positive energy like a cleric. Using this ability consumes two uses of her lay on hands ability. A paladin uses her level as her effective cleric level when channeling positive energy. This is a Charisma-based ability."

I see no evidence that extra channel doesnt refer to this ability paladins gain at 4th level. Gaining 4 lay on hands that must be used to channel positive energy is clear to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that it refers to channel positive energy.

Sorry Cavall, you're correct, but that's not the misunderstanding here (and apologies for those who have been following/trying to follow the argument).

The argument is about the idea that taking the EXTRA CHANNEL feat would give you the ability to use Lay on Hands 4 extra times per day as a Paladin.

Paladins can take Extra Channel, and when they do instead of getting "2 extra uses of channel energy per day" they get "4 extra uses of Lay on Hands per day" with the caveat that those 4 uses can "only be used to channel energy" (effectively giving them 2 extra channels per day rather than 4 extra LoH uses). The feat is worded this way because of how Channel Positive Energy is written in the Paladin entry.

I will readily admit the feat could have been written better, but it doesn't allow 4 extra channels for 1 feat.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding. It seemed like there was an argument that it wasnt used for this ability but 4 lay on hands in general which could be used as lay on hands and not specifically to channel positive energy at 2 uses a piece.

Which is not what the feat is saying. Perhaps you're right and I am simply not following.

This was my takeaway as well. Extra Channel specifically grants channels, never LoH uses. It also specifically grants paladin 2 extra uses of channel. How can you interpret it any other way without squinting your eyes, rotating the page 90 degrees, hopping on one foot while sticking your tongue out and really, REALLY wanting it to say something it doesn’t?


MrCharisma wrote:
I will readily admit the feat could have been written better, but it doesn't allow 4 extra channels LoH for 1 feat.

Woops, fixed that =P

born_of_fire wrote:
Cavall wrote:

Perhaps I am misunderstanding. It seemed like there was an argument that it wasnt used for this ability but 4 lay on hands in general which could be used as lay on hands and not specifically to channel positive energy at 2 uses a piece.

Which is not what the feat is saying. Perhaps you're right and I am simply not following.

This was my takeaway as well. Extra Channel specifically grants channels, never LoH uses. It also specifically grants paladin 2 extra uses of channel. How can you interpret it any other way without squinting your eyes, rotating the page 90 degrees, hopping on one foot while sticking your tongue out and really, REALLY wanting it to say something it doesn’t?

As far as I can tell you're both agreeing with me. If you're both having trouble following that then perhaps this whole argument has been my fault for being unclear =P

I do think it's taken enough of this thread though, so I'll leave it there. People can make their own decisions.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I dont think either of us was disagreeing with YOU. It was the alternate opinion we were having an issue with. We are in fact supporting you.


Cavall wrote:
I dont think either of us was disagreeing with YOU. It was the alternate opinion we were having an issue with. We are in fact supporting you.

Ah, I apparently misread this post ...

Cavall wrote:
I see no evidence that extra channel doesnt refer to this ability paladins gain at 4th level. Gaining 4 lay on hands that must be used to channel positive energy is clear to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that it refers to channel positive energy.

... and thought you misread my post and ... well nevermind =P

It turns out we agree so how we got here isn't that important.


Back to the thread at hand ...

All the archetypes for various classes like the COMBAT HEALER SQUIRE Paladin, or the MAJORDOMO Investigator that turn a PC class into an NPC class (there are a bunch of them but I don't want to look them all up right now).

From memory I think these archetypes were actually designed to be NPC archetypes, but they take a class and intentionally make it less powerful - so much so that it's not a viable playable archetype. This is sad because I've looked at a couple of these for character concepts (currently playing as Professor Lorrimor's butler in book 1 of Carrion Crown), but they're so bad. As NPC classes they're fine, but they could just as easily have made them PC power-level classes with the same or similar theme, but instead the best option for that kind of fluff is to take the mechanics from another archetype and the fluff from one of these.

Thematically interesting, but mechanically terrible.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Gunslinger wizard. Gives up too much magic for what it gets.


You mean Spellslinger? That one actually works... on the caveat you only ever take a single level in Wizard since there is ZERO limitation on where your casting comes from (not even arcane/divine/psychic or attribute). Think of it as a one level prestige class that doesn't advance casting with no requirements beyond "can't have any levels in wizard".


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Even if you do continue in spellslinger wizard it'd be easy to make work to some degree. You might not be as good as a regular wizard, but that still leaves a long way before you reach 'as unplayable as a brute vigilante'.


Extra Channel wrote:

Prerequisites: Channel energy class feature.

Benefit: You can channel energy two additional times per day.
Special: If a paladin with the ability to channel positive energy takes this feat, she can use lay on hands four additional times per day, but only to channel positive energy.

With this feat....

-- Anybody who can channel can channel energy (of any type they are previously able to) two more times daily.
-- Paladins may also, instead, LoH several additional times per day, and we-the-reader are reminded that paladins may not channel negative energy (whether by "channeling" directly, or via LoH, which is a type of positive-energy, as laid forth in previously-mentioned FAQ)
-- You don't get four extra channels per day if you're a paladin.

The wording is typical bad-Paizo, but it is parsable in this case. It's there to preclude oddball builds, such as a paladin/cleric multiclass (of a cleric archetype that forfeits channeling), from using Extra Channel to distribute negative energy -- since the only class portion of the build capable of channeling is the paladin part, and paladins are only capable of positive channeling. Or, if you're a cleric(negative channeling)/paladin multiclass (of a paladin archetype that forfeits channeling and LoH), from using it to gain LoH (since the build is only capable of negative energy).


Alternate classes (Antipaladin) are really just big archetypes. It's mostly important for Ninja (since there are some rogue archetypes that can be stacked with Ninja) and feat requirements, a Paladin can channel negative energy. How Extra Channel actually works on a Antipaladin is up in the air (though every GM in existence will make it work like it does for normal Paladin) and not really relevant though.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm going to go ahead and submit Monk of the Healing Hand on the worst archetype ever list.

Because if you make it to Level 20, you get to use your capstone feature once and then your character retcons themself out of existence. Seriously.


Ventnor wrote:

I'm going to go ahead and submit Monk of the Healing Hand on the worst archetype ever list.

Because if you make it to Level 20, you get to use your capstone feature once and then your character retcons themself out of existence. Seriously.

Still better than gray paladin.


deuxhero wrote:
You mean Spellslinger? That one actually works... on the caveat you only ever take a single level in Wizard since there is ZERO limitation on where your casting comes from (not even arcane/divine/psychic or attribute). Think of it as a one level prestige class that doesn't advance casting with no requirements beyond "can't have any levels in wizard".

It also works quite well with 5 levels as an entry into Eldritch Knight (with Trench Fighter it's actually a great build). The archetype is extremely unforgiving, gives up too much for what it gets, its class features don't really synergize with each other, and it has some weird quirks to work around. However, for all these problems, the abilities this archetype gives are actually really good. It's also gotten progressively better as Pathfinder has aged since it has more support options to work with today.

The Spellslinger is a deeply flawed archetype, but it's not even arguably the worst archetype. Heck, there are multiple Wizard archetypes that are unambiguously inferior to Spellslinger in the same book it was published in (Siege Mage and Arcane Bomber are in the running for the worst Wizard archetypes ever published)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Slim Jim wrote:
Extra Channel wrote:

Prerequisites: Channel energy class feature.

Benefit: You can channel energy two additional times per day.
Special: If a paladin with the ability to channel positive energy takes this feat, she can use lay on hands four additional times per day, but only to channel positive energy.

With this feat....

-- Anybody who can channel can channel energy (of any type they are previously able to) two more times daily.
-- Paladins may also, instead, LoH several additional times per day, and we-the-reader are reminded that paladins may not channel negative energy (whether by "channeling" directly, or via LoH, which is a type of positive-energy, as laid forth in previously-mentioned FAQ)
-- You don't get four extra channels per day if you're a paladin.

The wording is typical bad-Paizo, but it is parsable in this case. It's there to preclude oddball builds, such as a paladin/cleric multiclass (of a cleric archetype that forfeits channeling), from using Extra Channel to distribute negative energy -- since the only class portion of the build capable of channeling is the paladin part, and paladins are only capable of positive channeling. Or, if you're a cleric(negative channeling)/paladin multiclass (of a paladin archetype that forfeits channeling and LoH), from using it to gain LoH (since the build is only capable of negative energy).

That is a deeply tortured misreading. You really think that 'but only to channel positive energy' is there to preclude an oddball build that's already precluded by alignment restrictions, and not a straightforward reference to the fact that Paladins have a Channel Positive Energy class feature which is fueled by uses of Lay on Hands? Why do you think a separate 'Extra Lay on Hands' feat exists that provides two extra uses if you think this feat provides four without restriction?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ya I think not a bad paizo and more bad reading.

I once again see no evidence it doesnt refer to channel positive energy. It's not a reminder paladins use positive energy it's a direct reference to an ability they have.

You get 4 lay on hands. To channel energy. Which costs 2 lay on hands. Which equals the same amount everyone gets.

This is basic black and white RAW and RAI.


Dasrak wrote:


The Spellslinger is a deeply flawed archetype, but it's not even arguably the worst archetype. Heck, there are multiple Wizard archetypes that are unambiguously inferior to Spellslinger in the same book it was published in (Siege Mage and Arcane Bomber are in the running for the worst Wizard archetypes ever published)

With the Wizard it doesnt actually matter how many bad archetypes there are since Pact Wizard(HH) + Exploiter is an unfathomably OP archetype combo..... Pact Wizard all by itself is hideously OP but the fact that it can stack with Exploiter is just farcical.

Good thing the folks at PFS took one look at Pact Wizard and banned it!


Ventnor wrote:

I'm going to go ahead and submit Monk of the Healing Hand on the worst archetype ever list.

Because if you make it to Level 20, you get to use your capstone feature once and then your character retcons themself out of existence. Seriously.

I, on the other hand, think Monk of the Healing Hand has the most awesome capstone a cMonk could have: Not only can you instantly resurrect your entire party (probably winning a fight you party would've lost), you now get to reroll to a class that doesn't suck!

But wait, it gets even better: Unlike regular Monk, you can still profit from Enlarge Person at 20th level!

Also, (and I'm completely serious about this), compared to a vanilla Monk, Healing Hand's Ki Sacrifice ability skyrockets the Monk's usefulness, thus making the archetype an upgrade.

Wonderstell wrote:
A Wis penalty Druid is mean, but Nimble Guardian is pretty damn good. Your Wis mod is probably only one lower than it would be normally since wisdom isn't your primary stat, and you get Beast Shape III for the trouble. Combine it with the Nornkith archetype to key everything off Charisma, and it really shines for Catfolks.

Doesn't stack, both archetypes replace Purity of Body. Problem with Nimble Guardian is that you could just be a Druid or Shifter instead for basically the same character concept.

Jhaeman wrote:
I don't know where it stands in terms of ranking, but I've always thought the Siege Mage archetype for Wizards was rubbish. Partially because siege weapons themselves aren't particularly impressive in Pathfinder, partially because wizards are veritable siege engines of their own (lobbing fireballs and disintegrating castle walls and teleporting defenders behind it, etc.!), and partially because taking *three* opposition schools of magic is a pretty high price for what you get.

And yet, it's still a tier 1 class.

The NPC wrote:
[Spell]slinger wizard. Gives up too much magic for what it gets.

And yet, it's still a tier 1 class.


Derklord wrote:
Wonderstell wrote:
A Wis penalty Druid is mean, but Nimble Guardian is pretty damn good. Your Wis mod is probably only one lower than it would be normally since wisdom isn't your primary stat, and you get Beast Shape III for the trouble. Combine it with the Nornkith archetype to key everything off Charisma, and it really shines for Catfolks.
Doesn't stack, both archetypes replace Purity of Body. Problem with Nimble Guardian is that you could just be a Druid or Shifter instead for basically the same character concept.

Augh, that it doesn't. I'm using one of those sites that automatically checks stackable archetypes, but it's evidently not perfect.

On a related note, I really dislike when a racial archetype is better for those qualifying via Racial Heritage, than the race itself.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
doc roc wrote:
Good thing the folks at PFS took one look at Pact Wizard and banned it!

Any sane GM would! It is so obviously broken that I'm still puzzled how it got published at all.

Derklord wrote:
And yet, it's still a tier 1 class.

That's more a measure of the fact that there's no realistic way for an archetype to trade out or substantially modify the spellcasting class feature. A Wizard would be T1 even if it had no other class features and a bunch of arbitrary penalties, because spellcasting is really the heart and soul of the class. No matter how bad the archetype is, the class will always have that fallback. They're still exceptionally bad archetypes in that they're steeply negative trades.

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Ventnor wrote:

I'm going to go ahead and submit Monk of the Healing Hand on the worst archetype ever list.

Because if you make it to Level 20, you get to use your capstone feature once and then your character retcons themself out of existence. Seriously.

I strongly disagree.

I'd LOVE that as the final capstone of a campaign. The campaign ends up in a huge battle between the PCs and allies and the Bad Guys. Most of the PCs are down and dead, the fight is all but lost.

Then my PC gives up not only his life but the very fact of his existence to wrest victory from defeat.

That sounds like an INCREDIBLY cool way to end the campaign.

Just think of the stories afterwards

Old fart - "All was lost until He Who Cannot Be Named made the ultimate sacrifice"
Young kid - "You mean we respect him so much his name can't be said? Its magic?"
Old Fart - "No, more than that. His sacrifice was so great that NONE know who it was, know anything of his deeds. His sacrifice was MORE than any ever made by any being in existence. Even the Gods can NOT say his name. He will be forever remembered, even if we know NOTHING about her"


I mean, I wouldn't say an archetype is bad if it replaced your capstone with nothing at all. Capstones almost never matter; in the 10+ years of Pathfinder how many characters with 20 levels in a single class has anyone here actually played (personally- two)?

Like the Monk of the Healing hand is indistinguishable from any other core monk until level 7, at which point you trade Wholeness of Body, for "Wholeness of Body only usable on others." Either way this ability is pretty poor so the only problem is that you can't trade it away for Qinggong powers.

At level 11, what the archetype gives is actually pretty good: spend all your ki to bring someone back from the dead without material components. Since your ki point replenishes after an 8 hour rest, this is basically "resurrect one person for free every day" at level 15. I would say this is probably much stronger than Quivering Palm and Diamond Body.

So the "capstone is super flavorful, but you'd never use it" doesn't matter, I would say the monk of the healing hand is a good archetype in that what it gets is better than what it gives up, though not by much. Like the sense in which it's not great is the the opportunity cost of "you can make three fewer Qinggong trades" and "it isn't compatible with several better archetypes" (nornkith, sohei, zen archer, etc.)


Dasrak wrote:
doc roc wrote:
Good thing the folks at PFS took one look at Pact Wizard and banned it!

Any sane GM would! It is so obviously broken that I'm still puzzled how it got published at all.

Derklord wrote:
And yet, it's still a tier 1 class.
That's more a measure of the fact that there's no realistic way for an archetype to trade out or substantially modify the spellcasting class feature. A Wizard would be T1 even if it had no other class features and a bunch of arbitrary penalties, because spellcasting is really the heart and soul of the class. No matter how bad the archetype is, the class will always have that fallback. They're still exceptionally bad archetypes in that they're steeply negative trades.

I honestly don't see what all the hubbub is about the pact wizard it honestly doesn't look like anything special.


There's two pact wizards Doomman, maybe you're looking at the wrong one? Try this.

It gets to expand its spell list via a witch patron and spontaneously cast those spells. An oracle curse - which is a very thinly disguised bonus. Free action (not immediate) rerolls on saves, initiative and/or spell penetration. Eventually with Int added to the reroll. Metamagic cost reduction. How is this not a wish list?


avr wrote:

There's two pact wizards Doomman, maybe you're looking at the wrong one? Try this.

It gets to expand its spell list via a witch patron and spontaneously cast those spells. An oracle curse - which is a very thinly disguised bonus. Free action (not immediate) rerolls on saves, initiative and/or spell penetration. Eventually with Int added to the reroll. Metamagic cost reduction. How is this not a wish list?

That's the one I'm talking about I see nothing omg super op burn it down to the ground. While the roll twice effects are nice they don't kick in till 10th level and you need to get 15th level for the int to the roll. Also the spontaneous spells and reduced metamagic cost are only applied to a very limited amount of spells hardly something to write home about. Over all it seems rather meh, especially since it trades out the bonus feats.


Well all that sounds like a reasonable trade for a few feats, most of which would probably be meh considering wizards dont really need feats beyond the basics.


doomman47 wrote:
I honestly don't see what all the hubbub is about the pact wizard it honestly doesn't look like anything special.

Before I go into greater detail, I think there's some important context to state explicitly: Wizard archetypes are held to a much stricter standard than other classes. Archetypes for classes like the Fighter or the Alchemist are allowed to be upgrades, trading out class features in a way that's generally advantageous. This is not true for Wizards, and the very best Wizard archetypes are merely side-grades that break even.

When a Fighter archetype gives you objectively better features than the ones you traded away it's just a good archetype. A Wizard archetype that does that is broken. They're held to different standards, and the reason for this discrepancy should be fairly obvious. The Pact Wizard wouldn't be anywhere near as problematic on a martial, or even a 6-level caster, but on the Wizard in particular it's completely out of line.

doomman47 wrote:
Also the spontaneous spells and reduced metamagic cost are only applied to a very limited amount of spells hardly something to write home about.

Seriously, you are massively underrating this extremely useful ability. Even setting aside the other benefits, depending on which patron you choose it could also be giving you access to spells you wouldn't normally get. The ability to spontaneously cast something like restoration as a wizard is nothing to scoff at, but even for spells you normally get access to it still adds a great deal of flex room. The ability to prep a bunch of utility 1st level spells knowing you can convert them into color spray when combat occurs is huge for a 1st level wizard and his limited slots. It lets you play a lot more aggressively with your spell preps. It's also worth noting that this can be used to get around opposition schools since when you spontaneously convert you don't take the usual opposition school penalty.

While it's definitely playstyle specific, don't write off the Effortless Magic feature either. It exactly duplicates the Fast Study discovery, but gives it to you 4 levels early and for free. Some people don't like this discovery, and it's pretty useless if you're the type to just prep all your slots at the start of the day. However, if you're the type of player who likes leaving spell slots empty so you can prepare them later on demand then this is really good feat to have and close to a must-have feat tax. If you're in the middle of the dungeon with monsters prowling around and quickly need a stone shape spell, there is a huge difference between a 1 minute prep time and 15 minute prep time.

These benefits are not broken on their own, and it would be entirely possible to create a balanced archetype that grants them, but at 1st level all you traded off to get these benefits is your scribe scroll bonus feat. That is a completely and totally silly trade. Adding even a single spell from another spell list, or being able to spontaneously cast a single spell, is worth a feat. And you're getting one per level, plus the equivalent of another bonus feat.

doomman47 wrote:
While the roll twice effects are nice they don't kick in till 10th level and you need to get 15th level for the int to the roll.

A roll-twice effect is not per say overpowered, but 3 + 1/2 int/day uses is extremely generous. Similar abilities are usually once or twice per day, but a typical wizard will be getting 7-9 uses out of this. This can be used very liberally, and does not need to be rationed. Again it would be conceivable to think of an archetype that would trade fairly for that, but you're just losing out on some bonus feats (at a point in your career where you have plenty of feats anyways) so you're losing basically nothing to get it. And while it may come late, adding intelligence bonus to those a roll-twice ability is as close as you can get to auto-success.


Extra Channel wrote:

Prerequisites: Channel energy class feature.

Benefit: You can channel energy two additional times per day.
Special: If a paladin with the ability to channel positive energy takes this feat, she can use lay on hands four additional times per day, but only to channel positive energy.
(snip)
Revan wrote:
Why do you think a separate 'Extra Lay on Hands' feat exists that provides two extra uses if you think this feat provides four without restriction?

But it does have restrictions: for example, Antipaladins (among other possible non-good and/or bad-touch classes) can use Extra Lay on Hands -- so that feat is broader, but weaker (it's also older, dating from 3e, whereas Extra Channel debuted with Pathfinder). Antipaladins cannot use Extra Channel to convert LoH into Touch of Corruption because Extra Channel specifically calls out only paladins as gaining any additional utility beyond additional basic channeling uses, while painstakingly clarifying that there'll be no negative energy LoH (since Paladin is the only class who'll be receiving those).


Dasrak wrote:
doomman47 wrote:
I honestly don't see what all the hubbub is about the pact wizard it honestly doesn't look like anything special.
doomman47 wrote:
Also the spontaneous spells and reduced metamagic cost are only applied to a very limited amount of spells hardly something to write home about.
Seriously, you are massively underrating this extremely useful ability.
You are vastly overrating it
Dasrak wrote:
Even setting aside the other benefits, depending on which patron you choose it could also be giving you access to spells you wouldn't normally get.
Spell research
Dasrak wrote:
The ability to spontaneously cast something like restoration as a wizard is nothing to scoff at, but even for spells you normally get access to it still adds a great deal of flex room.
good but not broken and extremely situational
Dasrak wrote:
The ability to prep a bunch of utility 1st level spells knowing you can convert them into color spray when combat occurs is huge for a 1st level wizard and his limited slots.
if you aren't playing a mesmerist/oracle its not even worth relying on color spray
Dasrak wrote:
It lets you play a lot more aggressively with your spell preps. It's also worth noting that this can be used to get around opposition schools since when you spontaneously convert you don't take the usual opposition school penalty.

So? I have house ruled opposition schools out of existence cuz its dumb.

Dasrak wrote:

While it's definitely playstyle specific, don't write off the Effortless Magic feature either. It exactly duplicates the Fast Study discovery, but gives it to you 4 levels early and for free. So giving the wizard something that they would have taken anyway just slightly earlier and not for a feat since they trade out their bonus feats which are needed for discoveries and discoveries are awesome.

Dasrak wrote:
These benefits are not broken on their own, and it would be entirely possible to create a balanced archetype that grants them, but at 1st level all you traded off to get these benefits is your scribe scroll bonus feat. That is a completely and totally silly trade.
Scribe scroll is an amazing feat and losing it 1st level and thus having to take it at a later level is a pretty big blow
Dasrak wrote:
Adding even a single spell from another spell list
Spell research
Dasrak wrote:
or being able to spontaneously cast a single spell, is worth a feat.
not really.
Dasrak wrote:
A roll-twice effect is not per say overpowered, but 3 + 1/2 int/day uses is extremely generous. Similar abilities are usually once or twice per day, but a typical wizard will be getting 7-9 uses out of this. This can be used very liberally, and does not need to be rationed. Again it would be conceivable to think of an archetype that would trade fairly for that, but you're just losing out on some bonus feats (at a point in your career where you have plenty of feats anyways) so you're losing basically nothing to get it. And while it may come late, adding intelligence bonus to those a roll-twice ability is as close as you can get to auto-success.

And especially based on what these boards say how many people actually make it past 10th level, how many people make it past 15th, not many and for those that do they deserve cool abilities.


born_of_fire wrote:
Cavall wrote:
MrCharisma wrote:
Slim Jim wrote:
<Oath of Vengeance Stuff>
<More Stuff>
<Even More Stuff>
<But Wait! I know you still want More Stuff!>

I realise we haven't really solved anything here, but what's say we quit flogging this dead celestial horse and call it a day (agree to disagree)?


doomman47 wrote:
Over all it seems rather meh, especially since it trades out the bonus feats.

Don't take this the wrong way..... but are you absolutely insane!!??

It is the most OP archetype in the whole of PF!!

The fact that someone decided to put it on the wizard AND make it stackable with other archetypes, takes it into other dimension levels of brokenness!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Slim Jim wrote:
Extra Channel wrote:

Prerequisites: Channel energy class feature.

Benefit: You can channel energy two additional times per day.
Special: If a paladin with the ability to channel positive energy takes this feat, she can use lay on hands four additional times per day, but only to channel positive energy.
(snip)
Revan wrote:
Why do you think a separate 'Extra Lay on Hands' feat exists that provides two extra uses if you think this feat provides four without restriction?
But it does have restrictions: for example, Antipaladins (among other possible non-good and/or bad-touch classes) can use Extra Lay on Hands -- so that feat is broader, but weaker (it's also older, dating from 3e, whereas Extra Channel debuted with Pathfinder). Antipaladins cannot use Extra Channel to convert LoH into Touch of Corruption because Extra Channel specifically calls out only paladins as gaining any additional utility beyond additional basic channeling uses, while painstakingly clarifying that there'll be no negative energy LoH (since Paladin is the only class who'll be receiving those).

At the time Extra Channel was written,the Antipaladin did not exist, no class besides the Paladin had a Lay on Hands' ability, and it was (and so far as I'm aware, *remains*) impossible for a Paladin to multiclass into something which can use negative energy and retain Lay on Hands due to alignment constraints. Lay on Hands', while using positive energy, has never elsewhere been referred to as channeling positive energy, that terminology exclusively applying to the specific Channel Energy class feature. Your reading requires assuming an extraordinary level of future-proofing which would make it unbalanced at the time it was published with the assumption that future options would empower Extra Lay on Hands by making it 'more broad'.

Paladins have a specific class feature called Channel [Positive] Energy. This is shared with Clerics, with the exception that while clerics get a set (but scaling) number of usages per day, Paladins sacrifice two uses of Lay on Hands to use theirs--but while Lay on Hands fuels Channel Energy, they are still distinct abilities, with only Channel Energy referred to as 'channeling positive energy'. The stated purpose of Extra Channel is to allow the Channel Energy feature to be used more often in a day. You can't give a Paladin two extra uses of Channel Energy, because they don't technically *have* uses of Channel Energy. You can't give them four extra uses of Lay on Hands, because that would be extraordinarily powerful, especially in light of another feat which exists to grant two uses of Lay on Hands. Giving them four uses of Lay on Hands *which can only be used to fuel their Channel Energy feature* gives them the same benefit as a Cleric--two extra uses of the Channel Energy class feature.


doomman47 wrote:
Spell research

You can't use spell research to learn spells that do not normally appear on your list. The rules are amenable to using spell research to design homebrew spells, but those rules explicitly state that the spell should be in line with existing spells. Giving a spell that duplicates something that was explicitly not given to your class is completely inappropriate.

doomman47 wrote:
good but not broken and extremely situational

It's not situational in the slightest. It greatly alleviates spell preparation, in that you don't need to prepare the spells you can spontaneously convert and any niche utility spells can be spontaneously converted if it turns out you need combat power instead. This expands the number of spells you can keep available at your fingertips and will benefit you literally every day in your basic preparation.

It's also worth noting that, however much you may not appreciate this benefit, it costs a feat to get this benefit with only a single spell. This isn't a garbage feat that no one takes; it actually does get used in spite of its feat tax prerequisite. Perhaps this isn't a feat you'd prefer to take, but the fact remains that this effect alone is worth multiple bonus feats.

doomman47 wrote:
if you aren't playing a mesmerist/oracle its not even worth relying on color spray

I specifically said 1st level for that example. It's a tremendously effective spell at 1st. Without the HD cap expansion it goes obsolete, but by that point you'll have higher level spells.

doomman47 wrote:
So? I have house ruled opposition schools out of existence cuz its dumb.

Your own houserules have no bearing on the discussion of how the archetype fares under the standard game rules. It's not even a particularly common houserule (first time I've heard of anyone complaining about opposition school rules, tbh), and most people run the opposition school rules as written and don't have any problems with them.

doomman47 wrote:
Scribe scroll is an amazing feat and losing it 1st level and thus having to take it at a later level is a pretty big blow

Well, good news, you get a feat at 1st level (two if you're human) and can buy it right back if you like.

doomman47 wrote:
And especially based on what these boards say how many people actually make it past 10th level, how many people make it past 15th, not many and for those that do they deserve cool abilities.

The fact that your table might not reach these levels (at my table we do play 10+ often enough, but virtually never play 15+) doesn't change the fact that the benefits are quite over the top for anyone who is playing at those levels. It's the same deal with the Spell Perfection feat; very few tables will ever go high enough to see it, but it doesn't change the fact that it's basically mandatory on any serious caster build. The ability to pick one spammable spell and get free quickens on it is huge.

And seriously, the Wizard does get cool abilities at high levels. In fact, Wizards are quite literally the last class that needs cool abilities at high levels. Wizards are the only class that doesn't even need a capstone class feature, because they're just that good at high levels. Seriously, they don't need handouts at high levels by any stretch of the imagination.

doc roc wrote:

Don't take this the wrong way..... but are you absolutely insane!!??

It is the most OP archetype in the whole of PF!!

While I don't feel personal attacks are constructive, I'm quite puzzled by doomman47's opinions. Even if we discount the high-level abilities, and even if the spontaneous casting doesn't fit your playstyle, it should still be very obvious that they're very powerful benefits that far outweigh the paltry feat loss.

With that said, I wouldn't say it's the most OP archetype in all of Pathfinder. Definitely the most OP Wizard archetype, and probably would make the top 10, but there are some archetypes that are even more broken. I'd probably say Razmiran Sorcerer is the most broken archetype in the game. It's like a Munchkin's Parfait, with layer upon layer of brokenness for you to discover.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Dasrak wrote:
And seriously, the Wizard does get cool abilities at high levels. In fact, Wizards are quite literally the last class that needs cool abilities at high levels. Wizards are the only class that doesn't even need a capstone class feature, because they're just that good at high levels. Seriously, they don't need handouts at high levels by any stretch of the imagination.

I mean, the long and short of it is that a Wizard with no feats and no class features other than "Spells" (and "Cantrips", I guess) is one of the most powerful things in the game, past a certain level. Because of this, Wizard archetypes should be at best sidegrades. Whenever you come across one that is actually an upgrade it is seen as posing a problem.

On the other hand, without extreme system mastery (and several archetypes) the core monk is one of the weakest things in the games at all levels. So archetypes which are just sidegrades (e.g. "Monk of the Healing Hand") are seen as weak in part due to their practically useless capstone, but mostly because of the opportunity cost of not being able to access some of the archetypes that are significant upgrades.

So the starting power level of the class does matter in how archetypes are perceived.

51 to 100 of 226 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / What is the worst archetype? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.