| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, it IS quite good.
You're probably seeing this because it can basically replace 3 classes: Cleric, Fighter and Paladin. It's not quite as Cleric as a Cleric, and it's not quite as Paladin as a Paladin, but it does a reasonable job of emulating both.
As for Fighter - yeah it's basically better than a vanilla Fighter. With the Human FCB you end up with 1 less feat than a Fighter. So you take a Fighter, remove 1 feat, lower it to 3/4 BAB and lose Armour Training. Then in return you get a good Will save, 6th level spells, the War Blessing and Fervor. It's a pretty good deal.
It can cover most party roles - Support, buffing, damage, tanking - it's pretty good at all of that. Probably not great at debuffing, but it'd be doable.
The main downside compared to regular Warpriest that I see is the loss of Blessing variation. 4 War Blessings would likely be way less useful than any 8 random blessings. Also, a party of 4 Arsenal Chaplains would be pretty starved for skills, swap one of them for an Inquisitor and you're golden.
I like it. I've certainly theory-crafted with it a lot, but I have yet to play one. That probably says something.
You also see Occultist (especially with Trappings of the Warrior) mentioned a lot. You also see Inquisitor mentioned a lot. I like to point out that Summoner is a fitting answer virtually every time someone asks "what should I play with <race/stat rolls/low point buy/weird houserule>", or "what fits into this party", before even knowing the details.
It all has the same reason: Versatility is king in Pathfinder. These classes don't have the highest raw power (that's full casters), or the greatest adaptability (that's prepared full casters), but these classes fit into and strengthen every party, and MAC Warpriest, Occultist, and Inquisitor, alongside Investigator and Alchemist, can be used for for virtually every character concept that includes martial combat. And, that's the main aspect, make for better characters with a respective character concept than the classes people might first think of. Whatever backstory you want to use for a martial character, these classes let you create a both flavorful and strong character for that backstory.
MAC Warpriest isn't actually that good, as Warpriest is fairly weak compared to many of the other 6/9 casters, because the spell list is substandard (since it doesn't have discounted or exclusive spells, unlike most other 6/9 casters), almost all class features are martial combat centric (and only personal), and has annoyingly few skill ranks. But while these things can be noticed in comparison to other 6/9 casters, martial classes are usually plagued by them, too!
lower it to 3/4 BAB and lose Armour Training. Then in return you get a good Will save, 6th level spells, the War Blessing and Fervor. It's a pretty good deal.
Regarding the "lower it to 3/4 BAB", a MAC Warpriest with active Divine Favor or (later) Divine Power has an equal or higher attack roll bonus from class than a Fighter at all levels. With power Attack, it has a higher attack roll at all levels, and the sometimes lower damage bonus from Power Attack is more than compensated for.
It can cover most party roles - Support, buffing, damage, tanking - it's pretty good at all of that.
As usual, I strongly disagree here - because there is no such thing as party roles. "Role" implies that you have one character who does that and for whom that's the defining characteristic. In Pathfinder, you don't have distinct roles in a party that you fulfill with one character - you have multiple jobs that you want handled, but those can be split up between and doubled on by different party members.
And this is indeed the reason why MAC Warpriest is mentioned so often - because you don't need a distinct character for a job in a party, and can use a class/archetype like MAC Warpriest that excels at a whole bunch of such jobs as the same character.| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
lower it to 3/4 BAB and lose Armour Training. Then in return you get a good Will save, 6th level spells, the War Blessing and Fervor. It's a pretty good deal.Regarding the "lower it to 3/4 BAB", a MAC Warpriest with active Divine Favor or (later) Divine Power has an equal or higher attack roll bonus from class than a Fighter at all levels.
I thought I covered that with "6th level spells" but yeah that's the idea. Your spells will easily make up for 5 less BAB.
It can cover most party roles - Support, buffing, damage, tanking - it's pretty good at all of that.As usual, I strongly disagree here - because there is no such thing as party roles.
Eh, you say "Tomayto", I say "Tomahto".
You say "Warpriest ... can be used for for virtually every character concept", I say "It can cover most party roles". Same idea.
And this is indeed the reason why MAC Warpriest is mentioned so often - because you don't need a distinct character for a job in a party, and can use a class/archetype like MAC Warpriest that excels at a whole bunch of such jobs as the same character.
This is the crux of it - the Warpriest can fill a whole bunch of party roles jobs all at once without much effort.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I don't think roles are pigeon holes. If the guy who handles your healing also does a lot of ranged damage, he's still a healer. It's just not the only thing he is. If a damage guy gets in the enemies face, so he's slower to get to my ranged guy, then that guy is "tanking" for me.
I like it...
It would, or at least could, be quite a versatile party... regardless of the homogenized class/archetype selection. Let's make the all Shaman's Apprentice Half-Orcs with Sacred Tattoos and Fate's Favored, too... because variety is BS. Lol.
I get that not every problem is a nail, so not every answer is going to be a hammer... but when it comes to dealing damage, MAC gets it done. When it comes to mitigating damage, MAC gets it done. When it comes to healing damage taken, MAC gets it done. It may not be perfect for everything, but chances are even someone without any min-max'ing knowledge or experience can build an effective MAC to fit just about any "role" in the party. It raises the floor... your least optimized build is still decent.
People come to the forums asking advice to fill a perceived hole in the party. A lot of times they want damages to be paramount, and MAC delivers. Sometimes they want this or that, and a lot of times MAC can probably do that, too. Maybe people are not asking creative enough questions that a generic Shaman's Apprentice Half-Orc with Sacred Tattoos and Fate's Favored Arsenal Chaplain isn't an adequate answer...
I thought I covered that with "6th level spells" but yeah that's the idea. Your spells will easily make up for 5 less BAB.
For anyone who did the math, or ist familiar with Warpriest, yes, but I wanted to make clear that you don't trade attack roll bonus for spells like healing stuff - a MAC Warpriest hits better and harder than a Fighter. Basically I just wanted to highlight that MAC Warpriest is a popular suggestion because you don't sacrifice accuracy and damage to gain casting.
Eh, you say "Tomayto", I say "Tomahto".
It is semantics, but most people seem to interpret e.g. "healer role" to mean that this is the defining thing about a character, and that they should invest mainly into that. Unsurprising, really, since "role" is not a game term, but an existing word, and in non-RPG-usage, e.g. movies/playes or phrases like "role in society", the term is used to describe a single, defining thing. That's why I protest against using the same term, as I just don't think "main defining characteristic" and "one of half a dozen things the PF character can do, even though they didn't invest anything into it and during 99% of the playtime they don't do it at all" should be described with the exact same term.
Maybe people are not asking creative enough questions that a generic Shaman's Apprentice Half-Orc with Sacred Tattoos and Fate's Favored Arsenal Chaplain isn't an adequate answer...
Well, here's the thing: For the question of how much fun John Smith from Smalltown City has, what other people in other groups play is completely irrelevant. Whether John is the only player on the planet with a certain character build, or if every other group on the planet has an identical character build, has zero impact on the fun the player has. What does have an effect on his fun, however, is not being useless out of combat or when enemies are unreachable on the ground, and so on.
If a player has (predictably) more fun with a MAC Warpriest than with a Fighter, suggesting the MAC is helpful, no matter how many other threads for different people contain the same suggestion.
A MAC Warpriest with active Divine Favor or (later) Divine Power has an equal or higher attack roll bonus from class than a Fighter at all levelsI've noticed most people don't include the swift action weapon enhancement buff that all warpriests get in their attack/damage calculations. Is there some reason for that I'm not aware of or is it just coincidence?
It’s a few things combined. Mainly, it’s because it has to compete with other swift actions, like fervor. But also, the bonus is small and limited to rounds per level, so it’s not very reliable. If it were minutes per level, it’d probably get more respect.
I've noticed most people don't include the swift action weapon enhancement buff that all warpriests get in their attack/damage calculations. Is there some reason for that I'm not aware of or is it just coincidence?It’s a few things combined. Mainly, it’s because it has to compete with other swift actions, like fervor. But also, the bonus is small and limited to rounds per level, so it’s not very reliable. If it were minutes per level, it’d probably get more respect.
Yeah I think it's mainly the duration.
Divine Favour lasts 1 minute and gives a higher bonus. Sacred Weapon catches up for damage at level 12 , but by that point you have enough money to buy a necklace of pearls of power - or you can use Divine Power for a higher buff. With ~3 Pearls of Power you can have Divine Favour up more-or-less every combat, so you might as well.
Since Sacred Weapon is rounds per day you save it for when you need it and don't need your swift action for something else . It's good to have, but it's not your go-to.
Divine favor and power are good. You will usually want to start off with one of those those. But they are not the only spells you’ll want to apply with fervor.
Yeah I always just assume it's your round 2 buff after divine favor.
Not necessarily - the enchantment isn't that powerful (unless you need Ghost Touch), and there's a bunch of spells that might be of higher priority: Protection From Evil, Shield of Faith, Ironskin, Resist Energy, Silence, Surmount Affliction, Channel Vigor, Magic Circle against Evil, Protection from Energy, Air Walk, Death Ward, Freedom of Movement, Cleanse, Righteous Might, True Seeing, Heal...
There's a whole lot of stuff that could be included in a comparison (I did actually include Fate's Favored, forgot to mention that), but I wanted to keep it basic. So if you want to play an archer, and want to full attack at full strength even if you were surprised by combat, MAC still has at least as high an attack roll bonus as a Fighter - that was the point I wanted to make. Even if the character concept doesn't include condition removal, MAC can still be a perfect fit for it, and its frequent suggestion is thus justified.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Although judging by your pearl of power comments it sounds like you're fighting about 9 combats per day which might explain why you don't like the duration.
It's not that I don't like the duration, it's that it's less useful as a standard buff due to the duration, and more useful as a problem solver.
A 1st level character obviously won't be buying pearls of power, but a 1st level pearl only costs 1,000gp. By 10th level characters have ~62,000gp, so grabbing a few pearls is a great idea. This lets you diversify your prepared spells since only 1 spell slot needed for Divine Favour. You're also not locked into using those pearls on one spell, you can use them on any appropriate spell slot, which makes them a very good item for the price. So the reason I have 3 Pearls of Power isn't that I want to use Divine Favour 9 times, it's that I want to have 6 different spells in my first level spell-slots , and I want to use some of them more than once.
The other thing about using your buffs this way is that your Sacred Weapon buff is flexible - but only until you use it. You can use it to add brilliant energy, defending, disruption, flaming, frost, keen, and shock; depending on your alignment you can also add some of the following: anarchic and vicious, mighty cleaving and unholy, ghost touch and holy, axiomatic and merciful, or spell storing and thundering.
So for both my Pearls of Power and my Sacred Weapon - I'm not using them to maximize my numerical advantage, I'm using them to give myself more versatile options throughout the day.
That's a pretty diverse and flexible list, but once you've used it you're locked into that choice for the rest of the day. You could do 2 things with this:
1. Guesss the best buffs for the day and use them. This can work, and if you're good at it great, but it likely leaves you with less-than-optimal buffs.
2. Use other buffs as a standard, and use the Sacred Weapon buff when you need a particular damage type. Fighting a Ghost, use Ghost Touch. Fighting a Troll, use Flaming. Fighting something with DR, just pump the Enhancement bonus.
You don't know what you'll need until you need it, so using the second method saves this flexible buff until it's most impactful.
If you want to force an RP restriction, rather than trying to force the players to RP their character a certain way just force them to remember the party that Arsenal Chaplains are from Molthune.
And your campaign isn't even set in Golarion or anywhere near Molthune. So you can just say it's not available.
Of course, if I was the player in your group I'd just swap to Inquisitor. Not quite as great at martial pursuits but like 80% of the way there and better (IMO) spell casting and definitely better skills.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Molthuni Arsenal Champion is a perfect example of something that was intended to be restricted to characters coming from a very specific area in the setting, but because PF1 balance + Paizo QC over stuff in small books was ooga booga chugga chugga, they ended up printing a tier S must-pick archetype in a peripheral setting sourcebook, and since PF1 didn't have any hard-coded rules for option rarity and "can I pick it" played out mostly depending on what GM was cool with, here we are.
Frankly most people who play PF1 grab stuff from d20pfsrd and never bother to check if there was any Paizo IP attached to it, so for them the whole "Molthuni" angle is lost completely, they aren't even aware that this was a setting-specific thing at all.
Yeah, they made a banger of an archetype and soft-locked it with RP...which often isn't enforced whatsoever.
The sad part is that it was pretty much a strictly better fighter. And if you knew you weren't going to play past level 13, it was kind of a strictly better cleric too. The cleric extra spell casting really just doesn't give enough umph (IMO) until you hit 8th and 9th level spells.
What really made it daffy was that what you gave up was so small and inconsequential to get this nice buff to attack and damage which stacked with all your other tricks.
What really made it daffy was that what you gave up was so small and inconsequential to get this nice buff to attack and damage which stacked with all your other tricks.
I'm not quite sure I agree with this .
I DO think the Molthuni Arsenal Chaplain is an S-tier archetype, but to my mind the main thing you give up is Blessings. You give one up Blessing entirely - which is a direct downgrade - and you give up any choice in Blessings - you have to take War regardless of whether it's normally available to your deity or not. The War Blessing is pretty good, so this could be an upgrade, but it could be a side-grade or a downgrade as well.
I DO think you get more than you give, but losing one Blessing and losing the choice for your other Blessing is a fairly substantial loss of flexinioity IMO.
Besides that yeah it's pretty much all gravy.
There is a way to roleplay nerf it by having arsenal chaplains forced into being less diplomatic/more hostile, as their tenets are about kicking peoples stuff in.
Hell no. The archetype has a backstory requirement, not a roleplay requirement. There is no penalty for not following the Molthuni doctrine.
I think it depends how you want to play them.
If you want to be a caster the the Cleric will be strictly better from level 5 onwards , but if you plan to be more of a beat-stick the the Warpriest is a VERY good chassis, and one that the Cleric can't really compete with .
Of course I never fully bought into the idea that prepaired 9th level casters are unbeatable in the first place. So in terms of seeing a change in the meta-discussion I'm probably not adding much.
Are we at a point where prepared 9th level casters are starting to get seen as overshadowed?
Nah. It's always been the way that certain people have been calling Rogues overpowered, and Zen Archers overpowered, and Gunslingers a tier 3 class, and Synthesists stronger than regular Summoners, and so on.
What sparks all these is the perception of power, in contrast to the actual power. First, many people grossly overvalue combat when it comes to rating a class's power, so much that even though a caster may solve all the problems out of combat, that doesn't get recognition. Second, in combat, people often grossly direct overvalue damage done, ignoring the impact of buffs, debuffs, and crowd control, so even if the casters uterly dominated the fight, if the martials do the mop-up, the /full) casters aren't seen as dominant (even though they were vital while the martial could've been replaced by an animal companion or Warrior NPC). I once calculated the effect of my Summoner's Haste to be on par with that of a full damage dealing character - that shows how powerful a caster can be in effect, even though that extra damage show up in the other players' damage meter, metaphorical speaking.
So if a Warpriest deals more damage in combat than a Cleric, it's considered more powerful, even if the Cleric actually contributes more to the damage dealt or the success of the party.
Are we at a point where prepared 9th level casters are starting to get seen as overshadowed?Nah. It's always been the way ...
... First, many people grossly overvalue combat when it comes to rating a class's power, so much that even though a caster may solve all the problems out of combat, that doesn't get recognition.
Yes and no. Yes people often build entirey around combat. But also for a lot of games combat is ~80% of the game. Not saying that's how it should or shouldn't be, but that's how it is. People build for the games they're given, so if you want to emphasize out-of-combat utility then include it more in your games.
Second, in combat, people often grosslydirectovervalue direct damage done, ignoring the impact of buffs, debuffs, and crowd control, so even if the casters uterly dominated the fight, if the martials do the mop-up, the /full) casters aren't seen as dominant (even though they were vital while the martial could've been replaced by an animal companion or Warrior NPC).
This kind of conversation gets ... self involved really quickly. In organised play or in home groups Derklord may be correct. On the forums - where people theorise and spend their time breaking the game - I find the opposits to be true.
There is no challenge in the game that requires a 9th level caster. No matter what else is said, you could easily get through every published module and AP without them.
That's not to say they aren't useful, or aren't powerful, but saying that "the martial could've been replaced by an animal companion or Warrior NPC" is about as useful as saying "the wizard could've been replaced with a bag of potions". Technically it's true, but you're getting something inferior.
Buffs, debuffs and battlefield control are only useful if you can make use of them. A buffed up Cleric is likely to deal less damage than a buffed up Warpriest, even though the Cleric has the same BAB and higher level buffs. This is true primarily for 2 reasons:
1) The Warpriest has some combat-buffing class features that increase their damage potential in ways the Cleric can't emulate
2) The Cleric has to take a round out to cast the buffs.
This second point cannot be overstated - in a combat lasting 4 rounds the Cleric loses 25% of their damage potential to cast that buff when compared to the Warpriest.
I'm not saying you shouldn't play a Cleric, or that they're bad. But just as combat prowess can be over-valued, so too can spell-casting.
I also DO understand the power and flexibility of buffing/debuffing/control/etc. It's precisely because of these abilities that the Molthuni Arsenal Chaplain is considered a straight upgrade on the Fighter. I just think there's a certain point where more isn't necessary, but having a more diverse set of abilities can actually be stronger than the sum of it's parts.
With the Bard providing Heroism, Haste and Inspired Courage to my Bloodrager that goes to ~154 damage per round, or up to ~249 damage with AoOs. That means it's more like I'm killing 2-3 enemies every 2 rounds .
I just want to point out how much of a bonus the Bard is giving the Bloodrager, but also how much the Bloodrager is giving the Bard. Neither one could hope to achieve these numbers alone. Even combining the Bloodrager's solo damage potential with the Bard's solo damage potential would probably only equate to roughly half what we get when they actually work together. Buffs multiply the effects of their targets, but a higher base number is still going to get more from the buffs.
Not at all relevant to the thread topic, but morale bonuses and Bloodragers do make me think of the Id Rager.
Id Rager - Metamagic Rager - Urban Bloodrager 12 / Dreamthief Rogue 1
As a Dreamthief you choose the Pride emotional focus which is normally unavailable to the Id Rager. It's cheesy, but Id Rager allows you to treat your Bloodrager level as Phantom/Spiritualist for abilities without restriction.
Nab Heroism as a 2nd level spell thanks to Urban Bloodrager.
Take the Ascendant Spell metamagic to use with Metamagic Rager.
Cast Ascendant Heroism by expending 14 rounds of rage for a +4 morale bonus to "all checks, attack rolls, saves, and weapon damage rolls". Then enter rage and watch it all double thanks to Pride's Overwhelming Confidence. +8 to everything and +12 to Strength.
...until you fail a single ability check, skill check, or attack roll and all bonuses are applied as penalties.
You could also nab Threefold Sight from the Bard list if you're seriously gonna attempt this.
And if you knew you weren't going to play past level 13, it was kind of a strictly better cleric too. The cleric extra spell casting really just doesn't give enough umph (IMO) until you hit 8th and 9th level spells.Regardless of whether or not I agree, this is actually a super interesting statement from a community meta-analysis standpoint; it's not the first time I've heard it either. Are we at a point where prepared 9th level casters are starting to get seen as overshadowed? It's seemed for a while like the community is starting to turn their backs on cleric. It's actually the main reason why I made this thread. I wanted to see if this would get addressed.
For me I think it's because I simply don't find low level Cleric spell list to be all that interesting or good. Like, it's got a lot of spells that you need (occasionally) to keep the party running. But they're mediocre (IMO) in buffing and debuffing for the party (when using low level slots).
To be honest I've never really liked the cleric because I always thought their low level spell list is just not that interesting. But around the time you get 7th level and above spells it really start swinging, but it's no fun getting to that point (for me).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Regardless of whether or not I agree, this is actually a super interesting statement from a community meta-analysis standpoint; it's not the first time I've heard it either. Are we at a point where prepared 9th level casters are starting to get seen as overshadowed?
Overshadowed on the condition of level break. Really this has always been a thing. Before gaining their 3rd level spells, 9th level casters often perform worse than 6th level casters or even martials. There just aren't enough spells to fill the day, and what spells you do have don't always fit the situation. Even when reaching 3rd level spells, it's more of a "break even" situation. The full casters don't really pull ahead until about 5th level spells in my opinion.
I roughly agree with Melkaidor. I think prior to 3rd level spells 9th level spell progression casters aren't very enjoyable to play compared to what a martial character can do. I think 3rd level spells to 5th level spells are a "close enough" situation. And somewhere around 6th to 7th level spells caster start to definitely pull ahead. Especially prepared casters which are Schrodinger's wizard in terms of what spells they have prepared (they have a lot of options and can be theoretically prepared for anything) and they finally have enough slots that they can use low level slots to buff and higher level spells for offense. Prior to this point I've never found full casters to be very fun.
Also, a party of 4 Arsenal Chaplains would be pretty starved for skills, swap one of them for an Inquisitor and you're golden.With a 20 pt buy, you could potentially have a 12 Int on these PCs. Build them all as Human for their race so they gain an extra skill rank along with the aforementioned FCB. This means you have four AC's with 4 skill ranks/level.
12 INT Humans putting their FCB's into skills would have 5 skill ranks per level. Personally I find it hard to go past the Human alternate FCB, but you could use your abundance of feats to take CUNNING instead, and as a class with this many feats the Focused Study alternate racial trait seems like a pretty good trade. I can see them having enough skills to function if the party builds around it, so I concede the point.
Between the four of them, they need to acquire Perception and 5 knowledge skills (Arcana, Dungeoneering, Local, Nature and Planes) as Class skills from Traits. Among them, one or more need to have ranks in these as well as Diplomacy, Knowledge: Religion and Spellcraft. Ideally, in a perfect world one of them might also have Disable Device to manage mechanical traps; magic traps will have be avoided or purposefully triggered.
Guidance and Enhanced Diplomacy need to be permanent fixtures on their daily spells for low levels, for help with skill checks. As they level, spells that buff stats or skill use as well as items to those effects should be employed liberally. With these essential skills covered, the ACs are not skill starved.
Mark is of course referring to THIS.
Rather than getting into it here, I'd just head to that thread if people want to contribute to that discussion.
Regardless of whether or not I agree, this is actually a super interesting statement from a community meta-analysis standpoint; it's not the first time I've heard it either. Are we at a point where prepared 9th level casters are starting to get seen as overshadowed?Overshadowed on the condition of level break. Really this has always been a thing. Before gaining their 3rd level spells, 9th level casters often perform worse than 6th level casters or even martials. There just aren't enough spells to fill the day, and what spells you do have don't always fit the situation. Even when reaching 3rd level spells, it's more of a "break even" situation. The full casters don't really pull ahead until about 5th level spells in my opinion.
*Druid glances up with a raised eyebrow. Snorts.*
Clerics and Druids perform only slightly worse than 6th casters or martials if they're statted for martial combat.
Druids aggressively push the envelope from level 1. If anyone in this thread thinks 4 MACPriests are wild, 4 Nature Fang Druids with a combination of Animal Companions or Druidic Herbalism is blasting through the stratosphere.