So what class(es) would you change and what about those class(es) would you change?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So what class(es) would you change... ?None of them
I was wondering which I wouldn't change. Some much more than others of course.
I get the feeling that Mark's RAW-mad players would revolt if he changed anything.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Clerics. I find them to be the most mechanically boring of all the classes. Not much happens on level up that gets me excited. Lots of 'dead level' space on the class table.
I'd make channel energy one of several options they can choose (like what is seen with a Wizard's Arcane Bond, and Druid's Nature Bond, etc). Not every (un)holy warrior priest needs to focus on channeling positive/negative energy.
I would likely be something like this... You get to pick ONE domain, and any of the following: Another domain AND bonus 'caster' feats; Channeling AND bonus 'channeling' feats; Bonded Object AND bonus 'caster' feats; Familiar (improves to Improved Familiar) AND bonus 'summoning' feats; or some kind of Companion creature with related bonus feats. The bonus feats would be like a wizard's and show up at 5th level and every 5 after.
Nothing that would add any overt power ups that couldn't already be accomplished with feat selections.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd ditch daily action currencies on all martial classes, or at the very least make archetypes so you could trade them out for something else. For whatever reason, one of my players never remembers to use abilities that have limited uses per day, and another is too miserly about them to ever use them. They're typically imbalanced depending on how long your adventuring day is anyway and many once per day abilities are so unlikely to matter or succeed that they aren't worth writing down.
I'd make the same change for casters too, but that would require a major restructuring of the game. Maybe give them a pool of active spells or something to that effect. But that's way outside the scope of changing classes.
I'd add damage sharing abilities, like life a oracle's, to clerics. Damage sharing is a much more effective life saving tool than healing.
Get rid of sneak attack from rogues. Replace it with an ability which can only be used when hidden, that gives a victim a few rounds to get healing or lose consciousness. Give them full bab and the ability to use dex instead of strength for prerequisites on combat feats. Let their rogue level be the caster level of magic items activated with UMD. Let them step into an allies square, make a full attack, then move back behind that ally.
I'd let magus use a spell DC for magic weapon special abilities as a spell combat option instead of casting a spell.
Give shifter the natural armor of the forms it takes and the benefit of creature types, and con to AC up to their class level.
Maybe anyway. I'm always testing minor and major changes with each game, and what works for me is based on my groups needs not a generic player base.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
All of the spontaneous casters would learn Level 2 spells at level 3, Level 3 spells at level 5, and so on and so forth. The "delay learning a new level of spells for 1 level" rule doesn't make any sense.
Almost all of them.
Cleric and Wizard are terribly made, with the casting way too strong and the other abilities way too weak
Druid is mostly fine, but I'd actually remove the animal companion
Witch is mostly fine, but way too many hexes are for lame evil NPCs
Shaman can access other spell lists a little too well
Sorcerer, Oracle, and Psychic are mostly fine apart from spontaneous casting being too far behind prepared casting
Summoner's SLA is too strong (and cSummoner is just ridiculous)
Bard should let you redistribute skill ranks in skills made obsolöete by Versatile Performance
Hunter has a super narrow niche thanks to Druid also having a full level animal companion
Skald should interact better with Barbarian, and Inspire Rage should work like unBarb's rage (Wyrm Singer actually did this)
Warpriest has way too many swift action abilities
Mesmerist seem to be super narrow in scope and maybe should've been a prestige class
Spiritualist's Eidolon Phantom is too weak, and the class doesn't have enough to differentiate it from a Summoner
Paladin and Antipaladin should be more modular, the alignment and code are too restrictive, and the alignment of what they're facing is way too important
Ranger requires is way too based on player knowledge and shouldn't exist at all
Bloodrager is too close to Barbarian, most notably Bloodrage should not be identical to Rage
Medium isn't actually bad as it is per se, but doesn't work as it's supposed to work
cBarbarian should've been the unchained version to begin with
unBarbarian should have stance rage powers for flight and blindsense, stance rage powers need more support, and there should be a rage power that applies Rage to archery
Fighter should be completely re-done
cMonk was completely re-done
unMonk is lacking archetypes and an Extra Ki Power feat
Rogue should be retooled to focus on few, big attacks, have much stronger talents, and be actually good at skills (e.g. by making the skill unlocks not suck)
Ninja should be merged with Rogue
Cavalier, Samurai, Gunslinger, and Swashbuckler all lack character shaping choices, and they all should just be archetypes
Brawler should be merged with Fighter
Slayer needs better talents (e.g. Favored Enemy, expanding Studied Target to party members)
Kineticist shouldn't use the word "level" for so many different things.
Vigilante shouldn't exist in the first place, as Pathfinder simply isn't the right game for it
Shifter is objectively atrociously made
Cleric, Sorcerer, Warpriest, Paladin, Antipaladin, and Fighter also should have 4+Int skill ranks per level, as I mathematically explained here. And no class should have just reflex as a good save.
while almost all classes can be built right (almost all - sorry shifters, but you guys need a major rewrite). some archetypes could really use a once over.
number one of which for me is the white hair witch, it has such great potential but the way they wrote it is just...let's just say that the only way to play it as intended is by homebrewing how it works.
(the damage and maneuvers use int, but the the attack roll that initiate them still uses str for some reason. not to mention that it's a class so strongly built to go into grappling when it has 1/2 bab and no in class bonus for maneuvers..). the hair hex, which the white hair can never have since she gives up on hexs, is written better.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
while almost all classes can be built right (almost all - sorry shifters, but you guys need a major rewrite).
Shifter is actually one of the strongest martial classes in the game if "build right". But "you can make a strong build with it" and "the class is well made" have absolutely nothing to do with each other. A class that only allows one good build is a bad class, no matter how good the build is.
First off… Prepared spellcasters… besides the fact that I personally feel they all should have functioned how the Arcanist does… Which I know a lot of people disagree with me on… I also believe they should start with more spell slots… it has never made sense to me why spontaneous casters start with 3 and end with 6 of each level while prepared start with 1 and end with 4 of each level… that’s just absurd. Prepared spellcasters are constantly described as being the more versatile spellcasters… but the way I see it that’s simply not possible. Spontaneous casters have more versatility built in by being able to choose which of their spells know ln they will use each round on the fly instead of having to remember that they only prepaired one use of this spell today… it’s honestly better to know a limited number of spells that you can use more often than to know an unlimited number of spells that you can only use a set number of each day with only one or two casting of the ones you chose for the day… which is why I believe Arcanist has prepared casting done right… but baring just making all prepared casters function like Arcanist, I’d personally bump up starting spells for prepared to 4 and end them at 5 of each level. Atleast for full casters anyways… 6th level casters I’d leave their maximum at 4 but raise their start to 2, 6th level casters have plenty of options outside of spellcasting as is so it’s not as detrimental to them… as for 4th level casters… personally I think they should all just be spontaneous… spells are more of a minor aspect to them as is, and even the most spellcasting centric one hardly has much use for spells… I know quite a few players who either forget that Paladin and Ranger even have spells all the time or archetype them out of their spellcasting because of how little impact it has on the class… if their spells were spontaneous on the otherhand then they would be more likely to have some solid weight on the class and see some actual usage.
Alchemist… ok, so I’ve gone over before how I actually do believe the alchemists extracts class feature is incredibly well balanced despite its extreme limitations… however… that doesn’t change the fact that they still suffer the same overarching issues as all 9th level prepared casters… and despite being a 6th level pseudocaster alchemist does infact fall more in line with a full caster… base class that is, archetypes change things quite a bit… a base alchemist is not a strong martial combatant, they are for all intents and purposes a caster… honestly I feel they should just straight up get 4 extracts per day of each level they can create with no increase at higher levels… 4 1st level extracts at 1st and 4 1st level extracts at 20th (plus bonus from high int still of course)… I also think they should have an ability that lets them spontaneous mix extracts in the field a limited number of times per day as a move or swift action… mutagen should have been a choice ability choosing between mutagen or cognitogen, speaking of which cognitogen should have functioned EXACTLY like mutagen but with reversed stat changes. And lastly… add 0 level extracts… simple spells like Detect Magic and Polypurpose Pancea would be excellent 0 level extracts for an alchemist…
Shifter… I keep wanting to like this class… but it is so badly designed it’s not even funny… but what is funny is the simple fact that the vast majority of its issues could be alleviated with one simple addition… bonus feats… the shifter should get 5 or 6 bonus feats… this would greatly improve its performance and actually bring it up to par with most other pure martial classes… other things need fixing too but that topic has be discussed to death on these boards countless times already…
Magus… one simple change… ALWAYS spontaneous… prepared spellcasting magus has never made sense to me. Magus is a martially focused caster, but unlike most 6th level casters the magus has an emphasis on actually using their spells EVERY ROUND… no matter what a magus is doing they can almost always cast a spell and still perform their other action… also… add just one damaging melee touch cantrip to their spell list or give them an ability to treat all ranged touch cantrips as melee touch… it’s ridiculous that people have to resort to using things like Arcane Mark to spellstrike every round…
And lastly for the biggest problem classes in my book is all 9th level divine spellcasters… 9th level spells, 3/4 BAB, D8 HD, and they can wear armor… compare that to 9th level arcane who get 1/2 BAB, D6 HD, and suffer ASF when wearing armor… or 9th level psychic spellcasters who have the same drawbacks as arcane minus the ASF… something has got to give… cleric and Druid go on to add further insult to injury by having 2 good saves… and the Druid just keeps on going by having a full suite of class features AND an animal companion… but it gets worse… 9th level prepared casters also have access to their entire spell list for preparation each morning instead of only a limited selection that they have transcribed into a spellbook… if you were to objectively rank every 9th level Spellcaster on a scale of 1-10 I guarantee arcane casters would be at the bottom, psychic just above them, and all the divines above that with Druid being the only solid 10 and cleric right below… something has to give… either that or arcane and psychic casters need some major improvements.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fighter: Replace the Bonus Feats with actual fighting styles taken from the archetype. Seriosuly, replacing the Weapon/Armor Training with those was a bad idea.
Shifter: Give them the ability to merge major forms, like an actual chimera, as well as giving them the ability to grow multiple natrual attacks like a Eidolon, AND giving them a flurry with 2 natural weapons.
Monk: Allow them to channel their unarmed strike damage and effects through weapons as a base feature, and trade the speed enhancement for something else.
Arcanist: Not changing it, but offering the exploits to other classes via feats.
Cavalier / Samurai Offering the Warpriest's sacred weapon as an alternative to mounts (as well as replacing any mount-related features with Weapon Training).
Kineticist: Applying your Strength modifier to Physical Blasts, applying every single shape infusion to every single Blast, offering Acid Blast (energy) to Earth, Hard Light Blast (physical) to Fire and Sonic Blast (energy) to Aether.
Any archetype and Prestige Class that offers Form of the Dragon: Give Form of the Dragon III as a late ability.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So what class(es) would you change and what about those class(es) would you change?
I'd give the rogue(reflex and will) and fighter(fort and will) two strong saves. I'm going to playtest it the next time I run a game.
Fighter-I think it would benefit from something like the abilities from the 3.5 Book of Nine Swords that gave it options.
Rogue-Maybe allow the rogue to do sneak attack damage for X number of times per day without meeting the normal requirements. This can be useful when another party member just refuses to flank, or there is nobody to flank with.
-----
I'd let a monk using monk weapons do his unarmed strike damage through his weapons. Since they can't wear armor I'd also have a magic item that boost his unarmed attacks, for those who choose to go unarmed. That would free up the neck slot for the amulet of natural armor.
Alternately, I'd let him use his ki points to enhance his unarmed attacks so they can gain the properties of some magical weapons. I don't know the exact mechanics.
-----
I'd probably let rangers choose from the druid companion list.
The only classes that I think Need changing are classes that people only dip - eg. Gunslinger and Swashbuckler. I don't think I've seen anyone take a Gunslinger past level 7 without switching to another class.
Fighter: Replace the Bonus Feats with actual fighting styles taken from the archetype. Seriosuly, replacing the Weapon/Armor Training with those was a bad idea.
Come to think of it, the Fighter would need several more buffs...
- 4 or even 6 skill points + Int modifier; I swear, it would avoid them to be the mindless basher... and soldiers are supposed to have way more knowledge than your peasant. It would compensate for fightiers not always prioritizing Intelligence as their primary stats.
- Weapon Specialization should have granted the Warpriest's Sacred Weapon, similar to Focused Weapon. A +2 to damage is just laughable.
- Greater Weapon Specialization should have granted a special Vital Strike ability to Fighter, so they can make one attack and multiply the base weapon's damage by their level, so they could rival spells.
- They should receive an Exotic Weapon Proficiency of their choice at 1st level.
- Bravery should be a +1 per fighter level bonus to fear, not a measly +5 to an already weak Will save.
- They should also receive an ability to roll a Fortitude save instead of a Reflex save, to simply TANK the move.
- To further explain the bonus feat replacement, have the fighter select a weapon group, which would lead to special abilities related to that group, instead of bonus feats.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A lot of them....
I think that about half (or more) of the classes could disappear and be archetypes of the remaining classes.
My thoughts as well, although I will be hard-pressed to find time to give much in the way of details while I am redeployed (again) to the coronavirus testing lab.
A brief non-exhaustive list (note that some classes appear more than once due to being pulled into different remixes):
General: Reduce (NOT eliminate) the number of archetypes needed by making many of the alternate class features selectable options within a class.
General: Anybody who isn't an Intelligence-based spellcaster gets at least 4 + IntMod skill ranks per level. Some socially-oriented non-Intelligence-based classes get a class feature Unencumbered By the Thought Process, which gives ChaMod skill ranks per level that have to be spent for social skills.
Prestige classes: Make these into prestige feat chains, sort of like 2nd Edition does, although tweaked to work in a 1st Edition framework (and none of this requirement to take 3 feats in 1 prestige feat chain before taking any in another).
4/9 casters: Fix spellcasting progression to make it more even, but still a cut below the 6/9 casters. This would probably end up changing the category name, but for the purposes of discussion, I'll leave it as it is for now.
Alchemist + Investigator: Remix to make an alchemically-oriented semi-skill-oriented to skill-oriented class (depending upon initial options).
Arcanist + Magus + Rogue/Ninja: Remix to make an Arcane Trickster base class: 6/9 spellcasting, d6, 1/2 BAB, with good skills.
Barbarian: Make this a hybrid between pre-Unchained and Unchained versions. Unchained did some good things, but cut out a lot of options.
Bard + Skald: Fix the dead level at level 4. Levels 13 and 16 look dead in the table, but actually aren't if you read the text; not so for level 4. This isn't a balance thing, just one of those nits that drives me nuts. Also, while Versatile Performance serves an important purpose, it seems incredibly kludgy. Then remix these and their archetypes to have selectable options so that (as noted above) you don't need so many archetypes, and you don't need 2 separate classes.
Cleric + Druid + Arcanist + Shaman + Inquisitor + Warpriest + Hunter + Paladin/Antipaladin (Holy Warrior) + Shifter: Remix these so that Holy Warrior is the undisputed fighting priest (and shifter is the nature-oriented equivalent), Warpriest is the hybrid casting/fighting priest (and Hunter with a better name is the nature-oriented equivalent), and Cleric is the d6, 1/2 BAB caster with more class features other than spellcasting (and Druid is the nature-oriented equivalent, and Shaman is the . . . um . . . shamanic equivalent), while alignment-specific and deity-specific class features that aren't part of Domains (looking at you, Paladin and Antipaladin) get moved to prestige feat chains. Also remix Domains + Shaman Spirits + Blessings + Inquisitions so that they are more like mini-Mysteries (except that Spirits count as 2 Domains and are accordingly more expansive), that you can select options from, and move Channeling into some of these -- if you don't have much use for Channeling, don't choose that Domain or option thereof; some of the nature-oriented Domains have Wildshaping (which the Shifter should have been able to do in the first place) and Animal Companions. Make things that conceptually don't make sense at 1st level become prestige feat chains (looking at you, Paladin and Antipaladin AND Inquisitor).
Fighter + Monk + Ranger + Cavalier/Samurai + Gunslinger + Brawler + Slayer + Swashbuckler: Remix these to produce a well-rounded martial class with good options that you can find from the start without looking through a whole load of books. And bump the alignment-specific stuff to one or more prestige feat chains (looking at you, Monk).
Oracle (in some cases + Skald): Remix with itself along the lines given above for the other divine casters, making 9/9 1/2 BAB d6, 6/9 3/4 BAB d8, and 4/9 full BAB d10 versions, including the option for Rage Prophet archetypes that actually work (unlike the current prestige class, which is a cool idea, but doesn't work).
Rogue/Ninja + Investigator + Slayer + Swashbuckler: Remix to make a good skill-using covert operations class.
Sorcerer + Eldritch Scion Magus + Bloodrager: The base classes at the ends aren't bad, but clean up this Bloodline mess! Balance Bloodlines, and make them consistently have options for 9/9 casters, 6/9 casters, and 4/9 casters. Also, the in-between class (actually an archetype) is currently rather bad (although certainly not the worst archetype ever) -- pull this square peg out of its archetype round hole, and do it right.
Vigilante: Convert to prestige feat chain (like 2nd Edition does).
Witch: Convert into a prestige feat chain -- any class can potentially get into Witchcraft, if they manage to meet the prerequisites. (But unlike the current VMC Witch, which is the 2nd worst VMC ever, it has to actually work.)
Wizard + Arcanist + Magus + Summoner + 4/9 prepared arcane caster that they never made (Child of Acavna and Amaznen Fighter is so bad that it doesn't count): Remix these to make full caster, hybrid, and arcane martial characters for each Arcane School (including Universalist), with Arcane Schools having selectable options like they were mini-Mysteries, and give you more than just an extra spell slot of your Arcane School specialization.
Occult classes: Not sure what to do with these yet. These have some good ideas and good concepts, but they feel like a set of grafts that didn't take very well.
Cavalier / Samurai Offering the Warpriest's sacred weapon as an alternative to mounts (as well as replacing any mount-related features with Weapon Training).
On top of what I've said, I'd also correct something that really bugs me for the Samurai:
Weapon and Armor Proficiency: Samurai are proficient with all simple and martial weapons, plus the katana, naginata, and wakizashi. Samurai are proficient with all types of armor (heavy, light, and medium) and shields (except tower shields).
The naginata is ALREADY a martial weapon, so... why is it separated for those? Was it supposed to be an Exotic weapon initially (doubtful given the stats though)? Was there supposed to be a new Exotic weapon that was cut later on? Was there another Exotic weapon for the Samurai that became Martial and thus removed for the proficiency text?
I feel like the Nagamaki (oddly missing from Pathfinder) was supposed to be the Samurai's 3rd free Exotic weapon, but was cut in the end. For the record, the Nagamaki is essentially a Nodachi (another Martial weapon), with a much longer hilt/haft, thus probably giving it Reach. At this point, replace the Naginata with the Fauchard, and you have a good trade, because a Nagamaki would essentialy be a Reach Nodachi, thus making it an Exotic weapon.
On a sidenote, I would have liked Paizo to list other regional daisho weapons for the Samurai, based on the Inner Seas' regions. Then again, coming up with 2 or 3 Exotic Weapons to replace the Katana and Wakisashi would have been more troublesome than expected ^^;
^I wonder if they just got naginata and nagamaki mixed up?
^I wonder if they just got naginata and nagamaki mixed up?
Probably, and what's weirder is that the nagamaki is completely absent.
^Maybe they thought they were different spellings of the same thing?
The samurai’s proficiency with naginata is most likely due to the optional eastern weapons rule that shifts all simple and martial eastern weapons up one category for campaigns taking place in regions where such weapons are not commonly found. When using that rule the naginata is infact an exotic weapon… so samurai having built in proficiency guarantees that you won’t have to take exotic weapon proficiency if your DM runs with the optional rule. (Which mine does… it’s rather annoying)
^Where is that rule? It makes sense, but I can't actually find it.
^Where is that rule? It makes sense, but I can't actually find it.
I’ll have to ask my DM where he found it again when I get a chance to talk to him in the morning. But I’m pretty sure it was in the same book that the eastern weapons were first introduced with.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not a fan of the kineticist burn mechanic. It scales oddly, interacts badly and generally isn't fun. I think a standard penalty would have been a lot better than fiddling with untouchable nonlethal damage. Or even just a standard limited pool without a penalty mechanic could have been fine without being that much more powerful.
I don't think having big hit points would have been that game breaking, though. It's not like the class isn't already MAD, needing a good dexterity and constitution just for class functions, while still needing a good wisdom for will saves and a decent intelligence for skills. It's not the same as that old archetype for the witch, where constitution became your everything.
And that's assuming the class even had to be constitution based. It could have just as easily have been based on wisdom or charisma.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
^ . . . RIP original Orc Scarred Witch Doctor . . . .
Clerics. I find them to be the most mechanically boring of all the classes. Not much happens on level up that gets me excited. Lots of 'dead level' space on the class table.
I'd make channel energy one of several options they can choose (like what is seen with a Wizard's Arcane Bond, and Druid's Nature Bond, etc). Not every (un)holy warrior priest needs to focus on channeling positive/negative energy.
I would likely be something like this... You get to pick ONE domain, and any of the following: Another domain AND bonus 'caster' feats; Channeling AND bonus 'channeling' feats; Bonded Object AND bonus 'caster' feats; Familiar (improves to Improved Familiar) AND bonus 'summoning' feats; or some kind of Companion creature with related bonus feats. The bonus feats would be like a wizard's and show up at 5th level and every 5 after.
Nothing that would add any overt power ups that couldn't already be accomplished with feat selections.
Honestly I do like your ideas, I get kind of sad that in order to really nail down what I want my cleric to do I typically have to pick and archetype and prestige class (usually evangelist for prestige cause duh :P)
Not something that would require a "change" per se, but the Summoner's Eidolon should have been offered as an alternate class feature or even with a new feat to other classes.
Also, premade Eidolon packages to mimic specific non-outsider creatures would have been welcomed...
Not something that would require a "change" per se, but the Summoner's Eidolon should have been offered as an alternate class feature or even with a new feat to other classes.
What would be the point of the summoner class if any class could opt to have an eidolon?
Not something that would require a "change" per se, but the Summoner's Eidolon should have been offered as an alternate class feature or even with a new feat to other classes.What would be the point of the summoner class if any class could opt to have an eidolon?
There's a feat to get a familiar or an animal companion.
The thing is that Eidolons are almost exclusive to the Summoner with barely any archetype that grants one.
Not something that would require a "change" per se, but the Summoner's Eidolon should have been offered as an alternate class feature or even with a new feat to other classes.What would be the point of the summoner class if any class could opt to have an eidolon?
Most of my summoners have had the eidolon as a secondary feature, because I prefer to focus on using summon monster.
I think that summon guardian spirit should have been this eidolon feat chain. Something you can only summon with your summoning spells.
VMC Summoner gets you an Eidolon at 7th level with your effective Summoner level being {character level} - 4 (which you could just fix with Boon Companion) and half as many Evolution points. So having a feat chain in all but name that would grant this would be fair: Iron Will --> Eidolon Bond (acts like VMC Summoner II) --> Boon Companion (optional but you would really want this).
which you could just fix with Boon Companion
NopeBoon Companion is animal companions and familiars only. Phantom has a feat for that (Phantom Ally), but Eidolon doesn't.
It should also be noted that the VMC is one round casting time to summon an Eidolon of four levels lower, and half evolution points, for rounds per level once per day (thrice at 11th level).
There's a feat to get a familiar or an animal companion.
But a familiar isn't the focal point of any class. Animal Companion is somewhat of the focal point of the Hunter, but there's a lot of stuff in the class that elevates it, and for the other classes, it's not a focal point.
The thing is that Eidolons are almost exclusive to the Summoner with barely any archetype that grants one.
The same can be said about a lot of class features. What's your point? You can't get Hexes for via feats, or a Ki Pool + Ki Powers, or or Rage + Rage Powers (apart from a totem line in a limited fashion), and so on.
The thing is that Eidolons are almost exclusive to the Summoner with barely any archetype that grants one.The same can be said about a lot of class features. What's your point? You can't get Hexes for via feats, or a Ki Pool + Ki Powers, or or Rage + Rage Powers (apart from a totem line in a limited fashion), and so on.
A few archetypes grant Hexes, Ki powers and even Rage powers.
Eidolon? Nothing much...
Some class features are so powerful they don't get shared around much. Inquisitor judgement isn't handed around. A few class options get something like Bane, but it's a weaker version of inquisitor bane
A few archetypes grant Hexes, Ki powers and even Rage powers.
Eidolon? Nothing much...
Elemental Ally Druid and Planar Extremist (the Ex-Druid archetype) do, and there're archetypes (and feats) that grant evolutions to animal companions or familiars.
The problem with granting an Eidolon to other classes is how stand-alone it is. There're archetypes that grant hexes to Cleric, Rogue, and Magus, but that results in action economy issues. An Eidolon on the other hand has its own actions, meaking it a pure add-on.
The only thing that keeps Summoner somewhat in check is there isn't much it can do with its second set of actions per turn apart from buffing the party. If you put an Eidolon on anyone else, be it martial or caster, you are in acute risk of ruining party balance because you basically let one player control two characters (similar to an unchecked Leadership feat). Unless you nerf the Eidolon so much that it isn't good, of course, but that would just result in lamentation.
which you could just fix with Boon CompanionNopeBoon Companion is animal companions and familiars only. Phantom has a feat for that (Phantom Ally), but Eidolon doesn't.
You're right -- I overextended Boon Companion in my head (although I wonder why they made a separate feat that does exactly the same thing for Phantoms instead of just extending Boon Companion?).
It should also be noted that the VMC is one round casting time to summon an Eidolon of four levels lower, and half evolution points, for rounds per level once per day (thrice at 11th level).
{. . .}
Yes, extending Boon Companion to Eidolons would fix the level delay but not the Evolution Points.
The only thing that keeps Summoner somewhat in check is there isn't much it can do with its second set of actions per turn apart from buffing the party. If you put an Eidolon on anyone else, be it martial or caster, you are in acute risk of ruining party balance because you basically let one player control two characters (similar to an unchecked Leadership feat). Unless you nerf the Eidolon so much that it isn't good, of course, but that would just result in lamentation.
Since a Summoner doesn't need a lot of feats, they could pick up some combat feats and fight directly and/or imitate a Reach Cleric (for which buffing the party is perfectly valid).
Eidolons are out-of-the-box nerfed enough to not count as unchecked Leadership. Their hit dice gradually fall behind the Summoner's levels, and their Point Buy equivalent (Unchained version) is 7 points. (Of course, this has the weird effect that the Summoner gets relatively MORE powerful as the global Point Buy limit goes down.)
Since a Summoner doesn't need a lot of feats, they could pick up some combat feats and fight directly and/or imitate a Reach Cleric (for which buffing the party is perfectly valid).
It's about the perception of power. Power that makes your character do something is percieved differently from power that makes either the whole party or other party members do something.* With medium BAB, weak Fort save, only light armor prof, and zero class features to help them, a melee Summoner's martial prowess doesn't make a player of a martial character feel like the other player has two full characters. If you would add an Eidolon to a martial chassis (e.g. on a Fighter in exchange for all bonus feats), that would change, even though going from a 6/9 caster to that would be a huge loss in objective power. On the flip side, an Eidolon on a full caster (e.g. on a Witch in exchange for all hexes) would allow having both a martial and an offenive caster, which obviously can make group members playing either feel disadvantaged.
*) Same reason why Synthesist is more hated than vanilla Summoner - additional actions aren't perceived enviously when used to cast Haste. Also the same reason why players without deeper understanding so often balance whine about classesd and archetypes that're actually pretty weak. When you're playing, say, an archer Ranger, a Wizard debuffing enemies doesn't make you feel inadequate, but a Zen Archer or Gunslinger might.
Their hit dice gradually fall behind the Summoner's levels, and their Point Buy equivalent (Unchained version) is 7 points.
BAB is one higher three out of four levels compared to medium BAB, though. Also, Eidolons can way more easily increase their ability scores, and have access to stuff like pounce and flight that many martials don't (easily) get. And you can only reduce the evolution pool so much before it doesn't really feel like you're playing an Eidolon anymore.
I wonder why they made a separate feat that does exactly the same thing for Phantoms instead of just extending Boon Companion?
The feat is older than the class, and making a new feat is cleaner than reprinting the feat with added stuff.
|
Maybe it's because I'm currently playing a fighter, but I say the fighter needs the most re-work.
Things I suggest would be:
- 4 skill points (did it already in my groups since I started with PF and the players were happy)
- Ability to ignore attribute requirements for feats (I'm looking at you Int 13 for Combat Expertise^^)
- Let them choose a combat style which gives special abilities based on the style (similar in scale to 5E feats, maybe streched over some level )
- Give them the martial flexibility ability from the brawler
- make the adv. weapon/armor training abilities "fighter only"-feats
- remove the weapon training ability (boring)
Related to this:
reduce the amount of feat "taxes" for combat feats
Another one would be Cleric
- again 4 skill points
- change spontanouse casting to "you can swap a prepared spell or use an not used slot to cast any cure/inflict spell or any spell from your domain list (same level or lower)."
- remove the minor damage domain powers and exchange them with non damage options
Related to this:
- make 0-level spells scale with the caster level, so they are still a viable backup option at higher levels.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Related to this:
- make 0-level spells scale with the caster level, so they are still a viable backup option at higher levels.
Doesn't seem needed. By even mid levels you will have enough spells per day to carry you through most adventuring days. By the high-mid levels, you should have more spells prepared than you could use up in any reasonable adventuring day.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Doesn't seem needed. By even mid levels you will have enough spells per day to carry you through most adventuring days. By the high-mid levels, you should have more spells prepared than you could use up in any reasonable adventuring day.Related to this:
- make 0-level spells scale with the caster level, so they are still a viable backup option at higher levels.
Pathfinder 2nd Edition actually does this, which sort of compensates for the drastic nerf in non-Cantrip spell slots. But here's the idea I had instead: Instead of Cantrips automatically scaling, you have to invest to scale them by putting them into higher level slots. They retain their recastability, but now they're occupying a >0 level spell slot, so you need to pick and choose each day (if you are a prepared caster), or pick and choose as you level up your spells known (if you are a spontaneous caster). As an extension of this concept, since Cantrips would no longer be all 0 level spells, some Cantrips could start out at levels >0 (although at least the great majority of 0 level spells would be Cantrips).
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Related to
Pathfinder 2nd Edition actually does this, which sort of compensates for the drastic nerf in non-Cantrip spell slots. But here's the idea I had instead: Instead of Cantrips automatically scaling, you have to invest to scale them by putting them into higher level slots. They retain their recastability, but now they're occupying a >0 level spell slot, so you need to pick and choose each day (if you are a prepared caster), or pick and choose as you level up your spells known (if you are a spontaneous caster). As an extension of this concept, since Cantrips would no longer be all 0 level spells, some Cantrips could start out at levels >0 (although at least the great majority of 0 level spells would be Cantrips).
I like the idea, this reminds me of the "spell feats" in 3.5e.
Personally I would be fine if cantrips did 1d6+casting stat mod damage for most except for ones that damage 1 creature type like disrupt undead would be 1d10+casting stat mod damage. Also alignment based ones would do at least 1d8+casting stat mod in damage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally I would be fine if cantrips did 1d6+casting stat mod damage for most except for ones that damage 1 creature type like disrupt undead would be 1d10+casting stat mod damage. Also alignment based ones would do at least 1d8+casting stat mod in damage.
I've houseruled cantrips in my PF1 games (more like PF1.5 at this rate) to do 1d4+casting mod damage, and they get more powerful at level 3, 7, 11 and 15, increasing by 1d4 each time. Just enough that they never really outshine other actual spells or the damage of melee combatants at their specific level. It eventually relegates 1st and 2nd level spells to utility roles, which they should be after a certain point. I have a particular design philosophy behind why I keep the damage where it is, notably that casters shouldn't be able to one shot CR equivalent mobs with a cantrip at any level of play unless they get a good damage roll on a crit. If you don't agree, don't play at my table.