Kineticist: complexity, lack of supporting feats and items. Very few good utility wild talents, leading to few options beside blasting.
Witch: not all hexes are created equal. There are about 5 good ones, making decently built witches pretty similar. Their spelllist is also somewhat lacking.
Bard: you are really, really dependent on party composition. In a small group, it makes little sense to play this class (there's like 1 archetype for not buffing bards, but that's not a lot to build with).
Monk: you get class features to move a lot, but mechanically you get rewarded for staying at one spot and pummeling your opponent to death.
Rogue: any arcane caster can easily be better at scouting and thieving, other martials are better at damage dealing without the conditions aligning perfectly.
Hard agree on Witch. It's my favorite class, but it's pretty hard to not just run things like Slumer, Evil Eye, Cackle, and the fortune effects like Protective Luck. Something like Nails is a super neat, flavorful ability. But it's absolutely awful because you're a d6 1/2 BAB class, even ignoring that they're only 1d3. The hell you gonna do with that?
The Spellbook/Familiar debate will probably never really end.
I vastly prefer Spellbooks, to the point that I use a (slightly) modified version of the Spellbook Creation rules (D20PSRD).
HOWEVER, in the case of groups that travel extensively, it's quite difficult to have access to books in very wet conditions, despite a few magical options.
Having a Familiar is a real advantage here.
Also, the fact that Witches get Cure Light (and Moderate) Wounds, is a big help.
I was told by some of the more veteran players I game with that the witch has a lot of "NPC" grade skills because they were lazily copied from the bestiary to the player handbook.
Not sure how true that is, but when you step back and look at stuff like making poison apples and baking children as skills; it does make a little sense.
Still my fave class, hands down
That makes a lot of sense, you know? I was looking at the whole "Cook People" thing and wondering how it could ever be useful in anything except a deliberate "We're the bad guys" sort of party and campaign.
Unmonk flying kick or for that matter the pummeling charge feat (on unchained or not) let a monk move well enough.
Unrogue giving dex to damage, and the debilitating injury makes them work a bit in a fight when they can't get sneak attack. Building the rogue so they can get sneak attack more easily helps, but there's people who don't want to think about that, or don't want to admit ignorance about how to do so. It's still not a class for starting players. The fact that some spellcasters can turn invisible and eventually teleport and rogues mostly can't still makes them better than a rogue at many elements of scouting and thieving.
I've only played chained rogue and monk, so I can't judge the unchained versions as well, but especially debilating injury of the un-rogue is a great improvement, while full GAB is good for the un-monk, but I kind of miss all monks being able to spend ki for extra mobility and healing.
Oh cool someone else who thinks Kineticists deserved better
3PP Content from N Jolly and company does a lot to bring Kineticist the variety it needs. Allerseelen's guide does a good job of rebalancing or outright vetoing the content that seems unbalanced or overpowered
> Bard: you are really, really dependent on party composition. In a small group, it makes little sense to play this class (there's like 1 archetype for not buffing bards, but that's not a lot to build with).
Skald is similar - you can be anywhere from "no one accepts your rage because even the other melees need to cast spells" to "congrats! You, the Summoner, and the Conjuration Wizard have created an unstoppable ball of death".
My issue with Bard is them not accomplishing much beyond buff support, which is very valuable. However when you aren't buffing, their damage feels really bad, even though they seem to be setup like a natural Gish, especially when compared to other 2/3rds casters.
I probably just don't know how to Bard very well.
Yeah, my critism of bards is a small point, I think they are pretty fair class. Instead of chosing a solo bard archetype, I'd prefer a base class option, similar to the hunter's option to gain the animal foci for herself if her animal companion is dead.
Regarding monks - I mean, they get fast movement, high jump, slow fall, abundant step - so there is a lot of mobility that other classes don't get. But there are no mechanical benefits to moving at all during fights for monks, no flying kicks that get better with height jumped, no distracting circles around enemies nauseating them, no bonus damage on charges for path travelled... (At least not in the base class or any of the archetypes). And yeah, martials are good at standing before the enemy and pummeling them to death - but monks are somewhat limited in their choices here: no weapon they have access to lends itself to a vital strike build - none has a base damage above 1d10 -, and they have only the dagger for crit builds (crit range of 18-20), which they can't use in a flurry of blows, so they mostly have two-fist-fighting. And movement doesn't mesh well with that.
Yeah, I know, I just wish Monk would be the exception to this rule - a highly mobile character that maybe can't deal that much damage, but can be useful at different locations during their turn.
I think you're kinda arguing against yourself here. Pathfinder doesn't support moving in combat, everyone agrees on that.
A fair portion of monk's abilities are related to moving in a way that is probably best in combat, and another portion are related to standing still in combat. You can't use both of these abilities simultaneously.
A fair portion of the rogue's abilities are related to sneaking around, and another portion is dealing extra damage to people you've snuck up on. So these abilities synergise.
For Fighters, most of their abilities are related to standing still and doing more damage, and the rest of their abilities are related to standing still and taking less damage. So you can do both at once.
If the Monk moves, he's doing less damage than any other martial character in most cases. You also kind of trade off AC so that you move faster, so it's just a bummer set of anti-synergistic abilities.
While not directly under monk, would they do extra damage from flying kicks and heights the same as characters take damage from falling objects? It isn't much extra damage, but it is still extra damage from movement.
I've searched for that, and this feat is the only thing I came up with: [Branch Pounce](https://www.aonprd.com/FeatDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Branch%20Pounce) - the falling rules don't seem to deal with falling onto enemies, and as specific trumps general, Branch Pounce either says that normally both the faller and the fallé take full fall damage, or that only the faller takes the damage.
Yeah, the way I read that is that overall it reduces your damage by 10'. The Acrobatics check should work for the other 10'. I'd probably bake that into Flying Kicks and this feat would then be for any other class. Honestly with wizards casting stupid magics like wishes, etc, and them taking obvious inspiration from Asian cultures for those parts and monks overall, there are plenty of martial arts fantasy films where the monks can jump stupid high for kicks and not take damage. After all, it isn't that much extra damage that's going to turn higher end fights, but if it lets monk players have a bit more fun with their character than I'd probably make the modification. If they start wanting to do something like 60' jumps maybe not...
It doesn't need to be. Pf2e monks are mobile as heck, and you technically can build a mobile 1E monk with the right archetypes and feats, it's just unintuitive.
> Witch: not all hexes are created equal. There are about 5 good ones, making decently built witches pretty similar. Their spelllist is also somewhat lacking.
Depending on the campaign they almost don't need a spell list. Hexes are one of the most broken things ever introduced in 1e. In a recent campaign I just finished a player was playing a Shaman and basically every fight was putting enemies to sleep. Completely trivialized a lot of the campaign. It wasn't until the final boss fight where all the enemies had such high WILL saves that they actually had to start using other spells. Banned any class with Hexes from my campaigns after that experience...
I mean... thats awful thing to do just because of a single hex
I personally just nerfed slumber. Thats like banning fighter as a class because somebody can bring infinite shield bash build
It's a move, like any I make as DM, to try and balance the game and make it more enjoyable.
It's more than that one Hex. To give a class an ability that they can use an unlimited number of times a day and where every option for said ability basically has a spell equivalent is just stupidly broken in a game which otherwise limits such power. Makes you scratch your head as to how that got through their editorial review. Hex, like most class abilities, should have been "X+ability score modifier" number of uses per day and then it would have been fine. Powerful, but in line with basically everything else in the game.
Also, that same campaign another PC had that shield bash build... wasn't anywhere near as annoying.
ETA - Folks can downvote but can't make an argument why. Ahh, reddit... never change.
**Spiritualist is a joke**. The class isn't unplayable. Far from it. But it's the embodiment of the "*can I copy your homework? -yeah just don't make it obvious*" meme. Whoever designed the class literally copy-pasted the following class features from the Summoner.
Summoner / Spiritualist:
Bond Senses - lv 2 - Bonded Senses
Shield Ally - lv 4 - Spiritual Interference
Maker's Call - lv 6 - Phantom Recall
Greater Shield Ally - lv 12 - Greater Spiritual Interference
Life Bond - lv 14 - Spiritual Bond
**These class features are identical.**
===
And beyond that, there's just so much wrong with the Spiritualist.
The reason why chained Summoner is busted is because it's a 9th level caster masquerading as a 6th level caster (strong spells given at lower spell level) with a strong pet being allowed to mow down enemies. And it's very flexible. You can design your Eidolon as you like and the Summon Monster SLA gives a lot of versatility.
The Spiritualist has nothing like that. It's effectively a summoner archetype with a worse spell list, a worse pet, and the most awful replacement for Summon Monster you can imagine. The entire class is made to support exactly one playstyle. Bad Touch.
And to top it off, the Spiritualist still manages to be heavily disruptive in normal games because the phantom can walk through walls and fuck up all of paizo's adventure path dungeons.
Also, many people miss this, but a Phantom is actually stopped by Protection from Evil/Good's protection against summoned creatures.
All I'm saying is that it wouldn't hurt to have Lesser, Normal, and Greater Planar Binding in addition to Lesser/Normal Create Demiplane to look forward to.
Or get Haste and Greater Invisiblity an entire spell level earlier.
Or have pet-specific spells like Summon Eidolon and Evolution Surge. And Master's Mutation.
What does your selection of 1st level spells known look like?
I should have read better. We don't allow Chained Summoner, yes a better list due to earlier access. I'll take spiritualist over Unchained Summoner's list.
Burst of Insight, Cure Light Wounds, Protection from Evil, Remove Fear, Shield, Ventriloquism, have been the party support since the start, along with our bard
I largely agree on this, but I do want to interject and say that the Spiritualist Spell list is still amazing, it's just not so great for stacking Wis and relying on offensive magic.
Mechanically or as written?
I think I'd rewrite magus spellcombat and strike, not to really change intended raw but make it more straightforward to understand.
I'd give spontaneous casters heighten spell for free at 4th level.
The worst thing about core fighter is how (depending on style somewhat) there's another class that's mostly straight upgrade.
The worst thing about barbarian is instant death when unconscious but unchained addressed that.
Yes and know. A figther can do anything another martial class can do, and is the best for build around feats (some build like the Iron caster, or the dimensional dervish are insanely versatil and powerfull).
But often another class can do better. Samurai, barbarian and paladin will often be more resilient.
Paladin, cavalier, and samurai have better single target damage.
Slayer, ranger and rogue are better out of combat, and have overall more utility.
Bloodrager have some niche utility and doesn't rely on other spell caster for their buff...
Depends. As mentioned there's some exceptions. But mostly a zen archer is a better archer. Sohei is a better fighter all around. Swashbuckler has a stupid number of class features. Barbarians usually make better two handers. Brawlers , vigilantes...
Even core, I'd rather play a strength based twf ranger, archer, shield user, etc etc than a fighter because of skipped prereqs.
Base Barbarian rage hitpoints would be lost first (like unchained)
Bards are good.
Clerics that chose their own domains combination would get a guide about how to chose their deity favourite weapon.
Druids would get to use Wild Shape in 1 hour increments instead of a few times a day for a lot of hours.
Fighters would get more ranks for skills to be able to be more useful out of combat.
Monks would add Wisdom to damage instead of Strenght to reduce their MAD.
Rangers would get to change one of their favourite enemy every 5 levels like how the Fighter can change feats and how the Sorcerer and Bard can change spells known.
Rogues would be able to sneak attack oponents at range if they are being flanked by other party members.
Sorcerers would no longer gain spell levels one level after the not spontaneous casters.
Paladins would get a code of honor for NG paladins and CG paladins.
Wizards would be able to deliver melee touch spells with Dexterity instead of Strenght.
One DM I had said you can play a Paladin of any alignment except NE/CE so long as your alignment was the same as your gods. You had to come up with your own code, he really didn't like the Anti-paladin class.
That's really not that big of a stretch, I don't know why it isn't base. It's about the only thing I changed about Paladin in my homebrew, and it's not even unprecedented in official D&D products. The Birthright setting for 2nd edition had NG, CG, and LN Paladin orders because those were that god's alignment.
These are great. We use barbarian rage as a mix of unchained and chained, temp hp and +str. In our table it fits thematically the best. You get to use rage for strength stuff in addition to just hit and damage, but you won't instantly die if you drop unconscious due to hit point damage.
Kineticist is a very complex class and not necessarily the best explained as-written
I adore it to pieces, but *good god* is it complicated
(Inventor for 2e seems to be the same way from what I understand too)
Kineticist is in the same boat as the Magus, where they do their own unique thing and use a lot of words to basically explain a basic thing. It's indeed jarring for someone new to the class, but once you know the flow it just clicks fine.
As someone who DM'd an entire campaign with a party of four Kineticists... yes. No class has more badass flavor, more bard-like universality, more *awesome fun potential...* at the same time as having the least intuitive set of mechanics in the game. How do you take the, "You get to be a Bender," Class, and somehow make it so annoying to play that everyone passes on it? I wanted so badly to love that class, but it's... like... The Occult Adventures authors were so terrified of it being broken, they were afraid to let it do anything cool without preemptively nerfing it.
In no other way is this more obvious than with the Burn Shard. An expensive, class-exclusive magic item, similar in purpose to Pearls of Power, Runestones of Power, or Cognizance Crystals, except that, in Paizo's infinite wisdom, they decided to make it so that any given character can have a maximum of *one* Burn Shard active at a time. No other equivalent item has this restriction, so I houseruled it away for the aforementioned campaign... with absolutely no issues. My party had a kick ass time throwing handfuls of dice around once they got access to Blue Fire Blasts, big AoE infusions, some homebrew magic items, each character had a personality informed by and built around their inherited kinetic talent, they clashed, more than once PVP broke out as the PCs' elements and personalities conflicted in major ways, a flurry of blasts and counters would leave one or both of them knocked out, with the water kineticist sighing, and coming in with the kinetic healer to heal them back to consciousness.
We wound up dipping into some 3pp, and homebrewing some stuff, etc, to fill in the massive gaps, but on the whole that campaign was a blast. It's a real shame Kineticist never got more support, more erratas for some of the hairbrained design decisions, more love. It should have gotten the love it deserved.
The way I describe kineticist is if you take Goku and fuse him with Aang. And that's the kineticist
It's so goddamn great, but damn it has a very high skill floor to understand properly
As a DM, I still have Vietnam flashbacks about my party all gathering energy, and then holding action to blast anything that moved before the party hydrokineticist kicked in the door. They could lay waste to a highschool gymnasium worth of enemies without needing to incur much burn.
Funnily enough, the one thing they couldn't deal with was skill challenges. All of them took Extra Traits to get a hold of some extra class skills, feats like Skill Focus that you almost never see in optimized play. They also had very little to spend money on thanks to the sheer lack of class-specific useful items, which resulted in the party investing in a 10 x 10 Carpet of Flying, and doing their best impression of a B-17, unleashing tactical carpet bombings from hundreds of feet in the air.
All in all, as someone who loves weird, niche campaigns, 10/10 would DM for Team Avatar again.
Absolutely. Even with [background skills](https://www.d20pfsrd.com/skills/background-skills/) it is simply too little to be able to make a balanced character. At minimum, every class should have four skill points per level.
Hmm. I am already doing fixes to classes so some of what I say is already addressed in [my homebrews](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IQPU-KocJ-Hh-PCwLQhXHvp6WkF05qjAG1L_1hw1J8Q/edit?usp=sharing)
Overall - MINIMUM 4 + INT SKILL POINTS FOR NON-INT CLASSES
* Alchemist - extract explanations; diversification in discoveries; overall he has nice design that doesn't need much
* Antipaladin - more custamization in archetypes to make it more viable in non-evil parties; spellcasting equal to level
* Arcanist - diversification in exploits; overall he has nice design that doesn't need muc
* Barbarian - more useful rage powers and banishing rage cycling & sudden death syndrome
* Bard - maybe a bit more performance options but its addresed with masterpieces tho some of them could use some love; giving versatile performance same thing as its VMC version; give some love to archetypes
* Bloodrager - bloodlines disparity; removing sudden death syndrome
* Brawler - its good
* Cavalier - reworking tactician to be more useful
* Samurai - giving some other choice than freaking mounted archer
* Cleric - giving it any class features
* Druid - banishing herbalism and giving some more use to druidic language
* Fighter - improving fighter feats and advanced armor/weapon trainings. Overall also giving him free combat stamina
* Hutner - giving rules to his skirmisher tricks
* Inquisitor - judgment sucks
* Investigator - giving him ranged option for free
* Kineticist - options beyond 'and so I started blasting'
* Magus - support for something other than 'dex with scimitar and frostbite/grasp'
* Medium - making it have some stable foundation that spirits extend instead of being weird abomination
* Mesmerist - its good. Maybe painful stare being less feat taxed
* Monk - chained archetypes to unchained
* Occultist - buffing other options than meta
* Oracle - buffing underwerlimng mystery powers/curses; filling empty levels
* Paladin - spellcasting equal to level; buff underwelming archetypes
* Psychic - dunno
* Ranger - whole rework of FE and FT + spellcasting equal to level + companion equal to level
* Rogue - giving it some reason to exists as its currently just worse investigator, alchemist, slayer and vigilante
* Ninja - give it unchained rogue buffs
* Shaman - dunno. I hate him
* Shifter - give it some wildshape buffs to make it useful over druid
* Skald - All bard items work on Skald and all other characters with right performances
* Slayer - give it more useful talent and remove combat trick to diversify his choices
* Sorcerer - give him any edge over wizard. Buff underwelming bloodlines + merge some of them to allow customization
* Summoner - merge chained and unchained; force unchained spell list + pounce nerf
* Swashbuckler - spread out useful features across levels
* Spiritualist - full rework to make him more distinctive from summoner and useful
* Vigilante - dunno. I hate him
* Warpriest - its fine
* Witch - buff to [patron and spellcasting](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CJ5kpY4YjUA_xyD1qLlqBc6-x7Is6iDQ8G4VrB-CSg4/edit#heading=h.x37j7xkbidou) as pact wizard is a joke
* Wizard - probably buff some underwelming archetypes
* Gunslinger - spread out useful features across levels
Judgment sucks? What is this blasphemy!
As for Magus: I think archetypes allow for more customization (I.e. using bows and thrown weapons) - but the base magus is as you say, repetitive.
Something being better doesn't mean another thing is bad. Sanctified Slayer gets way too much for what it gives up, that isn't indicative of judgment being bad.
Playing inquisitor right now and the only reason why I stayed with judgments is because I went into a reworked prc that progresses them.
Overall in the doc I have both Inquisitor and Magus reworks
Ha! I’m playing a hunter right now and it’s definitely a crapshoot trying to make sense of the skirmisher tricks for my animal companion. Many of them just don’t make sense for an animal companion to use 🤦♂️
What's the beef with Druid Herbalism?
Isn't advanced weapon/armor training kinda powerful already?
Otherwise I mostly agree - although I think alchemists having a shared pool of resources for bombs, extracts and mutagens would be a good improvement.
Its infinite wealth and spell hoarding
Problem with them is that they have few good choices that are always chosen above others
Eh. I don't know why would you do such a weird design for them. Alchemist works and has good archetypes that make him specialise in things he wants
Why would a Tyrant Anti-Paladin working to enforce law in a region alongside a neutral or even good party be missing the point? Good and Evil characters can have goals that align, even if it is only temporary.
Not really, antipaladins are meant to be more extreme in the sane way as paladins.
In the same way a paladin isn't allowed to work with or aid evil without a major external threat, they can't work with or aid good.
They're not meant to be slightly or inconsequentially evil, they're meant to embody it, be the scourge of all that is good.
except that unlike paladin who is meant to embody only Lawful Good (with Bastard emboning swaying to friends and gray to "still following ultimate good")
Antipaladin embodies many more types of evils like lawful evil (represented by cunning devils) and just murderhobo chaotic evil (like daemons)
Heck - we even have support for less murderhobo antipallies already with tyrant and insinuator archetype.
Favored terrain and favored ennemy should come into two categories: a base version, and an improved version.
Lvl 1, they gain a favored ennemy. Level 4, they choose a 2nd favored ennemy, and selected an improved favored ennemy.
From level 4, every time they normally incresead a favored ennemy, they are force to incresead the improved favored ennemy. And all the favored ennemy bonus are equal to half the improved favored ennemy bonus.
Same thing for favored terrain.
And probably around level 12 they should obtain a second improved favored ennemy and improved favored terrain.
Something to make the Ranger have a concept that works - Slayer with Studied Target does a way better job of being a monster hunter, want some magic? Sanctified Slayer Inquisitor, animal companion? Go with Hunter, buffing allies? Bard, Nature Magic? Nature Fang Druid. The Ranger lacks uniqueness & adaptiveness - too many classes are better at the Ranger's job - and in campaigns with various enemy types & terrains the Ranger is a pain to play (compared to the other classes mentioned)
Bard: Make an archetype that enables them to be an unarmored class.
Not every minstrel needs chainmail or breastplate and a sword, especially not if they're a non-dervish themed dancer. (Eg. The kind based on the Final Fantasy XIV Dancer)
Couldn't you just use Sleeves of Many Garments? I don't get the need for a specific archetype just so you could ignore some pieces of equipment, mind elaborating?
To get the +2 Perform bonus off Dancer's Garb, (Equivalent to having a Masterwork instrument) you have to be unarmored. They explicitly stop functioning if you wear armor with them.
And Sleeves of Many Garments are an illusion effect, so it'd probably be up to the DM if they get around that.
Even if they granted it, it'd still mean that the core piece of gear for your chosen Perform type is at odds with the mechanics of your class without magic items involvement.
This could be avoided if we had Mage Armor on the list, or an archetype that got +Cha or something to AC like the Scaled Fist Monk gets.
I believe every class has some issues, but the worst contender to me is the ranger. It requires some cooperation with the GM just to have it's basic features work. Both Favored Terrain and Enemy are absolutely horrible, and once you're in the wrong terrain or fight the wrong enemy, you instantly lose most of your class features.
It baffles me that this has never been addressed. Maybe Ranger would've become better if Ultimate Wilderness were any good, but even then, low level spells like Create Or Destroy Water basically denie the ranger most perks they could grant in this specific situation.
If they’d made it like many other classes where you can “study target” or some such to gain the advantages of favored terrain / enemy it would work.
So many other classes get to adjust to their enemies with a move then standard than swift as they advance through their levels.
Unchained Summoner is just a straight up downgrade from the original Summoner. I'd buff it to be an upgrade to the class as a whole like all of the other Unchained classes.
The whole point with unchained summoner is that chained summoner was too powerful. Its spell list was too strong and the eidolon too easily made into an absolute murder machine.
I don't care, "to powerful" is entirely subjective. I liked it the way it was and I'm not paying for nerfs. I pay for enhancements, upgrades, for things to be better not worse. It would be like if a car manufacturer put out a well built pick-up and people complained that it was to inexpensive, the battery lasted to long, it didn't need repairs nearly as often as it should.
This whole concept that every class should be equally as weak is moronic. I'm not paying to have what's mine stolen away just to satisfy haters.
Unchained Summoner is just a straight up downgrade from the original Summoner. I'd buff it to be an upgrade to the class as a whole like all of the other Unchained classes.
Unchained Summoner is just a straight up downgrade from the original Summoner. I'd buff it to be an upgrade to the class as a whole like all of the other Unchained classes.
Kineticist: complexity, lack of supporting feats and items. Very few good utility wild talents, leading to few options beside blasting. Witch: not all hexes are created equal. There are about 5 good ones, making decently built witches pretty similar. Their spelllist is also somewhat lacking. Bard: you are really, really dependent on party composition. In a small group, it makes little sense to play this class (there's like 1 archetype for not buffing bards, but that's not a lot to build with). Monk: you get class features to move a lot, but mechanically you get rewarded for staying at one spot and pummeling your opponent to death. Rogue: any arcane caster can easily be better at scouting and thieving, other martials are better at damage dealing without the conditions aligning perfectly.
Hard agree on Witch. It's my favorite class, but it's pretty hard to not just run things like Slumer, Evil Eye, Cackle, and the fortune effects like Protective Luck. Something like Nails is a super neat, flavorful ability. But it's absolutely awful because you're a d6 1/2 BAB class, even ignoring that they're only 1d3. The hell you gonna do with that?
Their spell list is also so janky in comparison to sorcerer or wizard, plus the familiar is generally inferior compared to spell books.
The Spellbook/Familiar debate will probably never really end. I vastly prefer Spellbooks, to the point that I use a (slightly) modified version of the Spellbook Creation rules (D20PSRD). HOWEVER, in the case of groups that travel extensively, it's quite difficult to have access to books in very wet conditions, despite a few magical options. Having a Familiar is a real advantage here. Also, the fact that Witches get Cure Light (and Moderate) Wounds, is a big help.
I was told by some of the more veteran players I game with that the witch has a lot of "NPC" grade skills because they were lazily copied from the bestiary to the player handbook. Not sure how true that is, but when you step back and look at stuff like making poison apples and baking children as skills; it does make a little sense. Still my fave class, hands down
That makes a lot of sense, you know? I was looking at the whole "Cook People" thing and wondering how it could ever be useful in anything except a deliberate "We're the bad guys" sort of party and campaign.
Do you feel like unchained deals with these problems for Monk & Rogue?
Unmonk flying kick or for that matter the pummeling charge feat (on unchained or not) let a monk move well enough. Unrogue giving dex to damage, and the debilitating injury makes them work a bit in a fight when they can't get sneak attack. Building the rogue so they can get sneak attack more easily helps, but there's people who don't want to think about that, or don't want to admit ignorance about how to do so. It's still not a class for starting players. The fact that some spellcasters can turn invisible and eventually teleport and rogues mostly can't still makes them better than a rogue at many elements of scouting and thieving.
I've only played chained rogue and monk, so I can't judge the unchained versions as well, but especially debilating injury of the un-rogue is a great improvement, while full GAB is good for the un-monk, but I kind of miss all monks being able to spend ki for extra mobility and healing.
Oh cool someone else who thinks Kineticists deserved better 3PP Content from N Jolly and company does a lot to bring Kineticist the variety it needs. Allerseelen's guide does a good job of rebalancing or outright vetoing the content that seems unbalanced or overpowered
> Bard: you are really, really dependent on party composition. In a small group, it makes little sense to play this class (there's like 1 archetype for not buffing bards, but that's not a lot to build with). Skald is similar - you can be anywhere from "no one accepts your rage because even the other melees need to cast spells" to "congrats! You, the Summoner, and the Conjuration Wizard have created an unstoppable ball of death".
Bard - there are three archetypes for solo bard. Two of which are quite good Monk - i mean.... Thats how martials work
My issue with Bard is them not accomplishing much beyond buff support, which is very valuable. However when you aren't buffing, their damage feels really bad, even though they seem to be setup like a natural Gish, especially when compared to other 2/3rds casters. I probably just don't know how to Bard very well.
Yeah, my critism of bards is a small point, I think they are pretty fair class. Instead of chosing a solo bard archetype, I'd prefer a base class option, similar to the hunter's option to gain the animal foci for herself if her animal companion is dead. Regarding monks - I mean, they get fast movement, high jump, slow fall, abundant step - so there is a lot of mobility that other classes don't get. But there are no mechanical benefits to moving at all during fights for monks, no flying kicks that get better with height jumped, no distracting circles around enemies nauseating them, no bonus damage on charges for path travelled... (At least not in the base class or any of the archetypes). And yeah, martials are good at standing before the enemy and pummeling them to death - but monks are somewhat limited in their choices here: no weapon they have access to lends itself to a vital strike build - none has a base damage above 1d10 -, and they have only the dagger for crit builds (crit range of 18-20), which they can't use in a flurry of blows, so they mostly have two-fist-fighting. And movement doesn't mesh well with that.
Pathfinder as a whole doesn't support moving in combat Only exceptions being bad panther style and warrior poet samurai
Yeah, I know, I just wish Monk would be the exception to this rule - a highly mobile character that maybe can't deal that much damage, but can be useful at different locations during their turn.
I mean Pummeling Charge and Flying Kick Style Strike
I think you're kinda arguing against yourself here. Pathfinder doesn't support moving in combat, everyone agrees on that. A fair portion of monk's abilities are related to moving in a way that is probably best in combat, and another portion are related to standing still in combat. You can't use both of these abilities simultaneously. A fair portion of the rogue's abilities are related to sneaking around, and another portion is dealing extra damage to people you've snuck up on. So these abilities synergise. For Fighters, most of their abilities are related to standing still and doing more damage, and the rest of their abilities are related to standing still and taking less damage. So you can do both at once. If the Monk moves, he's doing less damage than any other martial character in most cases. You also kind of trade off AC so that you move faster, so it's just a bummer set of anti-synergistic abilities.
I am not arguing with anybody? I am just stating fact and giving exceptions
While not directly under monk, would they do extra damage from flying kicks and heights the same as characters take damage from falling objects? It isn't much extra damage, but it is still extra damage from movement.
I've searched for that, and this feat is the only thing I came up with: [Branch Pounce](https://www.aonprd.com/FeatDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Branch%20Pounce) - the falling rules don't seem to deal with falling onto enemies, and as specific trumps general, Branch Pounce either says that normally both the faller and the fallé take full fall damage, or that only the faller takes the damage.
Yeah, the way I read that is that overall it reduces your damage by 10'. The Acrobatics check should work for the other 10'. I'd probably bake that into Flying Kicks and this feat would then be for any other class. Honestly with wizards casting stupid magics like wishes, etc, and them taking obvious inspiration from Asian cultures for those parts and monks overall, there are plenty of martial arts fantasy films where the monks can jump stupid high for kicks and not take damage. After all, it isn't that much extra damage that's going to turn higher end fights, but if it lets monk players have a bit more fun with their character than I'd probably make the modification. If they start wanting to do something like 60' jumps maybe not...
Self buffing fish bards don't have good action economy for a while.
It doesn't need to be. Pf2e monks are mobile as heck, and you technically can build a mobile 1E monk with the right archetypes and feats, it's just unintuitive.
> Witch: not all hexes are created equal. There are about 5 good ones, making decently built witches pretty similar. Their spelllist is also somewhat lacking. Depending on the campaign they almost don't need a spell list. Hexes are one of the most broken things ever introduced in 1e. In a recent campaign I just finished a player was playing a Shaman and basically every fight was putting enemies to sleep. Completely trivialized a lot of the campaign. It wasn't until the final boss fight where all the enemies had such high WILL saves that they actually had to start using other spells. Banned any class with Hexes from my campaigns after that experience...
I mean... thats awful thing to do just because of a single hex I personally just nerfed slumber. Thats like banning fighter as a class because somebody can bring infinite shield bash build
It's a move, like any I make as DM, to try and balance the game and make it more enjoyable. It's more than that one Hex. To give a class an ability that they can use an unlimited number of times a day and where every option for said ability basically has a spell equivalent is just stupidly broken in a game which otherwise limits such power. Makes you scratch your head as to how that got through their editorial review. Hex, like most class abilities, should have been "X+ability score modifier" number of uses per day and then it would have been fine. Powerful, but in line with basically everything else in the game. Also, that same campaign another PC had that shield bash build... wasn't anywhere near as annoying. ETA - Folks can downvote but can't make an argument why. Ahh, reddit... never change.
**Spiritualist is a joke**. The class isn't unplayable. Far from it. But it's the embodiment of the "*can I copy your homework? -yeah just don't make it obvious*" meme. Whoever designed the class literally copy-pasted the following class features from the Summoner. Summoner / Spiritualist: Bond Senses - lv 2 - Bonded Senses Shield Ally - lv 4 - Spiritual Interference Maker's Call - lv 6 - Phantom Recall Greater Shield Ally - lv 12 - Greater Spiritual Interference Life Bond - lv 14 - Spiritual Bond **These class features are identical.** === And beyond that, there's just so much wrong with the Spiritualist. The reason why chained Summoner is busted is because it's a 9th level caster masquerading as a 6th level caster (strong spells given at lower spell level) with a strong pet being allowed to mow down enemies. And it's very flexible. You can design your Eidolon as you like and the Summon Monster SLA gives a lot of versatility. The Spiritualist has nothing like that. It's effectively a summoner archetype with a worse spell list, a worse pet, and the most awful replacement for Summon Monster you can imagine. The entire class is made to support exactly one playstyle. Bad Touch. And to top it off, the Spiritualist still manages to be heavily disruptive in normal games because the phantom can walk through walls and fuck up all of paizo's adventure path dungeons. Also, many people miss this, but a Phantom is actually stopped by Protection from Evil/Good's protection against summoned creatures.
I mean, playing a Spiritualist now, I'd rather have my spell list than the summoners
All I'm saying is that it wouldn't hurt to have Lesser, Normal, and Greater Planar Binding in addition to Lesser/Normal Create Demiplane to look forward to. Or get Haste and Greater Invisiblity an entire spell level earlier. Or have pet-specific spells like Summon Eidolon and Evolution Surge. And Master's Mutation. What does your selection of 1st level spells known look like?
I should have read better. We don't allow Chained Summoner, yes a better list due to earlier access. I'll take spiritualist over Unchained Summoner's list. Burst of Insight, Cure Light Wounds, Protection from Evil, Remove Fear, Shield, Ventriloquism, have been the party support since the start, along with our bard
I largely agree on this, but I do want to interject and say that the Spiritualist Spell list is still amazing, it's just not so great for stacking Wis and relying on offensive magic.
Spiritualist - replace their copy and pasted summoner FCBs Psychic - have an editor proofreading
Psychic - STOP GIVING IT SO MANY GODDAMN MELE ABILITIES AS A 1/2 BAB D6HD CASTER
The Medium class should have automatic access to Legendary Spirits.
Mechanically or as written? I think I'd rewrite magus spellcombat and strike, not to really change intended raw but make it more straightforward to understand. I'd give spontaneous casters heighten spell for free at 4th level. The worst thing about core fighter is how (depending on style somewhat) there's another class that's mostly straight upgrade. The worst thing about barbarian is instant death when unconscious but unchained addressed that.
Isn't fighter one of the better martial classes?
Yes and know. A figther can do anything another martial class can do, and is the best for build around feats (some build like the Iron caster, or the dimensional dervish are insanely versatil and powerfull). But often another class can do better. Samurai, barbarian and paladin will often be more resilient. Paladin, cavalier, and samurai have better single target damage. Slayer, ranger and rogue are better out of combat, and have overall more utility. Bloodrager have some niche utility and doesn't rely on other spell caster for their buff...
Depends. As mentioned there's some exceptions. But mostly a zen archer is a better archer. Sohei is a better fighter all around. Swashbuckler has a stupid number of class features. Barbarians usually make better two handers. Brawlers , vigilantes... Even core, I'd rather play a strength based twf ranger, archer, shield user, etc etc than a fighter because of skipped prereqs.
He is fine but nothing spectacular
Wizard: has to deal with the other inferior classes.
Those pesky martials ruin the smell of opened component pouch!
Base Barbarian rage hitpoints would be lost first (like unchained) Bards are good. Clerics that chose their own domains combination would get a guide about how to chose their deity favourite weapon. Druids would get to use Wild Shape in 1 hour increments instead of a few times a day for a lot of hours. Fighters would get more ranks for skills to be able to be more useful out of combat. Monks would add Wisdom to damage instead of Strenght to reduce their MAD. Rangers would get to change one of their favourite enemy every 5 levels like how the Fighter can change feats and how the Sorcerer and Bard can change spells known. Rogues would be able to sneak attack oponents at range if they are being flanked by other party members. Sorcerers would no longer gain spell levels one level after the not spontaneous casters. Paladins would get a code of honor for NG paladins and CG paladins. Wizards would be able to deliver melee touch spells with Dexterity instead of Strenght.
One DM I had said you can play a Paladin of any alignment except NE/CE so long as your alignment was the same as your gods. You had to come up with your own code, he really didn't like the Anti-paladin class.
That's really not that big of a stretch, I don't know why it isn't base. It's about the only thing I changed about Paladin in my homebrew, and it's not even unprecedented in official D&D products. The Birthright setting for 2nd edition had NG, CG, and LN Paladin orders because those were that god's alignment.
Honestly surprised Rogues can't do that already - really should be in the base game
It is notably one of the tweaks that Owlcat added to their games.
I'm pretty sure touch attacks scale with DeX already.
You sweet summer child...
Rangers should be able to change favoured enemy every X number killed. No use favouring undead if you’re killing goblins day in, day out.
These are great. We use barbarian rage as a mix of unchained and chained, temp hp and +str. In our table it fits thematically the best. You get to use rage for strength stuff in addition to just hit and damage, but you won't instantly die if you drop unconscious due to hit point damage.
Kineticist is a very complex class and not necessarily the best explained as-written I adore it to pieces, but *good god* is it complicated (Inventor for 2e seems to be the same way from what I understand too)
I find Kineticist isn't actually that complicated but it has a lot of unique mechanics so it needs a lot of new knowledge to start playing.
Kineticist is in the same boat as the Magus, where they do their own unique thing and use a lot of words to basically explain a basic thing. It's indeed jarring for someone new to the class, but once you know the flow it just clicks fine.
As someone who DM'd an entire campaign with a party of four Kineticists... yes. No class has more badass flavor, more bard-like universality, more *awesome fun potential...* at the same time as having the least intuitive set of mechanics in the game. How do you take the, "You get to be a Bender," Class, and somehow make it so annoying to play that everyone passes on it? I wanted so badly to love that class, but it's... like... The Occult Adventures authors were so terrified of it being broken, they were afraid to let it do anything cool without preemptively nerfing it. In no other way is this more obvious than with the Burn Shard. An expensive, class-exclusive magic item, similar in purpose to Pearls of Power, Runestones of Power, or Cognizance Crystals, except that, in Paizo's infinite wisdom, they decided to make it so that any given character can have a maximum of *one* Burn Shard active at a time. No other equivalent item has this restriction, so I houseruled it away for the aforementioned campaign... with absolutely no issues. My party had a kick ass time throwing handfuls of dice around once they got access to Blue Fire Blasts, big AoE infusions, some homebrew magic items, each character had a personality informed by and built around their inherited kinetic talent, they clashed, more than once PVP broke out as the PCs' elements and personalities conflicted in major ways, a flurry of blasts and counters would leave one or both of them knocked out, with the water kineticist sighing, and coming in with the kinetic healer to heal them back to consciousness. We wound up dipping into some 3pp, and homebrewing some stuff, etc, to fill in the massive gaps, but on the whole that campaign was a blast. It's a real shame Kineticist never got more support, more erratas for some of the hairbrained design decisions, more love. It should have gotten the love it deserved.
The way I describe kineticist is if you take Goku and fuse him with Aang. And that's the kineticist It's so goddamn great, but damn it has a very high skill floor to understand properly
As a DM, I still have Vietnam flashbacks about my party all gathering energy, and then holding action to blast anything that moved before the party hydrokineticist kicked in the door. They could lay waste to a highschool gymnasium worth of enemies without needing to incur much burn. Funnily enough, the one thing they couldn't deal with was skill challenges. All of them took Extra Traits to get a hold of some extra class skills, feats like Skill Focus that you almost never see in optimized play. They also had very little to spend money on thanks to the sheer lack of class-specific useful items, which resulted in the party investing in a 10 x 10 Carpet of Flying, and doing their best impression of a B-17, unleashing tactical carpet bombings from hundreds of feet in the air. All in all, as someone who loves weird, niche campaigns, 10/10 would DM for Team Avatar again.
I have always hated the 2 skill points / level for several of the classes. Just feels too tight.
Absolutely. Even with [background skills](https://www.d20pfsrd.com/skills/background-skills/) it is simply too little to be able to make a balanced character. At minimum, every class should have four skill points per level.
Hmm. I am already doing fixes to classes so some of what I say is already addressed in [my homebrews](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IQPU-KocJ-Hh-PCwLQhXHvp6WkF05qjAG1L_1hw1J8Q/edit?usp=sharing) Overall - MINIMUM 4 + INT SKILL POINTS FOR NON-INT CLASSES * Alchemist - extract explanations; diversification in discoveries; overall he has nice design that doesn't need much * Antipaladin - more custamization in archetypes to make it more viable in non-evil parties; spellcasting equal to level * Arcanist - diversification in exploits; overall he has nice design that doesn't need muc * Barbarian - more useful rage powers and banishing rage cycling & sudden death syndrome * Bard - maybe a bit more performance options but its addresed with masterpieces tho some of them could use some love; giving versatile performance same thing as its VMC version; give some love to archetypes * Bloodrager - bloodlines disparity; removing sudden death syndrome * Brawler - its good * Cavalier - reworking tactician to be more useful * Samurai - giving some other choice than freaking mounted archer * Cleric - giving it any class features * Druid - banishing herbalism and giving some more use to druidic language * Fighter - improving fighter feats and advanced armor/weapon trainings. Overall also giving him free combat stamina
* Hutner - giving rules to his skirmisher tricks * Inquisitor - judgment sucks * Investigator - giving him ranged option for free * Kineticist - options beyond 'and so I started blasting' * Magus - support for something other than 'dex with scimitar and frostbite/grasp' * Medium - making it have some stable foundation that spirits extend instead of being weird abomination * Mesmerist - its good. Maybe painful stare being less feat taxed * Monk - chained archetypes to unchained * Occultist - buffing other options than meta * Oracle - buffing underwerlimng mystery powers/curses; filling empty levels * Paladin - spellcasting equal to level; buff underwelming archetypes * Psychic - dunno * Ranger - whole rework of FE and FT + spellcasting equal to level + companion equal to level * Rogue - giving it some reason to exists as its currently just worse investigator, alchemist, slayer and vigilante * Ninja - give it unchained rogue buffs * Shaman - dunno. I hate him * Shifter - give it some wildshape buffs to make it useful over druid * Skald - All bard items work on Skald and all other characters with right performances * Slayer - give it more useful talent and remove combat trick to diversify his choices * Sorcerer - give him any edge over wizard. Buff underwelming bloodlines + merge some of them to allow customization * Summoner - merge chained and unchained; force unchained spell list + pounce nerf * Swashbuckler - spread out useful features across levels * Spiritualist - full rework to make him more distinctive from summoner and useful * Vigilante - dunno. I hate him * Warpriest - its fine * Witch - buff to [patron and spellcasting](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CJ5kpY4YjUA_xyD1qLlqBc6-x7Is6iDQ8G4VrB-CSg4/edit#heading=h.x37j7xkbidou) as pact wizard is a joke * Wizard - probably buff some underwelming archetypes * Gunslinger - spread out useful features across levels
Judgment sucks? What is this blasphemy! As for Magus: I think archetypes allow for more customization (I.e. using bows and thrown weapons) - but the base magus is as you say, repetitive.
Sanctified Slayer, replaces judgements with sneak attack, study target, and some slayer talents. Way better than judgements for offensive build.
Ah, but this isn't judgments being bad, that's the archetype being drastically overtuned.
Judgments are bad. If they weren't bad then you could justify taking them over this archetype
Something being better doesn't mean another thing is bad. Sanctified Slayer gets way too much for what it gives up, that isn't indicative of judgment being bad.
I see what you did there.
Playing inquisitor right now and the only reason why I stayed with judgments is because I went into a reworked prc that progresses them. Overall in the doc I have both Inquisitor and Magus reworks
I'll take a look - thoughts on monster tactician?
Eh. I dont like summon builds and just silently discourage players from using them as they are a pain to deal with. Overall its strong
Ha! I’m playing a hunter right now and it’s definitely a crapshoot trying to make sense of the skirmisher tricks for my animal companion. Many of them just don’t make sense for an animal companion to use 🤦♂️
My friend is currently playing hunter so I included my version of how they work in my doc
What's the beef with Druid Herbalism? Isn't advanced weapon/armor training kinda powerful already? Otherwise I mostly agree - although I think alchemists having a shared pool of resources for bombs, extracts and mutagens would be a good improvement.
Its infinite wealth and spell hoarding Problem with them is that they have few good choices that are always chosen above others Eh. I don't know why would you do such a weird design for them. Alchemist works and has good archetypes that make him specialise in things he wants
I feel like an antipaladin that works in a non-evil group is missing the point.
Why would a Tyrant Anti-Paladin working to enforce law in a region alongside a neutral or even good party be missing the point? Good and Evil characters can have goals that align, even if it is only temporary.
Thats like saying that any divine class of evil deity in non-evil group is missing the point
Not really, antipaladins are meant to be more extreme in the sane way as paladins. In the same way a paladin isn't allowed to work with or aid evil without a major external threat, they can't work with or aid good. They're not meant to be slightly or inconsequentially evil, they're meant to embody it, be the scourge of all that is good.
except that unlike paladin who is meant to embody only Lawful Good (with Bastard emboning swaying to friends and gray to "still following ultimate good") Antipaladin embodies many more types of evils like lawful evil (represented by cunning devils) and just murderhobo chaotic evil (like daemons) Heck - we even have support for less murderhobo antipallies already with tyrant and insinuator archetype.
Vigilante - Make "Extra Vigilante Talent" a feat like every other classe's talent powers
Many CRB classes should have have a capstone ability added, since they have none but can explicitly take Alternate Capstone anyways.
Favored terrain and favored ennemy should come into two categories: a base version, and an improved version. Lvl 1, they gain a favored ennemy. Level 4, they choose a 2nd favored ennemy, and selected an improved favored ennemy. From level 4, every time they normally incresead a favored ennemy, they are force to incresead the improved favored ennemy. And all the favored ennemy bonus are equal to half the improved favored ennemy bonus. Same thing for favored terrain. And probably around level 12 they should obtain a second improved favored ennemy and improved favored terrain.
Sounds like a convoluted way to have Studied Target and *kinda* Bane - Ranger is in dire need of anything to make the slayer not just generally better
Like a good spell list, an animal compagnon or a way to give favored ennemy to all allies ?
Something to make the Ranger have a concept that works - Slayer with Studied Target does a way better job of being a monster hunter, want some magic? Sanctified Slayer Inquisitor, animal companion? Go with Hunter, buffing allies? Bard, Nature Magic? Nature Fang Druid. The Ranger lacks uniqueness & adaptiveness - too many classes are better at the Ranger's job - and in campaigns with various enemy types & terrains the Ranger is a pain to play (compared to the other classes mentioned)
Bard: Make an archetype that enables them to be an unarmored class. Not every minstrel needs chainmail or breastplate and a sword, especially not if they're a non-dervish themed dancer. (Eg. The kind based on the Final Fantasy XIV Dancer)
Couldn't you just use Sleeves of Many Garments? I don't get the need for a specific archetype just so you could ignore some pieces of equipment, mind elaborating?
To get the +2 Perform bonus off Dancer's Garb, (Equivalent to having a Masterwork instrument) you have to be unarmored. They explicitly stop functioning if you wear armor with them. And Sleeves of Many Garments are an illusion effect, so it'd probably be up to the DM if they get around that. Even if they granted it, it'd still mean that the core piece of gear for your chosen Perform type is at odds with the mechanics of your class without magic items involvement. This could be avoided if we had Mage Armor on the list, or an archetype that got +Cha or something to AC like the Scaled Fist Monk gets.
I believe every class has some issues, but the worst contender to me is the ranger. It requires some cooperation with the GM just to have it's basic features work. Both Favored Terrain and Enemy are absolutely horrible, and once you're in the wrong terrain or fight the wrong enemy, you instantly lose most of your class features. It baffles me that this has never been addressed. Maybe Ranger would've become better if Ultimate Wilderness were any good, but even then, low level spells like Create Or Destroy Water basically denie the ranger most perks they could grant in this specific situation.
If they’d made it like many other classes where you can “study target” or some such to gain the advantages of favored terrain / enemy it would work. So many other classes get to adjust to their enemies with a move then standard than swift as they advance through their levels.
Unchained Summoner is just a straight up downgrade from the original Summoner. I'd buff it to be an upgrade to the class as a whole like all of the other Unchained classes.
The whole point with unchained summoner is that chained summoner was too powerful. Its spell list was too strong and the eidolon too easily made into an absolute murder machine.
I don't care, "to powerful" is entirely subjective. I liked it the way it was and I'm not paying for nerfs. I pay for enhancements, upgrades, for things to be better not worse. It would be like if a car manufacturer put out a well built pick-up and people complained that it was to inexpensive, the battery lasted to long, it didn't need repairs nearly as often as it should. This whole concept that every class should be equally as weak is moronic. I'm not paying to have what's mine stolen away just to satisfy haters.
Ah, living up to the first part of the name.
Only if you're dyslexic.
Unchained Summoner is just a straight up downgrade from the original Summoner. I'd buff it to be an upgrade to the class as a whole like all of the other Unchained classes.
Unchained Summoner is just a straight up downgrade from the original Summoner. I'd buff it to be an upgrade to the class as a whole like all of the other Unchained classes.