Pathfinder 1E [Pathfinder] Some class questions

[Shisumo]

Throwing together some random questions I wanted to ask, all around how various classes fit into the world.

1) Clerics - I get that there's no default pantheon (at least not for humans), though I guess the elves kind of have one, so the GM can insert his/her preferred one to "underlay" the Clergy, but I'm curious about the Clergy itself. Does it produce clerics? If so, how would you describe the faith's alignment, domains and favored weapon?

2) Paladins - This seems like a setting better suited to "secular" paladins (that is, paladins empowered by their own sense of righteousness) than "religious" ones, but given the crusade-like nature of the Victories, I was wondering if the Clergy produces any paladins either.

3) Summoners - Can they even work in this setting? (I'm thinking not.)

 

[RangerWickett]

Throwing together some random questions I wanted to ask, all around how various classes fit into the world.

1) Clerics - I get that there's no default pantheon (at least not for humans), though I guess the elves kind of have one, so the GM can insert his/her preferred one to "underlay" the Clergy, but I'm curious about the Clergy itself. Does it produce clerics? If so, how would you describe the faith's alignment, domains and favored weapon?

The clergy is wildly pantheistic, with as many gods as the Catholic church has saints, and yes, it pops out clerics by the bushel. But with the sole exception of Triegenes (a mortal fisherman who pulled the secret of divinity out of the sea with a net) and Srasama (killed 500 years ago), I don't plan to mention any specific gods.

I suppose for Triegenes you could go for the domains Liberation (freedom or revolution), Nobility (martyr), and Water (oceans), with the favored weapon of a net. And maybe use the 'Self-Perfection' alternate channeling rule from Ultimate Magic.

2) Paladins - This seems like a setting better suited to "secular" paladins (that is, paladins empowered by their own sense of righteousness) than "religious" ones, but given the crusade-like nature of the Victories, I was wondering if the Clergy produces any paladins either.

Well here's the thing. The traditional 'knight in shining armor' paladin doesn't have as large a role as it once would have for the Clergy. They've secured their borders pretty well, and supernatural evil doesn't encroach very often. There aren't handy 'bad guys' for Lawful Good types to hunt without qualms, so while there may be the occasional paladin who feels a call to be a hero -- and while there are definitely orders of knights who claim they've got gods on their side -- there wouldn't be large quantities of paladins.

One possible place for paladins to show up, if you tweak them a bit, is in the forests of Elfaivar, trying to protect Crisillyir and other nations' colonists from attacks by the locals. But that's probably better-served by rangers.

3) Summoners - Can they even work in this setting? (I'm thinking not.)

Well, you can certainly summon critters from other planes for short durations, but it would make the most sense if a summoner's eidolon was fey- or shadow-themed, since the Dreaming and the Bleak Gate are easier to access. Plus there are elemental planes that are visible in the night sky.

Remember, players can break the rules of the setting a little, as long as they're aware of the fact that they're unique. If a summoner had a fire elemental-style eidolon, scholars would figure he's just drawing on magic from Jiese and creating the creature, rather than summoning an actual entity.

 

[Rugult]

One thought for summoners was to use them as a specialized Technologist. Basically, the Eidolon would represent a very advanced contraption that would act as companion to the 'summoner'. Spells could be various technological based abilities that the summoner uses.

 

[ridingsloth]

3) Summoners - Can they even work in this setting? (I'm thinking not.)

One of my players asked me the same thing. I decided that I couldn't quite justify the summoner with the restrictions on inter-planar travel in place. Of course, I'm also considering making Danor a much harsher place for magic than it is in the Player's Guide on the basis of "No magic means no magic!", so it's possible I'm just a terrible person.

One thought for summoners was to use them as a specialized Technologist

I wish I'd thought of this before character creation, I love this idea

 

[benfromidaho]

I love the idea of seeing Clerics and Paladins a little differently. What if Paladins were more akin to martial Inquisitors? I know [MENTION=63]RangerWickett[/MENTION] said that the Clergy have secured their borders, but they've got to require the occasional muscle to dispense holy justice against those the Clergy deem "Evil." I sort of see the Clergy a little more akin to Eberron religions in which clerics had a much more grey sense of good and evil.

 

[Shisumo]

Another question about classes - well, kinda, anyway. But I don't want to keep spamming the forum with threads, so I'll pretend like it is.

I note in the Player's Guide a reference to psionic classes, and

Spoiler

of course Sijhen from "Digging for Lies"

, and I found myself wondering what the angle the Pathfinder rules will take on psionics is. Will it be a mindspell sorcerer bloodline? Dreamscarred Press' excellent Psionics Unleashed? Something completely new?

 

[Rugult]

I found myself wondering what the angle the Pathfinder rules will take on psionics is. Will it be a mindspell sorcerer bloodline? Dreamscarred Press' excellent Psionics Unleashed? Something completely new?

I've spoken with [MENTION=63]RangerWickett[/MENTION] about this briefly and the basic plan would be to use Psionics Unleashed as it is THE source book for Psionics in Pathfinder, and it is easily accessible through the d20PFSRD.

Keeping the above in mind, Ryan is fairly inventive when it comes to design and his mind might come up with something entirely different. If that's the case, you can expect to see something 'unique'. Really, you should hopefully be seeing something unique in every adventure!

 

[RangerWickett]

Well, to be totally honest, I'm infected by the 2nd edition/4th edition mentality of "give it an interesting skin, and screw the mechanics" when it comes to NPCs, monsters, and pretty much anything the PCs don't have on their character sheets. DMs and players don't have to use the same rules.

It's a lot easier to say a 5th level monster has an attack bonus of of +11 because my party's best AC is 20 and I want it to be able to hit most of the time "so I'm giving it a +11 because that's the number that works best for the game," than it is to assemble an attack bonus of +11 by saying, "Okay, it's undead, but I don't want it to have so many HD it can't be turned, so I'll say it has 6 HD, but that only gives it a +3 BAB, so now I need to get +8 from somewhere else, so I guess it has a 26 Strength, though I really was envisioning it more as a nimble monster, so how about I give it a 26 Dex and Weapon Finesse, except now it's damage is kinda low, etc etc."

Rugult had to convince me that some PF folks would appreciate having monsters follow the monster-building rules, so I let him handle the fiddly bits of how many hit dice and feats he needs to get reasonable attack bonuses, hit points, and saves.

What I'm getting at is, it's up to Rugult how he converts to Pathfinder. In the 4e version, any psionic stuff we put in will do interesting things, but we don't have to only use options that have already been printed in some other sourcebook. Old school Mind Flayers had mind blast because whoever designed them thought it would be cool, not because the psionics supplement listed 'mind blast' as a power psychic creatures could take.

On the Player side of things, having listed options is excellent because it helps PCs of the same level be on equivalent footing. And it establishes what the baseline of the world is, so when a monster or NPC shows up and starts doing things PCs can't, the players can know, "Okay, that's ominous." (Or occasionally, "Okay, our GM is a bastard.") And those rules help the GM adjudicate how things play out whenever he does decide to wing it.

I know many groups play in ways different than how I do it, which is why I'm cool with letting Rugult worry about the fiddly bits. I just know that in the games I run, I make monster stuff up all the time, and as long as I stick to stats that are reasonable within the conceit of the setting, the players don't seem to care how I came up with those stats.

 

[benfromidaho]

[MENTION=53273]Rugult[/MENTION] Should I expect to "need" to use psionics, or is this only if my players want to?

 

[Shisumo]

@Rugult Should I expect to "need" to use psionics, or is this only if my players want to?

I'm rather hoping not, not because *I* don't want to (I'm actually rather excited about getting to use the copy of Psionics Unleashed sitting on my bedside table at the moment) but because I know it's sufficiently controversial among the general Pathfinder-playing audience (as a leftover from 3.5, basically) that I wouldn't want to see the potential readership reduced simply by its inclusion. That said, spell-equivalents aren't typically that hard to come up with for NPCs, and I would imagine a few sidebars (or one really long sidebar covering the whole adventure at the beginning) in a module including a psionic character should cover it. It's extra wordcount, but it is doable.