Commander base class

[pawsplay]

I'd say it does require patience, concentration and so on.* Ever tried to be an effective leader while in the throes of an intense rage? Okay, probably not, sure, but there might just be a good reason for that.

* The active abilities even require a free action to maintain, each round.

I think if you yelled, "Stab them in the jim-jim!" it would be all the more effective if you looked like hate incarnate.

 

[SteelDraco]

I updated several things, adding a few new command pool powers and the Commander of the Dead feat. I also added complete descriptions of class abilities, rather than just my shorthand notes.

I added Mighty Strike and Sure Strike after building a few sample commanders, and discovering that they don't have very many commands at low levels that were useful in normal combat situations. I'm curious about their balance - Mighty Strike is a damage bonus if the ally hits as an immediate action, and Sure Strike allows an ally to reroll a failed attack roll. What do you guys think?

Oh, forgot this one in the edit.

Courageous Command
Prerequisites: Command pool ability, aura of courage
Your tactical acumen bolsters the benefit of your courageous spirit.
Benefit: All allies who are subject to an active tactic of yours gain the benefits of your aura of courage, even if they are outside of the normal area.

 

[pawsplay]

Why good Fort and poor Will?

 

[SteelDraco]

Why good Fort and poor Will?

The first draft had good Fort and Will, d8 hit dice, and average BAB. I decided to go for more combat-oriented, and two good saves, full BAB, and d10 HD seemed overpowered. I think the original stats would work too, just not how I wanted to go.

 

[pawsplay]

The first draft had good Fort and Will, d8 hit dice, and average BAB. I decided to go for more combat-oriented, and two good saves, full BAB, and d10 HD seemed overpowered. I think the original stats would work too, just not how I wanted to go.

So why not Good will and poor Fort?

 

[Icyshadowlord]

Just a random question: Can this be used in a 3.5 game, or does it need some tweaking before conversion?

Also, I gotta say I have always like classes like this. The 3.5 Marshal felt like it was lacking, and I never really was convinced with the 4e Warlord either. And this SORT OF reminds me of the Cavalier, but they are so far from each other that it doesn't fit to compare that class with this one.

 

[SteelDraco]

Just a random question: Can this be used in a 3.5 game, or does it need some tweaking before conversion?

Also, I gotta say I have always like classes like this. The 3.5 Marshal felt like it was lacking, and I never really was convinced with the 4e Warlord either. And this SORT OF reminds me of the Cavalier, but they are so far from each other that it doesn't fit to compare that class with this one.

The balance should be okay, though the design is intentionally very Pathfinder (power choices frequently, a single central pool for class abilities, and minimal dead levels). It's my first core class for Pathfinder, and I tried to follow their design principles.

I started with the cavalier for design, since it has group tactical powers. I just wanted to have the focus on that.

Paws: interesting thought. Just felt off to have a full BAB class that didnt have Fort as a good save, and I wanted them to be a "lead from the front" type.

 

[paradox42]

I have to agree with pawsplay, if you're going to go with just one good save, Will makes more sense because a Commander is (as a basic fictional role) a person who uses his brain to win battles, by getting subordinates to use their abilities most effectively towards some overarching goal that the individuals themselves can't necessarily see.

But honestly, given that Paladin and Ranger are both full BAB, and also get (admittedly minor) spellcasting to boot, I don't see a problem with giving the Commander good Fort and Will. Sure, the basic Fighter doesn't get good Will, but the basic Fighter can use armor and weapons better than the same-level Commander can in his wildest dreams.

Since this is my first time chiming in on this thread, I'll mention that I, too, really like the class concept and execution so far. I have to say that the idea of making a Death Knight or Cleric Lich, who has Commander levels and the Commander of the Dead feat, gives me shivers of evil delight!

 

[Scott DeWar]

not to throw a monkey wrench into the works, but what if this was a Prestige class with pre reqs of leadership, rage ability, min bab of X, .. .. .. .. ?

 

[SteelDraco]

not to throw a monkey wrench into the works, but what if this was a Prestige class with pre reqs of leadership, rage ability, min bab of X, .. .. .. .. ?

There's already a tactically-oriented prestige class; it was my intent to make it a base class option.