Pathfinder 1E Factotums in Pathfinder

[Chronologist]

Skill consistency would be nice for the factotum, but since by level 10 they're probably relying on Cunning Knowledge for that +10 skill check bonus, I don't see them as being consistent, more just having really good rolls when they put effort into it.

I think that giving the factotum some leadership abilities would fill up the dead levels and round it out nicely. The class can fill in for a fighter (albeit only for a short time), they can sneak attack like a rogue if they need to, they can heal, and they have arcane spells for support. All that's missing here is leadership abilities (ala Cunning assault posted above). Any thoughts on that?

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Err... Rogues do get such an ability.

Only on 3+ int skills. Not all of them.

 

[Zurai]

Only on 3+ int skills. Not all of them.

And how many skills does a rogue need to be able to take 10 on in combat? Of all the skills in Pathfinder, UMD is the only one that you can't take 10 on outside of combat, and the number of skills used in an average combat is exceedingly small.

And, if it's that important to you, Skill Mastery is selectable multiple times. Considering it's available 9 levels before the Bardic "take 10 at all times with every skill" ability, that's fair. If he wanted, the Rogue could get 18+6*Int skills with Skill Mastery, which covers every skill that's even remotely combat-useful and then some.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

18+6*int? Where are you getting that from? The Rogue, if he wanted to blow ALL his Rogue major abilities on skill mastery (are you even allowed to take it multiple times?) could take it about 3 times by level 19. That's 3*Int +9 skills. Furthermore, did PF change how skill mastery worked? In 3.5, many DMs ruled you could not use it for UMD, the one skill above alll others a Rogue would want to take 10 on. You're also neglecting that the Bardic ability is just the last of three benefits gained fro ma single class feature, Jack of All Trades. Expecting the Rogue to blow a similar number of gained benefits just ot equal 1/3 of the Bard's seems rather unfair. And even then, he's still unlikely to pull even, barring massive Int.

If "it should be better, because it's gained at level 19" is the rationale...why not have an auto-boost for the Rogue at level 19, so his Skill Mastery expands to cover every skill. Still no good because he could partially benefit before then...what if "Greater Skill Mastery" or whatever, functionally identical to the Bard ability and only available at level 19, replaced it? The Bard ability is either a) too powerful for any class or b) has no logical reason not to give it to Rogues and Factotems as well.

Sorry...rant. Back to the thread topic?

 

[Chronologist]

Yeah, back on topic everyone, just wanted to know if a leadership ability for the factotum would make them balanced for pathfinder.

 

[Zurai]

18+6*int? Where are you getting that from? The Rogue, if he wanted to blow ALL his Rogue major abilities on skill mastery (are you even allowed to take it multiple times?) could take it about 3 times by level 19.

Rogues get rogue talents every even level. Starting at 10th level, they can choose Advanced Talents instead of the normal list. Skill Mastery explicitly states it can be chosen more than once, choosing different skills each time. That means you can take it at 10th, 12th, 14th, 16th, 18th, and 20th levels, for 18+6*int mastered skills.

I notice you also conveniently dodged the question: Just how many skills do you actually need to take 10 on in combat? Because combat and UMD are the about the only situations take 10 is disallowed.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I notice you also conveniently dodged the question: Just how many skills do you actually need to take 10 on in combat? Because combat and UMD are the about the only situations take 10 is disallowed.

Because combat isn't the only time you may not be able to take ten, and the number of skills you could reasonably expect to use in combat varies by campaign, so I really can't answer the question.

Sorry, I went by the 3E advancement rate, forgot PF changed it for rogue advanced talents. Even so, why does the Rogue need ot spend several class features just ot get one (or 1/3, depending on your perspective) of the Bard's class features? If all skills at level 19 is fair game for the Bard, why not for the Rogue? Or, the Factotem. Is it broken? If it is, should the Bard even have it? Is it no big deal / "why are you getting so worked up over it"? Then it shouldn't be that unbalancing to give it to Rogues and Factotems, too.

 

[Jhaelen]

If all skills at level 19 is fair game for the Bard, why not for the Rogue?

What kind of argument is thisd supposed to be?
If being able to cast ninth level spells is okay for level 19 wizards and clerics, why not for the rogue?

Because it's a different class! The bard is supposed to become the ultimate jack-of-all-trades and the rogue isn't. It's as easy as that. If you want everything that a bard can do, I'd suggest playing a bard.

 

[Maidhc O Casain]

What kind of argument is thisd supposed to be?
If being able to cast ninth level spells is okay for level 19 wizards and clerics, why not for the rogue?

Because it's a different class! The bard is supposed to become the ultimate jack-of-all-trades and the rogue isn't. It's as easy as that. If you want everything that a bard can do, I'd suggest playing a bard.

What he said.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

What kind of argument is thisd supposed to be?
If being able to cast ninth level spells is okay for level 19 wizards and clerics, why not for the rogue?

Because it's a different class! The bard is supposed to become the ultimate jack-of-all-trades and the rogue isn't. It's as easy as that. If you want everything that a bard can do, I'd suggest playing a bard.

My bad, trying to compare the two most skill-oriented class on their class features related to...skills. Except in reality, a Bard gets about the same skill points and class skills as a Ranger, so...he can't even really claim to be the rogue's sole competetion.

I don't want everything a Bard can do. He can keep all the music abilities, his moderately good spellcasting, his armored casting...I just want to know why he's better at using skills than the Rogue. That's not "jack of all trades" any more than casting 9th level spells like a Wizard or having full BAB and a high HD like a Fighter would be.

Was bard better with...what? Nonweapon proficiencies (?) in earlier editions than the Rogue/Thief? In 3E, the only thing in core that gave Bards a possible edge was Inspire Competence, which they couldn't use on themselves. Maybe the Glibness spell. Bardic Knowledge wasn't truly a skill, I don't think that counts. In 3.0, Bards only got 4 +int skill points. So how come in PF, and really, not until very high level, are Bards suddenly catapulted to "best skill monkey in the game"?