I wish classes were more dipable

[harpy]

Having played systems like Star Wars Saga, which was pretty much built from the ground up to be a dip-friendly d20 system, I find Pathfinder's dipableness is kind of... meh.

I understand that Paizo was moving away from that, changing the multiclass penalty into a multiclass bonus, and giving capstone powers, but if you find the modular element of the game fun there just seems to be something lacking.

This isn't as big of an issue with spellcasters since they have always been geared towards rewarding deeper investment, but for the martial classes things can feel really constrained when your trying to create certain character concepts. Because the martial classes have much less flexibility than spellcasters you tend to have to invest in several levels to grab enough different class features that help round out the character concept.

I guess I feel like rather than playing with legos, I'm playing with an erector set. They both have a lot of modular parts, but the erector set isn't as fine grained in delivering certain effects, or you have to scale up the model (with characters it means needing to reach upper mid levels) to get the details you want.

Perhaps the APG will fix some of this feeling I have, perhaps we'll have some alternative class features that will make dips into various classes more worthewhile. Unfortunately the new base classes don't seem to tickle my dipable mood. A lot of those concepts seem to be coming into their own at higher levels rather than at first level.

It would be great to see some "limited base classes" which would be kind of an inversion of prestige classes. Rather than being a class with prerequisites, these are base classes that only go for 3 to 5 levels, designed to jump you into a concept and then let you branch out.

 

[Azgulor]

I've long been a proponent (all thru 3.x) of greater variety of non-spellusing classes. Yes, you may be able to pull it off with a Fighter or Rogue, but usually by bringing along class baggage that doesn't fit the original concept.

The Conan RPG did a very nice job of providing non-spellcasters a niche and I think the same could easily be done within the PFRPG. My hope is that the Cavalier will not be the only one.

I mean, seriously, no one seems to have an issue with numerous variations on spellcasters that ultimately utilize the same spell lists but people balk at the idea of classes dedicated to archers, knights, swashbucklers, pirates, nomads, gladiators, thugs, etc.

I like your idea, though. Why do these concepts have to fit within a 20-level class? If a prestige class can go 5 or 10 levels, why not have a class that starts at level 1 and runs for a finite amount: 5, 10, etc.?

 

[HatedRogue]

I spent time trying to figure out what to do for non caster classes to add flavor to the class and give them something to do in combat. I did my best with the first book i put out and plan on making more books as i go. Now as it is the class that i made does not progress that fast at lower levels and it makes it a bit hard to multi-class with it but because i gave a melee class options like a sorcerer gets bloodline. the class progresses as it seems it should. I agree that it would be nice to have something start off fast but when classes do that it gets a bit ruff on a GM much like adding a level of monk to something because of how powerful they seem to kick it off. With pathfinders addition to all the classes giving options where none was before it feels good to be able to stay in a class and draw a roleplaying personalty from the chooses you make as you progress.
I guess if you are a power gamer then the thought of adding base classes that start off fast would be appealing.

 

[Chronologist]

I like the idea of lower level caps for base classes, it kind of reminds me of the prestige paladin and ranger. I think it would be really interesting to cap base classes at 10 levels (or maybe even 5 for some) and focus on multiclassing and prestige classes. Add in a method of balancing "gish" casting and rework the progression, and I think we have a great idea here.

 

[Walking Dad]

I like the idea of lower level caps for base classes, it kind of reminds me of the prestige paladin and ranger. I think it would be really interesting to cap base classes at 10 levels (or maybe even 5 for some) and focus on multiclassing and prestige classes. Add in a method of balancing "gish" casting and rework the progression, and I think we have a great idea here.

... don't like it. They also tried something like that in d20 modern (basic classes, advanced classes, prestige classes).

What about if I wanted my 'fighter' to stay 'fighter'? Making a new prestige class, 'The Generalist', that provides the same bonus as a straight fighter class? I think the way are more options in a class, like more choos-able class features, like fighting styles or SWSE talent trees.

 

[Chronologist]

What if classes gave the core features at levels 1-5 or 1-10, and after that they gave very little? Then you combine that with having prestige classes ADD abilities rather than replace them. Kind of like 4.0 but not as terrible.

For example, if you wanted your Fighter to stay fighter, he would still get bonus feats (at a slightly slower pace) but you could also have him take a specialization/prestige class (like Weapon Master or Kensai). You could always just design a prestige class that just gives a bonus feat every now and then, if you're sure you just want streight-up Fighter.

 

[Glade Riven]

This is kinda silly...one thing I've noticed is that in Pathfinder, a lot of the base classes increase flexibility. The other thing is that should you choose to multi-class, the only thing you really lose out on is either an extra skill point or HP per level in the other class and a capstone, but usually cross-classing has other benefits.

For instance: a fighter has extra fighter feats on even levels...but if you want, you can have a rogue use rogue talents to take fighter feats instead (and, at 10 level, any feat they qualify for). Fighters still get their weapon and armor aptitudes and have a higher BAB. Sure, some of the otehr classes are a little more thematically restricted, but it is still more flexible than 3.5. Once you dig into that big 3.5 feat list, there are plenty of thematic options.

'porting prestige classes to Pathfinder typically requires maybe a HD change and tweaking the requirements. The Prestige class that Pathfinder put in the Golaron campaign setting under 3.5 is not changed at all under Pathfinder RPG. This means there is a whole bunch of stuff (even d20 modern, if you want) that you can use with Pathfinder.

I guess I fail to see what the problem is...

 

[azhrei_fje]

What was the point of this post? You also posted it over on the Paizo forums and got plenty of response there... why here also?

(It's probably something like "I wanted a wider audience". But given the number of responses on the Paizo boards...)