Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Starfox" data-source="post: 6184936" data-attributes="member: 2303">A first shot at a Daredevil archetype for Pathfinder is up here:<a href="http://hastur.net/wiki/Daredevil_%28Apath%29" target="_blank">http://hastur.net/wiki/Daredevil_(Apath)</a>The changes focus on replacing sneak attack with other combat abilities, so all of the new daredevil tricks are combative in nature.It is of course not playtested or even seriously balanced. Also I should check the names of the various abilities for collision with other official terms in Pathfinder. It is not made for Next, but I think Pathfinder is a lot closer to Next than 4E and my previous 4E Daredevil class was, so it can act as a start for an attempt to replace sneak attack in Next too. However, next has much fewer abilities on characters that Pathfinder has, and this class is rules-heavy even by Pathfinder terms. I do not feel something of this level of complexity belongs in Next, possibly as an expansion but not in the basic set.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Starfox, post: 6184936, member: 2303"] A first shot at a Daredevil archetype for Pathfinder is up here: [url]http://hastur.net/wiki/Daredevil_%28Apath%29[/url] The changes focus on replacing sneak attack with other combat abilities, so all of the new daredevil tricks are combative in nature. It is of course not playtested or even seriously balanced. Also I should check the names of the various abilities for collision with other official terms in Pathfinder. It is not made for Next, but I think Pathfinder is a lot closer to Next than 4E and my previous 4E Daredevil class was, so it can act as a start for an attempt to replace sneak attack in Next too. However, next has much fewer abilities on characters that Pathfinder has, and this class is rules-heavy even by Pathfinder terms. I do not feel something of this level of complexity belongs in Next, possibly as an expansion but not in the basic set. [/QUOTE]

Verification