Tinker base class (WoW core rulebook)

[Chronologist]

I'm going to be playing in a high-tech, low-arcane magic D&D campaign in a few weeks, and I remembered that I had a copy of the World of Warcraft 3.5 book. Lo and behold, there's a class called the Tinker, which can be summarized as a Rogue except instead of trap-oriented and sneaky class features, he can make technological devices and blow **** up on-par with a Sorcerer.

My question is, for those who have read the book, how balanced is the class? The math parts aren't an issue, I've got an Excel sheet set up already for those. The game is going to be Pathfinder, is the Tinker balanced with Pathfinder classes? Are the races balanced by Pathfinder standards?

I know it's an obscure book, but any help would be welcome.

Chronologist

 

[Kvantum]

Why not just play an Alchemist from the APG? It's a skills-oriented blow-stuff-up type, just with more weird mutation-inducing concoctions rather than gizmos and doodads.

 

[Cor_Malek]

Why not just play an Alchemist from the APG? It's a skills-oriented blow-stuff-up type, just with more weird mutation-inducing concoctions rather than gizmos and doodads.

It's a very good idea, and it's fairly popular too. You only change the fluff:
- bombs might stay as bombs.
- mutagens become mechanical enhancements (like an exoskeleton), like mechanical gloves, a thinking-helmet, and such. Highly unstable design(goblin-like, actually), that lasts only for a while but gives great effects while it lasts. It'd be actually far easier to justify why only you're able to use those (complicated and non-ergonomic design)
- instead of potions, make traps - if anything, it's less imba than the original version

All you need is a "go" from DM.

If you like the tinker you have better - use the Alchemist as a benchmark to compare to (in terms of power/balance).