[Dreamscarred Press] Path of War: Expanded! (Discussion Thread IV)

[NineThePuma]

Well, you've got Warlord, Zealot or Mandala Adept Mystic. Use the abilities you want, don't use the ones you don't want and just focus on your Sorcerer/bladecasterness. All your Initiating base class is doing is providing a vehicle to get to the character you actually want to play.

The character I want to play is an Intimidate focused Cha-Initiator who isn't gimped and doesn't have class features focused around party buffing but ALSO isn't restricted to 9th level.

Also, Mandala Adept isn't a thing available to me anymore.

[Vhaidara]

You're hardly gimped by not using Warleader or the Tacticals. That's like saying Warder is gimped if they don't run a 16+ Dex, because Clad in Steel raises the max dex bonus of full plate.

[NineThePuma]

... Why isn't the Warder just buying a +6 to Dex item?

[Elricaltovilla]

The character I want to play is an Intimidate focused Cha-Initiator who isn't gimped and doesn't have class features focused around party buffing but ALSO isn't restricted to 9th level.

Also, Mandala Adept isn't a thing available to me anymore.

Don't think of it as being gimped, think of it as being focused.

The last session of Pathfinder I played, I was a warder and I didn't use my Defensive Focus once in five different combats. You're not going to use every ability you have in every combat, no matter how central they are to the class. If you're choosing not to use certain abilities, then all you're doing is making it easier to determine which abilities to use in combat.

Really, it sounds like a roleplay thing, not a mechanics thing.

[Vhaidara]

... Why isn't the Warder just buying a +6 to Dex item?

Because you have better things to do with 36k gold than +3 to AC?

[Kaidinah]

Well, I adore the Brutal Slayer. Really, its darn rocking! Though Muscle Memory seems like such a strong ability to not replace anything.

[squiggit]

Not exactly the solution you want but the Bruising Intellect trait makes an intimidate focused warder or harbinger (or vigilante) pretty functional.

Also remember when adept died there was talk of another VGA mystic to replace it.

Been thinking about it and.. What about a chaos themed archetype? Charisma and magic tend to have reckless connotations with the way sorcerer and wilders are fluffed and one of the MA's other features I liked was that it fully randomized your recovery.

Seems like you could expand on that and make something out of it

[Elricaltovilla]

Well, I adore the Brutal Slayer. Really, its darn rocking! Though Muscle Memory seems like such a strong ability to not replace anything.

Stalkers only get light armor proficiency, and Brutal Slayer is no different. The Brutal Slayer encourages you to dump DEX, but that would shoot your AC and Saves into the pits so Muscle Memory is there to help make the archetype less MAD. And if you go Full Plate for some reason, you're really only picking up +1 or 2 AC.

[NineThePuma]

Really, it sounds like a roleplay thing, not a mechanics thing.

Let me rephrase then.

"When are we getting a Cha based Initiator who isn't a (to use the 4e term) Leader" because right now we've got two of them who have a lot of thematic overlap.

Not exactly the solution you want but the Bruising Intellect trait makes an intimidate focused warder or harbinger (or vigilante) pretty functional.

My problem there is that I've made 4 harbingers in the last 3 weeks.

[Seerow]

Well, you've got Warlord, Zealot or Mandala Adept Mystic. Use the abilities you want, don't use the ones you don't want and just focus on your Sorcerer/bladecasterness. All your Initiating base class is doing is providing a vehicle to get to the character you actually want to play.

I always thought the point of having archetypes was so you never have abilities you don't want, so you can trade away the ones you don't want for ones you do want. And if the abilities you don't want make up too much of the class for it to make sense giving up all of those abilities, then you should probably look at a different class.

Seriously, you're the archetype guy. I find it really strange to hear you of all people saying "If you don't want that ability on your character, don't use it!". Wanting a cha based character that is not a buffer is a completely reasonable request, and insisting that having cha must translate directly to being a buffer/leader is really weird. I mean yes, there is obviously synergy there if you want to be a buffer with Cha, but that doesn't mean that is all Cha should be able to do.

[Elricaltovilla]

I always thought the point of having archetypes was so you never have abilities you don't want, so you can trade away the ones you don't want for ones you do want. And if the abilities you don't want make up too much of the class for it to make sense giving up all of those abilities, then you should probably look at a different class.

Were it up to me, it would have been done that way. But it's not up to me, so I have to write archetypes based on the existing rules for them.

Seriously, you're the archetype guy. I find it really strange to hear you of all people saying "If you don't want that ability on your character, don't use it!". Wanting a cha based character that is not a buffer is a completely reasonable request, and insisting that having cha must translate directly to being a buffer/leader is really weird. I mean yes, there is obviously synergy there if you want to be a buffer with Cha, but that doesn't mean that is all Cha should be able to do.

I'm the Archetypes guy, yes. I write lots of archetypes, but I also have to look at archetypes and frequently go "no, that isn't going to work." Or someone else will come along and say that to me. There's more to designing an archetype than going to a chart and finding a blank square to fill in.

In this case though, Nine is actually trading away a large number of leadership features for Sorcer/bladecaster features. Depending on the build, it could have as little as one warlord level, which means that everything Nine is complaining about won't even matter, because they were traded away, just like with an archetype.

[NineThePuma]

In this case though, Nine is actually trading away a large number of leadership features for Sorcer/bladecaster features. Depending on the build, it could have as little as one warlord level, which means that everything Nine is complaining about won't even matter, because they were traded away, just like with an archetype.

I used Sorcerer compatibility as an example of something gained, not referencing my specific build. In the specific case, I ultimately decided "Screw PoW, I'll go ask my GM if I can port Crusader up from 3.5" since it's fairly clear at this point that you guys do not intend to add a non-Leader Cha focused initiator.

[CGNefarious]

My problem there is that I've made 4 harbingers in the last 3 weeks.

I fail to see how that could ever be a problem.

[NineThePuma]

I fail to see how that could ever be a problem.

As awesome as Lord_Gareth is, I eventually end up longing for diversity every now and again.

[Anlashok]

It doesn't seem that crazy: Cha supports leaders well, but it also supports swashbucklers and ronin and mysterious strangers and dashing rogues and so on.

Not like we've had any allegiance to mental-attribute stereotypes anyways. Neither the Warder nor the Harbinger are particularly scholastic. Heck, the harbinger's fluff practically screams charisma, but they're smart instead. Because that's cool. Likewise I'd say the default mystic is more sorcerer than sage.

[IZ42]

Is there an Unquiet Grave Style or something similar anywhere? I've got a character I'm building and the other discipline styles he qualifies for aren't that interesting.

[Vhaidara]

No, Grave and Pyramid lack styles currently. Those are only in place for the mainline PoW disciplines.

[IZ42]

Ah, thank you. Though an Unquiet Grave style could end up pretty cool.

[Lord_Gareth]

I used Sorcerer compatibility as an example of something gained, not referencing my specific build. In the specific case, I ultimately decided "Screw PoW, I'll go ask my GM if I can port Crusader up from 3.5" since it's fairly clear at this point that you guys do not intend to add a non-Leader Cha focused initiator.

Well, yeah. Charisma + Warfare sorta naturally equals leadership. Crusader's an example of it not doing that, but we're also not remaking crusader. Do you have another angle on charisma-without-leadership? The combination of martial prowess and force of personality has been leadery for long enough that you can still find it in Crusader's fluff, god forbid anywhere else.

I empathize with you having trouble getting your specific concept around, but not every specific concept is going to get supported. There are some I want installed that aren't getting installed and I'm design lead on the damn book, man. If something down the line seems appropriate for Charisma and ends up not being leadery, it'll happen. Nothing has so far.

Not like we've had any allegiance to mental-attribute stereotypes anyways. Neither the Warder nor the Harbinger are particularly scholastic. Heck, the harbinger's fluff practically screams charisma, but they're smart instead. Because that's cool. Likewise I'd say the default mystic is more sorcerer than sage.

This on the other hand we've covered in depth. Look, if you've got a problem with Wisdom being force of will, take it up with Paizo and Wizards of the Coast. In the meantime, Mystic fits Wisdom rather well and the only thing "encouraging" Charisma is Paizo's arbitrary and restrictive stance that ARCANE IS NEVER WIS GAIS. If I have to re-explain why Harbi is Int, I will, but I have to say I'm getting a little tired of doing so. The idea that smart people have emotions should not be shocking.

[Elricaltovilla]

I used Sorcerer compatibility as an example of something gained, not referencing my specific build. In the specific case, I ultimately decided "Screw PoW, I'll go ask my GM if I can port Crusader up from 3.5" since it's fairly clear at this point that you guys do not intend to add a non-Leader Cha focused initiator.

I can't answer questions regarding your specific build unless you talk about your specific build. If you're not trying to get sorcerer casting or Bladecaster, then discussing them and not discussing the thing you're actually trying to do is only going to make the issue more confused and make it more difficult for me or any of the other PoW staff or other posters in the thread to advise you.

I'm willing to listen to what you guys want. I'm willing to experiment with all kinds of ideas and champion the ones that get good traction. But I resent the implication that it is somehow my fault that the one specific thing you want to do with one specific character you're making isn't coming out perfectly.

[Vhaidara]

If I have to re-explain why Harbi is Int, I will, but I have to say I'm getting a little tired of doing so. The idea that smart people have emotions should not be shocking.

I take offense to this. All intelligent people are Vulcans.

I actually had an idea for a Cha based Harbinger. I have a name, but no abilities.

Fear the potentially forthcoming Hypinger! Instead of drawing on darkness and angst, you draw on positive emotions and hype.

[Nyaa]

Transmogrifist 8 / Brutal Slayer 2 / Awakened Blade doesn't lose AC by increasing size. He actually gains 4 AC from STR-boosting class features, and doesn't care about max dex(str) bonus because it's for muggles who can't manifest inertial armor. Though this build ends up with awkward 16ML/16IL. Do IL/ML-increasing traits allow me to pick higher level maneuvers and powers?

[stack]

Shouldn't armor of scars come at the same levels as the regular stalker bonus? According to the SRD, dodge bonus starts at level 2, then every 4 after, brutal slayer starts at 1. Intentional?

[Elricaltovilla]

Transmogrifist 8 / Brutal Slayer 2 / Awakened Blade doesn't lose AC by increasing size. He actually gains 6 AC from STR-boosting class features, and doesn't care about max dex(str) bonus because it's for muggles who can't manifest inertial armor. Though this build ends up with awkward 16ML/16IL. Do IL/ML-increasing traits allow me to pick higher level maneuvers and powers?

As long as your IL/ML doesn't exceed your HD those traits will increase your IL or ML for reals, so yes, you can learn higher level maneuvers/power.

[NineThePuma]

I'm willing to listen to what you guys want.

I want an option to use Cha as my initiating stat on a full initiator WITHOUT having to play Zealot or Warlord, both of whom are EXTREMELY heavy on support and arguably have a lot of their power tuned toward buffing the party. I want to have the option to play a Charisma character who is soft spoken but persuasive off the field of battle and a supremely technical combatant who is abnormally graceful, flitting around the battle field like a dancer, or one who is Intimidate Focused and incredibly terrifying, but not particularly good at leading people and is super showy and dramatic in fights. I want an option where I can safely take Warlord into a party that isn't going to have other characters who are going to benefit from my class.

As it stands, my option is to go grab the wonky and incomplete Pharoah or up-port Crusader to fill either of those niches.

[Ironsides]

The reason I would like to see another Charisma based initiator is because the Warlord's class features don't work with the undead. I am going to play a gestalt game and I wanted to remake a Dread Necromancer from 3.5 using spherecasting from Spheres of Power and be a full initiator (and I want to eventually become a vampire later in the campaign). However while the Warlord at first glance seems PERFECT for this it isn't. The undead are immune to all morale effects which includes morale bonuses from his gambits and tactical presence. The reason I don't want to play a zealot is because I am unfamiliar with psionics and I dont want to keep track of psionic powers as well as spherecasting stuff.

[Vhaidara]

Zealot has no powers unless you use an archetype. Their power points are more like animus than normal power points, unless you mix in another psionic class.

[Anlashok]

This on the other hand we've covered in depth. Look, if you've got a problem with Wisdom being force of will, take it up with Paizo and Wizards of the Coast. In the meantime, Mystic fits Wisdom rather well and the only thing "encouraging" Charisma is Paizo's arbitrary and restrictive stance that ARCANE IS NEVER WIS GAIS. If I have to re-explain why Harbi is Int, I will, but I have to say I'm getting a little tired of doing so. The idea that smart people have emotions should not be shocking.

You don't have to re-explain anything. I was just merely pointing out that use of mental stats outside the normal predefined archetypes is something you've already done: Harbingers "channel their inner negative emotions" but aren't charisma based. Mystics use raw, untapped power in their blood, but aren't bound to the same paradigm as a sorcerer or wilder. I certainly am not complaining about anything. These are good things. I'm just saying that you guys have already proved that you can fiddle with design space like that.

Do you have another angle on charisma-without-leadership?

Scoundrels of all flavors really. Your fear inspiring ronin mercenary, the dashing swashbuckler, the charming thief. All probably high charisma and not really inclined toward leadership.

[AGrinningCat]

I know Harbinger has already been shot down by Nine, but a current character in the play test is running a neat trick using Black Seraph Damage grants Intimidate and Crimson Countess 'Free damage at start of turn vs claimed targets' to basically keep people shakened damn near the entire fight.

[NineThePuma]

I'd seen the trick bandied around.

I think my biggest issue is that both Cha initiators occupy a very similar design space ("Leader/Party-Support") while the others have different design spaces (Warder is a Tank, Harbinger is a debuffy striker, Stalker/Vigilante is/are a DPS focused striker type(s), Mystic's a supporty blasty type that can be strikey) and... Iunno. Warlord and Zealot don't really feel very different, I guess.