Building a character for PF, for the first time.

[Judge_Worm]

I've used Pathfinder material before, bbuuutttt, I've never actually played in the Pathfinder system before. So as a new experience (more or less) I've come seeking aid.

First off, I already know my race and alignment (LN Android), we're rolling for traits so that those won't affect the initial build. We also rolled stats :smallfurious: my rolls were 8, 8, 14, 16, 17, 18.

The plot- Dunno, the location is the Inner Sea however (which is why I chose android).

To the point. PF base classes generally equal 3.5 base classes, I know and understand this, so I want to use an ACF or class template thingy. I want a mostly martial class, and either a minor amount of spell casting (a la ranger or paladin) or face/skill monkey potential.

[Tuvarkz]

Question, what material do you have available for play? Paizo only? +DSP(and possibly playtests)/SoP?
If just Paizo, I'd reccomend the Inquisitor or the Magus.

[Secret Wizard]

Why would you recommend Inquisitor and Magus if he said he doesn't want much spellcasting?

Anyway, my personal recommendation is Ranger. It has lots of tools to skill money and the exact type of casting you want.

I would assign stats like this:

S18 D17+2 C14 I8+2 W16 CH8-2

I recommend you take the Guide archetype if you don't know anything about the campaign, so as not to waste your Favored Enemies.

[Tuvarkz]

Yeah, the Magus is a bit too much, but the Inquisitor can just keep his spells for utility stuff, in combat judgements+Bane will do most of the damage needed, no real need to use spells then.

[Florian]

To the point. PF base classes generally equal 3.5 base classes, I know and understand this, so I want to use an ACF or class template thingy. I want a mostly martial class, and either a minor amount of spell casting (a la ranger or paladin) or face/skill monkey potential.

Ah, not true. PF core/base classes in general have a "higher floor" of competency than 3.5 classes.
So if you´re comfortable with a class in 3.5 and want the same level of complexity, you´ll find it in one lower tier in PF.

For "simple yet somehow complex", take a look at the Slayer and Investigator base classes.

[Geddy2112]

THe unchained rogue can hold it's own in melee combat and is an excellent skillmonkey/face.They get dex to damage at level 3, so less MAD than other rogues. There are a ton of archetypes that trade away trap sense(which is mostly useless) for everything from minor magic ability,to better face skills, you name it.

Bloodrager is also a decent choice for a martial with a dash of spellcasting, I personally like the steelblood archetype so you can rock full plate and still use arcane magic.

[Callin]

Honestly I love the Slayers "Studied Target" mechanic. So I would recommend one. Played a Sanctified Slayer Inquisitor using a Falchion and loved he fact I had a use for my swifts. Felt like I really used my actions to full effect. Well its a move to start with, but it gets to be a swift at 7th.

[Rainshine]

I'm an alchemist fan, myself. If you go straight alchemist, you can grab the Vivisectionist to trade bombs for sneak attack, if you prefer. Extracts give you moderate self-buffs to deal with normal problems (flying, invisibility, etc.)
Investigator is an awesome skill monkey; Empiricist and Mastermind can both do an OK job on facing as well.

Neither is, however, a full BAB.

[AnonymousPepper]

I'd do an Inquisitor personally. The thing about Inquisitor is that, while it has the pluses of not being *particularly* complicated (basically, you have precisely four things you need to do - apply Judgments, apply Bane, spellcasting, and full-round attacking) and having a well-rounded kit (between good skill points, good face potential, good spell list, and great offensive abilities), the big thing about Inquisitor is that it's an extremely well-made class. Everything just kind of meshes together in a way that I've never quite seen in another class.

What I'd do is roll up a Spellbreaker Inquisitor:
STR8
DEX17
CON16
INT14
WIS18
CHA8

Spellbreaker A. gives you some nice bonuses against casters and B. cuts away from dealing with Teamwork Feats (which, while nice, are an added layer of complication) (along with Monster Lore, which is nice but not *that* nice, and the save-or-die vs fort capstone that's also nice but ultimately not that important).

Play it as a frontline fighter that can ramp its damage to ridiculous levels with Bane, Judgement, and spells like Divine Power, and has some decent ability to support the party with its spellcasting as well. You don't get full BAB, but you have plenty of other tools for fighting that are frankly worth it over having a full BAB (and you still have 3/4, which is good enough).

Now, that stat array is going to look a little weird, playing a frontline fighter with 8 strength, but there's a method to my madness. There's a weapon enhancement called Guided that lets you use Wisdom in place of Strength for a weapon. Your damage output will be a little lacking until you get that into place (the price of a +2 total weapon), but once you do, you'll be almost entirely single-attribute and will have saved yourself investing in Strength over Dexterity and thus saved yourself from having a really, really bad Reflex save. In the mean time, you can make up for your lower to-hit and damage with your spells, Bane, and Judgements; you'll find them to be more than sufficient to at least have you keeping pace with, say, an equivalent Fighter in frontline fighting. If your GM enforces carrying capacity, that's okay; you're not going to wear more than light armor at most for a long time as is, and thus you should be okay until you can get a basic +strength belt.

[ghanjrho]

I'd do an Inquisitor personally. The thing about Inquisitor is that, while it has the pluses of not being *particularly* complicated (basically, you have precisely four things you need to do - apply Judgments, apply Bane, spellcasting, and full-round attacking) and having a well-rounded kit (between good skill points, good face potential, good spell list, and great offensive abilities), the big thing about Inquisitor is that it's an extremely well-made class. Everything just kind of meshes together in a way that I've never quite seen in another class.

What I'd do is roll up a Spellbreaker Inquisitor:
STR8
DEX17
CON16
INT14
WIS18
CHA8

Spellbreaker A. gives you some nice bonuses against casters and B. cuts away from dealing with Teamwork Feats (which, while nice, are an added layer of complication) (along with Monster Lore, which is nice but not *that* nice, and the save-or-die vs fort capstone that's also nice but ultimately not that important).

Play it as a frontline fighter that can ramp its damage to ridiculous levels with Bane, Judgement, and spells like Divine Power, and has some decent ability to support the party with its spellcasting as well. You don't get full BAB, but you have plenty of other tools for fighting that are frankly worth it over having a full BAB (and you still have 3/4, which is good enough).

Now, that stat array is going to look a little weird, playing a frontline fighter with 8 strength, but there's a method to my madness. There's a weapon enhancement called Guided that lets you use Wisdom in place of Strength for a weapon. Your damage output will be a little lacking until you get that into place (the price of a +2 total weapon), but once you do, you'll be almost entirely single-attribute and will have saved yourself investing in Strength over Dexterity and thus saved yourself from having a really, really bad Reflex save. In the mean time, you can make up for your lower to-hit and damage with your spells, Bane, and Judgements; you'll find them to be more than sufficient to at least have you keeping pace with, say, an equivalent Fighter in frontline fighting. If your GM enforces carrying capacity, that's okay; you're not going to wear more than light armor at most for a long time as is, and thus you should be okay until you can get a basic +strength belt.

Point of Order, Guided is 3.5 only. In Pathfinder, the closest you can get is the Guided Hand feat, which 1) only applies to attack rolls, and 2) requires the Channel Smite feat, which requires the Channel Energy class feature.

[Captain Morgan]

Could really use more input on what you want to play. That's a good stat array for playing some of the more MAD classes though. Quick rundown.

Alchemist/Investigator: great classes, too magic reliant for me to recommend here.

Paladin: In PF the Pally is a juggernaut, with good AC, swift action self heals, and the best saves in the party. And Smite damage is insane. You'll be lacking in Skill points but with a CHA that high you can rock the social skillz and/or UMD.

Inquisitor: 6th level casting, but less reliant than others for using them to kick ass. Easiest to build as a front liner but can be a great archer too once you get enough feats. Really solid skill package here, including massive face potential with the right archetypes and Inquisitions.

Ranger/Slayer: Both of these guys make a solid chassis thanks to their ability to ignore certain feat perquisites. They are especially well suited for Archer/Swift-Hitter rolls. Like 3.5, the Ranger exceeds when you know what you'll be fighting. A lot of people think it's better than the Slayer because of the Instant Enemy spell, but you don't get that until level 10. I'm a fan of the Wild Hunter archetype and boon companion feat, which gives you some really flexible buffs for yourself and your animal companion.

Unchained Rogue: See above.

There are plenty of other solid classes, but I think most are too low on skills or too high on magic for you. There are also 3rd party options which are cool, but I won't go into those if I don't know they are allowed.

[AnonymousPepper]

Point of Order, Guided is 3.5 only. In Pathfinder, the closest you can get is the Guided Hand feat, which 1) only applies to attack rolls, and 2) requires the Channel Smite feat, which requires the Channel Energy class feature.

It's on d20pfsrd, though.

[ghanjrho]

It's on d20pfsrd, though.

With a note indicating that it is a 3.5 property. The source on the page is Pathfinder #10, A History of Ashes; aka the 4th book of Curse of the Crimson Throne, which is described by Paizo as a OGL AP, not a PFRPG AP.

Now, I don't have a huge problem with the property (though I would probably limit it to attack rolls, not damage rolls (in a Paizofinder game that is; 3rd party/3.5 game, let it stand)), but it's not a part of the Pathfinder rules, and can't be found on the PRD.

[MyrPsychologist]

I vote for unchained rogue or gunslinger. They're both very solid classes that don't require the use of spells. And the gunslinger can even let you become the party face if you go down the mysterious stranger route.

[Judge_Worm]

I think I'm sold on Inquisitor (spellbreaker, law domain). Spellcasting can be used for utility (so I can just worry about hitting things in combat). Enough skills, decent saves, HD, and BAB.

Weapon Finesse hasn't changed, so I can always just dump strength, and grab power attack at level 3 (or not). I have a bonus to Dex so I'll give it the 16(18), I'll want my Wis to be my 18, Int 17(19), Con 14, Str 8, Cha 8(6).

As for what I have available... I'm honestly not sure, any of our DM's books he's read through or owns, which'd be at least the ultimate series, the advanced series, and a few setting books. Maybe some Adventure paths or DSP/other third party, but I wouldn't know what.

[Captain Morgan]

I think I'm sold on Inquisitor (spellbreaker, law domain). Spellcasting can be used for utility (so I can just worry about hitting things in combat). Enough skills, decent saves, HD, and BAB.

Weapon Finesse hasn't changed, so I can always just dump strength, and grab power attack at level 3 (or not). I have a bonus to Dex so I'll give it the 16(18), I'll want my Wis to be my 18, Int 17(19), Con 14, Str 8, Cha 8(6).

As for what I have available... I'm honestly not sure, any of our DM's books he's read through or owns, which'd be at least the ultimate series, the advanced series, and a few setting books. Maybe some Adventure paths or DSP/other third party, but I wouldn't know what.


You can't take Power Attack without STR of 13. You are stuck with Piranha Strike for extra damage. Also, that's a poor use of your stat array unless you really don't care about combat that much. You don't need that much Wisdom-- Pushing your DEX to the max would be advisable. I'd go DEX>WIS>CON>INT>STR>CHA, personally. Unless this is very low combat and you really want to max a ton of skills.

Also, you should confirm if and how you can get one of the following: Deadly Agility feats, Agile Weapon, Guided Weapon. Otherwise you will need to get the Slashing Grace or Fencing Grace feats ASAP, which require Weapon Finesse and Weapon Focus first. Your damage is gonna be lacking with 8 STR until then.

[vasilidor]

what should be asked here is what do you want to play? the warrior type? you can make a sword and board type with an ac of 50-55(pending dexterity) at level 20, or a two handed smasher with a +40-46 (pending starting strength) to whatever damage die all from the core rule book using wealth by level and the fighter base class. or for a rogue type, what do you see them doing? the bluffing of dragons? sneaky as hell? the skills you would want to focus on most are based on what you want to accomplish really. since you want to stay away from caster i have to ask would that include paladins? by the way with a 55 ac and a cloak of displacement, the tarasque misses you 95%+ of the time. its the pesky saving throws that hurt you then.

[vasilidor]

ah, just reread your original post. a paladin does the tanking thing rather well with their lay on hands, and in the fight against the big bad, if you got a level 4 spell slot use it on holy sword. they also do the face thing rather well with diplomacy and sense motive as class skills and all of their specials are charisma dependent. i just hate it when people dismiss fighters out of hand in pathfinder. never cared for rangers though, the favored enemy is just to situational for my liking, especially compared to smiting (so much more likely to run into something that is just evil). it really is only useful if you talk to your DM about recommendations and he is honest with them. I will second the slayer as being a good option though.

[DMVerdandi]

Surprised no one suggested either based bard or skald.
Decent spell casting, Decent enough martial, AWESOME face potential and skill, and bardic inspiration/Raging songs.
Personally I prefer skald in most cases, and for said character, it is a bit more physically focused so it would be better.

[Captain Morgan]

ah, just reread your original post. a paladin does the tanking thing rather well with their lay on hands, and in the fight against the big bad, if you got a level 4 spell slot use it on holy sword. they also do the face thing rather well with diplomacy and sense motive as class skills and all of their specials are charisma dependent. i just hate it when people dismiss fighters out of hand in pathfinder. never cared for rangers though, the favored enemy is just to situational for my liking, especially compared to smiting (so much more likely to run into something that is just evil). it really is only useful if you talk to your DM about recommendations and he is honest with them. I will second the slayer as being a good option though.
It is a great time to build a Fighter, thanks to the newest options released. But Fighter isn't the way to go here. They don't make good skill monkeys or faces in comparison to literally any other class, and they are actually very complicated to build if you don't know feat chains. Goes against what this guy wants, and his current exposure level.

[vasilidor]

true, it does take some system familiarity (ok, a lot) to figure out such builds. so for non spellcasters that are good in a fight but have good skill sets we have: unchained rogue, slayer, trap build ranger, thats about all i can think of for the moment. for good combat abillity with minor spellcasting and decent skills we have the alchemist, the investigator, inquisitor, ranger with spells, skald, and maybe bard. each with its own special flavor and specialty. so what now? what do you think would be a fun play?

[Alex12]

Is Dreamscarred Press stuff on the table? They're the ones that did psionics and initiators for Pathfinder. They're all in the SRD.

The reason I ask is because the more I read the stuff you want, the more I think Aegis (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/psionics-unleashed/classes/aegis). Or, if you want to focus more on skillmonkey stuff while still being good in combat, I've seen some terrifying things done with Cryptic (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/psionics-unleashed/classes/cryptic).

[Amphetryon]

Surprised no one suggested either based bard or skald.
Decent spell casting, Decent enough martial, AWESOME face potential and skill, and bardic inspiration/Raging songs.
Personally I prefer skald in most cases, and for said character, it is a bit more physically focused so it would be better.

+1 on Skald. It's almost exactly the sort of concept pitched originally.

[Platymus Pus]

Why would you recommend Inquisitor and Magus if he said he doesn't want much spellcasting?

Anyway, my personal recommendation is Ranger. It has lots of tools to skill money and the exact type of casting you want.

I would assign stats like this:

S18 D17+2 C14 I8+2 W16 CH8-2

I recommend you take the Guide archetype if you don't know anything about the campaign, so as not to waste your Favored Enemies.
What this man said, a dedicated archer and melee type does wonders for a party.
Your spells can be used for nice utility that the party skimps out on.