What base class for an ECL 2 Transformer?

[Uncle Pine]

I was thinking of building an Otherworldly warforged with the divine minion (Anhur or Nephthys) template at ECL 2, taking advantage of fast wild shape and composite plating with either Adamantine Body or Mithral Body to create an alien shifting construct that can freely changes between its humanoid and lion/crocodile/hawk/snake form at low level. However, I'm not entirely sure what base class to choose at 1st level in order to maximise the chance of the character to survive with a single HD. I'm leaning towards Crusader for obvious reasons, but I can see a point being made for either Barbarian or Warblade, there may be some good Fighter ACF I forgot about and the temptation to take Warlock and add an at-will laser to the budget mecha is also really high.

What's your opinion on the matter?

[WhamBamSam]

A DFA's breath weapon could also be refluffed as a laser, and they're more Con focused than Warlocks.

Incarnate is pretty sturdy at low levels. Astral Vambraces or whatever for DR/Magic is pretty consequential at ECL 2.

Otherwise, yeah, probably Crusader. It should ultimately end up a little sturdier than the Barbarian between Steely Resolve and maneuvers, and you've already got pounce in lion form.

You don't actually need Otherworldly, do you? Good thing too, since without flaws you need that feat for your plating. Or does Divine Minion not apply to Constructs or something?

[Uncle Pine]

Divine minion can only be applied to a "humanoid, monstrous humanoid, humanoid or monstrous humanoid with the celestial or fiendish template, or humanoid-shaped outsider", so a warforged is pretty much restricted to Otherworldly or incarnate construct, although the latter strips you of pretty much everything. You're right that taking both Otherworldly and Adamantine/Mithral Body requires a flaw, but that's hardly a problem with stuff like divine minion on the table.

I didn't think about DFA and I could definitely see it working, although even if it's more Con-focused than the Warlock it isn't actually proficient with light armor, which is a bit of a hassle.

[Ruethgar]

I didn't think about DFA and I could definitely see it working, although even if it's more Con-focused than the Warlock it isn't actually proficient with light armor, which is a bit of a hassle.

Actually, all non-Sorcerer, Wizard, or Monk classes get the Light Armor Proficiency feat automatically.

[Uncle Pine]

Actually, all non-Sorcerer, Wizard, or Monk classes get the Light Armor Proficiency feat automatically.
whycantijustpostquotesthatspeakforthemselves

Weapon and Armor Proficiency: Dragonfire adepts are proficient with simple weapons, but not with armor or shields. Like arcane spellcasters, a dragonfire adept wearing armor or using a shield incurs a chance of arcane spell failure (all invocations have somatic components).

[Ruethgar]

From the Player's Handbook 3.5

Special: All characters except monks, sorcerers, and wizards automatically have Light Armor Proficiency as a bonus feat. They need not select it.

It it not a function of the class but a function of the feat that you get light armor proficiency.

[Vizzerdrix]

From the Player's Handbook 3.5


It it not a function of the class but a function of the feat that you get light armor proficiency.

Accept dfa says you dont, so you dont.

[Uncle Pine]

From the Player's Handbook 3.5


It it not a function of the class but a function of the feat that you get light armor proficiency.

While this is definitely a hilarious piece of RAW, I'm afraid it won't fly this time. :smallbiggrin:
(Seriously, how have I not heard of this before? And has it been mentioned in the dysfunctional thread?)

[Buufreak]

From the Player's Handbook 3.5


It it not a function of the class but a function of the feat that you get light armor proficiency.

This is definitely a case of specific over general. The feat being the general.

[Ruethgar]

Accept dfa says you dont, so you dont.

The feat grants itself to you as a function of the feat based on class. If you take the armor proficiency class feature as overriding the feat, then the feat becomes 100% useless even if you discount the Special section.


This is definitely a case of specific over general. The feat being the general.

If armor proficiency class features granted the feats instead of flat out proficiency, I would agree that there is some merit to that line of reasoning. However, even if that were the case, the feat's function is separate from class features and is never modified by them specifically that I can find.


While this is definitely a hilarious piece of RAW, I'm afraid it won't fly this time. :smallbiggrin:

Pitty, it helps fighters quite a bit with shuffle/retraining, would probably suggest sticking with Crusader and using your second flaw on Stone Power.