New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Results 1 to 25 of 25
  1. - Top - End - #1
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Maat Mons's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2018

    Default SAD-est Classes?

    Is there any sort of guide to how well the various Pathfinder classes can function without multiple good ability scores? I've tried looking at guides for each class individually, but those are all written by different people, so I'm not confident they're all measuring with the same stick.

    Also, some of the guides say things I disagree with regarding which ability scores a class needs. For example, I've found Fighter being cited as requiring Dexterity and Intelligence. The reasons given were Combat Reflexes, Armor Training, and Tripping feats. But the Fighter is unique in having an archetype, High Guardian, that allows Combat Reflexes to be keyed off Strength instead of Dexterity. And the Dirty Trick feat allows anyone, of any class, to ignore the Intelligence requirement for Tripping feats. The Fighter doesn't actually need Armor Training to match the AC of other front-line warriors, and it can be traded for various other cool things, so it really seems quite optional. All in all, I think Fighter is about as Strength-SAD as it's possible for a class to be. I don't know of any other class that can lay as good a claim on needing only Strength.

    That rant got a little long.

    TLDR: Forum, Forum, what's up y'all? Who's the SAD-est of them all?

  2. - Top - End - #2
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Serafina's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Germany
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    When talking about SAD, you also ought to account for all the ways in which you can make ability scores do other things.
    Can you add (ability modifier) to attack rolls? saves? skill checks? hit points? other things? The more the better.

    I'd nominate Oracle.

    In terms of putting as many things as possible onto one ability score:
    - Desnas Shooting Star divine fighting technique feat: Charisma to attack and damage with starknives
    - Noble Scion of War feat: Charisma to Initiative
    - Oracle and one of the mysteries that gives Charisma to AC and either CMD or Reflex Saves
    - Bestow Grace of the Champion spell (which is on the Oracle list): Charisma to Saves
    - Friend to the Animals revelation (Nature Mystery) while you count as an animal yourself (e.g. via being 20th level Nature Oracle) also gives you Charisma to all your saves
    - Pageant of the Peacock Bardic Masterpiece (go for Bard Variant Multiclass) allows you to use Bluff (and thus Charisma) in place of any Intelligence-based skill check.

    And of course you're a primary spellcaster, so Charisma inherently benefits your spellcasting too.

    So at this point, you've covered all but Hit Points, amount of skill points, and non-charisma non-intelligence skills.
    I'd say that's fairly SAD.

  3. - Top - End - #3
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Ramza00's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    3.5 Feats from Paizo conditional so you may not be up for it.

    Wizard with Keen Intellect (Int to Will saves instead of Wis, Wis skills use Int instead) combine with Wedded to History feat that allows you to choose to make Fort and Reflex saves via Will Saves. But each time you choose to do your Fort or Reflex save that way, all Will Saves for 24 hours take a -1 penalty.

    Then put the rest of your stats into 14 Con and 14 Dex (5 points each for a total of 10). Your Will Save should be about +4 or 5 from Intelligence and +4 from Class at HD08
    Stupendous Man drawn by Linklele

  4. - Top - End - #4
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2009

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    I’ll toss in the pre nerf scarred witch doctor. A witch that casts using con.

  5. - Top - End - #5
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    Best: (one or barely one stat required) This is the cloth casters who mostly just need the casting stat, and the guys where literally half the class is a minion unassociated with your stats.
    Hunter
    Spiritualist
    Summoner
    Wizard
    Sorcerer
    Witch
    Psychic

    Good: (1 stat required for minimal use, but likely to be expected to have a better stat range (like for melee) or 2 stats.
    Rogue
    Bard
    Arcanist
    Gunslinger
    Mesmerist
    Kineticist
    Shaman

    Bad: (the basic combat muggles. Will typically need high Str/con or dex/con, maybe str/dex/con, +decent wis and possibly int for some feats)
    Fighter
    Barbarian
    Shifter
    Brawler
    Slayer
    Alchemist



    Worst (require a full set of combat stats and also a class ability stat.)
    Monk
    Ranger
    Paladin
    Cavalier
    Inquisitor
    Magus
    Omdura
    Vigilante
    Bloodrager
    Swashbuckler
    Warpriest
    Skald
    Occultist

    Odd: (can be played as SAD casters (Best) or gishes (worst).
    Cleric
    Druid
    Oracle
    Last edited by Gnaeus; 2022-01-16 at 09:34 PM.

  6. - Top - End - #6
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Kurald Galain's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Maat Mons View Post
    Also, some of the guides say things I disagree with regarding which ability scores a class needs. For example, I've found Fighter being cited as requiring Dexterity and Intelligence.
    Well, some of the older guides don't include all the material from all the books, and some guides were made by 3.5 players who didn't check if their assumptions about 3.5 still hold true in PF. That said, suggesting that fighters ever needed intelligence is a rather dubious statement for any guide (combat expertise is an option but hardly a requirement).

    That said, the easiest answer is "any Dex-class". Dex already adds to AC, init, reflex, and several good skills. So take either a ranged weapon or the Weapon Finesse feat. Some classes add dex to damage, which means you'll do almost everything with dex. Barbarian/bloodrager even has an archetype that boosts dex instead of strength, when you rage.

    So some good SAD classes include fighter (archer); barbarian (urban archetype); Magus (if you don't use spells with a saving throw); gunslinger; and rogue (unchained). From the caster side, there's oracle (see Serafina's post above), as well as sorcerer (with a one-level dip to get cha to AC).

    Honorable mention to the inquisitor, who has a good chassis for "wis to everything", but needs a dip for wis to AC, and some feats for wis to attack.

    Of course, "without multiple good ability scores" doesn't mean "every score except one is below 10".
    Last edited by Kurald Galain; 2022-01-17 at 02:42 AM.
    Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.

    "I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
    Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!

  7. - Top - End - #7
    Titan in the Playground
     
    AvatarVecna's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2014

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    Don't know how up-to-date this is, but it's something.


    Currently Running WW/Mafia: flat_footed's Fallout 3: Forecast--Rapidly Changing Conditions

    Avatar by AsteriskAmp

    Quote Originally Posted by Xumtiil View Post
    An Abattoir Vecna, if you will.
    My Homebrew

  8. - Top - End - #8
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2012

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    I'll second the Oracle as having the most options for going SAD, with multiple revelations that let you use Charisma instead of another ability score for certain things. Combo that with feats which do the same, and you can have a mostly CHA focused build. You can also get many of these benefits from Oracle with just 1 or 2 levels, so it makes for a good dip on other builds.

    As for the Fighter advice you were given, I can understand somebody focusing heavily on Dexterity. With easy access to Dervish Dance or the various Grace feats, it's easy to gain dex-to-damage with most weapons. This lets you keep your Strength low, or even dump it if your GM ignores equipment weight. Boosting Intelligence isn't really needed for most builds, and even the Combat Expertise requirement for Improved Maneuver feats has an alternative feat if you don't want a high Int. As you've noted, Advanced Weapon Training and Advanced Armor Training gives you access to bonus skill ranks so you don't need Int for that either.

    If you're focused on the Fighter, realize that this is an incredibly versatile chasis for a character build. You're not likely to have a truly SAD fighter, but you don't need high secondary attributes either, so it doesn't have the problems of the truly MAD builds.
    WIP - Nightbringer's Guide to the Pathfinder Fighter
    Please send me any feedback you have! This is a huge undertaking as I'm evaluating all Combat Feats, a bunch of other feats and Combat Stamina too!.

  9. - Top - End - #9
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Maat Mons's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2018

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    Does the fact that the Shooting Star feat limits you to a specific light weapon provide any meaningful hinderance? My 3.5 instincts scream out “No, I need Power Attack!” But it looks like Piranha Strike is almost as good?



    Thanks for the list. I tried creating one from these guides, but it gave some questionable results.

    Spoiler: Questionable Results
    Show
    If you’re curious, I tried to use the ability score advice in those guides into a “MAD-ness Rating.” I assigned a value of 2 to any rating of “very important,” a value of 1 to ratings of “important,” and 0 to “neutral.” But then some of the contributors refused to stick to the rating system they were all supposed to share. So, I added some half-point values. After I added those up for all the covered classes, I converted everything to a “SAD-ness rating” by inverting the scale and normalizing to a range of 0 to 5. For a laugh, here are the results.

    Sadness Rating 5: Antipaladin, Paladin, Psychic, Rogue Unchained, Shifter, Sorcerer, Summoner Unchained, Swashbuckler, Witch, Wizard
    Sadness Rating 4: Medium, Mesmerist, Vigilante
    Sadness Rating 3: Arcanist, Barbarian Unchained, Bard, Bloodrager, Brawler, Cavalier, Druid, Gunslinger, Investigator, Kineticist, Magus, Ninja, Oracle, Spiritualist
    Sadness Rating 2: nothing
    Sadness Rating 1: Alchemist, Cleric, Fighter, Monk Unchained, Ranger, Skald, Warpriest
    Sadness Rating 0: Inquisitor
    Unrated: Hunter, Occultist, Samurai, Shaman, Slayer

    I don’t know enough about most of those to have any opinion, but I find some of them difficult to believe.




    I’m glad to hear I’m not completely crazy on the Fighter thing. Though I do have to acknowledge that there are situations in which a Fighter may want those other ability scores.



    I'm a little surprised not one person has phrased their answer in the form of a rhyme. A modification of "Famed is thy beauty, Majesty. But hold, a lovely maid I see. Rags cannot hide her gentle grace. Alas, she is more fair than thee." Or maybe instead a modification of "Over the seven jeweled hills, beyond the seventh fall, in the cottage of the Seven Dwarfs, dwells Snow White, fairest one of all."

  10. - Top - End - #10
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Kurald Galain's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    Quote Originally Posted by NightbringerGGZ View Post
    This lets you keep your Strength low, or even dump it if your GM ignores equipment weight.
    It's doable even if he doesn't ignore weight, because one of the best armors for dex-based characters is the Mage Armor spell, which weighs nothing. And put your gear in a bag of holding, of course. Strength 7 is doable on a melee character, maybe strength 6 if you're pushing it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Maat Mons View Post
    Thanks for the list. I tried creating one from these guides, but it gave some questionable results.
    I don't really get that; maybe you could post a list of all classes and which ability scores they supposedly need?

    Like, if a wizard is "sadness 5" because he technically only needs int, then why is a cleric "sadness 1" even though a caster cleric technically only needs wis? I mean sure, a cleric can be build to fight in melee, but a non-fighting cast-all-the-time cleric is a valid choice, and much SADder.
    (edit) and I'm not so sure if an int-only wizard or witch works, because you're going to have rather poor armor class and saving throws.
    Last edited by Kurald Galain; 2022-01-18 at 06:13 AM.
    Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.

    "I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
    Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!

  11. - Top - End - #11
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Kurald Galain's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    Quote Originally Posted by AvatarVecna View Post
    Don't know how up-to-date this is, but it's something.
    I think this is the most up-to-date version.
    Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.

    "I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
    Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!

  12. - Top - End - #12
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2012

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kurald Galain View Post
    I'll have to bookmark that list, thanks for sharing it.

    Minor quibble on equipment, while Mage Armor is great early on you'll need to spend some resources on potions or a depleted wand. A bag of holding usually takes some time to acquire. I'd argue that a 12 Str is doable for most SAD builds and allows you 43 pounds of gear while being under light encumbrance.

    More my personal play style though. I have run 7 STR characters before, usually spell casters.
    WIP - Nightbringer's Guide to the Pathfinder Fighter
    Please send me any feedback you have! This is a huge undertaking as I'm evaluating all Combat Feats, a bunch of other feats and Combat Stamina too!.

  13. - Top - End - #13
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Kurald Galain's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    Quote Originally Posted by NightbringerGGZ View Post
    Minor quibble on equipment, while Mage Armor is great early on you'll need to spend some resources on potions or a depleted wand. A bag of holding usually takes some time to acquire.
    Wand is 750 gp, bag of holding is 1000 gp, WBL for level 3 is 3000 gp. That doesn't strike me as a problem.

    I'd argue that a 12 Str is doable for most SAD builds and allows you 43 pounds of gear while being under light encumbrance.
    I'd argue that 8 Str is doable for most SAD builds: scimitar (4), mithral chain shirt (12.5), spell components (2), minor bag of holding (3), belt (1), headband (1), cloak (1); rings, amulet, spellbook ritual, lenses, ioun stone (0). This is 24.5 pounds, and still a light load for strength 8.
    Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.

    "I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
    Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!

  14. - Top - End - #14
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    I disagree pretty strongly with most of Kurald's comments and the thread discussion in general.

    First, SAD means that you can use all your class features and perform your basic class roles. It isn't "who can get the most X to Y" unless that is actually a functional path to using your class features and performing your class roles.

    Second, if you are asking about a SAD class, the answer isn't a build. 3.5 druid can claim to be SAD (or 2 attribute dependent with Con) because Natural Spell, because Natural Spell is a standout that every druid wants to take unless some major build constraint prevents them. Oracle is a class. Oracle who worships Desna and is an heir to a specific noble house and takes the following abilities is a build. None of those things are must haves for Oracle.

    Finally, when we are looking for a SAD build, there are generally 2 reasons. 1, a player rolled a wildly dysfunctional set of stats and had to/decided to keep them, or 2, the GM is mandating some kind of low fantasy, you are all just villagers campaign, you get 10 points for attribute buy, hur hur hur.

    So: cleric isn't SAD. Even a caster cleric (especially a caster cleric) needs cha for channeling.
    (Dex) magus isn't SAD. It doesn't mean he can't use spells that require saves. It means he can't use spells. Or maybe first level spells. If he's lucky.
    Archer fighter isnt sad. First, he's not really fulfilling his class role of tank/control. He's just a striker. But second, he isn't a good striker because bows still use str for damage.
    Also, it's bizarre to me to argue that archer fighters are SAD and wizards and witches aren't because HP and saving throws. First, they have the same one good save as fighters. Second, they start getting ways to mitigate saves and HP by first level, like protection from evil and resistance. A wizard/witch whose stats are 16 int, 8 everything else is functional and plays like any other cloth caster. A fighter who is dex 16, 8 everything else is not functional. He's shoehorned into one role and not great at that.

  15. - Top - End - #15
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Kurald Galain's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gnaeus View Post
    A fighter who is dex 16, 8 everything else
    Point buy 10 will get you substantially better stats than that, even before racials. Frankly, a 16/8/8/8/8/8 stat array is a completely unrealistic example of anything.
    Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.

    "I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
    Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!

  16. - Top - End - #16
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kurald Galain View Post
    Point buy 10 will get you substantially better stats than that, even before racials. Frankly, a 16/8/8/8/8/8 stat array is a completely unrealistic example of anything.
    It's an excellent example of what a SAD class should be able to deal with. Maybe you didn't get 10 points. Maybe it was 5. Maybe it's a old school 3d6 no rerolls game and your stats are 17 and a bunch of penalties. A wizard/witch/summoner can play fine. That's what a SAD class looks like

  17. - Top - End - #17
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Kurald Galain's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gnaeus View Post
    It's an excellent example of what a SAD class should be able to deal with.
    A dex-based fighter has decent fort (because fighter), reflex (because he's dex-based), and will (bravery class feature); in addition to decent hit dice, and good initiative. An int-based wizard has decent will, and that's it. So two poor saves, poor hit points, and a low initiative; that's a serious survivability issue, right there. Sure, chain gating solves all your problems, but not if your wizard dies a dozen levels before getting there.
    Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.

    "I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
    Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!

  18. - Top - End - #18
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Eurus's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    There are definitely multiple ways to define "single-ability dependent", made more complicated by the fact that classes exist on different tiers to begin with.

    If you look at "which class performs best with an array of 16/8/8/8/8/8", it's going to be slanted toward the classes that are generally stronger. Spellcasters are often seen as SAD for this reason: it's not that they don't get use out of other attributes, but rather, they can typically afford the hit and still do their job.

    If the working definition is "which class has the smallest variation
    in power between 16/8/8/8/8/8 and 16/16/16/16/16/16", any class that can apply one stat to a bunch of things is probably the winner. This has the drawbacks, as mentioned by Gnaeus, of being reliant on feats and items, potentially encouraging you to ignore the parts of the class that don't fit and emphasizing "generic" things like saving throws and attack rolls over more unique features.

    If the goal is "a class that can use all of its features and fill its role on a lopsided array without accounting for non-class mechanics", you're going to have to get everyone to agree on what the class's role is first, and I don't envy that task...

    That's in no way an exhaustive list, either.
    Last edited by Eurus; 2022-01-18 at 10:46 AM.
    Avatar by araveugnitsuga.

  19. - Top - End - #19
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kurald Galain View Post
    A dex-based fighter has decent fort (because fighter), reflex (because he's dex-based), and will (bravery class feature); in addition to decent hit dice, and good initiative. An int-based wizard has decent will, and that's it. So two poor saves, poor hit points, and a low initiative; that's a serious survivability issue, right there. Sure, chain gating solves all your problems, but not if your wizard dies a dozen levels before getting there.
    Bravery is less useful than the resistance cantrips when you get it. Wizards aren't more SAD than fighters at 17. They are more SAD at level 1, vastly so by level 3. A first level wizard can disappear from combat with vanish. Or protect himself from enemy archers with obscuring mist. By level 3 you can nope common saves or damage types with vanish, levitate, protection from evil, invisibility, fog effects. Can give yourself more HP than the fighter with false life. Can function as a buffer. Can scout via familiar. Yeah, the fighter has a better initiative, but he has already surrendered as a tank (which as far as I'm concerned means he isn't doing the job of a fighter) and isn't a good striker either.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eurus View Post
    If the working definition is "which class has the smallest variation
    in power between 16/8/8/8/8/8 and 16/16/16/16/16/16", any class that can apply one stat to a bunch of things is probably the winner. This has the drawbacks, as mentioned by Gnaeus, of being reliant on feats and items, potentially encouraging you to ignore the parts of the class that don't fit and emphasizing "generic" things like saving throws and attack rolls over more unique features.
    I disagree. I think the winners are the pet classes. A hunter or summoner is a completely stat independent pet followed by a half caster. The tank part is unaffected. The caster part is functional with a single casting stat, and will be shielded from combat by the pet.

    And of course the full casters, aside from playing basically the same with any stat array, are going to be functionally identical by the time their pet spells come online. Level 5-10 generally, depending slightly on class.
    Last edited by Gnaeus; 2022-01-18 at 11:59 AM.

  20. - Top - End - #20
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Denomar's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Calgary

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    An oracle as stated.

    Being some sort of intelligent undead in pathfinder will in turn also key your hitpoints off charisma (though there are some group compatibility issues that can cause)
    All Hail Fun!
    Quote Originally Posted by Cardea View Post
    No... no... its... its supposed to be 'then'... NO. DENOMAR OUT. YOU HAVE RUINED EVERYTHING.
    New Sexy Mordrent Avatar via Tiffany Lirle! I bow down to her sense of fun.

  21. - Top - End - #21
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Maat Mons's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2018

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    I went through those guides I linked and made a table summarizing the ratings they gave to each ability score for the various classes. The blank spaces are where the individual guide-writer was a rebel and deviate from the 3-category rating system all the guides were supposed to be standardized on.

    Spoiler: Summary of Guides
    Show
    Str Dex Con Int Wis Cha
    Alchemist Important Important Important Very Important Important Neutral
    Antipaladin Very Important Neutral Important Neutral Neutral Important
    Arcanist Neutral Important Important Very Important Neutral Important
    Barbarian Unchained Very Important Important Very Important Neutral Neutral Neutral
    Bard Important Important Important Neutral Neutral Very Important
    Bloodrager Very Important Important Important Neutral Neutral Important
    Brawler Very Important Important Important Neutral Important Neutral
    Cavalier Very Important Neutral Important Neutral Important Important
    Cleric Important Important Important Neutral Very Important Important
    Druid Important Important Important Neutral Very Important Neutral
    Fighter Very Important Important Important Important Important Neutral
    Gunslinger Neutral Very Important Important Neutral Very Important Neutral
    Inquisitor Important Neutral Very Important
    Investigator Important Important Important Very Important Neutral Neutral
    Kineticist Neutral Very Important Very Important Neutral Important Neutral
    Magus Important Important Important Very Important Neutral Neutral
    Medium Important Important Important Neutral Important
    Mesmerist Neutral Important Very Important
    Monk Unchained Very Important Important Important Neutral Very Important Neutral
    Ninja Neutral Very Important Important Important
    Oracle Important Important Important Neutral Neutral Very Important
    Paladin Very Important Neutral Important Neutral Neutral Important
    Psychic Neutral Important Important Very Important Neutral Neutral
    Ranger Very Important Very Important Important Neutral Important Neutral
    Rogue Unchained Neutral Very Important Important Neutral Important Neutral
    Shifter Important Important Important Neutral Important Neutral
    Skald Very Important Neutral Important Important Neutral Very Important
    Sorcerer Neutral Important Important Neutral Neutral Very Important
    Spiritualist Important Important Important Neutral Very Important Neutral
    Summoner Unchained Neutral Important Important Neutral Neutral Very Important
    Vigilante Important Important Important Important Neutral
    Swashbuckler Neutral Very Important Important Neutral Neutral Important
    Warpriest Very Important Very Important Important Neutral Important Neutral
    Witch Neutral Important Important Very Important Neutral Neutral
    Wizard Neutral Important Important Very Important Neutral Neutral

    I strongly suspect that the problem is that the different writers didn't have the same idea of of what Very Important, Important, and Neutral meant. But it could also be that my attempt to distill this down to a single number for each class was naïve.

    I was hoping my query could exist in a vacuum, and thus be generalizable, but if a specific context matters, I’ve been imagining a D&D setting with a robust public education system. The goal of the government would be to have no citizens with NPC classes, and absolutely no Commoners, though they wouldn’t have the knowledge of game mechanics to know that was what they were after.

    In trying to flesh this out in my head, one of the issues that came up was that most citizens would have bad ability score arrays, and the government-sponsored training programs would need to try to turn these lemons into lemonade. This is where I though SAD classes could be of help. There are better odds of any given citizen being passable in one area than of being passable in specific combinations of areas. I hadn’t considered pet classes for the people with truly terrible stats. That could be promising.

    I was kind of figuring that most NPCs would have the non-elite array, assigned randomly at birth. Some lucky ones would have the elite array, also assigned randomly at birth. But I figure only players have the luxury of picking their aptitudes. Well, that’s not quite true. I figure the ability score increases for level what direction people focus their training on.

    Other problems are that some classes require being born special (e.g., Sorcerer), being chosen (e.g., Oracle), having a particular ethos (e.g., Druid), or feeling strongly devoted (e.g., Cleric). I’ve been trying to come up with a small set of classes such that very nearly everyone should be able to do passably well in at least one of them. For anyone interested, here’s what I have so far, and my rationale.

    Training Program for Strong Citizens: Fighter
    • No alignment restrictions.
    • Requires only Strength. High Guardian archetype allows attack-of-opportunity builds without Dexterity. Dirty Trick feat allows qualification for feats normally requiring Combat Expertise without Intelligence. Even without Dexterity to benefit from Armor Training, AC is as good as any other heavy-armor character. Armor Training can be replaced via archetype, such as Mutation Warrior, or Advanced Armor Training can be taken.
    • Flexibility (by big dumb brute standards). Class is not innately tied to a specific fighting style. Martial Master archetype allows adapting tactics to the situation.

    Training Program for Dexterous Citizens: Unchained Rogue
    • No alignment restrictions.
    • Requires only Dexterity. Unchained variant gives Weapon Finesse at 1st level, and Dexterity to damage at 3rd level. Class gives enough skill points to allow even low-Intelligence characters to have decent skills.
    • Flexibility (by non-caster standards). Numerous archetypes. Rogue Talents provide many options. Sylvan Trickster archetype allows Witch Hexes to be learned, covering such functions as restoring limbs and bringing the dead back to life.

    Training Program for Intelligent Citizens: Wizard
    • No alignment restrictions.
    • Requires only Intelligence.
    • Flexibility. Broad spell list from which you can learn unlimited number of spells. Numerous archetypes.

    Training Program for Wise Citizens: Shaman
    • No alignment restrictions.
    • Requires only Wisdom. … Except the things that require Charisma. … It's the only Wis-based full caster without special requirements.
    • Flexibility. Broad spell list which you can freely access. Hexes provide many options.

    Training Program for Charismatic Citizens: Seducer Witch
    • No alignment restrictions.
    • Requires only Charisma. Seducer archetype converts spellcasting and all class features to Charisma.
    • Flexibility. Broad spell list from which you can learn unlimited number of spells. Hexes provide many options. Can heal, restore ability damage, regenerate limbs, and bring back dead without daily limit.

    These wouldn’t be the only training programs available, but I’m imagining them being the most common ones. I don’t have one for Constitution, because the closest I could find to a strictly Con-based class was Kineticist, and looking at that, I’m not convinced the class can do well with just Con.

    I guess I could add one for citizens too untalented to pull off any of the others. That pet class idea could work. I wonder if Summoners can shape their Eidolons into waifus?

  22. - Top - End - #22
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Kurald Galain's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Maat Mons View Post
    I strongly suspect that the problem is that the different writers didn't have the same idea of of what Very Important, Important, and Neutral meant.
    Yeah, at a casual glance there is a lot wrong with that table. For example, you generally build a ranger as either a melee character or a ranged character, but not both (because both builds require different feats and items). For the melee build, strength is highly important, and dex not so much; for the ranged build, it's the opposite. So it's not accurate to write that for all rangers, str and dex are very important.

    I was kind of figuring that most NPCs would have the non-elite array, assigned randomly at birth.
    The issue is that the non-elite array is not so much "SAD" but "no-attribute-dependent", as in you have no modifier above a +1. At this point it doesn't matter all that much that the rogue gets finesse (+1 to hit instead of +0 from str), or dex-to-damage (+1 more to damage). It matters much more that he gets sneak attack (that's basically double damage), or that an u-monk gets two attacks (again, double the damage) or that a barbarian gets a big boost from rage. And armor proficiency becomes highly important, since you get essentially no AC bonus from dexterity.

    And yeah, pet classes are going to dominate.
    Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.

    "I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
    Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!

  23. - Top - End - #23
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gnaeus View Post
    Bravery is less useful than the resistance cantrips when you get it. Wizards aren't more SAD than fighters at 17. They are more SAD at level 1, vastly so by level 3. A first level wizard can disappear from combat with vanish. Or protect himself from enemy archers with obscuring mist. By level 3 you can nope common saves or damage types with vanish, levitate, protection from evil, invisibility, fog effects. Can give yourself more HP than the fighter with false life. Can function as a buffer. Can scout via familiar. Yeah, the fighter has a better initiative, but he has already surrendered as a tank (which as far as I'm concerned means he isn't doing the job of a fighter) and isn't a good striker either.
    I don't think Batman Wizard is a reasonable comparison for low-level characters here. You can defend against any situation - but you have to choose the situation to defend against when you wake up in the morning. Levitate just makes you more of a target for archers and hungry bears don't care that you're protected from evil. Escaping with vanish or invisibility doesn't do anything to help the party. You could prepare all of those, sure, but then you're stuck plinking away with your crossbow or Acid Splash.

    The difference is that the fighter has his defenses every encounter, and he can still rapid shot people while he's at it. That may not be the role you expect a fighter to take, but it's a lot more useful than the wizard who loads up on selfish defensive spells and then sends his familiar to scout as his chief contribution. Heck, he could save himself the bother of preparing spells at all and just tell the familiar to go on the adventure while he stays home and takes a nap.

    And if you really wanted a low strength area control/tank, you could always try building a whip fighter - Slashing grace gets you dex to damage and 15 ft reach with trip will keep the baddies on the ground. Takes a couple levels to get all the feats, but it could work.
    When in doubt, light something on fire.

  24. - Top - End - #24
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Maat Mons's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2018

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    Maybe I’ll modify my thought experiment to suppose that receiving enough training to gain a level in a PC class necessarily improves your ability scores to the elite array. I think it’s sort of a thing that no one with PC class levels has less than the elite array. It makes more sense to suppose that’s from people getting upgraded than from every non-elite who’s ever tried to train for a PC class always failing.

    But if you were to make a character with all-bad stats, which pet class would fair the best? What even are all the pet classes? There are probably a bunch that can be a pet master with the right archetype.

  25. - Top - End - #25
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: SAD-est Classes?

    Indeed, you've got plenty of classes that can grab a companion.

    Druids, rangers and hunters get one by default (or by choice, in the case of the two former). Cavaliers, paladins and antipaladins (the latter two get a choice there) also get companions, though with some differences and limitations. Class archetypes can change the selection and abilities of the aforementioned pets.

    Clerics can get one via Animal domain, oracles can get one with the Lunar Mystery and sorcerers can get one with the Sylvan bloodline.

    Winged Marauder alchemists, Mad Dog barbarians, Bloodrider bloodragers, Wild Child brawlers and Sacred Huntsmaster inquisitors are archetypes that grant some form of animal companion. Pretty sure the shaman also has something, and there are probably a few more archetypes I've missed.

    But the ultimate "pet" class, as far as the pet is concerned that is, is undoubtedly the summoner. The Eidolon is huge.

    So if you had a character with all-bad stats, just make a summoner and have others do the job for you. The Eidolon is quite powerful. And if it eventually falls, you have summon monster as a spell-like ability 3+Cha times a day. Just don't go too deep into the negatives with your stats for that one I guess.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •