Talk:Professional (Pathfinder)

Finished updating feats and skills. Since I've been staring at this for a while, I'm beginning to feel like the professional is underpowered compared to the other core classes. Some of this may just be that I still value combat skills over talky skills, which is no longer probably true for the SW game. Still, I think base classes got buffed quite a bit in PF, and some (like rogue) seem to be strictly a step above, so here are my current thoughts/comparisons:

	series 1	series 2	saves	HP	BAB	skills
professional	subset of general feats	subset of rogue talents	1 good	d8	3/4	8
rogue	sneak attack / trap sense	rogue talents	1 good	d8	3/4	8
fighter	all combat feats	weapon / armor training	1 good	d10	1	2
bard	special abilities	spells	2 good	d8	3/4	6
inquisitor	special abilities	spells	2 good	d8	3/4	6

So, rogue first, I'd say sneak attack/trap sense is probably better than subset of general feats, rogue talents are strictly better than a subset of rogue talents, and they are break even on all other stats. This is the big case against the current prof power level. Compared with fighter, again, all combat feats is strictly/significantly better than some general feats, weapon/armor training is probably eqivalent to a subset of rogue talents (although I may be way off there), and the hp/bab are a wash. Bard and inquisitor are harder to compare, but I feel like their spells/specials are somewhat better than professional as a gut evaluation, and I think 1 extra save is better than 2 skill points.

Here are suggestions to strengthen the professional:

• Bonus feats
  • All general feats--in this case, professional is a strong multi-class option, because you can pick up spell/mobility/racial/class-specific feats using your professional ranks.
  • Add combat/teamwork feats--this is the more stand-alone option IMO where we add defensive/tactical abilities like the expertise/mounted/defensive trees and teamwork feats.
• Talents
  • More spellcasting options (maybe more tiers than rogue)
  • Gain class-specific abilities at 1/2 prof level (bardic lore, disarm traps)
  • Expand in-class skill selection (stealth, escape artist, disable device, umd, etc)
  • Universality (definitely plays into multiclassing)
• Base abilities
  • Two good saves
  • d10 hp

Why did you change my 10/16/20 version of Adv. Professional Development to be a mimic of the rogue progression? Also, why'd you give it a stupid name? Also, why are you not flying down for gamecon this weekend? -gm

It needed a name that wasn't lame. I thought the advanced talents gimp was a bug, but if it wasn't, what's the rationale? I mean, professional development is mostly a subset of the rogue talents, advanced professional development is mostly a subset of the advanced rogue talents, and general feats seem pretty weak compared to trapsense and sneak attack. So why also give the prof less advanced talents than the rogue? I'd say they need to be buffed at this point, not gimped. Also, I wish I was flying down, but I'm too strapped for cash with the new home purchase and too strapped for time with a tiny baby :( --Msallen

That was actually really easy, and I like it. Nerfed combat abilities somewhat and reworked Professional Development system to make it like Rogue Traits, several of which fit very well on the Professional list. Selected the more skillzy ones and added some. The biggest change is dropping one category of Best saves to bring more in line with other core classes, but the increased number of potential feat selections via the new professional development should offset this somewhat for those that want mega saves since there are plenty of chances to pick up save boosters(for example, there are a whole host of PF feats that sub in one Attribute Score for another in Saves that should be put on the bonus feat list)

Neat! I haven't pored through the developments, will have to do that for edification. -Slitherrr

PF also likes to put unique 20th-level stuff in its base classes, but it's really hard to think about what would even entail for this class. It's the definition of a splash class, after all. -Slitherrr

In this case, they get an Advanced Professional Development. The rogue only gets one Advanced Rogue Talent. I decided that, since the professional would be ever more hampered at the fundamental D&D stuff at the stratospheric levels, it would be a good trade off. But, as you say, I don't even know what a 20th level professional would even look like or why it would exist. Maybe it should be a five or ten level only core class, sort of a prestige class turned on its head. -gm

Ah, I haven't looked at the rogue, so I didn't know that. Yeah, it is weird, the Professional is kind of a course correction for Pathfinder's divergence from 3.5e's tendency toward splash classes. Sure, the language in the PF SRD would love you to think that they're making multiclassing easier by removing exp penalties, but what they really mean is that they're making the bookkeeping easier--all the foregone bonuses are there to make multiclassing in PF a lot LESS attractive than 3.5e, in my opinion. The Professional basically says, "Hey look, man, sometimes classes just need a little more salt, not a ton more paprika or turmeric or whatever crazy you're working with over there." -Slitherrr

I thinks this is a clean, straightforward way to do the professional without having to make a big deal out of the conversion. Matt, I'm pretty sure you read the advanced rogue talents wrong--they are available anytime after 10th level. --Msallen

Yeah, I think I did misread it. -gm

Do we want to consider retiring the dragoman prestige class and just folding some of those abilities into the 10+ professional? Given the content of the rogue talents, it's seeming a lot less unique as a prestige class concept. --Msallen

I also agree it's probably easier to just get rid of the Dragoman class, since a lot of the dragoman skills have comparable feats in PF (like Taunt) that are easy to pick up with PFs greater number of feats. -gm

I'll try to go over the feats, and then if there are other abilities we want to add from Dragoman, we can. Given the talents, I think the only thing is the level 5 abilitiy and the (probably overpowered) level 1 ability. --Msallen

What does Universality mean for PF? Does that mean they can pick a non-professional class at startup, and then get +1 hp/sp per level with that class or professional? --Msallen

If we decide to keep that trait, then yah. If we do, I'd suggest lowering this down to d6 HD, which is the new normal. -gm

Hm. I think we move it to a professional development, but otherwise leave it. I think the models for this class are the rogue, bard, and inquisitor, and of those all but the rogue are 1d8. I'd say at d6 we'd have to seriously boost DPS or magic to make up for it. --Msallen

Also, I saw there was a PF human racial feat for this, so I think there is probably some straightforward prescedent to add it as a professional development. --Msallen

Correction, rogue is also d8 hp. I think we have to give the Prof a lot to justify dropping to d6 IMO. --Msallen

Also, the PF SRD has racial alternatives for the Focus Class traits (Human Fighters can choose +1 to UMD against two selected combat maneuvers, for example). Any ideas what that might look like for Professional, or would we rather just use the normal +1sp or +1hp? -Slitherrr

Reading a bit, slippery mind is redundant--hard to fool is strictly better. -Slitherrr

That is, hard to fool, advanced version, not regular version. Did Paizo really not realize that they were calling two completely different talents (without any prerequisite relationship) by the same name? -Slitherrr

QA is not their strong suit. That's a pretty sad oversight.