Talk:Adventurer (3.5e Class)

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Rating[edit]

Power - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it is obviously balanced. → Rith (talk) 12:18, 17 April 2009 (MDT)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it is very easy to understand. → Rith (talk) 12:18, 17 April 2009 (MDT)

Formatting - 3.5/5 I give this class a 3.5 out of 5 because interwiki linking is very good all around, and, while the preload isn't filled out, it's still present, and the creator of this class intends to fill it out eventually. (Also, LD, you have a red link in there). → Rith (talk) 12:18, 17 April 2009 (MDT)

Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because honestly, I love the fact that this class feels like a rogueish character without having to have all that sneak attack baggage being carried around with them. → Rith (talk) 12:18, 17 April 2009 (MDT)


Rating[edit]

Power - 5/5, I thought the class was well balanced with the bard. Giving up the magical songs for abilities that were equally useful(like uncanny dodge, or skill mastery).

Wording - 3/5, The grammar had some slight problems. There were a few a's, that should have been an's, and there were some singulars, that should have been plurals. But overall I thought the meaning of the words was reasonably clear(there was some slight confusion, but nothing major).

Formatting - 3/5, The page had tables laid out and the like. But it jumped back in between classes in a confusing way. "An Adventurer begins play knowing four 0-level spells of your choice. At most new Bard levels, he gains 1 or more new spells," I'm not sure whether it's talking about Bards or Adventurers. It makes me feel like the author copied and pasted some selections from the Bard spell rules, and dropped it in; because he was too lazy to rewrite the system for Adventurer.

Flavor - 2/5, The class had no background, or description. There were several key things people like to know about when they see a class. Such as which abilities are important, or what alignment the class generally is. Despite the classes complete lack of description of any kind; I could tell the general idea of what the author was going for.

Abandoned, almost[edit]

This class has not been edited for more then a year while large pieces of information are missing. The information states grammar and spelling only but by now it may be safe to assume that the original author may not finish this class at all. I took the liberty to add missing information and some lore without changing any functionality to my best of abilities.--Crashpilot 07:40, 3 March 2011 (MST)

Also the epic levels are a bit unclear to me, one could just proceed in the same manner as before gaining more stackable skills but I feel that this might make the adventurer a bit boring at that point. Any ideas?--Crashpilot 07:40, 3 March 2011 (MST)

How should I see adaptation, I am unsure what is meant by this frase in the last section that describes Adventurers in the game.--Crashpilot 07:49, 3 March 2011 (MST)

And as for the last question, how do you import the standard NPC template? Or should I create a NPC at the NPC section and somehow link it to this page?? The helpfiles are not clear about that or I have failed to look in the right section.--Crashpilot 08:13, 3 March 2011 (MST)

In my opinion, Template:Abandoned does not fit this article (now, especially).
The section "Adaption", I believe, is how the class can fit into settings. This is unique from the main "in the game" text as that is universal, and this covers specific setting options.
To make an NPC see also 3.5e NPCs, and then transclude it here. However, I have not required an NPC for a class to be without improving, reviewing, and removing article templates as I thought that was asking a bit much. Of course, yes, they should have them. --Green Dragon 16:50, 3 March 2011 (MST)
I agree, my title for the comment is a bit confusing, I meant more to say that it is clearly abandoned but it is almost finished. Also I have taken some personal interest in this class becouse it can be used nearly anywhere and will make nice NPC's so I decided to addopt it if the original owner does not mind.--Crashpilot 20:04, 3 March 2011 (MST)
I think I can finish it off though I would actually make a few minor changes in the class (d6hp instead of d8 since it has spells and similar to rogue and skill mastery affects 1 skill not multiple every time you take it) but I think I can flesh out the rest of it. Any objections to me fixing it up? Tivanir 10:22, 8 March 2012 (MST)
None here. --Green Dragon 10:43, 8 March 2012 (MST)
Asking for some quick input here while I am trying to clean this up and bring in the epic things. For the spellcasting section being able to pick from both lists seems to be a little excessive for having access to 6th level spells. Would it be better to add a choose either arcane or divine list or to lower the overall level (make it like the paladin or ranger lists) or am I off my rocker on this? Tivanir 12:14, 8 March 2012 (MST)

Input[edit]

If possible can I get a few people to take a quick look and see what they think of my modifications. I tried to make it a bit easier to read and rewrote some sections. I also tweaked a couple of abilities and the hd down one for balance. Mostly I would like feedback so I have a good idea of what all needs to be fixed up yet (outside of the example which I save for last when everything is stable.) Tivanir 15:16, 8 March 2012 (MST)

Rewriting it. Giving access to both spell types at level 1 with essentially a slightly reduced rogue isn't a viable trade off. Going to make this chart more like a paladins chart and change up the number of spells known a bit. Tivanir 04:49, 10 March 2012 (MST)
The spell selection states that they start with 4 spells, but the table says they start with 5 which is correct. Also you need to fix the link for Charisma in Adventures Fortune. As for my personal opinion on this class; I would say it seems like tier 2, it is rather balanced and it isn't overpowered. Its versatility will help a lot. But I think the Skill Bonus Trick should be rewriten so that you can't use it to get a +40 competence bonus on Craft, Jump, Profession, etc. --Milo High-Hill 18:36, 22 April 2012 (MDT)
I agree with what Milo said regarding the Skill Tricks. Add a maximum amount in. I do dislike them being able to pull from the cleric list. I do not think they should be able to pull from divine magic. Are they adventuring in the service of some diety? If so give them up to a certain MAX level for divine magic...say 4th level. This guy shouldn't be able to do what a 15th level Cleric can do. For that matter, the same could be said for their Arcane spells. They aren't trained and aren't focused on being a magic-user. Don't let them do what a typical arcane magi can do. I hope I made some sense.-- Irykyl 11:30, 3 May 2012 (MDT)
I changed up the skill tricks it specifies now that you may only take it once per skill, though you may select it multiple times to have it apply to a new skill (aka +4 to jump first then +4 to climb.) I forgot to add in the whole their caster level counts as one half their adventurer level thingy but level 4 spells is not excessive in my opinion. Also clerics aren't required to take a deity for normal 3.5 so I am not seeing the divine options as being a deal breaker personally though that could just be me. Tivanir 12:48, 3 May 2012 (MDT)
See what happens when I try to work and play at the same time. I completely overlooked the fact that it was already at 4th level. (Who's a dummy? This guy.) Now about the cleric thing, it's from a personal issue I had with 3.5e. I really don't like the idea of people being able to cast divine magic unless they are in service to a diety in one form or another. -- Irykyl 13:12, 3 May 2012 (MDT)
Yea I always had that too. Personally I could go with axing it but then I need to rebalance it again, since the versatility was suppose to be one of the huge selling points. Let me take a look and see what I can figure out for fixing it up again. Tivanir 13:25, 3 May 2012 (MDT)

Rating[edit]

Power - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because it is pretty balanced, but I think it's skillmonkey abilities are a bit too good for a class that gets some of everything else, too. It gets nearly as many TotT as a Fighter gets bonus feats, but also gets Sorcerer/Wizard spells, Trapfinding, Evasion, Uncanny Dodge, a really good bonus to saves and 3/4 BAB make it pretty good compared to Rogue, especially for multiclassing. --R2d2go (talk) 12:47, 28 April 2013 (MDT)

Working on correcting some balance issues; I changed up the frequency of TotT. I figured the spells were in line with say the ranger and wont give him ultimate power but a little extra zip to make him a bit more desirable as a class choice. Tivanir (Speak to me) (talk) 08:05, 29 April 2013 (MDT)
I think I may have weakened the class a little too far now though. Would someone actually choose this over a rogue in any situation? Tivanir (Speak to me) (talk) 11:02, 30 April 2013 (MDT)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it had a few issues but I have fixed them, and anything else I obviously have not seen. --R2d2go (talk) 12:47, 28 April 2013 (MDT)

Formatting - 5/5 I give this class 5 out of 5 because the formatting, as far as I can tell, is perfect, especially for a decently complex class. --R2d2go (talk) 12:47, 28 April 2013 (MDT)

Flavor - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because there was solid flavour wherever the preload prompted but didn't have any especially flavorful special abilities or themes. --R2d2go (talk) 12:47, 28 April 2013 (MDT)

I will work on flavor in the future, but with how much I had to change this class to make it viable I put that off until the end. Once balance is established I will flesh it out and make it a good read. Tivanir (Speak to me) (talk) 08:05, 29 April 2013 (MDT)

Rating of the Adventurer homebrew class[edit]

Rating[edit]

Power - 4.5/5 I give this class a 4.5 out of 5 because looking over the class abilities it gives a very good jack of all trades. The tricks of the trade are versitile though can not be used to surpass another class, say if someone selected all feats a Fighter of the same level would still have more. Aswell the average attack bonus and the array of savings bonuses are what one would expect from a basic character. --Tjcross (talk) 07:44, 6 May 2013 (MDT)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because I have not noticed any spelling mistakes or grammer errors major enough for me to recognize. --Tjcross (talk) 07:44, 6 May 2013 (MDT)

Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5/5 because from what I have seen all tables are done properly and there are appropriate links --Tjcross (talk) 07:44, 6 May 2013 (MDT)

Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5/5 because there is a good amount of lore and flavor added to the character, the quote and other minor details hold some humor aswell as being somewhat realistic. --Tjcross (talk) 07:44, 6 May 2013 (MDT)


Rating 11/20[edit]

Balance - 1/5 I give this class a 1 out of 5 because <<<The class seems a bit over powered>>> --184.78.159.103 02:01, 16 August 2013 (MDT)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because <<<This class was worded very well. No improvements needed>>> --184.78.159.103 02:01, 16 August 2013 (MDT)

Formatting - 3/5 I give this class a 3 out of 5 because <<<There was no improvements needed, but none really delivered>>> --184.78.159.103 02:01, 16 August 2013 (MDT)

Flavor - 2/5 I give this class a 2 out of 5 because <<<This was cute as an idea, but just not useful or needed in my opinion>>> --184.78.159.103 02:01, 16 August 2013 (MDT)

As a quick question may I ask what you believe is overpowered about the class? I like to address concerns when they are represented. Tivanir (Speak to me) (talk) 07:42, 16 August 2013 (MDT)
Personal tools
d20M
miscellaneous
admin area
Terms and Conditions for Non-Human Visitors