Barbarian
Rage seems to be the core of this class. The class features after that aren't the sort you can really rely upon for a full character, so the rage needs to be good. Improved Rage and Rage Powers look like they'll fit the bill, but I can't really comment until there's more than just a few blurbs of concepts. However, the large difference between enraged and not enraged may be an issue. If you don't spend any rounds on powers, you should have enough rounds for the day at most levels, I think. Probably will run short for the last encounter of the day, though. Using any rage powers will probably cost you an encounter's worth of rage, however, or more for the higher level ones.
Yeah, and something to keep in mind, that I need to remember to explicitly state, is that Rage Powers don't require you to be Raging to use. There will also be a decent Extra Rage feat to help fill in those gaps should you want to be a crazy Raging Rage Power using Rage Monster.
Fighter
Bonus Feats: The note says this makes you gain a feat every level. Did you change feats to be granted at every even character level somewhere? Also, the note only applies to single-classed Fighters, anyways, as multiclassed Fighters would potentially be out of phase on the two bonus feat cycles.
I'm going to need to look that up, because you're the second person to say that I mentioned that you gain a feat every level, but I can't find that. I know that it says you gain a feat every
odd level...
Changing bonus feats is interesting. Has a small typo, though ("fopr" instead of "for" when talking about keeping prereqs).
K, thx, I'll fix that.
Fighter training: Less than amazed with the way this works. The base options are all numerical bonuses, which is a decent fallback, but isn't as impressive. The fact that they are tied to specific weapons or armor kind of negates the Warrior's Aptitude ability, which is all about NOT being tied to specific weapons or armor.
Well, the two
are supposed to be filling different conceptual design space. Also, the training doesn't apply to "specific" weapons or armors per se, but rather to whole groups of weapons/armors.
The alternative abilities are more interesting. I don't see anything for shield use in there, though. For the requirements, are the bonus requirements before or after the +1 to everything you already have that you get alongside the new ability?
I'm having a hard time parsing your question. Do you mean to ask if the special abilities' extra stuff in addition to the normal bonuses? Because, if that's what you're asking, then the answer's yes.
Also, the way the bonuses scale (new weapon/armor groups come in at low bonuses), you're encouraged to grab all the groups you want at low levels, and only take special abilities at high levels.
Yeah, that is the idea.
The fact that you only get 5 options in total, at least one of which (two in practice since there aren't enough abilities you'll qualify for) has to be a weapon/armor group, you don't have that many options in here. They also feel rather limited in scope.
I'm not sure how limited they are, they feel like they can definitely be character defining abilities. Anyway, they aren't supposed to be superb in power or versatility, as the Fighter gets that from his bonus feats (what with Style Training and the re-written feats I have and am planning).
Field Commander: Shouldn't this require that the ally's contingent action be an action he could take? It seems to imply that the ally's contingent action could be actions the ally can't take.
I'll have to take a second look at this, because that's exactly how I meant for it to read (that the ally's contingent action
can't be an action that said ally can't take).
Paladin
Code: Losing out on circumstance bonuses to attack rolls seems a bit more open-ended than intended. For example, Marshal auras are circumstance bonuses. Also, according to the SRD, flanking isn't even a circumstance bonus (which seems to be the intent to forgo). Also, Paladins flat-out lose to Undead and Constructs and other creatures immune to nonlethal (get flat-footed or just fall prone, and he's not allowed to harm you).
Hmm... that's weird. Flanking bonuses should totally be circumstance bonuses. Anyway, since that's not the case, well, crap, I have to edit this again and it can't be as clean as I'd like it to be. Oh, well.
Why is Shocking Grasp the only direct damage spell on the spell list?
Don't worry, the spell list is totally not done by a long shot.
Ally divine bond: Do you only gain one effect? Do you gain all effects of equal or lesser hp expenditure value
None of the divine bond shit is anywhere close to done, it's just placeholder rules put there so I know where I'm going with it when I get there. lol.
I find it odd that Knight's Challenge makes Paladins as good or better at hunting Lawful creatures than Evil ones. Also, archers, spellcasters, and other ranged combatants get arbitrarily screwed.
Screwing spellcasters was definitely part of the intention. Ranged combatants less so, but, I dunno. The ability needs work, I'll give you that, but I think it's salvageable, very flavorful, and can get to a place that it's very awesome.
Daunting Challenge refers to the Divine Challenge ability. I don't see Divine Challenge anywhere.
Thx, will edit.
Edit: I assume Equipment Divine Bond will be changed soon to use the new special weapon/armor properties instead of the (weaker) SRD ones?
Eventually, yeah. It's all in flux all the time.
