Loremaster Feedback Megathread

[CrystalRL]

My only problem with the class so far (besides the things brought up re:commoners) is the ab feat.

It's a 3/4 bab class, so you lose 1 ab even with a single level in the class, and up to 3 depending on how deep you go. The feat's pointless unless it lets you adjust your ab accordingly. I saw someone mention it's actually good in epics, but taking levels of loremaster in epic is going to cost you Epic Bonus Feats in theory too! That one feat should probably either be scaled, or just adjust the class's BAB from 3/4 to 1.

[Tathkar Eisgrim]

Feedback on Loremaster!

Personally I think reduce its HD to a d4...., AB to 1/2th, and give it 3/4th spell progression.

Reason being that in PNP, it is intended for a caster, based upon its requirements; the flavor of it is indeed a drawing point, but in my opinion, it isn't enough, a Loremaster in my eyes is a wizened elder, whose knowledge of the world lends itself to knowing much about the world around them, the classes that best can use this are, however, things like fighter or rogue at first glance, which is almost the opposite of what I imagine a Loremaster to be...

Having re-read the original D&D description, I can certainly understand the OP's point about the Hit Die (D4). It is a strong indicator of the martial implications of taking to books - and foregoing martial exercise.

[Baseili]

I would argue that while PnP Loremaster is indeed a caster class, the actual function of it has largely been replicated in Arelith by the language system be it high Int or Gift of Tongues. The Lore specialisation is rather redundant since NWN bundled all the respective PnP lore skills into one, while Arelith lacks any form of checks beyond the aforementioned languages, scroll use and item identifying/book finding.

The version we currently have is a different beast unique to the server, and while I agree the class should be accessable to casters it should by no means be entirely limited to them. I am not fond of the class being one to merge into others like the harpers and would much rather see it as a standalone, once its figured out how many legs it will stand on.

[Drowboy]

I think, a lot like Hexblade, the name muddies what people expect from it. You see Loremaster and people expect the wizard PRC, but it's more like that superhero trope where someone sees something done a few times, or reads about it, and suddenly has cool kung fu abilities. (Or, like, the ability to clone themselves, I guess)

[Gouge Away]

I guess I still hold out hope for a future mundane version with rogue synergy. I personally don't think wizard needs a loremaster PRC (but if you do, great, just an opinion) and this seems to reward hybrids most of all (rangers, bards etc) which is cool in its own way, but the idea of an Indiana Jones or spy-type "loremaster" intrigues me more than anything.

[Rowlind Salem]

Personally, I really like how the loremaster had been turning out. But I'm planning on using my loremaster levels to supplement my fighter / wm build with languages, UMD and more efficient buffs.

If I was a caster, I'd want the efficiency of using scrolls doubled from any mundane class and for the caster level of these scroll to be equal to my caster level + loremaster levels. If the PM gets caster levels from pm levels, then loremaster should get something like that too.

either that or give scribe scroll / brew potion / craft wand as a free feat if you're multiclassing from a caster class?

Anyway, keep up the good work!

[Quidix]

There were quite a few iterations of the loremaster before it was released live just now, might it be possible to post the final class notes in one place?

By crafting secret says "WIP" on PGCC, is this intended?

Thank you!

[Kuma]

Druidic and Roushoum are counted as "non-secret languages" and thus can be taken at any bonus language level of Loremaster, not just 10. This, presumably, is not intentional.

[Jagel]

Druidic and Roushoum are counted as "non-secret languages" and thus can be taken at any bonus language level of Loremaster, not just 10. This, presumably, is not intentional.

And if it is intentional I WILL NOT STAND FOR IT!1