One of my players suggested Scion as a name for the oracle class.

thats as good as paragon, paradigm or avatar

It has some use in Arcana Evolved, but only through translation ("mojh" is draconic for scion).

I do like it much better than paragon and exemplar, which are so generic and overdone that they grate on my sensibilities. Of course, I also feel that "oracle" is a fine name too.

Cavalier - this sounds like 4E's Marshall. It could fill its own unique niche but the fear of stepping on the bard's toes is valid. On the plus side, I doubt many people will be playing bards after their nerf'ing, so this might be a good alternative :) I am hoping that it will be a combination of 3.5e's Cavalier and Knight classes.

I don't agree that Bards were "nerfed" as they have been in demand in the games I play in, though I respect your opinion.

I do believe the Cavalier could easily fill a role that the bard doesn't. To me, it would seem the Cavalier is more martial orientated than the bard. Also, I expect that the Cavalier isn't the skill monkey that the Bard is though I could be wrong. This class sounds more appealing than the bard to me primarily because I have a hard time being interested in the bard concept (I have no issue with their mechanics) but would enjoy a class that boosts allies. I just don't have the desire to play a character that sings, dances, acts, etc. I look forward to seeing how this class develops.

I also sounds like the Cavalier is going to be designed to handle foes and buff allies one-on-one as opposed the bard's ability to affect multiple creatures at once. It also sounds like the Cavalier is going excell at making himself the target, and capable of resisting the attacks of others through superior AC and hit points, and possibly ways of dealing with special abilities (Mettle, Evasion, Slippery Mind, etc.).

So it sounds a lot like the PH2 Knight to me.

I suspect the Alchemist will be mechanically similar to the Binder from "Tome of Magic." He'll drink elixirs instead of binding vestiges, but he will still get a suite of powers that he can change every day, making him highly versatile.

I also think the alchemist might be a good candidate for a skill monkey (6 or 8 skill ranks/level) that doesn't step on the rogue's toes.

THAT would be fricking awesome!

As an aside Binder might be a better description of what they say the Summoner is and does.

Also, I'd much rather see more base classes then a million prestige classes. I like seeing the lvl 20 rewards for NOT multiclassing. I think it adds more flavor when you have to go with a character concept and discourages min/maxing a bit.

I actually agree with you, although I suspect that we're in the minority. I like base classes because sometimes there is a concept that a character would want to work toward beginning at 1st level that cann't be replicated with a core class, and that doesn't make sense for him to wait around doing something else until he qualifies.

I think the Alchemist is a good example - what other class would you start out as in order to qualify for an Alchemist PrC? A wizard? What if you don't want a spell-casting character?

I guess you could start out as an expert, but that class isn't balanced for PCs.

I thought Aspects were introduced by WotC in thier Miniatures Handbook, and thus are closed content?

No, you're thinking of Favored Souls. Even if they were called Aspects, it wouldn't matter unless Paizo were to duplicate the class's abilities. After all, there's a Cavalier prestige class in Complete Warrior (just as an example).

I think the Oracle has great PC potential. [.quote]

Sorry, I didn't mean that the oracle wouldn't have great PC potentional; I meant that while it sounds like oracle/summoner/alchemists could potentially be great both as PCs and NPCs, it looks like cavaliers will shine mostly as PCs.

"Oracle" is a far better name for a spontaneous divine caster than "favored soul". There's a very limited amount of prediction, criticism, or changed that we can lobby for before the Beta is released.