Axebeak

MMCJawa's page

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber. 7,018 posts. 1 review. No lists. 1 wishlist.


RSS

1 to 50 of 7,018 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

If clerics are going to deity only, I kind of hope at some point that we do get mechanically distinct classes for those who draw power from philosophies or from a whole pantheon.

A Pantheon focused divine caster could be something that focuses heavily on domains, with an ability to swap out their domains at the start of each day, for instance.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I am kind of at the point where we should take twitter and dump it into the Mariana trench...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Derry L. Zimeye wrote:
Another thing is that Orcs would be particularly easy to write in is we already have half of the ancestry feats for orcs done; throw in a a handful more, write up a quick history thing, and some headshots- it's super low effort, but it'd go such a long way as far as marketing goes (Pathfinder- we have orcs, and DnD doesn't!)

EXACTLY

This is my main argument for adding Orcs, versus Tiefling/Kobolds/Ratfolk/whatever. Most of the work has already been done, and it feels weird to have a bunch of orc feats without an orc around


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I would guess they are leaving it open so that other villains may make use of them someday, even if not PC. Or perhaps at some point when they do a villain book there will be some high level PC options that allow their use.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

They are waiting for more results over more levels for Resonance, not simply basing things off the first round. I would imagine that part of the survey results is just to track peoples view of resonance as players play increasingly higher characters, to get a baseline of where resonance might be dropping off for instance.

So consider those questions for level one to be more about establishing a baseline than anything else.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I watched the Twitch last night...really a good chunk of that is wroth watching if you want spoilers, since not only do they list 5 (and a 6th later on) things that will be in the errata document, but during the question and answer period They also provide strong hints on future other possible changes. It's about an hour and 15 minutes, and at least a half hour if not more of that is relevant to confirmed errata and things they are considering.

For instance, they mention they are likely to address concerns with ancestry being barebones at the start, and signature skills, the latter by perhaps dropping them entirely. Also they are considering some changes to how bows work.

It's about an hour and 15 minutes, and at least a half hour if not more of that is relevant to confirmed errata and things they are considering.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Brother Fen wrote:
Not biting on that one. There's been zero support for Mythic from Paizo. I don't see them sullying their pretty shiny new and simpler game with mythic options.

A new system though gives them a chance to redo the underlying mechanics and make it work correctly. The ability to fix shortcomings in the existing playset is one of strongest arguments for a new edition at all.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
ShinHakkaider wrote:

Since 2012, I've been supporting Kickstarters:

Rappan Athuk @ $100
Reaper Bones Minis@ $256
Dwarven Forge Game Tiles @ $175
Giant Foam Polyhedral Dice @ $20
Deep Magic for Pathfinder RPG @ $40
Reaper Bones II @ $100
Deck of Many Things @ $24
Advanced Bestiary @ $45
Mythic Mania 3 rulebooks for Pathfinder RPG @ $150
Tact-Tiles @ $92
Aaron Allston's Strike Force @ $56
The Lost Lands: Bard's Gate for 5E, Pathfinder, and S&W! @ $100
Super Powered Legends Sourcebook for M&M @ $25
Critical Hit & Fumble Dice @ $22

That's $1205 over 6 years which may not seem like alot? But I can honestly tell you that I KNOW that I havent spent that much at my local gaming store in that time. Not even HALF of that. That's money that went DIRECTLY to the publishers/producers that I wanted to support and not a retail store.

This amount doesn't even include the boardgame (ARCADIA QUEST/ZOMBICIDE) or video game (PATHFINDER KINGMAKER) KS I've backed. To imply that Kickstarters don't have an effect on the game market is willful ignorance, AT BEST,

I've spent 0 on kickstarter, and while my purchases have declined in the last two years, far far far too much money on Paizo and to a much lesser degree brick and mortar stores. So we cancel each other out :)

I mean my question is...how many of these are products that would normally be available at all without kickstarter? and are the majority of folks investing in Kickstarter taking money they would be normally spending at retail shops and transferring it to kickstarter sales? I will more than happy to admit online sales in general are eating into businesses due to simple convenience and the availability of niche items. I just don't think that is a separate aspect from online sales in general.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I've never had a problem with it, and I actually see it as adding an element of fun.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

You know if you are worried about a single character beating up 20 low level guards...the simplest solution is to just use a troop instead of 20 individual NPCs. Given that troops are pretty popular as a concept I imagine they will show up early in the PF2 system.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I have to say, in response to some of the posts above, this so far has been one of my favorite threads in the forum, and it's great that everything has been civil and reasonable.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
TriOmegaZero wrote:

Thanks Virginia!

Last night we sat down with the rules and worked out playtest characters. My wife got so frustrated we went to Hero Lab Online to have a guide. Usability of the CRB will be an important point, as she nearly threw up her hands at the skills section. Once we had that handled, I knocked out a monk in about 20 minutes.

I don't have a group to playtest with, but I do have a good friend in another state who does, and this weekend they started building PF2 characters. He likes most of the character building, but as a Rogue his biggest complaint was it took forever to figure out skill feats, since they were mixed in with general feats and organized alphabetically, rather than by level.

His biggest suggestion was to split up the feats more, and to provide some table at least that listed feats by level.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Right now I am getting a bit tired of the CW shows. They almost all have the exact same formula (Legends is a bit different, but still somewhat similar). Even Black Lightning is drifting into the CW formula at the end.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I feel like casters already get a very powerful resource, which more than makes up for a reduced amount of feats.

Sure, Sorcerers probably should have the same number of feats as wizards, but there is a difference between giving casters and martials the same number of feats.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Yossarian wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
That's going to be a ton of work, and is asking Paizo to basically develop and run two separate games at once

Actually it's surprisingly simple to do. It shows how elegant the underlying framework is of PF2 that you can change the way proficiency scales and everything holds together. From that perspective PF2 is imho really impressively well put together.

Running two product lines means that for every adventure/splat, you will need to do separate rounds of editing or formatting for any product, beyond the rules revisions and changes to encounter design. also, let's say that 50% of the customer base goes for one version, the other folks go for another. So this means that each product takes about twice the effort to produce, without a commiserate increase in volume sold. It's just not really feasible to do on the scale that Paizo operates on.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

That's going to be a ton of work, and is asking Paizo to basically develop and run two separate games at once (which inevitably will just lead to further confusion when groups accidently use materials for one version when they meant to play another.

Also I think the level system is such a major cornerstone of the system that adjusting it requires reworking and playtesting the whole thing, to keep it balanced.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Luke and Cage season 2 was pretty great, and its probably the second best comic series I have seen this year (Cloak and Dagger edges it out as #1)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I have yet to see you actually present information suggesting that Kickstarter is actually having an effect on the game market, at least as far as Pathfinder and DnD are concerned.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Going through the playtest, I see as far as class feats are concerned, most classes have at least 4 or so very obvious distinct paths a player can take. That doesnt seem so bad.

Also I think some of the Siloing (is that a word?) of options is probably to leave design space open for future classes. One of the issues that Paizo ran across is that many conceptual niches seemed hard to pull off, if existing core rulebook classes were already really strong in multiple niches. I also think some of the complaints probably tie into the buzz going in on the blogs. There were a LOT of posts arguing that very few new classes would be needed after the playtest, and to me that is obviously not what happened.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I trust that Paizo has the good business sense to track the market and know whether PF 1E was still viable or not. And for everyone arguing for Paizo to do a 1E.5 or something...any benefit you get from players sticking around will be offset by A) People refusing to rebuy a slightly tweaked rulest; B) probably not addressing the fact people were leaving in the first place.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Greylurker wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
For what its worth, resonance isn't just about wands, but also about getting rid of slots, and allowing characters to deck themselves out in whatever equipment they want. But if you get rid of slots, you are going to need to some sort of way to limit the amount of magic a character can deck themselves out in.

I'vve seen attunment systems is several other games, Exalted, Earthdawn and others, even 5E has something like it

but those systems it's a good idea when dealing with permanent magical items.

But not consumables like Potions and Scrolls

I would agree, and I don't think resonance really makes sense for those. I am just responding by pointing out something I think is a positive aspect of resonance.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

For what its worth, resonance isn't just about wands, but also about getting rid of slots, and allowing characters to deck themselves out in whatever equipment they want. But if you get rid of slots, you are going to need to some sort of way to limit the amount of magic a character can deck themselves out in.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Gorbacz wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
I mean, I don't think you even need to give a generic name to a Succubus. After all, Succubus is from real world mythology.

Sure, but it is only in the courtroom that you will discover whether naming a lusty energy draining winged demon in a broadly D&D related comic/novel/board game "Succubus" does or does not constitute a breach of OGL. You'll argue that they're totes real life and thus public domain, the shark from Wolfram & Hart will argue that you've used the particular interpretation of Succubi drawn from OGL which is protected and is not open content in media other than a pen and paper RPG.

I'd charge 100 bucks an hour for that, discount rate.

Uniformity is valid enough reason as other pointed out. If this argument though was true, they would have to shuck pretty much every name that appeared in the SRD. Which they don't seem to be doing for other critters whose name is at least folkloric in origin.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I mean, I don't think you even need to give a generic name to a Succubus. After all, Succubus is from real world mythology.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Phantasmist wrote:


1. Do you currently like pathfinder 1e? (I know it sounds loaded, but please bare with me.)

2. Did you once like pathfinder 1e but now find it troublesome? (feel free to give details.)

3. Do you like 4th or 5th edition D&D? (Also sounds loaded but again no judgments)

4. Which are you looking for class balance, smoother high level play, more options, or even all of those things? (Small edit: these weren't meant to be mutually excursive, I just want the gist of what you're looking for, feel free to add additional thoughts/desires as well.)

5. How do you feel about making the game more accessible in general?

6. Are you willing to give up on accessibility if you can still gain all of the benefits listed in question 4?

7. Would you be willing to play an alternative rules system then what we have been presented? (A different version of pathfinder 2nd edition if you will).

8. And if you said yes to the above question what would you like to see in that theoretical game? (Most of you will see what I'm doing here, I'm finding common ground)

1. Yes

2. Uh...my major issue with PF 1E is less the rules, and more that it's increasingly hard it feels like to find anyone interested. Granted I can fully admit this might be a location issue, but I feel like based on other accounts it's not just me. A new edition is probably the shot in the arm Paizo needs.

3. I wasn't paying attention to RPGs when 4E came out, although I know my friends who kept gaming complained about it. I have the 5E rulebook but haven't played yet...someday perhaps.

4. Reducing caster-martial discrepancy without homogenization. Building the game from the ground up to allow further expansion of popular existing rules from non-corebooks and requested options. A robust release schedule that provides a streamlined yet complex gaming experience. Basically keep the customization of PF 1E while eliminating un-needed complexity.

5. I am not sure what this means exactly. An inaccessible game, especially to folks who are new or only played 5E (which I see as a feeder system for PF 2E) seems like something no one wants.

6. False dichotomy

7. Sure...It's a playtest...I don't expect the current rules to be what we get

8. See 4?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Hi James,

Since this is going into a new edition, could we perhaps get a new racial name for lizardfolk and serpentfolk?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm still only going through it slowly...I actually really like the underlying system, and most of my complaints have been things that would be very flexible and easy to change.

I think the thing I was most happy with was looking over spells. Almost all the complained about spell options from the first core rulebook have been fixed:

Scry and Fry is truly dead

Simulacrum doesn't exist

Wish is gated by a feat and not an option for the majority of the game.

Teleport, at least over long distances, is not going to completely skip an adventure.

Coming back from the dead carries a price.

Save or suck has been toned down and been granted degrees of success.

I am sure there are tons of minor things I missed or glossed over as well on just the spells alone.


10 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I actually would be perfectly fine with archetypes and prestige "classes" being put off until the next book, if it gave more room for class feats.

Mostly the big issue is that the way combat options and class feats are set up, you don't have any sort of general combat options that any martial character can take. Each individual class has to have various equivalent feats, which then have to compete with more unique flavorful options for that character. So basic concepts like an archer ranger don't have a whole lot of options compared to PF 1E core rulebook.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

You know, if the new edition actually results in...you know...ANYONE playing Pathfinder locally, I will be thrilled. I can't speak for other folks, but in my part of Wisconsin Pathfinder has for all intents and purposes been completely supplanted by 5E.

I like the options, adventures, and world support, but they are basically just collectibles for me at this point...


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
master_marshmallow wrote:

All of us are new players as far as PF2 is concerned, and if I'm skipping half the entry to get to the parts that matter for what makes the class unique, there's going to be problems. Plus a lot of wasted space in the book.

There's new and then there is NEW. I think anyone who is interested and experienced enough in gaming to break down the underlying math of the system is definitely not "new" to RPGs in general :)

I think this is set up so someone with little if any gaming experience can potentially open a chapter up and figure out exactly how his character changes as he levels up, rather than having to cross check an additional table. Certainly there are other aspects that still need some fixing presentation wise, but this seem okay.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The repetitiveness of class entries is almost certainly to help new players jump into things. Which isn't a bad thing, and I actually like that.

BUT I agree with you on the feat thing. It feels like we need some generic combat feats and allow the relevant classes to just pick them up. It would also free up Class feat space to include more flavorful options, which I feel is sort of an issue with the Ranger.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
MidsouthGuy wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:

Well,there are Neutral Clerics of Norgorber in his role a "the Reaper of Reputation" which is the most socially acceptable version of worshiping Norgorber, so I won't say there are "none."

But for the most part I like it, "joining team evil" is not really a thing neutral characters should be particularly interested in, and the "only one step" rule always bothered me since "Oh, no... I'm a neutral Cleric of Rovagug" wrankled. A lot of people would just play CN as a sort of "diet evil" and worship something horrific just to skirt around rules that prohibit actual evil. I will be glad to see this gone.

There are plenty of reasons to serve an Evil God without being Evil yourself (a severely deformed person praying to Lamashtu or a very strict lawyer revering Asmodeus for example), and previously published material directly mentions non-evil Clerics. So this is nothing but a retcon, which I am not a fan of at all. There should at least be a Heretic feat that allows for this as an option.

Would the lawyer have ranks in cleric? I think the alignment rule really only is relevant for those classes that are getting some sort of mechanical benefit from this. Lay followers can be whatever they want, but I think if you are a cleric on the same page as a god that is all about using law as a means of oppression, you probably are fully in on the LE angle


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
OntosChalmer wrote:

A lot of possible builds in core PF1 simply do not exist in PF2 as is. That is what I dislike.

There should be, simply, a list of generic class feats that ANY class can take, that lets them access what should not be a class feature. Like dual-wielding weapons. Being competent with a crossbow. Being competent with a ranged weapon. All this stuff was possible in PF1, but are now locked behind class feats for no real reason.

Also, restricting multiclassing to only 'class feats' feels likes scrapping a core part of PF1. Even 5e allows multiclassing, why can't PF2?

There should be combat feats that relevant classes (Fighter, Paladin, Ranger) Should be able to take. I like archer rangers, and it seems like an iconic option that would be harder to build vs the Pathfinder 1E core rule book.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Yeah my sense as well is that the framework is good, but class wise there just isn't much going on, and it's harder to build some concepts that were doable in PF1.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kalindlara wrote:

I'm not wholly disappointed or confused by the move towards more tightly restricted worship alignments in PF2. I'm not really a supporter of it, though, and I think there's a very good reason for most (though not all) good and evil deities to accept more neutral followers.

Redemption and temptation.

Asmodeus, of all deities, should be enthusiastic about accepting lawful neutral worshipers. Selling them on the faith's evil aspects as being purely optional, all with an eye towards their slow descent into corruption. By the same token, Sarenrae looking upon a prospective worshiper and saying "you're not pure enough, buzz off" seems less than encouraging to their climb towards salvation.

Now, this could involve tweaks to the anathema system to encourage such worshipers to slowly evolve. At the very least, I would expect systems in place to prevent them from getting all the benefits with none of the moral or thematic dedication, or to prevent them from acting wildly out of accordance with their deity's teachings. But just "pure/black of heart only" seems a bit constraining.

And, yeah. Add me to the group that finds Gorum's forbiddance of good worshipers confusing. This keeps heroic barbarians out of the church entirely, forcing them into the worship of deities that barely fit their cultures and traditions at all.

My sense is that there is a difference between lay followers versus clerics. This alignment chart is really only relevant to clerics and whatever future classes are created that have to choose a diety. Nothing is stopping a fighter or a wizard from being a LN follower of Asmodeus, they are just not going to be getting any divine perks out of the deal (and may have some problems in the afterlife).

Clerics on the other hand are divine agents of a God, invested in their teachings and given agency to carry out the will of said deity. Someone devoted to an evil god is going to know full and well what is up. That LE cleric will certainly act LN to lure devotees and slowly corrupt and damn them, and some of those lay followers may never waver beyond LN.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Arachnofiend wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
There are a few gods here and there I would prefer a bit more lenient alignment changes, but if this stops all the really weird CN worshippers of vile demons, it might be worth it.

Is Golarion really a better setting if you remove Nocticula's CN worshipers? Clerics that focus in on a specific appeal of their deity's portfolio have long been an interesting wrinkle in this setting and I think getting rid of that goes a long way to ruining the setting.

The fact that none of the deities got an expanded list really shows Paizo's hand with this. I've already argued on behalf of Gorum, and sure, maybe James Jacobs' vision of the deity is a nearly evil jerk, but why does Nethys care what your alignment is? Why does Pharasma? Why does Asmodeus only accept Lawful Evil clerics, when it is absolutely within his wheelhouse to present himself as appealing to those who value order and stability over freedom (ergo, Lawful Neutral worshipers)? Never mind the fact that in PFS this kills the Dark Archive since it is now illegal to play in that system and worship any of the deities of Hell.

Well, Nocticula is an outlier, and it's been hinted that as part of the events of the last two PF 1E AP's, she will transition from a CE Demon Lord to a full CN neutral goddess.

I mean I have a few quibbles here and there (Sarenae in setting seems like she should be allowing some neutral characters), but I think in general that yes...most evil gods are evil enough that I think a cleric (which is suppose to represent a devout worshiper and agent of the deity in the mortal realm) should also be evil (or good if the deity is good). I have certainly seen frustration from GM's here when a player shows up at a table with a CN follower of some horrendously vile demon lord, or some insanity inducing elder god. This seems to be a step to addressing that.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

There are a few gods here and there I would prefer a bit more lenient alignment changes, but if this stops all the really weird CN worshippers of vile demons, it might be worth it.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I think Signature skill is mostly a way of doing niche protection for different classes, and letting them have different niches (and most signature skills for a given class are probably set up as the ones you would be focusing on anyway).

That said I would agree that there SHOULD be either a floating signature skill somewhere in character creation, or at least a general feat available early on to let you pick another one. Lack of flexibility here is an issue I see with some other game elements at a glance, so signature skill is not the only concern.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Hi James,

How's it going today?

Also, I actually prefer the more specific name rather than the generic name for fiends. e.g. I prefer Demon, Vrock for instance


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Well, you don't want your best and most iconic villain in your first movie. Better to save him for when you have more time to develop him?

(assuming Venom actually does well enough that someone will want to finance a sequel)....


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I wouldn't make any assumptions regarding if something like mythic in the new ruleset will exist, based on what we have now.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Yeah...it's confirmed that Riz Ahmed's character is bonded with Riot


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Nathanael Love wrote:


The process of rebuying the same content parceled out in slightly different format is the WORST aspect of a new edition. No, I just really want to wait for Ultimater Magic and Advanceder Player's Guide just to get back a few of the things we already have.

Erik Mona has implied that the production model for new splats is explicitly going to avoid the "Okay, here is a new version of APG, here is a new version of UM" Etc. Certainly we will got old classes/races/rule options in future releases, but that doesn't mean it won't come bundled together with completely new options.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I suspect that the pirate archetype will be far more useful for building npcs than it will be for player characters


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

yeah I suspect Fiege will stick on, since I also assume at this point that Disney would be more than happy to drive a semi-truck full of cash to his house to get him to do so.

But really who ever really knows. He might decide to retire to his own private island once his contract is done, or another studio might try to woo him to their side.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Deadmanwalking wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:

Also, there are two "missing" spell lists in the core book, of the four essences IIRC Arcane is Material/Mental, Divine is Spiritual/Vital, Primal is Material/Vital, and Occult is Mental/Spiritual.

We could easily make a list and corresponding class or classes for a Material/Spiritual or a Mental/Vital magical tradition.

I think we're hard coded into only 4 spell lists with Mental and Vital, as well as Material and Spiritual, in opposition to each other. The fact that each spell list has a dedicated skill is probably the strongest evidence of this.

Not sure why a new skill is outside of the question in a future release, anymore than assuming that the absence of guns in the rulebook = no guns ever. Seems like a new skill would be fairly easy to add to the game if it was focused on a new system of magic.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I could see the Psychic being a Mental/Vital caster, and the Shaman fitting the Material/Spiritual spot


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I could see Witch being a prepared caster version of the Sorceror, and I could also see it being a prepared caster for occult magic.

I mean ultimately, I think most classes, with retooling, probably deserve to someday be brought back. After all, one person's class that is completely pointless to that individual, is another person's favorite.

I'd say the following are classes that might not be all that necessary.

Arcanist: This always felt like mechanically it filled a gap in the classes, but doesn't really have much of a thematic role to fill, being a bit too close to wizards. So I would be fine if this didn't come back, or if it did come back, was heavily reflavored

Brawler: If a straight fighter can be built for unarmed combat and be completely effective, and without pretending a good number of class features, this doesn't maybe need to exist anymore. A mundane, not mystical unarmed combatant is an important niche

Skald: This always seemed like a class that was a bit narrowly constructed, and feels like it would be better for either an archetype or just a set of feats

Classes I think could be problematic to bring back? Summoner. In PF1 that class always was bit of controversy. Summoner 1.0 was broken and caused issues. Summoner 2.0 was mechanically sound, but far more limited, and suddenly shucked a lot of concepts out of the window. I think thematically it has a place, but it might be better to figure out the class mechanics using the spiritualist or some sort of "build a construct" artificer class first.

Also, I really would like to see the cavalier class come back. Thematically, heavy armor and mounted combat seem like something that should exist for a class, and I think this could be retooled around as sort of a battlefield commander "rally the troops" type class.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I just use phases as a convenient short hand term. Who knows what the hell is happening after Phase 3, other than the "last" guardian movie, another spiderman, and presumably a Black Widow movie.

Hell, Fiege's contract runs out at the end of next year, so who knows who will even be around to manage things.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Seems okay to me, but I do wonder about balance issues. If MC archetypes are too "front-loaded" than they will be easy picks, which might increase the power level of some classes over others. Also, wondering how this will interact with the Fighter and all of his feats. Seems like its going to be a lot easier for that class to multiclasss than other classes.

1 to 50 of 7,018 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>