I should also say a thing or two about the basis of Paladins; Paladins are knights, whereas there isn't anything neccessarily knightly about a Templar. Over the years, I've seen some weakening of the knightliness of the Paladin, but such was the basis of the class: King Arthur and the *Knights* of the Round Table, as well as Charlemagne's Paladins and others. The Templar is a champion of a god, drawing power from the varying aspects of that divinity. . .
The Paladin, on the other hand, in the legends, served a master; In Pathfinder, that master may be a god, a king, or whomever, but nonetheless the basis was one who took knightly vows ( Hence the alignment Lawful Good; The Paladin upholds the laws of his lord ). The Anti-Paladin in APG, on the other hand, basically abandons ( or possibly, never was! ) his virtues to wreak vengeance on a world which he, for whatever reason, abandoned for a life of ultimate evil . . .
I'm working on a knightly-type that draws it's power from Lawful Evil, as well as one who draws from Neutral Evil ( Psycho Evil! ) and an alternate from Chaotic Evil, but a Templar need not be a knight; He is a holy/unholy warrior of his god.
I understand the conceptual difference, although let's be honest, a LG Templar and a Paladin in a game world where paladins must have a patron deity seem pretty close in concept.
I understand the conceptual difference, although let's be honest, a LG Templar and a Paladin in a game world where paladins must have a patron deity seem pretty close in concept.
I can't contest that there are a lot of similarities, just that a Templar is dedicated to a god ( and if the god's alignment changes, the Templar - being dedicated to the god FIRST - would have to change ). The Paladin is Lawful Good, as the holy knight of a lord ( lord meaning kings, gods, etc.), and enforces and upholds these laws which he sees as just. . .
I understand the conceptual difference, although let's be honest, a LG Templar and a Paladin in a game world where paladins must have a patron deity seem pretty close in concept.
It wouldn't be hard to say the same thing about clerics.
I understand the conceptual difference, although let's be honest, a LG Templar and a Paladin in a game world where paladins must have a patron deity seem pretty close in concept.It wouldn't be hard to say the same thing about clerics.
A Paladin is a warrior, a Cleric is a priest. . ..
I understand the conceptual difference, although let's be honest, a LG Templar and a Paladin in a game world where paladins must have a patron deity seem pretty close in concept.It wouldn't be hard to say the same thing about clerics.A Paladin is a warrior, a Cleric is a priest. . ..
It isn't hard to build a combat based cleric, and the crusader archetype only improves it's combat role.
But it's still a d8, and - while it has a greater emphasis on fighting - it's assortment of spells still make it a cleric, albeit a more martial one.
The Templar doesn't get the selection of spells - if any - that even a Crusader does, so there's still a lot of emphasis on spells. With a templar, the emphasis is on powers to further the cause of his god. . .
That should say, "powers and fighting skills"
My cleric of Balder (it was a Norse mythos game) was geared toward combat buffs and that's what he prepared every day without fail. You said that a lawful good templar is close in concept to a Paladin with a focus on it's deity. I point out that a Lawful good combat cleric is almost the same concept, and their spells are the supplemental class features to support that.
Yeah, there are a lot of similarities; I guess it comes down to what you prefer. Templar offers a d12 and a lot less spells, and Crusader is a d8 with more spells. Whichever you prefer, I guess, is the question.
Yeah, there are a lot of similarities; I guess it comes down to what you prefer. Templar offers a d12 and a lot less spells, and Crusader is a d8 with more spells. Whichever you prefer, I guess, is the question.
lol, the reason he ended up a cleric was so I wouldn't feel trapped by the code...My DM at the time was a pretty big dick about it.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would like to see a cleric one myself. One where you can be a more scholarly less armored cleric, or less spell devoted one for more martial abilities etc.
To be fair sadly i still don't have these talent books so i don't know how well my idea even fits with the concept of these books. But something I would like to see anyways. :)
I would like to see a Talented Gunslinger or Talented Barbarian next.
Also glad to see More Monk Talents is coming out later this week.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Genius Guide to More Monk Talents should be out this week!
Great, make me spend more money. Because the idea of this product existing, but not owning it, is abhorrent to me.
Contributor; Developer, Super Genius Games
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would like to see a cleric one myself. One where you can be a more scholarly less armored cleric, or less spell devoted one for more martial abilities etc.
To be fair sadly i still don't have these talent books so i don't know how well my idea even fits with the concept of these books. But something I would like to see anyways. :)
That perfectly describes what I hope to accomplish when i get to The Talented Cleric. :)
I've been posting on a thread about the problems of Fighters, and a lot of people feel that they should get 1. a second good save ( probably chosen by the player ), and more skill points. The Talented Fighter gave him more fighting options, but what about those out-of-combat times? I wish some of these changes were made in The Talented Fighter. .. . oh well. . . ..
I think the Fighter is an excellent argument for the medium save progression. Medium Will and Medium Reflexes just seem right for them.
That's a good solution. If only RJ Grady was in our Fighter thread. . .
|
Contributor; Developer, Super Genius Games
|
The Talented Fighter is designed to be more flexible, and allow players and GMs both more ways for characters to be effective, without making them (overall) more effective.
In playtest they held their own as it. If I handed out more skill points and better saving throws, they'd overshadow the existing fighter and some common classic core rules builds.
Now if you WANT to overshadow the existing fighter, those are great ways to do it that are unlikely to break a game. :)
If I were going to rewrite the fighter, things would get crazy after 6th level. But working within the existing class framework, Owen is right on the money, of course.
|
Contributor; Developer, Super Genius Games
|
If I were going to rewrite the fighter, things would get crazy after 6th level. But working within the existing class framework, Owen is right on the money, of course.
Thanks!
But now you have me really curious what your 7+ fighter class would look like. :)
I have to say, I am kind of in love with the talented monk. I love the concept of the 'special attack bonus' so that a monk isnt forced to take flurry of blows to get its full bab while remaining a 3/4 bab class. I think that alone makes a huge difference with the class, and the deadly strikes talent opens up a huge variety of options to be just as effective as the main options normally afforded the monk. Finally a monk fighting with 2 kamas or throwing shurikens can be as effective as just fighting with his fists.
If I were going to rewrite the fighter, things would get crazy after 6th level. But working within the existing class framework, Owen is right on the money, of course.Thanks!
But now you have me really curious what your 7+ fighter class would look like. :)
Me too! I guess we are trying to improve the existing Fighter, which has trouble with only one good save and low skill points. We came up with:
A trait available that allows a Fighter to qualify as school-trained, which gives him 4+Int skill points, and adds Perception, Heal and Sense Motive to his skills. . .
The ability to add half his class level to skill checks involving physical attributes ( Str, Dex, Con )
The ability to add his ability score bonus/penalty to his skill points, but only to the skill that uses that ability score.
I guess this is overwrite, but I find a lot of people that have problems with Fighters for the above reasons ( among others ). In any case, Talented Fighter is a great product and I'm looking forward to the next one, but it seems a lot of people *do* feel it's time for a new Fighter. . .
|
Contributor; Developer, Super Genius Games
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Talented Cavalier will be released this week, with the cover teased on my Facebook page this morning. (Though you can also see it here!)
Talented Cavalier will be released this week, with the cover teased on my Facebook page this morning. (Though you can also see it here!)
I like the cover, it's like Lancelot and Guinevere rolled up into one.
|
Contributor; Developer, Super Genius Games
|
Talented Cavalier will be released this week, with the cover teased on my Facebook page this morning. (Though you can also see it here!)I like the cover, it's like Lancelot and Guinevere rolled up into one.
Thanks!
And now The Genius Guide to the Talented Cavalier is available at Paizo!
|
|
Talented Cavalier will be released this week, with the cover teased on my Facebook page this morning. (Though you can also see it here!)
Very colorful! Is that by Mark Smylie?
The Talented Fighter is designed to be more flexible, and allow players and GMs both more ways for characters to be effective, without making them (overall) more effective.
In playtest they held their own as it. If I handed out more skill points and better saving throws, they'd overshadow the existing fighter and some common classic core rules builds.
Now if you WANT to overshadow the existing fighter, those are great ways to do it that are unlikely to break a game. :)
Does the first line also apply to the Talented Monk? (That it's supposed to be as effective as the Core monk, but not more so.)
The Core monk is often judged as severely underpowered, and often lack of synergy is blamed for this. The Talented Monk can have good synergy (without all that much thought on the player's part), so it ought to be more powerful. With luck this exactly balances out the underpoweredness :-)
So... as powerful as a Core monk, or as powerful as a <insert Core class you believe to be powered correctly>? What did playtest show?
The Talented Fighter is designed to be more flexible, and allow players and GMs both more ways for characters to be effective, without making them (overall) more effective.
In playtest they held their own as it. If I handed out more skill points and better saving throws, they'd overshadow the existing fighter and some common classic core rules builds.
Now if you WANT to overshadow the existing fighter, those are great ways to do it that are unlikely to break a game. :)
Does the first line also apply to the Talented Monk? (That it's supposed to be as effective as the Core monk, but not more so.)
The Core monk is often judged as severely underpowered, and often lack of synergy is blamed for this. The Talented Monk can have good synergy (without all that much thought on the player's part), so it ought to be more powerful. With luck this exactly balances out the underpoweredness :-)
So... as powerful as a Core monk, or as powerful as a <insert Core class you believe to be powered correctly>? What did playtest show?
I havent done alot of testing, but I've assembled a number of npcs using the talented monk. And what I see is you can essentially make any kind of monk that is as good as the best monks like the zen archer. The problems with synergy are solved so long as you choose the right abilities, you can be mobile and use combat methods OTHER then flurry of blows and full attacking, or you can put less into those mobility abilities and flurry away. And you can be effective with any weapon thanks to the Deadly strikes talent.
|
Contributor; Developer, Super Genius Games
|
Does the first line also apply to the Talented Monk? (That it's supposed to be as effective as the Core monk, but not more so.)
Yes. But.
It's designed too be as effective as the core monk, when the core monk is used in the way that is optimal, which by my playtest experience is not front-line fighter, but more of a skirmisher/scout, harasser who doesn't need as much support from other characters.
That is VERY effective in the hands of players who are good at it. For players who want to be a front-line King Fu master, it's frustrating.
So, the Talented Monk is designed too allow players who want to have front-line combatant monks to make one... but at the cost of many of the abilities that allow monks to be effective in their best tactics for core play.
In playtesting, we found a front-line monk was A: no more effective than core monks run in their one effective style using core rules and B: no more effective than typical core rules front line combatants of other classes.
But it can be a LOT more satisfying for players who want an experience in play the core monk doesn't do well.
In playtesting, we found a front-line monk was A: no more effective than core monks run in their one effective style using core rules and B: no more effective than typical core rules front line combatants of other classes.
Excellent. Thanks, and great job!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The magus shares with the monk the issues of being very archetype-driven and with the core class having difficult to harness synergies. I think that makes it a prime target for the Talented treatment. The magus isn't my favorite class, by far, but it probably could be, if done right. I'd like to see options to expand both the castery side and the swordsman side. In an ideal world, the ingredients for the Eldritch Knight would be blended right into the options for the magus.
Please tell me the Talented Ranger is next??? After the Ranger I would love to see the Inquisitor, Barbarian, Bard, and or Magus. I know you are saving the Cleric, Wizard, Druid and Sorcerer for last otherwise they would be after the Ranger.
Any updates to the talented line?
I was told on the Twenty-Seventh of last month that it would still be a few weeks, not sure how they define a few weeks but we can only hope they use the same dictionary I use and give us a update within the week.
|
Contributor; Developer, Super Genius Games
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Heya folks.
The next book will be Talented barbarian. It's not out of playte4st yet, and editing and layout take time on top of that. further I am currently the Special Gaming Guest at the Great Lakes Game Rendezvous, so I won't be working on it over the weekend (and didn't get anything done on the three day drive up here).
I can't be certain, but I would guess Talented Barbarian won't be out any time in October, but should be out sometime in November. That is, however,a guess.
I have some reason to believe new talented books will come out more quickly after than (maybe one every 4 weeks, instead of one every 6-9 as it has been up to now), but again that's a guess.
I love writing the line and I'm thrilled it's so very popular, but I have to fit it in around a lot of other work I agreed to before I know these would be a hit, and end-of-summer-through-fall is both heavily booked for me, and rife with distractions beyond writing assignments.
I recently purchased all of the Talented line, and after seeing this thread I wanted to express a few opinions.
I absolutely love the line but I do have concern that this will move into caster territory. Not that casters cant be diverse but I think the martial classes have more of a problem with being narrow and being hard to play because of it. I'd probably get Talented Barbarian, Talented Paladin, and Talented Ranger (three classes that are married to their signature ability so much that archetypes are very lacking) but that's probably it.
There's more Talented classes I'd like but I think Monk, Rogue, Fighter and Cavalier NEEDED this whereas other classes its just kind of nice.
For sorcerers I really liked Beyond Bloodlines and would like to see more of that in regards to casters; focusing on diversifying class features that are normally linear. Whether or not this comes in the Talented line I'd love to see something fresh happen with the Magus. Scimitar Crit Fisher is so prevalent that it feels like that's the Magus' signature ability.
I can't wait for Talented Barbarian. During roleplaying Barbarian has already strayed far past it's title as it's definition but I think the fact that one archetype is literally just a list of rage powers shows that the class is too married to the Rage class feature despite being a berserker is not the most definitive feature of classic barbarians in pop culture. I'm looking forward to making and seeing barbarians that can move beyond rage and be Conan, Krull, or Beastmaster.
Any updates grand master Stephens?
Very much looking forward to talented barbarian (and expanded option)!
Is there an updated release date on this yet?
|
Contributor
|
My original plans for Talented barbarian got delayed, in part by the need to plan my exit from Super Genius Games.
I did receive the Talented books as part of my payout, as well as the right to use "genius games" in the name of a company, so I am working on organizing Rogue Genius Games, LLC as we speak.
I hope to be putting up new products by early next month, and Talented Barbarian is near the front of that list.
I know you said barbarian and ranger is next, but if at all possible could you consider pushing up at least one example of a full caster and medium caster class so that we can get a basic Idea of how to tackle casters with this. I currently have a few home brew classes that I have been converting to this general outline and this would be of a major use to me.
Ooo talented inquisitor or bard would be interesting...
That said, I'm glad they're tackling mostly the full BAB classes first. They are more the ones that need this sort of help, so I'd still prefer to see Barbarian and Ranger next for sure.
|
Contributor
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Barbarian is pretty well set in stone as the next talented book. For it to not be next, I'd have to sit on it while other things came out. That wouldn't speed the arrival of other books, it's just delay the talented barbarian.
Ranger is MUCH further along than anything else after barbarian, but if there was a real hue and cry, I *could* switch from doing it next to getting something else out the door. And after ranger, the field is wide open.
So, let's take a poll!
The Cavalier, Fighter, Monk, and Rogue are done. Barbarian is unquestionably next. After that, what would you like to see (pick one)
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Alchemist
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Bard
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Cleric
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Druid
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Gunslinger
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Inquisitor
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Magus
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Oracle
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Paladin
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Sorcerer
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Summoner
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Witch
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Wizard
Alchemist next, even though Ranger is close
Bard next, even though Ranger is close
Cleric next, even though Ranger is close
Druid next, even though Ranger is close
Gunslinger next, even though Ranger is close
Inquisitor next, even though Ranger is close
Magus next, even though Ranger is close
Oracle next, even though Ranger is close
Paladin next, even though Ranger is close
Sorcerer next, even though Ranger is close
Summoner next, even though Ranger is close
Witch next, even though Ranger is close
Wizard next, even though Ranger is close
What I really want is a Talented Paladin, with Antipaladin and other alignments all supported
What I really want is a Talented Archon
What I really want is a Talented Armiger
What I really want is a Talented Death Knight
What I really want is a Talented Death Mage
What I really want is a Talented Dragonrider
What I really want is four Talented Godlings
What I really want is a Talented Hellion
What I really want is a Talented Magister
What I really want is a Talented Mosaic Mage
What I really want is a Talented Riven Mage
What I really want is a Talented Shadow Assassin
What I really want is a Talented Templar
What I really want is a Talented Time Thief
What I really want is a Talented Time Warden
What I really want is a Talented Vanguard
What I really want is a Talented War Master
What I really want is a Talented Witch Hunter
What I really want is an enormous Kickstarter for a 500-page hardback book I'd be willing to pay $65 for that does talented version of all the Paizo Base and Core classes, even though that means you won't be writing much of anything else for a year.
Vote for enormous kickstarter. Second vote for Sorcerer even though ranger is further along.
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Alchemist.
I wouldn't buy a big book because I only think certain classes really need the boost in modularity.
After ranger I'd say Gunslinger or Witch considering that they feel the next least variable.