What I do not accept from this edition. Archetypes.


Prerelease Discussion

51 to 58 of 58 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

Wicked Woodpecker of the West wrote:

I'd like take with archetypes as done with Rogue Genius - Talented Classes - all special class features put together as list of free talents for martial classess to customise from it.

No strictly bound to archetypes.

The class feats in PF2 are very much this

Note that not all class features were Talents that you could choose from freely. Some were Edges that excluded one another. So it was not a 100% customizable system either

And people asked for portability of Talents from one class to another. PF2 archetypes sound similar to this


"Note that not all class features were Talents that you could choose from freely. Some were Edges that excluded one another. So it was not a 100% customizable system either"

100% customizabilation is impossible anyway in such crunch-class system. Some level of exclusivity is good. I think Talented strike good point for it.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

One of the other reasons not to put all the would be archetypes feats as things you can always pick is exclusivity. It is a lot easier to balance archetypes knowing they are mutually exclusive.


That can be resolved by chain elements. The most op elements would be depended of others.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I can envision the "bucket of feats" style of archetype granting feats normally not available to a class. Such as allowing for class feats from other classes in order to fit a theme.

That would be nifty.


They showed subclasses for druid. Not sure if those are the kind that you're talking about.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Senkon wrote:
They showed subclasses for druid. Not sure if those are the kind that you're talking about.

The druid stuff I interpreted as being closer to diety or school choice for the cleric and wizard, rather than archetypes


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Rob Godfrey wrote:
but as far as we know you can't ditch sneak attack (for instance) for something else, which is what the OP was after, Archetypes that fundamentally change a class. For instance I am not interested in a mad bomber Alchemist and never have been, but the mutagens really appeal, so ditching bomb making for earlier and better mutagens would be great... But afaik couldn't be done.

Yeah. This is basically my feeling. Sometimes a class is almost perfect for what you want, but comes with a class feature you don't care for. And while you could simply ignore the class features you have and don't want, that never feels good.

My guess is that from a design perspective, the "feat buckets" option is just a whole lot easier to work with. But from a player perspective, it can mean less satisfaction from your play experience. You'll be stuck playing a character that doesn't fit your vision very well, or be stuck playing a substandard character, since you can't use all of the abilities your class gives you.

51 to 58 of 58 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / What I do not accept from this edition. Archetypes. All Messageboards
Recent threads in Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion