Universal archetypes you'd like to have.


Pathfinder Playtest

51 to 100 of 111 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge

PossibleCabbage wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Dragonborn3 wrote:
Why the need for another identity though? It can be completely ignored in PF1 and if they changed it makes no sense. "I'm not wearing my mask so I don't have Lethal Grace anymore" seems quite silly.
Who says any such restrictions would be part of the Archetype? I was mostly just thinking 'two identities who can't be magically revealed to be the same person', possibly with separate Alignments.
What Dragonborn3 describes wasn't even how the Vigilante worked in PF1. If you had lethal grace, you have it in any identity you assume, it's just that if you used it in a social identity you temporarily give up your +20 disguise bonus you'd ordinarily get for passing off Bruce Wayne as an incompetent billionaire playboy.

To clarify, I meant if they changed it in PF2. My apologies for not being more clear.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Dragon78 wrote:
None, I would like the game to be customizable enough not to need them.

This. Archetype feats should just be universal class feats.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ChibiNyan wrote:

Yes and No. A lot of those archetypes were really redundant, but not all of them. For example, the Gun Wizard/Magus could fire spells from the gun and the Rogue one had some gimmicks with concealing small arms and sneak attacks. So there were some that actually manage to combine their class abilities with the gun in unique ways! This could still be done by printing class-specific archetype feats down the line, with just the Dedication giving the gun and needing the other ones to get the combos.

Anyways, hope we don't lose that design space by making everything too broad.

That redundancy is definately noted as is attempting to shoehorn in questionable features just to round it out enough to warrant creating an archetype. There are bunch that really feel padded out. This also played into the class-dipping culture.

From what the devs had said, they haven't closed that design space off just yet. This seems like an avenue they'd be excited to pursue. I certainly hope they allow for the more specific interactions between class features and archetypes in the future.

For my 2-cents of things i'd like to see:
Harrower
Pathfinder Society themed
Scout / Explorer
Assassin
Hedge mage (limited access to divine magic for arcane lists users)
Noble
Luckbender (for halflings and catfolk)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Add my vote for Hellknight and Vigilante.

I just had a though (too late for the Playtest, but maybe for afterwards): Change Paladin/Antipaladin from a base class into a prestige archetype. Also do this for Inquisitor.


I'm really curious how you would organize a Hellknight Prestige Archetype for PF2. Like would there be one "Hellknight Devotion" which qualifies the user for both Signifer feats and regular Hellknight feats, and then have there be specific feats for each of the Orders (or at least the six major ones and whatever smaller ones we want to highlight)? Or would you do a bunch of different Hellknight Archetypes?


^ Independent of Archetype/Dedication mechanic or not, I could see something like each Order has it's own intro Feat that qualifies you for general Hellknight/Signifier Feats, as well as advanced Feats unique to that order (or some can be shared between specific Orders). Some Orders may just have initial intro Feat, some might have really generic intro Feat that is common to marginal Orders with just skill/weapon/armor specification etc. Each order could also have different pre-reqs to their Intro Feat, whether skill/proficiency/feat.


Quandary wrote:
^ Independent of Archetype/Dedication mechanic or not, I could see something like each Order has it's own intro Feat that qualifies you for general Hellknight/Signifier Feats, as well as advanced Feats unique to that order (or some can be shared between specific Orders). Some Orders may just have initial intro Feat, some might have really generic intro Feat that is common to marginal Orders with just skill/weapon/armor specification etc. Each order could also have different pre-reqs to their Intro Feat, whether skill/proficiency/feat.

I think the baseline Hellknight feat should be universal, as all Hellknights share common values and such. Also means you can change order without sotpping being a Hellknight and stuff like that. But then yeah, the "Disciplines" should be the next feat on the chain, and those only apply to specific order as you have further specialized in being a Hellknight!


But do you do fighty hellknights and magic hellknights with the same prestige archetype? IIRC in PF1 they were two different ones, but it would make some sense to fit them in the same box and distinguish signifers via later feats in the chain.


Yeah, I would chain both Hellknight/Signifiers off same initial Feat, which would obviously be designed to be useful to both*. IMHO the initial Feat should be Order specific**, although I don't see why if you switched Orders in-game you would cease to be Hellknight, the Feats don't need to have constant pre-req "member of XYZ Order" they just have pre-req "inducted into lore of XYZ Order". Which would plausibly allow simultaneously having intro Feat to multiple orders, although many would prefer to re-train their feats into more useful combo with just one order's feats.

* (the over-all approach doesn't strictly preclude Feats giving conditional benefits to casting vs martial, or it could grant martial & casting Reaction which you can't really use both of simultaneously, for example)

** (which helps accent each Order, the 'generic Hellknight-dom' is in followon Hellknight/Signifier Feats and organic similarities between them, but FIXING those similarities on any one point isn't needed... given Setting design decisions limit all this to begin with, and rules don't need to limit their possibilities)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

eh, mostly interested in the prestige archetypes.

The generic archetypes I admit as seeing as useful, but so far they feel like GM tools. I could totally see a GM statting a bunch of pirate archetype NPCs for an encounter during a campaign where the PCs are taking a ship across water or whatever. But it doesn't feel like they would be terribly useful long term for an actual PC that needs to operate across a variety of encounters.

Also I am with PossibleCabbage in that the best aspect of archetypes was really the idea of subbing out class features for new ones. While a lot of class features are now feats, not all of them are, and so the new archetypes also lose a bit of appeal for me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
MMCJawa wrote:


Also I am with PossibleCabbage in that the best aspect of archetypes was really the idea of subbing out class features for new ones. While a lot of class features are now feats, not all of them are, and so the new archetypes also lose a bit of appeal for me.

While true, it is also true that many times i have found a cool archetype that I was eager to play that swapped out a core class feature i didn't want to lose. Now I can play that archetype and I get to choose what I lose out on, so there is an opportunity to play some of these archetypes at last.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Perhaps the best compromise would be a sidebar in the archetype section of the CRB stating:

"As an alternative house rule a GM may allow a character to take an archetype feat in place of a class feature rather than a class feat at a level equal to or later than the level of the archetype feat."


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Why do some people seem to be assuming that "universal archetype" necessarily must mean "this will work on any class"? "Universal" just means "you don't need to be a Fighter to be a Crossbowman." It makes no claims that "Crossbowman is a perfectly valid archetype for your Sorcerer," just that "your Sorcerer is technically able to take Crossbowman."

And that's perfectly fine. If you want to be a Crossbow Sorcerer, more power to you, but I don't see the need to include explicit synergy.

Shadow Lodge

Putting aside whether they should be executed as "archetype" packages or "universal class feats," and definitely still wanting to see archetypes that swap out the non-feat class features, concepts I'd like to see executed in this way would include:

Prestige Classes

VMC-style options. As Shiroi said, serving as a level of investment between taking a skill or general feat for a minor feature, and full multiclassing. If executed well it could fill the need for concepts like the arcane trickster (rogue VMC wizard) or hedge mage (wizard VMC cleric) and could reduce the need for later hybrid classes (eg bloodrager would be a barbarian with VMC sorcerer).

Divine Champions, whether or not this replaces paladin as its own base class.

Combat styles (mounted, unarmed, guns, poison, swashbuckling)

Vigilante

Tactician

Assassin

Something granting a familiar. If it can be balanced, something granting an animal companion. What can I say, I like my pets.

Noble also sounds interesting, though I'd want it to be a background option as well - and possibly make the archetype version a more general Courtier/Intrigue archetype so it could represent a character that wasn't necessarily born into nobility.


DFAnton wrote:

Why do some people seem to be assuming that "universal archetype" necessarily must mean "this will work on any class"? "Universal" just means "you don't need to be a Fighter to be a Crossbowman." It makes no claims that "Crossbowman is a perfectly valid archetype for your Sorcerer," just that "your Sorcerer is technically able to take Crossbowman."

Sure, and just to be clear, since the archetypes people are discussing are basically 'groups of feats that can be taken independent of class', there already are other class feats that can be taken by multiple classes, that aren't class unique. AoO (non-feat ability for Fighter), Sudden Charge, Whirlwind, and more are usable by multiple 'martial' classes. Those are "Universal" (or at least not Exclusive) Feats that are being presented separately from Archetypes. The difference is latter has Dedication mechanic, although if you only take 1 Dedication Feat that has no impact or difference vs taking one of these non-Archetype Universal Feats. They've said Archetypes can theoretically be made Class-exclusive, so logically they could also be made exclusive a small group of specific classes, like Fighter/Barb/Pally... Thus not much difference, aside from Dedication mechanic.


I feel like doing "universal archetypes" which require a specific kind of spellcasting, or at least n spell points, or something which excludes a great number of classes are A-OK.

In fact if the forums are correct in that the various types of casting are combinations of two of the four magic traditions, you could do archetypes for like "spiritual specialist" so anybody whose magic uses the spiritual tradition can take it.

Paizo Employee

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd really like a warlord or squad leader archetype, both because I really like that concept in general, and because doing it as one of these universal archetypes would open up a whole new world of interesting possibilities. A half-orc sorcerer warlord who whips his allies into a magic-fueled frenzy before leading them into battle. An elven fighter squad leader who acts as the coordinating center for a group of hit and run ambushers. A halfling wizard who was also a sergeant in a mercenary group.

As much as the fearless leader and tactician tropes tends to skew towards non-casters, it could be a really interesting universal archetype to have open and available to all classes, especially for campaigns that are more Malazan than Lord of the Rings.


Vigilante - extra stealth and ambush options centered around a strong avenging theme.

Duelist - I've always really liked this, but it's not distinctive enough as a full class.

Mouser - It's fun to have unique combat styles for smaller races, and I think this is something that should be available to all classes.

Bodyguard/Protector - 'the tank' is something we've always had to jump through a lot of hoops to pull off; can we have a dedicated archetype please?

Religious archetypes for the different deities/otherworldly beings.

Magus - options which allow the blending of swords and sorcery.


Ssalarn wrote:

I'd really like a warlord or squad leader archetype, both because I really like that concept in general, and because doing it as one of these universal archetypes would open up a whole new world of interesting possibilities. A half-orc sorcerer warlord who whips his allies into a magic-fueled frenzy before leading them into battle. An elven fighter squad leader who acts as the coordinating center for a group of hit and run ambushers. A halfling wizard who was also a sergeant in a mercenary group.

As much as the fearless leader and tactician tropes tends to skew towards non-casters, it could be a really interesting universal archetype to have open and available to all classes, especially for campaigns that are more Malazan than Lord of the Rings.

I had an idea that the Cavalier should be split into three separate archetypes, one for the Mounted stuff, One for Challenge and Order stuff, and one for leadership and buffing stuff, and I think this could work with the latter. While there'd be mostly options for martials, I could see also having some "Spend a Spell point to get this effect" type stuff, which would be neat, and could work for basically any class with spell points. It'd just have to be a bit more expansive than what we've seen (namely, we know the pirate only has 6 non-dedication feat options), but I could see something in an APG, which isn't as restricted in the page count necessitated for other things having archetypes that have a wide variety of feats for different classes.


Tholomyes wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:

I'd really like a warlord or squad leader archetype, both because I really like that concept in general, and because doing it as one of these universal archetypes would open up a whole new world of interesting possibilities. A half-orc sorcerer warlord who whips his allies into a magic-fueled frenzy before leading them into battle. An elven fighter squad leader who acts as the coordinating center for a group of hit and run ambushers. A halfling wizard who was also a sergeant in a mercenary group.

As much as the fearless leader and tactician tropes tends to skew towards non-casters, it could be a really interesting universal archetype to have open and available to all classes, especially for campaigns that are more Malazan than Lord of the Rings.

I had an idea that the Cavalier should be split into three separate archetypes, one for the Mounted stuff, One for Challenge and Order stuff, and one for leadership and buffing stuff, and I think this could work with the latter. While there'd be mostly options for martials, I could see also having some "Spend a Spell point to get this effect" type stuff, which would be neat, and could work for basically any class with spell points. It'd just have to be a bit more expansive than what we've seen (namely, we know the pirate only has 6 non-dedication feat options), but I could see something in an APG, which isn't as restricted in the page count necessitated for other things having archetypes that have a wide variety of feats for different classes.

It does feel like morale boosting mechanics or teamwork feat sorts of things haven't gotten any light shined on them. I can see why it they are saving the Bard, but I hope we get some more mundane options as well. Contagious Rage sounds neat, for example.


DFAnton wrote:

Why do some people seem to be assuming that "universal archetype" necessarily must mean "this will work on any class"? "Universal" just means "you don't need to be a Fighter to be a Crossbowman." It makes no claims that "Crossbowman is a perfectly valid archetype for your Sorcerer," just that "your Sorcerer is technically able to take Crossbowman."

And that's perfectly fine. If you want to be a Crossbow Sorcerer, more power to you, but I don't see the need to include explicit synergy.

Seems like if they wanted to make universal archetypes, they should provide for archetypes to have versions for 1/2 BAB, 3/4 BAB, and Full BAB classes . . . Oh wait, they did away with different Base Attack Bonuses. Oops.


Monster Hunter/Slayer

Its an archetype that'd be useful to every class out there. Any class should be able to be trained to identify and exploit monster weaknesses.


Vigilante
Gun user
Pirate
Mounted combatant


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Vigilante as a PF2 Archetype makes a lot of sense, and would definitely be one of the Archetypes I'd like to see first.

I'd also obviously like to see the Master Chymist as a Prestige Archetype as soon as possible. While the MC could probably just be a Vigilante, given the specific flavor of the Master Chymist (and the purpose of Prestige options to be support fairly specific in-world concepts), I'm inclined to think Prestige Archetype is the way to go. With the expansion of Alchemy, it need not even be an Alchemist-exclusive option anymore, but rather something that can happen to anyone who drinks too many mutagens.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I kinda want vigilante to be embodied by a series of skill feats rather than an archetype that makes me lose some combat functionality.

I want a detective/investigator archetype that gives some kind of bonus if you make knowledge skill checks in combat.
I eventually want a gun archetype, probably.
A vampire archetype might be neat (like, it would let you gain vampire powers and weaknesses slowly over time and lets you resist being evil)
Something similar for werecreatures woupd be cool too.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Excaliburproxy wrote:

A vampire archetype might be neat (like, it would let you gain vampire powers and weaknesses slowly over time and lets you resist being evil)

Something similar for werecreatures woupd be cool too.

I hadn't thought about it much, but now that you bring this up, I think this is precisely what I want to see from 2e's universal archetypes system. Not necessarily vampire or werewolf, but I think things that are outside any particular class, and wouldn't really make sense as their own class (with apologies to shifter fans, if there really are any). But stuff like planetouched or pseudo-bloodline stuff for non sorcerers, I could definitely dig.


Excaliburproxy wrote:

I kinda want vigilante to be embodied by a series of skill feats rather than an archetype that makes me lose some combat functionality.

I want a detective/investigator archetype that gives some kind of bonus if you make knowledge skill checks in combat.
I eventually want a gun archetype, probably.
A vampire archetype might be neat (like, it would let you gain vampire powers and weaknesses slowly over time and lets you resist being evil)
Something similar for werecreatures woupd be cool too.

Well, we do know there's a skill feat that lets you don a disguise in a round, so you may get your wish.


Vampire and Werewolf should be templates, afflictions, not a vocation. They tried the Vampire as a class in 4th Ed, but that was obviously due to the popularity of a certain movie-series.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Chest Rockwell wrote:
Vampire and Werewolf should be templates, afflictions, not a vocation. They tried the Vampire as a class in 4th Ed, but that was obviously due to the popularity of a certain movie-series.

The affliction/template versions of vampire and werewolf should still exist but if that happens to a PC then the GM should just take their characters away cuz now they are bad monster lads. More seriously: if being a vampire or werewolf confers mechanical benefit then a player character ought to give something up.


I agree with Were and Undead and a few other similar options being archetypes, since not all fantasy tropes include automatically becoming awesome and instantly top tier on your first transformation (and doing so in Pathfinder makes a player very absurdly overpowered and also usually an evil NPC). I imagine it probably wouldn't be PFS legal for thematic reasons, but it's definitely appropriate for many home campaigns and would work very well as an inclusion of several dark themed archetypes in an adventure path designed around that kind of setting.


I would think that were-stuff, and vampires, and most things that require a template in 1.0 could be handled through the racial feats you get as you level.


Excaliburproxy wrote:
Chest Rockwell wrote:
Vampire and Werewolf should be templates, afflictions, not a vocation. They tried the Vampire as a class in 4th Ed, but that was obviously due to the popularity of a certain movie-series.
The affliction/template versions of vampire and werewolf should still exist but if that happens to a PC then the GM should just take their characters away cuz now they are bad monster lads.

Ha, total, the softening of vampires, starting with Anne Rice, is not something I am on board with!


Shiroi wrote:
I agree with Were and Undead and a few other similar options being archetypes, since not all fantasy tropes include automatically becoming awesome and instantly top tier on your first transformation (and doing so in Pathfinder makes a player very absurdly overpowered and also usually an evil NPC). I imagine it probably wouldn't be PFS legal for thematic reasons, but it's definitely appropriate for many home campaigns and would work very well as an inclusion of several dark themed archetypes in an adventure path designed around that kind of setting.

Yeah, that's a cool idea for a vampire/undead themed campaign, a vampire archetype (and feats), to represent the progression of power for vampires as they age and master their powers and so forth.

Silver Crusade

Yeah, I agree with the early posters here; a lot of the PF1 archetypes are basically "Class X with a bit of class Y"

For example, Cult Leader is Warpriest with a bit of Rogue etc

So long as not the entire choice of class feats are burned using VMC style rules it makes sense to go that direction; for example rather than 'You get d6 sneak attack, can take multiple times', make it 'You get 1/3 or 1/4 your level sneak attack progression'


I really thing for like vampire and werewolf characters, we're better off using something like the corruption system from Horror Adventures which is self-contained than having something like "you're a worse swordsperson because of all that vampirin' you do."


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I believe Mark Seifter has already posted in a Corruptions and 2e thread that 'corruptions' could unlock new ancestry feats that would replace the regular ancestry feats.

That's an incredibly elegant way of doing things like vampires and weres I think. It'd be like an enforced 'Ancestry Archetype'.

And it'd be really easy to homebrew getting 'vampire ancestry feats' as required bonus feats if you don't want your players to lose out on their elf goodness or whatever. Though it's perfectly thematic to lose out on your original ancestry if your fundamental nature has changed to something else.

Being a vampire shouldn't make you worse at swinging a sword, but it should make you less dwarfy.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Azih wrote:

I believe Mark Seifter has already posted in a Corruptions and 2e thread that 'corruptions' could unlock new ancestry feats that would replace the regular ancestry feats.

That's an incredibly elegant way of doing things like vampires and weres I think. It'd be like an enforced 'Ancestry Archetype'.

And it'd be really easy to homebrew getting 'vampire ancestry feats' as required bonus feats if you don't want your players to lose out on their elf goodness or whatever. Though it's perfectly thematic to lose out on your original ancestry if your fundamental nature has changed to something else.

Being a vampire shouldn't make you worse at swinging a sword, but it should make you less dwarfy.

And thus began the greatest horror of all, poisoned ale that makes you more like an elf.


Elleth wrote:
Azih wrote:

I believe Mark Seifter has already posted in a Corruptions and 2e thread that 'corruptions' could unlock new ancestry feats that would replace the regular ancestry feats.

That's an incredibly elegant way of doing things like vampires and weres I think. It'd be like an enforced 'Ancestry Archetype'.

And it'd be really easy to homebrew getting 'vampire ancestry feats' as required bonus feats if you don't want your players to lose out on their elf goodness or whatever. Though it's perfectly thematic to lose out on your original ancestry if your fundamental nature has changed to something else.

Being a vampire shouldn't make you worse at swinging a sword, but it should make you less dwarfy.

And thus began the greatest horror of all, poisoned ale that makes you more like an elf.

That's a full campaign for a Dwarf character right there!


Azih wrote:

I believe Mark Seifter has already posted in a Corruptions and 2e thread that 'corruptions' could unlock new ancestry feats that would replace the regular ancestry feats.

That's an incredibly elegant way of doing things like vampires and weres I think. It'd be like an enforced 'Ancestry Archetype'.

And it'd be really easy to homebrew getting 'vampire ancestry feats' as required bonus feats if you don't want your players to lose out on their elf goodness or whatever. Though it's perfectly thematic to lose out on your original ancestry if your fundamental nature has changed to something else.

Being a vampire shouldn't make you worse at swinging a sword, but it should make you less dwarfy.

From a balance perspective though, that is going to limit the kinds of mechanical benefits that you can give those kinds of characters. That did, there could be room for both:

Ancestry feats that give the basic powers and weakness and then an archetype that represents he player developing their monstrous powers further.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

I'd really love to see something that focused on crafting! Both Mundane and Magical items.

Outside of that:

1) Tinkerer/Engineer
2) Mundane and Planar Travel and Exploration
3) Mercantile/Trade
4) Professional Mercenaries
5) Pioneering (Town-Building)
6) Adventurer's Guild Archetype
7) Cook/Chef (Would love something that could power a Toriko themed adventure)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Guard/Soldier archetype to represent some form of official military training. (& would be very helpful for more diverse NPCs)

Merchant/Trade archype to give abilities related to appraising items (especially a mundane way to recognize magic items), and additional social skills that would be used in making deals.

A general Priest/Worshipper archetype that gave proficiency with a deity's favored weapon and signature skill as part of the dedication. Could have feats giving limited access to domain abilities, and access to a deity's listed spells for any spellcaster.

Specific archetypes/prestige archetypes for a particular deity's followers. Could be used as a way to bring back the deific obedience boons and divine fighting techniques which were specific to each deity. Could also take bits of the evangelist, exalted, and sentinel prestige classes from PF1.

Bloodline archetypes that could give any class the theme of getting power from some magical heritage. Could have feats that enhance an existing bloodline for sorcerers or help recreate a bloodrager for a barbarian.

Honestly, I could get behind turning Paladins into a prestige archetype which gave you the paladin code along with themed abilities like smite evil.

Other classes I think could potentially be turned into archetypes would be Magus (mixing spells with swordplay) and Cavalier (one archetype for mounted builds and other for pledging yourself to an order).


Ranger might work OK

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

A formula for designing spell-using archetypes maybe with a requirement in the appropriate skill and that would grant some spells as powers with appropriate Spell Points costs would be wonderful IMO


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Also another religious archetype, since Pathfinder is generally assumed to be a polytheistic setting and Planar Adventures had some nice deity statblocks which concisely listed a deity's allies, relations, and enemies...

Secondary Worship archetype. Allows a character who receives power from a patron deity (either a class like cleric/paladin or through another archetype/feat/feature) to gain a limited amount of power from a second deity who is both allied with the character's patron deity and accepts followers of the character's alignment. Because it makes no sense that a polytheistic world has no options for characters to pay worship to multiple deities - especially when certain deities are known to help each other out and have shared interests.


Azih wrote:

Perhaps the best compromise would be a sidebar in the archetype section of the CRB stating:

"As an alternative house rule a GM may allow a character to take an archetype feat in place of a class feature rather than a class feat at a level equal to or later than the level of the archetype feat."

I what possible way is "you do not get what you want, but the GM can houserule it" any kind of compromise? If you can get them onside, the GM can always hoseurule it.

_
glass.


Iron_Matt17 wrote:
I like the idea of having a Divine Champion that can be fit for each Deity.

This would make a great archetype that you could fit to multiple classes. A bardic Divine Champion for a god of the arts, for example. It's perfect!

My own list:

* Exorcist
* Skald

Could Inquisitor be an Archetype? It seems like different classes could lend their skills to this concept quite well.


assassin archetype for rogue and maybe ranger.


As a mechanical thing, I'd like to have archetypes that let you trade out all your power points, resonance, spell points, hero points, and whatever else, for some per encounter powers that balanced things out. I have one player who won't ever remember how many things he's done in the day, and I'd like to have something to push him toward to decrease my DMing load. I don't care what it is, or what you call it, I just need something like that and I think archetypes are the place to make that happen.

A more specific suggestion; I like the ghost rider archetype. Changing out your mount for something summonable is really great. Thematically the archetype isn't that strong, but I'd really like to see pet classes have access to summonable pets. Having to go with a mauler familiar as a workaround is fine, but I'd prefer to have an option that built for that purpose.

I'd also like to see a hybrid between the eldritch guardian and the carnivalist. An archetype made for martials who want a familiar that compliments their skill set is really a must.

I'm also a big fan of combat maneuvers, though their life span is pretty short in PF1. Something like the bounty hunter slayer, tetori monk, or the siegebreaker fighter would all be sweet. Trading out damage for crowd control or hampering is always welcome. Particularly when done at will rather than limited by a points pool.

Specific themes I'd like to see covered are gamblers, monster tamers, mimics, shapeshifters, hidden powers, casual magic use, weapon and armor summoners, reluctant heroes, and golem builders.


ErichAD wrote:

As a mechanical thing, I'd like to have archetypes that let you trade out all your power points, resonance, spell points, hero points, and whatever else, for some per encounter powers that balanced things out. I have one player who won't ever remember how many things he's done in the day, and I'd like to have something to push him toward to decrease my DMing load. I don't care what it is, or what you call it, I just need something like that and I think archetypes are the place to make that happen.

Not sure if it helps, but there are a number of techniques people have used that have helped them. One is to give them a dice with the number of uses on it facing up. Every time they use one, it gets turned down to the next number.

Personally, I think it would be prone to getting knocked and then play has to stop while you try to remember what number it was on.
Another option might be to give counters or beads that are colour coded equal to the resource being counted. Every time he uses a resource, he hands in a counter of the appropriate colour. This also works for consumables (a small piece of card or paper with the type of consumable written on it works better for scrolls and potions as there are fewer of them but many different types).


Gunslinger
aquatic
arboreal
basically environment focused ones.

51 to 100 of 111 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Universal archetypes you'd like to have. All Messageboards