Save the Date!

Thursday, December 17, 2020

On the first day of Paizomas, my GM gave to me…

As we close 2020, we give you exciting news of a new Pathfinder Playtest! Just after the new year we’ll release a playtest with two new classes for you to create, play, and share feedback on. The playtest will run from Jan 5-Feb 5. We wanted to share the news so you can plan some games in that window. For our organized play community, players will be able to try the playtest classes and earn credit for a Pathfinder Society character at the same time.

A general looks over a scale model of the battlefield, determining the best place to deploy her troops.

Be the first to play two new Pathfinder classes in just under 2 weeks!

Not sure how to find a game? Check out warhorn.net or our VTT partners (Roll20, Fantasy Grounds or Astral) for games. Need a pre-made adventure? Consider using a Pathfinder Society scenario (you can run them outside of Society rules), link together a few Pathfinder Bounties, or try Troubles in Otari!

We hope you all have a safe December, enjoy a cup of virtual cheer, and we’ll see you here on January 5th!

The Paizo Goblins

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Pathfinder Playtest Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Pathfinder Second Edition
401 to 450 of 629 << first < prev | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Stranger would be a good name, but I would never want a world where Stranger and Ranger coexist.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Grankless wrote:
Stranger would be a good name, but I would never want a world where Stranger and Ranger coexist.

You can play a lizard, you can play a wizard, and you can play a lizard wizard but people manage to keep these straight.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Grankless wrote:
Stranger would be a good name, but I would never want a world where Stranger and Ranger coexist.

If we get a Stranger class then what will I call strength-based Rangers??


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Grankless wrote:
Stranger would be a good name, but I would never want a world where Stranger and Ranger coexist.
You can play a lizard, you can play a wizard, and you can play a lizard wizard but people manage to keep these straight.

You don't see any complication if a new class was added that was called a Quizzard?


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Sporkedup wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Grankless wrote:
Stranger would be a good name, but I would never want a world where Stranger and Ranger coexist.
You can play a lizard, you can play a wizard, and you can play a lizard wizard but people manage to keep these straight.
You don't see any complication if a new class was added that was called a Quizzard?

Mostly a strong inclination to multiclass your lizard wizard into quizzard.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Summary of what we've got so far:

"Two classes, one has 8 letters in the name, heavily implied to consist of one returning class and one entirely new class. There would be something poetic about if it had happened on the feast of the epiphany."

I kind of assume the 8 letter class is new, because as people have mentioned, it would have to be the Arcanist otherwise, and I get the sense we're not getting an additional spell caster until after Magus and Summoner come out (also, Arcanist could easily return as a class archetype for Wizard.) Unless the class was renamed, like if Gunslinger was returning, but not named that-- in which case yeah, it'd have to be something like Wanderer or Inventor.

The epiphany thing would make sense either if it was a divine class, or more likely, if it was a class that somehow centered around having epiphanies (as in, realizations.) We have the Investigator already, so if my interpretation is correct, it probably would be some kind of battlefield tactician-- that would also fit the bill of things Paizo hasn't done as a class before.

But obviously this is all wild speculation, and some of the things I'm interpreting about might not have been meant as a hint. Regardless, I'm confident that whatever does come will be great, everything so far has been ended up pretty sweet.


One thing about a class having a name that's fairly close to another class, is that you could strongly associate the class in question with their subclass.

Like if there's a Swashbuckler and a Quashbuckler, only one of those two things is going to have a Fencer option.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I hope we get vague hints every day until the 5th, that would be great.


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

I note that "Epiphany" is also an 8 letter word.

PossibleCabbage wrote:
If we get a Stranger class, I just hope we can make it strange.

Definitely. I'd love for a Martial class that leaned into Occult themes the way the ranger dips into primal and the champion does divine.

If they also get the Grit system and a gun subclass, I think that'd make for some really cool RP.

Edit: Building on this thought, I think most people see Kineticists as more Primal than Arcane, I certainly do, but what would make them lean more the other way? I think their conception (especially with that name) was more towards Mind magic; would leaning more into those themes and away from healing magic help?

What if instead of elements per se, it evoked inner and transitive planes. Like, yes, tap the elemental planes, and maybe Wood taps the First World, but what comes from the Shadow plane? Astral? Dimension of Dreams? Dimension of Time?


4 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Like if there's a Swashbuckler and a Quashbuckler, only one of those two things is going to have a Fencer option.

Well there should only be one class. The Leshy Squashbuckler. Cabbage, as a vegetable you should know this.

A quick search on thesaurus.com for Gunslinger gave some interesting 8-letter results.

M-a-r-a-u-d-e-r
H-o-o-l-i-g-a-n
J-a-i-l-b-i-r-d
F-u-g-i-t-i-v-e

Some 8-letter word guessers gave some good ones too.

S-l-a-p-j-a-c-k
B-u-z-z-k-i-l-l
J-u-d-g-m-e-n-t
C-o-n-j-u-r-e-d
D-r-o-p-k-i-c-k
M-u-n-c-h-k-i-n


The-Magic-Sword wrote:

Summary of what we've got so far:

"Two classes, one has 8 letters in the name, heavily implied to consist of one returning class and one entirely new class. There would be something poetic about if it had happened on the feast of the epiphany."

I kind of assume the 8 letter class is new, because as people have mentioned, it would have to be the Arcanist otherwise, and I get the sense we're not getting an additional spell caster until after Magus and Summoner come out (also, Arcanist could easily return as a class archetype for Wizard.) Unless the class was renamed, like if Gunslinger was returning, but not named that-- in which case yeah, it'd have to be something like Wanderer or Inventor.

The epiphany thing would make sense either if it was a divine class, or more likely, if it was a class that somehow centered around having epiphanies (as in, realizations.) We have the Investigator already, so if my interpretation is correct, it probably would be some kind of battlefield tactician-- that would also fit the bill of things Paizo hasn't done as a class before.

But obviously this is all wild speculation, and some of the things I'm interpreting about might not have been meant as a hint. Regardless, I'm confident that whatever does come will be great, everything so far has been ended up pretty sweet.

Keeping with this train of thought the Inventor class would also fit the idea of an epiphany I think


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I will note, that the epiphany comment mentioned "oh well, maybe in 2022" so actually that probably wasn't a hint, since its probably just referring to the new classes being revealed in general. Tragic.


I'm hoping for a Harrower or Harrowed for the new class, personally.

Depending on whether the Harrow deck is more your tool or whether you are more of a tool of the Harrow.


What's a Harrower?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
DrakoVongola1 wrote:
What's a Harrower?

I think in 2e concepts it would be a prepared occult caster with an emphasis on using the harrow deck (kind of like tarot, I think). I'm not sure if folks' concepts have it at a full caster, though.


That sounds really cool o-o


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
DrakoVongola1 wrote:
That sounds really cool o-o

I may be entirely wrong, of course. It doesn't exist so there's no real consensus on what it could do.

I am (a couple days away from being proven wrong) still convinced that we'll see one or both of these turn out to be martials and not casters. Maybe a full martial and some brand of hybrid, if their playtests for SoM gave them a lot of confidence.


Sporkedup wrote:
DrakoVongola1 wrote:
What's a Harrower?
I think in 2e concepts it would be a prepared occult caster with an emphasis on using the harrow deck (kind of like tarot, I think). I'm not sure if folks' concepts have it at a full caster, though.

Someone whose schtick involves "shuffling a deck of cards, then dealing them" probably shouldn't be a *prepared* caster.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber

Harrow Deck

Harrow Deck wrote:
The legendary fortune-telling deck of the Pathfinder RPG world! With this 54-card, full-color set of fortune-telling cards, you’ll learn how to include the Harrow in any Pathfinder RPG game, and enhance play with rule cards detailing spells, fortune-telling methods, and other insights.

Plus:

The Harrow Handbook
"The Harrowing" module


I would 100% be excited for a class that "draws at random from a deck of cards (or rolls on a table) and you get bonuses or abilities based on what you draw".


And Epiphany is a break-through, typically a "Eureka" moment.

That definitely seems to evoke "Inventor" vibes.

Maybe we're getting the Investigator/Rogue equivalent of the Alchemist in the form of Inventor/Engineer?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Sporkedup wrote:
DrakoVongola1 wrote:
What's a Harrower?
I think in 2e concepts it would be a prepared occult caster with an emphasis on using the harrow deck (kind of like tarot, I think). I'm not sure if folks' concepts have it at a full caster, though.
Someone whose schtick involves "shuffling a deck of cards, then dealing them" probably shouldn't be a *prepared* caster.

A full Harrowed class would probably play like a super-charged version of the Ancestors Oracle. Randomized routine every round but you get rewarded big time for playing the hand dealt to you.

Liberty's Edge

I too am afraid that mention of the epiphany was linked with the day when the playtest' classes would be revealed (epiphany means revelation in Greek).

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I like the idea of a Harrower. I think Pathfinder needs a class that's tied to the Pathfinder lore.

All the classes so far can be from any setting.


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

I don't know about getting more casters in the next playtest book. We got 2 more casters with the APG, 2 more casters with the secrets of magic book. We need more caster focused archetypes, but base classes feels like it is leaning a little too hard into casters as it is.

I am assuming the new book will have some kind of theme, so it makes sense for both classes to be related in some way. I think we could use an items and equipment focused book (which should probably not include casters). It really depends on the next couple of APs past Strength of Thousands.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Didn't they say something like one of the new classes kind of spun out of the other one?


Sporkedup wrote:
Didn't they say something like one of the new classes kind of spun out of the other one?

Michael said they started with an idea and then Mark axed part of it to focus on another aspect of the original concept. It could be something else though, it’s left ambiguous.

I think i would interpret that to mean a different cornerstone ability/mechanic for the Class as opposed to one turning into another but we’ll probably get that extra insight on what Michael Sayre meant by that after the day of Playtest release.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path Subscriber
Michael Sayre wrote:
Once that decision is made, the design team collabs on how best to execute the classes and book we've decided on; in the particular instance of this as-yet-unrevealed book we'll be playtesting, we actually ran with pretty much my first idea for the class I wrote. Mark started to run with my first idea for his class but discovered some interesting dynamics during his early groundwork that led to him carving a portion of that idea off and expanding another piece of the idea into the core of the class.

Doesn’t sound like one class underwent mitosis, more what midnighttoker describes.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Thanks! I'm a bad researcher. Lot of people here smarter than I am, haha.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I also feel like the two classes will be more martial, not magic. But at the same time, both the summoner and magus aren't exactly full casters, kind of a mix of martial and magic. So who knows, maybe one or both of these playtest classes will be magic users in some form.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Not sure that a Harrower would need to be a caster at all.

And if Mark Seifter had something to do with harrow-class stuff in PF1e then that might be a thing. If the Harrower could take on personas or abilities depending on the 54 cards of the Harrow deck, that would be interesting. Kind of like if the same Mark Seifter had once written the Masquerade Reveller.

You know, just to give some 3PP author love to Mark also.
And to throw more options into the mix. Reveller has 8 letters too...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
The-Magic-Sword wrote:
"Two classes, one has 8 letters in the name..."
rainzax wrote:
Ok I'm ready for the Captain / Commander / Strategist / Tactician / Warlord base class!

7/9/10/9/7

0/5 @ 8

=(


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
rainzax wrote:
The-Magic-Sword wrote:
"Two classes, one has 8 letters in the name..."
rainzax wrote:
Ok I'm ready for the Captain / Commander / Strategist / Tactician / Warlord base class!

7/9/10/9/7

0/5 @ 8

=(

Yeah, but that means the other class doesn't have 8 characters in the name, so you're still golden.


The plot twist is this really is Arcanist and the new class actually is Warlord


Unicore wrote:
I think we could use an items and equipment focused book [...]

Speculations about a "Secrets of Equipment" book has been floated a couple of times in this thread, but am I misremembering, or didn't Eric Mona specifically say that they wouldn't be doing those types of "ultimate books" past Secrets of Magic?


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Gaulin wrote:
I also feel like the two classes will be more martial, not magic. But at the same time, both the summoner and magus aren't exactly full casters, kind of a mix of martial and magic. So who knows, maybe one or both of these playtest classes will be magic users in some form.

APG was two casters, two martials. SoM was two half casters. So I think we could go either way.

I feel like there might be an opportunity for another "other" category of class like the Alchemist here though.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I liked the bit where Michael Sayre said or was quoted as saying that by the end of 2021 PF2e would be richer in classes than PF1e. Or something. Sadly “richer” may be qualitative rather than quantitative, but surely not, otherwise it’s casting aspersions vs simple math. I’d prefer simple math over casting aspersions. Never understand mages and clerics.

Anyhoo, I really hope we see a gunslinger or gun rules soon so those of us who aren’t in on Starfinder can play magicless Pathfinder with gunnes. If we want.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Tweezer wrote:
Unicore wrote:
I think we could use an items and equipment focused book [...]
Speculations about a "Secrets of Equipment" book has been floated a couple of times in this thread, but am I misremembering, or didn't Eric Mona specifically say that they wouldn't be doing those types of "ultimate books" past Secrets of Magic?

What I got from that statement was that they want their new 2e books to be more all-encompassing and general purpose than just a list of items and a few rules to go along with it. I could imagine a book that introduces guns and other technological items, has a couple of classes and archetypes, and delves into the lore of that tech and the regions where it comes from.

Though now that I say it, that sounds an awful lot like secrets of magic. I guess I have a hard time imagining what the alternative is. All we can really conclude from his statement is that whatever book it is won't be called "Secrets of X".

Anyways I'm excited to see what the new classes will be! I hope someone posts some more teasers because it's fun to think about what they might be.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If it is an equipment focused book (yes please), I could see us getting an inventor and an Occultist as our classes. One magic, one mundane, but both heavily built towards items.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Titleist. Pugilist beyond compare.
Domn8rix. Non-gender specific too!
Waitress. Able to juggle ten plates, four cups, salt from that other table, your order and tips!
Knspir8r. No-one can know the truth, except them.
Flinbard. Part uber-gnoll, part exotic weapon, all yip. Feline too for the catfolk vibe.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Regardless of their overall direction I want a general Ultimate Equipment syle book as it was a HUGE godsend in PF1e and by far my most used book.
Followed by a npc codex style book.

Oh and finally, a strategy guide like with 1e would be nice. I know it didn't sell well but by god did I love using it whenever I introduced a new player to the game. A different name though, Strategy Guide was a misleading title originally.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

2 more days, guys. I am excited beyond reason!


From PF1, Arcanist is the only class name I can see that has 8 letters that isn't already existent in some way, shape, or form in PF2. There was Cavalier, but that's already an archetype. There was Summoner, but that's already had its own playtest and will be its own class when Secrets of Magic releases. With all the other classes in PF1, there aren't any other 8 letter named classes, most are 9s or 7s with a few 6s and 10s in there.

I'm skeptical that they wouldn't just have an Arcanist class playtest alongside the Magus and Summoner if they're making yet another spellcaster class like Arcanist and aren't throwing it into a Secrets of Magic book. With this, Arcanist can be safely ruled out, meaning we can safely say it's not anything brought back from the previous edition.


If the inventor class does come out I hope it has better weapon proficiencies than the alchemist. If the alchemist is what a true support class looks like then I have no interest in playing one. At least as a cleric I can give allies a myriad of buffs AND blast something if I so choose. Alchemist is purely a class for making other people shine and I'm not nearly so selfless as a pc. Supporting is fine, fun even. Supporting exclusively is a thankless drag that feels a little hollow.


WWHsmackdown wrote:
If the inventor class does come out I hope it has better weapon proficiencies than the alchemist. If the alchemist is what a true support class looks like then I have no interest in playing one. At least as a cleric I can give allies a myriad of buffs AND blast something if I so choose. Alchemist is purely a class for making other people shine and I'm not nearly so selfless as a pc. Supporting is fine, fun even. Supporting exclusively is a thankless drag that feels a little hollow.

In that same vein though, if the new Class introduction is in fact the Inventor, I hope it adds a slew of new mechanical interactions the Alchemist can dabble in.

I could see "Contraptions" being a new consumable type item or Inventors being able to grant traits to weapons via "Modifications" that normally wouldn't have it and only they can operate it properly as a result of the "Modification" (or perhaps it turns it into an "Advanced" weapon with which Inventors already get proficiency for or something).

Alchemist in this edition is just like a Caster in that the more "spells" you introduce, the theoretical power ceiling goes up. The trouble is, there's really only one class dabbling in the Alchemical region (with some archetypes and paths dabbling as well). Another Class coming into that same space (or expanding it) can definitely open up the Alchemist a bit.

In essence, it would be interesting to find out the Alchemist was the "Pick a list" of the Alchemical space, so the Inventor could theoretically be a forray into the more specialized portion of the alchemical items.

I wouldn't even hate a class that was focused on Snare use and triggering as a full concept. That's a type of battlefield control that would really change the way the game gets played when they are present. Even 5 foot space traps that encourage players to use Shove or block off paths for enemies adds a lot of depth to combat alone.

It's fun to theorize but if the Inventor is in the same sector as Alchemist this could be a "Rising tide raises all boats" situation.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I could see the Inventor being the replacement for the Occultist, with a magical tech theme replacing the overtly magical. Implements would become gadgets and mental focus would become more magical battery charge.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I kind of hope the occultist remains the "spooky know-it-all" class, even if that means I have to wait for it. The class had built-in flavor of "you are really keen on random objects of no obvious value" that I'd hate to lose.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I kind of hope the occultist remains the "spooky know-it-all" class, even if that means I have to wait for it. The class had built-in flavor of "you are really keen on random objects of no obvious value" that I'd hate to lose.

I sympathize but I could also easily live with two distinct classes, one based on the theme of the 1e Occultist (to me, this is currently the Bard) and one based on the mechanics.


PossibleCabbage wrote:
I kind of hope the occultist remains the "spooky know-it-all" class, even if that means I have to wait for it. The class had built-in flavor of "you are really keen on random objects of no obvious value" that I'd hate to lose.

Do you feel like a Class path "Antiquarian" could potentially fill that same niche on a more finite scale?

I have trouble thinking that a "I have a bunch of trinkets" class living alongside a larger item Class.

At least, not as a stand alone, I could see it being attached honestly to the Medium (one that interacts with objects that still have spirits) as a Class path or as part of the Inventor in an item focused occult kinda way.

Considering how a lot of the Classes from PF1 has expanded conceptually
(Sorcerer, Rogue, Fighter, Swashbuckler, Witch, Monk, Champion, and Investigator all added quite a bit of new playstyles under the same umbrellas as the old favorites) I have a hard time seeing it come back as a "full" class.

Then again, I have less experience with the Occult classes than others.

401 to 450 of 629 << first < prev | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / Paizo Blog: Save the Date! All Messageboards