Save the Date for a New Pathfinder Class Playtest!

I think the problem I have with a "Warlord/Tactician" class is that the thematic niche of the class is a thing that otherwise a lot of different classes can do. Like if you think of all the various thematic archetypes that "command armies" in fiction, you end up with a lot of different matches to existing classes.

I get that people want the mechanical trick from 4e of "you use your actions to give other people actions" but I can't help but wonder if there isn't a better way to frame that than "person who is good at tactics/giving orders".

I am 100% open to alternate names, and certainly dislike the idea of someone being the team captain by virtue of their class instead of RP.

The envoy pulls it off pretty well, I think, so that could work.

I'm a bit bummed we aren't getting a new flavor of pure martial, the Warlord/Tactician would have been good, but I am, as the kids say, most stoked for these two new classes.

Kinda shocked Psychic is making it back in, honestly. I'm looking forward to how it's made different from the other casters; that's gonna be a good time discovering.

Curious to see the actual crunchy bits, but I'm not particularly likely to include either of these in my homebrew so this gets a big "meh" from me.

My initial reaction to Psychic is that I don't see the appeal but I think there a likely lots of lore elements to them I have missed. And I will be interested to see what they do

Not sure I will be involved in the testing. There is an outside chance my current witch character might be interested in switching to one of these. My other group will not want one of these and the one I play in is unlikely to as 2/5 have recently switched characters anyway and another has finally got to play the final version of a SoM class.

So it would be down to me switching my character for the thaumaturge which I doubt I will do at this stage

Excited to see how these are built in the playtest! I'm happy to be surprised at their choices.

Super interested in how this Thaumaturge is going to be. Very happy about it having a strong focus on knowledge checks. Hoping that's a sign it will be intelligence based. Sounds like it will be very easy for me to convert my Investigator which was being used as a makeshift Occultist.

Holy cow a psychic! I thought it wouldn't happen bc of occult sorcerers and all the psychic flavored spells. Color me surprised. I'm super psyched to see how it shapes up. All I need now is a kineticist and I won't have anymore requests class wise.

Holy cow a psychic! I thought it wouldn't happen bc of occult sorcerers and all the psychic flavored spells. Color me surprised. I'm super psyched to see how it shapes up. All I need now is a kineticist and I won't have anymore requests class wise.

What sort of book would you expect a kineticist appear in do you think?

What sort of book would you expect a kineticist appear in do you think?

You could fit it in a nature-themed book or a planar-themed book I figure, depending on whether you want to play up the ties to the elements or the ties to the planes those elements are abundant in.

WWHsmackdown wrote:

Holy cow a psychic! I thought it wouldn't happen bc of occult sorcerers and all the psychic flavored spells. Color me surprised. I'm super psyched to see how it shapes up. All I need now is a kineticist and I won't have anymore requests class wise.

What sort of book would you expect a kineticist appear in do you think?

Hmm something planar or primal themed. But we might not see it bc of the elementalist archetype, who knows. Maybe an energy damage focused, non caster blaster isn't something the devs wanna explore. I won't be heartbroken if it doesn't show up but it's the last thing I really "want" to see outside of just being pleasantly surprised by new classes.

I am surprised there is no Inquisitor, but I am happy for Thaumaturgist. Neutral to Psychic. Not my kind of fantasy.

Can't say I'm super psyched out of the gate with these. I have to wonder what Psychic brings to the table past maybe a prepared occult only caster, and Thaumaturgist [IE: occultist] is too up in the air to as to how it might work so it's hard for me to get any excited for it.

Lanathar wrote:

WWHsmackdown wrote:

Holy cow a psychic! I thought it wouldn't happen bc of occult sorcerers and all the psychic flavored spells. Color me surprised. I'm super psyched to see how it shapes up. All I need now is a kineticist and I won't have anymore requests class wise.

What sort of book would you expect a kineticist appear in do you think?

Hmm something planar or primal themed. But we might not see it bc of the elementalist archetype, who knows. Maybe an energy damage focused, non caster blaster isn't something the devs wanna explore. I won't be heartbroken if it doesn't show up but it's the last thing I really "want" to see outside of just being pleasantly surprised by new classes.

Interesting. I asked because there seems to be someone over on Reddit who is pretty adamant that the kineticist is the “furthest thing from primal” and not magical or tied to any of those traditions

By this logic it would be planar book. Then you get back to the question of what to pair it with.

If it has to be this way my suggestion would be to split out the ranged and close combat versions

Not sure what else fits planes. Although there are so many planes …

Psychic is a class I expected we'd be waiting a lot longer for - I appreciate how many character concepts this opens up so much. I can finally make the Fleshwarp I've wanted to! It also opens the door to two sources of psychic stuff that are very dear to my heart: the psychic Lashunta and Formians on Castrovel, and the nation of Vudra. Fingers crossed we see both soon.

Thaumaturge seemingly being the cooler, weirder, spookier Investigator sounds like something I'd have a lot of fun with as well. I'm very curious to see what our subclass options look like, or how close I can inch to the play experience I wanted from an Inquisitor.

I was unpleasantly surprised by the new classes. Where is the Inquisitor? I think they made an error not including it.

I was unpleasantly surprised by the new classes. Where is the Inquisitor? I think they made an error not including it.

Well... I bet inquisitor will be in the next big book along with shifter and some class arquetypes. It just kind of not fits in an occult book and they already released the gods book so they probably want to wait a bit for the next divine one.

Looking forward to seeing how these turn out and expand the roster.

I’m hoping the some variation of the Rapport discipline will make it into the final version. Getting your psychic magic through the POWER OF FRIENDSHIP is a fun concept.

I was a huge fan of the Occultist and I really dug the idea behind the psychodermist archetype.

I would love it if the new class captured some of that feel.

Patrick McGrath wrote:

I was unpleasantly surprised by the new classes. Where is the Inquisitor? I think they made an error not including it.

Well... I bet inquisitor will be in the next big book along with shifter and some class arquetypes. It just kind of not fits in an occult book and they already released the gods book so they probably want to wait a bit for the next divine one.

Worth noting that Gods & Magic was a Lost Omens release, while all of these class books have been from the core line. I don't think the book of Golarion's deities used up the "divine tradition" slot, if there is such a thing.

I could imagine a divine book with Inquisitor and a retooled Medium or that prophesies Sayre-written Shaman, and then a primal book with Kineticist and either Shaman if it lands here or a heavily retooled Shifter.

GGSigmar wrote:

I am surprised there is no Inquisitor, but I am happy for Thaumaturgist. Neutral to Psychic. Not my kind of fantasy.

Can't say I'm super psyched out of the gate with these. I have to wonder what Psychic brings to the table past maybe a prepared occult only caster, and Thaumaturgist [IE: occultist] is too up in the air to as to how it might work so it's hard for me to get any excited for it.

Did they say it was prepared? It could be another spontaneous caster.

graystone wrote:

GGSigmar wrote:

I am surprised there is no Inquisitor, but I am happy for Thaumaturgist. Neutral to Psychic. Not my kind of fantasy.

Can't say I'm super psyched out of the gate with these. I have to wonder what Psychic brings to the table past maybe a prepared occult only caster, and Thaumaturgist [IE: occultist] is too up in the air to as to how it might work so it's hard for me to get any excited for it.

Did they say it was prepared? It could be another spontaneous caster.

They were spontaneous in 1e.

I'm at a loss for what kind of build/subclass options we'll see - hopefully a proper telepath among them?

graystone wrote:

GGSigmar wrote:

I am surprised there is no Inquisitor, but I am happy for Thaumaturgist. Neutral to Psychic. Not my kind of fantasy.

Can't say I'm super psyched out of the gate with these. I have to wonder what Psychic brings to the table past maybe a prepared occult only caster, and Thaumaturgist [IE: occultist] is too up in the air to as to how it might work so it's hard for me to get any excited for it.

Did they say it was prepared? It could be another spontaneous caster.

Nothing said that I know of [I'm relying on the forum for info], I'm just thinking 'what could it have that we don't already have'. I'm actually surprised they weren't a class archetype for casters that added/replaced the classes normal magic for psychic magic.

Guntermench wrote:

graystone wrote:

GGSigmar wrote:

I am surprised there is no Inquisitor, but I am happy for Thaumaturgist. Neutral to Psychic. Not my kind of fantasy.

Can't say I'm super psyched out of the gate with these. I have to wonder what Psychic brings to the table past maybe a prepared occult only caster, and Thaumaturgist [IE: occultist] is too up in the air to as to how it might work so it's hard for me to get any excited for it.

Did they say it was prepared? It could be another spontaneous caster.

Nothing said that I know of [I'm relying on the forum for info], I'm just thinking 'what could it have that we don't already have'. I'm actually surprised they weren't a class archetype for casters that added/replaced the classes normal magic for psychic magic.

Flavours of that may also be coming.

Guntermench wrote:

graystone wrote:

GGSigmar wrote:

I am surprised there is no Inquisitor, but I am happy for Thaumaturgist. Neutral to Psychic. Not my kind of fantasy.

Can't say I'm super psyched out of the gate with these. I have to wonder what Psychic brings to the table past maybe a prepared occult only caster, and Thaumaturgist [IE: occultist] is too up in the air to as to how it might work so it's hard for me to get any excited for it.

Did they say it was prepared? It could be another spontaneous caster.

They were spontaneous in 1e.

I'm at a loss for what kind of build/subclass options we'll see - hopefully a proper telepath among them?

I mean, Disciplines seem likely to return I think. I have a feeling the Mesmerist will be folded into it as one. Just a hunch.

Man when PF2 was first announced I would not have guessed that all three versions of the Sorcerer would make it into the game as full classes.

It won't happen in a million years, but getting psi-tech back would be very funny.

Disciplines as subclasses and Phrenic Amplifications as focus spell metamagics seems likely.

There's a few metamagic-tagged focus spells already (Elemental Tempest, Extend Boost, and Extend Spell) and a class built around them would be an interesting design space to explore.

That would make for a very interesting dynamic. Perhaps each Discipline could feature a Phrenic Amplification that ties their Discipline to their Spellcasting.

Like, perhaps for my theoretical Mesmerist Discipline, they'd get Hypnotic Stare, which does exactly what it does in 1e in, but right before an Illusion or Enchantment spell takes hold.

Very minor example, but it works.

Starting a Carrion Crown 2e game very soon, so thrilled with both of these playtest options.

Thaumaturge seems interesting and I hope to learn more about it today during design panel, but I am not super hyped for Psychic. Not my cup of tea and it's a full caster anyway, and we got plenty of them.

No idea if it was here or on reddit, but someone presented new classes and their books in a manner of:

Secrets of Magic (Arcane): Magus, Summoner
Guns & Gears (Martial): Gunslinger, Inventor
Dark Archive (Occult): Thaumaturge, Psychic

And while it's not really that accurate there is hope that we might see this pseudo-pattern continue and have Divine book with Inquisitor hopefully. And then Primal book with maybe Kineticist and Shaman.

Personally I am still rooting we will get Inquisitor and Warlord soon enough.

I wonder if between Thaumaturge and other existing divine classes we will even get an Inquisitor now.

Thaumaturge seems like it will cover the specialist who comes in to deal with the spooky occult monster. Rangers are dedicated hunters. Clerics and Champions are pretty flexible in how they can be built.

Also, maybe the Inquisitor, and it's whole not really following the tenets of the god in order to serve the god is just not a story they like anymore. It seemed to be mostly used to let someone do awful s~@# in the name of a Good god as justification, and maybe it's a can of worms that we'll leave in the past, with the fictional archetypes that inspired the class covered elsewhere.

(Yes, I read Erik saying magic 8-ball stuff about whether we'd see one, but I take that as a no comment not within the near future for sure. Or it's implying the Thaumaturge covers it).

I wonder if between Thaumaturge and other existing divine classes we will even get an Inquisitor now. ...

I don't see why we wouldn't. Paizo proved that they can create full classes out of very narrow concepts. If we can get Swashbuckler, Investigator and Gunslinger as a whole new class, I don't see how we wouldn't get an Inquisitor, which, I think, is a much broader concept than the mentioned ones. Mechanically it wouldn't even have to be something revolutionary, maybe just a skill-based bounded divine caster.

I feel like the Inquisitor is one of the easier concepts to make a full class out of. There is so much breadth to it, so much that can be added or expended upon.

The announcement of the Thaumaturge and the existence of the other Divine classes (or even a rogue with a divine archetype) does not limit the Inquisitor designspace.

I feel like the Inquisitor is one of the easier concepts to make a full class out of. There is so much breadth to it, so much that can be added or expended upon.

The announcement of the Thaumaturge and the existence of the other Divine classes (or even a rogue with a divine archetype) does not limit the Inquisitor designspace.

I think you're spot on.

I for one don't see the need. Doesn't an investigator with archetype cover the role of inquisitor well enough already?

I'd like to see entirely new concepts, or concepts unique to Paizo's brand that only had a short run (like the kinericist or shifter).

I for one don't see the need. Doesn't an investigator with archetype cover the role of inquisitor well enough already?

I'd like to see entirely new concepts, or concepts unique to Paizo's brand that only had a short run (like the kinericist or shifter).

Just a general point of thought, but in my experience with this game, when people ask

"Isn't X class with Y archetype enough to cover Z class concept?"

The answer is almost always "No."

I mean sure, an investigator with a cleric dedication can reasonably approximate the flavor of an inquisitor. But it has no banes or judgments--the self buffs that give the inquisitor its popular flavor are just not available in the game. Especially not to an investigator with a cleric dedication here. That is literally just an investigator who can get a small handful of low-level divine spells. And that with a cost for feats. You can approximate an inquisitor now to about 60%, maybe?

Now, I'm not saying an inquisitor is necessary or must be its own class or anything. I just have a bit of a long-held issue with the way that there's always a voice or two when we're talking about future classes that try to downplay the unique elements the class would bring (and the power, flexibility, and regularity with which they'd be able to do them) and try to talk folks into picking an archetype, squinting really hard, and being happy with what's already there. If you could do a great inquisitor now, people wouldn't be asking for it in droves.

All that said, I personally don't really care for the inquisitor. I'd much prefer to see a really good shifter happen, a major expansion on the 1e class. Totally agree with you on that.

I just wanted to step in as I see people getting pretty frustrated (and I'm one too) with being told the class they want to see return should be "just an archetype." Or worse, that the necessary pieces are already on the board.

Man when PF2 was first announced I would not have guessed that all three versions of the Sorcerer would make it into the game as full classes.

All three versions of the sorcerer ? Which three ?

To add to that, Paizo has proven on multiple occasions that this isn't their rule of thumb with Class design moving forward. Every Class we've seen so far has had a sizable number of naysayers who didn't/couldn't see a design space for them; and Paizo has shown that they do.

The only exception thus far as been the Cavalier and Vigilante; two Classes that Paizo intentionally looked at and decided that their overall concept worked better as an Archetype. Not because they were lesser than the other Classes or because all their Archetypical parts can make the whole; but because they felt mounted combat and an alter ego should be for everyone and not just one type of character.

So, can we please stop with the naysaying? I for one think that every 1e Class has the potential to return as a Full Class. Do I have my doubts with a few? Sure. But if anyone can find a new life behind any of the concepts and mechanics of their own Class ideas, it'll be Paizo.

To be fair, warpriest, arcanist and spiritualist look to be classes that were mixed into other existing classes. Vigilante and cavalier are the only two classes made into archetypes. I think an argument is being made that since thaumaturge is a brand new class, it could be a mix of existing ones, like occultist and inquisitor. Myself, I know little of them.

Squiggit wrote:

Man when PF2 was first announced I would not have guessed that all three versions of the Sorcerer would make it into the game as full classes.

All three versions of the sorcerer ? Which three ?

He probably means... sorcerer, psychic and summoner? Not sure tho

To be fair, warpriest, arcanist and spiritualist look to be classes that were mixed into other existing classes. Vigilante and cavalier are the only two classes made into archetypes. I think an argument is being made that since thaumaturge is a brand new class, it could be a mix of existing ones, like occultist and inquisitor. Myself, I know little of them.

Fair. Warpriest I'll say was folded in, likely to try and build on the Cleric's new Doctrines feature. Spiritualist was likely the same thing in a way, fusing it with the Summoner to broaden the choices for Occult Tradition Eidolon.

For its part, the Arcanist was made an Archetype, in the form of the Flexible Spellcaster, to allow every kind of prepared spellcaster the ability to play with non-Vancian magic.

I think the problem is people keep placing the Classes from 1e into a box containing their parts and then choosing not to look outside of it. They all have the potential to be more than what they were in 1e, and that is my point. I for one wasn't sure we would ever see a Hybrid Class in 2e, and yet we have 2 that are almost nothing like their 1e counterparts.

Lanathar wrote:

Squiggit wrote:

Man when PF2 was first announced I would not have guessed that all three versions of the Sorcerer would make it into the game as full classes.

All three versions of the sorcerer ? Which three ?

He probably means... sorcerer, psychic and summoner? Not sure tho

Sorcerer, Oracle, and Psychic; the latter two being the "Divine and Psychic Sorcerers"

I mean sure, an investigator with a cleric dedication can reasonably approximate the flavor of an inquisitor. But it has no banes or judgments--the self buffs that give the inquisitor its popular flavor are just not available in the game.

Not being funny, but I think that would be my thinking too, but it leads me to the reverse conclusion. The WAY that inquisitors worked mechanically in PF1e won't return, I'd be willing to bet. There won't be loads of floating number buffs, and many other implementations might just feel like a ranger.

So if there is to be an inquisitor, it would need to capture new flavor and execute that flavor with new mechanics.

I was thinking aloud that if Thaumaturge covers even more of the fictional niche of inquisitors, maybe we won't be likely to get a full class, especially with some of the baggage inquisitors had. I'm not saying they CAN'T or SHOULDN'T do it, just that it might be less interesting depending on what we see in the playtest.

Hmmm. It's really hard to predict. Paizo could either completely reinvent the class like it did with Swashbuckler and Investigator, or lean on its 1e mechanics like it did with Magus and Summoner.

I guess the trick for an Inquisitor would be deciding whether it fits in a book about organizations or a divine book.

I mean, it does not have a natural pair.

While it seemed to be the most popular request along with the Kineticist, I could not see a book to go along with it. I imagined something like Dark Archives could contain two 'occult' classes and can see a primal book with Shifter and Kineticist.

That said, I think we just need to be patient. Thaumaturge and Psychic will probably scratch the itch for Occult classes and we'll eventually see another divine class whether it's Inquisitor or a new class. I also imagine that we'll get the Kineticist at some point.

We also need to see what the Thaumaturge is about. Erik seems to have mentioned it is a martial. Could be that there is some space for the Inquisitor to be one of its Class Archetypes in a way that fits it better than, say, a Cleric Doctrine or an Investigator with a Cleric MCD

As an aside, I never thought they'd do psychic, and I'm very excited to see it and how rich I expect James to have made it, because they wouldn't be doing it if they didn't think it had thematic legs!

Which is to say, if they do do an inquisitor I bet it'll be really interesting and cool, I just would caution against a growing expectation that they WILL 100% do it, that becomes the kind of expectation that leads to betrayed feelings and forum rants, etc, when it doesn't materialize how you want! :D

Has Paizo said they'll never release just a single class in a book?

And if they want to release it next to another class...they don't have to use one from 1e. They can make something new like Inventor.

As an aside, I never thought they'd do psychic, and I'm very excited to see it and how rich I expect James to have made it, because they wouldn't be doing it if they didn't think it had thematic legs!

Which is to say, if they do do an inquisitor I bet it'll be really interesting and cool, I just would caution against a growing expectation that they WILL 100% do it, that becomes the kind of expectation that leads to betrayed feelings and forum rants, etc, when it doesn't materialize how you want! :D

YMMV, but I've been watching the class take shape since James started concepting it and I am absolutely psyched about what he's done with it and where he's taken it. I think it captures some of the best of what's gone before while also being a ground up reimagining of what the class can and should be.

And of course, you'll all get to help us make it even better when the playtest starts!

I'm definitely shocked at the new psychic iconic - Rivani had a great design, neat story, and was really pretty to my gay eyes. This new guy just kind of looks like Anti-Mage from Dota 2.

As far as new classes are concerned every time I see someone say, "it's just X class with Y archetype(s)", I immidiately think "there is a lot more to it than just a handful of feats."

The classes that have been made into archetypes so far have been either way too broad (Vigilante), incredibly niche (Cavalier), or Had a subsystem Paizo want any class to have access to (Vigilante, Cavalier, & Arcanist). Warpriest I chuck to early PF2 writing themselves into a corner as they seemingly forgot "clerics are supposed to be armored".

Also every time I remember that if you look at any one PF1 class, they always have way more than enough abilities between archetypes and feats to make their own class. Before even thinking about the generic PF2 feats that get added. Or the PF2 feats chains that get added.

Has Paizo said they'll never release just a single class in a book?

And if they want to release it next to another class...they don't have to use one from 1e. They can make something new like Inventor.

We have 2 Starfinder classes that released solo so far. Different team, but I don’t see why they would just do 1 class if it made sense.

I wouldn’t be surprised if they do 3 1 class playtests some year.

Warpriest I chuck to early PF2 writing themselves into a corner as they seemingly forgot "clerics are supposed to be armored".

The playtest cleric had armor, so likely not. More likely the other way around.