Kineticist.
Then Inquisitor as a cleric path and I like this Antiquarian idea.
Search Posts
If there's no dirty trick in this edition how does it handle throwing dirt in someone's eye or other non standard ways of messing with enemies? That's a fairly standard thing creative players ask about. It's a pretty big part of keeping the game open ended.
That seems like a weird oversight. Only three classes can ever be good at unarmed without multicasting into a specific flavor of character. Maybe four with a warpriest of the right god? Not being able to use most of your class feats even if you multiclass? That's got to be a mistake.
Spellstrike replacing the somatic action with an attack action makes the most sense to me. Spell combat could expand the options to any attack fear becoming a somatic action, even one that used multiple actions as long as you still have enough total actions to cast the spell. That last bit is probably too complicated.
Does the dirty trick or reposition combat maneuvers still exist? They weren't in the playtest. My flowing monk would be very sad.
I'm hoping there's good options for a ki sage or sensei style of monk, who focuses more exclusively on wisdom and ranged or support powers, or on disabling and maneuvers and not on just dealing damage.
I was excited for the idea of the kinetic knight because of this feat:
My DM was going to let it fly without a level of samurai and it would make him a pretty impressive tank I'm hoping. I'm thinking the archon style feat line would work well for this. Range seams less important as you get impressive flight capabilities counting as an aerokineticist to start with.
Also are there any good feats that expand the options for ki that would be useful to a non monk? I count as having combat expertise for free does that open up any particularly good options?
I'm looking at playing a Psammokinetic Knight, jumping into a game around 6th level and I'm trying to figure out a few things about the class. The main thing I'm worried about is that the ki pool that replaces elemental overflow doesn't include anything to make up for the size bonuses you're losing, which are there, I understand to help with the kineticist being able to hit properly. Has anyone tried playing one at mid to high levels who would know if this is actually a problem or not a big deal. Also it's kind of weird if I start with sirocco blast then when I get my expanded element there is no composite blast for that and no real way to get one. It seems like it wants to force you into the sand blast first.
If the additional set of essences are opposing and therefore harder to connect and create spells with it makes sense to me that they would take weirder traditions to access them. Those exist already in core in a way I think works. Alchemy and ki. This would bring them in world with the other spell list in an interesting way. I don't remember which essences are which list well enough but I think spiritual/vital makes perfect sense for ki as it's accessing magic through perfecting mind and body and alchemy would be mental/material because it's using material ingredients and mental understanding of the formulas involves. I do wish the essences were tied closer to the rules, having it listed what spells are tied to what essence and hanging other rule options off of that.
@pjrogers One of the nice things about having the sorcerer have kineticist style casting is that it would be integrated into the system from the very beginning instead of added on at the very end of a systems lifespan without a lot of support.
I've been arguing for the sorcerer as kineticist since the earliest preview posts about magic. I've never gotten a response to it. I don't think it has any traction with the designers, which is sad. I think it's one of the most interesting design spaces and I'd love to see how it plays with the 3 action economy. It would also open up the idea of everyone else using arcanist casting which would solve a lot of the situational spell list problems people have been complaining about because of the limited slots per day. It's going to be the first thing I homebrew when the actual game is released I think, and I almost never homebrew. I just feel very strongly about this one, it would bring together so many things and really help separate Pathfinder from other RPGs in a good way.
Forcing specific combat styles onto specific classes.
I've always liked the bloodied terminology, it feels good in narrative.
I'm not sure of the specifics but I like the general idea. I always like having a good reason to play a high intelligence or high wisdom fighter without having to resort to magic.
These are the sort of cool ideas I want to see worked into every class power in the game. That makes me actually excited about playing a druid sometime in a way that none of the current powers really do.
Idea for sneak attacks and critical hits. Instead of doubling damage on a crit, it does standard damage but both to stamina and HP. Sneak attack dice go directly to HP.
I can't believe I forgot about the excessive siloing of feats! That's my big one. Fix that and a lot of other things will fall into line I think.
Seconding MER-c here but my biggest thing is making heavy or light armor viable on all characters.
That's a bit of a bad metaphor considering the different specialist wizards being the base idea behind the wizard in Pathfinder. The magic tinkerer in pf1 was the arcanist the wizard was more like an engineer. A mechanical engineer has a very different toolkit than a electrical engineer.
I like the idea but I'm not sure what that would do to the universalist.
Just to chime in only slightly off topic as everyone is talking about strength and con or strength and charisma that all martial classes (and probably some non martial classes) should have dexterity as a possible key score too. The first character I made for the playtest was a dex based fencer paladin. I see no reason you couldn't have a small knife willing feral barbarian that rage leaps on people's heads, definitely also dex based. I really don't like the class key ability score in general. It seams overly limiting when you look at characters like a battle bard or cleric that can't start with an eighteen in strength. Or something like the eighteen con dwarven drunken master monk I had in pf1. Or a sensei style monk who starts with an 18 wisdom. The whole thing is rather pigeon holed.
#3 with powerful moves that can end rage early. Involve con in the max duration I think. Make the temp hit points and resetting rage ending actions a meaningful decision between continuing a rage or taking a round of fatigue. Make rage scale up to bigger damage bonuses. Also I don't think barbarians should get to master with weapons. That speaks to training which is not their thing. They should get those bonuses and the numbers they need in other ways. Rage definitely should stack with more things. Raaaggggeeeeeee!
All of these changes sound excellent to me. I'm hoping they go with something more like Knight for the overarching name of the class rather than champion and give it some options for being non divine, just tried good as well. That's probably farther than they're going to go though.
I while the problem might be solved numbers wise by multiclassing into fighter or the like it doesn't solve wanting to make a magical strike from a character perspective. I worry that because of the new multiclassing style and action economy that we won't see something like the magus for a long time because it's "easier to make a Gish now", but that hasn't made it so you can combine your spells and attacks into a single thing though and that's something I really want to see be part of the game.
I like everything about what bluescale just said. Also both, why not both those options.
Inquisitor and kineticist for me with the occultist not too far behind. My favorite prestige classes were there rage prophet and the champion of irori.
+1 for the shadowdancer and getting cool summoned shadow weapons. I also really like the idea of the summoner being an archetype that gets to flavor it's summon/eidolon on it's base class.
Yes to all of this. A knight class is probably the closest in making convention to the rest of the Pathfinder classes and when you add the paladin archetype would really feel like the paladin of old. This would let you make a holy war mage smiting enemies of their god with holy fire or a sneaky Inquisitor based on the ranger or rogue.
How about one to refresh an ongoing buff spell?
More spells that use the three action system. A non class specific or spell list specific feat that let you use a melee strike as a somatic casting action. More spells useful both in and out of combat.
1)I specifically like that about stamina because it pushes the healer out of a passive reactionary role and makes them need to be designed as a more active participant in combat. 2) Tracking another resource pool can be a pain but this can be designed to be a very story rich resource pool. Keep the wound pool very small, like negative hit points, say half your con score and gain one each of them only from falling below zero stamina, taking a critical hit or certain specific magic. Then you can track them individually and have cursed wounds, poisoned wounds or crippling wounds that can effect the story and have interesting story ways to heal them.
That gnome one might be enough to actually get me to play a gnome for the first time ever.
This is a great step. Hopefully as they get through some of the feedback from the classes survey and rules survey they'll start to fix some of the big problems with feats too.
There was a post in the survey blog post from one of the designers, Jason I think, said they're going to do an entire separate survey on magic. They are waiting because if they do to many surveys at once they get less answers, but it is coming.
Making treat wounds so you always heal some amount but it gets higher based on your check would fix that. A 2/4/6 progression would really feel more meaningful.
This plus making the feats themselves much more interesting is all this system needs to go from stable but bland to something I really really want to play.
There's definitely a disconnect between the idea of class and mechanical niche going on with the designers right now. To me class choice is about aesthetic, how I want to look and feel in the world, which is different then what role I want to fill in the party. In pf1 there were enough general feats and combat feats available that you could get almost any class to fulfill any role your party needed. In the entirely non scientific archetype survey that was posted back on the preview blog boards the most popular archetypes completely changed the nature of the base class. That's what I want out of Pathfinder, not rigidly defined classes who seem to get a lot less a lot later than their earlier versions.
They definitely need to add back in dirty trick and steal. Dirty trick is the go-to maneuver for doing interesting ad-hoc things in combat and steal just leads to great character moments for the rogue types.
I love this idea, and if a class doesn't feel like it has enough going on with proficiency stripped out that really shows a serious problem in the class as is. Math wise I'm worried about one issue with the armor proficiency and why it seems like the designers have avoided giving any sort of higher level light armor proficiency. Light armor would end up overshadowing heavy armor on defense making higher dexterity characters tankier than heavy armor characters. And while I love playing dex characters they should have other reasons to make them worth playing than that. This is a bit of a problem with the tight math in general I think. Not enough room for interesting bonuses, but that's not something I should get into in this thread.
I'm definitely with using intelligence for medicine. With alchemists becoming a core class and the timeline shifting a few years forward it makes sense that there might be some medical colleges cropping up around the world. Yes this is a fantasy game but remember:
This sounds like what they hinted at in the original blog posts previewing the fighter and then really failed to deliver on. I'm not sure the fighter paths are nessessary but I can get behind absolutely everything else in this post.
That does sound metal AF, I would really enjoy playing something like that.
Still hoping they'll at least try the wizard as arcanist and do something really interesting and different with the sorcerer. My personal wish would be to merge it with the kineticist.
It will be more like 30 versions of each feat before long if classes proliferate like they did before. I'd like to feats like double slice divided up by fighting style rather than class and have the feats gated by your proficiency. That gives fighters earlier access, protecting their niche. I'd want that to go along with the classes getting more control of where they put their weapon, armor and spellcasting proficiencies though.
I'd really been hoping they would do this but then use the kineticist framework for the sorcerer, making them really mechanically distinct and giving them a very different niche from the wizards. Plus I might actually play a wizard one day if they gave them the arcanist's casting. Won't happen otherwise.
I really hope the Divine sorcerer doesn't need a weapon to get by. That's kind of the clerics thing, getting better weapons armor and hit points. This seems like the right place to have a proper priest/whitemage class that is all about casting. Here's hoping they get some good ways to burn people with holy fire and good defensive casting they can be doing round after round instead of having to fall back on the old crossbow or multiclass into fighter just to keep up.
Considering how hard it's been up till now to make a priest/white mage type character I hope they give them good options to not need to use weapons and mundane tools. They should be able to hold their own magically better than a cleric who gets better hit points armor and weapons options.
I actually think the new rules help with interesting roleplay. The fact that you have the actions per round but a third attack whole possible is very good will get players into the mind set of looking for other things to do with their second or third action like flipping a table over or climbing a chandelier. There design of combat maneuvers being skill checks makes it easy to think up other ways to use skills on the fly in combat because you know how that works already. I think the only thing that really takes away from it right now is exploration mode, which is not a terrible idea just overly codified and defined right now. Edit: Also the tight math really helps the idea that my roleplayed combat ideas might actually mean something so that I'll actually use them more often. If climbing a chandelier and jumping on an opponent gives me a circumstance bonus on my one attack that actually matters in the round I get a significant higher chance of getting a crit, and vice versa for flipping a table for cover. That means it feels good to do as a player and I'm actually a lot more likely to actually do interesting actions that interact with the world. I love that.
Likes:
Dislikes:
|