Elemental95's page

I would ask that the two following archetypes be added to the list of paizo official archetypes for the occultist class.

the occultist archetype, "the Akashic Seeker"
*change armor and weapon proficiency to that of the wizard.
*Wisdom is the attribute used to determine all Akashic seeker class features, such as mental focus points and bonus spells.
*Bonus feat at first level, "third Eye".
*the Akashic Seeker uses the third eye as an implement, and does not select other implements as they advance. each additional implement simply adds to their third eye. Akashic seekers are limited to the divination implement school only.
*the Akashic seeker cannot have generic focus. All of the focus is invested in the third eye.
*change to "use magic item skill", this bonus is now applied to "sense motive".
*replacement for shift focus: at 4th level the Akashic Seeker gains the third eye feat as a bonus feat, again.
*Replacement for aura sight: at 5th level the use of the third eye feat requires only a standard action to perceive auras, and the akashic seeker may spend a point of mental focus to ignore the fatigue caused by using the third eye feat. At 10th level and thereafter the use of the third eye does not cause fatigue.
*replacement for magic circles, binding circles, and fast circles. The Akashic Seeker gains the third eye feat as a bonus feat in place of these abilities.
*The akashic seeker does not gain outside contact nor any improvement based on this ability.
*At level 20, the use of the third eye feat is at will with no limit on use.

The occultist archetype, the "Harrowed path"
*reduce armor proficiency to light armor and weapon proficiency to all simple weapons and two martial weapons of choice.
*acrobatics, climb, stealth, and swim become class skills.
*at first level the harrowed path gains weapon finesse as a bonus feat.
*at first level the harrowed path have only one implement and must start with the divination implements school. starting at 2nd level they gain additional implements normally.
*Magic item skill changes to benefit Disable Device.
*"read object" is replaced with the rogue talent "trap spotter".
the harrowed path may purchase rogue talents with focus power slots.
*shift focus is replaced with evasion.
*see auras is replaced with uncanny dodge.
*the harrowed path lose magic circles, outsider contact, and all associated improvements to those abilities.

while there may be a core of 13 archetypes for a character's background: rich, poor, working stiff, leader, artist, nihilist, etc.
why not reference the Harrow deck for a slew of background possibilities?

rather than 13 archetypes, one has easily 54 choices, and because some
of the harrow cards might be a bit nebulous, have multiple meanings or reversed meanings could there actually be many more choices?

say 108 or more?
would the implementation of these choices be feasible/realistically valid for the game?

I'm not a hard core "Game Lawyer", and I would not dream of changing the alignment system as a lose guide to describing a character's stance on morality: Good vs. Evil, and Order: Lawful vs. chaotic...
I like several of the Alignment Memes on the web. it doesn't get any clearer than: follows rules vs doesn't, and nice guy vs jerk.

the bit I am pondering though is: neutrality.
Neutrality does add to the spectrum of choices for a character's "character". It is clear that some adhere to certain behaviors much more stringently than others.

There is a difference between the Lawful good paladin who is willing to forgive and strives to redeem through example...
And the good guy Law enforcer who is a touch... zealous.

thing is - in the hard and fast of it all - does neutrality really exist?

is the basic choice between morality: Nice Vs jerk
and the basic choice between order: follows rules Vs don't
think about it. A choice has to be made, one can't truly "straddle the fence". one is essentially good, or NOT. One abides by rules or won't!

I am sure that people argue for a spectrum of shades, I do too...
Yet in the grand scheme of all things, isn't it "splitting hairs"?

The old "woodcut" image regarding alignment: a chaotic evil rogue trying to murder a bound captive goblin, a neutral fighter leaning back against the wall, and a lawful good cleric trying to stop the rogue. Could one say that the choice to "DO NOTHING" isn't really a choice? That ultimately the fighter *MUST* choose a course of action? stop the rogue or kill the goblin prisoner?

one is either good, or not.
one is either for the rules, or not.
could it really be that ultimately there are only two choices?
if a room has two doors, how can you define your self as good, if you don't always stick with the door labeled good?

aren't those occasional missteps through the Evil door, a matter of personal convenience? and could the willingness to choose that evil door -even once, out of a million times- be a matter of excuses and cast a permanent shade on your character?

it is something to ponder.
a school bus teetering over the edge: save the kids, or push the bus over... isn't that the choice you are making even if you choose to do nothing? isn't doing nothing, essentially choosing to allow the bad result to happen, and hence, the choice to be evil?

The following are my thoughts, suggestions, and desires for PF2.
I have noticed that my players absolutely prefer the unchained classes, and why not?

in addition to the regular gains for level advancement: saves, bab, skill ranks, feats, and attribute increases...

the unchained classes have goodies starting at level 1.
the unchained classes tend to get class abilities and features in what I call tracks. These gains may occur at a rate of One gimmick every 2, 3, or 4 levels.

for example:
rouge talents -> 1 every 2
sneak attack -> upgrades 1 every 2
and then we add: danger sense, trap sense, evasion, uncanny dodge, debilitating strikes, rogue's edge...

meanwhile the fighter has:
bonus combat feats -> one every 2.
bravery? a sad lackluster ability that should just change into to something less situational and more useful... like a bonus to will saves, period. "situational" means, "only matters when" which also means... might NEVER matter at all.

Then there is "The long crawl across the desert of no changes" to a 1 every 4 level ability and well, its like "here now your equipment dosen't make you suck as much" ooh, ahh, oh, count me astonished.
then the 1 every 5 level ability, "you get a +1"...

huh? what? a +1?

Seriously, there is far too much that the fighter class doesn't or can't do. So much so, that I feel the "ARMSMASTER" below is a vastly superior fighter than the actual fighter class.

the armsmaster adapts to any situation and can fight with any means availiable, the arms master isn't anchored to EQUIPMENT to matter in the game, and might do just fine without any magic items...

the fighter can't. the fighter is rigid, fixed, and options for recourse are few and none. Strip away the items (especially MAGIC ITEMS) and the fighter simply falls flat, dead as a door nail. the future fighter for pf2 should be the "armsman" or something like it.

Psionics is deemed too scientific by some and that gets my attention as Psionic classes are the ones I enjoy playing.

Is psionics fantasy?

Yes.

Fantasy adventure role playing games are based on a rich blend of historical realities and mythical fantasy.

The ancient Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans, experimented and explored the mysteries of the world with reasoning. Their philosophic insights are the foundations of the modern sciences. In the east, exotic faiths focused on meditation and contemplation spread, martial arts were created, practiced, and mastered. These concepts we find in history, myth, and legend can be borrowed from for our purposes.

For examples of psionic characters in our history we can look at mysterious historical figures such as Nostradamus, Mesmer, and Rasputin from history.
(*Conversely wizards have the likes of merlin and Faust for their examples, and both of these are fictional.)