Jedi Maester's page

183 posts. No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 183 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I didn't see a thread on the Remaster Investigator, so I thought I'd make one! I know this wasn't one of the classes mentioned to get a significant overhaul, but I'm curious what everyone else is hoping to see for this class in the remaster.

My hope is to see the narrative scope of the class broadened. Compared to other classes, detective is incredibly narrow flavor to build a class around. I'd love to see the class branch into archetypes (not the mechanic) that have yet to really be covered. I'd love to see the addition of these methodologies: archaeologist and cryptologist. With this broadening, it would be neat to see Devise a Stratagem work in different ways for either method.

Archaeologist could have it behave more like an Indy Ploy that feels more improvisational. Something that is less Sherlock and predicting outcomes, but more like gambling.

During the Thaumaturge playtest, a few people wanted a character that uses intelligence to actually know about weaknesses. I think the cryptologist would be an excellent subclass to see that flavor realized. Their Stratagem could revolve identifying creatures and helping the party to exploit their weaknesses. A Thaumaturge that does spend all day in books but lacks that ability to create weaknesses. A very book accurate Van Helsing.


I doubt this change will happen, but the recent additions of minotaurs and centaurs made me want to bring it up. How do people feel about giving bards more options for spells outside of the occult list? There are many musicians that can control animals and weather, which sounds pretty primal, in ancient Greek stories. Orpheus of course being a prime example. Then there are stories of people selling their souls for musically abilities, which could be a divine source. On top of this, the Thaumaturge, which is some ways a martial bard, easily goes between all four lists.

Not saying the bard should be a pick a list caster, not that I would mind it, but maybe some form of "occult access" to pick up some of these spells? Thoughts?


With the news that Sekmin are replacing the Drow, it seems the Darklands are in for quite the revamp. As it is my favorite area of Golarion, I'm curious what are everyone's hopes for the Darklands moving forward? What are the changes you want to see, and what are the things you hope stay the same (outside of the already confirmed changes).

My biggest hope is that the Darklands stay terrifying and dangerous. With Sekmin taking over, I'm not too worried about this. The idea of a place where society is completely evil and being good is a true minority makes the place unique to me. It's a chance to really roleplay being the light in the darkness, both literally and figuratively.

With Sekmin taking over the Drow territory, I hope to see their society really fleshed out. They already had very human motivations of power so I never considered them that mysterious. In fact, I think this is probably a good sign for anyone hoping for a Sekmin ancestry. However, we are losing the ancient society that's been sleeping for centuries waiting for their time to awaken. Sekmin could keep this, but as they now have a good power base, I wonder if this could be used with a new threat. Something much more alien and mysterious. Maybe that's what the Sekmin are containing in the ancient city?

Finally, I know the name will change, but whatever replaces Neothelids, I want more of it! Giant, incredibly powerful, psychic, occult worms please! Make them more Pathfinder original and flesh out the ancient war between them, the Alghollthus, and the Vault Builders!


Sanityfaerie wrote:

So... I'm taking a look at the stuff they've recently revealed about ancestry changes, and I'm noticing that this is the stuff that they *didn't* call out specifically as areas of focus. Like, the stuff they're describing there is adjustments that they'll be making to all of the ancestries in the book... including rebalancing feats to improve/replace some that are weaker than intended, and adding some new feats on top of that.

If they're doing that for ancestries, I feel like we have every reason to believe that classes are getting that kind of treatment, too. Even for those classes that we don't expect to see many large overarching changes to, I suspect that we'll see particularly weak feats fixed/improved, and new feats added.

We may well get some love over on the general feats and skill feats, too.

I don't really expect any of this to be huge, but I could easily see a fair number of potential builds climb up from "technically viable" to "actually pretty solid".

That was my big take-away as well. I'd love to see more classes get options that work with reload weapons for instance.


I'd like to see the skill requirements for spell casting dedications removed. You can see my previous thread on the topic, but it feels strange that a level 20 wizard can stay trained in arcane and cast rank 10 spells, but anyone multiclassing to wizard needs to be legendary to cast rank 8 spells.


Jacob Jett wrote:
Jedi Maester wrote:
Sanityfaerie wrote:
Also, I do admit bias in this. I want an aberration book... especially if they can fit a delicious new aberration-based class into it.
Yes! I would love a class around hosting an aberrant parasite!
This would be a truly novel class I don't recall seeing very often. (You can build something like this in several older TTRPG systems but they all seem clunky results wise.)

I'd make it a wave caster to have entities that both focus on combat or spellcasting. In order to differentiate it from the summoner, which is already about sharing power, I think this one could be more about a give and take. Using certain abilities in exchange for giving the entity something they want. It would be closer to the oracle that way, but with wave casting and occult spells.


I love the idea of autoscaling skills for everyone! Especially if the class has a skill you need to keep maxed out anyways. If that was done, then the multiclass spellcasting requirements at least make sense. Though I'd be okay dropping them anyways as I don't think the skill requirements are at all necessary for balance.


Karmagator wrote:

I would really like two things - an Eldritch Archer equivalent for firearms and a general Gunner archetype modelled after the Archer archetype...

As far as the Gunner is concerned, yes, it would impose on the Gunslinger. But the Gunslinger needs an upgrade in both power and an actual niche anyway. Making reload weapons vaguely viable is not a proper niche. It is also not like that stopped anyone where certain other archetypes are concerned - the Champion archetype already gives out every good feature of the Champion except the improved armor proficiency.

Yes! An entire groups of weapons should not be locked behind a class! Make reload weapons worth it, and give more classes something to do with them! At least the ones that are thematically appropriate like the Swashbuckler! I can settle for an archetype, but I'd really love some feats that allow the martial classes to have their own unique relationships with reload weapons.

Squiggit wrote:

Things I Need?

Investigator and Swashbuckler making it onto that list of classes getting some heavy adjustments and improvements in Remaster.

Investigator struggles in a lot of ways and relies overtly much on GM buy-ins to work and Swashbuckler has some serious design awkwardness, so here's hoping.

Also this! In fact, combine the two and give both classes reload options!

I'd really love for Investigators to get a full rework as well. I think the dedicative angle is too restricting of a class theme. This could be the "expert" class and have subclasses that revolve around different jobs for adventuring. So obviously you'd have a detective job, but I think this would be a great place to add archeaologist, occult researcher, doctor, or any other archetypes that rely on intelligence. As long as it circles around "investigator," the class is always going to feel restricted and need GM buy-ins to make sure there are things to investigate.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
AestheticDialectic wrote:
Well, let me say this. The 1e witch was my favorite class along with the wizard. My favorite thing about the which was their hexes which were at will supernatural abilities(which did not count as magic for the purposes of spell resistance) that allowed you to be a master debuffer combined with their cackle ability which sustained them. I liked that this was part of the full caster chassis. They traded a slightly worse spell list and a spell slot for the hexes in 1e. Wizard was baseline 5 and witch was baseline 4. I would be willing to go psychic style with 2 slots instead of three for massively improved at-will debuff and support capabilities, however I would prefer the witch be what it is now with better focus spells and focus cantrips but also 4 spell slots. Which should be just as good as the wizard or sorcerer. I do not, at all, want a "familiar specialist" at all ever. It's not why I loved the 1e witch, it is not why I was excited for the new witch and it isn't why I asked paizo in the playtest to make some of the focus spells into focus cantrips. To me the witch should be a support caster with a focus on debuffs and a secondary focus on protection and healing. Cackle in this edition sustaining *all spells* at once is awesome. Witch is the only class that can sustain multiple spells simultaneously given the focus points. It is precisely this feature I want developed for the class to turn it into a proper successor to the 1e version, sell the class fantasy and give it a unique identity

While the familiar is neat, I agree that this shouldn't be THE pet class. The idea of a witch is essentially you are cheating. Instead of studying for years in a school or being subservient to a deity or nature, you make a deal to cast spells yourself. And your familiar is just the cheat sheet your patron gives you. You are so good at cheating the system, you can learn divine spells without even needing to worship the divine! Cackle is a great example of this, but I'd love to see more ways the witch can cheat the system. Maybe learning spells from other traditions? Hexs as powers outside of the well known spells available to others? As much this as possible.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Sanityfaerie wrote:
Also, I do admit bias in this. I want an aberration book... especially if they can fit a delicious new aberration-based class into it.

Yes! I would love a class around hosting an aberrant parasite!


breithauptclan wrote:

It does seem strange and feel bad to have to spend skill boosts on a magic tradition skill as a tax for getting higher level spell slots. I'm not sure how to fix that.

I don't like the idea of having some classes require the skill boosts and others not - which actually is how some of the archetypes are currently. The multiclass ones all require skill rank improvements as prerequisites, but some of the other non-multiclass spellcasting archetypes do not. That is just really strange and feels even worse than having all of the archetypes fair about it.

I definitely see that. I'm wondering if it would be possible to throw out the skill prerequisites entirely. The dedications already give trained proficiency in the relevant skills, so you don't need to worry about the skill being completely untrained. Are the skill requirements really that important to balancing the spellcasting feats?


Maybe this has already been talked about, but with the big errata coming I thought this would be a good time to bring up a minor thing I find weird with the current rules. I think it is odd that the the Expert and Master multiclass spell casting feats require master and legendary in their associated spell tradition skill.

Hear me out: a level 20 Wizard can be only trained in Arcane and cast level/rank 10 spells with legendary proficiency, but a 20th level rogue with a wizard dedication must have legendary Arcane to cast 8th level/rank spells at master proficiency. That hurts my verisimilitude a bit, not enough to keep me from enjoying the game, but it does feel awkward at times. And it is especially awkward to me when multiclassing into a dedication where the spell casting comes from an intuitive source, like the sorcerer. One of the big fantasies of sorcerer is that the power is my own, and I don't need to study to use it. But if I'm a rogue who takes a sorcerer dedication, I now need to be master or legendary in my spell casting tradition to get more power.

If this is a nesseacry part of the game balance, I guess it is fine as is. But I wanted to bring it up during this transition time because removing these prerequisites is a small change and maybe others feel the same?

If I was able to change it, I'd probably split the prepared and spontaneous casting into separate groups. The spontaneous casters would not have the prerequisite skill proficiencies of their casting traditions for their multiclass spellcasting feats. The prepared casters are about learning (wizard and witch need to learn spells with intelligence, clerics and druids need to learn about their deity or nature) and would require the skill proficiencies for the spellcasting feats. But these classes would have their associated skill automatically increase like the inventor and crafting as, again, they are about their knowledge in their respective fields.

That might be too complicated a change, but I thought it might be worth considering.


Temperans wrote:
Quick drawing and stowing being a combat loop like spellstrike or gunslinger reload is not cool. I am deeply afraid that paizo will just do that, and people will just say "this is good because of the flavor of this one character", and we end up with another bad class.

Honestly, this is the kind of mechanic I wish the gunslinger had. I know getting fighter proficiency was a major cost on the power budget, but I don't think it made up for the reload cost as you pointed out. I would have preferred something like A_G is suggesting where you always have good options regardless of what state you are in. My panache-esque idea was meant to be similar, but I think the modal idea is a little more simple and elegant.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

In order to encourage staying sheathed, I could see the class granting different options if you roll initiative while your weapon is sheathed. So you could do the classic stare down with a free demoralize option when you roll initiative with your weapon sheathed. Things like that.

I think a reload weapon options would be great to tie together the thematic similarities between the Samurai and Gunslinger from their respective films.

Alchemic_Genius wrote:
I do think that both sheathed and unsheathed should have their own benefits though; I've noticed that a lot of people complain about classes that have action taxes to do their cool thing, so I feel with the class being modal, but each mode is interesting would be more satisfying. Making use of open for a lot unsheathing techniques, and press for sheathing techniques might encourage this flow between states while making each state feel powerful.

I think you are correct in that the objective should be about making both modes interesting in their respective modes of play. They need to both be useful, but different from each other so that the contrast is interesting. A reason the player wants to "ebb and flow."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alchemic_Genius wrote:

Now, like I said before, my objection to naming a class or archetype "samurai" is because terms with mechanics attached become loaded in definition, so once one, mechanically, becomes a Samurai, the other cannot be a Samurai; which is why I propose the name kensei, a term thats loaded with mysticism.

Most people itching for a class want there to be mechanics for sheathing and unsheathing. While I've seen swashbulker's panache system mentioned, I actually feel like a slightly different approach is better; having cool moves you can do with your sword sheathed, and cool moves you can do with it drawn; but cause you to sheathe your sword. A (really) rough set of example feats:

Kensei Dedication
You gain quick draw with one group of weapons. If you have Attack of Opportunity, Retributive Strike, or a similar reaction that allows you to strike, you may draw a weapon from the chosen group as a free action before making that reaction's strike....

I understand the issue with the class name, though I think that's probably already true for other classes. Like introducing an NPC as a bard that is just a plain bard with no magic. Or a more western style religious monk instead of the warrior monk class. I'm not attached to naming the class Samurai, but I think it wouldn't be hard to differentiate the profession from the class in game if that's how things went.

I like your idea for how feats could work! One set of feats work with a sheathed weapon and the other set works with an unsheathed weapon. You pick between the two pools of feats, letting you dance back and forth between different abilities. I would love to see this fleshed out as a full class and not a dedication though. I wonder what class possible class paths this could branch into.


AnimatedPaper wrote:

While I agree with your premise, I would point out that “martial” now includes Magi, inventors, gunslingers, and is about to get Kineticists. So the scope of how far you can push Martials, especially with multi-action attacks and abilities, is not small. A cyclical resource or status, such as having panache, clearing a misfire, or, you know, sheathing your weapon, might provide the action cost needed to power these attacks.

Actually, now that I think about it, would a swashbuckler class path that provides panache when your weapon is sheathed be something that could be written? May as well throw all the ideas into the pot.

Yeah! Someone else likes my panache-esque idea! The reason I wouldn't want it on a Swashbuckler is that the flavors are radically different and it might need to change the class too much. For instance, aside from the weapon selection, you'd always have the ability to gain panache from tumbling through. With Swashbuckler, the idea is to show off so tumbling through makes sense. Here, the idea is to be super stoic and focused. I guess the question is if you could build enough different class paths using a sheathing panache to make a full class.

I could see paths focusing on specific weapon styles similar to the magus: two-handed focused, one-handed focused, and reload focused. Though the ideas of Kenshin Himura and Vash the Stampede makes me think a pacifist path could be cool.


Totally Not Gorbacz wrote:

The biggest problem with Samurai as a class (or any historic archetype, but Asian ones get it strongest because anime) is the gulf between "I want to play an aristocratic horseback fighter" people and "I want fight a full plate demon mask godkiller who does an Omnislash with his katana" folks.

I remember how in PF1 Paizo did the dragoon archetype that wanted to be both a historic dragoon and FF4 Dragoon. It didn't really work ;)

This is definitely true. However, the historically accurate fans seems to be satisfied with a correctly flavored fighter. Hence why a new class focusing on Omnislash.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alchemic_Genius wrote:
That's actually incomparable. Swashbucklers in media actually have distinctly different fighting styles than rogues in media; a distinct class absolutely makes sense.

I very much beg to differ. Back before the Swashbuckler existed in 1E, the Rogue has filled this niche since I have been playing (3.5). During the playtest, I made a very swashbuckling fighter using the Rogue multiclass. I would say the difference between him and the Swashbuckler are about the same as what others have been describing between the fighter and what they want from a Samurai.

Jacob Jett wrote:
You can still do that with the Quick Draw feat, so...mission accomplished.

Not quite. People want a reason to keep their weapon sheathed until they attack. This feat lets them do so in an emergency, but it is almost always more effective to just already have your weapon drawn so you can do more effective attacks, like power attack and swipe. As it is, quick draw only lets you make a normal strike. People want a mechanical reason to walk around with their weapon sheathed that doesn't purposefully hinder their ability to contribute.


Alchemic_Genius wrote:

As someone whis actually practiced iaijutsu and kendo, I always find it weird that people are unsatisfied with fighter with a katana for being a samurai. Iaijutsu, irl, is literally just the quick draw feat. Cavalier is great for getting a horse if you want a more historical depiction; marshal if you want to be a general.

If you want more pop culture, precision ranger works well for the "fells a target in one studied, practiced strike" kind of warrior; gravity weapon and that feat that lets you RK when you hunt prey are also thematically potent. Flurry works for the lighting fast type of fighting; it's especially great for the katana in one hand, wakazashi in the other style of fighting.

If you want full anime complete with lightning charged swords, magus works great; laughing shadow for the "teleports behind you" trope; inorexable iron for the "my cuts are so strong they have a shockwave" trope.

Bushido is a roleplay flavor, or you can go champion or cavalier if you mechanics tied to it

I think that is like how it was said a Swashbuckler is just a combat focused Rogue or a skill focused Fighter; it doesn't need its own class. But I think most people are pretty happy they are their own class. Paizo was able to build a unique gameplay loop using the Panache mechanic that would not have fit easily within Rogue or Fighter. While you CAN build a samurai as you described, I think it's worth considering what COULD you build if you wanted to dedicate the space for it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like the idea of a sort of inverse panache. Where panache is gained by doing something cool, what about gaining something like "focus" whenever you do nothing while your sword is sheathed. Like panache, you then enter a state where you get cool bonuses to things like defense and intimidate. And you can then spend your focus on a powerful attack that includes drawing your sword. Then you need to spend time to sheath to regain focus. Feats could build off of this allowing for drawing into multiple attacks and such. This encourages the feeling of letting your opponents come at you and punishing them severely for it.


Karmagator wrote:
But back to the point, if "dude that uses weapon X" is good enough for the fighter, one of the most competitive and well-liked classes in the game, then that is good enough for me, really.

That is part of my point. We already have the class that's really good with a weapon. If we spread the reload love around, I'm not sure how much difference there would be between a fighter that uses guns and the gunslinger.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think something to consider is that if guns are made more useable themselves, then gunslinger needs a new niche. If any class can use guns, then most of the gunslinger's mechanics of making guns useful becomes much less useful themselves. Honestly, I'm all for this.

Thinking about the thematic disconnects, I see a few different gun using fantasies in media: pirate, cowboy, hunter, the matrix, and inventor. I really think these are distinct enough that if guns were more viable on their own, they could be more readily distributed between different classes, like swashbuckler, ranger, rogue, monk, and inventor.

But then what does the gunslinger do that is unique if everyone can use guns? I'd be curious what people would want to see from a gunslinger that needs to do more than just bring guns up to competent. Personally, I'd design a class around drawing weapons. So we get a unique class around quick drawing guns, katanas, anything. Essentially an inverse to panache, where you gain power by standing still and being stoic, before exploding with quick and efficient actions.


Trixleby wrote:
I don't want Last of Us Zombies as fellow party members. They're gross and terrifying and we should kill them all with fire. Immediately.

If skeleton can be an ancestry, fungal zombie is on the table!


I wonder if you could do something like how the Duskwalkers cover different ways you could have died, with different feats to cover different ways you infected your host. For instance, you are just puppeting an already dead body like I suggested above. No moral issues there. Then a feat for symbiosis focusing on two minds in one body. And then maybe a parasite feat for a more hostile situation. I think that could be pretty cool.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Sanityfaerie wrote:
I'm just not sure how you run "I am a mind-controlling parasite who is infesting a human" and have them not be strongly biased towards evil.

What if it just needed dead bodies? You could play one that doesn't kill, it just uses the already dead.


Trixleby wrote:
Jedi Maester wrote:
I want a medium sized fungal ancestry. Is that plant enough?
Like Toad? From Mario? Mushroom people? Goomba?

Wouldn't they be small sized?

Charon Onozuka wrote:
Kobold Catgirl wrote:
Yeah, we have plenty of specific plant ancestries, but no plant heritages! What if I want to play a flower goblin?
This makes me want a versatile heritage were you are technically playing a parasitic plant that used [base ancestry] as their host.

Make this a fungal parasite and I'm so down!!!


I want a medium sized fungal ancestry. Is that plant enough?


Dubious Scholar wrote:
Ninjas are an interesting bit. A more dedicated archetype might be neat, though I think Monk already provides a lot of the typical implausible movement type stuff, so I'm not sure how I'd implement them? Monk feats to support it better (Remove the feat tax on the shuriken stance, seriously) maybe?

When I think ninja, I want monk abilities with sneak attack. The problem with using multiclass to achieve this is the multiclass rogue's sneak attack is really weak and the multiclass monk selects from abilities at lvl/2. Something that can harmonize these better I think would be ideal.


From a design perspective, Paizo seems to give each class a strong, unique mechanic that all builds revolve around. In that sense, outside of Naruto, the ninja's most iconic move (in media) is striking from the shadows. As this is close enough to sneak attack, I would struggle to see a reason to make a different class. But the rogue is missing the iconic mystic abilities similar to monk. I think a rogue subclass that gives access to these ki abilities would be ideal.

As for Samurai, there are two things I want: some quick draw with a melee for bonuses mechanics, and a reason to build a two hander that doesn't want armor. I think both could be handled with fighter feats.

New classes take a lot of space. I'd really like to see a Tian Xia take on all current classes, using subclasses and feats, to give more options to all characters from the continent.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sanityfaerie wrote:
Mostly, I look at the spaces yet left to fill, and I'm just not sure what would be enough.

Aberrations + Darklands?


Karmagator wrote:
Jedi Maester wrote:
Karmagator wrote:

I want reasonable reload weapon support for anyone that isn't the gunslinger, i.e. reload feats. And by reasonable I mean as a level 1 class feat and/or level 2 archetype dedication feat. Currently, the first available one is Running Reload at level 4 (!) for the ranger or 6 via archetypes. For what is essentially basic functionality, that is absurd.

My group wants to do an all-rogues-party for a low-level homebrew adventure, so I'm strongly considering Mastermind (with some adjustments for balance) to cover the ranged problems of my friends. A crossbow would fit very well narratively, but I'm pretty much discouraged from using it for mechanical reasons. Ofc, I'm gonna do it anyway, but that is still rather annoying.

Yes, please! Classes that need to have some form of decent reload weapon support (outside of gunslinger): Alchemist, Fighter, Inventor, Investigator, Magus, Rogue, and Swashbuckler!
I think thaumaturge, ranger and some flavours of warpriest would like to be added to that list ^^. And I think giving everyone else the option via a dedication should be done as well.

Ranger and Thaumaturge have a few options already, but they could use more for sure. And warpriest is definitely one I missed!

The thing about dedications is that mutliclassing limits you to half the class level. Compare getting shield feats between the Bastion archetype and the fighter multiclass. While some of these classes need something more dedicated, like Swashbuckler, Inventor, and Magus, having a reload weapon archetype to offer feats at more appropriate levels would be a huge help.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Karmagator wrote:

I want reasonable reload weapon support for anyone that isn't the gunslinger, i.e. reload feats. And by reasonable I mean as a level 1 class feat and/or level 2 archetype dedication feat. Currently, the first available one is Running Reload at level 4 (!) for the ranger or 6 via archetypes. For what is essentially basic functionality, that is absurd.

My group wants to do an all-rogues-party for a low-level homebrew adventure, so I'm strongly considering Mastermind (with some adjustments for balance) to cover the ranged problems of my friends. A crossbow would fit very well narratively, but I'm pretty much discouraged from using it for mechanical reasons. Ofc, I'm gonna do it anyway, but that is still rather annoying.

Yes, please! Classes that need to have some form of decent reload weapon support (outside of gunslinger): Alchemist, Fighter, Inventor, Investigator, Magus, Rogue, and Swashbuckler!


4 people marked this as a favorite.

All this investigator talk has me wanting a few new methodologies for them:

An archaeologist methodology that can be built more around exploration. More tools for dealing with traps, finding hidden places, and maneuvering through dangerous terrain. This could probably be handled with just an Empiricist with some new feats, but I'd be curious what could be done to make something unique here that feels closer to Indiana Jones than Sherlock.

A monster hunter methodology that is more akin to Van Helsing. I know many wanted an Int based Thaumaturge, but I think this would actually be a better fit. It'd be nice to have some way for the investigator to learn monster weakness, and then have access to triggering them. It wouldn't be as strong as the Thaumaturge as it can't make a new weakness when there isn't one. But a way to use intelligence to know and trigger weaknesses would be a cool niche.

Following with dark archive classes, a psychic investigator. This is a classic trope that I think would be a fun build. Maybe something similar to the Eldritch Trickster that gives you the psychic dedication? Or something more specific to the investigator like the chemist methodology (as compared to just getting the alchemist dedication).

I think these could really round out the investigator so it isn't as pigeon holed into just different shades of Sherlock.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This "unsheathe style" is actually what I wanted the Gunslinger to be: link.

I love how similar samurai and western movies are and thought it would be a cool way to keep the gunslinger less weapon specific. My thought was that sheathing would be the equivalent to reloading (needing an action in between attacks) so a unique gameplay loop would be able to encompass both. Based on the polls, it looks like I was in the minority.

I still dream about a Guns and Gears with the above class so that firearm mechanics could be easily shared with all classes without encroaching on the Gunslinger's niche.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

If I wanted low level mythic, I'd want something akin to superheroes. The two I have in mind are: a really powerful single ability, or a panic button that upgrades everything.

For really powerful single ability, I could see something like at will invisibility, time manipulation, or super strength. It's enough to redefine your build, but your class still has an impact. Especially when your abilities don't come into play.

For the panic button, it'd need to be a last ditch effort with consequences, but would be ridiculous when used. Something capable of really fighting high level stuff, but limited by use number. That way, you're still mostly defined by your class, until you press the button.

I could see these using the archetype system to play on top of your class.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
keftiu wrote:
Jedi Maester wrote:
keftiu wrote:
Jedi Maester wrote:
That would be great for the alternate personality being another creature, I just hope they also include an alchemist version for the mad scientists out there!
Please tread at least a little carefully with the "evil alternate personality" trope. Lots of people out there have DID or other conditions that get stereotyped as making them dangerous, and they're real human beings, even if Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is a classic.
Good point! Thank you for the suggestion!
Thank you for being so receptive! I've got quite a few loved ones who deal with psychosis, so it's a pet cause of mine - I really, really appreciate it.

No problem. Outside of your very valid point, it also opens up the plethora of possibilities for any kind of alignment situations! I would never call neither Banner nor the Hulk evil, and they should definitely be included within this concept.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
keftiu wrote:
Jedi Maester wrote:
That would be great for the alternate personality being another creature, I just hope they also include an alchemist version for the mad scientists out there!
Please tread at least a little carefully with the "evil alternate personality" trope. Lots of people out there have DID or other conditions that get stereotyped as making them dangerous, and they're real human beings, even if Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is a classic.

Good point! Thank you for the suggestion!


Kekkres wrote:
Jedi Maester wrote:


I know this is probably on a lot of lists, but a mechanical way to play essentially two characters that swap between one body. Looking at Jekyll/Hyde, Banner/Hulk, etc. I know the mutagenist exists, but I want a more extreme character swap. A completely different play style with new strengths and weaknesses. I want to feel like I'm a different person, with even a new alignment. I know it's suggested to take the barbarian dedication on alchemist, but then my scientist side would also have barbarian abilities. I'd like to see the two personalities more segregated. I'd be happy with just focusing this as an alchemist option, but opening this up to an archetype with more mixing and matching would allow something closer to the movie Split, which would be pretty cool.
I suspect synthasist summoner where the summon is a transformation rather than a separate body would be good at filling that role, once that class archetype actually exists at least

That would be great for the alternate personality being another creature, I just hope they also include an alchemist version for the creative scientists out there!

Edited to be more inclusive!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

A few things I'd like to see:

I want an option that lets me play similar to the final fight in the first PotC movie. Particularly Jack's style. So a lot of sword play, and then finishing with a strong, single gun shot. I think this could be replicated with a Swashbuckler feat that lets you perform a finisher with a one handed range weapon? The focus would still be on sword play most of the time using it as a set up for the gun. The reason I don't think the Drifter Gunslinger quite does this for me is because it is more 50/50 on sword and gun. I'd like to use the gun so little that the need to reload isn't an issue, a bandolier with multiple guns would work fine. And I want the panache mechanic so that the gun needs a set up, forcing me into sword combat for general fighting.

I know this is probably on a lot of lists, but a mechanical way to play essentially two characters that swap between one body. Looking at Jekyll/Hyde, Banner/Hulk, etc. I know the mutagenist exists, but I want a more extreme character swap. A completely different play style with new strengths and weaknesses. I want to feel like I'm a different person, with even a new alignment. I know it's suggested to take the barbarian dedication on alchemist, but then my scientist side would also have barbarian abilities. I'd like to see the two personalities more segregated. I'd be happy with just focusing this as an alchemist option, but opening this up to an archetype with more mixing and matching would allow something closer to the movie Split, which would be pretty cool.

I know living vessel is an archetype, but I really want to see it as a full class with way more options. I think the idea is way too awesome to not be available as the main aspect of your character. I'm expanding this to be any situation where your primary abilities are through another creature that is some how connected you your body. Inspiration to me comes from Blue Beetle from Young Justice (just replace the technology with magic.) I think this would be best as a bounded caster/gish. So you can emphasize body transformation as a martial or channeling spells from the entity. Maybe this could be done as a summoner, but I don't want this to be full body swapping like above. More a constant push and pull between the two about how much control you are willing to give the entity. Like letting it give you a tentacle arm, but still keeping the rest of you you.

I know it's from a TTRPG, but it isn't in PF1 so maybe that's okay? It's the Beguiler from 3.5! You can get kind of close by taking rogue dedication on a wizard, but it's missing my favorite mechanic: your spell DCs are higher when you target a flat-footed opponent! It was so fun to play like a rogue, trying to set up your opponents up, but then hit them with debuff instead of just straight damage. And with PF2's multiple success levels, I think this would be even cooler!

There are others for sure, but these are at the top of my head right now.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Currently running a game where I'm having to home-brew laser guns. Clamoring for a technology guide ASAP!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I hope Drow are their own ancestry so we can get a half-Drow human heritage. That's what I'm mostly interested in.

A half-drow bodyguard (drifter gunslinger for full rapier + hand crossbow) to her matron, trusted because her half-blood meant she could never gain the throne herself. Then her half sister assassinates their matron and takes over the throne. Given a death sentence to clear out those loyal to the old matron, she is on the run seeking vengeance against her sister.


Michael Sayre wrote:
Sanityfaerie wrote:
Part of me would really like to see a martial one-handed crossbow, but I'm pretty sure that Drow Shootist means that for balance reasons that's never going to happen.

We've actually already shown the art for one of the new martial one-handed crossbows! I think it was in the Discord channels during PaizoCon so I don't know if you can still find the teaser or not, but I know we showed the rotary bow and mentioned that it's a one-handed capacity crossbow.

(Drow Shootist is pretty specific to hand crossbows and repeating hand crossbows, so balance ripples are unlikely, and also it's an uncommon AP archetype; it's not going to dictate core design options. If there was a balance concern blocking off an entire category of weapons caused by an uncommon AP backmatter archetype, we'd most likely errata the archetype.)

Awesome! I hope this comes with some support for different classes using reload weapons. I've been wanting a swashbuckler that can use firearms as a finisher. That way you can recreate the ending to the first Pirates of the Caribbean, epic sword fight followed by a single shot to finish the fight.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I know people want some big event to explain a change in why they are now playable, but I don't think it's necessary. If this was the core rule book, then like goblins you'd need something as the expectation would be that not evil Sekmin are common. But if made a rare ancestry in a side book with an explanation that this would be extremely uncommon, I see no reason not to let them be playable as is. I don't need 10% of them to be different, just one. That uniqueness in itself is part of the fun.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Ly'ualdre wrote:
I'd love to see Black Blood return in an Aberration book. Good place to cover the Dominion of the Black a bit as well. An in depth look at Alghollthu seems like a given. In fact, I feel like an Aberration book would likely focus on examining some of the more major abberant creatures found on Golarion and have player facing options that stem from them or are good to combat them.

If Neothelids are included, yes please! I've always been fascinated by the brief mentions of the ancient war between the Alghollthu and Neothelids. Would love a book that fleshes out both with other aberrations.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Just wanted to add another voice asking for Darklands ancestries! Would love a Lost Omens: Darklands book!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Claxon wrote:
Squiggit wrote:

The original D&D axis was basically LG to CE as a straight line and it kind of shows, with how a lot of CN characters are CE light or how LE often feels more like NE with a different paint job.

That said I think you're overstating a few things. Proteans specifically dislike purely destructive acts of Chaos, it's why they're considered enemies of demons, qlippoths and don't get along well with hunduns.

Quote:
And I have never understood the association with chaos and entropy
I mean, entropy is the break down of ordered systems into disorder. That's literally what the word means.

Technically true, although what people might think of as ordered and disordered might not match up so it can lead to incorrect conclusions at time.

For example, one day our universe will reach a state of thermodynamic equilibrium which will also be a state of maximum entropy in which the heat energy of the universe will be evenly distributed through everywhere.

Personally, I find the concept of the equilibrium state to be very orderly, so the words to describe it breakdown for me on a personal level.

Anyways, you have an accurate description.

I actually agree with this. From a physics perspective, entropy is a result of statistics from high sample size systems. For instance, imagine a room where all the air is on one side and a vacuum is on the other. Entropy is increased by the even spreading out of the air through the room.

If you ask me, any situation where the air clumps at specific points in the room would be chaotic in nature. It's unpredictable and not uniform. But that reduces the entropy. Only in the most uniform spreading of the air is entropy maximized. That seems more lawful to me.

Though maybe the lesson learned here is that when chaos is too great, the randomness averages out and suddenly becomes lawful.


Thanks for all the input! I have a related question to my dilemma. I know the pistolero is meant to be the obvious choice for TWF, but how well does the sniper work? I know most build it towards one big attack, but is there anything stopping me from using it effectively with two crossbows? I'd prefer to utilize the stealth focus rather than the Charisma focus.


aobst128 wrote:
Paired shots doesn't add map for the second shot and counts as 2 attacks afterwards. Mitigating map is more valuable than attacking a lot. Especially with the gunslingers proficiency. If it's just the number of attacks that matter to you, ranger is probably the best bet. There's "impossible volly" at 18th level that could potentially empty both clips of your crossbows in one round.

Impossible volley would be awesome! But it apparently requires a volley weapon, which hand crossbows aren't. I would love a way to empty both clips in an all out manner. I need to balance attack number and MAP, but I wanted to know what the limit is.

I agree the gunslinger is the better choice. Now I just need to add in the bounty hunting aspects.


aobst128 wrote:
If you're focussing on dual wielding repeating crossbows, gunslinger is the way to go with paired shots. Either pick up unconventional weaponry or take advanced shooter at 6th level. Pistolero or drifter could work depending on how much you intend to be in melee.

I just found the gunslinger Two-Weapon Fusillade, which lets me attack twice for one action. It's flourish, so I can only do it once. Then I can shoot two more times like normal for a total of four shots. Is there a way for me to get any more shots off in a round? And without ranger's flurry, is there a way to mitigate that MAP?


So here is a build I've always wanted to play, and I'm curious if/how it can work. And with Guns n Gears, I think this is its best chance. The idea is a Half-Orc bounty hunter who specializes in using crossbows like guns in a western. The style I'd like to use is dual wielding repeating hand crossbows to make as many ranged attacks as possible. I could see him sneaking up on a bounty, kicking down the door, using a round of shots to take out the henchmen, and then focusing on capturing the bounty alive.

My top two class picks are the ranger and gunslinger. The gunslinger seems obvious as it's built to use crossbows, but its abilities are more built around reloading often, which I won't be doing every turn. The ranger gets flurry to help with MAP and the thematic Hunt Prey to help with tracking down targets. But its crossbow feats are also more concerned with reloading every turn. Neither seem to have a way to really capitalize on using two ranged weapons.

What's the best way to see this idea realized? Is it worth it compared to other similar builds? We'll be using free archetypes, so they are an option too.

1 to 50 of 183 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>