Nicolas Paradise's page

So what if Cackle was like lingering composition and allowed you to make a check(relevant to the spell being maintained i.e. Arcana, Occultism, Religion, Nature) to on a Crit success the effect doesn't need to be sustained for a round. That way a witch can juggle multiple effect like they could in 1e but at the risk of failure ending the effect immediately and making the target immune for 24 hours.

Be OoT Link. Tumbel is your primary form of movement. Otherwise take "hardcore parkour!" as a lifestyle mantra.

LINK
While I am not sure the 2e crb specifically states what most deitys holy symbols are. The images on page 437 of the crb are the holy symbol of the gods presented there.

However a cleric can take THIS feat to use a shield or weapon as a holy symbol.

Typo in the Centaurs Gear. Has a longsword instead of halberd.

I agree with the sentiment of OP. The fluff in these books are great as well as the art being amazing. However, there just isn't enough crunch to go with the fluff and some of it is not only situational it is just bad. The worst part is the price per page compared to their equivalent 1E Product being close to double. From one of the recent streams it seems like these two books were likely intended to be one but the release schedule of 2E so far has been too tight so it was release what they had or nothing. I really hope the future books in the line are larger and have a better value because the price point for these books is bonkers for their current size and offerings.

I love puzzles!

You forgot something.

So the the new Lost Omens Character guide has the Lizardfolk which we know shows some vastly different art for different individual Lizardfolk. The Lizardfolk are all one species with a shared language but Lizards in the real world are different species and only related in that they are reptiles.

Anywho with the given different art examples would it be reasonable to assume that Lizardfolk can have outward physical traits of any reptile? Could they have chameleon eyes? Or could they have a wide spikey head and color changing beard like a Bearded dragon? Can they have a smooth body with splotchy coloration and a spiky tail and be strictly vegetarian like Uromastyx?

As a forever GM in my own games I say yes but in setting is this the case? Looking at the art in the book there are 5 lizardfolk no two of which look alike. One looks like an Iguana another like some kind of Frilled Water Dragon, The Cliffstrider looks like a dinosaur and not any lizard I am familiar with, and the Sandstrider looks similar to a Crocodile Skink in head shape and eye markings and the wetlander again doesn't resemble any real lizards I know and looks more like a dinosaur.

So I am a bit confused and disappointed by some of the content in this book. It takes TONS of page space to mention all kinds of heritages for Half-Elves and Half-Orcs but than doesn't actually offer them as heritage options that have any game mechanic differences. Hollowborn(Half-Drow) is mentioned but it isn't something you can choose and has no ancestry feats, compared to 1E such a character can get Darkvision and Light Blindness instead of low-light.

Also two pages are in my opinion wasted on listing a bunch of other common ancestries such as Tiefling and Tengu that exist around the inner sea but doesn't give them as options. This seems confusing and misleading to me this is supposed to be a character guide offering players options for character building and it offers them things they can't have. Who thought this was a good idea?

I love fluff and art but not if it comes at the cost of something else. With the amount of space wasted in this book mentioning things that than can't be used there could easily be many more pages of archetype and ancestry feats. I mean I constantly hear Paizo designers complaining that they have so much stuff they have to cut from books because there isn't room and than you do stuff like this. Not to mention the 1-2 full color advertisements at the back of each book. Why? The bulk of your business is direct to consumer do marketing someplace else.

Maybe I am alone on this but I have sowed these books to my gaming group who love 2E and the actual gaming content but they all think these Lost Omens books are too expensive for what they contain especially compared to some of their 1E equivalent books. The Lost omens World guide which don't get me wrong is an awesome book is crap compared to the Inner Sea World guide The lost omens world guide is almost twice the cost per page and should be closer to $22 than the $35 that all the books in this line seem to be. If the price per content difference is because these are hardcover now I would rather have softcover books at a lesser cost.

I really really like 2E and am subbed but if this line continues to offer more waste I may just drop back to only the AP sub and just wait for the expanded content to hit AoN.

Edit* In addition, am I correct in reading that both Bestiaries, the 5e version and the Pathfinder 1.0 version don't come with PDFs of their own?

I have the 1e bestiary in my backed add-ons and it lists a pdf as well as physical copy. Although when these become available for general retail I am sure the PDF and physical book will be separate items not bundled together like most paizo products.

And actually, the hero point token looks exactly like the Pathfinder Hero Point Tokens that you can buy on this site. I already have 12 of them.

This is untrue the coins are exclusive Kingmaker ones. they just haven't been made yet so the art on the backer page uses the generic preview art.

Yah, I feel like this is an oversight and as a GM who started play with a deep understanding of 1E and a decent understanding of playtest and kind of just play by ear and go to the book when needed for 2e so far was surprised when I ran into something calling for a save DC especially since monsters also don't have them listed. And while I assumed what it was quickly I couldn't find the rule in the book and actually found the answer faster googling and finding a post asking the same confused question.

I too would like some clarity sooner rather than later. I am not going to stop buying or playing but it feels like 2E dropped and than support for it other than new stuff coming went away.

Don't get me wrong I am a fan of new stuff and catch up content to get some 1e fan favorites back but if the base is broken(which maybe it isn't but it has a few nasty cracks)no amount of new stuff will fix that. 1E still has tons of stuff that gets ruels questions daily on the forums that never get answered and I don't want to see that happen with 2E.

It matches the Sandpoint book map and the book has quests and hooks from 1 to late teens so this will be great for a more free form game set in sandpoint.

The bestiary hobgoblins made a terrible first impression of the new art direction. I feel it's more constructive to point out why rather than simply allow Jacobs to be confused as to why people don't like goblinoids who look like goblinoids. I don't claim to speak for everyone upset by the new look but I really do not feel my criticism was out of line.

I disagree. I think the bestiary Hobs look awesome. The General is wearing complex armor that a standard goblin wouldn't is wielding a martial weapon not a cobbled together dogslicer or horsechopper. All of your complaints are subjective. Maybe not you particularly but I feel a lot of the dislike comes from that 1E Hobgoblins were a continuation of how they have been in D&D for a long time. Well this isn't D&D these are Paizo hobgoblins not D&D hobgoblins and I for one love paizo and pathfinder the more they separate themselves from WotC. All the D&D tropes are old and boring. Let Paizo do Paizo and if in your game that isn't how you like hobgoblins well then good thing there are decades of that old style of art to work from to make your game yours.

I find it odd people don't complain about the changes in other races like the fact that elves have solid colored eyes which changed really early in 1E or the new look of dwarves with the pronounced T shaped brow ridge.

Personally I don't want half casters. If you want to limit the power of spells give them specific lists or less slots. A full caster magus properly balanced would be my dream.

A sticky thread or a dedicated updates page even if it is just a basic list from the devs would be amazing and in good faith.

I am the eternal GM of my group and I am a paizo fan and try to follow as many things as possible but it is hard to know them all.

I heard about simple/unarmed proficiency.

Heard about bulk on adventures kit.

Heard about wizard first level feat fix and sorcerer resolve fix.

But I didn't hear about the alchemist bulk fux mentioned by op.

Also mutagenist is still just outright broken/missing features.

In my FoP group the alchemist bulk thing would be nice to know about because there is a 12 str bomber in the group so he is at encumbrance if he makes like half of his daily items.

It should list Primal Focus as the prerequisite. It is probably just a typo.

I assumed it was for things like darkvision and low-light vision.

As a GM most of the time I enjoy this change greatly. It makes at least base power level known.

In PF1 even when I try to limit available things like races, classes and archetypes to keep an more or less even curve in the group there is just so much content out there that some players still suprise me and when I think oh you must be streaching RAW vs RAI and find there are just things I don't know because there is so much available. But now if I say anything common plus xyz is available anything else you must ask makes things very easy.

And for anyone who thinks this is a bad system or it makes you jump through hoops read the first rule in the front of the book. If it isn't fun change it.

I have had entire encounters ruined by op stuff. And I have ruined encounters with op things as well. And I am not talking about being clever that I actually like and encourage and reward. But deus ex machina spells and items from the n'th dimension in a 30 page splat book from 8 years ago that I didn't say was not game feels cheap sometimes.

Also it feels like I can actually reward casters now. In 1e loot pretty much was here is a pile of coins a few items for the martials and oh some scrolls and partially used wands for the caster that he doesn't want. Now I can look at their spell list and say oh here are some things they don't have due to rarity that fit the story blah blah and reward them.

I am rambling. I like the system both as a GM and a Player.

Can anyone link to the rules for 2E society? I always wanted to play run/play it in 1E. And can anyone answer if I can run society at home or does it need to be at a flgs for it to count as society play?

Nicolas Paradise wrote:

Pumpkinhead11 wrote:

Azurespark wrote:

Rycke wrote:

That's not really true about the alchemist. You only need the infusion discovery if you want others to be able to the alchemist's job for them. A cure light wounds extract does not heal you for 1d8+level. It allows you to touch someone and heal THEM for that amount.

Sorry what? Infusion clearly says it allows a non-alchemist to benefit from an infused extract.

** spoiler omitted **

Yes, it would allow someone else to use the spell Cure Light Wounds; like the person said.

When laying your hand upon a living creature, you channel positive energy that cures 1d8 points of damage +1 point per caster level (maximum +5)

An alchemist would not need Infusion to make that extract useful.

Yes they would see my above rules quote. Extracts always ONLY target the alchemist. All extracts change the target to you.

So do Potions, all the way back to 1st Edition D&D.

Also true.

So another one that maybe isn't a feat tax but feels like in now that 2e rolled it onto weapons is weapon finesse.

Azurespark wrote:

Rycke wrote:

That's not really true about the alchemist. You only need the infusion discovery if you want others to be able to the alchemist's job for them. A cure light wounds extract does not heal you for 1d8+level. It allows you to touch someone and heal THEM for that amount.

Sorry what? Infusion clearly says it allows a non-alchemist to benefit from an infused extract.

** spoiler omitted **

Yes, it would allow someone else to use the spell Cure Light Wounds; like the person said.

When laying your hand upon a living creature, you channel positive energy that cures 1d8 points of damage +1 point per caster level (maximum +5)

An alchemist would not need Infusion to make that extract useful.

Yes they would see my above rules quote. Extracts always ONLY target the alchemist. All extracts change the target to you.

That's not really true about the alchemist. You only need the infusion discovery if you want others to be able to the alchemist's job for them. A cure light wounds extract does not heal you for 1d8+level. It allows you to touch someone and heal THEM for that amount.

This is not correct

An extract is “cast” by drinking it, as if imbibing a potion—the effects of an extract exactly duplicate the spell upon which its formula is based, save that the spell always affects only the drinking alchemist.

Back to topic.

My advice for running premade adventures is to make sure that you are familiar with the whole book and it's place in the whole path. No you don't have to memorize everything but being able to respond to questions and keep the game moving in a timely manner insead of having to spend 5mins reading a page between each event is when your players will start playing games on their phone or chatting out of character really derailing a game.

Also try and know what your players can do so that if a turn comes up and a player isn't sure what to do you can be like "Your an expert in survival right? Maybe you can find some tracks!" Instead of staring at them for 2 minutes while they flip their sheet 10 times.

Also always follow the first rule.

Is anyone else getting dragonlance vibes from this module. A bit of a mix of Chronicles and some of War of the Souls with a bit of the terrible live action D&D movie thrown in.

Any good info about rangers? I was very disappointed with them in the playtest despite loveing the rest of 2e A LOT. But they seem like they don't do anything better than other classes(which makes me sad because they were my favorite core class in 1e and 3.5 and didn'thave to take away fromtheir own power to have a strong Animal companion) . Also does an animal companion actually look like a viable build since you lose out feats on your self to keep them up to level?

I feel like for the most part these are all good things. The less bulk without str investment means you equipment and consumables are actually a resource instead of just having 2 of everything in the equipment chapter just because you can like in 1e.

I wish people other than rogues could get dex to damage but I suppose there is still opportunity that class archetypes will add more dex based builds in the future.

I mentioned in another thread that I at least want to try converting my current 1e RotR game to 2e. With that info I want to brainstorm on how to best convert each party member.

1a. Endria Aasimar Chosen One Paladin of Shelyn. Uses a Glaive one handed with shield brace and drops the shield to switch to two handed and gain reach when needed. Has a rabbit familiar granted by chisen one.

1b. Likely conversion Champion(Redeemer of Shelyn) maybe Wizard dedication to pick up a familiar and get the shield cantrip? Main issues not sure if there is a way to use a two hander with a shield in 2e yet. Also familiar won't have the same access to divine abilities as in 1e.

2a. Cassisus Human Transmuter Wizard(Thassilonion Specialist)/Eldrich Knight/Arcane archer. Focused on ysing his spells to buff himself and mess up the battlefield while supplementsing with archery.

2b. No big worries here Trandmuter school wizard with fighter dedication should cover this build pretty well. Also the groups main crafter.

3a. Rufus Half-Elf Cleric of Calistra(Evangilist archetype and Evangelist Prestige Class). Mostly functions as the face of the party. Has leadership with human oracle cohort acting as party healer.

3b. Cleric with Bard dedication would cover everything but leadership which is a big part of his build. I know 2e doesn't currently have an equivalent but I don't see any reason leadership can't just function without the need for feats. Bad guys don't need feats to get henchmen so why should players?

4a. Llib Human Unchaine Monk. Focused on dragon style and a few ki and quignog powers to boost his murder fisting like acid ki strike and barkskin.

4b. 2e monk seems to be unchained monk from the get go. Straight 1 to 1 conversion swapping maybe a ki power or 2 seems easy.

5a. Arcadia Human Ranger(Guide) dual wielder.
5b. 2e Base ranger is closer to the guide archetype than a normal ranger anyway seems like an easy conversion.

And last but most problematic my powergamer.
6a Hubert Human Investigator(empiricist)/Master of Many Styles/Fighter. Uses empiricist to use int for most skills. Uses master of many styles to stack crane style and kirin style. He also has a homunculus and a wood golem from promethean alchemist(subbed 2 of his early empiricist discoveries and all posion lore and use to get an alchemist archetype at my approval.)
6b. Alchemist with Rogue dedication can work for a lot of what he does. but being able to make constructs and be either a tank or burst damage dealer depending on his stance would be hard to emulate.

Thoughts?
Edit: Forgive grammar and spelling. Typed on phone at work.

https://imgur.com/a/ZOD1t56

Near the back of these images, yes.

There seem to only be 2 options for the alchemist. And unlike the wizard in the playtest they have no feats to increase the number of familiar features they get. Unless that has changed and how many features they get scales with level. I mean I am sure in the future there may be a class archetype or new feats that can allow stuff like a 1e promethean alchemist. Heres hoping an actual homunculus is a option for creation from the bestiry or a magic item.

There are no feats to add to or advance the Alchemical Familiar? That makes the familair pretty weak no?

Are these prestige archetypes gonna have pages on AoN/Srd? And are there more? Two seems like a small amount to cut.

A bit flowery for such a shorty story. However I love that she basically dares her foes to insult her to feed her rage.

I know the page kind of says it but to confirm this will be in the AP Subscription and 1e Sub will rollover into 2e AP Sub when Tyrants Grasp is done?

I have a Chosen one Paladin of Shelyn in the party of my current Rise of the Runelords game. He has a Rabbit as his emissary(because it is one of Shelyn's sacred animals even though people usually think of birds for her). Any way when a chosen one becomes 7th(Party is currently 4th) they get to upgrade their emissary as per improved familiar. This player really likes the aesthetic and idea of his rabbit at the moment and he selected ahead of time that when he becomes 7th that an Agathion, Silvanshee would be the best pick for a Paladin of Shelyn with Redemption being a big part of her profile. But I wonder if I can't change or create an Agathion that is a rabbit instead of a cat both to keep the aesthetic and maybe tool it a little more to what an emissary is designed for by changing it's SLA's to be more suited for getting into and out of the combats to better use lay on paws and guidance and than get back to safety since rabbits aren't know for their bravery but are territorial and community driven. Also some fun fluff would be that it likes to eat even though as an outsider it doesn't need to, but like a real rabbit it has a fast "metabolism" and if not doing something constructive it eats out of boredom.

Anywho would like some suggestions as far as stats and abilities. It is easy enough to leave everything a Silvanshee has and just call it a rabbit but I would prefer a few better thematic choices. Like maybe having Expeditious Retreat a few times a day instead of Dimension door 1/day. Maybe have a reroll on Init to reflect rabbits ability to quickly react to danger? IDK Suggestions open.

I was re-reading through order of the stick and immediately thought of PF2e when I got to this comic.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0012.html

SNIP

Somebody new is also gonna be on the throne in Korvosa...not sure if they've got a canonical answer for that one, but ours will definitely be different since they're planning to make it a PC.

Nicolas Paradise wrote:

N N 959 wrote:

stuff

Just wanted to say you are my favorite person. Ranger being a worse fighter or druid in PF2 has made me immensely sad and you hit every nail on the head with these points.

I'm glad my issues are resonating with other players. Mark Seifter doesn't seem to want to participate in a discussion about Rangers on the forums, but at least someone at Paizo is listening.

For reasons I can't understand, Paizo nerfed Rangers pretty hard, especially when it comes to utility and versatility. One of the biggest problems with Rangers in PF1 was that the whole tracking and outdoor thing was under-leveraged. Tracking could be so more useful and beneficial in and out of combat, but WotC didn't formalize it. Worse, Paizo nerfed tracking when they reduced the information conveyed. Why? Why not allow tracking an animal to provide a lot of useful information and/or pre-combat benefits?

Another major issue I've had is the loss of spells. There is a vocal minority of posters on the forums who clamor for spells to be removed. I suspect the main reason is that spells for a Ranger in PF1 where poorly implemented. You got like so few spells and you have to choose it in advance? What? Naturally people felt that getting rid of spells for something more useful.

The fix is to give the Ranger spontaneous casting from the entire list. You're still only getting one spell, but now you have a LOT more versatility and can actually use so many of the spells that were simply to situational to prepare in advance. Instead, Paizo got rid of spells and give the class nothing. Why? The Ranger was never overpowered with spells. How is the Ranger better without spells? I simply don't get it.

One of the ways I play Ranger in PF1 and even in 3.5 is to grab the opposite feats to what the combat style grants. That way I feel like the martial equivalent of what the bard is to casters. In fact thinking of Iconic Rangers like Strider and Drizt and maybe a little bit of Tanis, they always feel like they can do anything they need to do just not quite as good as someone more focused at it. Strider could hit any target just as good as legolas but not as many times. He could trow down just as hard as Borimir just not against an army alone. He can charm animals like an Elf but maybe not ride the Lord of the Forest like Thranduil.

I was actually talking about this with a friend who doesn't play hybrids in PF1 because he feels Why play a Ranger when I can play a fighter and do it better if I want to be martial or a druid if I want to be naturey. Where as I would rather be really good at being a martial but also have something to do out of combat, like track, hunt provide food and gather intel from my surroundings. Have my AC talk with animals of its kind to learn about the enemy hideout. Send a pet bird out to scout when a noise is heard in the distance and speak with it to find out that a group of enemies are on our tail.

With the removal or spells and the lack of fighting styles(and the complete destruction of useful AC's) in PF2 I am more inclined to have my friends mentality. I will just play a fighter. At least there I have cool Stances, Opens and Pushes to play with. I am still not sold on the new druid but at least the storm druid makes caster focused druids doable instead of wishing you had a cleric or Wizard.

I took a look at the changes and only focused on the Ranger.

1. Hunt Target in Exploration mode. I appreciate that Paizo has listened to suggestions that this be made possible. But the trigger should be whenever a Ranger tracks a target, not just when using tracking in Exploration mode. Why? Because the whole mode thing is too formalistic. You're acknowledging that tracking something should trigger Hunt Target, so why limit it to a mode?

2. Hunter Edges Sure, I like the idea of different paths that are somewhat analogous to combat styles except....you juxtaposed a non-combat option. I fundamentally disagree with this approach. Give Rangers three combat option and let them choose one. Then give them three non-combat options and let them choose one.

Stalker does nothing for combat and it's debatable whether it's of any substantive benefit, or rather, it's so context dependent, it's impossible for players to be certain it will actually do anything. Worse, the text says this:

Quote:

You have additional benefits in outwitting and evading your target.

Except evading one's Hunted Target doesn't make in-game sense. In addition, the game rarely, if ever, rewards the party for avoiding contact with hostiles. Even if you use this to create a scout, individual scouting is so discouraged against, this ability is totally going to be underutilized compared to the others. Look, this is a good choice if it's juxtaposed to other non-combat choices.

Precision As others have mentioned, I don't get Paizo's philosophy with this non-scaling damage modifiers. Why create an ability that gets worse and worse as you level up? At level 1, this is thing is incredibly powerful. By level 8, it's laughable. You'd adding an average of 3.5 points of damage per round (with no accuracy modifier). Sure, it might be be more damage than Flurry, but psychologically, you're getting worse as you are supposed to be getting better.

3. Fundamental...

Just wanted to say you are my favorite person. Ranger being a worse fighter or druid in PF2 has made me immensely sad and you hit every nail on the head with these points.

Hello all, I wanted to make both for players and GM's a ranger Archetype for the Sable Company Marine. The Feat suggested in the players guide feels like a bad carry over from the OGL version of the Module and the Golorian Day archetype breaks later class features without compensation. As both a GM and a player for going on 20+ years now I feel I am personally Equipped to make this right so here is my current build and I will place my reasoning for each change after the fact.

Sable Company Marine
The Sable Company is an elite group of Rangers, Paladins and Soldiers under the command of the Seneschal of Castle Korvosa. These men and women protect the skies and waters of Korvosa as well as its surrounding territory. They are most known for riding Hippogryphs around the city.

• A Sable company marine gains Knowledge(Local) as a class skill

• Hippogryph Mount
  At 4th level when a sable company marine gets hunters bond he/she must select animal companion. They must also select a hippogryph as this companion. A sable company marine gets Monstrous mount as a bonus feat even if they don't meet the prerequisites to make this choice of companion possible.

  This ability replaces Wild Empathy and Endurance. This ability also replaces but otherwise functions as hunters bond for a ranger this level and a sable company marine treats their druid level equal to their ranger level -3 for determining stats and abilities for their Hippogryph.

• Combat Style
  A Sable company Marine must select either Archery, Crossbow or Mounted Combat as their combat style

  This ability changes but otherwise functions as combat style

• For Korvosa!
  At 3rd level a Sable Company Marine gains Favored Community(Korvosa) as a bonus feat. The bonuses provided by this feat is increased by +2 at 8th and every 5 levels thereafter(13th,18th)

  This ability replaces Favored Terrain at 3rd, 8th, 13th and 18th levels

• Mount Mastery
  At 7th level a Sable Company Marine gains Monstrous Mount Mastery as a bonus feat even if they don't meet the prerequisites. Additionally they receive the mastery bonus of this feat for hippogryphs when they acquire this ability even if their effective druid level is not 7th.

  This ability replaces Woodland Stride

My reasons and justifications

• Knowledge(local) As rangers who literally fly over and work exclusively within and around Korvosa this seems like a no brainer to me.

• Wild Empathy and Endurance - I feel having a hippogryph is a strong enough class option that it should have a cost and Endurance and Wild Empathy are both decent abilities that don't fit the theme of a city bound marine in my opinion and since endurance is itself a feat feel it is a good cost to grant Monstrous Mount as a bonus feat to facilitate getting a Hippogryph Companion.

• Favored Terrain - The Golorian Day archetype for the Sable company gave the hippogryph companion as a trade out for favored terrain. As the literal sky patrol and part protectors of the city if feels silly that they wouldn't be able to choose a favored terrain(likely urban), also removing favored terrain later breaks Camouflage and Hide in Plain Sight and offers no reasonable compensation for those iconic abilities. As a compromise both for a powerful companion and not ruining Camouflage and Hide in Plain Sight, Favored community allows a sable company marine to be an expert of their terrain while specifically in Korvosa and my modification making it grow like favored terrain but removing the ability to gain other favored Terrains.

• Combat Style - These just seem like the bread and butter of what the company does and would teach. While this does limit some ranger build it does not limit the 2 most popular and powerful builds the Straight archer and the Switch hitter.

• Monstrous Mount Mastery - Sable company marines are known for flying hippogryphs. Hippogryphs can't fly while they are mounted without this feat. Providing the ability to fly a few levels before a ranger taking this feat normally would be able to feels fine to me because in the confines of CotCT flight is not a huge power boost and 7th level is about where straight casters like wizards can get similar flight without the limit of being on the back of a large creature.

The only changes I could maybe think to this archetype are granting Boon Companion as a Bonus feat at 7th and than at 9th grant Monstrous Mount Mastery as a Bonus feat(or a free feat of the characters choosing if they already have that feat)

As a small aside although I am aware of spoilers about the Sable company as I also intend this to be for player use and the fact that I am currently playing in CotCT and am not aware of any spoiler other than those about the sable company since I did research on them, Lets keep this spoiler free.

Also I may look into making the Paladin equivalent to this archetype but at the moment ranger is what I am playing and I made this Archetype for myself before bringing it here to share with the community.

Feedback would very much be appreciated especially if someone like JJ who made the AP and the Sable Company gave some input.