Odraude's page

I love the magus and the main thing that appeals to me is being able to blend magic and fighting often. I'm not into limiting it to a resource where i can't use Spellstrike often.

I hope we get the Nightshades, they are one of my favorite category of monsters.

Same. I love Nightshades as a sort of rival to the kytons and sahkil.

I had a feeling that we'd still get the Magus as a class when it didn't appear as an archetype in the APG. I'm excited as my two favorite classes from PF1e are coming out. I can't wait to playtest this!

Apologies if it's off topic, but the Amber talk has me curious. How are games like Rifts (Savage Worlds Ed.) and Torg Eternity? They both seem similar, where you go jumping to other cosms. Was curious how they played and if there are other examples of games like those and Amber.

I think there's a way you can do it that doesn't put too much strain on the GM and can fit in the campaign.

One interesting way to do a Worldscape character is to make them a living anachronism. Instead of being from another world, you're from the past ala Tidus from FFX. You could even tie an event that happens during the past to what's going on in the campaign.

Alternatively, you could just be from Earth. I think that's kind of the easiest way to do it, but at the same time, it's ripe for in-game jokes that distract from the main campaign. If you tie your arrival to being summoned for the campaign, that would work. Basically make your character every child protagonist from most 90's kids movies (I'm looking at you, Warriors of Virtue).

Something I feel you also need to make this work... you need a Local Guide character. Most movies and such have a character that is basically their window into the history of the world. In a RPG, I'd actually try and spread that around to the group. FFX is actually a good example of this. All of the characters have to guide Tidus through the customs, society, bestiary, and geography of Spira through most of the game. They even do it in different ways. Some nicely and flirtaciously, some spitefully, and some kinda awkwardly.

But I think the most important thing is, your character has to be competent in something that is important to the campaign that the other characters need. Otherwise, why would they put up with you?

So if this is the final bestary, I'd love to see some of the older robots and tech stuff in here. I love my robots and lasers and it would actually fit my friend's current campaign. He's using Starfinder stats for the lasers and other tech stuff.

Gorbacz wrote:

Sporkedup wrote:

Gorbacz wrote:

There were hints here and there that PF2 publishing schedule is set for 5 years and that there will be 3 bestiaries, no more.

Maybe this isn't the place for this discussion, but do elaborate please.

Well, the bestiary hint is right there. The 5 years I base on this post from Lisa but I wouldn't mind if I'm mistaken :)

Gotcha. Lisa's comment seems more like hedging than plotting. While I know financially spending a decade on a single game isn't always the strongest, I feel like the development cycle on a game this large is just too big for a 5 year lifespan. 2e took them, what, two years to make plus a pretty hectic first year of releases? That gives me anxiety to think about.

I wonder if they'll try a new track with Bestiaries after 3. Instead of a general "pile of things" maybe they'll move to more specific thematic ties?

Really important question here.

That's a good point. They have done that in the past with Occult Bestiary and the Inner Sea Bestiary. Would be very interested in something like that. Although I'll miss cracking open a large grimoire of monsters and reading through it.

Sporkedup wrote:

Gorbacz wrote:

There were hints here and there that PF2 publishing schedule is set for 5 years and that there will be 3 bestiaries, no more.

Maybe this isn't the place for this discussion, but do elaborate please.

Well, the bestiary hint is right there. The 5 years I base on this post from Lisa but I wouldn't mind if I'm mistaken :)

Ah well i hope you are too, but hey, it is what it is lol

That's a shame. I've always loved Bestiaries/Monster Manuals ever since i was a kid. Even really loved B5 and 6's additions. I'm curious what'll take its place, if anything at all.

I've always wanted to do something like this, but i think it'd be tricky to do it without making it too gimmicky that it becomes disruptive, or putting my character at too much of a disadvantage.

I think to get it down right, you definitely want a character that excels at something that is useful in the new setting. I think that's usually why it's easier to fall back to a martial class. Anywhere you adventure, there will probably be some fighting that'll happen. You could also do a more social focused character that can use their charisma in encounters. Though with that, the biggest block would be a language barrier.

Magic would be odd because you have to have magic in the stranger's homeland and it has to be the same mechanically as magic in the main setting. Though I'm sure creative GMs and players can work around that a bit.

It's a cool concept but one that really needs the full buy-in from the group.

Also i like the name Worldscape. I've always just called them fish-outta-water (FOTs) but Worldspace is better.

I've definitely noticed some difficulty in my friend's homebrew game. We've been through about four combats and the last two dropped us pretty well. I think a lot of it is us in D&D5e/PF1e mode through the game. We're now looking at interesting ways to use our party's strengths to leverage over the enemy.

The fact that there are humans on multiple planets implies a relation between those planets, even if it's not obvious. It's not a reason we've revealed yet. We might some day, but for the moment, there are humans on multiple planets because we want to foster the implication that all Pathfinder homebrews (and any published settings you might use with the Pathfinder rules) are potentially found in the same universe.

Strange Aeons "what-if" spoiler...

** spoiler omitted **

This has me super interested. I picked up two of the Strange Aeon books, but I might have to look at more. I really dig the reveals from the Windsong Abbey Testaments.

I do like the idea. You can even do them in any order, or omit a few.

I've always liked the pacing and story telling in both spy movies and heist movies. I'd love to use more of that in my D&D games.

I like the idea of changing up wild shape as you grow in levels. Maybe you can become a swarm of small creatures, or only polymorph certain body parts.

I do something similar to this, but generally it's when things have 'gotten real' in the game (things have escalated, players have failed, a terrible revelation, etc) and the players themselves need a bit to really process what is going on. It's especially useful for helping players cope with a major misfortune (or string of minor ones), or maybe an upsetting revelation. Once people settle down, I find that my players are actually pretty quick to re-immerse themselves into the moment.

I've always liked the term 'Sagani' for the elemental races. Has roots in the real-world as a name for elementals. I think it fits.

I'd like to see it come back. Always liked the artwork on it.

Gun tricks would be a cool way to differentiate the Gunslinger/Drifter from a character that just uses a gun. Stuff like ranged disarm or busting a lock with your gun.

I like your Steely Gaze idea and would love to see more social stuff for the GS. Not a western, but imagine recreating the "Do you feel lucky punk?" scene from Dirty Harry.

Or a "I Shot First" talent that lets you use your gun attack roll as initiative.

Also Drifter is a cool name for is. I'm into it. Maybe have a 'Gunslinger' archetype to give other classes gun usage and have the 'Drifter' be the main class.

Correction, I DO have new a thought for this thread (more accurately, it's a refinement of something I've already said in previous threads):

In the waning days of 3.5, Wizards started playing with the idea of slotless casters. I'd like to see several of those, along the following lines:

1. Blaster: This is obviously the kinetecist
2. Terrain Control: Dragonfire adept played with this, but was never particularly good at it. I'd like to see another crack at it.
3. Restoration/Buffs: Dragon Shaman was the most sincere attempt, though some Paladin archetypes from PF1 also edged in there.
4. Debuffs and Mind Games: Hexblade was the closest in 3.5, the witch could do this (and should get the ability again), but I'd like to see a class built around not having spells get to specialize in it as well.

I don't necessarily need to see 4 different classes, or even require 4 classes to be sharply defined on these lines, but I'd like to see multiple iterations of a slotless caster, instead of just a kineticst.

I'm into this. I know it's a bit outside of the scope of this thread, but it would be cool to see Words of Power or some alternative casting rules sometime in the future. Such a product would be pretty niche I think and much better suited later in PF2e's lifetime. But I would love to see some alternatives to slots and spellpoints.

I could definitely see a Technology and Equipment book described by AnimatedPaper. I'd dig that.

I kind of agree to a point. Obviously the history of "kinetic" is important, but so is the general tone of it. Whenever I think of kinetic, it conjures up imagines of a more modern tone in my head. Kinetic energy, kinetic weapons, superheroism (like pyrokinesis). The name does feel a little more futuristic, though I could see it fit in stuff ranging from post apocalyptic to dying earth to even planetary romance and space opera.

Since the class does draw some parallels to Avatar the Last Airbender, I could see calling it a Shaper or Bender. I personally like Shaper and feel Bender might be a little too on the nose.

That said, if they keep the name, it's not really a deal breaker for me.

I do like the idea of the Summoner picking one of the four traditions and that guides their eidolon choices. Maybe not to the extent of "If you pick Divine, you only get angels.". But perhaps you can pick a basic body form for the eidolon, then the spell list you choose will affect the supernatural abilities of the eidolon. So you could still have a flexible look to the eidolon companion but still have a central theme to them.

I'm definitely in the camp that likes the customization of the original summoner. However, I definitely understand that it's a pain to balance, especially as a GM. So I'm okay with the eidolon losing some customization options for ease of use.

For me, I'm a fan of JRPGs. So I like the idea of the eidolon being this creature you can summon when things are dire. This admittedly pushes the focus away from the eidolon some, but I think it might be better from a design standpoint. Have the summoner be more useful with spells and such, while also scaling back the eidolon a bit.

That said, I hope we keep the original icon. I'm not really a fan of the new Alchemist and Oracle iconics and I quite like Balazar

There are two main book types I'd like to see. And a third that's cool to me but more of a pipe dream.

Ultimate Campaign is still my favorite hardcover from PF1e. I love it because it's more than just "new classes/spells/items". It has so many cool ideas and options that help expand a campaign, or run some campaigns that go against more traditional types of D&D/PF. Things like rules for Organizations and Buildings, Mass Combat, Child Adventurers, Monster Parts for Magic Item Crafting... I honestly love all of that. The GMG 2e has a lot of this and I really love that book. So I guess I just would love more books that expand your campaign.

For setting, I would love a hardcover that handled the stuff outside of the Inner Sea and Avistan. Don't get me wrong, I love Avistan and I love the Inner Sea setting. But I think it would be very cool to see alternative settings and how to fit them into the 2E ruleset. People that know me know I love and champion more Arcadia content, but seeing more of Tian Xia as well as expanding on Casmaron, Gaurand, and Sarusan (one day...) would neat.

And speaking of settings, I'd love to see a book (hardcover or soft) of other genres and working them into 2E. Things like Dying Earth style, Horror, Eberron Magicpunk, heck even something a bit more Modern. This one is more of a niche one, so I get that the chance of something like this is slim. But it'd be pretty cool to have.

The Magus and the Summoner were both super fun to me. I really love them, so I'd be down to see them in PF2e in some fashion. Either as a full-blown class or as an archetype. I understand it won't be a one-for-one conversion and that's fine. Something that captures the spirit of the Summoner and the Magus is neat. If they did do a Magus class, it'd be cool to expand them to more than just using a one-handed weapon. Maybe have options for armor and shields, or other weapons, melee and ranged.

I like the Gunslinger, but I think I'd prefer just rules for guns and an archetype that can be taking by other classes. I'll be honestly, I'm a sucker for mage guns and magic bullets.

I like the Occult classes, especially the Occultist. I'd love to see that make a combat. After that, the Medium and Kineticist are some I love.

Metal d4 are basically caltrops. I can't imagine someone stepping on that *shudders*

An AP where the PCs just cannot die. Maybe they escaped from a Final Blade but are not truly mortal anymore.

I like this idea. Especially if you pair it with something that is after them to fix this glitch in their mortality. A friend of mind did something similar to this, where a player came back to life randomly (without a spell or nothing), but was chased by a spirit of the ghost of his death. It would hone in on them after a few weeks of staying in one area, then the player would start seeing strange omens and hallucinations as the entity drew closer to him. It was really fun and flavorful, especially when the quest ended with the player regaining his mortality back and sending away the spirit.

I always imagined it like Warped Savant said. A bit more French sounding, maybe with an accent over the last syllable.

So 'je-gah-REH'

Odraude wrote:

Alexander Augunas wrote:

Rysky wrote:

Staffan Johansson wrote:

Rysky wrote:

There’s also more than one version of Serpentfolk so having “level 1” versions aren’t that far out there.

I don’t care about their innate spells (or whatever the abilities Serpentfolk get), I just wanna play a snake person.

I think we're more likely to get a PF2 version of the nagaji.

I’m not a fan of Nagaji, they’re something entirely distinct from Serpentfolk and really only have “I have some snake aesthetics” in common.

I like Vishkanya more than them, but still Vishkanya are also entirely distinct from Serpentfolk.

(I also really like Iruxi, but they’re not snakes :3)

I get how you're feeling about nagaji. I'd be pretty into a nagaji heritage that shows them with a lower-half that's more snakelike. (I did as much in a 3PP for Starfinder, Star Log.Deluxe: Blood Space Species Reforged.)

For vishkanya, I feel like that idea works better as a versatile heritage than an ancestry, personally, but that's because poison snake-elves seems super cool to me!

Yeah if I had to choose between nagaji and vishkanya, I'd go with the latter. Nagaji look less to me like serpents and more like monitor lizards. Which still looks cool, but if I hadn't seen the word 'naga' in their name, I probably wouldn't have realized that they were snake people.

For what it's worth, most of my friends also didn't realize they were snake people.

Well their mouths DO look like snake mouths

I can kind of see it with the nagaji iconic from the Dragon Empires Gaz. But it's definitely not obvious. I think some more recognizable markers of its serpentine nature could help a bit. Maybe with a tongue or fangs sticking out. Or perhaps fit them out with the typical coloring and patters of snakes (like some rattlesnakes, cobras, king snakes, etc). You could even fit a cobra hood on them, though that could lean more on the side of cliche.

Odraude wrote:

Going along with this, I'd love to see an AP focused on building an organization. My own preference would be a thieve's guild. but there are other cool groups you could do.

Going by subsystems alone, we have two of these.

But we could always use more. I'd be tickled by a trade unionist three-part low-level AP, likely settings for which are in Alkenstar or Andoran (the iconic assassin's backstory mentions that they're a thing there).

You bring up a good point. I'd forgotten about those APs.

I like the idea of a trade union, especially if we get to have an AP in Alkenstar. Another idea I had would be to combine running a religious organization with the Sarenrae schism plot hook. Maybe the players are tasked to fix a temple in disrepair while also mediating the split sects in that faith. I think it'd be pretty sweet.

Rysky wrote:

Staffan Johansson wrote:

Rysky wrote:

There’s also more than one version of Serpentfolk so having “level 1” versions aren’t that far out there.

I don’t care about their innate spells (or whatever the abilities Serpentfolk get), I just wanna play a snake person.

I think we're more likely to get a PF2 version of the nagaji.

I’m not a fan of Nagaji, they’re something entirely distinct from Serpentfolk and really only have “I have some snake aesthetics” in common.

I like Vishkanya more than them, but still Vishkanya are also entirely distinct from Serpentfolk.

(I also really like Iruxi, but they’re not snakes :3)

I get how you're feeling about nagaji. I'd be pretty into a nagaji heritage that shows them with a lower-half that's more snakelike. (I did as much in a 3PP for Starfinder, Star Log.Deluxe: Blood Space Species Reforged.)

For vishkanya, I feel like that idea works better as a versatile heritage than an ancestry, personally, but that's because poison snake-elves seems super cool to me!

Yeah if I had to choose between nagaji and vishkanya, I'd go with the latter. Nagaji look less to me like serpents and more like monitor lizards. Which still looks cool, but if I hadn't seen the word 'naga' in their name, I probably wouldn't have realized that they were snake people.

For what it's worth, most of my friends also didn't realize they were snake people.

ChibiNyan wrote:

I don't think it'd be too crazy to have one token "Large-size" ancestry, at least as a novelty. I mean, yeah, it will make the gameplay different and not fit into adventure design assumptions. I don't think this is necessarily bad! It'll at least spark player and GM creativity and be "different". Better than another ancestry just being "Humans but X" and playing the exact same.

It would probably need to be banned from PFS though, which is understandable. Could be a good candidate for the "Rare" keyword to keep it from appearing much.

Right! It might need adjudication at a table by table basis (it's almost as if there's a built in mechanic to enable this...), but what would the harm be with Paizo trying it out? They clearly are about to try out tiny ancestries. As long as it's just one of a number of ancestries released at one time and not like a "Lost Omens Giant People" book, I see absolutely no harm in giving it a try.

Though I think the biggest downsize in a large ancestry is that none of the current maps and materials in the APs and stuff are built to accommodate that. I can think of one battle in Fall of Plaguestone that medium creatures struggle to get to, so a large PC would have to just stand outside and wait...

One thing I've done in a game was take the Spriggan and make it into a PC race. You're a halfling-sized fey that, for X amount of turns, can grew into a Large size. Worked around the loot problem pretty easily. I even had a feat tree where you could increase the number of turns, or even make it permanent at high levels.

City or settlement builder. No building entire kingdom, just a single thorp or hamlet or village growing into city or metropolis over course of the campaign.

Base builder for even smaller scale version, Age of Ashes did taste that with castle thing bit, but it didn't really focus on it ;D

I like this idea a lot. It would be cool to just build up relationship with your local NPCs while also building up the town into a large city.

Going along with this, I'd love to see an AP focused on building an organization. My own preference would be a thieve's guild. but there are other cool groups you could do.

Paizo may not have Goliaths but they do have Nephilim.

And I would love to see them as an Ancestry.

This is a super cool idea and something I actually have for my own setting. You could even have the ancestry as descended from nephilim. I know from the same mysticism, there are tribes of giant peoples called elioud that descended from nephilim. Would be a cool way to introduce them in and base them on real-world lore.

Odraude wrote:

Gorbacz wrote:

Archetype list:

Acrobat, Archaeologist, Archer, Assassin, Bastion, Beastmaster, Blessed One, Bounty Hunter, Cavalier, Celebrity, Dandy, Dragon Disciple, Dual Weapon Warrior, Duelist, Eldritch Archer, Familiar Master, Gladiator, Herbalist, Horizon Walker, Investigator, Linguist, Loremaster, Marshal, Martial Artist, Mauler, Medic, Oracle, Pirate, Poisoner, Ritualist, Scout, Scroll Trickster, Scrounger, Sentinel, Shadowdancer, Snarecrafter, Swashbuckler, Talisman Dabbler, Vigilante, Viking, Weapon Improviser.

Weird that there's no Witch archetype.

There's one in the image they showed. It definitely exists, just a transcription error here.

Ahhh no sweat. For a second I thought they cut it after the playtest.

Archetype list:

Acrobat, Archaeologist, Archer, Assassin, Bastion, Beastmaster, Blessed One, Bounty Hunter, Cavalier, Celebrity, Dandy, Dragon Disciple, Dual Weapon Warrior, Duelist, Eldritch Archer, Familiar Master, Gladiator, Herbalist, Horizon Walker, Investigator, Linguist, Loremaster, Marshal, Martial Artist, Mauler, Medic, Oracle, Pirate, Poisoner, Ritualist, Scout, Scroll Trickster, Scrounger, Sentinel, Shadowdancer, Snarecrafter, Swashbuckler, Talisman Dabbler, Vigilante, Viking, Weapon Improviser.

Weird that there's no Witch archetype.

So basically Gen from Street Fighter. I'm into it!

Here I am hoping for a final confrontation in a maze of mirrors. Would be fun :)

I'm a sucker for martial arts movies and fighting games, so I'm psyched for the Ruby Tournament. The vaults one sounds interesting, though I'll admit, I'm a bit Absalom fatigued. But a three part megadungeon sounds interesting.

I once had a monster encounter that was an undead spider who could breathe flying spiders at people.

I liked it. My players didn't appreciate it as much :D

I've been a champion for Arcadia for awhile. I'd like to learn about a lot of the stuff in the thread we had awhile back brainstorming about Arcadia.

One thought process I've read about that really changed my views on gaming and hobbies in general is the concept of Eight Types of Fun. It was talked about by game designer Marc LeBlanc to ascribe more concrete examples on what people look for when having fun.

• Sensation
  
• Fantasy
  
• Narrative
  
• Challenge
  
• Fellowship
  
• Discovery
  
• Expression
  
• Submission

The more formal PDF is here. I think it's a good read to check out. Might help you with your thoughts on gamestyles.

I would love to see something like Ultimate Campaign, which was my favorite hardcover. Instead of focusing on new classes or feats or general game bloat, I'd love to see rules that expand what can be down in the game. Kingdom Building, rules for research, material usage of magical beasts... I would love to see Ultimate Campaign with some new stuff.

Honestly while I really am liking the changes to PF2, I'm not a fan that the ability to design monsters/NPCs isn't in the bestiary. It's a real shame to wait until the GMG drops before being able to write up/convert my own monsters. In the meantime, we can kind of work backwards with what we have in the bestiary and make our own critters.

If you create a DMPC, I strongly suggest you hand off the character sheet to the most experienced player and have him run it in addition to his own character.

Be sure that the DMPC is a passive character that doesn't come up with his own ideas and just goes along with the group.

Also be sure to treat him like a "red shirt". When the going gets tough, he'll be the first to die. That way you can also test out the rules for the dying condition. <g>

I'd actually be careful with this. Maybe it's just the people I've played with, but I've found that I catch more flak for having an incompetent GNPC rather than one that's too competent. Very much a "Why is this person here again?".

I've found a good balance by having a GNPC that's a level behind people, but helps shore up some of the party's weaknesses. Like, say, a guide that knows some stuff about the wilderness we're in.

Excellent. I'll have to take a look. Glad to see most of my favorites up there though. I'd love to see the Summoner one day.

Oddddddddraude!

*glomps*

I live!

Odraude wrote:

keftiu wrote:

Y’know, you could phrase this thread as “how long until the content /I/ want?” instead of “the current options are boring” and not broken anything.

We’re having four new classes playable in October and gonna have bare minimum 15 archetypes by the end of this year. Complain that you don’t like what we’re getting, sure, but there’s 0 comparison to 5e’s glacial release cycle.

Just curious, where is the listing for these classes? I'm looking for the 2e APG but I can't seem to find it anywhere.

Investigator, Oracle, Witch, and Swashbuckler. There's also going to be 60 pages of archetypes so plenty of toys for the existing classes to change up their style.

Right, but I don't see the APG 2e under the products section. The only upcoming book I see is the GMG for 2e

Y’know, you could phrase this thread as “how long until the content /I/ want?” instead of “the current options are boring” and not broken anything.

We’re having four new classes playable in October and gonna have bare minimum 15 archetypes by the end of this year. Complain that you don’t like what we’re getting, sure, but there’s 0 comparison to 5e’s glacial release cycle.

Just curious, where is the listing for these classes? I'm looking for the 2e APG but I can't seem to find it anywhere.

Most of the arguments here for a new system are reminiscent for 4e, yet gamers still felt that they were losing a great deal of support with it coming out. I myself felt that way when all the splat books I got really were worthless. Especially if I wanted to continue doing organized play. And then Paizo came along with Pathfinder and gave us something to use our old stuff while also getting more support, both rules-wise and adventure-wise.

The thing people are forgetting is that Pathfinder was built on giving 3.5 fans most support, both ruleswise and adventurewise. And now a decade later, we're faced with the same issues that WotC dealt us. I'm not really happy about this, no. I like 3.5 and I'd rather not see a full blown new edition that invalidates any support for the books I bought from Paizo. I don't like 5e and truthfully, I'm not a fan of Starfinder. If Pathfinder 2e is going to be like those, I just don't see myself shelling out more money for it. Especially if they are pulling the plug on supporting PF1.

I'm not happy with this. If my GM were still alive, he'd be very sad about hearing this.