I'd be ok with either.
Oh! & Don't lose Seltyi-- er... the Magus in PF2!
I am potentially OK with a few?some?many? of the "non-core rulebook" classes (introduced in later supplements/rulebooks from PF1) being doable as archetyped/multiclassed character options in PF2.
So, if the Magus actually doesn't appear as its own class but can be done well as an alternative build to one of the base classes, I'll learn to deal with it.
I'm not OK with potentially losing an iconic of which I'm a fan were this to be the design route chosen for PF2.
It's there in the alias above the pic of said iconic... There is more to the Magus class than just its mechanics (for some).
Also, I was being over-dramatic/silly. There wasn't anything really serious about it. ^^
NOOOOOOOooooooo...! What about Seltyiel?!
... Another, Paizo specific is an image in the Armor Master's Handbook of Seltiyel in "heavy armor", but still bare chested.
I do agree with you that "bare-chested heavy armour" is...impractical.However, it does fit Seltyiel's aesthetic, & I'm OK with that!
No bias here! ;-p
But on another character... Er, I guess it'd depend, even though it is silly?
Remy P Gilbeau wrote:
...but my character, who's a front-line fighter (Swashbuckler, technically) and my definition of "the sexy male" fought through literal Hell wearing nothing but an albino Crocodile skin pimp coat, breeches, and some exceptionally fashionable boots, just so the devils could admire his awesome abs while he stabbed them, and it was glorious.
The only thing the Magus really had going for it was casting a touch spell through your weapon. It would be relatively easy to add a feat or class ability that could be chosen to make this possible.
That's not the only thing the Magus had going for it!
The Magus should be CORE (or as early in the development cycle of the new edition) because of...
I'm missing him already. (ToT)
Just thought we needed a little less "crunchy" POV in this thread, too...