They'll probably start releasing previews for the book in the near future. If they follow the format they used for Ultimate Magic, every Tuesday should see a blog post revealing something from the book when the previews start rolling.
|
They'll probably start releasing previews for the book in the near future. If they follow the format they used for Ultimate Magic, every Tuesday should see a blog post revealing something from the book when the previews start rolling.Havent they started already? I thought I remembered seeing something awhile back?
Thst was probably the playtest. Whic, I suppose, is a preview, just one a long way out and subject to massive rewriting.
The playtest as it as a rogue alternate class, not an archetype (more changes than an archetype), and when they decided to not do that with gunslinger, gunslinger got a round 2. I haven't seen one for the ninja (or any real reason to not have it as a variant rogue, which is all I've ever used for one). You should check out the playtest document before you call bad on it being an archetype (I'm sure there are some changes between the playtest and the final product, but I doubt it's changing a huge amount).I just really really really have my fingers crossed that they decided against making ninja a rogue archetype.
It's been stated on the boards that they were considering making it an archetype for no other reason than to prevent multiclassing with rogue, and that sort of rationale makes me a bit unhappy, as it's hard to justify for in-game reasons.
Same difference - just because I got the terminology wrong (and I find the distinction to be just an annoyance) doesn't change the comment - you can't multiclass rogue/rogue whether it's two archetypes, an archetype and an alternate class, or what have you.
So I'm still hoping they decided against the arbitrary "let's make it an alternate class so people can't multiclass rogue/ninja" thing.
I just really really really have my fingers crossed that they decided against making ninja a rogue archetype.
It's been stated on the boards that they were considering making it an archetype for no other reason than to prevent multiclassing with rogue, and that sort of rationale makes me a bit unhappy, as it's hard to justify for in-game reasons.
ask yourself what a ninja does differently than a rogue and what could be gutted from a rogue in order to make it a ninja and now you see what paizo is doing (and what i think is the correct decision) i mean rogue = versatile sneak , ninja = assassin sneak both have sneak attack both have a emphasis on the more subtle side of combat and both have the same attack progression it makes more sense to make it a alternate class .
and so you shall know archetypes and alternate classes are different .
the ninja is very much so and will be a breed of its own.
Yes, yes, I said archetype instead of alternate class. Here's my question: does that make my point invalid?
And, clearly ninja won't be a breed of its own if it's a rogue archetype. If it were actually a breed of its own I could multiclass ninja/rogue like I could ninja/monk or ninja/samurai.
I really don't understand those people who complain about guns in a fantasy setting. Fantasy means 'magic' and such exists in the setting, it doesn't mean 'middle ages but without technology'. Steampunk is fantasy, and there's guns. There's 'urban fantasy' which is set in a more modern period. There's historical fantasy.
Gunpowder and the advance of technology happens, even in 'fantasy' settings. Worlds evolve, and there should be nothing wrong with introducing gunpowder or any other advancements in society that we've seen.
Hell, if you're going with 'middle ages', hit some history books or the web, and look at what kind of technology existed in different parts of the world - you'll be surprised at what you can find.
It's typically the RATE of technological advancement that becomes problematic. You've got your fantasy world (let's say Golarion...) that has 1000s of years of history. You innocently decided to introduce primitive firearms. Then the players weigh in...
Suddenly, you've got PCs interested in crafting rules for the 1st time because they want to invent rifled barrels, revolvers, and gatling guns...
You've shifted the campaign from Middle Ages/Renaissance to Age of Sail because once the pirate ship is equipped with cannons, bows, knights, and heavy armor "just don't fit".
Players want to jump past the 1800s directly to modern day tactics -- precisely because they favor fast, highly trained specialist commandos... Y'know like the PCs.
Obviously, it doesn't have to go this route, but it can. Personally, I've seen it happen on 3 occasions. I was the GM for one of them. Despite my efforts to "reign the tech in", the sessions devolved to the point where I was constantly arguing why something couldn't be done ("Your fighter has an 8 INT, how in the hell did he come up with THAT idea, let alone know how to design it?!")
Firearms and modern tactics are an easier step (even the Old West) for the average gamer to associate with. Given our position on the technological advancement line and our modern media, it's no surprise.
Yes, it can be handled. If you want a game that has firearms and you want to handle those issues at the outset, go for it. Many of us, however, would prefer to be spared the headache - at least as far as official campaign related material is concerned.
YMMV.
|
|
Hear hear! Hound master cavalier! New orders!Just... We can haz moar Cavalier?
Quick quasi threadjack ...
Have you by any chance checked out Advanced Options: Cavaliers' Orders from Super Genius Games?
It has 6 all new cavaliers orders, new feats and other goodies ... :)
I notice the ISB-number is still TBD. Any ETA on that?I've added the ISBN to the product description.
You are a king among men.
I know the Ultimate Combat flyer in the back of my Ultimate Magic book references "3 all new classes." I wondered whether they were counting alternate classes as classes, or if they actually mean that Samurai and Ninja got made into base classes.
They said the Gunslinger is a base class now but I haven't heard anything about the Ninja and Samurai being base classes.
They said the Gunslinger is a base class now but I haven't heard anything about the Ninja and Samurai being base classes.
Which is good - they are perfectly done as archetypes/alternate classes.
I disagree, I would rather have Ninja and Samurai as base classes and why the Cavalier was the base for the Samurai was the last choice that I would have picked.
I disagree, I would rather have Ninja and Samurai as base classes and why the Cavalier was the base for the Samurai was the last choice that I would have picked.
To me, it's the only sane choice.
My only concern is that I think the gunslinger should be allowed access the (currently) fighter-only feats for firearms. Stuff like weapon specialization, etc. Having an entire class dedicated to a small group of weapons yet not allowing them to take weapons specialization would be dumb.
I agree. Gunslinger as an alternate fighter makes sense. I some setting, I guess IS the fighter, as a role in society.
Ninja/Rogue and Cavalier/Samurai alternate classes seem so obvious and logical to me that is not even needed a discussion.
I'm guessing the gunslinger will get a class ability that'll allow her to take feats usually reserved for fighters, similar to the magus's Fighter Training ability.
|
My only concern is that I think the gunslinger should be allowed access the (currently) fighter-only feats for firearms. Stuff like weapon specialization, etc. Having an entire class dedicated to a small group of weapons yet not allowing them to take weapons specialization would be dumb.I agree. Gunslinger as an alternate fighter makes sense. I some setting, I guess IS the fighter, as a role in society.
Ninja/Rogue and Cavalier/Samurai alternate classes seem so obvious and logical to me that is not even needed a discussion.
You don't quite agree with me, as I do think that gunslinger should be different enough to be it's own class. Just that certain fighter-only feats should be expanded to include gunslingers as well.
You don't quite agree with me, as I do think that gunslinger should be different enough to be it's own class. Just that certain fighter-only feats should be expanded to include gunslingers as well.My only concern is that I think the gunslinger should be allowed access the (currently) fighter-only feats for firearms. Stuff like weapon specialization, etc. Having an entire class dedicated to a small group of weapons yet not allowing them to take weapons specialization would be dumb.I agree. Gunslinger as an alternate fighter makes sense. I some setting, I guess IS the fighter, as a role in society.
Ninja/Rogue and Cavalier/Samurai alternate classes seem so obvious and logical to me that is not even needed a discussion.
I apologize for the misunderstanding then :)
I admit to being slightly disappointed that we didn't get a bit more spoiled on this book from PaizoCon. :(
+1
I disagree, I would rather have Ninja and Samurai as base classes and why the Cavalier was the base for the Samurai was the last choice that I would have picked.
Agreed. I preferred both to be Base Classes and they had plenty of ways to do it, particularly snagging ideas from the Final Fantasy series. Alas, Paizo keeps treading the easy path. I wish they'd take a narrow path once in awhile, they'd be surprised how big the pay off is sometimes.
The book is about 1 and a half months away, it's driving me nuts. But I have to be patient.
Did you go to the Banquet?I admit to being slightly disappointed that we didn't get a bit more spoiled on this book from PaizoCon. :(+1
No, I wasn't able to go. I've just been combing the boards looking for more UC tidbits. Seems the races book & the new AP have stolen all of the thunder, though.
Chief Technical Officer
|
Did you go to the Banquet?I admit to being slightly disappointed that we didn't get a bit more spoiled on this book from PaizoCon. :(+1No, I wasn't able to go. I've just been combing the boards looking for more UC tidbits. Seems the races book & the new AP have stolen all of the thunder, though.
I'm a bit surprised I haven't seen more of the details we showed on the boards, too. Perhaps when the YouTube videos are posted...
Speaking of more infos, given the time-line for UC's street release, shouldn't the 6-week preview start this coming Tuesday? :)
I'm hoping and praying for a Vampire Hunter archetype of the Inquisitor.
A vampire hunter would be nice but I would like to a dragon slayer archtypes for fighter, paladin, ranger, and cavalier. Also a mage killer one for the Barbarian.
So, it appears that this hasn't been addressed yet. I was wondering if there's going to additional Animal domains for Druids in this book? I see Lion and Bear domains being very Combat oriented.
Also wondering when we'll start seeing previews for this book. I am really looking forward to adding this one to my library.
Will there be archetypes for the Gunslinger, Ninja, and Samurai?
If there are archetypes, could Paizo please reveal at least one for either the Ninja or the Samurai in the coming weeks, it would be greatly appreciated and could hype up players to get the book even more.
Will there be archetypes for the Gunslinger, Ninja, and Samurai?
If there are archetypes, could Paizo please reveal at least one for either the Ninja or the Samurai in the coming weeks, it would be greatly appreciated and could hype up players to get the book even more.
The ninja and samurai are essentially themselves archetypes as alternate classes are just bigger/more-extensive versions of archetypes. So, no, there won't be any archetypes for the ninja and samurai; just the two alternate class descriptions themselves. The closest you will get is by picking an Order for your samurai to follow, including an Order of the Ronin.
The ninja and samurai are essentially themselves archetypes as alternate classes are just bigger/more-extensive versions of archetypes. So, no, there won't be any archetypes for the ninja and samurai; just the two alternate class descriptions themselves. The closest you will get is by picking an Order for your samurai to follow, including an Order of the Ronin.Will there be archetypes for the Gunslinger, Ninja, and Samurai?
If there are archetypes, could Paizo please reveal at least one for either the Ninja or the Samurai in the coming weeks, it would be greatly appreciated and could hype up players to get the book even more.
Just because it's an alternate class, does not mean it could have it's own archetypes.
And yes I know that samurai have orders that they can pick, but what about an archetype that modifies the other things than what the order modifies.
Nevermind, I got my answer
I wish ninjas, and samurai had their own archetypes, they don't).
The ninja is like a blend of Rogue(mostly) and Monk(partially), and due to this blend should have it's own archetypes, like a more Ki based ninja, a more combat based ninja, a Kunoichi, a more skilled ninja, a scouting ninja, etc..
The samurai is somewhat configurable with the use of orders, but I would like to see a more weapon(s) specific configuration like in APG for the fighters, applied to samurai.
YAY (sarcasm), only one month to go.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
If we have the ongoing subscription for this book, will we get the option to pick it up at GenCon like the APG last year?
Yep. We have one more subscriber shipment to deal with before we can flip the switch allowing you to choose that; I'd expect to see something in your inbox about it in the second week of July.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Time wise
it is so close, yet so far away.
Since archetypes for alternate classes do not exist yet, I would ask Paizo to consider it an option for a later book(s).
Did someone say AIRSHIP COMBAT?
Any sneaks at this :)
Time wise
it is so close, yet so far away.Since archetypes for alternate classes do not exist yet, I would ask Paizo to consider it an option for a later book(s).
An evil version of the Oathbound Paladin would be cool ... :-P