Are they fighting yetis?
Chief Technical Officer
|
... I have images of parties composed completely of "Ultimate" and "Advanced" archetyped/feated/alternated characters tearing through encounters that would have been a challenge for Core Rulebook characters.
My current campaign consists almost entirely of APG classes... and you know what? We verified that core classes are core for a reason. APG classes are cool, but rogues and clerics sure are useful to have around!
My only disappointment was that when I saw this I thought we were going to see a whole slew of new product announcements and preorders. Hopefully this is just the first of many...
We'll be announcing the rest of the August products next month. We chose to announce this one early for two reasons: one, we'll be showing off Ultimate Combat in the PaizoCon banquet, so we wanted to mention it by name in the banquet announcement; and two, we're about to launch the playtest.
About to? As in a week, a couple days, a month? Gah! I need more info. :( I am extremely excited about everything in this book and can't wait till its release.
|
Director of Game Design
|
Hey there folks,
Just a couple of notes. I think when you get a chance to take a look at the three alternate classes, you will understand why they landed in this category instead of getting their own slot as a base class. They are very similar to the class that they are built off of, but different enough that they need a full write-up. You will see very soon.
That said, even we are unsure about the gunslinger. It could easily bump over to be its own base class. That is what the playtest is for to be honest.
Soon now...
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
Director of Game Design
|
About to? As in a week, a couple days, a month?As in way sooner than those.
Yeah, like right now
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
About to? As in a week, a couple days, a month?As in way sooner than those.Yeah, like right now
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Wow, that was fast.
About to? As in a week, a couple days, a month?As in way sooner than those.
Awesome I can definitely live with that.
Thank you!! You guys at Paizo rock!
Wow. Despite my previous couple of doom & gloom posts in this thread, that announcement is a pleasantly nice surprise.
Looking forward to this.
|
About to? As in a week, a couple days, a month?As in way sooner than those.Yeah, like right now
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Oh, you guys are the bestest!
Yay! Downloaded the playtest. I think my
Dean; The_Minstrel_Wyrm
No...
They're getting a big spotlight because there's a long tradition of samurais and ninjas and gunslingers being beloved characters in movies, novels, comics, and the like. That's not something you can say about the majority of the various archetypes we've created.
I defy any gamer to watch "Seven Samurai" or "The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly," for example, and not get inspired to make a character who does some of the awesome things that Toshiro Mifune or Clint Eastwood do in those movies.
I hope we'll get to see a real Swashbuckler alternate class soon, then. I think I am not the only fan of the three musketeers. :)
That being said, my big hope for the book ( beyond it's already awesome sounding content ) is that the martial arts archetypes for the Monk give us the option of a.) losing the "Lawful" alignment requirement and b.) allowing replacements of the supernatural Monk stuff with more Wuxia style alternatives. There are lots of depictions of martial artists who were neither monks nor lawful, so that is something I've been missing something fierce in Pathfinder so far.
I don't mind the class still being called a monk, but more variety in the depiction of possible martial artists, in origins and powers, would be appreciated by me.
Oh, and great cover! Will the artwork be featured on the blog soon? :)
Will there be a geisha archetype in this book? :P
This sounds far too much like Book of Ten Swords for my comfort...
If you mean the D&D book Tome of Battle: Book of Nine Swords with that, I think you can relax, as that book is probably the one sourcebook least favored by the authors of the Pathfinder RPG.
|
I really do wonder if the Samurai will be doing any double takes when he meets a Rune Giant on nearly the other side of the planet.
Heh, I'm wondering the same. Considering that cover art shows yetis and Valeros, the poor unnamed Samurai might be closer to trading blows with Graithzog Ebonrunes than he thinks...
|
Creative Director
|
On the new iconics:
Gunslinger is awesome.
I'm so glad the Ninja is a "classic" ninja.
I really do wonder if the Samurai will be doing any double takes when he meets a Rune Giant on nearly the other side of the planet.
Heh... probably.
My theory of giants: They work best when they're giant versions of other humanoids or cultures or groups. Which is why the stone giant, for so long, didn't feel like it fit in with the other giants. Making them into "Giant Easter Island head dudes" really helped to fit them in.
My other takes:
Hill Giant = Giant Hillbilly
Fire Giant = Giant Dwarf
Frost Giant = Giant Viking
Cloud Giant = Giant Greek
Storm Giant = Giant Roman
Marsh Giant = Giant Innsmouth Folk
Taiga Giant = Giant Inuit/Native American
Wood Giant = Giant Elf
Rune Giant = Giant Samurai
|
Creative Director
|
Will there be a geisha archetype in this book? :P
Geishas are more magical than they are combat oriented. So if we were to do a geisha archetype... she'd have a better chance of showing up in a book about magic than she would a book about combat.
And she'd have an even BETTER chance of showing up or having said archetype get expanded if we were to ever do a Pathfinder Chronicles book that discussed world-specific stuff for, say, Tian-Xia or Minkai.
Just saying.
Having spent a little more time reviewing the classes playtest info, I've concluded the following:
I don't like them. At all.
Gunslinger - I'll admit that this one reflexively goes to my "no f-ing way" bin. There's no way this class becomes a viable option without undermining/changing the tone of the setting. We're not talking about an early firearms specialist here, we're talking about a Western gunslinger. If I was playing Pathfinder: Tales of the Old West, I'd be all over this. For my beloved fantasy rpg setting - no thanks.
Mechanically, I like it. But not for Pathfinder and not for Golarion. (And if Greenwood's web fiction portrayal of firearms in Golarion is a theme that's going to continue, furuter Golarion products are going to RAPIDLY lose their appeal...)
As for the ninja and samurai, the more I read them, the more convinced I am that they should have been archetypes.
The ninja seems to lean heavily towards the "like a rogue, but better. Because they're NINJA!". Also, the bombs should be equipment, not a class ability. I'm guessing that if treated as such, you're stepping on the ninja's shtick, but making them a class ability makes little sense to me.
Samurai - I'm not seeing anything that warrants a class vs. a cavalier or fighter archetype.
While I've loved 95% of the Pathfinder RPG & Golarion goodness that's come out of Paizo over the years, based on this playtest info, Ultimate Combat is dropping from "must have" to "wait and see".
Will there be a geisha archetype in this book? :PGeishas are more magical than they are combat oriented. So if we were to do a geisha archetype... she'd have a better chance of showing up in a book about magic than she would a book about combat.
And she'd have an even BETTER chance of showing up or having said archetype get expanded if we were to ever do a Pathfinder Chronicles book that discussed world-specific stuff for, say, Tian-Xia or Minkai.
Just saying.
If you're doing a geisha archetype/alternate class, bard feels like a shoe-in for the base class, right?
Will there be a geisha archetype in this book? :PGeishas are more magical than they are combat oriented. So if we were to do a geisha archetype... she'd have a better chance of showing up in a book about magic than she would a book about combat.
And she'd have an even BETTER chance of showing up or having said archetype get expanded if we were to ever do a Pathfinder Chronicles book that discussed world-specific stuff for, say, Tian-Xia or Minkai.
Just saying.
Cool I look forward to seeing this in the World Guide to Tian Xia then.
"Lisa Rocks"
"and wizard archetypes like the gunmage"
Well looks like I can throw my Gunmage out the window now...though mine is probably unbalanced.
And she'd have an even BETTER chance of showing up or having said archetype get expanded if we were to ever do a Pathfinder Chronicles book that discussed world-specific stuff for, say, Tian-Xia or Minkai.
Hmm....
Does this mean that a World Guide to Minkai is on the slate?
Finally..I can be a cowboy!
Finally..I can be a cowboy!
A cowboy with a 15th century front loading one-shot gun, though.
|
Creative Director
|
And she'd have an even BETTER chance of showing up or having said archetype get expanded if we were to ever do a Pathfinder Chronicles book that discussed world-specific stuff for, say, Tian-Xia or Minkai.Hmm....
Does this mean that a World Guide to Minkai is on the slate?
Well... doing an AP that takes place half in Tian-Xia (Minkai) would certainly make doing a world guide for that part of the world a logical decision!
So, since James chose to ignore my post, this means we probably will still not see non-lawful Monk archetypes? :(
Well... doing an AP that takes place half in Tian-Xia (Minkai) would certainly make doing a world guide for that part of the world a logical decision!And she'd have an even BETTER chance of showing up or having said archetype get expanded if we were to ever do a Pathfinder Chronicles book that discussed world-specific stuff for, say, Tian-Xia or Minkai.Hmm....
Does this mean that a World Guide to Minkai is on the slate?
Ah, I thought Minkai was a different continent than Tian-Xia.
Until this book I was excited to purchase all the hardcover rules books Pathfinder had to offer.
The fact that Ninja, Samurai, and (yuck) Gunslinger are introduced in this book make it a non-purchase for me. The fact you put these classes into a book that I would have otherwise purchased makes me ill.
What is next "Space Jockey"? I know... Jedi. Use the force feat Luke.
Perhaps I am being old-fashioned but I consider a "Base Class" should be able to fit in 99% of all settings. These three classes are so exotic that you will NEVER see all three allowed in someone's campaign.
I can just see it now.. Indiana Jones Gunslinger goes up to the Samurai.. Bang.. Dead.. Laugh.
Ninja and Samurai I can see being in an Asian flavored setting book, but to put them as base classes is pushing way too hard. You are giving players the argument "Why can't I play a Samurai.. ITS A BASE CLASS!" and I have to tell them.. "Because this is a fantasy game you idiot not SHOGUN!"
Gunslinger is just spitting in my old-fashioned face. Put this class in the Campaign Book, not as a base class.
I know that I am not alone in my feelings and I suggest you reconsider these classes for this book.. Perhaps it is too late for that to happen.
I guess you rolled a one.
|
Creative Director
|
I hope we'll get to see a real Swashbuckler alternate class soon, then. I think I am not the only fan of the three musketeers. :)
That being said, my big hope for the book ( beyond it's already awesome sounding content ) is that the martial arts archetypes for the Monk give us the option of a.) losing the "Lawful" alignment requirement and b.) allowing replacements of the supernatural Monk stuff with more Wuxia style alternatives. There are lots of depictions of martial artists who were neither monks nor lawful, so that is something I've been missing something fierce in Pathfinder so far.
I don't mind the class still being called a monk, but more variety in the depiction of possible martial artists, in origins and powers, would be appreciated by me.
Oh, and great cover! Will the artwork be featured on the blog soon? :)
I didn't MEAN to ignore your question...
I hope to see a real swashbuckler something soon as well. That type of character is one of my favorites to play, and I've been trying to use my influence to get something akin to it into a hardcover for a while now. HOPEFULLY we'll see something cool in Ultimate Combat...
As for monks... we'll see, but the thing is that monks having a "lawful" requirement to their alignment is a pretty hard-coded element/feature of the class. That's unlikely to change. Adding some more Wuxia type stuff is more likely than that, though. And there'll certainly be a lot of martial arts options for ALL classes... not just for monks. That could be ONE way to get into a non-lawful martial artist, after all.
The artwork itself won't be featured on the blog, since it's already out. I don't really like using blog space to show off "old news."
|
Creative Director
|
Ah, I thought Minkai was a different continent than Tian-Xia.Well... doing an AP that takes place half in Tian-Xia (Minkai) would certainly make doing a world guide for that part of the world a logical decision!And she'd have an even BETTER chance of showing up or having said archetype get expanded if we were to ever do a Pathfinder Chronicles book that discussed world-specific stuff for, say, Tian-Xia or Minkai.Hmm....
Does this mean that a World Guide to Minkai is on the slate?
Just as Japan is a part of Asia, Minkai is a part of Tian-Xia.
|
Creative Director
|
Gunslinger is just spitting in my old-fashioned face. Put this class in the Campaign Book, not as a base class.
Actually... the rulebooks are the BEST place to put experimental concepts in the game. While Golarion uses content from the rulebooks... it doesn't use ALL of the content. And as we continue to put rulebooks out, the incidences of things showing up in them that aren't necessarilly going to be a big part (or even a part at all) of Golarion will increase.
That said, if folks DO like things like, say, the gunslinger, the rules DO work with Golarion.
But the rulebooks are used for far more game worlds than just Golarion, and the more they support ALL possible play styles, the stronger they''ll be overall. That's the theory, at least.
If they just supported Golarion and that's it, then the rulebooks wouldn't be presented as world neutral books.
|
|
Until this book I was excited to purchase all the hardcover rules books Pathfinder had to offer.
The fact that Ninja, Samurai, and (yuck) Gunslinger are introduced in this book make it a non-purchase for me. The fact you put these classes into a book that I would have otherwise purchased makes me ill.
What is next "Space Jockey"? I know... Jedi. Use the force feat Luke.
Perhaps I am being old-fashioned but I consider a "Base Class" should be able to fit in 99% of all settings. These three classes are so exotic that you will NEVER see all three allowed in someone's campaign.
I can just see it now.. Indiana Jones Gunslinger goes up to the Samurai.. Bang.. Dead.. Laugh.
Ninja and Samurai I can see being in an Asian flavored setting book, but to put them as base classes is pushing way too hard. You are giving players the argument "Why can't I play a Samurai.. ITS A BASE CLASS!" and I have to tell them.. "Because this is a fantasy game you idiot not SHOGUN!"
Gunslinger is just spitting in my old-fashioned face. Put this class in the Campaign Book, not as a base class.
I know that I am not alone in my feelings and I suggest you reconsider these classes for this book.. Perhaps it is too late for that to happen.
I guess you rolled a one.
To be fair the classes will be what 5% of the book if that? Likely a lot less. i wouldn't discount the whole book on that. Hell if a RPG ever come out that I love more than 80% of the book I will likely die of a bliss attack.
|
Creative Director
|
Oh oh! I thought of the *real* difference between archeypes and alternate classes: alternate classes get illustrations.
That's more true than you think, to be honest.
Another way to put it: Alternate classes are ones we want to particularly shine a spotlight on, either because we think that they're neat or because we think that there's fan demand for them. And by taking the time to present full level progression tables and illustrate them, we do just that.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
What is next "Space Jockey"?
We honestly don't have a lot of things after these three classes that we feel need to be treated as full classes (at least, not without being hooked up to significantly new mechanical concepts such as psionics). I'm not promising we won't *ever* do more classes after this—we certainly reserve that right—but we don't currently have concrete plans for *any* new classes after Ultimate Combat.
|
|
My post was mostly tongue-in-cheek ;)Oh oh! I thought of the *real* difference between archeypes and alternate classes: alternate classes get illustrations.And a chart doing all the conversion work for you, plus likely more fluff for the class.
Oh I know but it is still pretty true. :) As James points out as well.