Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Pathfinder Unchained (OGL)

I'm think with regards to the summoner they might do what JJ suggested once, which is for the class of have a specific creature that levels up with you, much like an animal companion

I'm think with regards to the summoner they might do what JJ suggested once, which is for the class of have a specific creature that levels up with you, much like an animal companion

I recall having an unfinished idea in Google Drive that took the idea of "eidolon models", and combined it with your idea. Essentially, you chose a creature that fit the "model" (angel, devil, etc), and it advances similar to an animal companion (though, it advances slightly more than that in my initial idea).

Alas, it went on the back burner, and never left.

I'm think with regards to the summoner they might do what JJ suggested once, which is for the class of have a specific creature that levels up with you, much like an animal companion

Yeah, that's my biggest worry. I really hope they don't do this.

ikarinokami wrote:

I'm think with regards to the summoner they might do what JJ suggested once, which is for the class of have a specific creature that levels up with you, much like an animal companion

Yeah, that's my biggest worry. I really hope they don't do this.

If it makes anyone feel better... I'm not going to be one of the authors on this book, nor am I going to be much involved with its outlining or its development.

Ross Byers wrote:

However, that does open up room for an archetype that allows an eidolon with a different alignment, so that you can play up a non-evil character than signed an infernal pact for a devil. Or a neutral or evil character with a 'guardian angel' trying to redeem him. Or whatever.

That's a pretty cool idea. Makes me wonder what kind of class abilities such an archetype would have in place of its regular features.

Not sure it would have to give anything up. Just picking an outsider subtype and a corresponding alignment isn't a power boost in and of itself.

But that's mostly to prevent characters that pick Angel and then make it a multi-tentacled horror with poison attacks. It could be left on the honor system.

Insain Dragoon wrote:

Speaking of Advanced Bestiary... You excited for the Pathfinder Advanced Bestiary?

Link in case you weren't aware

Yeah, when's that supposed to come out, anyway?

Current best guess is pdfs before Gen Con, print shortly after Gen Con. Once we have print books, shipping them out to patrons first is going to be a big priority.

Current best guess is pdfs before Gen Con, print shortly after Gen Con. Once we have print books, shipping them out to patrons first is going to be a big priority.

Off topic, but is there any estimate when the surveys with be sent out for that kickstarter? I can only assume it will be shortly before the PDFs get sent out. It's either that or something really went wrong as I never got one.

Odraude wrote:

ikarinokami wrote:

I'm think with regards to the summoner they might do what JJ suggested once, which is for the class of have a specific creature that levels up with you, much like an animal companion

Yeah, that's my biggest worry. I really hope they don't do this.

If it makes anyone feel better... I'm not going to be one of the authors on this book, nor am I going to be much involved with its outlining or its development.

Hey! I'd feel better if you were an author :) I generally find myself agreeing with you and even when I don't I find your reasoning sound. I can't think of anyone at Paizo whose work I don't want to see, whether I agree on everything or not. You've got a good crew there.

Cthulhudrew wrote:

Ross Byers wrote:

However, that does open up room for an archetype that allows an eidolon with a different alignment, so that you can play up a non-evil character than signed an infernal pact for a devil. Or a neutral or evil character with a 'guardian angel' trying to redeem him. Or whatever.

That's a pretty cool idea. Makes me wonder what kind of class abilities such an archetype would have in place of its regular features.

Not sure it would have to give anything up. Just picking an outsider subtype and a corresponding alignment isn't a power boost in and of itself.

Maybe link it to the 'eidolon models' somehow so that if you've decided you want a LE devil for an eidolon, you have to buy evolutions listed for devils. Maybe reduced evolution points in exchange for certain free evolutions at various levels (especially if it's a racial power not normally available via normal evolutions, like maybe Genie eidolons could get wish 1/week at 17th level or something.)

But that's mostly to prevent characters that pick Angel and then make it a multi-tentacled horror with poison attacks. It could be left on the honor system.

Genie Bound Noble

This was a summoner archetype I created a while back that did this specifically for genies. I could imagine something similar could be done for Devils (with free curses) and Angels (free healings/miracles).

But I suspect the summoner talk might be a slight threadjack as there's more to the product then the one class.

True. If you want to create another thread, I'd be happy to continue discussing it.

Odraude wrote:

ikarinokami wrote:

I'm think with regards to the summoner they might do what JJ suggested once, which is for the class of have a specific creature that levels up with you, much like an animal companion

Yeah, that's my biggest worry. I really hope they don't do this.

If it makes anyone feel better... I'm not going to be one of the authors on this book, nor am I going to be much involved with its outlining or its development.

Hey -- it is an interesting idea if somebody can work out all of the fiddly details. I also liked the idea of "siloing" the evolutions to limit specialization as a combat monster. Anyway, I am really curious to see what is done with this class.

Well Jason, five pages later and it seems pretty clear that the unchained summoner is going to be a tough beast to tackle.

Based upon your comments in the skald thread, I guess you're going to be the one who tackles it, eh? ;-P

Specific Summoner conversation to be continued in linked thread.

Owen KC Stephens wrote:

Current best guess is pdfs before Gen Con, print shortly after Gen Con. Once we have print books, shipping them out to patrons first is going to be a big priority.

Off topic, but is there any estimate when the surveys with be sent out for that kickstarter? I can only assume it will be shortly before the PDFs get sent out. It's either that or something really went wrong as I never got one.

Rather than derail this thread, let's talk about any Advanced Bestiary questions in its own thread.

I know we don't need to worry about wishlists, but one thing that has come up in discussions among my current gaming group is the Paladin. Specifically, Paladins for all alignments. That would be nice.

the one thing I don't want to see, is paladins of different alignments

Odraude wrote:

ikarinokami wrote:

I'm think with regards to the summoner they might do what JJ suggested once, which is for the class of have a specific creature that levels up with you, much like an animal companion

Yeah, that's my biggest worry. I really hope they don't do this.

If it makes anyone feel better... I'm not going to be one of the authors on this book, nor am I going to be much involved with its outlining or its development.

Now i feel worse about it! I was hoping they'd reign in the summoner with that method. Any time you give people the kind of options the summoner does they WILL find a way to abuse it.

James Jacobs wrote:

Odraude wrote:

ikarinokami wrote:

I'm think with regards to the summoner they might do what JJ suggested once, which is for the class of have a specific creature that levels up with you, much like an animal companion

Yeah, that's my biggest worry. I really hope they don't do this.

If it makes anyone feel better... I'm not going to be one of the authors on this book, nor am I going to be much involved with its outlining or its development.

Now i feel worse about it! I was hoping they'd reign in the summoner with that method. Any time you give people the kind of options the summoner does they WILL find a way to abuse it.

Yeah, bums me out too. James' vision of the summoner is exactly in line with what I'd like. My first reaction on hearing about this book was the hope that James would be tapped to lead this particular design.

As written, I'm one of those GMs who doesn't allow summoners at my table.

the one thing I don't want to see, is paladins of different alignments

We will agree to disagree. I want to see faith-charged warriors of every alignment. Maybe not smiting, but they do need to be divinely charged.

Paladin's aren't 'faith-charged warriors' though, they are fueled by the powers of Law and Good, Righteousness and Justice.

They don't draw their power from any specific God, they get their power from their dedication to their code and ethics and upstanding moral integrity.

Paladins of every alignment just wouldn't work, at least not if you want it to resemble the current Paladin.

A Paladin of each alignment would require the introduction of 7 more base classes because each alignment would be very different and have different goals, different abilities and different features.

I mean, take the various Aura's that a Paladin would have, what would be the equivalent of for the 7 remaining alignments?

What would the Smites of a Neutral Paladin be? Would it function like the spontaneous cure/channel of Clerics where they have to choose between Smite Good and Smite Evil? If so, what's the point?

Just sounds to me like trying to argue for a Paladin of each alignment is a very niche desire that is highly unlikely to see the light of day. It would also take up a lot of text in a book, a kin to an alternate system (like Words of Power) except unlikely to be used as much.

Paladins of every alignment just wouldn't work, at least not if you want it to resemble the current Paladin.

Sure it would. It has before. James Jacobs even wrote just such an article in Dragon.

BigNorseWolf wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

Odraude wrote:

ikarinokami wrote:

I'm think with regards to the summoner they might do what JJ suggested once, which is for the class of have a specific creature that levels up with you, much like an animal companion

Yeah, that's my biggest worry. I really hope they don't do this.

If it makes anyone feel better... I'm not going to be one of the authors on this book, nor am I going to be much involved with its outlining or its development.

Now i feel worse about it! I was hoping they'd reign in the summoner with that method. Any time you give people the kind of options the summoner does they WILL find a way to abuse it.

Yeah, bums me out too. James' vision of the summoner is exactly in line with what I'd like. My first reaction on hearing about this book was the hope that James would be tapped to lead this particular design.

As written, I'm one of those GMs who doesn't allow summoners at my table.

See, I think that it's possible to have that level of customization while still reining the balance issues. And hell, it might even be possible to compromise and combine the two ideas. Have a more limited, but still customizable, eidolon with the option for "outsider packages". Outsider companions could have a list of evolutions that make them the outsider they are at level one. So those of us that enjoy the ever-changing aspect of the current eidolon are happy, and those that want just an animal companion are happy too.

Don't think I completely disregard JJ's opinions on the summoner. He's a smart individual who's advice I always take to heart as a DM and designer. I honestly agree with James Jacobs about the Summoner spell list. It needs to be looked at and redone desperately. And I think the Synthesist Summoner should be redone to be more in line with a Druid's Wild Shape. But I feel gutting the eidolon for balance and verisimilitude would be a missed opportunity on a cool and fun rule set.

Tels wrote:

Paladins of every alignment just wouldn't work, at least not if you want it to resemble the current Paladin.

Sure it would. It has before. James Jacobs even wrote just such an article in Dragon.

I might be misremembering, but I seem to recall JJ not liking that article too much. I'd have to find the post about it though.

EDIT Found it

And a more recent one with more info

Well of course. Doesn't mean it won't work.

Well of course. Doesn't mean it won't work.

I think a part of it was that it didn't work and that the Warpriest seems to fill the niche.

I don't really have a horse in the "Paladins of All Alignments" race though. I could take it or leave it :)

There was, however, a much more widely-used collection of paladins of other alignment in Unearthed Arcana, which are all available for viewing here due to being OGC. Pathfinder Unchained is pathfinder's answer to UA, so this is the perfect place to put similar variants.
I can say though that I'm not particularly eager to see yet another rendition of different-alignment paladin variants, because it's already easy for GMs to do. And, for GMs too inexperienced to do it, there are the previous non-LG paladin variants, plus a huge amount of homebrew available for free. If this is suppose to be a product worth paying for, it should have alterations which are do difficult for the typical GM to make on their own.

...although, given that one of the 'revolutionary ideas' given so far is a full-BAB monk, maybe I shouldn't be so hopeful.

There was, however, a much more widely-used collection of paladins of other alignment in Unearthed Arcana, which are all available for viewing here due to being OGC. Pathfinder Unchained is pathfinder's answer to UA, so this is the perfect place to put similar variants.

I can say though that I'm not particularly eager to see yet another rendition of different-alignment paladin variants, because it's already easy for GMs to do. And, for GMs too inexperienced to do it, there are the previous non-LG paladin variants, plus a huge amount of homebrew available for free. If this is suppose to be a product worth paying for, it should have alterations which are do difficult for the typical GM to make on their own.

...although, given that one of the 'revolutionary ideas' given so far is a full-BAB monk, maybe I shouldn't be so hopeful.

Idk, you're glancing over a lot of interesting ideas that they list there, like the alternative magic items rules and the resource pool for martial characters. I don't think Unchained is supposed to be revolutionary, but it is hopefully going to deliver in some fun and interesting options that many fans have been clamoring for.

I'm super interested in this. The rogue remains one of my favorite classes, and I'm always up for new takes on it. Additionally, I've made many...slights of hand over the years as far as mechanics and math go in favor of fluff because I'm absolutely terrible at math, so some new math-lite mechanics sounds super neato as well :D

Odraude wrote:

ikarinokami wrote:

I'm think with regards to the summoner they might do what JJ suggested once, which is for the class of have a specific creature that levels up with you, much like an animal companion

Yeah, that's my biggest worry. I really hope they don't do this.

If it makes anyone feel better... I'm not going to be one of the authors on this book, nor am I going to be much involved with its outlining or its development.

That's a shame. I find that you are one of the very best writers at Paizo (along with Brandon Hodge... who really should get more work with you guys, especially for AP modules) and your idea of a Summoner which summons specific outsiders was much more in the vein of what I imagined a Summoner to be than the actual product.

There was, however, a much more widely-used collection of paladins of other alignment in Unearthed Arcana, which are all available for viewing here due to being OGC. Pathfinder Unchained is pathfinder's answer to UA, so this is the perfect place to put similar variants.

I can say though that I'm not particularly eager to see yet another rendition of different-alignment paladin variants, because it's already easy for GMs to do. And, for GMs too inexperienced to do it, there are the previous non-LG paladin variants, plus a huge amount of homebrew available for free. If this is suppose to be a product worth paying for, it should have alterations which are do difficult for the typical GM to make on their own.

...although, given that one of the 'revolutionary ideas' given so far is a full-BAB monk, maybe I shouldn't be so hopeful.

I gotta say, I love those three alt paladins!

While I understand it's easy to make these changes, even for an inexperienced DM I believe their is value in Paizo being the one to print them. Plenty of DMs allow Paizo material only and if it's Paizo written it may even be allowed in PFS.

Iave no beef at all about characters (or the vancian magic system). I'm much more interested in the alternate sytems for character actions - [wishlist]particluarly if it's: new combat system that doesn't bog down at higher levels; flight and new stealth/prception/darkness rule [/wishlist]

Cheers
Mark

See, I think that it's possible to have that level of customization while still reining the balance issues. And hell, it might even be possible to compromise and combine the two ideas. Have a more limited, but still customizable, eidolon with the option for "outsider packages". Outsider companions could have a list of evolutions that make them the outsider they are at level one. So those of us that enjoy the ever-changing aspect of the current eidolon are happy, and those that want just an animal companion are happy too.

I also think that combining the full customization method with the 'animal companion' method could be a good path to go down.

In fact, I think it would be cool if we could pick from a list of more specific animal companion-like base forms that are modeled after different types of outsiders. Then each base form could be modified by a limited list of evolutions. For example, angels would get celestial traits and weapon proficency by default, and then could be customized with various elemental attacks and spells (but not claws or tentacle attacks, lol).

If the new summoner does go down this route, I would actually recommend that the entire animal companion list be allowed as 'base forms' as a way of emulating the various celestial/fiendish animals on the summon monster list. Give each animal the option of having an alignment or elemental template to give it the propper planar flavor.

I still think the Barbarian is fine the way it is. I will love to see what they are doing with the Rogue and Monk. But I will more then likely not be happy with the Summoner.

As much as I would love to see a new Sorcerer and Fighter, of all the classes that could use a real revamp I would say the Samurai. I would love to see a Samurai that uses Ki to penetrate hardness/DR, to deflect physical, ranged, and some magical attacks, and release energy blasts from there sword. Who could have an ancestral weapon that becomes magical and functions only in there hands and can gain abilities like flaming and axiomatic. Also some bonus feats like cleave, power attack, sunder, and vital strike would be nice.

I'm think with regards to the summoner they might do what JJ suggested once, which is for the class of have a specific creature that levels up with you, much like an animal companion

That is the one thing most summoners don't want. The freedom to design your own eidolon is what makes the class so versatile, concept wise.

ikarinokami wrote:

the one thing I don't want to see, is paladins of different alignments

We will agree to disagree. I want to see faith-charged warriors of every alignment. Maybe not smiting, but they do need to be divinely charged.

I think the Warpriest was conceived with this very notion in mind.

But warpreists don't get hella saving throw bonuses, bro!

But warpreists don't get hella saving throw bonuses, bro!

With a Swift Action spell, they can.

Expected April 2015?

I smell a preemptive April Fool's joke...

Kryzbyn wrote:

But warpreists don't get hella saving throw bonuses, bro!

With a Swift Action spell, they can.

I'm... Not really seeing it. Closest I got was Wrathful Mantle, which scales slowly and doesn't stack with resistance cloaks. What spell did you have in mind?

I was more just highlighting a different ability they have, their self buffs, than specific 1 for 1.

Perhaps they meant Bestow Grace? It lets you temporally get a sacred bonus equal to your charisma modifier.

Perhaps they meant Bestow Grace? It lets you temporally get a sacred bonus equal to your charisma modifier.

Would be an excellent spell for a warpriest archetype that's based on charisma instead of wisdom, but it's a paladin only spell. :-/

Apologies, Bestow Grace of the Champion. Which is higher level spell, but does give you charisma to your saves, and apparently looks to stack with Bestow Grace.

Apologies, Bestow Grace of the Champion. Which is higher level spell, but does give you charisma to your saves, and apparently looks to stack with Bestow Grace.

Of course, the problem with that, as with Bestow Grace, is that they're really only worth bothering with if you've got the Charisma.

The paladin's bonus to saves is only worth bothering with if you have the charisma.

Admittedly, but it was the only spell I could think of off the top of my head. I suppose there are the various Protection Spells, and there are a few spells like Suppress Charms and Compulsions.

An excellent spell, but the warpriest will never get access to it - it's 7th level on the cleric list, the warpriest never goes above level 6.

Expected April 2015?

I smell a preemptive April Fool's joke...

It's not.

Expected April 2015?

I smell a preemptive April Fool's joke...

Actually, this is now in line of their original announcement, which was for a Spring release.

For whatever reason, when the product description was originaly put up, it stated August 2015.

For those who are interested, yes I am the one designing the summoner. As for the ideas of other folks around the office, I always showcase off my concepts and let others throw in their ideas, concerns, and criticisms. Its how the process works.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer