|
In the Star Wars Revised Core Edition (RCR), there was a twist for characters who multi-classed to fill certain roles. These were called archetypes. When you followed a developmental tree of multiclassing, doing so represented taking on an "archetype." By taking on the archetype, you actually had available a means to substitute "new" special abilities for those belonging to the other class(es). Has Paizo considered adding this to the Pathfinder RPG?
The reason I ask is that I was thinking about creating a character who had both Bard and Wizard classes. He would be a Loreseeker. His primary class would be Bard, but it would be supplemented with Wizard levels to represented his acquisition of specialized knowledge. I.e., the Wizard levels would augment his Bardic growth. Not a singer by any means - but rather a person on the quest for knowledge . . . like a Pathfinder.
I really liked the aspect of Archetypes in RCR and would like to see Paizo tackle them here, as the start of its Brave New World.
Similarly, as stated in another post, I'd really like to see Paizo build variants into its class progressions to illustrate how no two Bards are alike, or Rogues, or Rangers, or Fighters, etc. etc., and as such their special abilities are different.
|
|
In the Star Wars Revised Core Edition (RCR), there was a twist for characters who multi-classed to fill certain roles. These were called archetypes. When you followed a developmental tree of multiclassing, doing so represented taking on an "archetype." By taking on the archetype, you actually had available a means to substitute "new" special abilities for those belonging to the other class(es). Has Paizo considered adding this to the Pathfinder RPG?
The reason I ask is that I was thinking about creating a character who had both Bard and Wizard classes. He would be a Loreseeker. His primary class would be Bard, but it would be supplemented with Wizard levels to represented his acquisition of specialized knowledge. I.e., the Wizard levels would augment his Bardic growth. Not a singer by any means - but rather a person on the quest for knowledge . . . like a Pathfinder.
I really liked the aspect of Archetypes in RCR and would like to see Paizo tackle them here, as the start of its Brave New World.
Similarly, as stated in another post, I'd really like to see Paizo build variants into its class progressions to illustrate how no two Bards are alike, or Rogues, or Rangers, or Fighters, etc. etc., and as such their special abilities are different.
Well, you'd need to cover the following:
Barbarian/Bard
Barbarian/Cleric
Barbarian/Druid
Barbarian/Fighter
Barbarian/Ranger
Barbarian/Rogue
Barbarian/Sorcerer
Barbarian/Wizard
Bard/Cleric
Bard/Druid
Bard/Fighter
Bard/Rogue
Bard/Ranger
Bard/Sorcerer
Bard/Wizard
Cleric/Druid
Cleric/Fighter
Cleric/Monk
Cleric/Paladin
Cleric/Ranger
Cleric/Rogue
Cleric/Sorcerer
Cleric/Wizard
Druid/Fighter
Druid/Monk
Druid/Ranger
Druid/Rogue
Druid/Sorcerer
Druid/Wizard
Fighter/Monk
Fighter/Paladin
Fighter/Ranger
Fighter/Rogue
Fighter/Sorcerer
Fighter/Wizard
Monk/Paladin
Monk/Ranger
Monk/Rogue
Monk/Sorcerer
Monk/Wizard
Paladin/Ranger
Paladin/Rogue
Paladin/Sorcerer
Paladin/Wizard
Ranger/Rogue
Ranger/Sorcerer
Ranger/Wizard
Rogue/Sorcerer
Rogue/Wizard
Sorcerer/Wizard
If you REALLY wanted to be complete, you could find a way of achieving the following:
Bard/Monk
Bard/Paladin
Barbarian/Monk
Barbarian/Paladin
Druid/Paladin
I'm not opposed to the idea, but this seems like it would be a good supplement for Paizo to put out in 2010 rather than something to wedge into the core rules. You've got 50 "legal" combos and 5 "illegal" ones there. That's going to take up some space.
|
|
Very good point. Of course, it could always be a new edition to each Pathfinder adventure. Each issue has a new playable archetype . . . or drop the archetype theme altogether. Each issue has new playable variants for each core class. This way, Paizo isn't pressured to come up with a new approach 'all at once,' but can spread it out over time.
|
|
Very good point. Of course, it could always be a new edition to each Pathfinder adventure. Each issue has a new playable archetype . . . or drop the archetype theme altogether. Each issue has new playable variants for each core class. This way, Paizo isn't pressured to come up with a new approach 'all at once,' but can spread it out over time.
Like I said, if they went this way, I certainly wouldn't object. I'm not sure how likely it would be, but there's no denying it would be cool if they did. In fact, the archetypes I'd most like to see would be the "illegal" ones. Paladin/druid has always sounded like a cool combo to me.
|
|
Paladin/druid has always sounded like a cool combo to me.*cough* RANGER *cough*
Except it's not. Mechanically or flavor-wise. Even in the old days when the ranger had to be good, it's still a far cry from being a a paladin, though a 2e ranger is probably the closest you'd get. What was that guy's name in BGII?
In the Star Wars Revised Core Edition (RCR), there was a twist for characters who multi-classed to fill certain roles. These were called archetypes. When you followed a developmental tree of multi-classing, doing so represented taking on an "archetype."
<SNIP>
Another company has already done that with 3.0/3.5 (Mongoose, w/their "Complete II" books.) The changes that Pathfinder is making to the classes complicates (but does not eliminate) the usage of those books, but you can look at them to get the basic ideas.
(Personally, I'm a little miffed that they canceled that line before they got around to the Complete Psion II and the Complete Psychic Warrior II books. *sigh*)
|
|
In the Star Wars Revised Core Edition (RCR), there was a twist for characters who multi-classed to fill certain roles. These were called archetypes. When you followed a developmental tree of multi-classing, doing so represented taking on an "archetype."
<SNIP>
Another company has already done that with 3.0/3.5 (Mongoose, w/their "Complete II" books.) The changes that Pathfinder is making to the classes complicates (but does not eliminate) the usage of those books, but you can look at them to get the basic ideas.
(Personally, I'm a little miffed that they canceled that line before they got around to the Complete Psion II and the Complete Psychic Warrior II books. *sigh*)
Yeah, that was one of the VERY few things Mongoose did that I liked. Not the whole product line, but the multiclassing guidelines.
|
|
I think they did something similar to this in Dragon magazine. There weren't any special powers, but they definitely said something like..
If you want to be "this" you'd multiclass like "this."
I have dim recollections of a fighter/monk "martial artist" and a combat necromancer using the 3.0 rules (though that had a prestige class or two). I've always liked those, and I'd be hard-pressed to even explain WHY.
In the Star Wars Revised Core Edition (RCR), there was a twist for characters who multi-classed to fill certain roles. These were called archetypes. When you followed a developmental tree of multiclassing, doing so represented taking on an "archetype." By taking on the archetype, you actually had available a means to substitute "new" special abilities for those belonging to the other class(es). Has Paizo considered adding this to the Pathfinder RPG?
The reason I ask is that I was thinking about creating a character who had both Bard and Wizard classes. He would be a Loreseeker. His primary class would be Bard, but it would be supplemented with Wizard levels to represented his acquisition of specialized knowledge. I.e., the Wizard levels would augment his Bardic growth. Not a singer by any means - but rather a person on the quest for knowledge . . . like a Pathfinder.
Not *necessarily* cirticizing the concept in general -- but I'm dubious;
I do know that in the specific case you cite what you want is a PrC; a Bard PrC that trades combat and roguish ability for more powerful spellcasting. There are already two: the Sublime Chord, which only kicks in above level 10, but allows a high-level bard to carry his weight with sorcerer-like casing, and one in Complete... trickster? mage? that more modestly grants the bard a few extra spell slots and spells known.