|
Ok. Please tell me the best way to make the following characters with multiclassing:
An anti-paladin?
A spontaneous divine caster?
An artificer?
A psionic character?
1) cleric/fighter
2) bard (with the flavour changed)
3) wizard (with the flavour changed)
4) sorcerer (with the flavour changed)Don't get me wrong; I like more options. But to say that I need new base classes to make those character types is not true.
So as long as you houserule things substantially, you don't need new classes. I quite agree.
Can you do it without houseruling arcane casters into divine casters? ;-)
|
Since GenCon and the street date for the PFRPG release occur at the same time, I would think that there is at least a possibility that the new core classes would be in the core book. That being said, I am not holding my breath. The classes I would like to see are 1)Blackguard and Avenger (which used to be a Neutral aligned Paladin back in the old days), 2) Some kind of arcane fighter along the lines of a duskblade, 3) at least one psionic class, most likely a soulknife since they don't require extensive power lists, 4)A divine caster similar to the Favored Soul that can cast their spells without preparing them ahead of time.
Hey, aren't you making the Avatar movie?
No, but I did get a walk on part - you can see me just to the left of Appa's rearmost left leg right before Sokka yells "yip yip" (not really).
Hey, aren't you making the Avatar movie?No, but I did get a walk on part - you can see me just to the left of Appa's rearmost left leg right before Sokka yells "yip yip" (not really).
Ah. I had you confused with M. Nykqill Shymalongadingdong.
@ KaeYoss my friend, the Hellknight is already a done deal. Locked and loaded. James said you'll see it in Pathfinder #27. No rumor or speculation, but rather fact. PF #27.
*******************
I know I am in the minority.. but I'd like to see a crafting oriented class of some kind. <sniff> Like the Magesmith.
I'm not holding my breath however.
EDIT: Having said that, I'm not banking on Psi either.. but that would shock and delight me.
I said this not too long ago in another thread. The only three niches that the core classes don't fill that can't be created by multi-classing are:
* Warrior who dabbles in arcane magic (Hexblade)
* Spontaneous divine caster (Favored Soul)
* Caster w/ all at-will abilities (Warlock)
No, they don't need to be called these names and they don't need to be any more closely related to the WoC classes that we've been using than what is stated above.
The Hexblade doesn't need to curse people. He just needs to fill the void that the Ranger does for Druidic magic and the Paladin fills with Clerical magic. The fighter class who dabbles a little in arcane magic but not enough to affect his attack bonus.
The Warlock doesn't need to have an Eldritch Blast or have free reign over UMD or magic devices/items in general. He could be a Sorcerer who has less spells known, can use them at-will but maybe has some kind of recharge mechanic. He could have a seperate list of invocations like the Warlock from 3.5 but maybe just balanced out better. This is probably the niche that needs filled the least though.
These are desirable to a lot of people and you can't recreate them with the core classes. You have to go back to using old 3.5 stuff or recreating your own. Other classes listed are bad choices for base classes IMO.
* Scout - No. Steps on the Rangers toes
* Gish - No. Steps on the Ftr/Wiz, Ftr/Sor toes
* Noble - Steps on the Bards toes
* Marshal - God, I hope not
* Swashbuckler - Steps on the Ftr/Rog, Ftr/Brd toes
* Assassin - Steps on Rogues toes
* Samurai, Shaman, Wu Jen, Shugenja - No. Oriental Adventures
* Psion, Psychic Warrior, Wilder, Soulknife - Could be if they are just getting everyone excited about what new classes are coming just to announce that they are going to do Psionics.
There's one niche that I totally forgot about until this thread: the evil Paladin. Actually, I didn't really forget about it, I just assumed that it'd still be a PrC. I love the idea of the Blackguard as a base class and it sounds like it has the best shot out of making it.
Wish they'd have included these in the core book but I certainly wouldn't complain about buying a book that has four new base classes and bunch of well designed PrCs in it. Something like a Spell Compendium for classes.
I also agree that new base classes shouldn't be added without good reason. The hybrid and specialist classes from 3.5 looked like a good idea at first until you realize that no one multi-classes anymore. They just take the multi-class base class which sucks out all of the customization that it usually offers. There's a million ways to make a Ftr/Sor. There's only one way to make a Duskblade. Kind of a shame, really.
I know I may be alone with my opinion, but I want the Dragon Shaman, I rarely had so much fun playing a Class as with the Dragon Shaman.
And a spontaneous Divine Caster would be good, but more flexible than the Favored Soul, for me that was the most boring 3.5 class ever.
Krome - you are a crusty, curmudgeonous, old dwarf - - - and I agree with you.
Um, was there something about the last two years.... that.... prevented these classes from being included in the book? Everyone knows I am a PAIZO cheerleader.... but... 4 seperate pages announced at GEN CON? Hmmmmmn? So... somehow I'm supposed to be excited about 4 new pages that didn't get included in the book I was already so excited about?
If we're throwing in mud-flaps that's one thing, but I'm not thrilled with hearing that we've just decided which additional gear we're adding to the transmission.
This doesn't add up. Please help me understand!?
Here's something you don't see every day; I'm with Pax. Core means in the corebook, end of story. If it was important enough to be core, it should have made the cut. If it wasn't, then it still isn't. Adding base classes was a bad idea when WotC did it, and its a bad idea now.
Further, I find this a disturbing development. I hope the huge success of the corebook hasn't made paizo take their eyes off the ball: great settings and stories. PFRPG was created to support these...a means to an end. It is because of this focus that the RPG became such a success in the first place. If the RPG becomes the end in itself because of sales numbers, then a big part of what made Pathfinder RPG special in the first place will have been lost. Seriously..."Green-lit"? I'm sorry, but that just sounds pompous. I'd like to see this officially confirmed (or better yet, officially refuted).
Edit: So, this was hearsay, but it appears to be legit. That's unfortunate. I'm sure I'm in the minority, and I'm equally sure that my concerns will be dismissed as inevitable disgruntled RPG ranting, but:
Dear Paizo:
I expect that, right now, you're telling yourselves you can do both equally well, but no man can serve two masters. I'm sure it is hard to remain objective in the face of the corebook's amazing success, but please, guys...pause a moment before you do something you might regret. We don't need another WotC; one is more than enough.
Why doesn't anybody want the Tome of Magic/Magic of Incarnum classes?!?
|
Although I agree with KaeYoss' earlier assessment, I was sure hoping for a Noqual Adapt - using the powers of his mind the Noqual Adapt can form noqual extensions to his body, temporarily gaining bonuses and abilities that reflect the melding...oh, wait. What in the hell am I talking about?!?
I did quite like Magic of Incarnum...
Since GenCon and the street date for the PFRPG release occur at the same time, I would think that there is at least a possibility that the new core classes would be in the core book.
Not a chance, we've seen the Table of Contents, it would have been revealed before now, it would have been playtested. I'd say its so wholly unlikely that... no actually I'd say it has no chance whatsoever of happening, because the core rulebook is done and I would bet you everything I own their not in their.
I don't have anything against well done core classes, but I really don't see it happening in the core rulebook. It'll be sometime next year, after the Gamemastery Guide. Maybe even after Bestiary II, all things going well.
|
|
Since GenCon and the street date for the PFRPG release occur at the same time, I would think that there is at least a possibility that the new core classes would be in the core book.Not a chance, we've seen the Table of Contents,...
Ah, but what if the ToC we saw was a red herring. Seriously though, I did say I wasn't holding my breath. However, one must never rule anything out completely. There is always an almost imperceptible chance.
Yeah, it's hard to tell from such a short post, but I took the "announcement" to be not "here are the four classes," much less, "here are the four classes, snuck into the core rulebook," but "these are the four classes we think need to be added, that we will be working on over the next year/six months/what have you."
While I partially agree with Krome/Pax/Bugley (talk about an odd triumvirate!!!), it's as a concern and not an alarm. If Paizo can already tell that the rules are about to kick their bottom line into outer-space, then there may be a sense in which rules, not stories, will make them "great". But they still may be successfully careful in adding to the rules in such a way that story telling will be enhanced, not side-lined, and without rules bloat.
Edit: There better not be four new classes if dwarven defender still got the boot!!! Anyway, I feel confident. Take heart, Paizoi!
If they're going to add core base classes, I hope they only add classes that are absolutely needed. Blackguard (hope they change the name and make it not suck) and perhaps Warlock, Shaman. Definitely the psionic classes.
Besides that, I don't see the need. Do we really need a Knight class, can't either Fighter (with maybe a level of Paladin) be used, especially with the amount of customization you can do with feats? Can't Swashbuckler be a multiclass Fighter/Rogue until they get to level 5 and can take the prestige class? (Sorry, don't mean to pick on anyone, I just needed something for an example).
I just think the core classes are fine right now. If people want particular character concepts, to me it makes sense to multiclass and/or pick feats that make sense and then switch into a prestige class at level 5. If that can't be done (in a way that makes sense), perhaps there is a need for another core class.
If Paizo can already tell that the rules are about to kick their bottom line into outer-space, then there may be a sense in which rules, not stories, will make them "great".
I don't doubt for a moment that Paizo may make more money by shifting their primary focus, but that isn't what I meant when I said great. To me, it comes down to the difference between doing what you love (and making a living at it), and making money first (while getting to do something you like). Perhaps a subtle distinction, but to me it is one that can (and has) made all the difference for Paizo. I'd hate to see that difference lost. The world has enough companies where the bottom line comes first.
All I can say concretely is that "core" (read:base) class proliferation does not bode well.
|
|
Yeah, it's hard to tell from such a short post, but I took the "announcement" to be not "here are the four classes," much less, "here are the four classes, snuck into the core rulebook," but "these are the four classes we think need to be added, that we will be working on over the next year/six months/what have you."
I agree that they are very likely a ways off. I was trying to address the specific comment that if they were meant to be core, they would be in the core rulebook. I was just saying that you should consider every possibility. I'm afraid that some people are going to start turning on Paizo the same way they turned on WoTC when they went a different direction than the fans wanted them too.
scout,scout,scout,and did i say scout.
I'm afraid that some people are going to start turning on Paizo the same way they turned on WoTC when they went a different direction than the fans wanted them too.
Dibs on Mona's dice. ;-)
Director of Games
|
Hey there everybody,
I have a couple of points I want to bring up.
1. We have no intention of producing a mountain of base classes. The one that we are thinking of help us round out some mechanical and conceptual niches. To top it off, these classes will be open to us.
2. These classes are not in the core book. The rules in that book are primarily to convert the 3.5 system, not to present new content. (although we broke this in some places, classes were not one of them).
3. Finally, if you want to know more about the classes and the book that contains them (which is currently unannounced), I would recommend that you attend the PFRPG seminar on Saturday at GenCon.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
I don't doubt for a moment that they may make more money by shifting their primary focus, the world has enough companies (Paizo) where the bottom line comes first. That isn't what I meant when I said great.
To me, it comes down to the difference between doing what you love (and making a living at it), and making money first (while getting to do something you like). Perhaps a subtle distinction, but to me it is one that can (and has) made all the difference for Paizo. I'd hate to see that difference lost.
All I can say concretely is that "core" (read:base) class proliferation does not bode well.
On the first points: Right.
On the final point, should one read core=base or base=/=prestige? In any event, it serves less like a canary in the cave for me and more as an unexpected development I'm keeping an eye on. So I think it's just a matter of emphasis/valence between us.
Edit: Ta-da!
I'm going to have to get used to Jason's new avatar. :)
|
|
Krome - you are a crusty, curmudgeonous, old dwarf - - - and I agree with you.
Um, was there something about the last two years.... that.... prevented these classes from being included in the book? Everyone knows I am a PAIZO cheerleader.... but... 4 seperate pages announced at GEN CON? Hmmmmmn? So... somehow I'm supposed to be excited about 4 new pages that didn't get included in the book I was already so excited about?
If we're throwing in mud-flaps that's one thing, but I'm not thrilled with hearing that we've just decided which additional gear we're adding to the transmission.
This doesn't add up. Please help me understand!?
Here's something you don't see every day; I'm with Pax. Core means in the corebook, end of story. If it was important enough to be core, it should have made the cut. If it wasn't, then it still isn't. Adding base classes was a bad idea when WotC did it, and its a bad idea now.
Further, I find this a disturbing development. I hope the huge success of the corebook hasn't made paizo take their eyes off the ball: great settings and stories. PFRPG was created to support these...a means to an end. It is because of this focus that the RPG became such a success in the first place. If the RPG becomes the end in itself because of sales numbers, then a big part of what made Pathfinder RPG special in the first place will have been lost. Seriously..."Green-lit"? I'm sorry, but that just sounds pompous. I'd like to see this officially confirmed (or better yet, officially refuted).
Edit: So, this was hearsay, but it appears to be legit. That's unfortunate. I'm sure I'm in the minority, and I'm equally sure that my concerns will be dismissed as inevitable disgruntled RPG ranting, but:
Dear Paizo:
I expect that right now, you're telling yourselves you can do both equally well, but no man can serve two masters. I'm sure it is hard to...
They said they were adding 4 classes(one or more of which will probably be a "core" PrC that they felt deserved it's own base class) not x number of splatbooks every month with the occasional adventure thrown in for good measure. Relax a bit and give them the benefit of the doubt. They are Paizo, not TSR or WotC.
For the record, just because I don't want to see Paizo go a certain way doesn't mean I dislike them or wish them ill (or even think they're making a mistake; I think there is way more money in rules supplements than adventures). I happen to their their devotion to story first is special, and deserves to be preserved (yes, even at the cost of higher profits).
Move along, move along, nothing to see here.
Hey there everybody,
I have a couple of points I want to bring up.
1. We have no intention of producing a mountain of base classes. The one that we are thinking of help us round out some mechanical and conceptual niches. To top it off, these classes will be open to us.
2. These classes are not in the core book. The rules in that book are primarily to convert the 3.5 system, not to present new content. (although we broke this in some places, classes were not one of them).
3. Finally, if you want to know more about the classes and the book that contains them (which is currently unannounced), I would recommend that you attend the PFRPG seminar on Saturday at GenCon.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
I will now shamelessly glory in JB's post.
1. Sounds good.2. Told you guys! I hope Dwarven Defender is in that book!
3. Yeah, I wish. I'll attend the after-seminar here.
Move along, move along, nothing to see here.
Hey, bub, don't interrupt my glorying!
I petulantly demand:
assassin
cavalier
illusionist
acrobat.
Seriously, though. Most of this thread is just base speculation.
Edit: OOh! and jester.
|
I never understood why some people seem to dislike options so much.
Personally, I trust in Paizo. They've done a magnificent job thus far, and every product I buy from them is filled with story with the hint of crunch. It satisfies both my needs without going overboard on either, and I love it. I look forward to seeing what they will do with 4 new base classes, because:
A. I love having more options. For PCs, NPCs, what have you.
B. It means I'll be getting an equal amount of Fluff surrounding all of them, and that I love.
Until they put out something that is obviously too much crunch and not enough fluff, I don't get why people are over-worrying in advance. This is Paizo. They've done good so far. Stop throwing fits when they haven't screwed up yet.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
If I could pick four (non-psionic) base classes I'd like to see...
Noble - Not just because it's a specific niche, but because the Aristocrat is the only NPC class w/o a core class counterpart. Something based on leading and diplomacy. No magic backup like the bard, maybe contacts and a slew of (Ex) abilities. It also works as a 'supliment' class because some of the noble's 'powers' might require per region adjudication. (A noble's going to get along easier in, say, Taldor than Andoran, and better in Andoran than Galt). Yes, a fighter who has charisma and intelligence high enough can take and use bluff/diplomacy/intimidate/knowlege (nobility)/sense motive, but I think we need a class that is more dedicated.
Knight - A flexible class that is better on horse than foot. Give it a skirmish and bonuses to hit and damage on horseback balanced by an average BAB. Put him on a horse and he can give a fighter with mounted combat feats fits, knock him of the horse and he's subpar. Mix with ranger and you have a desert skirmisher.
Swashbuckler/Corsair. There have been a few good versions, but mixing the light nimble fighter with some ranger traits (sea based survival, limited favourite enemy, some rope tricks) would be a hole to be filled.
Finally a fighter/mage. I have my own, Adamant has their own, but an 'official' version would work. I'd recommend a Paladin version, but one of bardic levels would work as well. He's a trade off with the EK, gets magic earlier, but doesn't hit the powers of a ftr 2 wiz 8 EK 10.
umm to reiterate a question from above... Do we really need more classes?
It was said that yes, because there are niches left out there.
First, in chat James said that the assumption should always be that folks own the core book only, I am pretty certain that's a company wide thought. The phrase 'core classes' could mean a few things and in this case I think it means classes that are to be released under the PfRPG branding and designed for general consumption rather than classes which are designed and branded for Golarian specific use and released in an AP or a Pathfinder Companion product.
In general I am mostly in line with your thoughts on this. I really hope Paizo resists the urge to release new stuff every year for the sake of releasing stuff. When they suggested they would be releasing 3-4 hardcover rule books a year I was not a happy person, in my eyes that is entirely too close to the splatbook business model Wizards used.
My thoughts on new core classes? Something akin to psionic warrior or jedi but arcane (defensive magic, spell boosted attacks, swift spells, etc). It would be nice to see some of the spells work their way in to the ranger/ paladin spell list at the same time.
I suppose there is a role for a a non-martial divine class, perhaps this could be the spontaneous divine class folks are looking for. Though in my opinion a non-martial divine class should be an INT based caster and I really don't think we need 4 divine classes.
I'm all for more options.
What's more, it was good form to keep them out of the core rulebook. It's drawn enough flak for the changes. At least this way, anti-expansionist GMs can easily limit players to a single book.
The 11 core/base/original/whatever classes are pretty flexible, but there's really no reason to make the case that they cover every concept in fantasy between them.
I'm anxious to see what Paizo has deemed to be be "the gaps" and how well they fill them in.
I never understood why some people seem to dislike options so much.
Personally, I trust in Paizo. They've done a magnificent job thus far, and every product I buy from them is filled with story with the hint of crunch. It satisfies both my needs without going overboard on either, and I love it. I look forward to seeing what they will do with 4 new base classes, because:
A. I love having more options. For PCs, NPCs, what have you.
B. It means I'll be getting an equal amount of Fluff surrounding all of them, and that I love.Until they put out something that is obviously too much crunch and not enough fluff, I don't get why people are over-worrying in advance. This is Paizo. They've done good so far. Stop throwing fits when they haven't screwed up yet.
A. No one is throwing "fits" (and, in the interest of civil discussion, please curtail the uneeded, emotionally-charged rhetoric).
B. You are proceeding from a false premise. It isn't that I "dislike options;" rather, I dislike the proliferation of pointless mechanics because they sell (see:WotC).
One of the biggest selling points of PFRPG is that it is a self-contained platform for stories. I'm not interested in a Pathfinder that assumes I own seven different hardbacks. I know that isn't the stated intent, but misuse of the word "core" is especially troubling, coming as it does on the heels of WotC's similiar behavior.
I've beaten this horse enough; I'll be polite and leave the rest of the thread to those interested in discussing possible specifics of the upcoming classes. Cheers!
If they're going to add core base classes, I hope they only add classes that are absolutely needed. Blackguard (hope they change the name and make it not suck) and perhaps Warlock, Shaman. Definitely the psionic classes.
I hear ya. Anti-Paladin, Shaman would be my votes, although something warlockish would be okay. Not much use for the psionics, myself. I think Knight/Cavalier should be a prestige class.
Edit: Regarding what Bugley said, I'd like to have a clarification on the use of the word "core". It seems to me that we ought to keep the Core core.
I'm sure they will be great whatever they are but.... Please NO Warlocks!
I'm sure they will be great whatever they are but.... Please NO Warlocks!
[AD&D]You've got something against 8th level magic-users?[/AD&D]
|
|
A. No one is throwing "fits" (and, in the interest of civil discussion, please curtail the uneeded, emotionally-charged rhetoric).
Apologies for that line then. You're right, it wasn't best for civil discussion.
B. You are proceeding from a false premise. It isn't that I "dislike options;" rather, I dislike the proliferation of pointless mechanics because they sell (see:WotC).One of the biggest selling points of PFRPG is that it is a self-contained platform for stories. I'm not interested in a Pathfinder that assumes I own seven different hardbacks. I know that isn't the stated intent, but misuse of the word "core" is especially troubling, coming as it does on the heels of WotC's similiar behavior.
I've beaten this horse enough; I'll be polite and leave the rest of the thread to those interested in discussing possible specifics of the upcoming classes. Cheers!
My point is this exactly, though. It seems like a lot of people are also proceeding from a false premise. Who is to say that this is a 'proliferation of pointless mechanics because they sell'? Who is to say that Pathfinder is going to start assuming you own seven different hardbacks, merely because of a single word (that is likely a slipup anyways)?
My point was simply this. Paizo, so far, has been awesome. Each one of their books (and as my subscriptions show, I read a lot) has been *filled* with fluff, more than equal to the crunch they include. The companion books may have some feats, traits, spells, and a prestige, but the amount of fluff more than overshadows it. This is fine by me.
So far, they have yet to release a book that reminds me of the WotC crunch. Until they do, it just seems silly to bog down threads like this with worry, when we could instead be talking about how great this book will be. Think about it, four base classes? The amount of fluff surrounding each of those (considering how much they surround a single prestige class with) will be huge! This is a *good* thing.
@ KaeYoss my friend, the Hellknight is already a done deal. Locked and loaded. James said you'll see it in Pathfinder #27. No rumor or speculation, but rather fact. PF #27.
Did he say whether it will be a base class or a PrC?
Did he say whether it will be a base class or a PrC?
Sorry, he did not say. So I won't speculate.
If I had to bet, I would say PrC, because he was responding to Fray, at the Paizo Chat on Tuesdays.
Fray was good naturedly grousing that PF#27 was a long time to wait for Hellknights.. and James replied, "It's mid level in the adventure path, about the time that folks start thinking about taking prestige classes."
Edit: I guess I did speculate didn't I? Lol
* Caster w/ all at-will abilities (Warlock)
I don't agree that those 3 are the only niches that cannot be filled with core classes. I'd go as far as to say that other concepts need the treatment more.
Anyway, this one is one I feel needs not be represented at all. It's not a concept, it's a built. D&D magic isn't at will, if it were, the other classes were like that.
I think the whole thing would require a great angle for the flavour and/or some really groundbreaking and new mechanics to make it worth the paper and effort. Just saying "he gets to defy the game assumptions by casting all day long" isn't enough for me.
The Hexblade doesn't need to curse people.
Yes, he does. Without hexing anyone, he wouldn't be a hexblade.
If you're talking about a warrior/arcanist, don't call it hexblade.
Plus, what about bard? A lot in that direction already.
Or, of course, fighter/wizard/eldritch knight. You lose a bit of BAB, but you make up for it with your fighter levels and their weapon training.
* Gish - No. Steps on the Ftr/Wiz, Ftr/Sor toes
So does the "arcane paladin" (i.e. fighter with a little bit of arcane magic).
* Noble - Steps on the Bards toes
Not really. They are similar, but fighters and barbarians are similar, too.
* Samurai, Shaman, Wu Jen, Shugenja - No. Oriental Adventures
That one gets done as soon as Mike manages to talk Paizo into letting him write it.
* Psion, Psychic Warrior, Wilder, Soulknife - Could be if they are just getting everyone excited about what new classes are coming just to announce that they are going to do Psionics.
That would excite a lot of people, too.
There's one niche that I totally forgot about until this thread: the evil Paladin. Actually, I didn't really forget about it, I just assumed that it'd still be a PrC. I love the idea of the Blackguard as a base class and it sounds like it has the best shot out of making it.
I'd call it virtually a done deal. The blackguard PrC is not in the PFRPG core book because JJ (I think it was him) said the concept should be a core class. I'd say that's top priority.
My point was simply this. Paizo, so far, has been awesome.
Agreed. My concerns, oddly enough, could be largely addressed by not using the word "core." To me that word has some specific, and meaningful, connotations. It may seem trivial, but I'd feel much better if they were called "base" classes.
As to bogging down this thread; you're right. I've done enough of it. :)
Edit: Upon further consideration, it is almost entirely the use of the word "core" that troubles me. While I don't want to see Paizo become a rule company, I'd be much more OK with additional base classes as long as they are explicitly supplementary.
Here's something you don't see every day; I'm with Pax. Core means in the corebook, end of story.
Of course. It's in the dictionary and everything.
Too bad Paizo doesn't sell dictionaries. I guess they're not immune to misusing words.
If the RPG becomes the end in itself because of sales numbers, then a big part of what made Pathfinder RPG special in the first place will have been lost.
Huh?
Of course this is an end in itself. You don't put that sort of effort into something and make it your most expensive product if you don't want it to be great on its own.
Stories (not rules) are what made Paizo great.
Everything, not not everything is what makes Paizo great.
What I've seen from PFRPG is several flavours of awesome, all blended into one without tasting weird.
I'm really excited and impressed about PFRPG and how it improved 3e. I'd like to keep getting excited and impressed about PFRPG products.
They can make the great stories AND the great rules.
I expect that, right now, you're telling yourselves you can do both equally well, but no man can serve two masters. I'm sure it is hard to remain objective in the face of the corebook's amazing success, but please, guys...pause a moment before you do something you might regret. We don't need another WotC; one is more than enough.
Huh? wotc never served two masters.
So if they did that, they'd just be another wotc.
They're going to keep 3e alive and kicking, with both stories and rules to support those stories.
Why doesn't anybody want the Tome of Magic/Magic of Incarnum classes?!?
Tome of Magic:
Shadow Caster was weird. The rules didn't really work. It was just a different kind of wizard. Trash the rules and make it flavour. Maybe a bunch of feats.
Truenamer was an interesting concept, but the rules were terrible. Trash the class and the rules and do something else with the concept. I'd say incorporate it into spellcasting in general.
Spirit Binder: Just get Secrets of Pact Magic, nice book, full from cover to cover with lots of different classes (too many, I'd say, but you can pick the most interesting ones), feats, and spirits for the binder classes to use. (Dario, you owe me big cash for advertising your book ;-)
Incarnum: Never looked too closely. It's weird stuff.
3. Finally, if you want to know more about the classes and the book that contains them (which is currently unannounced), I would recommend that you attend the PFRPG seminar on Saturday at GenCon.
Sorry. A continent away. Plus, it's our company's yearly celebration, and I've been told the company knows how to party. I'll be with you in spirit, though. And in curiousity.
Edit: OOh! and jester.
I like the way you think!
what if they are just announcing a web enhancement for the core book that can be downloaded for free?
I like the way you think!
(Something about gnome-only classes
I like the way you think!