The 4 next PFRPG core classes to be announced at Gen Con


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

151 to 200 of 730 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

The odds are reasonable that this is a Psionics book. If it is, the 4 classes are the 4 Psionic classes.

Assuming this isn't a Psionics book I would say that an Artificer and Blackguard are probably no-brainers.

I think there is enough push that you will see some sort of spontaneous Divine caster, although in the spirit of fun, I am going to posit that their list will come from the nature side of the Divine house. I'll also guess that this class will look more like a Bard and less like a full progression caster, if we are lucky it will somehow focus on debuffs, maybes hexes or curses, as its core mechanic.

As for the fourth? No idea. But I can hope against hope for some sort of Mastermind.


Set wrote:


Can you imagine the sorts of Bindings you'd get from Rovagug or Nethys or Iomedae?

Would make a great community project: Turn Golarion's deities into spirits for Secrets of Pact Binding.

Set wrote:


A Hellknight core class (not-always-evil version of the Blackguard, as Hellknights are quite commonly LN, and not required to be LE).

I wouldn't call it a not-always-evil version of the Blackguard. Blackguard are evil. Hellknights are alwas lawful. I guess their MO would be different, too, in many ways.

Set wrote:


A Witch type class (less spells, more innate magical abilities).

Now that sounds interesting. Let's say a bard-like spell progression (with more hexes and witchy stuff in it), maybe an actual hex ability (that uses all manner of curses), and some always-on abilities.

Set wrote:


A Shaman / spontaneous divine caster.

I don't know whether it should be a shaman or a priest (i.e. nature magic or deity magic). Maybe both:

The shaman would go the way of the AE classes - change his spells known daily and cast like a sorcerer and would have some nature-based abilities (no wildshape - that's the druid's schtick)

Set wrote:


A Noble (a little bard, a little swashbuckler, a little marshal, no magic).

I wouldn't put in any magic.

My take would be:

  • Part swashbuckler, i.e. fighting with rapiers or similar weapons using style and grace. Nobles train fighting as a sport.
  • Part leader. They have servants and are used to giving orders. They usually have to run the family and its endeavours, so they actually know what they're doing.
  • Part social power. Contacts, knowledge, clout, that sort of thing.


  • A question I haven't seen asked: With these new base classes be available for play in Pathfinder Society scenarios?

    RPG Superstar 2009 Top 16, 2012 Top 32

    mdt wrote:
    I want as much fluff and crunch as possible out of Paizo that's not world/setting specific, including additional races and classes. The fact the CEO is naysaying it makes me figure I'll not be able to buy much past the core book and beastiary. I'll keep my subscription for now, but if I end up getting a lot of Golarian specific expansion books, I'm going to walk away and be sad for what could have been.

    I've re-read Lisa's comment several times, and I'm not sure I understand your response. Where are you getting the impression that setting-specific information is going to end up in the RPG subscription? And why would a limit on the number of base classes included in the RPG force you to use the Golarion setting?

    Scarab Sages

    I hope when you get around to a Tian (OA) settign book, it will be a full Pathfinder book, but instead of Base Classes, that it will be full of Alternate class abilities that change the existing classes, For example, a "Ninja" could be a rogue with Rogue talents that are ninja flavored...(mmmm ninja-flavored)...A shugenja would be a cleric with some different domains, a wu-jen would be a wizard with some alternate class abilities...(and spells of course for both the shugenja/wu-jen), A Samurai, Bushi, Ronin, all could be done within the existing class structure.

    Sovereign Court

    KaeYoss wrote:


    Sorry. I'm a foeigner, Please point out my mistakes so I may learn from them.

    Your birth.

    BOOYAH!

    Spoiler:
    just messin' wit cha dude

    RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

    4 classes I'd like to see:

    1. A mobility-based combatant. Kind of like a cross between a scout and swashbuckler. Maybe with a few "trump card" abilities, like the barbarian's rage powers.

    2. A skill-based magician. Maybe incorporating rituals of some kind for non-combat stuff, with a few combat related spells. Maybe based on a Spellcraft check to cast, and a separate Knowledge check based on the opponent's creature type for Save DCs (or maybe 10 + ranks in Knowledge). Possible to cast all day, but skill checks for the same spell get harder and harder the more you cast them. Kind of a cross between a warlock and a truenamer.

    3. A dedicated buffer. Kind of like the marshal or the 4.0 warlord, with the ability to buff and get a swing in during the same round.

    4. A flexible-role PC. Kind of like the binder, that can be a tank one day, a blaster the next, a healer the next, and a skill monkey the next. Might also be able to fit into the Shaman role if a similar mechanic is used (spirits instead of vestiges).


    Erik Mona wrote:
    Frogboy wrote:


    * 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.
    Most of these would be shoe-ins for an Asian or Psionics book. Is that what we're announcing at Gen Con? Show up and find out! :)

    It's starting to feel more and more like it's indeed a psionics book that's about to be announced, perhaps with an open playtest.


    lastknightleft wrote:
    KaeYoss wrote:


    Sorry. I'm a foeigner, Please point out my mistakes so I may learn from them.
    Your birth.

    That's not really my mistake. It was my parents. And it's the world that will suffer for it. MUAHAHAHAHAHA!

    Dark Archive

    Erik Mona wrote:
    bugleyman wrote:


    Any chance we can get the word "core" kept off of supplements? That is my only remaining concern. Or is that too specific a commitment that you're afraid might come back to bite you? Edit: Nevermind; this has been addressed as still under advisement in another thread.

    I can assure you that we will be a lot more careful with the word "core" than I was last night going forward. :)

    --Erik

    From EN World:

    Sorry, sorry, sorry!

    I should have said BASE classes. The CORE classes are the 11 found in the Core Rulebook. Period.

    --Erik Mona
    Publisher
    Paizo Publishing

    Liberty's Edge

    Jason Bulmahn wrote:

    Robert,

    We are cognizant of the past and the dangerous path that we tread. That is not to say we won't make mistakes, but we have no intention of letting things get out of hand. New rules will be a part of what we do, but it is not going to be the only thing. As someone with many many bookshelves full of 3.0 and 3.5 products, I am well aware of what has been done before and we do not plan to just retread old ground.

    And if we do... I am sure that I have about 20,000 active posters on these boards that will let me know.

    Jason Bulmahn
    Lead Designer
    Paizo Publishing

    JB, thanks for taking the time to post a response. I am quite sure that Paizo is cognizant of this. I have full faith in that.

    For the record, although I have admittedly a personal issue with too much extra cruch splat material added, my comments were only made to help answer the posters query as to why many people take issue w/ such material. I also included much praise and assurance that I believe if anyone was capable of balancing it - and make it work - it would be Paizo - because I was sure you were cognizant of it (especially since it's that collapse of a previous system that has provided you the Pathfinder opportunity) and in my heart I believe that although as a comopany profits are important - I do not believe that it is the sole focus of Paizo - especially not to the detriment of the gamers and game itself.

    Congrats on the sell out of your wonderful product. You deserve major kudos. I can't wait till my book we've all been eagerly contributing to and arguing about is finally in my hands in all its shiny goodness.

    One more thing of note: here is something that would help (me personally) swallow the need for additional crunch rules/classes/feats etc or whatever is designed. IF it's made to be used as part of Society Play - then that helps validate it's viability I believe. Otherwise - it falls into the same trap that "someone important" obviously doesn't think this is fair and balanced - otherwise it would be part of league play - which has always been reason enough for me to immediately dismiss it (historically speaking from previous un-fun publishers of our favorite RPG).

    Robert


    Epic Meepo wrote:
    mdt wrote:
    I want as much fluff and crunch as possible out of Paizo that's not world/setting specific, including additional races and classes. The fact the CEO is naysaying it makes me figure I'll not be able to buy much past the core book and beastiary. I'll keep my subscription for now, but if I end up getting a lot of Golarian specific expansion books, I'm going to walk away and be sad for what could have been.
    I've re-read Lisa's comment several times, and I'm not sure I understand your response. Where are you getting the impression that setting-specific information is going to end up in the RPG subscription? And why would a limit on the number of base classes included in the RPG force you to use the Golarion setting?

    I'm thinking mdt means that the RPG Subscription line of products should strive to avoid being Golarion-specific - or, rather, they should definitively not include Golarion-specific material. Some amount of it is unavoidable - the Cleric core class, for example.

    mdt, please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong! :)


    Epic Meepo wrote:
    mdt wrote:
    I want as much fluff and crunch as possible out of Paizo that's not world/setting specific, including additional races and classes. The fact the CEO is naysaying it makes me figure I'll not be able to buy much past the core book and beastiary. I'll keep my subscription for now, but if I end up getting a lot of Golarian specific expansion books, I'm going to walk away and be sad for what could have been.
    I've re-read Lisa's comment several times, and I'm not sure I understand your response. Where are you getting the impression that setting-specific information is going to end up in the RPG subscription? And why would a limit on the number of base classes included in the RPG force you to use the Golarion setting?

    There were two parts to that post of mine. The second part, which is what Lisa's post was about, was saying 'NO' to additional classes, races, etc. That is the part I didn't like about her post. Didn't mean to imply that she was trying to stamp any new classes/races/etc into Golarion. She's stamping them out. :(


    Turin the Mad wrote:
    Epic Meepo wrote:
    mdt wrote:
    I want as much fluff and crunch as possible out of Paizo that's not world/setting specific, including additional races and classes. The fact the CEO is naysaying it makes me figure I'll not be able to buy much past the core book and beastiary. I'll keep my subscription for now, but if I end up getting a lot of Golarian specific expansion books, I'm going to walk away and be sad for what could have been.
    I've re-read Lisa's comment several times, and I'm not sure I understand your response. Where are you getting the impression that setting-specific information is going to end up in the RPG subscription? And why would a limit on the number of base classes included in the RPG force you to use the Golarion setting?

    I'm thinking mdt means that the RPG Subscription line of products should strive to avoid being Golarion-specific - or, rather, they should definitively not include Golarion-specific material. Some amount of it is unavoidable - the Cleric core class, for example.

    mdt, please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong! :)

    Nope, you're right. That was addressed to people talking about Hellknights. The comment on how Lisa's post depressed me was addressed to her statement that she agreed with all the people who want no more new classes/races/etc. :(


    Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

    The next 4 classes will probably relate to an AP or region being done in the next year or so. So Council of Thieves seems too soon. That leaves King Maker or Jade Regent. Jade Regent seems the most likely to have new style classes.

    Sovereign Court

    Well.... I guess that's all cleared up then. Thanks to everyone who put the energy into getting this sorted out.


    mdt wrote:
    Turin the Mad wrote:
    Epic Meepo wrote:
    mdt wrote:
    I want as much fluff and crunch as possible out of Paizo that's not world/setting specific, including additional races and classes. The fact the CEO is naysaying it makes me figure I'll not be able to buy much past the core book and beastiary. I'll keep my subscription for now, but if I end up getting a lot of Golarian specific expansion books, I'm going to walk away and be sad for what could have been.
    I've re-read Lisa's comment several times, and I'm not sure I understand your response. Where are you getting the impression that setting-specific information is going to end up in the RPG subscription? And why would a limit on the number of base classes included in the RPG force you to use the Golarion setting?

    I'm thinking mdt means that the RPG Subscription line of products should strive to avoid being Golarion-specific - or, rather, they should definitively not include Golarion-specific material. Some amount of it is unavoidable - the Cleric core class, for example.

    mdt, please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong! :)

    Nope, you're right. That was addressed to people talking about Hellknights. The comment on how Lisa's post depressed me was addressed to her statement that she agreed with all the people who want no more new classes/races/etc. :(
    I would think they roughly plan something along the lines of:
    • The GM Guide (the one slated for Feb/Mar 2010 - hopefully "critter" feats are included in either here or the Bestiaries)
    • Bestiary II
    • Psionics for PRPG
    • High Level Play
    • Bestiary III
    • and perhaps a revival of the 2e Players' Option line, incorporating stuff like the Traits, new feats (for players), alternative class features, new base and prestige classes that are not Golarion-specific, new gear, new spells and anything else they can cram into it.

    At a release rate of 3 per year, those six books above cover PRPG for the next two years - which is a far more palatable release rate.


    Turin the Mad wrote:


    I would think they roughly plan something along the lines of:
    • The GM Guide (the one slated for Feb/Mar 2010 - hopefully "critter" feats are included in either here or the Bestiaries)
    • Bestiary II
    • Psionics for PRPG
    • High Level Play
    • Bestiary III
    • and perhaps a revival of the 2e Players' Option line, incorporating stuff like the Traits, new feats (for players), alternative class features, new BASE and prestige classes that are not Golarion-specific, new gear, new spells and anything else they can cram into it.

    At a release rate of 3 per year, those six books above cover PRPG for the next two years...

    Yep,

    I'm ok with that. Mostly, not my preferred order. :) Less Bestiaries and move the Option book up above psionics. Not that I hate psionics, just saying an Options book would be more popular than psionics, and usable by more people.

    If you look a few posts above though, you'll still see people posting and wanting expansions to be regional specific expansions within Golarian as part of the Pathfinder RPG line. If that happens, my subscription is gone.

    EDIT : Oh, and I fixed that core/base issue in the quote. :)


    As many may or may not know, Adamant Entertainment has a book coming out at GenCon, Tome of Secrets. This product has a number of classes in it. (8 new classes, including the Artificer, Knight, Priest, Shaman, Spellblade, Swashbuckler, Warlock and Warlord).

    This being the case, one thing I don't want to see is for Paizo to step all over 3PPs by producing the same thing, thereby nullifying 3PP ,material. This happened WAY too often with WotC. I know that some stuff will be crap, and some will be just a different interpretation, but I for one would prefer to see more 'cross-pollination' going on this time around. If one publisher does a good swashbuckler, then put it into an AP on an NPC. There can be enough printed in the AP so the GM can run it. It may encourage an intrigued fan to buy the original parent product.

    I feel WotC missed the boat on this one. More often, than not, they ignore very good 3PP material & wasted resources 'reinventing the wheel.' OGL movement needs to be fully embraced this time. Feed off of each other & show WotC (really mainly Hasbro) that they really screwed the pooch when they didn't take advantage of their own idea.

    EDIT:

    Erik Mona wrote:
    brock wrote:

    Artificer, Knight, Priest, Shaman, Spellblade, Swashbuckler, Warlock and Warlord.

    That's not my wishlist, that's the list of classes in The Tome of Secrets. I really hope we don't get too much overlap.

    Me too! Gareth's going to give me a copy of the Tome of Secrets at Gen Con, and I can't wait to look at it!

    So far I can pretty safely say that I'm not too worried about crossover.

    I didnt see this post at first, but am excited to hear it, none the less.


    mdt wrote:
    Turin the Mad wrote:


    I would think they roughly plan something along the lines of:
    • The GM Guide (the one slated for Feb/Mar 2010 - hopefully "critter" feats are included in either here or the Bestiaries)
    • Bestiary II
    • Psionics for PRPG
    • High Level Play
    • Bestiary III
    • and perhaps a revival of the 2e Players' Option line, incorporating stuff like the Traits, new feats (for players), alternative class features, new BASE and prestige classes that are not Golarion-specific, new gear, new spells and anything else they can cram into it.

    At a release rate of 3 per year, those six books above cover PRPG for the next two years...

    Yep,

    I'm ok with that. Mostly, not my preferred order. :) Less Bestiaries and move the Option book up above psionics. Not that I hate psionics, just saying an Options book would be more popular than psionics, and usable by more people.

    If you look a few posts above though, you'll still see people posting and wanting expansions to be regional specific expansions within Golarian as part of the Pathfinder RPG line. If that happens, my subscription is gone.

    EDIT : Oh, and I fixed that core/base issue in the quote. :)

    Noted, and edited on my end too ^_^.

    In preferred order, I'd probably go with (1)GM guide, (2) Players' Option, (3) Bestiary II, (4) High Level Play, (5) Psionics and (6) Bestiary III. I believe the Golarion-specific expansions will be incorporated into the Chronicles/Companion lines. Which should make our subs safe. :)


    Turin the Mad wrote:


    Noted, and edited on my end too ^_^.

    In preferred order, I'd probably go with (1)GM guide, (2) Players' Option, (3) Bestiary II, (4) High Level Play, (5) Psionics and (6) Bestiary III. I believe the Golarion-specific expansions will be incorporated into the Chronicles/Companion lines. Which should make our subs safe. :)

    I could really live with that order.


    I hope that when it is time to do Psionics, they don't change too much for the sake of change. 3.5 psionics are some of the best rules in the system.

    Sovereign Court

    Shame about the decision not to do something with the NPC classes... especially the Aristocrat, I loved the Patrician class from Arcanis. Something based on the Adept could be pretty interesting too.

    Dark Archive

    Calixymenthillian wrote:
    Shame about the decision not to do something with the NPC classes... especially the Aristocrat, I loved the Patrician class from Arcanis. Something based on the Adept could be pretty interesting too.

    Third-party solutions might work here;

    The Noble class from Green Ronin, or the Patrician from Arcanis, could probably replace the Aristocrat. Heck, an oratory/tactics based Bard makes a fine Noble, for that matter.

    The Warrior can be just flat out ditched in place of the Fighter.

    The Adept could be upgraded to the Witch.

    The Expert to Arcana Unearthed's Akashic.

    On the other hand, the Adept, Aristocrat and Expert are at least relatively useful in their roles as NPC classes. The Commoner and Warrior are the ones I never use. The PCs in my games tend to be tough enough for me to swap out every humanoid 'warrior' level with a Fighter level.

    Sovereign Court

    Set wrote:
    Calixymenthillian wrote:
    Shame about the decision not to do something with the NPC classes... especially the Aristocrat, I loved the Patrician class from Arcanis. Something based on the Adept could be pretty interesting too.

    Third-party solutions might work here;

    The Noble class from Green Ronin, or the Patrician from Arcanis, could probably replace the Aristocrat. Heck, an oratory/tactics based Bard makes a fine Noble, for that matter.

    The Warrior can be just flat out ditched in place of the Fighter.

    The Adept could be upgraded to the Witch.

    The Expert to Arcana Unearthed's Akashic.

    On the other hand, the Adept, Aristocrat and Expert are at least relatively useful in their roles as NPC classes. The Commoner and Warrior are the ones I never use. The PCs in my games tend to be tough enough for me to swap out every humanoid 'warrior' level with a Fighter level.

    True I guess, but I was hoping for something new and shiny. I might need to take a look at this Arcana Unearthed...

    Speaking of Experts, am I the only one who thinks they make excellent villains?

    Scarab Sages

    Erik Mona wrote:

    Someone has no doubt clarified this already, but I should have said the next four BASE classes, not the next four CORE classes. To a lot of people that probably means the same thing, but for now we want to consider only the classes in the Core Rulebook to be "core" classes, with everything else being more or less optional.

    Note that this has no impact upon what other publishers will be able to use, as we are committed to releasing all of our rules content under the OGL.

    --Erik

    Hmmm... I'll bite :^D

    New base class #1) the Varisian Witch
    New base class #2) the Chelaxian Blackguard
    New base class #3) the Taldoran Cavalier
    New base class #4) the Gunmarshall (of Alkenstar)

    Thus we would have 4 new base classes, tied to Golarian, but presumably viable anywhere with merely a change in name...

    BUT: on second thought, I have an inkling we'll see east asian themed classes like the Samurai and his friends...

    Well, it was fun to guess!


    Calixymenthillian wrote:
    Shame about the decision not to do something with the NPC classes... especially the Aristocrat, I loved the Patrician class from Arcanis. Something based on the Adept could be pretty interesting too.

    The NPC classes fill an important role even if everyone doesn't use them. They're simple and they cut down on DM prep time. Not everyone wants to stat out a 10th level Fighter and pick out and keep track of 11 or twelve feats; six or seven is bad enough. They're there because they're easier to build...boring, but easier to build.

    I'm not sure why anyone would ever stat out a commoner though. If they don't die, or at least fall unconcious with one hit, they probably aren't a commoner...unless they happen to be wearing a mithril shirt as in Frodo's case. I've always thought about playing one though just for the heck of it.

    Silver Crusade

    Personally...

    I'd LOVE for it to be the Blackguard, Jester, Battle Dancer, and Mountebank.

    But one out of four ain't bad when three are pipedreams. :)

    I really do love my Dragon Compendium classes.

    Liberty's Edge

    I'll cast a vote for asian-themed class over psionics. But if you have 1 GM themed product, 1 PC themed product and 1 beastiary a year... might could have both within 2 years. I'll try to be (mostly) patient.

    Silver Crusade

    As this thread has become far too informative, I have decided it is time for this thread to host some unreasonable and unnecessary demands.

    I respectively request that Paizo immediately cease and desist any and all development on these four mysterious "base classes". Any such information on these classes should be immediately burned, and anyone associated with their development sworn to silence on threat of purple nurple.

    Instead, the following base classes should be developed instead:

    1. The Superwarlock: This class will have all the abilities of a normal Warlock, but be at least 6 inches taller, ride a cool motorcycle, and carry a jar a marmalade, which presumably makes you commit adultery.

    2. The Halfling Paladin/Monk: Nothing screams "kill my character now" to a DM more than this combination. Except maybe the next class.

    3. The Hopeless: Resurrecting an optional AD&D class for when you're highest ability score is an eight. Besides, we need at least one class who makes the commoner look good. Still, that Feeblemind at will capstone ability is pretty sweet, until you realize it works on everyone you speak with. (You are a serious grognard if you remember when this class appeared in Dragon Magazine.)

    4. The Dungeon Master: Why should players have all the fun with leveling up? The DM should have his own class, too! Abilities could include Ignore Die Rolls, Summon Grudge Monster, Dangle Plot Hook, Create Adventure Railroad, and Bogart the Last Slice of Pizza.

    If my unreasonably insane demands are not eventually met, I may take no action whatsoever.

    Regards,

    Sowhereaminow

    Spoiler:
    Humor attempt. This is my brain on too much work. Do not taunt happy fun ball.


    Lisa Stevens wrote:
    I want everyone here to know that I am one of the biggest proponents AGAINST rules creep. I don't want a ton of new classes, races, prestige classes, etc. I am the person in the meetings who is constantly saying, "do we really need that?"

    Thank God. I hated the WoTc splat books. They just wanted to drain the fans, and the books were very unbalanced and some of them were just crap.

    Lisa Stevens wrote:


    That said, we do need to make some new rules to keep the game alive and growing. But I don't foresee that this will ever be the main thing that we do. Great adventures and a growing vibrant campaign setting are the core of what makes Paizo great. We will create new rules and have rulebooks come out, but my goal is that they add to the roleplaying experience and help us tell even better stories.

    So rest assured, I'll be fighting against the rules bloat we've seen in previous editions. But new rules are inevitable and will happen. They just won't be our main focus. Erik has mentioned in the past that there will be around 3 rulebook releases a year, with one most likely being a bestiary of some sort. That is a far cry from the rulebook a month that plagued past editions and caused the excessive rules bloat.

    -Lisa

    3 rulebook releases a year? So is that like 3 splat books a year. If this is going to be like the Complete Series i'm gonna be really disappointed in Paizo. Save us Lisa from mediocre stuff. Fight the good fight.


    I am thinking that 3 includes monster books, and setting books such as OA, and the like. I am thinking psionics still myself

    Silver Crusade

    seekerofshadowlight wrote:
    I am thinking that 3 includes monster books, and setting books such as OA, and the like. I am thinking psionics still myself

    Here's what I'm wondering about the (almost inevitable) psionics book:

    Would it be divorced from the Golarion setting entirely, or would it touch on it's presence there and on the other planets like Castrovel?

    Speaking of, I really see some of these hardcovers being more like setting books down the line, including some of the other planets to get that planetary romance thing going.


    Erik Mona wrote:
    Frogboy wrote:


    Other classes listed are bad choices for base classes IMO.

    * Scout - No. Steps on the Rangers toes

    Agreed.

    Thank you dear Sir. Thank you, thank you, thank you. I hate the Scout. A class that is a ranger and rogue at the same time. Only better than both.

    Erik Mona wrote:


    Frogboy wrote:


    * Marshal - God, I hope not

    Me neither!

    LOL. Well same here. It'a boring and pointless class. IMHO.

    Erik Mona wrote:


    Frogboy wrote:


    * Swashbuckler - Steps on the Ftr/Rog, Ftr/Brd toes

    I am inclined to agree, though I know some feel strongly about this.

    I'd like to see a Swashbuckler of some sort. Even if you don't call it a Swashbuckler.

    Dark Archive

    Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber
    Zark wrote:
    3 rulebook releases a year? So is that like 3 splat books a year. If this is going to be like the Complete Series i'm gonna be really disappointed in Paizo. Save us Lisa from mediocre stuff. Fight the good fight.

    That's 3 hardbacks a year, including the various Bestiaries. WotC released, oh, 15 to 18 hardbacks a year counting Monster Manuals. I don't think Paizo's going to settle for mediocre.


    Kvantum wrote:
    That's 3 hardbacks a year, including the various Bestiaries. WotC released, oh, 15 to 18 hardbacks a year counting Monster Manuals. I don't think Paizo's going to settle for mediocre.

    Agreed..

    Silver Crusade

    So, consensus on predictions?

    High Level/Epic Play
    Psionics
    Monster Characters/Savage Species
    Bestiary II(and onwards)


    Zark wrote:


    3 rulebook releases a year? So is that like 3 splat books a year. If this is going to be like the Complete Series i'm gonna be really disappointed in Paizo. Save us Lisa from mediocre stuff. Fight the good fight.

    Reading is your friend :P

    It was said that one per year will probably be a Bestiary. And I really doubt the rest will be "splat books". Expect more stuff like the Gamemastery Guide (i.e. pick a topic that benefits from the extra attention and write a book about it) or something really different from everything else (a Psionics book, and Epic book, an Asian-flavoured book) and maybe other stuff (the "Environmental Adventuring Book" which has tons of details, ideas, advice, and rules about adventuring in special environments, like high altitude, extreme temperatures, deep jungles, and strange planar places.)

    Mikaze wrote:


    Here's what I'm wondering about the (almost inevitable) psionics book:

    Would it be divorced from the Golarion setting entirely, or would it touch on it's presence there and on the other planets like Castrovel?

    Speaking of, I really see some of these hardcovers being more like setting books down the line, including some of the other planets to get that planetary romance thing going.

    I think that if they need some flavour, they'll use Golarion, but I'm not sure whether they'll add lots of setting information if they don't have to.

    The one book I would say needs setting information is Oriental Adventures. Or maybe they'll have a RPG hardcover and a Chronicles book to go with it.


    Mikaze wrote:

    So, consensus on predictions?

    High Level/Epic Play
    Psionics
    Monster Characters/Savage Species
    Bestiary II(and onwards)

    Agreed on all those, and some more:

    Oriental Adventures
    Maybe other Adventures that adapt the game to other cultural myths.
    Environments
    Modern/Future


    Mikaze wrote:

    So, consensus on predictions?

    High Level/Epic Play
    Psionics
    Monster Characters/Savage Species
    Bestiary II(and onwards)

    Based on what's been said here and elsewhere by the Paizo staff I would say that most things point towards a book will be announced with the 4 base classes. High level/epic play is very unlikely since it's base classes and not prestige classes. Bestiary II is also unlikely since Bestiary I is not even out yet, and also I find it hard to believe that they would put base classes in a bestiary. So of these four a psionics book or a monster character book seems most likely. Since they are announcing it during GenCon this seems to indicate that the new book will add a new element of rules to the game, which actually is true for both books. However, from what I can tell interest seems higher for a psionics book, which is why I think that's what they will be announcing during GenCon. Also, since they are doing an announcement this way I also think that they will subject the new psionics rules to an open playtest similar to the one for the core rulebook, although not as big. That's my prediction, but what do I know...

    Paizo Employee CEO

    Arinsen wrote:
    Marry me Lisa :) just dont tell my wife

    Only if you don't tell Vic. :)

    -Lisa

    Paizo Employee CEO

    One more thing. We are definitely making a large distinction between a rules book and a setting book. IF we end up doing something with an oriental themed book, there will be a rulebook with ninjas, samurai, etc. and a setting book detailing that part of Golarion (and probably an adventure path or adventure arc to go with the new rules and setting). The rulebook will have NONE of the Golarion stuff in it you would need to buy the setting book to get that stuff. The setting book would reference the rules for ninjas, samurai and such, but wouldn't give the details. In this way, folks who just want the rules for their home games can buy the rulebook and use the rules without knowing or using anything related to Golarion.

    -Lisa


    evilash wrote:
    made some sensible predictions

    I reckon,

    a) given what Jason said it will be 'mechanically different or filling different roles' classes like the warlock; or

    b) my actual thought which is a bit thrown by what Jason said but....given the desire to do the over the ice cap adventure path, and how it has been said that if that were done they would be needing to do an oriental adventures, a bunch of oriental style classes.

    either way as far as the mechanics and 'crunch' is concerned I hope the open playtest idea is kept up.

    Edit: I typed this before I read Lisa's message above

    The Exchange

    Erik Mona wrote:


    During the Core Rulebook design process I lobbied pretty hard to get Bulmahn to make the NPC classes actually playable classes, arguing that Frodo was essentially a high-level commoner and that high-level aristocrats are all over fantasy literature. Jason won that argument, so we get the same old boring aristocrat we've always had. Which frankly doesn't bode well for a "noble" base class.

    Drat! I wish you had won that one. I like the 'normal people in abnormal situations' take on gaming a lot more than the heroes with perfect hair and glinty teeth side.

    Liberty's Edge

    Judging the approach Paizo is taking with not overloading us with fairly useless classes that are covered elsewhere if you TRIED and the fact the samurai/ninja would be better in a regional book come the time around.

    So with that in mind, my predictions are;

    Blackguard - Finally an anti-paladin of sorts.

    Psion - I think it's only a matter of time which also means ...

    Psychic Warrior - Pushing with it. Maybe they'll get a FULL BAB to fit the Warrior part >_>

    Below is my maybe section:

    Hellknight maybe? Would that step on Blackguard's toes?

    Warlock is an OPTION but it would be kind of tricky to introduce them I think. How do you make them interesting and not straight up copy the base off of what wizards did?

    Likely Not Section:

    Swashbuckler is useless to me. Fighter/Rogue. Heck pick up the Duelist prestige class like I did (though I dont envision the flamboyant swashbuckler type but thats just me). Sometimes flavor is just how you represent it, not what the class says. Heck given enough feats you could probably represent a good swashbuckler character straight up fighter and customizing feats.

    Assassin ... well there's a prestige class already so thats just silly.

    Marshal would only happen if we hate our children. So ... do you hate the children?

    WISH LIST SECTION:

    Engineer ... ok this is a huge stretch here but there is some advanced engineering here. Hell, they have guns. It would be a very unique class and something they could build to customize to just their world to fit in. It's one of those exotic classes that could exist if someone wishes to use it though not have it shoved down their throats, just like the land where magic is all but null and firearms can be bought.

    Just saying ... would be friggen cool on some campaigns.


    Misery wrote:


    Psion - I think it's only a matter of time which also means ...

    Psychic Warrior - Pushing with it. Maybe they'll get a FULL BAB to fit the Warrior part >_>

    I think they'll do Psion, Psychic Warrior and Wilder, but not soulknife - that one is a feat chain disguising as a class.

    I don't know about full BAB - that would mean losing on the power section I'd say.

    Misery wrote:


    Hellknight maybe? Would that step on Blackguard's toes?

    No, it wouldn't: Blackguards are evil champions of everything that is vile and so on. Hellknights are ultimate champions of law, maybe tinged with evil, but not necessarily.

    Misery wrote:


    Warlock is an OPTION

    Not really. That will be done in that Tome of Secrets thing. I think that's enough.

    The Exchange

    Given the Paladin remained as Lawful Good, I'd like to see some sort of holy warrior avilable for the other alignments. There's Blackguard for Lawful Evil obviously.

    If not a core class, at least some outlines or feats that allows for holy champions of other alignments/faiths to be created from core classes.

    My prediction is I'll have to keep wishing though :(

    Liberty's Edge

    KaeYoss wrote:

    [

    I think they'll do Psion, Psychic Warrior and Wilder, but not soulknife - that one is a feat chain disguising as a class.

    I don't know about full BAB - that would mean losing on the power section I'd say.

    They MIGHT have to tone down the powers if they do a full BAB, but then again they gave the monk a full BAB when they flurry and beefed up the fighter so who knows.

    Also, I was never big on the psionic scene so ... what the hell's a Wilder anyway?

    151 to 200 of 730 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / The 4 next PFRPG core classes to be announced at Gen Con All Messageboards