Wow! Did no one post anything??? Where's the love? Did anyone put up anything about thing about all the upcoming APs James and I blabed about? :P
Wow! Did no one post anything??? Where's the love? Did anyone put up anything about thing about all the upcoming APs James and I blabed about? :P
You. Are. Evil.
:-/
Sweet! The new classes are...
Whale Rider
Master Chef
Disco Inferno
and of course, we already knew about the Squid Rangler
Awww! No Badger Bowler?
It's a Prestige Class.
|
Sweet! The new classes are...
Whale Rider
Master Chef
Disco Inferno
and of course, we already knew about the Squid Rangler
Oh, man, I *knew* they would introduce a bard variant... there have just been too many complaints that the bard got "nerfed"! ('Dance of Freedom', anyone?)
I don't know about the Whale Rider... it's one of Erik's ideas, right? Grrr, I'm sure that this end up being way overpowered... that always happens when Erik designs a class. ;P
|
I'm betting it's the psionics stuff. Mostly because there's a sticky thread they put up a WHILE back with "What do you want in Psionics" and it's got eleventy-billion posts to it.
I'm looking forward to seeing a new Wilder and new Thrallherd (my two favorite Psionic classes) and the return of Mind Switch, True (my favorite....uh 'villainous power I would never use to maintain my own immortality'...yeah...)
"Summoner" will be able to "create" monsterous "animal companions" (that don't suck) by summoning different aspects or something (will be various creation flavor). You essentially BUILD you comanion. "Give it horns, bite attack, more horns, etc"
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
"Summoner" will be able to "create" monsterous "animal companions" (that don't suck) by summoning different aspects or something (will be various creation flavor). You essentially BUILD you comanion. "Give it horns, bite attack, more horns, etc"
Heh, we call those 'astral constructs' where I come form.
think arcane Druid, not summon monster.
|
|
Crazy Alchemy Class
BOOOOYAAAAHH I called it, I read this entire danged thread and while everyone else was guessing psionics and retreads of WotC classes, I came in and was the only one to talk about it for two pages till someone responded
[dance][off key singing]Oh yeah, it's my birthday, it's my birthday, not your birthday, it's my birthday [/off key singing]
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.[/dance]
Yes, thank you for letting us know whats coming next. It's exciting to see what "3.7" is gonna do to with the game, as far as new and exciting character classes. Still for the sake of the characters we have stuck in limbo, a re-hash of the WotC classes would be welcome.
|
|
No Blackguard? Hmmm... does this mean it will remain a PrC?Are they even going to produce a Blackguard PrC?
I remember someone (Erik?) mentioning that the Blackguard would be published as a core class in PF RPG (although he didn't say when). Ergo, it might be published as a PrC, or perhaps even later as a core class (maybe they felt it still needs some polishing?).
"Summoner" will be able to "create" monsterous "animal companions" (that don't suck) by summoning different aspects or something (will be various creation flavor). You essentially BUILD you comanion. "Give it horns, bite attack, more horns, etc"
Sounds like a tupilak.
For those not up on the mythology, here's a reference:
Tupilak
"The history of the tupilak goes back 5,000 years. The tupilak proper was a magically created troll animal, which the Greenlanders manufactured out of the bones of children or various animals. The tupliak was made at a lonely well-concealed spot, the individual bones being put in place by the thumb and little finger only. If other fingers were used, the attempt would be a failure.Earth or seaweed was used for the musculature. The whole thing was wrapped in a piece of old skin and life was given to it by the singing of a magic song. The creator had no need to be a shaman, as tupilak magic came more under witchcraft and consequently anyone skilled in the latter could make a tupilak provided he adhered to the proper procedure.The purpose of the tupilak was to be rid of an enemy, and the tupilak attacked in the form of the animal it represented. If it was a seal, it would drag down the hunter and drown him. As a polar bear, it would eat the enemy.The tupilak was a magical impliment devoid of independent will. It was, thus, compelled to obey a person posessing insight into the supernatural world. Were the tupilak given orders by two different people, it would obey the one with the greater magical ability. Should the victim prove to be the more adept at the magic art and had reason to suspect what was taking place, he would return the tupilak in order that it would hunt its creator instead.When the Greenland explorer, Gustav Holm, reached Angmagssalik in 1884, he asked what a tupilak looked like. The people of Angmagssalik found it difficult to draw it on the spot, and therefore carved one in wood. This was the beginning of tupilak production which gradually spread all over Greenland. Only in rare instances will a Greenlander use his tupilak to bring misfortune or disaster to his neighbor.Today the artist is under the spell of goodness, of laughter, humor and kindness and not under the demonic control of the diabolic shamans. He creates what he has envisioned in his dreams, from what others have told him and from his own experiences with his fellow men. They still assume "unnatural" forms as did the original tupilaks.There is no definite or single theme behind the tupilak. Some are funny, some are droll, some sad and tragic, some show age old superstition. Others catch a wierd monster of the imagination. They appear as fettishes, totemic figures, and as fertility designs in various seemingly pornographic stances. However, this was not intended by the shaman or the artist."
And here's someone's exceedingly cool art for one:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_nOfpDHR3xdk/SP1_UejtNxI/AAAAAAAAAHE/Gdp9yhLifEU/s 1600-h/vinodrams-tupilak.jpg
|
|
"Summoner" will be able to "create" monsterous "animal companions" (that don't suck) by summoning different aspects or something (will be various creation flavor). You essentially BUILD you comanion. "Give it horns, bite attack, more horns, etc"Sounds like a tupilak.
It also sounds like a psion with the Astral Construct power. Seems a bit of an odd way for the generally anti-psionics Paizo to go.
It also sounds like a psion with the Astral Construct power. Seems a bit of an odd way for the generally anti-psionics Paizo to go."Summoner" will be able to "create" monsterous "animal companions" (that don't suck) by summoning different aspects or something (will be various creation flavor). You essentially BUILD you comanion. "Give it horns, bite attack, more horns, etc"Sounds like a tupilak.
Any sufficiently advanced psionics is indistinguishable from black magic.
|
|
Just scoped Jason Buhlman's facebook page.
He said there's the four mentioned classes,
and there will be two more; don't know if that's the swash and scout you guys are talking about or something else.
(edit) actually the swash and scout are on the "gencon" thread; the two threads are mutating into one thread in my head.
For a good summoning alternative (that doesn't suk) until the official one comes out check out the Summon Humanoid series over on the pathfinder database here :-)
|
|
Please Paizo, please don't go down this path, it only leads to evil (ok, and more profits, and the need to make a 2nd ed. to fix all the problems which leads to more profit).
So we going to have "everything is core" or death by splat book for Pathfinder RPG? Only time will tell. I never thought I would have to start keeping some of my "why WotC approach to 4e sucks" so I can start posting them here...
If you are going down this road of introducting 3,045,921 new classes (just guessing here), please include the half-fighter-ranger-mage-druid-mind powered-robot-death ninja please. It's like my all time favourite class ever and the game is almost unplayable with out its inclusion.
Thank you for your time Paizo,
S.
PS: pfRPG = core + bestiary I thought?
I wonder if the Cavalier class will resemble the Rider base class I posted here.
I'm a little disappointed. I was hoping for a redo of the 4 psionic classes in the XPH.
I am also hoping for a web enhancement or product that redefines classes in our other non-core 3.5e books, like the Marshal, Warlock, Samurai, etc.
Yes, those classes are not in the SRD, but publishing new additions to those classes isn't against any law is there? After all, if I say "Add these abilities to the Warlock class in Complete Arcane", you're actually helping WotC with profit instead of harming them because then people will buy Complete Arcane.
Wasn't the whole point of Pathfinder to be backwards compatible? Well, if the 11 core classes got a power-up, you kinda made the other 40+ classes from my other D&D supplements not worth playing save for a few of them.
Just my thoughts. I don't want new classes from Pathfinder until they can revamp the others.
From other thread ....
Book: Advanced PHB.
Classes: Cavalier, Monster Creating Arcane Type temporarily called "Summoner," Crazy Alchemy Class, and an Oracle.
oops, Around May Bestiary 2. GENCON 2010, adv. phb. big news is APHB will be an OPEN PLAYTEST! (on iPhone, so forgive typing)
Please tell me somebody at Paizo has heard that WotC has trademarked "Players Handbook". Going to need a different name.
I hope that Paizo understands that if they're going to introduce new core classes, they're going to have to support those core classes in all future supplements going forward. Then again APHB seems at first glance like it may be a book of rules that where to far from standard 3.5 to make it into the core.
Those all sound like awesome concepts for a class and I look forward to hearing more.
From other thread ....
Can I get a link, please?
|
|
I'm a little disappointed. I was hoping for a redo of the 4 psionic classes in the XPH.
I am also hoping for a web enhancement or product that redefines classes in our other non-core 3.5e books, like the Marshal, Warlock, Samurai, etc.
Yes, those classes are not in the SRD, but publishing new additions to those classes isn't against any law is there? After all, if I say "Add these abilities to the Warlock class in Complete Arcane", you're actually helping WotC with profit instead of harming them because then people will buy Complete Arcane.
Wasn't the whole point of Pathfinder to be backwards compatible? Well, if the 11 core classes got a power-up, you kinda made the other 40+ classes from my other D&D supplements not worth playing save for a few of them.
Just my thoughts. I don't want new classes from Pathfinder until they can revamp the others.
The Pathfinder/3.5 conversion guide has been posted already. That's all Paizo can legally do with WotC's classes. Anything else has to be fan-done, even add-on abilities. There were d20 publishers who tried the "referencing, not copying" idea, and all they got for their troubles were lawsuits and thousands of unsellable books they had to pulp. (If I remember FFE's debacle correctly.)
The psionic classes will probably be somewhere late in 2010, if I had to guess. But they are coming. For right now, figure out rough discipline abilities to add on to the psion, maybe "bloodlines" for wilders.
I thought the 'big shtick' of an oracle was supposed to be making long rambling propheics predicting the future? And I thought that long rambling prophecies predicting the future, on Paizo's 'home setting' of Golarion, were supposed to be strictly non-functional.
So Paizo are making a base class which doesn't function in their 'home setting'?
Umm, I seem to be not getting something here. :-?Edit:
Another way to look at is, is an Oracle is one that speaks for their god. That would be a nice background for a spontaneous casting diving class.
It also sounds like a psion with the Astral Construct power. Seems a bit of an odd way for the generally anti-psionics Paizo to go.
Huh?
The idea of the wizard creating his own monsters has been around in pulp fantasy for decades, and has been a huge part of D&D settings and fiction for as long as the game has been around.
There's nothing innately "psionic" about it.
Thanks Heathan.
Edit: I take that back, that link goes to this thread.
Scoundrel!
Please Paizo, please don't go down this path, it only leads to evil (ok, and more profits, and the need to make a 2nd ed. to fix all the problems which leads to more profit).
So we going to have "everything is core" or death by splat book for Pathfinder RPG? Only time will tell. I never thought I would have to start keeping some of my "why WotC approach to 4e sucks" so I can start posting them here...
If you are going down this road of introducting 3,045,921 new classes (just guessing here), please include the half-fighter-ranger-mage-druid-mind powered-robot-death ninja please. It's like my all time favourite class ever and the game is almost unplayable with out its inclusion.
Thank you for your time Paizo,
S.PS: pfRPG = core + bestiary I thought?
The "Core" thing was addressed previously in thread. It was clarified that "Base Classes" was more accurate.
And here is a quote from early-ish into this thread.
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?"
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
I have a question. If we add new "core" classes - let's say about 25% more.
Don't we then have 3.75 + 0.25 = well you get the idea...
S.
Specifically stated these are BASE classes, not core. won't see as much support either. they are "rare" in the game
It also sounds like a psion with the Astral Construct power. Seems a bit of an odd way for the generally anti-psionics Paizo to go."Summoner" will be able to "create" monsterous "animal companions" (that don't suck) by summoning different aspects or something (will be various creation flavor). You essentially BUILD you comanion. "Give it horns, bite attack, more horns, etc"Sounds like a tupilak.
I don't recall really anything to indicate that they are anti-psionics (I would even say that they are pro-psionics). There have been concerns expressed over a point-based casting system, like the Expanded Psionics Handbook uses, but that is separate from the concept of psionics and the ability to build your own summon.
It also sounds like a psion with the Astral Construct power. Seems a bit of an odd way for the generally anti-psionics Paizo to go."Summoner" will be able to "create" monsterous "animal companions" (that don't suck) by summoning different aspects or something (will be various creation flavor). You essentially BUILD you comanion. "Give it horns, bite attack, more horns, etc"Sounds like a tupilak.
I must not explaining it right. this class didn't sound ANYTHING like psionics.
From other thread ....
Book: Advanced PHB.
Classes: Cavalier, Monster Creating Arcane Type temporarily called "Summoner," Crazy Alchemy Class, and an Oracle.
oops, Around May Bestiary 2. GENCON 2010, adv. phb. big news is APHB will be an OPEN PLAYTEST! (on iPhone, so forgive typing)
I thought the 'big shtick' of an oracle was supposed to be making long rambling propheics predicting the future? And I thought that long rambling prophecies predicting the future, on Paizo's 'home setting' of Golarion, were supposed to be strictly non-functional.
So Paizo are making a base class which doesn't function in their 'home setting'?
Umm, I seem to be not getting something here. :-?Edit:
specifically stated all PFRPG products are strictly setting neutral (except deities listed in the core rules book)
|
|
The "Core" thing was addressed previously in thread. It was clarified that "Base Classes" was more accurate.
Thanks for that Blaze, most appreciated. I'm really glad this is their stance. I'm all ok with optional classes, I simply ban them from games I am running. Character class bloat is a huge headache for me as DM (or do I have to use GM) - I homebrew so I really need to know what classes do what to provide a challenge/fun and I can't be bothered with having to learn 20 new classes per week... With the BASE classes there is roleplaying for a life time and I have never understood the need for more than we have presented to us already.
Regards,
S.
It also sounds like a psion with the Astral Construct power. Seems a bit of an odd way for the generally anti-psionics Paizo to go.Huh?
The idea of the wizard creating his own monsters has been around in pulp fantasy for decades, and has been a huge part of D&D settings and fiction for as long as the game has been around.
There's nothing innately "psionic" about it.
There is a great section in the Belgariad where Belgarath fights a sorcerer who summons a demon which inhabits a custom made body from magic... I'm describing it poorly but it's a great section of the book. The description of this class makes me think of that section. Regardless, the idea goes back a ways.
felt like the APHB's primary focus is adding rage abilities, rogue tricks, etc, and alt class options. New base classes need to fill a niche that can't be satisfied by new class options. btw, cavalier was described as a class focused more being bossy and not overly focused on mounted combat.
thumbs tired, going to bed. PFS in 7 hrs! :D