Reposted from my blog in the hopes that I'll get what I want!
I was waiting to make this post until *all* the new classes were revealed for the Pathfinder Advanced Player's Guide. My overwhelming response to all of classes is "This is better suited as a variant." Time to take a quick look!
Alchemist - This is the most interesting and valid concept of the new classes Paizo are adding. Although, as it exists now, the skill of alchemy is open to all classes, so again, I think to myself, if you feel that there is not enough alchemy in games, then come up with some new funky uses for the skill - new alchemical items that anyone can make, possibly based on low level spell effects? Or again, work on a variant of the wizard class who brews potions instead of studying books and scrolls. In 2nd Edition, every wizard was also an alchemist by default. I'm interested to see how this is going to be pulled off, but it is going to have to be something special to convince me that more uses for the skill wouldn't have been better.
Cavalier - Ah! We all knew this relic of D&D was going to get resurrected! And, coincidentally, I just picked up the Green Ronin Cavalier class book for $2.00 in the Paizo sale. This is another idea that I love, the cavalier is a real classic archetype. However, they are already represented by the paladin in many ways, and it is perfectly possible to play a cavalier using a number of different options from the 3rd edition, any version you like, rule set. So why does this need to be a new class? I'm going to forgive this Paizo this one, like any eccentric writer, there are certain things they love and this is one of them. But I really don't feel the need for a whole new class.
Oracle - Spontaneous divine caster! Ooh! While there is a mechanical opening for such a class, and I welcome that opening to be filled, I really think that a variant sorcerer or a variant cleric would be the best way to present this idea. Also, there doesn't seem to be any logical connection between the divine and these casters - why do they get divine powers? I'm open to the idea, but I'm not sold on what I see. It looks messy in the preview, and not at all like what you would associate with the word "oracle".
Summoner - The summoning spells are awesome fun, but does this really need to be a new class? A wizard or a sorcerer (or a druid, or a cleric) can easily call themselves a summoner and there are a lot of options open to these characters regarding summoning already. Again I find myself wondering why this needs to be a whole new class. Some new, optional extra rules, like more feats to pick extra powers for your summoned creatures, for example, would be much more welcome than a whole new class. And much easier to integrate, too. My wife plays a summoner, a sorcerer who specializes in summoning spells. Some new and interesting spells would be 100x more welcome to existing players, I'm sure, than a whole new class. E.g. We've had a lot of fun with some 3rd party spells, including one that lets you summon siege weapons. A couple of intelligence boosting spells later and the summoned badgers are helping load them - it's great fun! Or perhaps something like Astral Construct for magic users?
Inquisitor - The description sounds like a ranger variant. In every sense of the word. This really flies in the face of what we were first told by Paizo - everyone of these classes was supposed to fill a niche that was wide open in terms of the core classes. Guy who hunts things down? Check one - Paladin, check two - ranger, check three - rogue, check four - assassin PrC. That is without going into the broadness of the concept, i.e. there is no reason why a wizard can't also be a hunter of X. Plus it is another slap in the face of the XPH fans who now have to rename the Inquisitor feat.... I'm taking that one very personally! ;p
Witch - I loved the witch kit, back in AD&D - awesome! Although this sounds less like that idea, which is a shame as, with no warlock in Pathfinder, the 'making pacts' angle is something that is wide open! Ah well. Plus with the focus on a beefier familiar, isn't the witch going to start stepping on the toes of the new summoner class and their touted "one big familiar" angle. And again, I think that a witch/warlock is already in the rules, just needs some additional options to bring them fully into the game, e.g. lower level versions of spells like planar ally.
In summary? I'm not impressed. These ideas do not really warrant separate classes, as promised, but would be better represented by class variants.
But I don't want to be totally negative. My doctors say that that is really bad for me right now, so I'm going to try to type a little more, giving some hints as to the things that might win me back, with regard to these archetypes standing on their own as classes.
Alchemist - I suppose the way to win me back with this one is to make it dynamic. I'm thinking that the more like McGuyver the class is, the less wizardly and more unique the class will come out as. I like the idea of brewing up some potions each day, but also have some tubes on stand-by, like open spell slots on the wizard, that just need a little of that dungeon-moss from over there.... That would be fun.
Cavalier - The more cultural neutral this class is, the more I'm going to be into it. Defined by having a code of honor of some kind, and fighting mounted somehow, are the ingredients. From there I want a gladiatorial charioteer (obey the rules of the games, please the crowd as a form of code) to be just as possible as a noble-knight. That would make for a good class. Plus any mount-related abilities would also be welcome, like being able to get more out of your horse (granting them temporary HP would be nice).
Oracle - To win me back here, all it needs is decent flavor. There is a gap in rules that this class will be filling, but I need to see that backed up with some solid "real world" reasons for the class to exist. None of the woolly divine-mind/ardent crap!
Summoner - I really don't know how to sell me on this concept as I don't see a vacancy here. Solid mechanics would be a good starting point. Some sort of exploration of the relationship between the summoner and the summoned would also be welcome - can the summoner exchange being summoned themselves for even more power? That'd be cool. I guess I'd also be on board with summoning things that aid the summoner indirectly - like summoning a spirit into their sword briefly, "self buffs", I think is the term.
Inquisitor - When is a ranger not a ranger? I would like to see something decidedly un-ranger like here, to be sold on it. A 6-level divine spell progression and lots of knowledge skills would be a good start. Divine bard? I guess I'd also like to see some sort of "wards" mechanic, I thinking more Van-Helsing from the novel as opposed to the terrible modern action movie. Yeah, the more I think about that, the more okay with the idea I'd be. Setting up wards that his/her foes cannot cross, or do so at their peril, that'd be fun. Also another niche of the rules not currently explored too deeply. And that would be a real nasty turn when the dark-elf inquisitor turns up hunting the party, all prepared!
Witch - Link this one to the warlock and the idea of "powers at a price" and I'm sold. Please refer back to the AD&D witch kit for reference. Maybe the familiar is sent by those powers to watch on the witch?
Peace,
tfad
It seems like you havn't read all the information out there about the various classes, even the information that's been out there for months.
For example, the Summoner (name tentative) has nothing to do with the summon monster spells. An example Summoner is Dr. Frankenstein. The class is all about your ONE "summoned" creature and enhancing it through class features. In MMO terms, it's a super pet class. There is no WotC or Paizo class in the game, even prestige classes, that fulfill this conceptual role (barring perhaps an obscure Dragon Magazine class that I havn't seen). The Druid comes closest, but the focus of the Druid isn't on the pet, the pet is just a sidekick (or even not present for a Pathfinder druid that chooses to take cleric domains). The focus of the Summoner is squarely on your summoned/created monster/creature/mentor/guardian angel.
That's just one example of where you've seemingly missed a lot of the point of the various classes.
It seems like you havn't read all the information out there about the various classes, even the information that's been out there for months.
For example, the Summoner (name tentative) has nothing to do with the summon monster spells. An example Summoner is Dr. Frankenstein. The class is all about your ONE "summoned" creature and enhancing it through class features. (SNIP)
That's just one example of where you've seemingly missed a lot of the point of the various classes.
Oh no, I get that the new summoner is all about one big summons:
Plus with the focus on a beefier familiar, isn't the witch going to start stepping on the toes of the new summoner class and their touted "one big familiar" angle.
I was just stating that, in this case, maybe an alternative option might be better than a whole new class and that summoning is not an unfilled niche. E.g. Maybe trading the summon spell at each level for something more permanent would be more desirable to me as a customer and a gamer. But as that is not going to happen, I made this post.
I've read all I can about the new classes. I want to see how they're going to turn out. I Just wanted to share some of my thoughts as a potential customer, and the existing APG thread starts off with a "no discussions about the new classes" comment. Hence the new thread.
Peace,
tfad
I was just stating that, in this case, maybe an alternative option might be better than a whole new class and that summoning is not an unfilled niche.
For one, the niche that the Summoner (remember, the name is tentative and very likely to be changed because the Summoner doesn't necessarily summon anything at all -- one of the examples is the mad scientist that "crafts" a monster. Don't get hung up on the name) fills is not one that is covered at all in 3.5 or Pathfinder.
For two, it's not a niche that can be filled by anything short of a full class. Like I said, the Druid is the closest thing to being what the Summoner is intended to be, and to make the Druid into the Summoner you're going to have to drop Wild Shape, significantly curtail the spellcasting (signs point to the Summoner having a very limited spell list), drop all the other class features other than the animal companion, boost the animal companion, and make it the focus of the class. That's not the kind of thing that really can be done with a class variant. At that point, you've stripped out nearly everything "druid". Better to just start with a new class from the ground up.
I know I'm in the minority on this site, but I much prefer full classes to variants, so needless to say I'm happy for another batch of base classes.
I know I'm in the minority on this site, but I much prefer full classes to variants, so needless to say I'm happy for another batch of base classes.
You're not alone. I'd prefer full classes over variants as long as they have an interesting and unfilled niche.
|
Happily, all of the new base classes will be released for an open public playtest, so you'll have plenty of opportunity to suggest changes or comment on what does and doesn't work for you once the playtest versions of the classes have been posted! :)
TEASE!
When is this happening? I have a friend that wants to do an Oracle or Inquisitor something fierce.
Happily, all of the new base classes will be released for an open public playtest, so you'll have plenty of opportunity to suggest changes or comment on what does and doesn't work for you once the playtest versions of the classes have been posted! :)
Thank god! These classes are not very impressive, and it kinda does fly in the whole lvl to 20 with your core class build.
and it kinda does fly in the whole lvl to 20 with your core class build.
Huh? These are all base classes.
|
|
Happily, all of the new base classes will be released for an open public playtest, so you'll have plenty of opportunity to suggest changes or comment on what does and doesn't work for you once the playtest versions of the classes have been posted! :)
Thank god! These classes are not very impressive, and it kinda does fly in the whole lvl to 20 with your core class build.
You do realize a base class means one you begin the game with right?
Right?
Happily, all of the new base classes will be released for an open public playtest, so you'll have plenty of opportunity to suggest changes or comment on what does and doesn't work for you once the playtest versions of the classes have been posted! :)
Thank you Eric. This piece of news (sorry if I missed it before) has cheered me up with regard to the APG. I have to ask then, is this going to be a standard thing for all big releases of rules that Paizo will be putting out?
Peace,
tfad
Happily, all of the new base classes will be released for an open public playtest, so you'll have plenty of opportunity to suggest changes or comment on what does and doesn't work for you once the playtest versions of the classes have been posted! :)
Thank god! These classes are not very impressive, and it kinda does fly in the whole lvl to 20 with your core class build.
You do realize a base class means one you begin the game with right?
Right?
Actually I do, which is why I said CORE classes (i.e. classes in the PF Core Book).
|
|
Actually I do, which is why I said CORE classes (i.e. classes in the PF Core Book).Happily, all of the new base classes will be released for an open public playtest, so you'll have plenty of opportunity to suggest changes or comment on what does and doesn't work for you once the playtest versions of the classes have been posted! :)
Thank god! These classes are not very impressive, and it kinda does fly in the whole lvl to 20 with your core class build.
You do realize a base class means one you begin the game with right?
Right?
How does it fly? These classes are taking up niches that the core classes don't necessarily cover. If these were all prestige classes, then I'd be inclined to agree, as flooding the market with prestige classes seems to do the exact opposite of what was intended.
The intent I always thought was to "take it to 20". That didn't mean just the core classes, but all the base classes being good enough to take them the full distance, and make multi-classing a rare thing.
|
|
Actually I do, which is why I said CORE classes (i.e. classes in the PF Core Book).Happily, all of the new base classes will be released for an open public playtest, so you'll have plenty of opportunity to suggest changes or comment on what does and doesn't work for you once the playtest versions of the classes have been posted! :)
Thank god! These classes are not very impressive, and it kinda does fly in the whole lvl to 20 with your core class build.
You do realize a base class means one you begin the game with right?
Right?
Core classes are whatever are determined core by the publisher, which usually limits their inclusion in books tagged as core books, but not always. If core classes stuck to just what was released in the first core rulebook that would be an offense WotC and other companies violated a very long time ago. As long as Paizo continues to limit what is considered a core book, I'll have no problem with them adding a few classes once a year or so. I never expected Paizo to stick to just the initial core classes and am really glad they are continuing the beta aspect of their design process.
The one I do agree is the Summoner. That does seem more like a cool prestige class. But the others offer some nice game mechanics. The oracle is what the favored soul should have always been. The alchemist seems like the artificer recast (I wish they could put a take on the artificer and warlock)
The cavalier seems like the paizo marshall which does create a different set of features distinct from the fighter's feat-o-rama. The witch combines arcane and divine which no other base class does.
The Inquisitor is just downright cool. A divine hunter. Coooooolllllll. I like the idea behind the mechanic of getting better in a fight as the fight progresses. Very unique.
Now if they would just tackle the gish class. Make a skill-monkey noble class, and a totem-wielding/spirit summoning shaman
a totem-wielding/spirit summoning shaman
From what I've gathered, the summoner class will be able to do that, while still being able to be a load of other concepts. Which seems a way better option to me.
a totem-wielding/spirit summoning shamanFrom what I've gathered, the summoner class will be able to do that, while still being able to be a load of other concepts. Which seems a way better option to me.
not really. I kind of like the idea of a shaman that can infuse totems with buff abilities through commune with spirits as well as other spirit based powers. No druid spell list
The summoner deals with magical beasts and the like as an animal companion type thing from what I gather
Core classes are whatever are determined core by the publisher, which usually limits their inclusion in books tagged as core books, but not always. If core classes stuck to just what was released in the first core rulebook that would be an offense WotC and other companies violated a very long time ago. As long as Paizo continues to limit what is considered a core book, I'll have no problem with them adding a few classes once a year or so. I never expected Paizo to stick to just the initial core classes and am really glad they are continuing the beta aspect of their design process.
Paizo folks have said repeatedly that they are going to write APs and supplements with the expectation that folks only have the PfRPG Core book. So with regards to Paizo "Core" classes are limited to the Core book.
IMO this is the best way to run a game system, GMs and players can buy the core book and any other book which they feel will supplement their game without having to worry about whether they have all the right secondary material.
|
|
Core classes are whatever are determined core by the publisher, which usually limits their inclusion in books tagged as core books, but not always. If core classes stuck to just what was released in the first core rulebook that would be an offense WotC and other companies violated a very long time ago. As long as Paizo continues to limit what is considered a core book, I'll have no problem with them adding a few classes once a year or so. I never expected Paizo to stick to just the initial core classes and am really glad they are continuing the beta aspect of their design process.Paizo folks have said repeatedly that they are going to write APs and supplements with the expectation that folks only have the PfRPG Core book. So with regards to Paizo "Core" classes are limited to the Core book.
IMO this is the best way to run a game system, GMs and players can buy the core book and any other book which they feel will supplement their game without having to worry about whether they have all the right secondary material.
I agree with that, my attempt was to show that the publisher really determines what is core and as you point out Paizo has yet to say the APG will be a core book. If Paizo continues to design their products so that only the core rulebook is needed, then by far they'll ensure more customers will purchase and play Pathfinder. And this is where I think WotC and a few other companies have brokendown, in that they are forcing all products to become part of the core. If Paizo allows their secondary products to touch the niche markets and thereby access the fringe players they extend their market. The key then is to support only those products that show necessity while continuing to focus on the core rulebook. Which I guess is a convoluted way of saying "Paizo hasn't broken their rule of playing the core base classes to 20; instead they're adding six new classes for those players who want to play something different all the way to 20."
Creative Director
|
The idea that EVERY rulebook is core, and thus indispensable for your game, makes a certain amount of sense when you approach the problem in a business sense and want to sell more books. How better to sell more books than to make them ALL required?
The dirty little secret is, of course, that RPGs don't NEED additional books after their core book; you can run a 20 year campaign using only a game's core rules (and perhaps a monster book). That's not a very good business model for the company that wants to stay in business selling games to the same customers.
Of course, you can say the same about novels. Anyone with the patience can sit down and write themselves or their friends a novel (won't necessarily be a GOOD novel, but the fact that the materials you need to do so are very affordable is my point). Yet novels still sell very well; bookstores and libraries are filled with them. The successful novelist sells more books not because you HAVE to have those books, but because you WANT them. That's basically how Paizo's approaching this thing.
We'll create the core game. We'll keep creating supplements and adventures for that game, and we hope folks'll buy them because they want them. They won't NEED them though. And our supplements will reflect that—if we use an oracle or anything from a non-core book, we'll make sure that you have what you need to run with it without forcing you to buy that non-core source book. The hope is, though, that you'll like what you see and that will make you go out and buy the non-core book anyway, of course!
Lots of good and amusing stuff!
Great to hear it James. May I ask, and I think I speak for a lot of people, do you plan on continuing to support non-core books going forward. What I mean by that is, let's take the classes for example, those base classes in the APG. Are they one-shot classes, mentioned in that book but never supported going forward in any other supplement? Or will only the staff favorites get updated (I'm thinking Warlock here, the Warlock seems to have been a staff favorite at WoTC and it got supported all over the place in just about every follow on supplement, but, the Knight, the Marshall, the Healer, the Beguiler, the list goes on and on, they never ever got any updates in any other supplement).
I'm not asking that every supplement have support for every class you ever produce. I am asking that the classes (and other supplements you produce) get equal attention down the road. Summoner, and all classes with companions, might get some attention in the Bestiary II. The Alchemist and wizard and sorcerer might get some love in an Equipment Guide, if you ever publish one. The fighter types (including the Cavalier) might get some love in the Book O Combat & Weapons if you ever produce one.
You see what I'm asking? I"m tired of getting a class I like (Healer, Marshall, Knight, etc) and then they never get any updates or are never mentioned again, while classes I don't particularly care for (Warlock) get all the love usually reserved for a brothel hostess with easily negotiated virtue.
Great to hear it James. May I ask, and I think I speak for a lot of people, do you plan on continuing to support non-core books going forward.
Definitely speak for me, here. I'd like to know the answer as well, and, like you, hope it's in the affirmative.
Keep in mind Paizo isn't going to have the book of the month club. So there likely isn't going to be a lot of supplemental material to pull from. Next year is Game Mastery guide, APG and Bestiary II. The following year will likely be Epic rules and Psionics (and probably Bestiary III?). After that... ?? the world is ending in 2012 so it's likely they won't have to worry about it.
So basically there isn't any real place to support the new classes. Maybe in the epic book?
Keep in mind Paizo isn't going to have the book of the month club. So there likely isn't going to be a lot of supplemental material to pull from. Next year is Game Mastery guide, APG and Bestiary II. The following year will likely be Epic rules and Psionics (and probably Bestiary III?). After that... ?? the world is ending in 2012 so it's likely they won't have to worry about it.
So basically there isn't any real place to support the new classes. Maybe in the epic book?
You're forgetting the other lines they have. Pathfinder Chronicles includes rules, and even the adventure paths and modules usually include a few crunchy bits each.
It's unlikely to be in AP or companions unless it is fouced on that class. It's just alot of space to a class that not everyone will have. The best I can see is maybe something along the companion lines. I myself could not see me picking up such a book but some might. The issue is will enough grab them to make it cost effective?
It's unlikely to be in AP or companions unless it is fouced on that class. It's just alot of space to a class that not everyone will have. The best I can see is maybe something along the companion lines. I myself could not see me picking up such a book but some might. The issue is will enough grab them to make it cost effective?
It's not like supporting one of these classes means not supporting core classes. For example, Pathfinder #5 (I believe) contained the article "Magic of Thassilon", which included 7 new spells. Adding the new classes to those who could cast those spells would be supporting them without removing any support for any other classes.
But you see having one as a major npc in an AP would mean they would have to reprint the class in that AP, which eats up space. Now they may have room for a few other options but it will kill the page count.
Let put it like this if you make companions x and have 7 [pages about say the witch well it needs to fit the theme, then I may not pick that book up as I do not have the witch class nor do I want 7 pages of a 30 page book wasted on useless stuff
It's a fine line of adding stuff, and loosing sells because of adding stuff
|
Creative Director
|
Once the Advanced Player's Guide is out, there are several things that will influence what kind of support the six new base classes get.
1) Needs of the adventure. We'll use one of these new base classes if the adventure needs it, and if there's room for that class in the adventure. To a certain extent this will be influenced by designer favorites.
2) Designer favorites. Naturally, classes that a product's particular designer likes have a better chance of showing up in an adventure or supplement.
3) Fan favorites. If we get feedback that a particular class is super popular, you can expect us to include more information about them in future supplements now and then. Likewise, if a new base class is particularly unpopular (if we're doing our job right this won't happen), we'll do less.
4) Nature of New Products. The majority of the products we produce are adventures or Golarion world supplements. We do a LOT of these, and sometimes it might make sense to support one of the new base classes. If, for example, we decide to do an Irrisen companion, chances are good that there'll be some new witch goodies in there since witches are a big part of Irrisen.
Now, all that said...
At this point, I suspect that the MAJORITY of the support for the six new base classes will be limited to the Advanced Player's Guide. We don't want to get onto a treadmill where we're constantly putting out new stuff and having to update more and more content—the hope for the APG is that it'll contain pretty much everything else we need to say about not just the six new base classes but ALSO the 11 core classes. We might, at a later date, decide to expand further... but since we're only doing 3 hardcover rulebooks a year, chances for going back to the APG well for more drinks are relatively slim.
|
Creative Director
|
But you see having one as a major npc in an AP would mean they would have to reprint the class in that AP, which eats up space. Now they may have room for a few other options but it will kill the page count.
Let put it like this if you make companions x and have 7 [pages about say the witch well it needs to fit the theme, then I may not pick that book up as I do not have the witch class nor do I want 7 pages of a 30 page book wasted on useless stuff
It's a fine line of adding stuff, and loosing sells because of adding stuff
Yes... but it's not REALLY a question of "losing content." If we want a new base class character in an adventure, we know that going IN to the adventure. The adventure itself is written with that in mind, and therefore there was never content to lose for reprinting the appropriate material for the new base class.
And I cannot, for the life of me, envision a new base class that'd bring with it the need to print 7 pages of reprinted material. If that comes to pass, we're doing something wrong.
A much better analogy would be to compare an NPC with levels in a new base class to a monster from the Tome of Horrors. In either case, those stat blocks will almost never run over a page in length.
But you see having one as a major npc in an AP would mean they would have to reprint the class in that AP, which eats up space.
What on earth are you talking about? That's got nothing to do with what was being requested. Read my post that this post was a response to. I'm talking about including these classes in the crunch abilities that are included in the various products (spells, feats, and so on). Making one a major NPC is an entirely different and completely unrelated issue.
heh 7 pages was a random number really. I for one am glad you are not planning the endless class/feat/spell/ uber power treadmill
At this point, I suspect that the MAJORITY of the support for the six new base classes will be limited to the Advanced Player's Guide.
All we're asking for in terms of "support" is things like making sure they're included in terms of new spells, bonus feat lines ("Special: Oracles may take this feat as a bonus feat", etc), and the like. One of the most irritating things about WotC was that they would introduce new classes with custom spell lists, bonus feat lists, etc etc ... and then you'd never see any updates to those spell lists and bonus feat lists.
Stuff
Will 3pp be able to use these classes in their material? Like if one decides that they just have to have a witch nation, will they have permission to use this witch, or will they need to reinvent the wheel?
We don't want to get onto a treadmill where we're constantly putting out new stuff and having to update more and more content—the hope for the APG is that it'll contain pretty much everything else we need to say about not just the six new base classes but ALSO the 11 core classes. We might, at a later date, decide to expand further... but since we're only doing 3 hardcover rulebooks a year, chances for going back to the APG well for more drinks are relatively slim.
But what do you plan for 3 hardcovers a year. A Bestiary sure then what? A second APG with more classes, spells, rogue talents? More Gamemastery Guide stuff?
Or will you go the splat book Complete Arcane type book
At this point, I suspect that the MAJORITY of the support for the six new base classes will be limited to the Advanced Player's Guide.All we're asking for in terms of "support" is things like making sure they're included in terms of new spells, bonus feat lines ("Special: Oracles may take this feat as a bonus feat", etc), and the like. One of the most irritating things about WotC was that they would introduce new classes with custom spell lists, bonus feat lists, etc etc ... and then you'd never see any updates to those spell lists and bonus feat lists.
What he said.
But what do you plan for 3 hardcovers a year. A Bestiary sure then what? A second APG with more classes, spells, rogue talents? More Gamemastery Guide stuff?
Or will you go the splat book Complete Arcane type book
Im hoping hardcover campaign settings for other continents in Golarion. Theyve mentioned theyd like to do an 'Oriental Adventures' one so maybe those can fill in a hardcover slot for the year
|
Is not the case that would be easier to just make alternate stats for those who ll use Apg and those who is not ?
it seems to me that said NPC is obviously a witch but gets sorcerer stats i would know what were has stas if she had been stated as a witch from the start.
So two sets of stats have a smaller page count than the class rules and create interest in buying the Apg.
If there something i am quite tired is to read about rules that we never more hear about, or classes that are never gets further support.
|
|
At this point, I suspect that the MAJORITY of the support for the six new base classes will be limited to the Advanced Player's Guide.All we're asking for in terms of "support" is things like making sure they're included in terms of new spells, bonus feat lines ("Special: Oracles may take this feat as a bonus feat", etc), and the like. One of the most irritating things about WotC was that they would introduce new classes with custom spell lists, bonus feat lists, etc etc ... and then you'd never see any updates to those spell lists and bonus feat lists.
This is where I stand also. If the Epic handbook sees print then I hope that the APG classes are given treatment. As well as any other major hardback that might have an impact upon them. WotC was renowned for doing as Zurai mentioned and I don't think including them in some of the product love as described would take up too much space, meaning x feat can also be used by x class or x weapon and so on. If anything promising to do web enhancements for them periodically wouldn't bother me if it came to that.
Im hoping hardcover campaign settings for other continents in Golarion. Theyve mentioned theyd like to do an 'Oriental Adventures' one so maybe those can fill in a hardcover slot for the year
I would like that. I would like Psionics at some point in a hardcover. I liked the Environmental books like Frostburn and whatnot
It's been said before, but PFRPG is setting neutral, if they do a Tian Xia book, it might use an Oriental book, but the Oriental book won't have any fluff relating to Golarion. I feel a 320 pg book might better discuss a few other cultures, e.g. PAthfinder India, China, Japan, say, maybe Aztec, Mesopotamia, etc.
With Chronicles doing the actual Golarion areas, like a Pathfinder Chronicle on Tian Xia, or just Minkai. Or a Vudran one, or one on the Padishah Empire of Kelesh.
It's been said before, but PFRPG is setting neutral, if they do a Tian Xia book, it might use an Oriental book, but the Oriental book won't have any fluff relating to Golarion. I feel a 320 pg book might better discuss a few other cultures, e.g. PAthfinder India, China, Japan, say, maybe Aztec, Mesopotamia, etc.
With Chronicles doing the actual Golarion areas, like a Pathfinder Chronicle on Tian Xia, or just Minkai. Or a Vudran one, or one on the Padishah Empire of Kelesh.
You know, when I posted that Id like to see hardcovers on Golarions other continents and those could fill a hardcover slot, I forgot that they want 3 hardcovers specifically from the RPG line a year, and not just three hardcovers in general. I think a regional hardcover would have to be a Chronicles product. I still would like to see them though.
I do agree with you about a hardcover discussing world cultures though. It becomes difficult to find campaign settings that arent Eurocentric or east Asian in flavor. For instance I still use my Maztica boxed set for anything Meseo American in flavor because there just isnt anything else I can find. The same for Nyambe and Africa.
But you see having one as a major npc in an AP would mean they would have to reprint the class in that AP, which eats up space. Now they may have room for a few other options but it will kill the page count.
I meant to comment on this before. They already do use stuff thats not in the core books, specifically monsters from Tome of Horrors (which I dont have by the way), but I dont mind that because they give me the info I need to run it right where they mention it. I imagine it would be the same for an NPC with one of the new classes.
They dont need to print the entire class, just whats relevant. If you have a level 3 witch, then they print that level 3 witches stat block just like they do the monster from Tome of Horrors. No need to print the whole class and all its options, just the stuff that particular character does. I dont have any problem with this at all.
EDIT: I also want to mention that in doing so they have piqued my curiosity about the Tome of Horrors and I have been looking into finding and purchasing a dead tree version. So not only have they included interesting monsters but have successfully encouraged me to purchase other products (in this case ones not even their own!).
Now, all that said...
At this point, I suspect that the MAJORITY of the support for the six new base classes will be limited to the Advanced Player's Guide. We don't want to get onto a treadmill where we're constantly putting out new stuff and having to update more and more content—the hope for the APG is that it'll contain pretty much everything else we need to say about not just the six new base classes but ALSO the 11 core classes. We might, at a later date, decide to expand further... but since we're only doing 3 hardcover rulebooks a year, chances for going back to the APG well for more drinks are relatively slim.
What I am curious about is when there are oportinities for crunch and fluff in paizo's other lines of products (not just AP's) will the Advance Players Guide Classes recieve attention. For instance, Pathfinder Chronicles: Guilds of Golaron comes out, will their be a description of guilds that involve oracles? Summoners guilds where secrets of creation are traded? Will there be if appropriate feats or class features special to those guilds/regions/whathaveyou (if appropriate for the material) along with the 11 base classes? (assuming the have a place in it at all ofcourse).
In addition, we know paizo doesn't have plans to churn out new crunch books, but when they do, if for instance an epic rules book is produced, or an oriental adventures style book. Will the Advanced Players guide classes have new stuff in those books as well? Or just the core 11 classes? Will each of the 3 yearly hard cover books be totally compartmentalized?
To me the whole 'players should only need core books' is a double edged sword. Sure I dont want to be 'forced' to buy a product any more then anyone else, but when I do I certainly want the next one I buy to add to what was given by the one I bought.
OK so the next hardcover books will be more specialized things like psionics and asia-theme
One thing to keep in mind is that these classes are specifically much rarer in world. So guilds of them may be a largely against their flavor, however there do exist a few scattered grups that suit, Witches of Irrisen, the Jadwiga; Oracles orcs in Belkzen, though they probably have many monks, or are all monks; Summoners among the Night Heralds, but it isn't counter to their place in the world if they get less mention; HOWEVER I really think even a pdf roundup of spells or feats available to them specifically would be nice.
Not all feats, just say a sorcerer only feat, but witches can use it, or this new divine cleric spell can be used by Oracles, even better if its in the product, or the APG has guidelines for what to add, then maybe the community could do a pdf. or a page or two in Pathfinder to summarise new material best suited to the new classes. That wouldn't take up too much space.
In all honesty I am far more interested in alternative class builds then in the new base classes. I want to be able to recreate the cleric and find fixes for the bard more then have new classes. However if the new classes work well with the game I am sure my group will try them out.