According to this thread "Paizo Blog: Magic Archetypes" 13 of the 17 Base Classes will have new archetypes in the Complete Magic coming out in May.
So 4 Class will not (Barbarian, Cavalier, Fighter, and Rogue)
According to the description page for the Complete Combat more than just those 4 classes will have archetypes.
Am i the only person a little miffed that magic users get more support than Non-casters.
According to this thread "Paizo Blog: Magic Archetypes" 13 of the 17 Base Classes will have new archetypes in the Complete Magic coming out in May.
So 4 Class will not (Barbarian, Cavalier, Fighter, and Rogue)
According to the description page for the Complete Combat more than just those 4 classes will have archetypes.
Am i the only person a little miffed that magic users get more support than Non-casters.
To be fair in the APG the Barbarian, Fighter and Rogue got lots of archetypes. While the wizard and cleric got none.
So it does not bother me as much. Though it would be nice to see a little less magic in the Ultimate Combat book.
The classes getting no archetypes for Ultimate Magic are not spellcasters, so it's understandable they'll get less support in the way of archetypes in a book all about magic. In the APG, the full spellcasters were given little love of that sort (only the druid got any of that love). So Ultimate Combat, which, when you get down to it, anyone can engage in (albeit not very well), should then support the noncasters more.
According to this thread "Paizo Blog: Magic Archetypes" 13 of the 17 Base Classes will have new archetypes in the Complete Magic coming out in May.
So 4 Class will not (Barbarian, Cavalier, Fighter, and Rogue)
According to the description page for the Complete Combat more than just those 4 classes will have archetypes.
Am i the only person a little miffed that magic users get more support than Non-casters.
Well...sorcerors, wizards, clerics, magus, oracles, witches, summoners, alchemists, and inquisitors don't have archetypes yet, so they're behind the curve in terms of archetype support. Several of those classes are also part melee/part caster, so it makes sense they would be in both too. The classes touched by these books aren't mutually exclusive...
Just my take on the situation.
To be honest... I think the mages and sorcerers open themselves up more to 'tinkering' then the fighter class.
Seriously... I was looking forward to making some kind of Gladiator and finally took a good look at the base 'fighter'... It's COMPLETLY Open.. You can do ANYTHING with it... No Archtypes needed.
But yeah, like everyone says above... if it's a caster class it gets support in the magic book.. if it's NON caster then it gets support in the combat book... if it's BOTH.. then they BOTH deal with the class....
I usually have a hard time explaining my point of view on this subject so sorry if i don't make a lot of sense.
it is hard to speculate just how much support will be presented in both books, really just need to wait and see.
I respect that all classes should have a fair number of archetypes, no class should be left out.
I think that if only those four classes, barbarian, cavalier, fighter, and rogue, received archetypes in ultimate combat the book wouldn't live up to its name very well. Bards, Rangers, Druids, Clerics, Paladins, and most of the APG classes have varying degrees of combat focus, as well as magical ability, so I'd imagine they'd see archetypes in both books. On the other hand, the fighter, cavalier, barbarian, and rogue don't have anything to do with magic, so I understand them not getting more archetypes in a magic focused book.
I think that if only those four classes, barbarian, cavalier, fighter, and rogue, received archetypes in ultimate combat the book wouldn't live up to its name very well. Bards, Rangers, Druids, Clerics, Paladins, and most of the APG classes have varying degrees of combat focus, as well as magical ability, so I'd imagine they'd see archetypes in both books. On the other hand, the fighter, cavalier, barbarian, and rogue don't have anything to do with magic, so I understand them not getting more archetypes in a magic focused book.
Not entirely true for rogues...as rogues can well deactivate magical traps and get rogue talents that spellcasting.
As I write this I realize this a little nit picking.
You'll have to wait a little longer... but when "Ultimate Combat" comes out at Gen Con, there'll be a LOT of archetypes for the non-spellcasting, more combat-themed characters.
I hate wait. Why can't you guys just release everything at once.
You'll have to wait a little longer... but when "Ultimate Combat" comes out at Gen Con, there'll be a LOT of archetypes for the non-spellcasting, more combat-themed characters.I hate wait. Why can't you guys just release everything at once.
But then you'd be waiting even longer. Think about it. To release everything at once, they'd have to wait and hold back the stuff they've got finished first so that it could be released with the stuff finished later.
They could just cast time stop over and over until they'd managed to write and edit everything. Then release all of it at once. That way, there would be very little waiting :)
Although, I suppose T-Rexes have few ways to cast time stop..
|
They could just cast time stop over and over until they'd managed to write and edit everything. Then release all of it at once. That way, there would be very little waiting :)
Although, I suppose T-Rexes have few ways to cast time stop..
Maybe the short, stubby arms. It must be hard to work out the somatic components...
I think that if only those four classes, barbarian, cavalier, fighter, and rogue, received archetypes in ultimate combat the book wouldn't live up to its name very well. Bards, Rangers, Druids, Clerics, Paladins, and most of the APG classes have varying degrees of combat focus, as well as magical ability, so I'd imagine they'd see archetypes in both books. On the other hand, the fighter, cavalier, barbarian, and rogue don't have anything to do with magic, so I understand them not getting more archetypes in a magic focused book.Not entirely true for rogues...as rogues can well deactivate magical traps and get rogue talents that spellcasting.
As I write this I realize this a little nit picking.
Haha yeah that's true, though I agree maybe a bit nit picking. Still, between that and the talents that let rogues cast minor spells as spell like abilities you have a point, but I felt that was such a tiny corner case that 90% of rogues will still fall in with the purely non-magical classes. You could've also pointed out the use magic device skill, which I didn't think about, so rogues do have a bit more magic in them than the other 3 classes. I still feel that between the APG, the ninja, and the archetypes I'm sure will be in Ultimate Combat the rogue has many options and I'm ok with them being left out of a book for casters.
Although, I suppose T-Rexes have few ways to cast time stop..
I *so* saw that as being time stoMp at first glance! It conjured up visions of the Toy Story T-Rex giggling and stomping on pocket-watches...