Goblin Squad Member
|
This is for player speculation/request though an answer from someone who knows wouldn't hurt either.
Personally I am guessing/pulling for Archetypes. I really want to know which archetypes will become available first.
I'm voting the ones that automatically make it in are:
Fighter
Wizard and/or Sorcerer
Cleric
Rogue
That gives is martial, arcane, divine, and skill-heavy and none are alignment dependent. Nice well rounded set of archetypes. I say Wizard and/or Sorcerer because if we have one won't that complete about 95% of the development needed for the other?
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Wouldn't archetypes just be modifications to the feat/ badge system currently being created? I would hope that they are easy to add so that the game has more variety at the start.
As for my speculation; I am going with prestige class. I think the next round will cover 1-5 prestige classes from the core book. This is assuming that the current crowdforger vote is used to create an order for the remaining core races.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I hope the druid's wildshape abilit y is put in the game early on. Though I don't plan on playing one.
I don't have a book handy but isn't wild shape like a 3-4 level abikity? So we might have a couple month cushion on this.
But I agree, a good shapeshifting system is a must IMO.
i hope druids can shape shift into a tree that looks exactly like the surrounding environment and i hope wizard/sorc illusion spells actually are included and work like hallucinatory terrain hehe.
But i think its a safe bet most of the core classes will be represented by release in the skill system.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Will they not have a blanket of skills at lower levels that are all generic, then choose which archetype levels above this are added?
Alternatively, what about choosing which mobs we're going to see knocking around? I hope to see a Very very dangerous wilderness requiring groups to navigate for dungeons and hunt for resources etc.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I will be truly shocked if Paladins don't make the first cut.My heart skipped a beat when I read Andius' post.
I won't be too much. Paladins are thee most restricted class in terms of alignment. Unless they launch with the ability to go for non-lawful good paladins I would put them as one of the lower priority classes.
I would vote for druids but I would expect rangers to get the most votes.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
... non-lawful good paladins...What?! You may be unclear on the concept...
They do exist at least in 3.5. And I know there is a neutral-good paladin type for PF. But whatever the case I think paladins, should be some of the last to make it in if only basic paladins are available.
Anyone wanting to be one can always go fighter or cleric or fighter/cleric while they wait.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Unless I missed something somewhere here in the forums (it happens often) the Dev blog "Your Pathfinder Online Character" stated:
"Each of the base classes in the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook will be represented in the online game in this way, and in time we intend to add additional development paths to simulate prestige classes, archetypes, and base classes from other Pathfinder RPG content such as the Advanced Player's Guide and the Ultimate rulebooks."
Given this statement I would expect to see all of the core classes represent in the game form day one. I also would expect prestige classes to come next as they are already putting in mechanics for pure builds with the capstone bonus. Prestige classes support the multiclass players and would require a lot more resources than adding in variant archetypes.
Also I thought the Devs stated that they are focusing on the core book first. So based on this the priority would seem to follow this pattern: core classes -> core races -> Prestige classes; as there are no archetypes in the Core Rulebook.
I would expect to see the first major update or something like an expansion to look like the Advanced Players Guide. Covering variant races and classes while also adding the next "set" of base classes. The following expansion might then bring in the ultimate line.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I suspect we'll see at least parts of all the core classes at start. Since training up would take a while, it may be that they're not fully fleshed skill tree wise, but I assume we'll have all the basics.
Here's hoping the other base classes make it in soon enough though, probably after release. I do like Alchemists, and it fits so well with crafters.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Void Ronin, that was certainly the plan, but I believe Ryan has hinted that they might not be able to get all 11 done for the start of Early Enrollment. I may be misreading that, and I don't think I could find a quote right now.
Lets say they do get all 11 Core classes in. What about the next set of base classes?(Alchemist, Magus etc) Will we have to start a new character from scratch or will we be able transition/adjust training from an existing archetype? Same with Races. If want to switch to say a Drow or Kobold (if they put in) will we need to start from scratch?
I ask due to the length of time required 2.5 yrs to cap. It's a long, long road if they don't allow to make these changes if they introduce a new class/race years later into the game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Unless I missed something somewhere here in the forums (it happens often) the Dev blog "Your Pathfinder Online Character" stated:
"Each of the base classes in the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook will be represented in the online game in this way, and in time we intend to add additional development paths to simulate prestige classes, archetypes, and base classes from other Pathfinder RPG content such as the Advanced Player's Guide and the Ultimate rulebooks."
I believe the said the same thing about core races. I think this means by the 2016 release. Not the start of the beta/crowdforging process.
Archetypes probably next. Naming any un-named cities towns or npcs would be in there at some point I hope.
|
Actually, I think archtypes are uneeded for this game, all they do is include those abilities and they will already be marked for that role, so they are eligible already to be equipped along with the capstone.
So at that point what is the archtype really gonna give us?
So perhaps additional roles/classes from outside the core book, or perhaps something along the lines of asking about spell groups, "should we include createing undead type spells? Or teleport type spells? Or polymorph type spells?"
There are several groups of spells that would take much work to implement, so they ask us what spell groups to include next.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They use the word "roles", to avoid confusion with "archtypes" or other PnP words.
FYI.
Hey, Nihimon,
A glossary of terms would be a good list to make. (And a commendation for your community service) I would, but I don't know anything about lists, and less then you about the state of the game thus far, and having them in the same spot as the other lists is a good idea anyway.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The base game should include all core classes and the next crowdforger should be a choice of extra classes. I vote for gunslinger.
Given all the restrictions on guns in PFS play, and some designer comments that they'd rather gunslingers were never added to Golarion, I think that's the least likely class.
The Summoner may be unlikely too, since they'd practically need a Spore-style creature designer for the eidolons.Cavaliers/Samurai, Inquisitors, and Ninja would be pretty simple, I think. Oracles could be difficult, mainly because they'd be fairly limited in what curses they could implement which would actually be significant to MMO play. Cloudy vision could be hackable the same way darkness could be, and speaking in tongues is irrelevant if people are using Teamspeak.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Alchemists..... alchemists please?
I think Gunslingers make more sense if you use variants from advanced races guide. Make weapons simpler, maybe even specially trained cross bow use based on timeline. If you use the experimental version you can get gunslingers/arrowslingers with the ability to incorporate minor alchemic abilities.
Inquisitor would also be an interesting class to play around with, although some spells might not convert well. Like confession and zone of truth.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think gunslinger would add something genuinely different from what you find in fantasy mmos. A class focused specifically around guns could bring in more players and clearly placePathfinder in position where it is viewed by the general population as a unique setting.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Quick Q: But what's the state of technology and blackpowder in Pathfinder IP?
I notice talk of a gunslinger, which sounds like the Warhammer equivalent of The Dwarf Engineer or the Guild Wars 2 equivalent of the Engineer or Steam-punkish Charr (thunder cats).
Tbh, I think Warhammer pulled it off really well, but then GW2 came up with mechanical cars next and the gun drones look a bit off too. There's arguments for including or not including it, but sometimes I think mixing genres can get a little out of control for the sake of populist appeal, which then would be a disservice to the IP. Anyway that's my rough thoughts. From that pov, I think "Gunslinger" might be best reserved after other classes seeing as it sits on that genre-crossing space that makes it more tricky/troublesome to place to make it work, at least I think so.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If they do guns in a way that make them balanced with other weapon types, then they're just expensive and pointless crossbows. If they do them in a way that is more true to the 'balance' in the gunslinger class, that's easy one-shot player-killing. It wouldn't be long before they're called 'griefslingers'. The class works in tabletop games because turning on other players is likely to get you booted out of the game, whereas in PFO you can be a 'bandit' as a cover for being a 'griefer' as long as you don't taunt your victims too much.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Any still they don't get a cool gun class that focuses on going cool gun things. They just get to do cool bow things with a gun.
Naw. They get to do cool gun things with a gun. Rifle-butt! Damage and stat-wise they're the same, but the weapon skills are different. I find the warrior longbow skills meh, but I like the Rifle.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Okay, so it wasn't Ryan, which was definitely complicating the search :)
From Gunslingers and swordsmen...what is the tech level of PFO?:
Pathfinder Online will remain true to the Pathfinder campaign setting.
While the campaign setting does include guns and even mysterious tech from a crashed spaceship, these things are generally present in specific areas, and virtually unknown in the River Kingdoms area.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Okay, so it wasn't Ryan, which was definitely complicating the search :)
From Gunslingers and swordsmen...what is the tech level of PFO?:
Pathfinder Online will remain true to the Pathfinder campaign setting.
While the campaign setting does include guns and even mysterious tech from a crashed spaceship, these things are generally present in specific areas, and virtually unknown in the River Kingdoms area.
That doesn't even make sense. As I recall the Crusaders Road was chosen specifically because people from all over the world travel through the region allowing any kind of player concept to be acceptable. That would mean if guns exist in the setting it would be perfectly acceptable for players to use use them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It makes sense in the context that guns aren't common enough in this area to accommodate gunslingers as an inherent class, but it would make sense for guns to be rare items that can be found and utilized. Players could still use guns (from my perspective) but without them being much more common in this area, it wouldn't make sense for there to be thousands of gunslingers running around.
