Super Genius's "Talented Class" Line


Product Discussion

101 to 150 of 179 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

... however tempting the Kickstarted 500-page ‘Compleat Talented’ book sounds, I think it might be a bit too ambitious for the time being. Personally, my ideal order for the near-to-mid-term releases would be Ranger, Sorcerer, Bard, and then Paladin.
(If you choose to intersperse SGG/RGG classes with the CRB ones to ‘break up the monotony’, I’d love to see the Time Thief, Dragonrider, Time Warden, and/or Templar done up in ‘Talented’ versions, but they could probably stand to wait a while. ;))


1 person marked this as a favorite.

TOUGH question. I'd go with...

Ranger, since it's so far along, then Gunslinger

followed closely by...

Ranger, since it's so far along, then Inquisitor

Wouldn't mind dragonrider either.

Liberty's Edge

After Ranger and Barbarian, I'd like to see Talented Inquisitor, Alchemist, and Witch Hunter.

Scarab Sages Contributor

Trace Coburn wrote:
... however tempting the Kickstarted 500-page ‘Compleat Talented’ book sounds, I think it might be a bit too ambitious for the time being.

I'm inclined to agree! I'd much rather have all the base and core classes out, and THEn to a KS for a revised and expanded book. (And the timing might be such that I could add material from the ACG to a print version of the book).

But if there was a massive outcry to do it differently, I'd have to look at that. :)

Scarab Sages Contributor

Parsing the votes as best I can, as I see it people are currently saying:

Ranger then Alchemist (2)
Ranger then Dragonrider (2)
Ranger then Gunslinger (2)
Ranger then Inquisitor (2)
Ranger then Sorcerer
Ranger then Witch

Enormous Kickstarter

Sorcerer (before even ranger)

Vote for soon but not next: bard, inquisitor, paladin

Obviously whatever I did "next," I'd assume people would still want whatever the voted for the be "early."

Dark Archive

Ranger then Inquisitor. Please.

Dark Archive

Then maybe a Genius Guide to Talented Arcane Prestige Classes...

or Martial Prestige Classes...

or Divine Prestige Classes.

You get the idea. ;)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:
Trace Coburn wrote:
... however tempting the Kickstarted 500-page ‘Compleat Talented’ book sounds, I think it might be a bit too ambitious for the time being.

I'm inclined to agree! I'd much rather have all the base and core classes out, and THEn to a KS for a revised and expanded book. (And the timing might be such that I could add material from the ACG to a print version of the book).

But if there was a massive outcry to do it differently, I'd have to look at that. :)

You know, if we could get a book like that in the next 24 months, and it included the new stuff from the ACG and the core stuff got the benefit of a second development pass I would be happy to wait for it. And if it had beautiful full color art I would happily pay $80-100 for it.

Dark Archive

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

Summoner, then Ranger! :D


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ranger, then Magus. Magus is, if anything, more constrained than the core Cavalier.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Ranger, then Alchemist


For what it's worth, I don't think all base-classes need a talented version. Ranger and Sorceror would spring to mind. What I would buy is a massive book of NEW CONTENT for the SGG-classes. Talented or not. What I wouldn't want to buy is "just" a talented version of those classes. my favorite bits and pieces in the talented-series tended to be the new ones.


I would like Ranger, then Gunslinger. Talented Godlings at some point would make me happy. :)


Sorcerer (before even ranger)

Dark Archive

I'm voting

Ranger, since it's so far along, then Magus

Also, I'd like to see some guidelines to combine martial-oriented classes with Talented Fighter, so that a Fighter could take a couple of talents from Barbarian list, or Gunslinger list or whatever.

(My ultimate goal for my own campaign is to combine Fighter with Barbarian - which I already did - Cavalier and Gunslinger into one Talented class).

Liberty's Edge

Ranger then Alchemist

or Ranger then Magus

Shadow Lodge

Ranger, then Alchemist, Magus, and/or Inquisitor. Not experienced enough with SGG's own classes to comment, though I wouldn't be opposed to more of them!

Most of the full-casters don't need Talented versions IMO. The main exceptions I'd probably make would be Sorcerer and only possibly Cleric; Oracle I think is modular enough already, but Clerics get to be pretty cookie-cutter. Definitely not Wizard.


Ranger then inquisitor.


Ranger-->Alchemist
Ranger-->Inquisitor

Dark Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Ranger then witch would be my vote. Since a book of me wasn't a option.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Dark_Mistress wrote:
Ranger then witch would be my vote. Since a book of me wasn't a option.

I'd totally buy a Talented Dark Mistress.

And wow that sounds dirty.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Genius Guide to the Talented Dark Mistress...

Would buy. Just saying.

Dark Archive

Starfinder Superscriber
Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:


Magus next, even though Ranger is close.
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Cleric.
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Paladin.
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Inquisitor.
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Gunslinger.
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Sorcerer.
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Oracle.

What I really want is a Talented Paladin, with Antipaladin and other alignments all supported.

What I really want is a Talented Templar, Godling, or one of the Time classes. Especially the Talented Templar.

I put this in order of what my gaming group and I want at this time.

Scarab Sages Contributor

Parsing the votes as best I can (and yes, I added the madness of fractional votes), as I see it people are currently saying:

Ranger then Alchemist (4.33)
Ranger, then Cleric
Ranger then Dragonrider (2)
Ranger then Gunslinger (3)
Ranger then Inquisitor (4.83)
Ranger then Magus (2.83)
Ranger then Sorcerer
Ranger then Witch (2)

Enormous Kickstarter (2, but only if we do it right)

Magus (even before ranger)
Sorcerer (before even ranger) (2)
Summoner (before even ranger)

A massive book of NEW content for Rogue Genius base classes (talented or not)

Vote for soon but not next: bard, dark mistress, godling, inquisitor, paladin (with antipaladin and all-alignment support)… and maybe Talented Prestige Classes.
Obviously whatever I did "next," I'd assume people would still want whatever they voted for as “next” be consider a vote for "soon."

Scarab Sages Contributor

nightflier wrote:

Also, I'd like to see some guidelines to combine martial-oriented classes with Talented Fighter, so that a Fighter could take a couple of talents from Barbarian list, or Gunslinger list or whatever.

(My ultimate goal for my own campaign is to combine Fighter with Barbarian - which I already did - Cavalier and Gunslinger into one Talented class).

There's a section covering combining fighters and cavaliers in The talented cavalier, just as there is one covering combining monks and rogues in The Talented Monk.

I DO expect to also add one for combining fighters and barbarians in Talented barbarian.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

This is a tough one. There is so much in that poll I want to see.

Talented Sorceror (theres lots of cool stuff in the bloodlines that would be interesting to mix/combine with other classes)
Talented Riven Mage (if only to get an expansion to riven magic with is what I want most of RGG at the moment).
Talented Shadow Assassin (would love to be able to combine this with my monk, rogue)


After Barbarian I would vote

1)Talented ranger has to be my first choice
2) talented cleric
3) talented magus
4) talented inquisitor
5) talented bard
6) talented sorcerer
7) talented paladin
8) talented druid
9) talented oracle
10) talanted wizard

Would bye kickstarter talented hardcover for sure


gunslinger
magus
paladin
in that order after ranger.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Another vote for Talented Dark Mistress.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Pawns, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Yep, Talented Dark Mistress FTW.


Kolokotroni wrote:

Talented Shadow Assassin (would love to be able to combine this with my monk, rogue)

I've got both the GGttSA and UO:PotN but I would love to see Shadow Assassin edges and talents... maybe in an GGtEven More Rogue Talents for rogues & ninja? Definitely something to consider for the upcoming new Slayer class.

Liberty's Edge

I'd definitely like to put a "coming soon" vote on the shadow assassin.


Am I stupid? Who is the dark mistress?

Would love to see Shadow Assassin options for both the monk and the rogue.

Would love to see the Witch Hunter options for the Cleric, Paladin, and/or the Inquisitor.

I really like when their are crossbreeding of the classes instead of always the need for multiclassing. Fighter and wizard should be seperate but I like when once removed classes can intermingle....such as Fighter and Barbarian, Ranger amd Druid

Liberty's Edge

She's the person who made the 63rd post in this thread.


My vote is to have Talented versions of all the base and core classes as the new classes in Paizo's Advanced Class Guide. You can always create new talents and edges to cover the new abilities they want to create with the hybrid classes proposed for that book.

Silver Crusade

Ranger then Magus....


Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

Barbarian is pretty well set in stone as the next talented book. For it to not be next, I'd have to sit on it while other things came out. That wouldn't speed the arrival of other books, it's just delay the talented barbarian.

Ranger is MUCH further along than anything else after barbarian, but if there was a real hue and cry, I *could* switch from doing it next to getting something else out the door. And after ranger, the field is wide open.

So, let's take a poll!

The Cavalier, Fighter, Monk, and Rogue are done. Barbarian is unquestionably next. After that, what would you like to see (pick one)

Ranger, since it's so far along, then Alchemist
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Bard
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Cleric
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Druid
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Gunslinger
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Inquisitor
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Magus
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Oracle
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Paladin
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Sorcerer
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Summoner
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Witch
Ranger, since it's so far along, then Wizard

Alchemist next, even though Ranger is close
Bard next, even though Ranger is close
Cleric next, even though Ranger is close
Druid next, even though Ranger is close
Gunslinger next, even though Ranger is close
Inquisitor next, even though Ranger is close
Magus next, even though Ranger is close
Oracle next, even though Ranger is close
Paladin next, even though Ranger is close
Sorcerer next, even though Ranger is close
Summoner next, even though Ranger is close
Witch next, even though Ranger is close
Wizard next, even though Ranger is close

What I really want is a Talented Paladin, with Antipaladin and other alignments all supported

What I really want is a Talented Archon
What I really want is a Talented Armiger
What I really want is a Talented Death Knight
What I really want is a Talented...

Seems rather odd to have talented caster classes. I mean, their selection of abilities is pretty impressive already. Talents seem like they work better for the more martial classes anyway.

Also, have you seen the Advanced Classes Playtest? Specifically their Swashbuckler class. I think they're ripping off SGG's Fusilier from "Grit and Gunslingers".

Scarab Sages Contributor

3 people marked this as a favorite.
TheDisgaean wrote:
Seems rather odd to have talented caster classes. I mean, their selection of abilities is pretty impressive already. Talents seem like they work better for the more martial classes anyway.

That's a pretty common opinion, and obviously I think I have both a reason and a way to make talented full casters interesting, flexible, fun, and balanced.

I suspect that claim is one reason some folks have asked me to do a full caster soon. :)

TheDisgaean wrote:
Also, have you seen the Advanced Classes Playtest? Specifically their Swashbuckler class. I think they're ripping off SGG's Fusilier from "Grit and Gunslingers".

You might note my name in the credits, under "Authors," so I am pretty familiar with the material in the book. That said, I had nothing to do with the Swashbuckler design, and I wouldn't be the person to ask about what the inspirations of their design was.

Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TheDisgaean wrote:
Also, have you seen the Advanced Classes Playtest? Specifically their Swashbuckler class. I think they're ripping off SGG's Fusilier from "Grit and Gunslingers".

As the designer of the both the gunslinger and the swashbuckler, and as a person who has not read Grit and Gunslingers, I assure you there was not ripping off.

The fact that I have not read Grit and Gunslingers is no slight on Owen, who is a wonderful designer, not to mention a fantastic fella. I do plan on reading that book sometime in the future--I just purchased it a couple of days ago, actually--I just haven't been able to find the time, and now I will probably have to wait until Advanced Class Guide design is concluded.

(Playtests are hard on the time and the energy to do anything other than spend time with the family and watch occult melodramas when the long workday is over. ;-) )

All that said, I'm sure there is probably some unintentional parallel design.

When I designed the gunslinger, I wanted to create a very cinematic, action-oriented class. Something that was more action hero than other traditional class designs. That design lends itself to certain other concepts, the swashbuckler being top on that list. And it was during the gunslinger playtest that discussion started about eventually doing a swashbuckler class using the design.

We just finally got around to doing it.

Contributor

Owen, I want the Talented Gunslinger. :)


4 people marked this as a favorite.

@Stephen,
We don't need you distracting us with your "facts" and "actual accounts" let alone your "unsolicited recognition of awesomeness", ok? There is only room for baseless accusation and armor spikes around here :D

Scarab Sages Contributor

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
All that said, I'm sure there is probably some unintentional parallel design.

And folks, this happens.

SRM and I both read a lot of game material, non-game material, threads of fans, and heck things each other write about game design. If we both set out from this similar space looking to build a swashbuckler, it's unsurprising we'd have certain similarities crop up.

Obviously I like my design *better*, but I'm biased. :)

I didn't want to talk out of turn about this until and unless the Paizo designers wanted to talk about their inspirations. Now that they have, I'm happy to chip and and note that I'm not at all bugged by this.

Hopefully that'll put this to question to rest.


I have to agree that they are very parallel in design. I've been playing a modified fusilier/fighter because I wasn't quite getting what I wanted from the single class. Sadly (for Owen), that character has been reskinned for the playtest and I'm very excited to see how he goes forward.

But I do like a number of things you both did in your accidentally-shared design.

Owen, I have been unable to explore your Talented series, but I'm going to have to take the plunge soon. Having no other opinion and recognizing the value of your time, I vote that you finish whatever you have in process before moving on to the wish lists.


I was working on a grit-based swashbuckler design at one point, but abandoned it when I became unhappy with the conceptual space. I am not shocked at all that this concept has been tried by others; I am more surprised it has not already been done more than once.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I want the massive "Genius Guide to the so Awesomely Talented Classes that it cant be contained in one Volume." But, that's just me.


Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:
I can see a viable barbarian build with with no rage -- and that opens up a lot of possibilities.

I am, definitely, interested. The 1e Barbarian was not a rager, but tough, quick reflexed, spell-less wilderness warrior with weapon proficiencies and skill bonuses based upon his or her culture/environment. In 2e, the barbarian was handled by several kits in the Complete Fighter's Handbook and only one of which was a berserker (I can't recall if the Complete Barbarian's Handbook introduced a new class other than the Shaman or if it just reprinted the 1e Barbarian). So, there is precedent for a non-raging barbarian.

My 3e campaign Barbarian is influenced by both David Howery's rewrite of the 1e Barbarian in "Tracking Down the Barbarian" which appeared in Dragon and the 2e Wilderness Warrior kit (primarily, the former).


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Distant Scholar wrote:


This sounds more like you're doing a Knight class which subsumes Cavalier, rather than expanding the Cavalier. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

I agree. I am not sure why it wasn't done this way in the first place. It sounds as if Talented Monk, Talented Rogue, Talented Monk and, now, Talented Cavalier (which I have also been eyeing) are all must buys.

It looks like Rogue Genius will be my go to third party for Pathfinder much like Green Ronin was my primary third party for 3e... Oh, wait, Owen is now doing Pathfinder for Green Ronin as well. All the better for me!


I change my vote to big book. My only real problem with the Genius titles is that horizontal printing leads to a lot of problems and I usually need a hard copy at the table.


I want to see you take on the Talented Casters, because I *think* I know how you'd approach it, after looking at Talented Rogue/Ninja. I love it when you prove to me that I know how you think.

I also want to see you tackle the Alchemist, because ... because. :) (Honestly, it could - imo - likely be worked into Talented Arcanist or Talented Gunslinger...but I definitely want to see a Talented Tinkerer, in some shape/form/fashion.)

Please don't do the huge5000000pagebookofTalentedClassUniversalAwesomeness because I can't go that long with no Owen Genius fix!!! But, whatever you do end up releasing, I'm buying it. ;)


After submitting my suggestions in the 52 thread, I discovered this thread earlier today. Now, I see that Talented Cleric and Talented Sorcerer have been on the table. Based upon my posts in the other thread, it should be obvious that those are the two that I would like to see next although Barbarian is third on my list.

101 to 150 of 179 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Third-Party Pathfinder RPG Products / Product Discussion / Super Genius's "Talented Class" Line All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.