I can never have too many new classes.*looks at his PDF library* I think....I think I have too many....
Then you should start writing reviews of them ;)
3) 4th-level prepared spells, witch-like spell list
4) 4th-level prepared spells, wizard-like spell list
4th-level spontaneous caster of any sort!!!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can never have too many new classes.*looks at his PDF library* I think....I think I have too many....
Than you should share them with I and Orthos as we don't have enough...and now we know why TriOmegaZero has been hogging them all up. ;)
Although I would love more classes that challenge certain status quos, namely martial classes that do cool things with their Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma.
Indeed, I think the un-touched niche of full BAB arcane ranger/paladin equivalents could be great for that, INT for Wizard type using Schools, CHA for Sorceror type using Bloodlines. For non-caster martials, Cavalier could really be pushed into a direction that uses CHA more, IMHO.
Re: the Fighter-Cleric class, since we already have Inquisitors, I think going a wholly non-caster direction (but with Domains and class-specific Domain-related abilities) or possibly a Paladin-casting-progression but with different spell list and different class abilities/ restrictions could be interesting... People clamor for alternate alignment Paladins all the time, this could be the vehicle for that.
Rules Bloat is a separate issue from power creep.
Only problem is something like the Ranger/Rogue hybrid, like Ninja, another focused hybrid makes another niche of Rogue pointless to pursue with the Rogue class, and the remaining parts are still mostly uncompelling.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I share Bugley's concerns about bloat. Both from the PFS PoV (More stuff for me as GM to track. Whee) and from the PoV of there being a lot of good classes already, from 3pp. Marc Radle's post lists his work.
I'd hope to see some of these in the advanced character guide (Marc's list and the Vanguard, for example)
Advanced Class Guide... as in +20
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ok...can those people who are calling this 'Rules Bloat' please explain to me how 1 book a year is rules bloat?
I mean really I think Pazio is being really fair and sensitive to this complaint...but what about us who do like more options? We are not even demanding more books...we are just happy to get this one.
Are you guys really being fair here?
|
Though really I will never understand the 'rule bloat' people complaints...just don't use the books.If you're really interested in understanding, there are several reasons why it isn't that simple:
1. Organized play.
2. Positive network externalities are impacted. The utility of subsequent adventure/setting products is decreased as those products rely on more supplementary rules material. For example, AP volumes now routinely contain references to non-core material (and not infrequently, non-PRD material). Yes, I can remove said material, but that's work I didn't have to do pre-bloat. Decreased utility.
3. Refusing to allow supplementary material often sets the stage for player/GM conflict.
4. Bloat hastens the advent of a new edition (though I personally don't care at all about this one at all).While I don't expect you to suddenly agree, hopefully this provides some insight into the POV.
It depends on if they get cute or not, which is where problems come in.
If the do something like a full BaB Ranger who loses all ranger abilities and spells in exchange for 1/2 power sneak attack with half as many rogue talents, that doesn't really effect much.
If they try to put complicated and confusing mechanics, yes that gets to be a problem.
--War Priest (Cleric / Fighter)
I'm guessing a Magus that casts divine spells from the cleric list, spell combat included.
--Slayer (Ranger / Rogue)
Probably going to be pretty close to a carbon copy of the Scout base class from 3.5 Complete Adventurer.
--Hunter (Druid / Ranger)
Magus class for druids, complete with spell combat.
--Shaman (Oracle / Witch)
I imagine this to be a spontaneous caster version of the witch.
Other classes I expect to see:
Spontaneous Druid
Hexblade/ Battle Scion/ Arcane Paladin-Ranger niche
Magus for witches, complete with spell combat
Archetypes that allow for non LG paladins
I also expect to see an in depth breakdown and streamlining of spell combat, along with feats and arcanas that allow for different multiclassing benefits between the magi clone classes.
Huh, that Hunter would actually really interest me.
If I had to guess, I'd say that the War Priest would be the replacement for non-LG paladins.
And I doubt they'll give spell combat to anyone else. It's an exceedingly powerful ability, and is really the main class feature of the magus.
Yesssss! That was the book I was hoping for. My players love new classes and I love them, too.
Fingers crossed for the Swashbuckler.
Huh, that Hunter would actually really interest me.
If I had to guess, I'd say that the War Priest would be the replacement for non-LG paladins.
And I doubt they'll give spell combat to anyone else. It's an exceedingly powerful ability, and is really the main class feature of the magus.
That's why I think they will, Paizo loves the magus class more than any of the others, they give more support to that class than any other. Have you seen the ridiculous number of traits in Ultimate Campaign that pertain solely to the magus class? No other class gets support like the magus does.
Given how this is the first real crunch book since Ultimate Combat, I am not too fazed with bloat problems, yet. I'll probably be in another five years, when this editions cycle will probably be just ending.
Given how this is the first real crunch book since Ultimate Combat, I am not too fazed with bloat problems, yet. I'll probably be in another five years, when this editions cycle will probably be just ending.
I'd argue that Mythic Adventures is a crunch book. It has a lot of GM elements to it, but in my opinion that's the book's greatest strength.
What does fairness have to do with personal preferences?
Because it is never about personal preference...it is always a attack and a swearing of PF going down hill...or some other ridiculous thing because Pazio is not bending all the way backwards to make them happy.
That would require READING them first... :PThen you should start writing reviews of them ;)I can never have too many new classes.*looks at his PDF library* I think....I think I have too many....
I believe in you! You can do it!
Ok...can those people who are calling this 'Rules Bloat' please explain to me how 1 book a year is rules bloat?
It's more bloated than none. Preference is just preference. Mine happens to be rules in one book, flavour in the rest.
I mean really I think Pazio is being really fair and sensitive to this complaint...but what about us who do like more options? We are not even demanding more books...we are just happy to get this one.
Are you guys really being fair here?
Maybe you're misunderstanding (or responding to people in other threads). Bugleyman has pretty much enunciated my view - but it's just what I like. I'm not suggesting (and I don't think he is either) that paizo shouldn't make rule books. It's just I don't really get much use out of them.
I have to say, I've very excited for this book. I think it will allow for some concepts that are doable via multiclassing today, but don't quite deliver on the goal.
I'm hoping Slayer is more of a lightly-armored warrior type rather than a Scout clone. I'd really like to see a class that doesn't have the wilderness focus of a Scout or Spell-Less Ranger. More of a Witcher (or at least when multi-classed with Alchemist, Wizard, or Sorcerer gets you closer to a Witcher-style character).
Also hoping for a swashbuckler-style character (Fighter-Rogue rather than Slayer's Ranger-Rogue). But it seems like a long-shot if they go with the "fill this empty combo slot" design route.
Shaman as Oracle-Witch blend is an interesting take. I like it conceptually.
Hunter - Ranger/Druid - kind of meh. Least interesting of the bunch from a knee-jerk 1st impression.
With only 10 classes (and I'm not clamoring for more), I really don't want this to be 9 martial/caster hybrids. If they fill a concept or classic archetype, great, but I don't need a X+Y class just because that particular arcane/divine/martial combo doesn't exist yet.
More archetypes are always welcome.
I do expect there to be at least a few prestige classes.
I DON'T want half the book to be feats & spells.
I wouldn't mind a class-creation system along the lines of the race-builder system we got in Advanced Race Guide.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Really, I always considered the D&D Bloat problems to be a problem with quality, not quantity. Pathfinder as it stands now is like a well built Sumo Wrestler. Big, but still very capable and awesome. D&D editions often become a morbidly obese man that was really, really unhealthy.
The difference is intake! Sumo Pathfinder eats healthy! Fat D&D eats terribly.
Okay, that metaphor got away from me a bit, but it still works. Anyways, I'm excited for this book. I'm hoping we get a more martially capable wildshaper.
CEO
|
| 47 people marked this as a favorite. |
I guess I just miss the days when Paizo was more about adventures than rules.
You are right. We just have two adventure paths (12 volumes), a 300+ page super dungeon, the next RPG Superstar module, and two or more PFS scenarios each month. By my count, thats at least 1,836 pages of adventures, compared to 732 pages of rules product. Certainly shows our lack of committment to adventures.
Lisa
Really, I always considered the D&D Bloat problems to be a problem with quality, not quantity.
Despite not wanting lots of mechanics. I certainly agree that paizo do it well. I enjoy reading their rule books (ultimate campaign being a fantastic book, IMO) even though I won't generally use them.
Ah! Lisa Stevens posted in a thread I made!
*faints with starry eyes*
|
I'm cautiously optimistic about this book. The magus is a really well-executed hybrid that feels like a fighter/wizard from a flavour standpoint but plays in a totally unique way that doesn't just replicate its host classes. I would be happy to see more classes designed this way, but I sincerely hope not all ten of them are. Most classes, including many core classes are already hybrids when you get right down to it (paladin is a fighter/cleric, ranger is a fighter/druid, witch is a wizard/druid, etc.), and there are already soooo many spellcasting classes out there.
I'd love to see a few classes that actually cover brand new ground. Off the top of my head, the following concepts would all make interesting classes that would fit the game and the setting but would feel completely fresh: a non-spellcasting non-nature-themed shapeshifter, an astral projectionist, a machinist, a golem-maker, a possessor, etc. Paizo's Pathfinder products have always felt better designed and better balanced than WotC's 3.5 but I do often feel that Pathfinder's a lot less adventurous.
That said, I do really think an arcane full-BAB tertiary caster would be great to have too. I don't think every class needs to be a brand new concept that feels nothing like existing classes, but I do hope some of them are. It's a shame the summoner turned out to be so abusable because that class has a truly interesting concept that feels very unlike anything that came before it and, in a way, I worry that its problems have stifled future class design.
Woah!!!! So excited for this!!!! While I can understand the repudiation of PFSers, this can only mean fantastic ideas, artwork and options!!!! With this and the Numeria AP Iron Gods dropping in 2014 that year is going to rock so hard!!!!! If only an artificer/engineer we're to be included in the ACG to go along with Iron Gods!!!!!
kinda hope we see some of the message board stuff in print like "huntmaster" (i know it was a RPG super star but still) any way i think this might be a great book for those of us that have our own game worlds like ARG and UCamp was.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Didn't see this coming!
Shoanti iconic plz! :D
Just throwing this out there, whomever orders the Paizo Art, I will fight Mikaze in a performance combat for your amusement if it'll get me a kitsune iconic.
Just throwing this out there, whomever orders the Paizo Art, I will fight Mikaze in a performance combat for your amusement if it'll get me a kitsune iconic.Didn't see this coming!
Shoanti iconic plz! :D
Actually yea, this *would* be the perfect time to create iconics of the more exotic races from the ARG ;)
This should be interesting. I certainly hope there is more support for classes that have seen little.
Actually yea, this *would* be the perfect time to create iconics of the more exotic races from the ARG ;)
Not to mention some classes based around non-Western style concepts. Tian-Xia and Vudra ftw!
Certainly cautiously optimistic. The Build-A-Class sounds fun. I liked the Race Creator, though I can imagine that like the Race Creator and the Magic Rules System, it'll be more of an art than a science to making it. Which, just about every point-based, customization system I've ever played has been like.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I'd like to see another half-orc or dwarf iconic. C'mon, we got plenty of humans, and three half-elves.
Interesting. The Magus and Inquisitor are two of the best designed classes in the game. I like more classes designed like that. I almost hope they decide to re-design classes like the fighter and rogue to fit the paradigm of the Magus and Inquisitor. The one good save for both classes needs to go. They need abilities to make them competitive with these new classes.
Seeing as they are apparently bringing out ten new Base Classes, I'm hoping they aren't all hybrids.
* At least one (or more) dedicated martial would be nice - a Swashbuckler definitely fits that design space. Or a shapeshifter - with SLAs perhaps, but not spells...
* If there is an artificer/engineer I'd like at least an option (archetype or hardcoded into ability suites) for a non-magical version - more steampunk and less arcanotech...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Boy, I can't wait for the playtest to come out, just like Mythic Adventures, and then for people to cry when the book comes out after Paizo decides, "Hm, we think we'll just do what we wanted to anyway."
Given how this is the first real crunch book since Ultimate Combat, I am not too fazed with bloat problems, yet. I'll probably be in another five years, when this editions cycle will probably be just ending.I'd argue that Mythic Adventures is a crunch book. It has a lot of GM elements to it, but in my opinion that's the book's greatest strength.
Yeah, but it is an optional rules book, like Ultimate Campaign. I don't see it getting as much common acceptance as a "10 new base classes" book will get. Those 10 new classes will be immediately adopted as canon rules by most groups, IMO, while having a mythic campaign will happen much more seldomly. Same for Ultimate Campaigns glut of optional rules, which will be adopted on a case-by-case basis.
People ask how Paizo will respond to the "threat" of D&D Next? The answer is simple: Iron Gods and Advanced Class Guide. Paizo wins.
Seriosuly, though, I'm very excited about this book. Especially the war priest class. I've been a massive fan of the concept of war priests for many years but haven't really found the optimal solution. I'm hoping this is it.
|
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
I guess I just miss the days when Paizo was more about adventures than rules.You are right. We just have two adventure paths (12 volumes), a 300+ page super dungeon, the next RPG Superstar module, and two or more PFS scenarios each month. By my count, thats at least 1,836 pages of adventures, compared to 732 pages of rules product. Certainly shows our lack of committment to adventures.
Lisa
One day I'll learn how to headshot people on the Internet like Lisa does.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
pretty sure she has a feat