Here's to hoping Bards, Paladins, and Rangers end up getting some love in Pathfinder Unchained 2.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I wasn't aware they needed love. :)
Bards are very potent in the hands of the right players, paladin and rangers dominate against the right enemies. I suppose Paladins could use a version thats not LG, and rangers might need a way to help players who make poor choices with Favored Enemy, but thats all I would do.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Unchained 2: Chains unleashed
on topic:
FIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTEEE EEEEEEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My vote goes to druids. They do not need a "power boost" in any way, shape or form, but much like monks they've always felt like a "jumble of random class features" to me and I would love a leaner, more focused druid; like, choosing between casting and combat, between plant lore and animal lore and fey lore maybe, et cetera, rather than trying to be all of it at once. Nature's a big place, yo!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, Bards are already one of the best-designed classes in PF. Paladins and Rangers are pretty solid, too.
The Fighter and the Cavalier could use some updating (like actual class features on the former, and a way to actually make use of his iconic abilities without feat taxes on the latter) but Rogue and Monk were the classes that really needed to get fixed... and they didn't really get everything they needed, but Unchained was a start.
|
My top picks for an Unchained 2 are Fighter and Sorcerer.
Fighter is the definition of bland, and its main shtick (bonus feats) is largely pointless in the face of classes like Swashbuckler or Brawler that get half (or more) of those feats and also get special class features that emphasize their fighting style. If anything, I would have expected fighters to get stances and/or fighting styles rather than barbarians and rangers respectively. I wouldn't mind a not-feat-based fighting style system for fighters that replaces half their bonus feats, though.
Sorcerer is.. well, I don't know what it is. Sure, it can full cast, and has some weird bloodline powers. But those two things don't synergize well at all in most bloodlines. I feel like they need something extra to make them actually stand out. Perhaps the bloodlines should give descriptor-based access to off-list spells (e.g. Celestial bloodline can choose [Good] spells from any list while Accursed gets [curse]). Regardless, at the moment it feels like "They're a natural caster! How do they get their powers you ask? Umm.. bloodlines! Yeah..." and yet the result is just 9-levels of casting with a tiny spice packet of flavoring that's basically just salt.
That's not to say that the classes are pointless as-is. They work well enough to have a place in the system. But, they can use a little extra spice to make me excited about playing them. I'm eating ramen, and that works (especially when I add an egg), but I'd prefer steak au poivre with an appropriate side of greens.
Are retooled classes the only subject here? Sometimes when some kind of class support or alternate rule comes out I feel like there's always a swell of desire for every other class to get the same treatment.
Anyways, for Unchained 2 I would probably like to see a new things for Charisma and new ways to handle Favored Class bonuses.
Probably packaged traits or a new way to handle races so you can reflavor more easily. Sort of a blank slate that got two feats and some traits with feats that represent creature subtypes.
I wasn't aware they needed love. :)
Bards are very potent in the hands of the right players, paladin and rangers dominate against the right enemies. I suppose Paladins could use a version thats not LG, and rangers might need a way to help players who make poor choices with Favored Enemy, but thats all I would do.
Ciaran Barnes is my man here. All of those classes are fine. The bard is awesome and has great archetype support. The ranger is (in my opinion) the most well designed martial in the game. They're strong in ways they should be strong, but they do possess weaknesses. Combat styles help bypass the design flaw of feats by allowing the ranger to branch out in multiple areas in the feat tree instead of dedicate themselves to one build. Spells, animal companions, and other class features keep them interesting in late game. The paladin deals some hefty damage and has plenty of cool tools to help the party. I just wish their auras came sooner.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Classes I'd like to see in Unchained 2:
Cleric. The role of holy man can be filled in quite a few ways. But the cleric was limited by 3.5 compatibility. As such, while potent, it's rather bland in its execution. I'd like to see how clerics could have been done if backwards compatibility were no longer an issue.
Fighter. Why? It got a few tricks in the conversion, but it's still a class that could use a makeover.
Bard. I love the bard class as it is, but I'd like to see from a pure curiosity standpoint what could be done with it.
|
|
Classes I'd like to see in Unchained 2:
Cleric. The role of holy man can be filled in quite a few ways. But the cleric was limited by 3.5 compatibility. As such, while potent, it's rather bland in its execution. I'd like to see how clerics could have been done if backwards compatibility were no longer an issue.
Fighter. Why? It got a few tricks in the conversion, but it's still a class that could use a makeover.
Bard. I love the bard class as it is, but I'd like to see from a pure curiosity standpoint what could be done with it.
I agree with Fighter and Cleric needing Unchained. The Bard is pretty awesome already. How would you go about Unchaining a Bard?
I have no idea about what could be done with the bard unchained. Honestly, the class doesn't need help at all. It's purely an intellectual desire to see what could be done with the class differently.
Here's hoping Monks actually get some love :P
Eh? Unchained monk is stellar from what we've seen so far.
I think Cleric needs a redo. They have the blandest class abilities table by far. Even then, nearly every other class has some way to replicate some of these few abilities. (Druids gain "Domains," Inquisitions, quite a few others have or can attain Channel Energy.)
I feel like they need something that is unique -only- to a Cleric, if that makes any sense.
I don't think the cleric is in a spot worse enough to warrant a whole new book. However, I do think they could benefit from a rework to make them less powerful but more interesting and fun. Mainly, reworking domains so they play a bigger role in the class. However, I'm not sure how I'd adjust the cleric in other ways. Either their spellcasting or their proficiencies would need to take a hit.
Here's hoping Monks actually get some love :PEh? Unchained monk is stellar from what we've seen so far.Not to derail the thread with Monk debate, I'll list my issues with the unchained Monk quick and short.
1: Bad Will Save
2: MORE Ki starved with no more ki points or built in ki regeneration
3: Bad Will Save
4: Previous Constant Monk Stuff now costs Ki Powers and in some cases Ki Points.
5: Bad Will Save
6: Incompatible with existing archetypes
7: Bad Will Save
You can take it up with the Unchaining the Unchained Monk thread. The bad Will save is not as bad as most say. It justified adding more power to the monk and it's the least painful save to lose because monks receive bonuses against mind-affecting effects and are incentivized to have a good Wisdom.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it would be neat if the cleric got Channel Powers at levels 2, 6, 10, 14, and 18, and more domain abilities at levels 4, 8, 12, 16, and something capstony at 20th.
Channel Powers would be things like shaping channels (cones, lines, rays), possibly bonus channel feats, increases in channel energy die types (1d6 to 1d8), meta-channel abilities (quicken channel, empower channel, maximize channel, etc.), maybe add Charisma modifier to channel energy, maybe the ability to add channeled energy as bonus hit points above normal maximums, mercy-like abilities added to channels, etc.
Alternatively, maybe just make channel energy a little more user friendly, like allowing the cleric to automatically not heal his enemies when she channels energy.
Smilodan those all sound cool. You should write up and post some home brew for that.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I understand the reason the Cleric's class features are so boring: they had like 20 pages of Domains in the book, and that took up all the room for actual interesting class features.
I'd rather they had put in a bunch of fun and interesting class features, and cut down on the number of Domains, which they could then add to in later books.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I honestly think domains are the most interesting class feature they have. I just wish they were more interesting and let you better customize your cleric based on your god. I once had an idea where they worked more like oracle mysteries where you can select domain powers from a combined pool from the two domains you choose at 1st level and the cleric can spontaneously cast domain spells.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree that the Domains are the most interesting Cleric class features, but they are still pretty boring. The vast majority of them are "You get something at level 1, and then maybe one or two more things, and then nothing. None of the Domains provide class features after level 8, and that's less than halfway through the Cleric's level progression. That's just weird.
Having fewer, more fleshed-out Domains over a huge list of mostly mediocre Domains would have been far more interesting, imo.
I REALLY like the idea of Revelation-like Domains.
You would pick 2 domains at level 1, and then get to choose domain abilities at levels 4, 8, 12, 16, and then get to select a Capstone ability at 20th.
Bard Unstrung? :P
the cleric, druid, cavalier, and fighter could use some lovin too.
Cleric is... meh. cool beans.
Druid seems like three classes crammed together. A shapeshifter, a wild cleric, and an animal tamer/hunter. it would be nice to see some path abilities that split it all up.
cavalier isn't all that great. My favorite version of it remains the Order of the Seal, mixed with samurai. That being said, its not even the cavalier class at that point.
Fighter is okay, but nothing special. I'd like to see some abilities that allow it to 'fake' a feat for an encounter, temporarily gaining use of something that it meets the prereqs for.
|
|
Bard Unstrung? :P
I would go for that, perhaps a Bard that has more of a choice in whether or not they want to be music focused and a bit of variety in that the class be allowed to choose performances as an Oracle is allowed to pick revelations.
Druid seems like three classes crammed together. A shapeshifter, a wild cleric, and an animal tamer/hunter. it would be nice to see some path abilities that split it all up.
I agree, perhaps have it that Druids can pick 'Paths' and based on the path chosen they would be able to focus on spellcasting, shapeshifting, or their animal companion. More perhaps have a druid that can choose between having a connection with nature, the elements, or animals/beasts.
Here's hoping Monks actually get some love :PEh? Unchained monk is stellar from what we've seen so far.Not to derail the thread with Monk debate, I'll list my issues with the unchained Monk quick and short.
1: Bad Will Save
2: MORE Ki starved with no more ki points or built in ki regeneration
3: Bad Will Save
4: Previous Constant Monk Stuff now costs Ki Powers and in some cases Ki Points.
5: Bad Will Save
6: Incompatible with existing archetypes
7: Bad Will Save
1: I can't tell/didn't notice.
2: That's probably true to a degree. I could point to some magic items, but it's still not innate.3: see 1
4: Right. But the original monk had a sort of mesh of abilities that didn't make sense or go together (What good did high speed and Flurry do together anyway? Among other things). Unchained feels more customizable with the Ki Powers, and feels in-line with other classes (Rogue/Slayer Talents, Rage Powers, the works).
5: see 1
6: This pains me right here too. Although at the same time, I don't miss them.
7: see 1
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm amazed that Cleric wasn't in Unchained..... for a class that has soooooooo much RP potential and soooooo badly put together for PF.... its been crying out for a complete overhaul since Day 1...... but no all we get is...
"The cleric is fine.... it can cast using a shield!!!"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm amazed that Cleric wasn't in Unchained..... for a class that has soooooooo much RP potential and soooooo badly put together for PF.... its been crying out for a complete overhaul since Day 1...... but no all we get is...
"The cleric is fine.... it can cast using a shield!!!"
Yes. The first thing I pointed out when I opened the Core Rulebook for the 1st time is that Clerics have no capstone ability at level 20. ):
Yes. The first thing I pointed out when I opened the Core Rulebook for the 1st time is that Clerics have no capstone ability at level 20. ):I'm amazed that Cleric wasn't in Unchained..... for a class that has soooooooo much RP potential and soooooo badly put together for PF.... its been crying out for a complete overhaul since Day 1...... but no all we get is...
"The cleric is fine.... it can cast using a shield!!!"
But that means you lose practically NOTHING if you choose to multiclass as a cleric 19/anything 1. Fighter for feats, armor, and weapons; rogue for skills, good Reflex, and sneak attack; wizard for access to all the wands and staves; druid to prove the bit about wizard being a lie; bard for a bunch of stuff (they're REALLY front-loaded!); monk for all good saves, feats, Wisdom to AC; barbarian for hit points, weapons, and speed and rage; sorcerer for very specific spells, like shield for a reach cleric; oracle for LOTS of low level cures; etc. etc.
I remember reading somewhere in the heydays of 3.0, that different WotC campaigns were going to use different mechanical methods to differentiate the worshippers of different deities. One was going to use Prestige Classes, and one was going to use Multiclassing. So maybe it is actually an intentional design element of the cleric to lack a capstone feature. It might be a method to encourage both design goals.
Especially now that there is the Magical Knack trait, this is a particularly attractive option.
You're right!
Although I haven't heard complaints of a boring Witch.
You're right!
Although I haven't heard complaints of a boring Witch.
That's because they get something really fun every level: either a new level of spells or a new hex. And the Grand Hex at 18th and 20th is almost a capstone. It's just a little early is all. Maybe 19th level is a little boring for witches.... Maybe.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
For Cleric: Bring back D&D 2nd Edition Spheres and Specialty Priests. Domains just don't cut it as replacements for these. Spheres and Specialty Priests were often mechanically flawed in 2nd Edition, but way cooler than D&D 3.x/PF Domains.
One compromise might be to expand Domains into something like Mysteries (like somebody noted above), but also having their own spell lists that are added to the core Cleric spell list, and give the Cleric a progression of gaining Revelations like the Oracle, and trim the core Cleric spell list down a LOT (and get rid of the Domain spell slot, which never made a great deal of sense -- if you need the extra spell slot at each level, make it work more like a Specialist Wizard's spell slot, in which you must prepare a Domain/Sphere spell, but you can also prepare these in your other spell slots if you want).
* * * * * * * *
For Witch, Grand Hex is sort of a split capstone.
* * * * * * * *
For the Monk, a Pathfinder Unchained 2 should include conversions of classic Monk archetypes to be compatible with the Unchained Monk.
* * * * * * * *
For the Fighter, add 2 more skill points per level, go to d12 Hit Dice, and make abilities available more a-la-carte to enable condensing a lot of the current archetypes into a few new archetypes. Actually, this should also be done for other classes, but the Fighter needs it worse than at least most others.
Fighter 1: Martial Path Skill and Weapon Proficiencies (corresponds to modifications made by various archetypes), Martial Path Combat Feat (in some cases this is just a General Combat Feat)
Fighter 2: Martial Path Ability (corresponds to special abilities that various Fighter archetypes get at levels 4n + 2), Combat Style Feat (like Ranger)
Fighter 3: Bonus Defensive Combat Feat (includes things like Armor Training and its substitutes)
Fighter 4: Bonus General Combat Feat
Fighter 5: Bonus Offensive Combat Feat (includes things like Weapon Training and its substitutes)
Fighter 6: Martial Path Ability, Combat Style Feat
Fighter 7: Bonus Defensive Combat Feat
Fighter 8: Bonus General Combat Feat Chain (length 2 -- get 2 feats in a chain in 1, and can rearrange existing feats into chains without counting against ability to swap Combat Feats, and thereby open up single feat slots, but only applies to General Combat Feats)
Fighter 9: Bonus Offensive Combat Feat
Fighter 10: Martial Path Ability, Combat Style Feat
Fighter 11: Bonus Defensive Combat Feat
Fighter 12: Bonus General Combat Feat Chain (length 2)
Fighter 13: Bonus Offensive Combat Feat
Fighter 14: Martial Path Ability, Combat Style Feat
Fighter 15: Bonus Defensive Combat Feat
Fighter 16: Bonus General Combat Feat Chain (length 3 -- the Feat Chains get longer now, and you can rearrange feats into chains of 3 to open up single feat slots and feat chain slots of length 2)
Fighter 17: Bonus Offensive Combat Feat
Fighter 18: Martial Path Ability, Combat Style Feat
Fighter 19: Martial Path Defensive Capstone Ability
Fighter 20: Martial Path Offensive Capstone Ability, Bonus General Combat Feat Chain (length 3)
* * * * * * * *
Bard is almost good to go as is, but does have a single level (4th) that has nothing other than advancement of spellcasting progression and incremental scaling of other features. The Bard class table looks like the 13th and 16th levels are "dead", but if you read down into the descriptive text, you can find that some class features improve non-incrementally at these levels (Bardic Performance gains the Swift Action option at 13th level, and Jack of All Trades makes all skills Class Skills at 16th level), even though these do not appear on the class table. So add a bonus Bardic Masterpiece or something at 4th level (and update the class table to reflect the descriptive text more completely), and we'll call it good.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I once considered homebrewing or publishing a "Archetypes Unchained" where I go through bad archetypes and fix them.
|
|
For Cleric: Bring back D&D 2nd Edition Spheres and Specialty Priests. Domains just don't cut it as replacements for these. Spheres and Specialty Priests were often mechanically flawed in 2nd Edition, but way cooler than D&D 3.x/PF Domains.
This is something I can agree with and have offered such feelings elsewhere. Specialty priests was a brilliant concept even if mechanically they weren't always balanced with each other. Really, why should a cleric of the deity of love basically be 90% the same as a deity of war? Putting aside the couple of domains that can be chosen all clerics are exactly the same.
Man, all this class talk is boring. Let's get into the meat and potatoes of unchained. RULES.
Though, now that I ask for a discussion about rules, I can't actually think of anything I'd want. Go figure.
* * * * * * * * More thoughts * * * * * * * *
For Cavaliers/Samurai, the class itself doesn't need Unchaining, but the Orders do. Order of the Lion requires you to be loyal to your king, but it's transnational? Order of the Star requires you to be loyal to your religion, but it's not only trans-religion, but also trans-alignment? Really?
Actually, this might be better not for an Unchained 2, but for a Pathfinder Campaign Setting book: Knights of Golarion (could have sworn such a thing already existed, but apparently not). While we're at it, include Cavalier/Samurai Orders (and maybe a Cavalier archetype) corresponding to the Hellknight Orders.
* * * * * * * *
For Witches, the class overall doesn't need Unchaining, but the Patrons need some more form: Right now, they are just collections of bonus spells.
* * * * * * * *
For Ninjas, apply the Rogue Unchained changes (with Ninja-specific tweaks).
* * * * * * * *
For Paladins/Antipaladins, expand these into a more general Holy Warrior class (Warpriest does NOT cut it, and Inquisitor is arguably a better substitute than Warpriest anyway). Better yet, make them into a prestige class: D&D 3.5 Unearthed Arcana offered a Prestige Paladin (ss does Kirthfinder), which makes more sense thematically anyway, although I'd like to see an entry path that doesn't require existing spellcasting.
* * * * * * * *
I once considered homebrewing or publishing a "Archetypes Unchained" where I go through bad archetypes and fix them.
+1 on that. Actually +5 -- badly needed, especially for some of the more recent archetypes (Eldritch Scion, I'm looking at you).
|
|
* * * * * * * * More thoughts * * * * * * * *
For Cavaliers/Samurai, the class itself doesn't need Unchaining, but the Orders do. Order of the Lion requires you to be loyal to your king, but it's transnational? Order of the Star requires you to be loyal to your religion, but it's not only trans-religion, but also trans-alignment? Really?
Actually, this might be better not for an Unchained 2, but for a Pathfinder Campaign Setting book: Knights of Golarion (could have sworn such a thing already existed, but apparently not).
It exists. Knights of the Inner Sea.
They actually mentioned at PaizoCon that if they had more room in Unchained for another class, it would've been Cavalier.
Because no one ever plays cavalier.