
PossibleCabbage |

PossibleCabbage wrote:
Think of the Occultist as the tankiest of the 6/9 casters, you get the fewest spells known but you have some hum dingers on your spell list.Also, a lot of classes get half class level as a bonus to a skill, but yours here is UMD...
They get more spells known than any other 6/9 spontaneous caster, 1 per spell level per implement, 49 including cantrips.
Silksworn gets 9 Implimemts so 63. Even sorcs only get 43(34 excluding cantrips) other 6/9 spont casters get 40 (34 excluding cantrips)
With heavy investment in the the human FCB you can have more than the normal Occultist, but not the Silksworn, unless you’re a Sorc with every FCB invested, which adds up to the same amount, but no-one ever does that.
Yeah, I didn't look at the exact numbers so you're right, but your spells known (for anybody except the Silksworn) are limited in other ways. You only get 4 implements in your first 9 levels, and there are some tricky choices on your spell list. Like, barring the Trappings panoply, you probably don't want to take Transmutation twice, so "Fly or Haste" can be tough; you can mimic either with a focus power but you want to keep at least 1 point of focus in your transmutation implement to keep your resonant power active and you likely also want to use legacy weapon a whole lot.
Plus some implements sort of force their way in there because they have focus powers that are so good (like you want Divination because Mind Eye might be the best scouting power in the game, and having Conjuration in time to take Side Step at level 7 is nice, but you'd anybody who's going in position to be swung at would like to have Illusion while Mirror Image still works, etc.
So the Occultist forces a bunch of hard choices, but they're hard choices because they're choices between good stuff that you want.

quibblemuch |

There's something else about the medium that no one ever seems to bring up, and that is that if you channel the Marshal spirit and are 2nd level or higher, you can share your seance bonus but let the other PCs choose whichever spirit bonus they want. It's a constant buff to other players that can be tailored to exactly suit their characters' strengths.
Boon is what I meant, not bonus. Gah. Even though boons give you bonuses, the spirit bonus is something different. DOES NO ONE HAVE A THESAURUS?!
:p

doctor_wu |

Well I do not like how the kinescist is organized. I find the spirtualist makes more sense than the summoner to me. I also think veteran players and gms think occult is more complicated than it is but then they have already done a lot of the hard stuff at times.
I personally do not like handle animal as a skill and have been playing for so long and still do not get it. One key thing to know gming a spirtualist is that it takes one minute to summon so no in combat taking back to head and resummoning which gets crazy.

Terrinam |

It honestly feels like it's an attempt to do psionics without doing psionics.
The same reasons I wouldn't allow psionics are why I wouldn't allow Occult Adventures. And the same reasons I'd use Occult Adventures are why I'd use psionics.
It just... it seems like they're trying to be different for the sake of being different without realizing why that isn't always a good thing.

doctor_wu |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

I feel like having never played 3.5 or 3p pathfinder psionics does give one a rather fresher set of eyes coming into psychic classes.
Although from what little I’ve heard of psionics mechanically and law wise they don’t seem similar beyond having no somantic and verbal components.
I honestly don't know how 3.5 psionics worked.

![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:I honestly don't know how 3.5 psionics worked.I feel like having never played 3.5 or 3p pathfinder psionics does give one a rather fresher set of eyes coming into psychic classes.
Although from what little I’ve heard of psionics mechanically and law wise they don’t seem similar beyond having no somantic and verbal components.
You had powers known, like a sorcerer.
To manifest (cast) a power (spell), you spend points the minimum number of points was to cast at the lowest possible caster level, additional points to manifest at a higher caster level.
That's basically it.

darth_borehd |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

They did a much better job with psionic/psychic powers than anybody else ever have. It is the first time I ever saw rules for that genre I liked and would fit into my campaigns.
If I had a criticism of the classes is that they are a bit more confusing. I had to read the kineticist and medium several times to understand them. They also tend to have a more "one trick pony" syndrome. It's a good trick, but when you get in a situation where you can't use it, you are sunk.
I didn't like the mindscape rules. It made no sense why classes that have a "pool" of points get such a huge advantage over similar classes that don't. If for example, they allowed a warrior-type to create a psychic version of their weapon for free, at least it would be something.
As with all the classes that have come out since Ultimate Magic, I must lodge a complaint that the Words of Power system has not been updated for them.

Dastis |

I love parts and dislike parts
Pros
1. Spells. Tons of cool fun spells
2. Some Classes. Psychic a great full caster class that made its own niche. Occultist fills that artificer itch I really think pathfinder has needed and with archetypes there are tons of fun ways to build it.
3. Undercasting. Very nice mechanic that is a lot of fun to play with
4. Occult Rituals. I really like ritual magic and honestly would like more in pathfinder
Cons
1. Psychic casting. The alternate components are just weird and I don't see a point. It just adds a few more things for everyone to remember. I get the idea of making psychic distinct
2. The other classes. Quick version they don't mesh system wise for me or they could have been archetypes
3. Occult skill unlocks. Find it really weird these weren't class abilities, feats, or just something else really. Kind of makes me wonder why divine and arcane casters don't get something similiar

Dragon78 |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |

As someone who played 2nd and 3rd edition I can say I never liked psionics, it didn't mesh well mechanically or flavor wise with ether edition. Psychic magic on the other hand fits mechanically and adds a new flavor and dimension to the game. I especially like having a third type of magic.
I love psychic casting, it feels like how magic should work, based on thought and emotion. Too bad only one sorcerer bloodline can cast spells that way because it fits the whole class so well.

Snowblind |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

doctor_wu wrote:Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:I honestly don't know how 3.5 psionics worked.I feel like having never played 3.5 or 3p pathfinder psionics does give one a rather fresher set of eyes coming into psychic classes.
Although from what little I’ve heard of psionics mechanically and law wise they don’t seem similar beyond having no somantic and verbal components.You had powers known, like a sorcerer.
To manifest (cast) a power (spell), you spend points the minimum number of points was to cast at the lowest possible caster level, additional points to manifest at a higher caster level.
That's basically it.
You forgot a theme of "everything is crystals".
Seriously, crystals, crystals everywhere. Familiar? Crystal. Magic weapons provided by class features? Crystal. Scrolls? Crystal. Blasting spells? Spells that shoot crystals.
Really, I have no idea why people think occult=psionics. The only similarity is the whole no hand waving and speaking to do magic thing, and that is it.

Terrinam |

Really, I have no idea why people think occult=psionics. The only similarity is the whole no hand waving and speaking to do magic thing, and that is it.
Because "psionic" means "psychic." Outside of Pathfinder, the terms are interchangeable. One of the psionic classes from 3.5 was even named "Psychic Warrior" in recognition of that.
Basically, people view them as the same because they are two different mechanical approaches to the same thing.
Also, you forgot the weapons and armor made of crystals.

Darksol the Painbringer |

Really, I have no idea why people think occult=psionics. The only similarity is the whole no hand waving and speaking to do magic thing, and that is it.
Please tell me that this is a joke.
Psionics use mental powers to create physical manifestations that are otherwise physically impossible to do.
Occult users are characters who use hidden powers and clandestine abilities to otherwise physically do the impossible, something that Psionics would fall under if they were persecuted (which they effectively have been).
Not only are they similar to themselves in both effect and relatable definition, but to most basic onlookers, they would confuse these abilities with even generic spellcasting that Wizards and Clerics do, making things that are physically impossible simply happen out of relatively thin air.

swoosh |
Reading through this thread has been pretty mystifying. Sometimes I'm left wondering if a lot of the people claiming to not like the system have even read it at all, given how far removed from reality some of the stated issues have been.
Too complicated? All but one of the classes use completely standard Pathfinder mechanics. Three of them you could even go as far to argue as being too simple and derivative and nothing about the mechanics of the other three really stand out either. I'm utterly baffled as to how anyone can be left in the dark here.
Athematic? They're spellcasters who use different components. I'm at a loss for how anyone could think including that in a campaign is somehow beyond the pale, especially given that characters with SU abilities already do that and work just fine. I can maybe see someone taking issue with the Spiritualist given their necromantic flavor, but that's about it, really.
Sure, some specific feats, spells or options might not be relevant in every campaign, but that's something that could be said about every book.
Overpowered? Psychic casters are by far the easiest flavor to shut down given how their components work. Even if you just ignore thoses entirely the Psychic is what amounts to a Sorcerer with a slightly worse spell list. Yawn.
Not only are they similar to themselves in both effect and relatable definition
Yeah, but as you yourself point out 'regular' magic fits just fine in that same umbrella definition too.
The main reason people keep drawing parallels between psychic and psionic is because they sound kinda similar.

Terrinam |

The main reason people keep drawing parallels between psychic and psionic is because they sound kinda similar.
Because outside of Pathfinder, they are the same exact thing. That is why they sound similar.
And why some of us are not buying into the idea the two are more than different mechanical approaches to the same exact thing. One of the psionic classes is even named "Psychic Warrior."
Psychic = Occult Class
Psychic Warrior = Psionic Class

MR. H |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Sometimes I'm left wondering if a lot of the people claiming to not like the system have even read it at all, given how far removed from reality some of the stated issues have been.
Part of the complaint has been them not wanting to learn more rules.
So most really haven't read it... By their own admission...

![]() |

And why some of us are not buying into the idea the two are more than different mechanical approaches to the same exact thing.
Psionic Classes
Psion - Psionic Wizard?
Wilder - Psionic Sorcerer?
Psychic Warrior - Psionic Fighter
Soulknife - I can make a weapon with a my mind!
Occult Classes
Pyschic - Psychic Sorcerer
Occultist - I work with the psychic residue left on items to cast spells and buff myself
Spiritualist - I have a ghost buddy!
Medium - I have a lot of ghost buddies!
Mesmerist - I can mind control people
Kineticist - I blast stuff with the elements
Aside from the Psychic and Psion/Wilder there's pretty much no* overlap between the Psionic and Occult system and classes.
*with the Phantom Blade archetype though we do have a Soulknife expy.

Terrinam |

Terrinam wrote:And why some of us are not buying into the idea the two are more than different mechanical approaches to the same exact thing.Psionic Classes
Psion - Psionic Wizard?
Wilder - Psionic Sorcerer?
Psychic Warrior - Psionic Fighter
Soulknife - I can make a weapon with a my mind!Occult Classes
Pyschic - Psychic Sorcerer
Occultist - I work with the psychic residue left on items to cast spells and buff myself
Spiritualist - I have a ghost buddy!
Medium - I have a lot of ghost buddies!
Mesmerist - I can mind control people
Kineticist - I blast stuff with the elementsAside from the Psychic and Psion/Wilder there's pretty much no* overlap between the Psionic and Occult system and classes.
*with the Phantom Blade archetype though we do have a Soulknife expy.
For Pathfinder psionics, you left out the Aegis, Cryptic, Dread, Marksman, Tactician, and Vitalist. And even 3.5 psionics wasn't limited to those four classes.
Aegis- I can make armor with my mind!
Cryptic- I use magic tattoos!
Dread- FEAR ME!
Marksman- Psychic archer
Tactician- Psychic general? Warlord?
Vitalist- I have ghost buddies! And I'm the healbot.
Then there's Seventh Path, which is "I have ghost buddies!" for all psionic classes. And Kineticists, which is "I blast stuff with the elements!" for all psionic classes. And that's the number of books I will dig into.
I have to admit I like how the Kineticist handles it better than the psionic version.

pjrogers |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

The same reason nearly anyone hates nearly anything. Too much time, not enough real problems. Feh.
Actually, my situation is the exact opposite. I have quite a few real problems, responsibilities, etc and not enough time for gaming and Pathfinder.
Over Christmas break, do I ...
a) work on the two very complicated adventures I'm going to run during the first two weeks of January
or
b) read and learn the Occult Adventures book
I would rather do option 1). The Occult stuff in abstract seems OK-ish to me. It's when it's added on top of all the existing Pathfinder material (and what has come out since), that it becomes something I'm not particularly fond of.

![]() |

Rysky wrote:Terrinam wrote:And why some of us are not buying into the idea the two are more than different mechanical approaches to the same exact thing.Psionic Classes
Psion - Psionic Wizard?
Wilder - Psionic Sorcerer?
Psychic Warrior - Psionic Fighter
Soulknife - I can make a weapon with a my mind!Occult Classes
Pyschic - Psychic Sorcerer
Occultist - I work with the psychic residue left on items to cast spells and buff myself
Spiritualist - I have a ghost buddy!
Medium - I have a lot of ghost buddies!
Mesmerist - I can mind control people
Kineticist - I blast stuff with the elementsAside from the Psychic and Psion/Wilder there's pretty much no* overlap between the Psionic and Occult system and classes.
*with the Phantom Blade archetype though we do have a Soulknife expy.
For Pathfinder psionics, you left out the Aegis, Cryptic, Dread, Marksman, Tactician, and Vitalist. And even 3.5 psionics wasn't limited to those four classes.
Aegis- I can make armor with my mind!
Cryptic- I use magic tattoos!
Dread- FEAR ME!
Marksman- Psychic archer
Tactician- Psychic general? Warlord?
Vitalist- I have ghost buddies! And I'm the healbot.Then there's Seventh Path, which is "I have ghost buddies!" for all psionic classes. And Kineticists, which is "I blast stuff with the elements!" for all psionic classes. And that's the number of books I will dig into.
I have to admit I like how the Kineticist handles it better than the psionic version.
I have never heard of any of those save for the Aegis (can't even find a "seventh path" or whatever it is). And aside from the Presige Classes I don't remember any base 3.5 Psionic classes.
But that goes back to what I said, none of those classes really overlap with the Occult classes (is Dread similar to the Mesmerist? And I didn't see anything about Vitalist having ghost buddies when I skimmed it just now). And saying the Kineticist is like Psionics since it's a blaster... uh?

Terrinam |

I have never heard of any of those save for the Aegis (can't even find a "seventh path" or whatever it is).
But that goes back to what I said, none of those classes really overlap with the Occult classes (is Dread similar to the Mesmerist? And I didn't see anything about Vitalist having ghost buddies when I skimmed it just now). And saying the Kineticist is like Psionics since it's a blaster... uh?
Seventh Path and Kineticists are psionics expansion products by Dreamscarred Press. And Kineticists is pretty much like what it says on the tin... it's devoted to turning psionic classes into elemental blasters, for the most part. In other words, like the Kineticist class, only if it were hybridized with each psionic class. There's a number of other psionics expansion products I didn't even open when posting, but which probably are along the same vein.
For the Vitalist, don't skim. Several of the abilities mention using spirits in a blink-and-you-will-miss-it fashion. Which is probably why Seventh Path is so over-the-top with it.
The dread is kinda like the mesmerist, but also obviously different. Vastly different focuses. Mesmerist abilities are more part of the psion class.
Basically, there is probably a lot of overlap, but not in the primary psionics books. In the secondary books, you start to see features like kineticist abilities being given to everyone.

![]() |

So DSP's Kineticist is an archetype for all the classes? Is it its own thing or is it referencing the Occult Kinecticsit?
The only ability I saw mentioning Spirits in the Vitalist is Spirit of Many, which allows them to affect their buddies when they're in range with their powers, it doesn't mention anything about ghosts or spirits.
Yeah Dread and Mesmerist are on the same side of the room but they're still distinct enough in themselves.

Terrinam |

I will have to double-check the publication dates when I get home, so I might be wrong on this. But, neither. The psionics kineticist archetypes have all of the powers, and more, of the Occult kineticist, but the DSP Kineticists product was published prior to Occult Adventures. So if one is a reference to the other, the Occult kineticist is a reference to the DSP product. Likely, both come from the same source material in 3.5.
I'll double-check the Vitalist when I get home, but I know they mentioned it uses spirits.

![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

The Kineticist stuff didn't come from this did it?
I also just found the 7th Path book, and while it went live a month before Occult Adventures, OA was announced (and a playtest was released) a whole year before it was released (don't know when/if 7P was announced/playtested before that).
The only Kineticist stuff I remember from 3.5 was the two Prestige Classes, Pyro and Cryo.

Terrinam |

Yep, I was wrong. And talking out my rear, I see.
Seventh Path is actually focused on psionic necromancy, not on replicating Occult classes. The reason they overlap with a couple of the Occult classes is that there's only so much you can do with spirits before overlap sets in.
Yeah, those prestige classes were the source material. Weren't they also psionic prestige classes?

Milo v3 |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

The DSP kineticist product is an archetype for kineticists, and it's part of a series where DSP made some psionics content for each occult class... It's really not relevant as it's specifically an attempt by DSP to overlap the two, and in those books they even have sections which discussed how Psionics and Psychic Magic are completely different beasts.

![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Yep, I was wrong. And talking out my rear, I see.
Seventh Path is actually focused on psionic necromancy, not on replicating Occult classes. The reason they overlap with a couple of the Occult classes is that there's only so much you can do with spirits before overlap sets in.
Yeah, those prestige classes were the source material. Weren't they also psionic prestige classes?
Ish okay.
Yeah there was a few (I loved the Pyro and Elocater) but I wouldn't consider them source material/overlap for Occult Adventures.

graystone |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |

-To complex(because I haven't read it).
I'm not sure where the 'I haven't read it' part came from. I personally mentioned I read some of the classes multiple times and had issues wrapping my brain around them. It's NOT an issue of apathy ot not putting in the work. They are legitimately confusing to people: I have yet to have someone look at a medium or occultist and after a quick look understand it. Most time even after several reads they aren't quite sure how they work.
-Too similar to psionics/-Too different to psionics.
With another working system in place, and one based off of the old 3.5 way, I can see people not wanting to use the 'new' system. Myself, I couldn't care less, however first party stuff is much more likely to be allowed in a game.
-I don't want jelly with my peanut butter.
Some people don't like guns, ninja's or samurai too... It happens.
--Change is bad.
Much like the above, some don't play past core. To each their own I guess.

![]() |
11 people marked this as a favorite. |

The post I was about to make would probably have been deleted so I'll try again.
I'd like to request that the people who like this book STOP putting up strawmen and making false and, frankly, insulting claims about those of us who have the temerity to NOT like the book.
To be clear, I have no problem at all with you liking the book. Many people do. Good for you (sincerely). But that doesn't mean that those of us who don't are idiots, liars, luddites, etc. It just means that we have significantly different tastes and/or priorities than you do.
I can only speak for myself but
1) I HAVE read the book
2) I find the value of the changes is just not worth the effort. Admittedly, in many places I assign a negative value to the changes :-)
3) There most definitely ARE significant changes in the mechanics. The new occult caster rules affect every class in a sometimes subtle manner. The kineticist doesn't use those rules but the Kineticist definitely has class rule that definitely change the mechanics :-))
4) I've played significant portions of an Adventure path with a Mesmerist and a Kineticist. I've run or played in PFS games with every single Occult Class. Any complaints I have may or may not be universal but they are certainly based upon actual experience
5) The rules book retroactively changed the world in ways that I do NOT like. Suddenly not all Undead are evil, for example. Suddenly, there is a whole 3rd way of magic that everybody must have known about all along without bothering mentioning it (since it makes no sense otherwise). I assign a much higher value to the world having internal consistency and making sense than Paizo does.
6) I run a lot of PFS and so have, perforce, had many of the changed rules rammed down my throat against my will. This means that I
a) DO understand a lot of the changes
b) DO have an informed opinion on whether they are worth the effort
c) Did not have the option of just ignoring rules options I didn't like

Coidzor |
I suppose I dislike the influence of Psychic casting on the decision-making process that lead to the Ultimate Intrigue nerf on magic with magic sparkles occurring whenever a spell is cast coming out of the pipeline as a retcon.
What's this about all undead not being automatically evil, though? Did I miss something or is this just about the Phantom class feature?
One thing some GM's might not realize is that plenty of D&D and by extension Pathfinder's fantasy utilizes a lot of the occult without necessarily tying it to psyhic powers (and frankly, Paizo fitting all the Occult classes into one spellcasting category labelled 'psychic' might have hurt it somewhat, although entirely for the sake of getting people to stop playing the same boring setting archetypes over and over).
If people choose to play fantasy settings repeatedly, it's almost certainly not because they're bored of them or find them boring.
It's not like we're back in the 1970s and you only really have one option that just got invented.
The kineticist... Not really seen enough of it to know if it works. I know it is very un-pedagogically written, and I like the concept behind it, but that's about it.
Are you saying that the write up for the Kineticist is clear as mud or are you using "un-pedagogically written" as a euphemism for something else?

Terrinam |

I'm not sure where the 'I haven't read it' part came from. I personally mentioned I read some of the classes multiple times and had issues wrapping my brain around them. It's NOT an issue of apathy ot not putting in the work. They are legitimately confusing to people: I have yet to have someone look at a medium or occultist and after a quick look understand it. Most time even after several reads they aren't quite sure how they work.
I'm going to agree those two are the most mystifying. They are far easier to grasp if you either have a heavy background at the occult, have read a lot of certain uncommon fiction, or can...
How can I describe this?
Most people think straightforward. These classes are better if you can think at an angle. If that makes any sense.
Those two are on my list of classes I would recommend a newcomer stay away from.

Chromantic Durgon <3 |

Dragon78 wrote:-To complex(because I haven't read it).
I'm not sure where the 'I haven't read it' part came from. I personally mentioned I read some of the classes multiple times and had issues wrapping my brain around them. It's NOT an issue of apathy ot not putting in the work. They are legitimately confusing to people: I have yet to have someone look at a medium or occultist and after a quick look understand it. Most time even after several reads they aren't quite sure how they work.
I found the Occultist pretty straightforward.
It’s got LOTS of moving parts, but none of them are particularly mind boggling.
Put points in things, got bonuses
More points more bonuses
Spend points for powers
Also it has spells.
That’s pretty much it, they get all the circle stuff too, but it’s not particularly exciting or confusing.
I think having read the Dresden files made it seem kinda familiar xD

![]() |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

The post I was about to make would probably have been deleted so I'll try again.
I'd like to request that the people who like this book STOP putting up strawmen and making false and, frankly, insulting claims about those of us who have the temerity to NOT like the book.
To be clear, I have no problem at all with you liking the book. Many people do. Good for you (sincerely). But that doesn't mean that those of us who don't are idiots, liars, luddites, etc. It just means that we have significantly different tastes and/or priorities than you do.
I can only speak for myself but
5) The rules book retroactively changed the world in ways that I do NOT like. Suddenly not all Undead are evil, for example. Suddenly, there is a whole 3rd way of magic that everybody must have known about all along without bothering mentioning it (since it makes no sense otherwise). I assign a much higher value to the world having internal consistency and making sense than Paizo does.
Psychic Magic existed before Occult Adventures, previously though it was only really mentioned in the context of Vudra and far-off lands. Just as guns migrated out of Alkenstar when Ultimate Combat came out, psychic magic migrated to the Inner Sea when Occult Adventures came out. Before Ultimate Magic there was no Magus, only Eldritch Knights. But most campaigns integrate Magi with little issue.
Internal consistency is the weakest reason to refuse change, because these worlds are all pretend anyway.

graystone |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

It’s got LOTS of moving parts, but none of them are particularly mind boggling.
I look at it much like a pocket watch. It's super ease to look at an individual gear or spring and understand how it works. It's something entirely different to be given a pile of them and be expected to produce a working watch.
The complexity isn't in any individual part but that there are SO many moving at once that you don't know where to start as changing one part affects the rest... A pool of points that gives you several other pools of points AND/OR are unspent to be use in any pool gets to be a bit of a juggling act until you get a balance you like.: It only gets worse if you intend to 'switch it up' depending in the day.
So from my experience, the class wasn't written in a way that the casual player just picks it up and runs it after a quick read. Now I'm happy you "found the Occultist pretty straightforward", but from my perspective it makes you pretty unique.

Milo v3 |

I never found occultist confusing, but I'm used to magic systems like incarnum/akasha that occultist takes partial inspiration from + the occultist class from d20 modern that it takes it's other half of inspiration from.
2) I find the value of the changes is just not worth the effort. Admittedly, in many places I assign a negative value to the changes :-)
3) There most definitely ARE significant changes in the mechanics.
5) The rules book retroactively changed the world in ways that I do NOT like. Suddenly not all Undead are evil, for example. Suddenly, there is a whole 3rd way of magic that everybody must have known about all along without bothering mentioning it (since it makes no sense otherwise). I assign a much higher value to the world having internal consistency and making sense than Paizo does.
6) I run a lot of PFS and so have, perforce, had many of the changed rules rammed down my throat against my will. This means that I
What do you mean by Changed Rules? Occult Adventures doesn't change any existing rules... It adds new rules for things which didn't have rules before which is very different so I'm rather confused.

Zwordsman |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I haven't seen them banned too often.. the complaitns i hear the most are related to confusion on kineticist.
and.
Occultist's spell list.. because its a specific list and is a weird pathway, it has waay to few spells in specific schools and will probably never be expanded like many other classes that get extras when the main ones update.
Though I realy can only complain about Evocation for occcultists myself
oh. the other bit i hear a lot about is.. "but they can cast with weapons and armour" and that being disliked.

Benjamin Medrano |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

For myself, I'm not in love with the rules in Occult Adventures, but I don't hate them either.
I've only seen four of the classes in play, so my thoughts are as follows. I will say that some of them are hard to fit into all styles of games, and looking back I probably would have gently nudged my group away from them for the campaign I was running at the time. (As an aside, I do hate the automatic Still/Silence, but that's just because I like standard spellcasting thematics.)
Kineticist is insanely complicated at first read-through, but once you manage to build one, they're dead-simple to run, and hard to screw up the build of. I enjoy them, and think they fit into the vast majority of my style of games.
Medium I only saw as a cohort, which made it difficult to judge. Personally, the constant change of it was a pure headache, and the player was trying to use a lot of the other abilities which weren't terribly applicable to the campaign. I personally have put this in my 'do not like' mental box, along with Shaman.
Occultist was played through about level 8, and despite many of the complexities of how it was explained, it's simpler than Kineticist at first glance, and is a quite useful class. My main problem is with the object-reading power, which in the future I'm going to house-rule to not automatically identify things, and I'm only going to give info if it's actually significant. That power gave me more of a headache than any other aspect of the class.
Psychic was pretty simple, though the PC was a bit frustrated when I kept rolling awesome for Will saving throws. I didn't fudge, it was just an accident, plus the themes of the campaign kept bringing up nearly half of the enemies as innately immune. He took the ability to hit undead with mind-affecting spells, but I'll admit I found that being able to regain the points via jumping jacks or the like was... annoying. I'll have to read over it in more detail at some point, but not that different than a sorcerer/witch combo.
Of the two which I haven't seen, I do have some thoughts.
Mesmerist is one of those classes that utterly falls flat for me, stylistically. I don't like Skald as a concept, and this is similar. I thus mostly ignored it, as none of my players have been interested in it. At a cursory glance it made me think of the Beguiler from 3.5. Not bad, just not the sort of thing I like.
Spiritualist looked interesting, but it's been a long time since I looked at it. It felt similar to a Summoner, but in an intriguing way... and then they based all of them around emotions that I didn't like, so I stopped caring. It looks interesting, I'd have to read the rules more thoroughly if I ever was going to run one.
I also liked a fair number of archetypes and other abilities in the book. The Mindscapes felt rocky to me, and I wasn't entirely thrilled with them, but that's at least partially because I've built my own versions of them for my campaigns and plots. I love that Occult Rituals are in the book, and there are plenty of other aspects that I can see using, depending on the campaign.
Long story short, not good, not bad, but not suited for all of my campaigns.

![]() |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

I believe he is saying that post Occult adventures Undead doesn’t always = Evil
Where as it did before. Although I can’t say if the latter is accurate
Ghosts didn't have to be evil, that's well established in Golarion. The only non-evil "undead" in Occult Adventures I can think of are a Spiritualist's Phantoms. Which really isn't a big jump from Ghost. Additionally Phantoms aren't undead, they're outsiders.