Base / Hybrid / Occult Classes?


Prerelease Discussion

51 of 51 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Count me among those who were surprised and disappointed that the alchemist was chosen over the oracle for Core. The oracle is just such a natural counterpoint to the cleric and a good divine counterpart to the sorcerer (without feeling like an archetype), and the curse mechanic is I feel one of the most interesting class features Paizo has created. It's the class that originally sold me on PF.

I do think the alchemist belongs in PF2, though; I'm just not sure it should be core. Inquisitor and magus also ought to make whatever the PF2 APG is.

Witch... needs to exist, if all else to provide a class for people who enjoy the 5e warlock, but I think it needs work if it's going to stand on its own as a class. There need to be way more useful hex options (even after all these years, every witch I build ends up taking nearly the same few hexes, because they're just far and away more powerful than the others and so many hexes seem written for NPCs only), and the patrons need to be better fleshed out in some mechanical way - Blood of the Coven was a good start in this direction.

The cavalier I personally love but I don't think I'd be too hurt if it became a fighter archetype. The gunslinger has basically no reason to exist, and even though I'm okay with guns in fantasy the gunslinger's distinctive Western flair doesn't really mesh well with the setting outside Alkenstar. Again, just make a fighter archetype.

Summoners... I like summoners, but I know enough people who hate them that I understand if they don't come back. If they do, I'm sure they'll use the unchained summoner as a base, and even then I'd probably clip its wings a bit more by flat-out removing the Summon Monster ability (though I'd also get rid of the base form restrictions of the various eidolon subtypes because those are stupid). Maybe give it some of the Hunter's mechanics to really focus the class on fighting alongside the eidolon.

Occult classes I think should come back (and heck, those are some of the ones I'd like to see streamlined the most, because they are a nightmare of too much text per ability right now IMO), but probably later.

Hybrid classes can pretty much be turned into archetypes/class feat options. As much as I've enjoyed playing them, they don't really need to exist. The one exception I could possibly see is building a class around a panache/luck/grit-style mechanic, possibly under the swashbuckler name, possibly not. And I've mentioned this in other threads, but I'm of the opinion the exploiter wizard should be made part of the core wizard and all prepared casters given arcanist-style preparation, which would make the arcanist doubly redundant.

Vigilante... ehhhh... I have yet to see one in play or really try to build one, which I guess says something to its over-complexity (similar to the worst of the occults). This too feels like an archetype (for bard or rogue maybe?) or just a background.

The shifter would actually be really cool to see return, just for the same reason everyone is cheering on the titan mauler in the archetype thread: in PF1 it's a great idea horribly executed. If all of PF2 is streamlined, you don't need the shifter to be an "entry level shapeshifting" class, and can instead flesh it out as more of what everyone was expecting it to be - a master of changing forms. I would love to see it make it into the game sooner rather than later.

51 of 51 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Base / Hybrid / Occult Classes? All Messageboards
Recent threads in Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion