Are the new Class Feats a form of D&D 4th Class Powers? And what about Spells?

[Bruno Mares]

When Paizo says that "the real meat behind the classes is in their feats", and shows some examples of the fighter feats, like Sudden Charge, Quick Reversal, and so on, it just remembered me about the 4e class powers: they're all powers that give characters new tactical options and/or different, new attacks with more damage dice.

All examples of Paizo's staff, like one that says "a fighter can leap and swing a blade to a dragon's head" looks the same way of 4e class powers.

I'm not saying this is a bad thing for martial characters (since fighters and the like always needed more different options to do in combat instead of "I'll walk and strike" or "I'll go full attack mode").

But I'm just thinking what that will do to spellcasters. Will they remain with the vancian spell system?

And what about the classic, fixed, must-having class features of the classes, like paladin's smite evil and detect evil, druid's woodland stride and beast shape, ranger's tracking ability, and so on? What will happen to this?

Will the classes remain with core/backbone features?

[Bruno Mares]

Bruno Mares wrote:

Will the classes remain with core/backbone features?

Starfinded did this, but some classes looked really "empty" of personality, since they core/fixed features are just too insignificant/unimportant, and I did not like it. (The mechanic and operative were the only classes that does not fit in this classes "without personality".)

[QuidEst]

Bruno Mares wrote:

When Paizo says that "the real meat behind the classes is in their feats", and shows some examples of the fighter feats, like Sudden Charge, Quick Reversal, and so on, it just remembered me about the 4e class powers: they're all powers that give characters new tactical options and/or different, new attacks with more damage dice.

Eh, not quite. Shield to reflex modifies an existing option. Really, though, if you eliminate feats for static bonuses, and you avoid taxing people feats to do things without provoking, you're going to be left with a very high percentage of tactical options.

Bruno Mares wrote:

All examples of Paizo's staff, like one that says "a fighter can leap and swing a blade to a dragon's head" looks the same way of 4e class powers.

That one's not a feat or special action, I think. Pretty sure that's just the result of having Mastery level Athletics.

Bruno Mares wrote:

But I'm just thinking what that will do to spellcasters. Will they remain with the vancian spell system?

Yep. We've had people playtest, and they didn't comment that spells were 4e style now or anything.

Bruno Mares wrote:

And what about the classic, fixed, must-having class features of the classes, like paladin's smite evil and detect evil, druid's woodland stride and beast shape, ranger's tracking ability, and so on? What will happen to this?

Will the classes remain with core/backbone features?

Yes. Classes get fixed features at odd levels. They pick features at even levels.

[Planpanther]

Feats may seem like 4E powers, but I dont think the structure will be quite as uniform as 4E.

Spells are still in. There has been mention of damage not scaling with level, and you need to slot them up. So I am guessing sometype of neo-vancian casting should be expected.

The big gamechanger will be the skill system allowing you do some interesting things in and out of combat. 4E didnt really have a dynamic skill system like that.

Other than the unified level proficiency system, I am not seeing too much 4E here. Though its early and with more reveals who knows?

[NielsenE]

Do rogue talents, magus arcana, etc feel like 4e powers to you? At a top level, your answer to this will answer your initial question. Class feats are the generic term, as far as well can tell, for those existing PF features.

Personally, to me, they feel different. Even if some of the talents/aracans/etc are gated/grouped by level.

Digging a little deeper, most of the existing PF1 'class feats' didn't feel like 'here's a new action' most felt like 'here's a new modifier/option'. However many of the pf2 class feats they've previewed are closer to 'here's a new 2action cost ability'. So I can see how it might feel more 4e-like. The question to me is, what's the range of type of things offered as class feats. Are we comparing 'new action1' to 'new action2' (very 4e), or 'new action1', to 'add an on-crit effect to all abilities', to 'gain an extra reaction', to .... (not 4e to me, and still true to what I think of as PF).

[Fuzzypaws]

I'm personally good with more feats that either let you do things or give you passive benefits, and way way way less feats that are just +1 or +2 modifiers to numerical character traits.

[Malk_Content]

I don't see how they look any more like 4E power than any action granted to you in PF1E looked like a 4E power. 4E had a power that let you move, attack and then move. Does that mean Shot on The Run is like a 4E power? Not at all.

In 4E Powers were all you did. I not once just hit someone, I always from lvl 1 used a power. In PF (1 OR 2) your abilities/feats modify you interact with the rules. This can be seen from the podcast reveal pretty simply, the players were doing all the things they would be doing in PF1E. I don't see the real difference between, say, Sudden Charge reducing the action economy required to move twice and attack in PF2E and Rapid Reload reducing the action economy to reload.