I prefer the term "Witch" to "Warlock" personally, but I definitely agree that the class needs to be recontextualized to heavily emphasize "you have entered an agreement with some entity which has agreed to teach you magic" and like "wise woman folk magic" stuff and leave the squicky options solely for people who have made a deliberate series of choices to seek them out.
PF2 in general needs to be less "in your face squicky" than like the first half of PF1's existence.
|
Summoner - as the big pet-focused class - could have a lot of versatility. Are you a holy priest who is guarded by an angel? A shaman who calls forth a nature spirit? A madman followed by the ghost of a murderer? An arcane dabbler who wove his imaginary friend into reality? An alchemist who's built a mecha suit he pilots?
Don't hold your breath for the more interesting ideas. Paizo showed their colors on 'build you own creature' with the misnomer Unchained Summoner.
I do agree on the Kineticist. It's my favorite class by far.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, there are two "missing" spell lists in the core book, of the four essences IIRC Arcane is Material/Mental, Divine is Spiritual/Vital, Primal is Material/Vital, and Occult is Mental/Spiritual.
We could easily make a list and corresponding class or classes for a Material/Spiritual or a Mental/Vital magical tradition.
I think we're hard coded into only 4 spell lists with Mental and Vital, as well as Material and Spiritual, in opposition to each other. The fact that each spell list has a dedicated skill is probably the strongest evidence of this.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think we're hard coded into only 4 spell lists with Mental and Vital, as well as Material and Spiritual, in opposition to each other. The fact that each spell list has a dedicated skill is probably the strongest evidence of this.Also, there are two "missing" spell lists in the core book, of the four essences IIRC Arcane is Material/Mental, Divine is Spiritual/Vital, Primal is Material/Vital, and Occult is Mental/Spiritual.
We could easily make a list and corresponding class or classes for a Material/Spiritual or a Mental/Vital magical tradition.
Not sure why a new skill is outside of the question in a future release, anymore than assuming that the absence of guns in the rulebook = no guns ever. Seems like a new skill would be fairly easy to add to the game if it was focused on a new system of magic.
|
|
Not sure why a new skill is outside of the question in a future release, anymore than assuming that the absence of guns in the rulebook = no guns ever. Seems like a new skill would be fairly easy to add to the game if it was focused on a new system of magic.
There are games predicated on the ability to add new skills easily, and ones predicated on never changing fundamental things like that. Historically, Pathfinder has always been the latter, and that seems unlikely to change in PF2.
Not sure why a new skill is outside of the question in a future release, anymore than assuming that the absence of guns in the rulebook = no guns ever. Seems like a new skill would be fairly easy to add to the game if it was focused on a new system of magic.I think we're hard coded into only 4 spell lists with Mental and Vital, as well as Material and Spiritual, in opposition to each other. The fact that each spell list has a dedicated skill is probably the strongest evidence of this.Also, there are two "missing" spell lists in the core book, of the four essences IIRC Arcane is Material/Mental, Divine is Spiritual/Vital, Primal is Material/Vital, and Occult is Mental/Spiritual.
We could easily make a list and corresponding class or classes for a Material/Spiritual or a Mental/Vital magical tradition.
All of the four magic related skills function as specialized UMD/Spellcraft and knowledge skills for some significant (and in total all inclusive) categories of monster. Any new skills would be heavily gimped because they wouldn't have any monsters to identify and would only have a new, necessarily very fringe form of magic to identify and use items based thereon. Lots of core classes share each others magic related skill training proficiencies, but no one would have any basic understanding of the new magic without spending feats.
Not sure why a new skill is outside of the question in a future release, anymore than assuming that the absence of guns in the rulebook = no guns ever. Seems like a new skill would be fairly easy to add to the game if it was focused on a new system of magic.There are games predicated on the ability to add new skills easily, and ones predicated on never changing fundamental things like that. Historically, Pathfinder has always been the latter, and that seems unlikely to change in PF2.
Unchained added the Lore skill in Pathfinder, but it was part of an optional subsystem. If you were to put the other two spell lists as part of a hardcover of largely optional material (like Occult Adventures) you could easily add a couple of new skills.
Since people could play PF1 without psychic magic existing, you could make the Mental/Vital caster the psychic and the material/spiritual caster the Medium or something.
Eh. It would involve reformatting the character sheets, which might prove annoying.
Can be done. My personal solution would be to simply allow the weakest two of the four to double dip into a second spell list. Like Occultism could cover a new "Eldritch" spelllist that covers the Material and Spiritual essences, while Arcane picks up "Empathic" magic that keys off the Mental/Vital.
Another method, which would involve more work, would be to link those spell lists to underutilized skills, like Society and, idk, Diplomacy . The caster feats would need to be expanded to accommodate the skills as caster related, but honestly if we're doing that we may as well redo the character sheet.
A third method might be to reduce Arcana, Nature, Occultism, and Religion to be four types of Lore skills (or a different skill with a similarly open ended set up), which would future proof against new sub skills being added later for new spell lists. This actually makes somewhat sense considering many skill feats treat those skills as if they were the same skill. Obviously this wouldn't be ideal going from the CRB to a later rulebook, but might be something to consider as once they move from the playtest to the CRB.
Not sure why a new skill is outside of the question in a future release, anymore than assuming that the absence of guns in the rulebook = no guns ever. Seems like a new skill would be fairly easy to add to the game if it was focused on a new system of magic.There are games predicated on the ability to add new skills easily, and ones predicated on never changing fundamental things like that. Historically, Pathfinder has always been the latter, and that seems unlikely to change in PF2.Unchained added the Lore skill in Pathfinder, but it was part of an optional subsystem. If you were to put the other two spell lists as part of a hardcover of largely optional material (like Occult Adventures) you could easily add a couple of new skills.
Since people could play PF1 without psychic magic existing, you could make the Mental/Vital caster the psychic and the material/spiritual caster the Medium or something.
If you added two spell lists with associated skills all existing characters would be untrained in the new skills and completely unable to identify spells cast by new classes using those lists. That's tough for existing classes who bothered to be trained in all of Nature, Arcane, Occult, Religion and have a conception as all around knowledgeable about magic.
Those new classes would also get signature skills in new magic related skills that are the only ones that can't identify any creature types. That's hard on the new classes.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
... Batman?If we're talking new design space, I'd love to see a "monster slayer" kind of class. A technical martial full of specialised tricks for their prey, and the ability to improvise ways around monstrous defenses on the fly... With a high enough Lore check, of course (which they would get bonuses to). Think like Joseph Delaney's Spooks.
Mechanically, I'd imagine that they'd be decent at alchemy and trapping, but far more focused than the Alchemist or Ranger. They'd be able to undermine resistances and better exploit vulnerabilities; they'd always have just enough silver, salt and cold iron on hand, and would be able to apply such things to their arsenal of "tools" at a moment's notice. They'd also have to be able to share their knowledge, directing their party to better combat specific threats, which could be enhanced with feats and the like.
These would be the specialists you'd hire to oust a coven of bags, slay a dragon, or capture a rampaging ogre. They're not Rangers; they don't care much for the wild, and take a much more technical approach to their hunt, utilising every tool at their disposal and fighting always by the skin of their teeth, eternally outmatched in body but unparalleled in mind.
Also I think it would be fun to have a Martial that would prioritise Intelligence over Strength or Dexterity.
Actually hadn't crossed my mind! I was very much more thinking in terms of, say, the Spooks series, with some more classic vampire or werewolf hunters and probably a little bit of RDJ's Sherlock Holmes.
Batman actually kinda wouldn't fit exactly. He's a superb combatant due to his physical prowess and martial dedication, augmented by his intellect. This class I'd envision as much more of a just-capable physical combatant with a heck of a lot of tricks and techniques that really define the playstyle whether for combat or utility.
Witch, Summoner and Oracle. I'd definitely like to see the Oracle get more towards the Divination side of things, maybe play with the reaction economy a little.
I think there needs to be a Class chassis for Grit/Panache as a spell point equivalent for martial characters. I'd also fold the Cavalier/Samurai in here with Resolve and Challenge using the same mechanic.
I could see the Psychic being a Mental/Vital caster, and the Shaman fitting the Material/Spiritual spot
I think Mental/Vital sounds more like the Witch than the Psychic. The Psychic was firmly Mental/Spiritual in PF1, and I think PF2 has space for a dedicated Occult caster. Psychic Disciplines could just become a new class of bloodline that make Sorcerers int-based, but I'd rather have the Psychic be its own class so they can do something more interesting.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I hope Paizo has already started thinking about how they'd add more spell lists. Because the linked skill issue shows a big potential problem for them. But at the same same time, I continue to maintain that having four spell lists now and forever just seems terribly limiting and doesn't fit all PF1 classes. Have they been looking at this and have an idea on what they're doing yet? No clue, and I doubt they'd be free to say much if they had other than maybe "We're aware of this, and have some ideas already."
Potential ways to handle this (and my commentary on problems with this approach):
- Simply never add new spell lists. (Way too limiting on future class options, cuts off a lot of thematic options).
- Add new skills with new lists. (Problematic in that existing skills already seem to cover all the monster types, so any additional skills would be less useful than the default, possible sheet redo, non-core skills being treated as second class).
- Have some of the existing four magic-linked skills double-dip into the new lists (Potentially could make some of the skills more powerful than others and might have thematic mismatch).
- Assign other existing skills to the new spell lists. (This would probably be a bit too much of a dirty hack. I could maybe see how something like society could be used for psychic magic, but even that's a stretch, and beyond that? I don't see it)
- Re-orient the existing skills around essences. (Would probably need to retool the skills entirely, also would it mean you can use either of the skills linked to the two essences of that spell list?)
- Use Lore skills. (Basically the same as adding new skills)
- Don't have a skill linked to the spell lists. (I'm not sure of all the uses of these skills yet, but I think this could seriously restrict the new lists by not allowing spellcrafting or possibly rituals for that type of magic).
- Add new skills for future spell lists to the CRB before it comes out (Would require future spell lists to be planned ahead of time, the skills could be rather vestigial until the new lists are released. Also locks them into going in one direction. Adding something for say Psychic magic and then later deciding not to do psychic magic creates a dead skill).
- Similarly to the above, add the other spell lists to the CRB before it's released. (Basically the same problem and potentially others tacked on, like would it be a list without spells assigned and simply be like Psychic Spell list: TBA? Or would the full lists, including unique spells need to be fleshed out? Page-count and work required to come up with new spells would be a problem.)
- Abandon the spell list and skill linkage and replace it with something more expandable. (Major overhaul of the system with limited time to create and test).
Did I miss any?
Of the above, the easiest and mechanically cleanest option is the first, never add spell lists. But this is really unsatisfying to me. Of the other options, the double-dipping of skills might be the best, or at least, least-bad.
Hmm. It seems to me that the classes which can't be replicated via feats or multiclass are: the Gunslinger/Swashbuckler, Kineticist, Medium, Occultist, Oracle, Shifter, Summoner/Spiritualist, Witch, and maybe the Arcanist, Cavalier, Psychic, and Shaman.
Hmm. It seems to me that the classes which can't be replicated via feats or multiclass are: the Gunslinger/Swashbuckler, Kineticist, Medium, Occultist, Oracle, Shifter, Summoner/Spiritualist, Witch, and maybe the Arcanist, Cavalier, Psychic, and Shaman.
I'd add inquisitor to the list, I don't think a fighter/cleric quite cuts it. Mesmerist might go there too, but I don't know the class well enough.
Yeah inquisitor should probably be its own. (I would of said ranger/cleric would be closer btw)
Shaman could still be its own class. It has enough flavor to be on its own. (However we did used to use shaman and druid terms interchangeably at one time)
Swashbuckler? so just rogue fighter or maybe even just a rogue archetype?
I think gunslinger and vigilante both could be done with archetypes alone.
Witch, cavalier (however if you said fighter/bard and had a convincing enough mechanic to pull it together you could maybe convince me) and all the occult classes still should be their own classes
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have a lot of assorted feelings that frequently fall into combining certain classes.
I feel that the summoner should probably come back, as well as having the spiritualist rolled into it. Maybe even the Hunter, too, if we were feeling daring.
And unlike most of you, I actually want the Swashbuckler back. I like the unique point pool mechanics they have that reward luck and action. I think a Swashbuckler should be the primary "Grit" character and the gunslinger should be an archetype.
This may sound crazy, but I think the Skald and Cavalier has an unusual overlap. I think a class that more broadly covers buffing allies and granting abilities should exist without the baggage of a mount or magic. Warlord, yo.
The Witch should come back with some more emphasis on the pact and patron. The Oracle could use more emphasis on the curse, too.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Given that many Classes straight-up add spells to their default list (Clerics of Sarenrae add Fireball to the Divine list, Bards add a variety of cantrips, Sorcerers add many of their Bloodline spells, etc.) I really don't see keeping the core lists limited to only four ever is actually that limiting.
Lets see theres a few that could work around a bit, but i feel it would be reworks for other classes or classfeatures that would suit another class better.
Forexample Gunslinger i feel could be absorbed into Ranger as class feats, as i personally feel they didnt bring much else other than being "guy with gun", but as a part of ranger they could just be an alternative to the ranger in a setting that allows for guns.
I am in the opinion that Cavalier should have replaced Paladin as a Core class and made the paladin as a "path" for Cavalier as a order to follow. The Paladin is no more than just a fighter with some holy abilities, but the Cavalier chassis would suit better with a paladin flavor than just their own class, hell a paladin could even done better as a prestige class in all honesty, like the Holy Vindicator.
The Oracle i think actually would have enough to be their own thing if they expanded on the "Curse and Mysteries" line of their class, and then they would be less "spontanious cleric" and more their own thing.
Swashbuckler would be something of a "prestige" shared between either fighter or rogue, brawler would be a prestige between monk and fighter etc etc.
I think that, in general, discussions like this really can't even be had until the system as currently written is experienced. Until the current options are seen, it's kind of hard to determine what holes there are to be filled in.
When dealing with a new system, one should not be asking "what classes are missing?" Instead, one should be asking "what character can not be represented by the currently available options?" I think one of their stated goals is for the classes to be more versatile, so it should be assumed that more concepts will be able to be handled by fewer classes. That's what a proper modular design is all about.
Given that many Classes straight-up add spells to their default list (Clerics of Sarenrae add Fireball to the Divine list, Bards add a variety of cantrips, Sorcerers add many of their Bloodline spells, etc.) I really don't see keeping the core lists limited to only four ever is actually that limiting.
That can help with customizing a list with specific options, but is inherently more limited than a new list. Unless you're going to have a list of dozens of additional spells or some such, it's not really the same. And in that case you still have all the spells of the base list in addition, making your selection significantly superior to that base list. It also makes it harder to add spells down the line that fit that class, you'd have to do something like include "This spell is added to the options available to the X class." which in effect is like having a new list, but much less elegant. Easier to have Arcane, Occult, Psychic or what have you in the section for spell list.
i mean people have wanted blue mage and dancer for a while, but since stormblood is already out--wait, wrong game.
I would like to see more variants of 'pet' classes available. Many could possibly be archetypes on top of other classes, often likely the Summoner (which is unique enough that it should totally come to PF2, hopefully with the full customization of the original version not the more restrictive Unchained one. I don't want a knock-off of an existing outsider, I want a custom-made monstrosity), but I can see some alchemist-like ones too. A construct maker as stated above would be great, have your clockwork companion with all sorts of weird customization options. Also an alchemist who mutates some poor base critter to make it all sorts of weird is also cool. As well as a Frankenstein class who takes bits and pieces from other sources and sticks them together into an abomination. And an ooze companion could be cool too.