I'm not really seeing a difference between multiclasses and archetypes in PF2. Both are just feats that give listed benefits with identical requirements (both to take feats and the limitations on what different kinds of feats you can take).
Is there really any reason to make them different terms that will just confuse newer players in understanding what makes an Archetype an Archetype and what makes a Multiclass choice a Multiclass choice? I mean, yes, Multiclassing gives you some specific class features of other classes, and Archetypes are more generalized in benefits and application, but I'm not really seeing how that should make a difference between what the two really are.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think they will be presented as "multiclassing" in the CRB.
I think the intent is for 'Class Archetypes' to just be a subset of Archetypes. With an archetype's benefits (especially initial) being weighed against it's requirements. For example:
Basic Archetypes have easy requirements (see the Pirate). They also provide significantly more focused benefits (read, they're generally weaker but have niche uses).
Class Archetypes have fair requirements (see the Wizard). They also provide significant, character defining initial benefits without depriving you of your capstones.
Prestige Archetypes have hard requirements (see Grey Maiden). They also have room to be truely powerful, potentially overarching your class features and providing alternative capstones.
This leaves them room to extend the system with "Mythic" Archetypes, "Corruption" Archetypes (like Vampirism), or whatever a third-party designer's world needs. "Giant-Robot Piloting" Archetypes anyone?
Did you see that the Multiclass feat was also an archetype? Multiclass archetypes are archetypes with a restriction: you can’t take one for the class you started as.
Well, that is one difference, but it's also one that I'm certain is going to trip people up, and it'll go down somewhat like this:
"I'm a Rogue, I want to take this Archetype to have more Rogue stuff."
"You can't."
"Why not?"
"Because you're a Rogue, so you can't take that Archetype that gives you [more] Rogue stuff."
Between the different kinds of feats, archetypes, levels, and so forth, it's a miracle we can even understand what's being said half the time, so it's an understatement to realize that people are going to make these kinds of relatively silly mistakes.
I think it would be nice if they could find a way to word the class archetypes in such a way that make it clear that you would only be getting things you already had if you selected them for the class you had, making it unnecessary to include wording about not being able to take it. It seems like the easiest way to do that would be for the feats to grant you specific class features, with their modified effects explained in the feat or proficiencies instead of listing everything. SO you would gain the wizards cantrips class ability (with a limited number of cantrips), etc.
I think it would be nice if they could find a way to word the class archetypes in such a way that make it clear that you would only be getting things you already had if you selected them for the class you had, making it unnecessary to include wording about not being able to take it. It seems like the easiest way to do that would be for the feats to grant you specific class features, with their modified effects explained in the feat or proficiencies instead of listing everything. SO you would gain the wizards cantrips class ability (with a limited number of cantrips), etc.
The obvious problem is that the Rogue one likely gives Sneak Attack so unless there is just "extra sneak attack" feat people will try to use it to just get more/better/faster sneak attack.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I figure the multiclass archetypes are just redundant on the existing class. Like the wizard dedication gets you spells (which you get from your class), an Arcane School (which you get from your class), and wizard feats (which you can take instead of these feats anyway).
So it's not inconceivable that the rogue dedication gives nothing which would be useful to an existing rogue. So there's no need to spell out "you can't take this."
I figure the multiclass archetypes are just redundant on the existing class. Like the wizard dedication gets you spells (which you get from your class), an Arcane School (which you get from your class), and wizard feats (which you can take instead of these feats anyway).
So it's not inconceivable that the rogue dedication gives nothing which would be useful to an existing rogue. So there's no need to spell out "you can't take this."
The Rogue one will give you sneak attack-- so it has to have limiting language somewhere-- either by disallowing rogues to take it or in the description of how you get the sneak attack dice that they can't stack.
Yes, cantrips and spells are somewhat redundant- but sneak attack dice are not.
The only reason you cannot take a Class Archetype of you own class is it wouldn't stack anyway. It would be a stupid trap to leave in.
A fighter is already proficient with all armor and martial weapons, there is nothing to gain from fighter dedication.
A rogue already has the best sneak attack progression they're allowed...
A wizard or cleric can already cast spells of their traditions better than what the feats grant, etc.
They already have feats to make Fighters more fightery, Fighter Class Feats! Which muticlass fighters have to wait twice as long to take.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They already have fixed the sneak attack description. You get the sneak attack ability. The sneak attack ability scales at its own progression. That is part of what got fixed by not having individual character class charts.
The only reason you cannot take a Class Archetype of you own class is it wouldn't stack anyway. It would be a stupid trap to leave in.
A fighter is already proficient with all armor and martial weapons, there is nothing to gain from fighter dedication.
A rogue already has the best sneak attack progression they're allowed...
A wizard or cleric can already cast spells of their traditions better than what the feats grant, etc.
They already have feats to make Fighters more fightery, Fighter Class Feats! Which muticlass fighters have to wait twice as long to take.
If the difference between being able to call all archetype feats "archetype" feats and needing special "Multi-class" archetype feats is that Multi-class archetypes need to include "you cannot take this feat for your starting class." I'd rather have that text in the feat itself than have Multi-class feats be their own thing.
If the difference between being able to call all archetype feats "archetype" feats and needing special "Multi-class" archetype feats is that Multi-class archetypes need to include "you cannot take this feat for your starting class." I'd rather have that text in the feat itself than have Multi-class feats be their own thing.
I don't think this is necessary. We have 4 feats from the wizard archetype in the blog, and none are useful to a Wizard. So "I should not take this on a wizard in lieu of wizard feats" is clear on examination.
Presumably for the rogue archetypes sneak attack it's phrased as "you gain a sneak attack at x, which increments at [level]" If the rogue already has a better version of that, no rogue will want it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
PF2 focuses on Tag-Based rules for extensibility. It takes fewer lines to define the tag once than it does to reiterate the rule that tag represents every time it applies, and then cause huge issues if you forget to do so even one time.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think getting extra spell slots is a major thing that I hope isn't restricted to multi class characters.
Example:
A Druid with Cleric multi-class (who invests heavily in it) has full druid progression and then an additional 2 spell slots of level 1-6 and one spell slot for levels 7 and 8.
That's 14 extra spell slots, most of them low level but they can be used for utility stuff it's a lot. I could see a wizard wanting to multi-class wizard to get that benefit.
Hopefully there will be options such that if a character want's to monoclass they can get a similar number of total spell slots.
I think getting extra spell slots is a major thing that I hope isn't restricted to multi class characters.
Agreed!
Do the wizard dedication feats give you extra spell slots if you already have wizard spell slots? IIRC the language is "you gain a spell slot" which may or may not add to an existing number of spell slots.
Do the wizard dedication feats give you extra spell slots if you already have wizard spell slots? IIRC the language is "you gain a spell slot" which may or may not add to an existing number of spell slots.
I assumed it wouldn't I just hope that there is a wizard class feat, maybe a lvl 12 one so a multiclass can't get it that just gives a bunch of extra spell slots.
Do the wizard dedication feats give you extra spell slots if you already have wizard spell slots? IIRC the language is "you gain a spell slot" which may or may not add to an existing number of spell slots.
I do believe from the blog, that you cannot take a dedication for a class you already are.
So no Wizard/Wizard.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do the wizard dedication feats give you extra spell slots if you already have wizard spell slots? IIRC the language is "you gain a spell slot" which may or may not add to an existing number of spell slots.I do believe from the blog, that you cannot take a dedication for a class you already are.
So no Wizard/Wizard.
Indeed, you cannot take the Wizard Dedication, you've already passed Wizardry 101. There'd be no point in taking it again.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Indeed, you cannot take the Wizard Dedication, you've already passed Wizardry 101. There'd be no point in taking it again.Do the wizard dedication feats give you extra spell slots if you already have wizard spell slots? IIRC the language is "you gain a spell slot" which may or may not add to an existing number of spell slots.I do believe from the blog, that you cannot take a dedication for a class you already are.
So no Wizard/Wizard.
But I want to go back for Bachelors.
You have one, Wizard Dedication is like getting an Associates degree, or Minoring.
If the difference between being able to call all archetype feats "archetype" feats and needing special "Multi-class" archetype feats is that Multi-class archetypes need to include "you cannot take this feat for your starting class." I'd rather have that text in the feat itself than have Multi-class feats be their own thing.I don't think this is necessary. We have 4 feats from the wizard archetype in the blog, and none are useful to a Wizard. So "I should not take this on a wizard in lieu of wizard feats" is clear on examination.
People often do things without examination. Clarity costs little, and is quite valuable.
It also helps stop unforseen shenanigans, which do happen in RPGs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
People often do things without examination. Clarity costs little, and is quite valuable.It also helps stop unforseen shenanigans, which do happen in RPGs.
For the first time ever, I agree with Voss.
At least in the blog it says explicitly that you cannot multiclass into you in class. Hopefully things are clear in the book as well.