General thoughts and questions on archetypes

[JoelF847]

Archetypes aren't even between classes, since not all classes get the same number of class feats, but archetypes require using class feats. Should be a way to be more even handed about this, especially with the multi-class dedications.

wow only 2 regular, 1 prestige and the 4 sample multiclass? That’s very restrictive even for beta to see what they can really do.

Short description of cavalier shouldn’t say “makes you into a mounted knight”. You can do that without the archetype. It instead grants you abilities suited for a mounted knight.

cavalier - this is very bland- basically the animal companion chain plus 2 other choices. Should include order options with additional benefits and anathemas.

multiclass dedications - why require a 16 in the ability score? It’s a secondary choice only - why not let PCs do this with a 12 if desired? They already wouldn’t be as strong at class abilities, but that’s their choice on how to build a character.

fighter dedication - this doesn’t give much to a character that’s already martial themed. Additional training in weapon and armor types probably doesn’t grant anything you actually want beyond what you currently use.

Gray Maiden dedication - prerequisite of member of the Gray Maidens is never explained. If this is going to be a requirement, then the entry requirements of the group need to be included. Can’t have that in a separate campaign book somewhere. Also, how does gaining access to gray maiden armor work? If the armor physically exists, it’s able to be forged by anyone, and put on sale, right? Especially for armor which is better than full plate - why wouldn’t everyone have this?

scars - not a good name for the effect. Being heavily scarred shouldn’t toughen your skin enough to resist slashing damage. I could see resisting pain effects, but not physically hardening your skin like that.

Pirate dedication - this should be a skill feat, and not locked in a archetype. Furthermore, since the power of this feat is equivalent to a skill feat, requiring it to be replace a class feat is completely under powered. Class feats are far better than skill feats, so having archetype powers which are skill focused like this simply isn’t a good design.

heave ho - if the foe fails the acrobatics check, can they be pushed overboard with the 10 feet? Many feats which have this type of movement don’t allow that.

Rope runner - this is also basically a skill feat, not worth a class feat to take

Sea Legs - this doesn’t do what sea legs actually means. A sea legs feat should be similar to rope runner, and also give bonuses to motion sickness type effects. This feat should be clear it’s about swimming (which is actually off flavor for pirates, many pirates couldn’t swim at all).

Boarding action - what are the rules for swinging on a rope? I don’t see those in the core book at all, but if this gives a bonus after doing so, swinging on a rope should be in the core rules (probably as an action under acrobatics).

plunder - this effectively gives a limited use version of the pickpocket feat, only in combat and only if you hit. It takes the same number of actions. To make it actually worth taking, I’d suggest removing the requirement to hit with the Strike. Even if you miss, you can time the steal action to take advantage of the target avoiding your attack.

Rogue dedication - I’m surprised that this doesn’t give finesse striker - or at least unlock a feat which allows you to take that. That’s probably the single most desired rogue ability for others.

[Zamfield]

I dislike the archetypes as feat chain design after looking at the possibilities. I think they are way too restrictive and I really prefer the fully fleshed out archetypes in PF1e. As these are written, you basically limit everyone to a dip since most of your class features can't keep up with level unless you spend class feats, and classes don't get an equal amount of class feats, certain ratios of multi-classes are impossible due to primary class lacking enough feats.