| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Spell combat might have been a bad example given the way 2e's action economy works.
The larger point though was just that one of the strengths of PF1's partial casters is the way they created class features and unique spells to blend together martial and magical components to some degree, Spell Combat was just an example of that.
And my worry is that with battlemages being built around multiclassing instead we'll see a bit of a backslide toward 3.5 design philosophy where being a gish is just bolting spells onto your fighter or bolting attack bonuses onto your wizard with not a lot of meaningful interconnectivity between the two and I hope Paizo looks at that when designing feats to support these systems.
It seems to me that an easy (if potentially very wordcount-heavy) first step is making multiclass feats with multiple class prerequisites. So multiclass feats with both fighter and wizard as prerequisite, sort of thing. Then you can design tightly-focused benefits to build off the two classes' specific strengths.
METACLASS ARCHETYPES
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
It seems to me that an easy (if potentially very wordcount-heavy) first step is making multiclass feats with multiple class prerequisites. So multiclass feats with both fighter and wizard as prerequisite, sort of thing. Then you can design tightly-focused benefits to build off the two classes' specific strengths.
This is roughly what I figured we'd see at some point, although I was thinking more likely we would see something like a fighter class feat that has the wizard dedication as a prereq.
Which I think I'd actually prefer, because then you can have a similar-but-different feat for wizard/fighters so that they are differentiated from fighter/wizards. I feel like one of the strengths of PF2e is providing that kind of distinction - like how Fighters, Rangers, Barbarians, and Rogues all have mechanically different feats for two weapon fighting.
The "meta class" / "Multi class with multiple class prerequisites" thing was something I had thought of when mentioning magus before, or like Hybrid or Prestige Classes as feats, Like here's a few examples...
Skald: Bard and Barbarian feats (maybe specific feats even) and you can grab a class feat for Raging Song.
Battle Herald: Let players take Champion (or fighter) and Bard feats to be able to learn things like Inspiring Command.
Master Chymist: Taking a certain number of Alchemist and Barbarian feats lets them take a class feat for Mutagenic Form or whatever it's called.
Eldritch Knight: Fighter and Wizard feats let them take stuff like Spell Critical
Holy Vindicator: Let them take things like Stigmata for combining Cleric and Champion or something.
Arcane Archer: Fighters and Wizards with an archery specialization can take meta class feats to gain some of the extra powers like enhancing arrows.
Shadowdancer: Sorcerers and Rogues or something with a specialization in darkness being able to grab Shadow Jump
Brawler: Fighter/Monks taking extra meta class feats to use their flurries in armor and the like.
Arcane Trickster: Stuff like Ranged Legerdemain, Impromptu Sneak Attack, and Surprise Spells as meta class feats.
Granted, there's the general problem that there are probably WAY too many class combinations (132 to be exact, since its' a permutation that would be 12 base classes times 11 base classes (so we don't have something like Alchemist/Alchemist or Barbarian/Barbarian) Which would mean that even 5 meta class feats per base class would be 660 feats just for metaclasses, 3 meta class feats per class would be 396, but either way the point is more that that would be a LOT of feats, like more than the core rulebook even has as a whole I'd assume. but it would also have the advantage that they don't actually need to make that many new classes, since like the Hybrid Classes and Prestige Classes could just be these meta-class feats that people can just bolt together. and I'd assume 5 feats is a bit easier to make than a whole new prestige class... right?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd assume any multiclass prestige thing's prereqs wouldn't be class based, but proficiency based.
I.E. (expert in martial weapons, expert in spells): Do the thing with a sword and a spell!
Since this is more or less turning into a thread about Gishes (with a few extra things thrown in here and there), why not make a separate forum about them?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This metaclass archetypes idea actually sounds like a great thing to dedicate a whole separate book to. Like just a book of class feats that require specific dedication feats to take, and maybe other metaclass functionality or establishment.
Haven't they decided to always give player content in setting books now? In that case we'll only get "metaclass" archetypes and feats in the appropriate product...
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Haven't they decided to always give player content in setting books now?
No. Or at least, they haven't done what I think you're saying (ie: player content only shows up in setting books from now on). There probably is player content in all setting books, but it's not exclusive to them.
Now, all books will include setting elements in the sense that all flavor stuff in them will refer to Golarion specifically, but primarily mechanics oriented books with, say, new Classes or Ancestries, are entirely possible and, IMO, extremely likely.