| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If Multiclass Dedications were available at level 1, nothing would stop someone from taking an archetype at level 1 and a multiclass dedication at level 2...I thought the fact that they were bringing PF1 style Archetypes over was more common knowledge. Generally this is why i don’t like the idea of making the Dedication Feats available at level 1.
It literally says under the ‘Special’ in every dedication feat that this is impossible. The only exception i’ve seen is with the level 9 Human Ancestry Feat, ‘Multitalented’; so no, this would never be an issue.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, the reason having multiclass dedications being available at level 2 seems reasonable to me, is that multiclassing always required 2 levels- one can't be a Rogue 1/Wizard 1 at first level.
Dedications like the pirate one or the hellknight one should be available at level 1 generally.
So I guess the question is- if someone wants to play a sort of "hybrid of two classes" is asking them to play one level as just one of those classes reasonable? Like if you're making a bespoke magus, arcane trickster, or mystic theurge just play level 1 as a wizard and go from there.
I actually completely agree with this. The Hellknight Armiger Background just gives a better point of discussion than the power creep of giving everyone an additional Class Feat at level 1 with zero drawbacks.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, the reason having multiclass dedications being available at level 2 seems reasonable to me, is that multiclassing always required 2 levels- one can't be a Rogue 1/Wizard 1 at first level.
Dedications like the pirate one or the hellknight one should be available at level 1 generally.
So I guess the question is- if someone wants to play a sort of "hybrid of two classes" is asking them to play one level as just one of those classes reasonable? Like if you're making a bespoke magus, arcane trickster, or mystic theurge just play level 1 as a wizard and go from there.
My gut tells me that level 2 multiclassing is a bit of unnecessary baggage. Getting rid of traditional multiclassing should have unlocked the ability to play a multiclassed character concept from level 1.
There's nothing sacred about slogging through the first level of a fighter/thief character as a fighter only. If your concept and background match the multiclassed concept, I don't see there being a roleplaying benefit.
It might be reasonable to ask it of someone, level 1 typically only lasts a couple sessions at most anyway, or is skipped altogether. But why?
If it's over powered, then it's probably still over powered at level 2.
If it's because some classes don't get a first level feat to trade out, well, I still think everyone should get a first level feat. Even still, is it really a big problem?
If it's because you don't like the roleplaying implications, then I counter that it makes a lot more sense for someone to start with magical training than to pick it up midway through their first rat slaying dungeon.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, the reason having multiclass dedications being available at level 2 seems reasonable to me, is that multiclassing always required 2 levels- one can't be a Rogue 1/Wizard 1 at first level.
Dedications like the pirate one or the hellknight one should be available at level 1 generally.
So I guess the question is- if someone wants to play a sort of "hybrid of two classes" is asking them to play one level as just one of those classes reasonable? Like if you're making a bespoke magus, arcane trickster, or mystic theurge just play level 1 as a wizard and go from there.
My gut tells me that level 2 multiclassing is a bit of unnecessary baggage. Getting rid of traditional multiclassing should have unlocked the ability to play a multiclassed character concept from level 1.
There's nothing sacred about slogging through the first level of a fighter/thief character as a fighter only. If your concept and background match the multiclassed concept, I don't see there being a roleplaying benefit.
It might be reasonable to ask it of someone, level 1 typically only lasts a couple sessions at most anyway, or is skipped altogether. But why?
If it's over powered, then it's probably still over powered at level 2.
If it's because some classes don't get a first level feat to trade out, well, I still think everyone should get a first level feat. Even still, is it really a big problem?
If it's because you don't like the roleplaying implications, then I counter that it makes a lot more sense for someone to start with magical training than to pick it up midway through their first rat slaying dungeon.
I feel this boils down to difference of opinion at a certain point. I prefer Cabbage’s viewpoint, but i’ll be okay with a compromise that can make both side content. I simply disagree with the power creep that can happen from some of the ideas suggested so far. My issue with an additional class feat means if a class has an option to grab a class feat already, like a Universalist Wizard, then you have situations where a Human Fighter/Monk/Universalist Wizard can start off with 3 class feats at level 1. I’m sorry, but i find that as HUGELY un balanced. The reason i suggested a Background option is most of the arguments for lvl 1 dedications are either RP or Niche mechanic based; cool, sounds like something a background can cover. A background also can’t be retrained as far as i know, so a Background Dedication would be a sink or swim lvl 1 decision.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The only way a human can get 2 dedication feats at 1st level is if one of the dedication feats specifically allows him to do so. Usually, a dedication feat requires you to take a certain number of feats from the corresponding multiclass before you can take another dedication feat. I have seen no evidence that this rule is changing from the playtest.
So, if a human character is somehow able to take 2 dedication feats at 1st level, somebody at Paizo will have had to decide that there is some special thematic connection between the two multiclasses in question to make that combination reasonable.
A friend of mine is running Emerald Spire and one of our players is a gnome paladin/gunslinger/cavalier. He wanted to eventually have a riding dog, but with his build he was going to be 7th or 8th level before he could actually get one. So what he did was start play with a pet dog that adventured with him all the time but stayed out of combat, and then when he finally got the appropriate class feature made a big deal in character about how he'd finally finished properly training his dog.
...Then we ended up giving the dog a magical cape we found that allowed it to turn into a lion, which was especially funny because the dog's name was Courage and it started the game running away from combat all the time, but that's a whole other story. :P
So his riding mount was Courage, the cowardly dog?
Edit: Also, a thought came up with some of the info revealed during PaizoCon. They mentioned about getting access to the HellKnight MC features and all the HK MC feats counting as the same class for things like Dedication Feat requirements, which had me thinking; i don’t much care for level 1 MC dedication feats, but i could see them making Backgrounds that give you a Dedication Feat and a stat boost in the key stat, and restricting access from the same class.
Example: Wizard (Background)
Gain two ability boosts. One must be to Intelligence, and one is a free ability boost.
You gain the Wizard Dedication feat, and you’re trained in the Arcane Lore skill.
Special: You cannot select the Wizard class with this Background.
Fascinating idea on the background concept. Certainly a skill feat basically giving a full dedication feat is too much for balance purposes. However, having a Hybrid Dedication that costs a skill feat, that pre-starts the Multi-class dedication process, granting something like about half of what the multi-class dedication grants, might just be balanced. When they buy the Multi-class dedication, the skill feat's effect changes to provide something skill-feat level ability that is relevant for that multi-class.
I mean, the reason having multiclass dedications being available at level 2 seems reasonable to me, is that multiclassing always required 2 levels- one can't be a Rogue 1/Wizard 1 at first level.
Dedications like the pirate one or the hellknight one should be available at level 1 generally.
So I guess the question is- if someone wants to play a sort of "hybrid of two classes" is asking them to play one level as just one of those classes reasonable? Like if you're making a bespoke magus, arcane trickster, or mystic theurge just play level 1 as a wizard and go from there.
Technically, if you go back far enough, to be multi-classed you had to start all of them together at 1st level. What we are more recently used to called multi-classing, was called Dual-class and had limitations on using old class abilities until your new class level exceeded the old one.
So, I firmly believe the requirement to have to be 2nd level to do multi-classing is unnecessary baggage coming from the last implementation of it.
Honestly, I wish the multi-class dedications granted less. The primary skill should be a prerequisite. It shouldn't need to front load all the proficiency at level one or first feat. I also think that taking a multi-class dedication could 'dedicate' one of your attribute boosts for the classes primary stat, so the next time you earn one you have to spend dedicated ones.
So if you want a fighter who multi-classes into wizard. You'd need to plan ahead a bit and insure he starts trained in Arcana. You buy the dedication feat at level 1 or 2 and it commits you to increasing your INT next time your attributes go up. That would have required less front loading, and while adding the class would widen their choices some, it would also commit some minor but understandable choices in their future. It also would have required less front-loading in the dedication feat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think Pumpkinhead11 might have the reason for the 2nd level requirement. 1st level is the only time you can get 3 class feats at once and you can't retrain to a higher level feat.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
From the [PaizoCon] "The Future of Pathfinder"
"World Guide. One of the archetypes in here is the Hellknight Armiger. So if anyone told you you couldn’t play a Hellknight in Hellknight Hill, that information is incorrect. This also introduces two new things. This archetype wants to become another archetype. It lets you enter another archetype before you’ve taken enough feats to satisfy its dedication. And, it has an “access entry”, a special way to get make an otherwise-uncommon choice common-for-you. Here, anyone who’s from the Old Cheliax region can choose Hellknight Armiger automatically at 2nd level."
From what I understand the archetype is still lvl 2 but have an special way to make the entry easier to access (background maybe?) and to get access to other Hellknights archetypes.
So I kinda want the source of archetypes being accessible from lvl 1.
From the [PaizoCon] "The Future of Pathfinder"
"World Guide. One of the archetypes in here is the Hellknight Armiger. So if anyone told you you couldn’t play a Hellknight in Hellknight Hill, that information is incorrect. This also introduces two new things. This archetype wants to become another archetype. It lets you enter another archetype before you’ve taken enough feats to satisfy its dedication. And, it has an “access entry”, a special way to get make an otherwise-uncommon choice common-for-you. Here, anyone who’s from the Old Cheliax region can choose Hellknight Armiger automatically at 2nd level."
From what I understand the archetype is still lvl 2 but have an special way to make the entry easier to access (background maybe?) and to get access to other Hellknights archetypes.
So I kinda want the source of archetypes being accessible from lvl 1.
This could very well be my misremembering what was said then. It sounded like Hellknight Armiger was a background that you took, not an Archetype all its own. If that ends up being the case then I apologize for making the Archetype sound like something you could grab at level 1.
As for class specific archetypes that will probably trade out class features, I would imagine those would be accessible as early as 1st level.
@Greystone - Honestly that’s just my preference. Multiclass at level 2; i’m Just not married to the idea so a form of compromise wouldn’t hurt me. I am against 3 1st level feats at level 1 though. A Monk could grab a stance, Ki strike, and stunning fist; fighter can grab sudden charge, combat grab and reactive shield. . . At level 1. This idea would always have to be taken into account when making more 1st level feats as well so. . . Yeah. . . Power creep.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
One thing worth considering is that there is more than one kind of feat, and that one thing that was promised after he playtest was to reduce the number of things competing for class feats. If there is an archetype that costs, for example, a skill feat to acquire the dedication (e.g. the nautical themed one) then hypothetically we could create a background (or several) which grants that specific feat. Later feats within the archetype would cost whatever kind of feats are most appropriate but qualifying via a background/skill feat lets you be able to say "I am a pirate" from level 1.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, the reason having multiclass dedications being available at level 2 seems reasonable to me, is that multiclassing always required 2 levels- one can't be a Rogue 1/Wizard 1 at first level.
I have always considered that a design flaw, because spending a level as not-my-character has always bugged me. Given the existence of the magus and the eldritch scoundrel, I don't think I'm alone in this.
So I guess the question is- if someone wants to play a sort of "hybrid of two classes" is asking them to play one level as just one of those classes reasonable? Like if you're making a bespoke magus, arcane trickster, or mystic theurge just play level 1 as a wizard and go from there.
This is a lot less punitive an idea than it used to be, I'll admit - PF2 multiclassing, proficiency rules, and so on are definitely steps in the right direction. Even so, though, there are things, especially things like the mystic theurge concept, that are still almost entirely out of reach until 2nd level, which leaves you back at the "spending a level as not-my-character" stage.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hmm. The background idea does make me think, you could still do backgrounds for each class- they have ability score boosts relevant to the class (breaking the "one mental option, once physical option" rule for classes with two possible key ability scores), they grant training in the skill that the multiclass gives (meaning multiclassing will give you any skill of your choice trained), maybe gives you the class as your lore subject, and the skill feat is chosen for the best thematic fit. It's no more powerful, but it reduces flavor dissonance between level 1 and 2 a little.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I had an interesting idea. What if they kept the dedications at 2nd level, but added a ancestry feat for humans which gives you a 2nd level dedication feat, but was available to a first level human?
This would allow players who wanted to get rolling on a dedication a little earlier would have an option, and this would help better express the adaptability of humans.
Humans already get access to an Ancestry feat by level 9, in an update, that allows them to circumvent the Dedications’ minimum feat requirement. Something like this would slant certain build to default to Human, and then you’d have to think of what the other Ancestries would get that Humans’ don’t as a balancing act.
Personally i never liked Humans getting a bonus Feat in 1e, and found their ‘endless adaptability’ shtick less and less impressive. Surprisingly, with how Heritage choices ended up in one of the PT updates, now i actually like how Humans are conceptually in this edition. I also like how Half elf/orc are able to dip into two seperate ancestry lists; but that’s going on a tangent.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think you could simply weaken or take away a lvl 1 class feature in exchange for the 1st lvl MC archetype.
But feats would certainly be easier.
It's strange, I didn't think they would have re-introduced 1st level archetypes, and the idea that the armiger can take their archetype only from 2nd level seems to support that they haven't...
... I'm really interested in discovering the truth about this. And how they plan to fit 1st lvl archetypes, if it's true.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think you could simply weaken or take away a lvl 1 class feature in exchange for the 1st lvl MC archetype.
But feats would certainly be easier.
It's strange, I didn't think they would have re-introduced 1st level archetypes, and the idea that the armiger can take their archetype only from 2nd level seems to support that they haven't...
... I'm really interested in discovering the truth about this. And how they plan to fit 1st lvl archetypes, if it's true.
The language they are using is fairly confusing. There are general archetypes achievable through Dedication Feats. As far as we know these start at levels 2 and above.
Then there a Class Archetypes, which operate like PF1 archetypes. They are class specific and swap out class features and are all or nothing (rather than choosing when and how much you invest.) There are none of these in the Core Book, but the rules are for future proofing reasons.
So class archetypes are exactly like 1e archetypes... huh. That's good. That's very good. And it doesn't require all classes to have a lvl 1 feat, for instance, because each archetype will apply to just one class. Like old times, essentially.
Nice, thanks Malk. So assuming this is how it works (and I have no reason to doubt you) it's a bit confusing indeed, but 1st level archetypes are feasible, which is very good news!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I think I've decided 2nd level dedications are fine for me. And not only because, as mentioned, a level based game is based around you getting cooler powers as you level up and it is inevitable that some concepts are going to rely on getting those higher level abilities as you level up.
It is also because I feel like there are exceedingly few concepts that are actually impacted here. One player had her cleric start out trained in stealth and thievery at first level. A barbarian can just have anger management issues. Backgrounds are also a major boon here, especially now that they grant training in a skill.
The hardest concepts to actualize out the gate are probably going to be getting spells on a fighter, rogue, or barbarian or getting full plate on a caster. But many ancestry feats can get you a cantrip at 1st level and you can always buy a spell book to be studying. And humans can get an armor feat at first level to upgrade their class proficiency and the heavier the armor is the harder it is to afford at 1st level anyway. Heck, even the Magus couldn't do this in PF1
Even so, though, there are things, especially things like the mystic theurge concept, that are still almost entirely out of reach until 2nd level, which leaves you back at the "spending a level as not-my-character" stage.And what if my concept is Master of Magics? Why can't I start level 1 casting from all four lists? Why must my Monk wait to do flying kick when his name is soaring George.
I'll add that if you feel like the 1st level as Mystic Theurge is not your character, that is on you. We've got a newer wizard player obsessed with learning as many spells as possible, and she asked a local wizard if she could learn healing spells from him. This was a great way to explain to the character in narrative about the different magical traditions and the essences which act as their building blocks. So she immediately made a beeline for the Sandpoint Cathedral and started studying divine magic and preparing to take the cleric dedication.
She is very much embodying the mystic theurge from level 1, and this happened without any sort of planning ahead on her part. It happened organically and makes total sense in the realm of the story. (I house ruled that her 14 Wisdom was good enough to take it at 2nd level. I won't need to do that in the final version of the game.) Heck, even if she can't start casting heal for a couple more levels, she can get a Staff of Healing and be good to go.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I think I've decided 2nd level dedications are fine for me. And not only because, as mentioned, a level based game is based around you getting cooler powers as you level up and it is inevitable that some concepts are going to rely on getting those higher level abilities as you level up.
It is also because I feel like there are exceedingly few concepts that are actually impacted here. One player had her cleric start out trained in stealth and thievery at first level. A barbarian can just have anger management issues. Backgrounds are also a major boon here, especially now that they grant training in a skill.
The hardest concepts to actualize out the gate are probably going to be getting spells on a fighter, rogue, or barbarian or getting full plate on a caster. But many ancestry feats can get you a cantrip at 1st level and you can always buy a spell book to be studying. And humans can get an armor feat at first level to upgrade their class proficiency and the heavier the armor is the harder it is to afford at 1st level anyway. Heck, even the Magus couldn't do this in PF1
I'll add that if you feel like the 1st level as Mystic Theurge is not your character, that is on you. We've got a newer wizard player obsessed with learning as many spells as possible, and she asked a local wizard if she could learn healing spells from him. This was a great way to explain to the character in narrative about the different magical traditions and the essences which act as their building blocks. So she immediately made a beeline for the Sandpoint Cathedral...Even so, though, there are things, especially things like the mystic theurge concept, that are still almost entirely out of reach until 2nd level, which leaves you back at the "spending a level as not-my-character" stage.And what if my concept is Master of Magics? Why can't I start level 1 casting from all four lists? Why must my Monk wait to do flying kick when his name is soaring George.
Nice! Btw in 2e 14 is enough to MC. True Fact!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...Yeah, I think I've decided 2nd level dedications are fine for me. And not only because, as mentioned, a level based game is based around you getting cooler powers as you level up and it is inevitable that some concepts are going to rely on getting those higher level abilities as you level up.
It is also because I feel like there are exceedingly few concepts that are actually impacted here. One player had her cleric start out trained in stealth and thievery at first level. A barbarian can just have anger management issues. Backgrounds are also a major boon here, especially now that they grant training in a skill.
The hardest concepts to actualize out the gate are probably going to be getting spells on a fighter, rogue, or barbarian or getting full plate on a caster. But many ancestry feats can get you a cantrip at 1st level and you can always buy a spell book to be studying. And humans can get an armor feat at first level to upgrade their class proficiency and the heavier the armor is the harder it is to afford at 1st level anyway. Heck, even the Magus couldn't do this in PF1
I'll add that if you feel like the 1st level as Mystic Theurge is not your character, that is on you. We've got a newer wizard player obsessed with learning as many spells as possible, and she asked a local wizard if she could learn healing spells from him. This was a great way to explain to the character in narrative about the different magical traditions and the essences which act as their building blocks. So she immediately made aEven so, though, there are things, especially things like the mystic theurge concept, that are still almost entirely out of reach until 2nd level, which leaves you back at the "spending a level as not-my-character" stage.And what if my concept is Master of Magics? Why can't I start level 1 casting from all four lists? Why must my Monk wait to do flying kick when his name is soaring George.
Yup. I picked up on that, and it is a change I'm happy to implement in the playtest. :)
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
A homebrew suggestion for people who need level one multiclassing: use the hitpoints and proficiencies of one class, but instead of your level one class features, get both multiclass feats. Then at level two, resume a normal build.
A homebrew suggestion for people who need level one multiclassing: use the hitpoints and proficiencies of one class, but instead of your level one class features, get both multiclass feats. Then at level two, resume a normal build.
Mmm. We could work on this and come up with a better defined set of rules, it's a pretty cool idea!
I think you could simply weaken or take away a lvl 1 class feature in exchange for the 1st lvl MC archetype.
But feats would certainly be easier.
It's strange, I didn't think they would have re-introduced 1st level archetypes, and the idea that the armiger can take their archetype only from 2nd level seems to support that they haven't...
... I'm really interested in discovering the truth about this. And how they plan to fit 1st lvl archetypes, if it's true.
The language they are using is fairly confusing. There are general archetypes achievable through Dedication Feats. As far as we know these start at levels 2 and above.
Then there a Class Archetypes, which operate like PF1 archetypes. They are class specific and swap out class features and are all or nothing (rather than choosing when and how much you invest.) There are none of these in the Core Book, but the rules are for future proofing reasons.
I might be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure I've heard/read designers musing about general PF1 Archetypes, that could be applied to multiple classes — now made possible because classes have more shared architecture and nomenclature (i.e. PF1 Rogue Talents, Rage Powers, and Discoveries are all now class feats).
There is definitely some confusion between PF1 archetypes and PF2 dedications though, so I may have been mistaken.
That would be really cool. Achetypes you can apply to any class at character creation, level 1. Better than 1e in other words.
... One almost wonders, if this is the case, what are normal non-MC archetypes good for ;P
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
... One almost wonders, if this is the case, what are normal non-MC archetypes good for ;P
For trading away fundamental Class Features. Fighters who can add Dex to damage with a Finesse weapon but only get Light Armor Proficiency, Rogues without Sneak Attack, Bards trading away Inspire Courage, and other things like that.
Other than stuff like that, I sincerely hope that most Archetypes are indeed class agnostic. It's cooler that way.
... One almost wonders, if this is the case, what are normal non-MC archetypes good for ;PFor trading away fundamental Class Features. Fighters who can add Dex to damage with a Finesse weapon but only get Light Armor Proficiency, Rogues without Sneak Attack, Bards trading away Inspire Courage, and other things like that.
Other than stuff like that, I sincerely hope that most Archetypes are indeed class agnostic. It's cooler that way.
I was talking about the other normal archetypes, the ones you take at 2nd level, like cavalier, pirate, HK armiger... too many things with the same name right now.
Still, the use for 1st lvl archetype you suggest is pretty awesome and even though knowing 1e archetypes I should have realized this was all design space opening up, I didn't. I'd be very glad if this falls into place in the end.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My take on this:
Class Archetypes (PF1 style) can (by definition) only change your class features for other class features. So they can be available at level 1, but are (like PF1 Archetypes) specific to that class. Like DMW's example of the Dex to damage light armored fighter.
Multiclass Archetypes are the dedication feat archetypes that make you a mix of two (base-)classes. They can only be available from 2nd level up.
Theme Archetypes like Pirate and Cavalier in the playtest will be dedication feat archetypes as well, starting at 2nd level.
Previously called Prestige Archetypes are dedication feat archetypes with higher prerequisites, so those would be available from 6th(?) level up.
The one piece I'm not sure how to fit in there is the Hellknight Armiger.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Becomes problematic when the nomenclature you're using, Franz, doesn't correspond to the official one (which of course is still partially obscure, arguably at least).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A homebrew suggestion for people who need level one multiclassing: use the hitpoints and proficiencies of one class, but instead of your level one class features, get both multiclass feats. Then at level two, resume a normal build.
Perhaps, an Anti-Gestalt. Take the lowest of HP, Skill points, etc at first level and get to count yourself as 1st level for both classes for other purposes. However, the only class features you get from either are the MC archetype abilities from both classes. At second level you rebuild, adding any better boosts or first level class features from the class you decide to make your primary class. Your second level class feat remains the multi-class dedication for the other class.
I haven't tried it, but that definitely sounds like something that could be a workable starting point.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A homebrew suggestion for people who need level one multiclassing: use the hitpoints and proficiencies of one class, but instead of your level one class features, get both multiclass feats. Then at level two, resume a normal build.Perhaps, an Anti-Gestalt. Take the lowest of HP, Skill points, etc at first level and get to count yourself as 1st level for both classes for other purposes. However, the only class features you get from either are the MC archetype abilities from both classes. At second level you rebuild, adding any better boosts or first level class features from the class you decide to make your primary class. Your second level class feat remains the multi-class dedication for the other class.
I haven't tried it, but that definitely sounds like something that could be a workable starting point.
That sounds very workable as a starting point, and reminds me a lot of the "apprentice-level" multiclassing that was in the 3.0 GMG. I approve!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A homebrew suggestion for people who need level one multiclassing: use the hitpoints and proficiencies of one class, but instead of your level one class features, get both multiclass feats. Then at level two, resume a normal build.Perhaps, an Anti-Gestalt. Take the lowest of HP, Skill points, etc at first level and get to count yourself as 1st level for both classes for other purposes. However, the only class features you get from either are the MC archetype abilities from both classes. At second level you rebuild, adding any better boosts or first level class features from the class you decide to make your primary class. Your second level class feat remains the multi-class dedication for the other class.
I haven't tried it, but that definitely sounds like something that could be a workable starting point.
I would say to decide on your primary class at first and use that for proficiency. If you did two casters (the easiest balance comparison), you’re running four cantrips instead of four cantrips and some first level spells and a feature. Penalizing proficiencies on top of that isn’t necessary, and requires more rebuilding at second level.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My take on this:
Class Archetypes (PF1 style) can (by definition) only change your class features for other class features. So they can be available at level 1, but are (like PF1 Archetypes) specific to that class. Like DMW's example of the Dex to damage light armored fighter.
Multiclass Archetypes are the dedication feat archetypes that make you a mix of two (base-)classes. They can only be available from 2nd level up.
Theme Archetypes like Pirate and Cavalier in the playtest will be dedication feat archetypes as well, starting at 2nd level.
Previously called Prestige Archetypes are dedication feat archetypes with higher prerequisites, so those would be available from 6th(?) level up.
The one piece I'm not sure how to fit in there is the Hellknight Armiger.
The Class Archetype is the odd man out there. The others all work by being taken with a class feat, but the Class Archetypes work by subbing class features. So those really should have had their own name to go with the fact that they're a different kind of mechanic. Perhaps keep the term Archetype for those, because it's more like the PF1 archetypes, and then call the others something different, like Dedication feats or something. Well, this ship has sailed, from now on I guess we just need to be very careful about specifying the type of archetype we're talking about to avoid confusion. At least it's not as bad as level.
The Class Archetype is the odd man out there. The others all work by being taken with a class feat, but the Class Archetypes work by subbing class features. So those really should have had their own name to go with the fact that they're a different kind of mechanic. Perhaps keep the term Archetype for those, because it's more like the PF1 archetypes, and then call the others something different, like Dedication feats or something. Well, this ship has sailed, from now on I guess we just need to be very careful about specifying the type of archetype we're talking about to avoid confusion. At least it's not as bad as level.My take on this:
Class Archetypes (PF1 style) can (by definition) only change your class features for other class features. So they can be available at level 1, but are (like PF1 Archetypes) specific to that class. Like DMW's example of the Dex to damage light armored fighter.
Multiclass Archetypes are the dedication feat archetypes that make you a mix of two (base-)classes. They can only be available from 2nd level up.
Theme Archetypes like Pirate and Cavalier in the playtest will be dedication feat archetypes as well, starting at 2nd level.
Previously called Prestige Archetypes are dedication feat archetypes with higher prerequisites, so those would be available from 6th(?) level up.
The one piece I'm not sure how to fit in there is the Hellknight Armiger.
Unfortunately to take a class archetype you must take the dedication feat. It's in the full text posted above.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just noticed that these images include the definition text for Class Archetypes. So here's my best transcription of that text:
All in all, this seems like a promising setup to implement class archetypes within the class design framework of PF2.CLASS ARCHETYPES
Archetypes with the class trait represent a fundamental divergence from your class's specialties, but one that exists within the context of your class. You can select a class archetype only if you are a member of the class of the same name. Class archetypes always alter or replace some of a class's static class features, in addition to any new feats they offer. It may be possible to take a class archetype at 1st level if it alters or replaces some of the class's initial class features. In that case, you must take that archetype's dedication feat at 2nd level, and after that you proceed normally. You can never have more than one class archetype.
Found this in the ‘MASSIVE SPOILER DUMP FROM UK GAMES EXPO‘ thread. So it seems like there will be no 1st level archetypes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Found this in the ‘MASSIVE SPOILER DUMP FROM UK GAMES EXPO‘ thread. So it seems like there will be no 1st level archetypes.I just noticed that these images include the definition text for Class Archetypes. So here's my best transcription of that text:
All in all, this seems like a promising setup to implement class archetypes within the class design framework of PF2.CLASS ARCHETYPES
Archetypes with the class trait represent a fundamental divergence from your class's specialties, but one that exists within the context of your class. You can select a class archetype only if you are a member of the class of the same name. Class archetypes always alter or replace some of a class's static class features, in addition to any new feats they offer. It may be possible to take a class archetype at 1st level if it alters or replaces some of the class's initial class features. In that case, you must take that archetype's dedication feat at 2nd level, and after that you proceed normally. You can never have more than one class archetype.
It states: “It may be possible to take a class archetype at 1st level if it alters or replaces some of the class's initial class features. In that case, you must take that archetype's dedication feat at 2nd level, and after that you proceed normally.”
So you can take it at level 1 but if you do so you must spend your 2nd level feat on the dedication. The dedication itself probably won’t benefit you until you take it at lvl2 but you still swap out the 1st level class feature.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, the Class specific Archetypes will still replace Class Features and as early as level one, you are right. I meant to allude to even with Class specific Archetypes a 2nd level dedication feat is still required it sounds like.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So sounds like no more combining class archetypes the way we could in Pathfinder 1st Edition if they didn't alter the same things.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So sounds like no more combining class archetypes the way we could in Pathfinder 1st Edition if they didn't alter the same things.
I feel like latter day PF1 design sort of showed that archetype stacking was on the way out, since it got increasingly difficult to find mutually compatible archetypes for latter day classes (and was kind of a massive headache to figure out.) Only PF1 class that really needed archetype stacking was the core monk, after all.