Paizo's unwillingness to make a proper Theurge is understandable, given that a class that does justice to the concept of "combining the two most powerful classes in the game" would be... problematic, to say the least. You certainly wouldn't be able to just make a base class that gets 9th level progression out of both the Wizard and the Cleric lists without creating a special tier zero all to itself.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Like the magus, the theurge class would have dual 6th level spell casting.
I never liked prestige classes, myself. I greatly prefer the archetypes that Paizo introduced.
Absolutely. They don't solve my problem, but there's so many other problems they do solve.
Like the magus, the theurge class would have dual 6th level spell casting.
It would have then had to solve the inherent difficulties of being a 6th level caster that is supposed to be a caster rather than a gish. They managed just that with the Occultist and Mesmerist, but those came rather late in PF1's life cycle and solved the problem in ways that likely wouldn't have worked for a Theurge (the Occultist's reliance on class-scaling SLA's would not work for a class that's supposed to be all about it's spell list, and the Mesmerist's stare is limited to a single type of save for a very good reason).
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it'd be an impossible conundrum to solve, far from it; it would have required quite a bit of work and testing though, and if they messed it up the controversy of creating a class stronger than the wizard would have made the Shifter hate look like peanuts by comparison.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My issues with multiclassing:
- The requirements are rather steep and can mess up your builds.
- Some requirements are solely for lore reasons, such the Shadowdancer's Perform skill, which is never used again in the PrC itself.
- A PrC basically halts progress for your base class[es]. Since many base classes state the "per class level" rule for scaling/advancement, PrC levels don't count toward them unless specified, not to mention that several class features are even tied to specific levels.
- As a few others stated, since the addition of archetypes, PrCs have become almost useless. Sure, you trade features, but your key abilities aren't affected. Even more, the Assassin was essentially rendered useless thanks to the Slayer's class.
- Many PrCs could have been turned into archetypes, such the Battle Herald for Bards, Horizon Walker for Rangers or Rage Prophet for Warpriests.
- I understand that Prestige Classes are supposed to be a special membership card, but in many situations, you cannot simply be "part of the organization". You always had to be a "member in becoming". There also can be an issue due to how the lore has to be adapted for homebrewed campaigns... or how it will be implemented in an existing one.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I was just never a fan of preplanning a character's complete career path from the start to qualify for a prestige class. I know that's a minor gripe, but it's why I never wanted to play one.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pathfinder First Edition is not going anywhere, at least not for me. I got AP's for at least half the runtime 2E is going to have (which will be another ten years, very probably. Can't wait to see the catervauling people do when people start to suggest "It's time for 3E" in five years. ^^). More if I go into the ones which are not at the absolute top of my priority list to run.
Love: Most of it, with still evolving houserules to balance out some of the OP stuff which inevitably creeps in.
Hate: Mythic Adventures for PC's. It's fine for NPC's, if used in moderation.
Miss: Miss? I'm playing it. You guys go have fun with the new stuff. As long as the 2E AP's are easily convertable (which the GM's have indicated that they will be), I'll be fine over here.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Loved: The fact that after 2e comes out, I will still be playing 1e with my friends, the fact that the content is not magically disappearing, and that 3rd party content is still a thing that exists. The Alchemist. The Paladin (Yes, even with the stupid alignment restrictions) Ninja and Samurai. Paths of War. Spheres of Might and Power. Building characters and enjoying using crunch to represent fluff and vice versa.
Hated: A lot of things, several specific classes (Vigilante's fluff, Shifter's Crunch, the over complicated nature of Occult classes which despite that they were still weak choices.) Water balloons beating crossbows. Vow of Poverty. Diagonal squares math. Ultimate Equipment nerfs. People acting like 2e will magically slay 1e in the same way DnD 4e fans claimed that 4th edition had killed 3.5 and made it so that it would never be played again.
Miss: Future content. Admittedly I haven't rated a paizo made sourcebook as majority good in around four years, but there is stuff I enjoyed. I enjoy the concept of the Shifter. I enjoyed parts of Ultimate Horror. I enjoyed the Kineticist despite it's issues. The release of 2e will also likely mean some 3rd party content will transfer over there even if 2e flops even worse than I predicted.
Frankly though I hope DSP and the Spheres people and FFD20 and the like stick to 1st edition. Same for Purple Duck and the wonderful N Jolly. I don't really have the desire to see Maneveurs as feats or N Jolly doing an alchemist rating guide for 2e.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Love: the evolutionary game design, archetypes, traits, the customizability, the fact that pcs npcs and monsters all run off the same basic rules, point buy stat generation, the old PRD only containing setting neutral core books and organizing the information by book
Hate: occult instead of psionics, the explosion of classes that started with the ACG, how badly they messed up the shifter, faqs/errata made in response to PFS problems that don't come up in non-PFS games, the increasingly-dismal-now-dropped faq schedule, the fact that PF2 is not another evolutionary step of the system
Will Miss: being excited over new releases, as I'll doggedly stick to Pathfinder and don't see myself enjoying PF2
Multiclassing still sucked if you assumed that a Wizard/Fighter would go into Eldritch Knight. Paizo's solution was to create the Magus instead.
In my opinion, the Magus doesn't fill that niche properly (and risks becoming a one-trick pony). Note: part of that opinion is based on the fact that I hated 3.x' Spellsword.
Personally, I think that the Magus would have been a better class if it had been designed more along the lines of the Warpriest: swift self-buffing (both of self and weapon/armour) as opposed to sending a spell - usually the same one - through one's sword.
Personally, I think that the Magus would have been a better class if it had been designed more along the lines of the Warpriest: swift self-buffing (both of self and weapon/armour) as opposed to sending a spell - usually the same one - through one's sword.
You can build a rather strong magus that doesn't rely on his spellstrike much. I think you just see more people focusing on spellstrike, because people like the sensation of rolling a lot of dice.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I probably will not buy 2E between reaching a stage where I no longer buy new editions of rpgs and generally being satisfied with the flaws of PF 1E.
Lovedthe extras they added to the character classes. Paladins in previous 3E were not worth taking past tenth level as one received nothing bur extra spells. As well the Sorcerer was really fleshed out beyond having the blood of Dragons in them.
Hate Too many feats, classes, archetypes not really worth taking. The devs stubborn insistence that Fluff trumps crunch. One can write a +1 feat with a full page of fluff it is still a +1 feat at the end of the day. The design of some of the new material seemed uneven. Either something was too powerful or not worth taking. Very often it was never a mix of it being good yet not too powerful. PFS having WAY too much control on what gets nerfed or not and when nerfing for whatever reason is done it either becomes no longer worth taking or rules that are broken are not actually properly errated if ever.
The Gun rules..still kind of annoyed at the devs for that especially when their ignored their own playtesters advice on not implementing them as they are currently written. Fighters not getting the proper love that as their due.
Miss New material for 1E being released. Yes we may still have 3PP yet I was looking forward to seeing more of the world being fleshed out under 1E.
Multiclassing still sucked if you assumed that a Wizard/Fighter would go into Eldritch Knight. Paizo's solution was to create the Magus instead.
In my opinion, the Magus doesn't fill that niche properly (and risks becoming a one-trick pony). Note: part of that opinion is based on the fact that I hated 3.x' Spellsword.
Personally, I think that the Magus would have been a better class if it had been designed more along the lines of the Warpriest: swift self-buffing (both of self and weapon/armour) as opposed to sending a spell - usually the same one - through one's sword.
Arguably Spell Combat is better than swift action buffing. You risk AoO but get to cast ANY spell as part of a full attack and can still use your swift action. Given that they can swift action buff their weapon with their arcane pool, I'm not sure the Magus isn't already capable of playing exactly like the better design you suggest.
You're definitely overly focused on Spellstrike, which is nice for a nova strike but anyone who has played the Magus for any length of time will tell you it's a lot more occasional than it's made out to be.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Things that I loved:
The massive upgrade that it was over D&D 3.5.
The huge emphasis on customizability that has spoiled me on tabletop rulesets.
The art. Pathfinder was the first tabletop game that I could open a book for and sometimes the first thing I did was scan the book and look at the art.
Archetypes. A massive improvement over prestige classes in almost every way.
Things that I wanted:
Nothing, if I'm being honest. Pathfinder sated my needs for a tabletop RPG in just about every way. Actually, for the last few years of its run, I've found myself mostly not wanting, and wishing that rules content and features would slow down.
Things that I hated:
ALL of the finicky bits inherent to the 3.x system. The fractional math; the bolted-on nature of many of the systems that often conflicted with each other; the enormous gulf between character capability, particularly with skills and saves; 6th-level casters; the massive house rules document I have to make the system any more than the most basically functional, etc.
The silly amount of feats, spells, and classes. There was just too much. Picking feats and spells was an actual chore for the second half of PF's run. It turned one of my favorite parts of the system (character creation and progression) into something that I had to work through to get the enjoyment out of it.
Things that I will miss:
Hm, what would be the best word to use here? Nostalgia? Despite the grotesque horror-monster that 3.x has become in these 20-ish years of support and evolution, it is honestly saddening to move on from the only tabletop rules system that has ever truly engrossed me, or that I was ever truly satisfied with. Certainly the only system I ever enjoyed GMing for.
It is very bittersweet; I will truly miss 3.x and Pathfinder, but I am glad to move on. I am excited for and encouraged by PF2's direction, and hope it will become the second tabletop system that fully satisfies me. Perhaps, after an ample break from the terror it has become, I will return to it with a refreshed state of mind and find the passion I once had for it again. If PF2 fails to satisfy me, I'm certain I will.
Things I loved:
The APs, specifically Kingmaker, Skull and Shackles, Carrion Crown, Iron Gods and Strange Aeons. The ability to successfully iterate and expand the 3.5 rules set and make it satisfying to play again after I was burnt out on 3.5. Archetypes, something I didn't know I needed, even 5th edition D&D integrated Archetypes into their classes. All the great little source books like Distant Worlds, City of Strangers, Path of the Hellknight, and Magnimar City of Monuments. Base classes I fell in love with like Gunslinger, Witch, Oracle, Investigator, and Slayer. The preponderance of Mythos content and stats for things like Kaiju in the bestiaries.
Things I hated: Not much really. Chained Summoner, and the Mythic Rules come to mind.
Things that I will miss: New APs in 1st edition is probably the thing I will miss the most. I hope the best for 2nd edition.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Things I loved: The sustainment of the game I started with, keeping reasonably familiar rules.
Things I hated: The boundless limits that players could push and the social dynamics needed to keep everyone in the same ballpark.
Things that I will miss: Herolab, since I doubt I will buy into the online model.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Loved: Archetypes that were added to literally become a comic book, video game, or movie character. Shield Champion, the idea of Arachnid Wild Soul(I actually hate the archetype), Magical Child, and others.
Wanted: Fewer feat taxes. More logical flexibility. Swashbucklers should qualify for Advanced Weapon training(maybe not all of them and many aren't useful for Swashs anyways)
Hated: The stigma on Dex-to-damage. The Arachnid Wild Soul vigilante archetype(wall crawling at 12th level, full web swinging at 18th level, wtf?).
Will Miss: The Magus class. Traits. Traits are one of my favorite parts of PF1, they add so much more to character builds. Being able to change how you use a skill or gain another class skill. Bumping your initiative just a little bit.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Loved: Archetypes. Best idea Paizo had.
Wanted: A Pf2 that was a natural upgrade from PF1, but depowered the OP core caster classes.
Hated: The bleeding-edge dope published from especially from 2015 onward. (I recall the overpowered 3.5e splats heralding the end of that system as well.)
Will Miss: PF1, warts and all, as it was the d20 system I love.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I too support the ‘natural upgrade’ path PF2 could have taken. I hope this forum remains a great place to support a fan-generated ‘natural upgrade.’Loved: Archetypes. Best idea Paizo had.
Wanted: A Pf2 that was a natural upgrade from PF1, but depowered the OP core caster classes.
Hated: The bleeding-edge dope published from especially from 2015 onward. (I recall the overpowered 3.5e splats heralding the end of that system as well.)
Will Miss: PF1, warts and all, as it was the d20 system I love.
I keep saying multiple times: I'm perfectly fine with Paizo upgrading the aging d20 system for something better, simplier more streamlined.
I am salty that I essentially need to "get down the hill, change my gear and climb again" instead of just "getting better gear in mid-ascension and keep on climbing". In short, I kinda wished that at least 50% of P1E was converted for 2E, be races, classes, spells AND monsters, have the 50% coming shortly after and THEN getting brand new materials.
For instance, we just got the Shifter class... only to be dropped from P2E until further noticed... You would think that after so many revisions, they would have given the Druid something equivalent in 2E ^^;
Guess I'll chime in.
Loved: Like everyone else the wealth of options, but I also really loved that every class sorta did it's own thing, barbarian's raged and had appropriately themed rage powers, paladin's had mercies, fighter's weapon and armor training, the summoner's eidolon and it's evolutions. All of these things worked a little different from one another. Something about making it all into feats (not all of it) takes away all of the character, the charm.
Wanted: I actually prefer 4th level spell full BAB classes like the paladin, ranger & bloodrager, instead of the medium BAB 6th level spell casters. I would have liked to see more of those classes. Also a marshal style class would have been nice. Finally some actual epic level rules and support.
Hated: Pathfinder unchained. Didn't like that particular book as a whole, and since it heralded in pathfinder 2e. I'm just not a fan. Mythic rules, not a fan either would have preferred epic rules instead.
Will miss: The first party support, but as long as third party material keeps coming out, I'll be just fine. Personally I think pathfinder 1e still has about another decade of material in it, no need to move to a new edition.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Loved: The idea that you can easily make a single-class character work without having to multiclass in order to be on pair with those that do "dip" into other classes.
Wanted: More Prestige Classes that had some nice concept to them and were worth taking.
Hated: Rogues usually being trap class for most new players (I've introduced hundreds of people into this system and standard Rogue class often was causing some issues). Also PrCs too often were a liability, than an actual option worth taking. What I always liked about PrCs in 3.5 is that they felt like an elite version of the class or elite specialization - something you work towards and reach at later levels.
Will Miss: No a single thing. I will keep playing Pathfinder until the end times. Together with 3.5 it is the GREATEST system ever created, even with all its flaws. I guess nothing will ever come close to this level of official and 3PP support.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Love: Archetypes. Witches. Golarion Lore. Weird Alchemical items that do niche things. Rule subsystems for social combat and the like being available. Being able to come up with really odd ideas and finding out they can be statted up as playable characters because ‘somewhere there is an archetype for that”. Investigators. Kitsune. Kitsune Investigators with bags full of obscure alchemical items in social encounters.
Wanted: More information about places outside the Inner Sea (Kelesh and Vudra).
Hated: Grappling monsters. Rocket tag. Grappling rules generally. Classes only getting 2 skill points/level.
Will Miss: Going to PFS conventions and meeting new people there.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I home ruled that whole "2 skill points/level" nonsense. Every class gets 2 more points than the book sez.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Loved: Honestly i pretty much love all of PF1. Hell my fav games are run RAW going from, if it is in any book... well outside unchained which i avoid like the plague and only pick very few things from, then it can be added to the game. While true i dont add in every single system every single time due to how big the system is and the amount of possible rules. Then again, i love it because of all those rules and options haha.
Wanted: Even more books, even more options, but above all, even more pet classes.
Hated: Nerfs. How i hate paizo new found need to "balance" everything out. Why they made up this need to balance out everything in a table top game i dont know, but did i hate each time they nerfed eyt another thing. Above all, i hate their unchained summoner, hell i pretty avoid the whole book because of this change alone.
Will Miss: having new options made all the time. Overall ofc, if the playtest is anything to go by, then i will just keep playing PF1, 2E be dammed haha. Honestly, not a single thing in the playtest made me want to change editions, while plenty made me for sure not want to.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I home ruled that whole "2 skill points/level" nonsense. Every class gets 2 more points than the book sez.
I usually just gave every 2+Int class 4+Int skills, except Wizards because f!$% 'em.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Let's see:
Loved: The refinements of the familiar 3.5 chassis, and the new base classes built on it.
Hated: The way the math breaks down and casters start to dominate at high levels. This was admittedly a 3.5 problem ported over unchanged.
Wanted: More careful editing and proofreading of options before release. See the rage and confusion over Advanced Class Guide and Ultimate Wilderness, as well as the endless delays vetting things for Additional Resources in PFS.
Will miss: Golarion. I'm off to Starfinder, where it's gone missing. When I come back to fantasy RPGs, who knows what world I'll return to, but PF2's Golarion's not high on the list of candidates.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Loved: Many cool character options and fun Adventure Paths.
Hated: Complexity of prepping and GMing a game, trap options, optimization and power gaming, rocket tag, and linear fighters/quadratic wizards.
Wanted: Nothing, it already has more options than a person could ever use in a lifetime.
Will Miss: Flexibility. It looks like PF2, while much easier to run, will not quite have the flexibility of PF1 (such as with multiclassing).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Loved: Customizing. I haven't played many characters, but I love making them - seeing how I could get a concept to work, coming up with character ideas just by seeing an archetype description, making each one different from each other.
Hated: Useless options. There are a LOT of feats that are just not worth taking, even for fluff reasons, because they are super weak or super situational. Like all the underwater feats.
Will Miss: Customization. I LIKE all the options to make different characters. (My group just finished a Pathfinder campaign and the next one is 5e. I really like the group so I decided to stay in, but there is almost no way to make an actual character concept in 5e. Luckily the GM let me use a homebrew class and homebrew background so I feel a little more like what my character is distinct.)
Loved: Options. There was almost always a way to make a character fitting a specific concept. It might require an archetype, alternate race/class features, or PC, but it could almost always be found.
Wanted: A better crafting and magic item creation system. Not some of the home-rule ones or third party, since the games I'm in pretty much stich by the book. By better I mean easy to understand, but not so much a gimme on many things (magic items) mostly. The alternate rules introduced were interesting, but added too much complication to the process.
Also wanted, a system somewhere between the existing and the old 2e/3e type where it was a major undertaking to identify magic items.
Hated/Disliked: Some of the races are too mutable. I've had games where most characters are AAsimars, for example, because they can choose from all the different types and have wholly different bonus stats plus the other racial abilities. If a race or two is so common for those reasons, it's probably not balanced.
Miss: Not sure. Since it'll be a while before I get into a PF2 game, it will be a while before I have a chance to miss anything.
Player side, I want the game to flow faster without tripping over it's own rules.
DM side, I want the game to prep faster without tripping over it's own rules.
All without any loss of versatility in being able to tell the stories we want to tell!
And a pony!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Like a real pony, or one of the strangely enjoyable "My Little Ponies" from TV?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'll keep playing PF1 for many years to come. Sandy Petersen's "Pathfinder Cthulhu" is veeery good!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll keep playing PF1 for many years to come. Sandy Petersen's "Pathfinder Cthulhu" is veeery good!
It really, really is.
Loved: The huge amount of options with archetypes, classes, and prestige classes. There was a huge amount of nonsense you *could* do for your character, even if it was terrible gameplay-wise. Like taking a level in 20 different classes.
Wanted: A theurge that doesn't suck. More unique prestige classes would have been nice - we got a lot that were kind of bland, or just alignment-swapped versions of each-other (diabolist and the other obedience PRCs)
Hated: High level play got really stale and rocket-taggy. The summoner class was absolutely horrendous to deal with as a DM, and the unchained version came out a bit too late for me. It didn't help that when trying to teach new players the game, they were always drawn to either Magus, Druid, or Summoner which are probably the 3 most complicated classes in the game. Full-round attacks also sucked, especially when you have a dual wielder that gets 7 attacks on a full-attack and 1 on a standard attack. Traits were either useless, or worse, so powerful that they were no-brainer options. And there's plenty of other minor things that have been discussed to death.
Miss: I'll probably miss magus the most. That class in the hands of a skilled player was really something to behold. I know the action economy in PF2 might make this possible without a dedicated class, but everything just came together so well for the PF1 magus.