| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bards were 6-level spellcasters in 1e and have become 9-level in 2e. Paladins were 4-level in 1e and now don’t get spells at all (but always start out with at least one Focus Spell).
I like the new bard, and I recently converted my 1e warpriest (a 6-level spellcasting class) into a Liberator. I was a little worried about losing true spellcasting but the PCs focus was always on his weapon damage anyway. The spells were just to augment him; or for utility. So I gave him all the domain Focus Spells and Mercy/Liberating Step feats and I’m pretty happy with the result. He can’t cast real spells but he has plenty of flavorful magic options and is great with his weapon.
Anyway, my point is that I’m not losing sleep over not having partial spellcasters in 2e but I’m wondering if we ever will get them. Will it just be 9-level or bust? You’re either a full spellcaster or your only option is to have Focus Spells if you want to be somewhat, but not completely, magical.
What do you guys think?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think we will ever get new spell lists, honestly, which makes partial casters questionable.
However, I think it's entirely possible we might see a base class that gets the spellcasting progression that multiclass archetypes currently grant.
Champions and Monks (with focus spells but no real spellcasting) seem to be the middle ground between spellcasters and non-spellcasters in this edition. That suggests that, if we want to have a Magus class, it would have to be built as a lightly armored martial class with arcane focus spells but no real spellcasting unless they select appropriate multiclassing feats.
There are a lot of things about how a PF2 Magus would work that I have no idea about the likely mechanics of. Focus is one of them, definitely.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I could see Paizo releasing a class that gets restricted spellcasting progression kind of like multiclass feats allow.
But a class built around focus, either with a way to break the 3 focus cap or a way to quickly regenerate focus, could give us a sort of middleground too.
There's a lot of "partial caster" space that can be covered by Multiclassing Sorcerer.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
PF1 had classes with 6-level casting off of 9th level lists (warpriest and hunter come to mind) so there's no reason you couldn't just do delayed progression for a class.
There's a lot of "partial caster" space that can be covered by Multiclassing Sorcerer.
Disagree strongly. Multiclassing as a spellcaster gives you a bit of flavor in a very small number of 1/day actions that aren't particularly level appropriate by the time you get them. Most classes have to sacrifice a fair few useful or even signature feats to get even that much.
Towards the mid teens, a multiclass spellcaster has a passable (but still very small) array of stuff, but it still doesn't compare to 1e partial casters, and will be very far behind on DCs and attack rolls unless you game it a bit (Bards and occult sorcerer being the best example, same stat, same training)
Personally so far with character building I've been far more comfortable multiclassing spellcasters than martial characters- with martials I already feel feat starved, there are multiple ones I want to have at several levels. With spellcasters I don't care about their feats so much, and don't mind sacrificing them for more spellcasting.
There's a lot of "partial caster" space that can be covered by Multiclassing Sorcerer.
Eh, the spell caster multiclass, at least in low levels, seems more like the 4 level casters than the 6. You have a couple spells a day and use magic items better, but a lot of your focus is going to be fighting prowess (for martial characters) due to limited slots. But a class that gets progression on par with multicast casters and gets an expanded focus pool with unique powers and maybe a couple class cantrips would get the feel right IMO.
It seems to me that a magus-like PF2 character should be built the other way round - start as a wizard or sorcerer, then add in fighting proficiencies by multiclassing as a fighter or other martial. You might even be able to pull it off without multiclassing by taking elven weapon proficiencies, say.
Getting things back on topic from the "copied 5E" shenanigans going on, there is also the multiclass archetype way of combining things, where you can get up to 6th level spells with Expert spellcasting by investing 3 feats (as well as some skill training).
Granted, you might be able to do something better for your own class with those 3 feats, but the option to be the 6th level spellcasting or what have you is still there if you want more spellcasting, and it's honestly not a bad idea depending on what you multiclass into.
But you're limited to 3 focus points max. Sure you can refocus after an encounter. But still, if your casting relies entirely on focus you won't be casting that many spells.
3 focus points is plenty.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
3 focus points is plenty.
3 focus isn't bad, but the limits on the refocus action means even with three you still only get to cycle one point per combat, which kind of drags the idea a bit.
A focus spell oriented class would definitely need a way around that earlier than 12.
Generally, I think it'll be common that if you have time for a 10 minute break, you have time for a 30 minute break.
In my games we tend toward the side of not having 10 minutes available to do anything but progressing to the objective. It's hard for us to justify kicking back when we've gotta save the prince, or defeat the orc raid on the town.
I hazard that a focus cap of 4 would better suit my table. So, one per combat between rests on a fairly aggressive day.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Generally, I think it'll be common that if you have time for a 10 minute break, you have time for a 30 minute break.
In my games we tend toward the side of not having 10 minutes available to do anything but progressing to the objective. It's hard for us to justify kicking back when we've gotta save the prince, or defeat the orc raid on the town.
I hazard that a focus cap of 4 would better suit my table. So, one per combat between rests on a fairly aggressive day.
The Refocus activity has this requirement:
You have a focus pool, and you have spent at least 1 Focus Point since you last regained any Focus Points.
So you can't regain three points in a row - you need the feats that let you recover more at a time to do that.
Generally, I think it'll be common that if you have time for a 10 minute break, you have time for a 30 minute break.
In my games we tend toward the side of not having 10 minutes available to do anything but progressing to the objective. It's hard for us to justify kicking back when we've gotta save the prince, or defeat the orc raid on the town.
I hazard that a focus cap of 4 would better suit my table. So, one per combat between rests on a fairly aggressive day.
The Refocus activity has this requirement:
You have a focus pool, and you have spent at least 1 Focus Point since you last regained any Focus Points.So you can't regain three points in a row - you need the feats that let you recover more at a time to do that.
Thanks, I completely forgot about that.
Generally, I think it'll be common that if you have time for a 10 minute break, you have time for a 30 minute break.
In my games we tend toward the side of not having 10 minutes available to do anything but progressing to the objective. It's hard for us to justify kicking back when we've gotta save the prince, or defeat the orc raid on the town.
I hazard that a focus cap of 4 would better suit my table. So, one per combat between rests on a fairly aggressive day.
The Refocus activity has this requirement:
You have a focus pool, and you have spent at least 1 Focus Point since you last regained any Focus Points.So you can't regain three points in a row - you need the feats that let you recover more at a time to do that.
Excellent catch. I completely missed the logical implications on that.
Multiclass archetypes are where the 'middle ground' resides now.
I feel like there is room for "less casty than casters but more than martials, less martial than martials but more than casters" in a class. It just requires a little bit of tightrope walking, since you don't want to completely obsolete the multiclass way of doing the same thing. We're probably going to clear out the classes which are easiest to do (i.e. full casters and non-casters) before we do any of those.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Right now the Bard and (especially) Warpriest Cleric are kind of middlegrounds, even if they hew a lot closer to the caster side of things.
Bard has fewest spells compared to Cleric (with Divine Font), Sorcerer, and (especially, with feats) Wizard and the least directly useful focus spells, but better weapons/armor, ability to get critical specialization on weapons, better saves/perception, and combat buffing compositions.
Warpriest still has Divine Font, and so drops down a proficiency in spellcasting in return for better armor, better use of their deity weapon, and a better save.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It seems like the variables we can tweak are:
- Saves
- HP
- Weapon/Armor Proficiency
- Spellcasting Proficiency
- Number of Spell Slots, and how fast they advance
Currently at the Martial extreme everybody gets at least MME saves with barbs, rogues, monks, and rangers getting LME, with M/M proficiency in armor/weapons and fighters, monks, and champions getting L/M, M/L, and M/L (alchemists are E/M for weapons/armor). At the casty extreme we get MEE for saves and E/E for weapons/armor.
A maximally multiclassed fighter/wizard gets L/M/M weapons/armor/casting, MME saves, 10 HP/level, and 2 spells/level up to 8th at the cost of 5 feats. A wizard/fighter gets E martial weapons, E unarmored proficiency, 6 HP/level and L spells with MEE saves and 4 spells/level up to 10th for 2 feats. So a hypothetical arcane gish class needs to fit somewhere between those.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As several people here know, my money has been on Magus being Focus based if it comes back.
I think all you'd need to deal with the limited pool of Focus points is A) give Magus class cantrips like Bard has and B) have a limited method of refocusing in combat, a la Tome of Battle.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's still Paizo. Every possible way to build a character will exist eventually.
It's still Paizo. Every possible way to build a character will exist eventually.
I don't expect to see it until the sun begins to set on second edition but I am already PUMPED for the 2e Oozemorph.
There definitely will be a middle ground, and there definitely will not be a middle ground.
It's still Paizo. Every possible way to build a character will exist eventually.
Possible and usable are 2 different things in the community.
Did you look at multiclassing cleric and fighter at all to try to get the same feel of warpriest or did it just not work?Bards were 6-level spellcasters in 1e and have become 9-level in 2e. Paladins were 4-level in 1e and now don’t get spells at all (but always start out with at least one Focus Spell).
I like the new bard, and I recently converted my 1e warpriest (a 6-level spellcasting class) into a Liberator. I was a little worried about losing true spellcasting but the PCs focus was always on his weapon damage anyway. The spells were just to augment him; or for utility. So I gave him all the domain Focus Spells and Mercy/Liberating Step feats and I’m pretty happy with the result. He can’t cast real spells but he has plenty of flavorful magic options and is great with his weapon.
Anyway, my point is that I’m not losing sleep over not having partial spellcasters in 2e but I’m wondering if we ever will get them. Will it just be 9-level or bust? You’re either a full spellcaster or your only option is to have Focus Spells if you want to be somewhat, but not completely, magical.
What do you guys think?
I considered Cleric with fighter multi class, but I still couldn’t get good enough weapon proficiency, and would be too spell-focused. Fighter with cleric multiclass would work though. I’d have more spells, but less thematic Focus spells (domain only through cleric feat, instead of Domain, Mercy, and Liberating Step with Champion). maybe the best option would be Champion with a select few cleric multi class feats...
Since Spells per Day tables are class specific, I could definitely see one with less slots per day, but I’m not sure I could see one with slower spell level progression. I don’t know why, but it just doesn’t sit right with the paradigm of 2e spells. But Paizo has a tendency to manipulate their own game design in unique ways as the life of a game progresses.
I also like the idea of a focus-based class. Such a class could have an ability to restore focus as an ability measured in Actions. Concentrate for two actions to get a focus point back; for example. That would let you refill easily between combat, and even give you options in long fights. That would change the feel of focus significantly, but, again, totally within Paizo’s possibilities.
I think you've got it.
The best way to make a semi-spellcaster melee character appears to be to start with a martial class and add a spellcasting multiclass to give just a dash of spellcasting goodness. Which was all that 4-level casters really had anyway.
I've been looking at building an elven fighter-magic-user by taking wizard as main class and tossing in some martial feats and elven weapon training. But if that seems too lackluster, perhaps the otehr way round would be more effective: fighter with wiz or sorc multiclassing.
I think you've got it.
The best way to make a semi-spellcaster melee character appears to be to start with a martial class and add a spellcasting multiclass to give just a dash of spellcasting goodness. Which was all that 4-level casters really had anyway.
I've been looking at building an elven fighter-magic-user by taking wizard as main class and tossing in some martial feats and elven weapon training. But if that seems too lackluster, perhaps the otehr way round would be more effective: fighter with wiz or sorc multiclassing.
It seems to me like multiclassing to martial classes for “be good at weapons” doesn’t seem to work very well. You just can’t get a very good proficiency at high levels.
Starting with fighter as your base class is nice because your weapon/armor proficiency scales no matter where you put your feats. And fighters get those bonus “flexible” feats as a baseline class feature eventually, so you’re even getting back some of the class feats you’ve sacrificng by multiclassing! But yes.... your spells won’t be nearly as good