Advanced Player's Guide playtest announced for October!


Paizo Products

101 to 150 of 295 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

swoosh wrote:

Surprised at the class picks.

Not that they're bad or Paizo can't make them interesting, but they're easily some of the most redundant options when it comes to PF2 core's design space.

How's this:

Oracle... Hardly redundant at all, unless you start thinking Casting off same tradition list is redundant. Spontaneous Divine Caster, totally divergent from Deific concerns, with unique Curse mechanic. "But Divine Sorcerors!" you say? Glad you asked, Divine Sorcerors are all highly attuned to emulating Aligned Outsiders... or Undead. The only real intersection with Oracle is Undead/Bones, Life doubling down on pure healing even in Positive Elemental direction, and the rest diverging from Divine tradition in ways that might be similar to some Cleric Domains, but not Divine Sorceor Bloodlines. I might say if they DIDN'T do Oracle right away, people would be compelled to view Divine Sorceror as unsatisfactorally fulfilling this niche, and so given Oracle was also #1 most requested Class it's not a surprise. (Paizo actually stated the only reason they didn't include Oracles in Core was they wanted to include Alchemists) Oracle was one of first "unique" classes in Pathfinder, and Paizo also established unique world role specifically tying in with the Class... So if you are against Oracle in APG... You are against Pathfinder. ;-)

Witch... I know what you're thinking, this could be done with Wizard/Sorceror with Druid MC (or Cleric w/ Nature Domains), or even just Sorceror with Crossblooded spell access, maybe a Primal Gnome Cantrip Heritage to boot. I know, because that's what I thought too. There's even a Feat to turn Familiar into Bonded Object. Really, I absolutely agree... But... I am not SURPRISED. Because Witch is also one of the most popular and oldest non Core Pathfinder classes, similar to Oracle in defining Pathfinder as unique from D&D, Pathfinder just has a Witch. And from other end of things, it's just a classic trope that is deeper than D&Disms and people like it being specifically manifested. Certainly you can say it's redundant with what you can reasonably do just in Core, but when you have a solid trope that is very popularly demanded, that's actually a pretty good class to anchor your first expansion book on.

Investigator... What ARE they doing that a Rogue with Alchemist MC can't do? Okay, but wait, first ask yourself why Paizo put Alchemist in Core to begin with. Because they wanted it built into Core mechanical assumptions, so it works well with everything else. Part of that might also include other Classes tying into Alchemy, right? Okay. Also consider their upcoming AP, apparently in Absalom and perfect for Investigator skill-sy abilities. Sure, but Rogue does skill-sy, right? Yeah, but if they are going to introduce Peak Skill-sy mechanics, isn't it better to do so for The Peak Skill-sy Class rather than for Rogue and then later have to out-do themselves when they get around to Investigator? Or to say it another way, if they were EVER going to DO Investigator, and not abandon skill-sy niche to Rogue (who does have many other things going on), this was good time to introduce Investigator. And establish how it and Rogues' vying takes on skill-sy niche compete and coexist. Not so shabby a move, if I do say...

Swashbuckler... Let me get straight to the chase: Lots of people might think this isn't even Class material in the first place. From where they stand, they're probably right. But maybe this depends on what Paizo actually plans to do with Swashbuckler. We've had lots of hints that anything that is merely weapon or combat-style specific doesn't even need to be in a Class for the most part, they already have Archetypes for that, and apparently Duelist Archetype will cover that combat style in APG. So they have some other plan, obviously. I can't say what that is, but clearly it will revolve around the lucky, charismatic, improbably flashy/tricky combatant trope and mechanics. Which to me smells like it will be 100% non-magical yet pushing the edges in ways other martials won't tend to. The other thing is regarding those weapon style Archetypes, is it a stretch a Swashbuckler would take the Dueling Archetype? Maybe this even involves some synergy between Class and Archetypes, and developing how such synergies work might be a good idea when introducing 60 Archetypes to the game. And I might guess a Investigator-appropriate AP would also be a Swashbuckler-appropriate AP, so why miss that opportunity?


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Mark Moreland wrote:
Joana wrote:
Rysky wrote:
It'd probably be Freiya if I have to guess, but then I'm not happy since design wise I love her, but then I love all of them.
They specifically said Feiya was safe, so that leave Quinn, Lirianne, and Alahazra and her huge hat.
What would you say if I told you that we've already illustrated the new iconic and you've all seen them? And no, we're not updating an existing NPC to iconic status.

...Damiel is the new iconic Investigator? :P


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Mark Moreland wrote:
Joana wrote:
Rysky wrote:
It'd probably be Freiya if I have to guess, but then I'm not happy since design wise I love her, but then I love all of them.
They specifically said Feiya was safe, so that leave Quinn, Lirianne, and Alahazra and her huge hat.
What would you say if I told you that we've already illustrated the new iconic and you've all seen them?

I would say that i have a terrible memory and you should remind us who we’ve already seen. : )


Mark Moreland wrote:
Joana wrote:
Rysky wrote:
It'd probably be Freiya if I have to guess, but then I'm not happy since design wise I love her, but then I love all of them.
They specifically said Feiya was safe, so that leave Quinn, Lirianne, and Alahazra and her huge hat.
What would you say if I told you that we've already illustrated the new iconic and you've all seen them? And no, we're not updating an existing NPC to iconic status.

Should I be hunting through the rulebook or the world guide blog posts?


10 people marked this as a favorite.
MaxAstro wrote:
Mark Moreland wrote:
Joana wrote:
Rysky wrote:
It'd probably be Freiya if I have to guess, but then I'm not happy since design wise I love her, but then I love all of them.
They specifically said Feiya was safe, so that leave Quinn, Lirianne, and Alahazra and her huge hat.
What would you say if I told you that we've already illustrated the new iconic and you've all seen them? And no, we're not updating an existing NPC to iconic status.
...Damiel is the new iconic Investigator? :P

I got you covered.

https://imgur.com/kH5VgWE

You guys can make that check out to "Ruzza."


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Can I just say "do it with a sorcerer" is an argument I hate. Sorcerer is a flavor that is a strong spice- it is literally "you have magic blood, from whence flows magical powers" the class, which is not something you can take away from the sorcerer while preserving the class's identity.

One shouldn't need special blood to access divine power from a source which is not a deity, any more than one should need special blood to spontaneously cast occult spells. Special blood is a fine thing to have on a character if that's what you want, but it's not something we need smuggle in with different, unrelated concepts.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
MaxAstro wrote:
Mark Moreland wrote:
What would you say if I told you that we've already illustrated the new iconic and you've all seen them? And no, we're not updating an existing NPC to iconic status.
...Damiel is the new iconic Investigator? :P

Could be something like that sample Iruxi, whom we've 'seen' on the blog, becomes an Iconic.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Ruzza wrote:
MaxAstro wrote:
Mark Moreland wrote:
Joana wrote:
Rysky wrote:
It'd probably be Freiya if I have to guess, but then I'm not happy since design wise I love her, but then I love all of them.
They specifically said Feiya was safe, so that leave Quinn, Lirianne, and Alahazra and her huge hat.
What would you say if I told you that we've already illustrated the new iconic and you've all seen them? And no, we're not updating an existing NPC to iconic status.
...Damiel is the new iconic Investigator? :P

I got you covered.

https://imgur.com/kH5VgWE

You guys can make that check out to "Ruzza."

Take all of my internets. <3


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

By the way... wasn't "Paizo surely will not oversaturate the new edition with fast releases of new splatbooks" one of the main arguments how this new edition would be super-duper newbie friendly?

I mean, it's just one new "essential" splatbook at this point, but having it announced already in the same week as the new edition launches kinda makes me wonder how the pacing over the next few years for more new hardcover splatbooks will look. Not that I would personally have a problem with that, but given the attitudes I encountered during the playtest, I wonder how other people see this aspect of such a fast announcement?


OCEANSHIELDWOLPF 2.0 wrote:
I predict Lirianne gets the chop, with the Retconhammer, in the Designpit.

Who the hell is Lirianne? I meant Jirelle. Apologies to Lirianne, and Jirelle.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
magnuskn wrote:

By the way... wasn't "Paizo surely will not oversaturate the new edition with fast releases of new splatbooks" one of the main arguments how this new edition would be super-duper newbie friendly?

I mean, it's just one new "essential" splatbook at this point, but having it announced already in the same week as the new edition launches kinda makes me wonder how the pacing over the next few years for more new hardcover splatbooks will look. Not that I would personally have a problem with that, but given the attitudes I encountered during the playtest, I wonder how other people see this aspect of such a fast announcement?

A lot of people basically called this one, actually. It follows very closely the schedule by which the original APG came out, with a release roughly one year after the original game. Well before GenCon I saw several posts along the lines of "the developers have been saying old classes will return fairly soon, I bet a new class book gets announced at GenCon".

Also, I don't think one year after the original game is really very "fast" as far as bringing in significant new content.

It is additionally interesting to see what the specific content is: Fewer classes than the original APG, but a lot of archetypes and ancestries. Archetypes and ancestries add a great depth of customization possibilities, but they are mechanically lean and don't tend to massively increase the complexity of the game like new classes do. That says to me that Paizo is focusing on widening the breadth of character concepts available without flooding out too many class options too fast. Even counting Alchemist now being a base class, post-APG PF2e will have fewer classes than post-APG PF1e.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

As someone who introduced PF2 to new players, they've been laser focused this week on any information about the game. The fact that people who never picked up a die a year ago are now gossiping about the APG seems to stand to me as a "strike while the iron is hot" situation. People are watching PF2, so Paizo is making sure that interest stays on them.

And a big book that we all expect coming out in a year is quite a bit different from the smaller releases that we'd see every month.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
magnuskn wrote:

By the way... wasn't "Paizo surely will not oversaturate the new edition with fast releases of new splatbooks" one of the main arguments how this new edition would be super-duper newbie friendly?

I mean, it's just one new "essential" splatbook at this point, but having it announced already in the same week as the new edition launches kinda makes me wonder how the pacing over the next few years for more new hardcover splatbooks will look. Not that I would personally have a problem with that, but given the attitudes I encountered during the playtest, I wonder how other people see this aspect of such a fast announcement?

It's being announced this early because they're playtesting it. It'll be a full year before the book comes out proper.

That being said, the idea that there would be "fewer splatbooks" was always a misnomer. What's really going on is that the campaign setting and player companion books are being consolidated into the World Guides; there will be fewer books, yes, but we can still expect about as much total content as in PF1. Something I'm happy with given that being drowned in options and ideas is one of the things I like about Pathfinder.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
magnuskn wrote:

By the way... wasn't "Paizo surely will not oversaturate the new edition with fast releases of new splatbooks" one of the main arguments how this new edition would be super-duper newbie friendly?

I mean, it's just one new "essential" splatbook at this point, but having it announced already in the same week as the new edition launches kinda makes me wonder how the pacing over the next few years for more new hardcover splatbooks will look. Not that I would personally have a problem with that, but given the attitudes I encountered during the playtest, I wonder how other people see this aspect of such a fast announcement?

Where else are they going to announce the playtest that needs to happen in a few months for the book to come out in time for the next GenCon where it's going to get more attention than "the current GenCon"?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Mark Moreland wrote:
Joana wrote:
They specifically said Feiya was safe, so that leave Quinn, Lirianne, and Alahazra and her huge hat.
What would you say if I told you that we've already illustrated the new iconic and you've all seen them? And no, we're not updating an existing NPC to iconic status.

Oooooh... Well, I already had theory Paizo won't ever do Gunslinger, but will just fold it into Swashbuckler since weapon-specific stuff can mostly dwell in Archetypes like Duelist, so replacing the Swashbuckler with the Gunslinger Iconic would make sense if they both are being merged into same class... There's only room for one! (and she can swap weapons as needed per scenario, since Gun Archetype is just as accessible as Duelist Archetype)

Then I noticed you responded to Joana, who mistakenly stated Lirianne was candidate for replacing, when Lirianne is actually the Gunslinger and Jirelle is the Swashbuckler who is the actual candidate for replacement, i.e. the exact opposite, so you couldn't resist!

Also, Lirianne like Jirelle is Half-Elf, so this isn't reducing Half-Elf representation... So I'd say Lirianne as new Swashbuckler is good bet!

EDIT: Swashbuckler really ALSO being vehicle for Gunslinger makes sense given Guns were poster child for Archetypes, Alchemist was put into Core so it would be base assumption that could be built off of, so why shouldn't we expect a Gun Archetype and Guns built off Alchemy, that might even synergize with Swashbuckler somehow....??? Thoughts, just cheap thoughts...


Quandary wrote:
Oracle was one of first "unique" classes in Pathfinder, and Paizo also established unique world role specifically tying in with the Class... So if you are against Oracle in APG... You are against Pathfinder. ;-)

An absurd statement, but also beyond the scope of this thread so I'll let it slide.

In any case, this has nothing to do with how great the Oracle supposedly is and more that mechanically the PF1 Oracle was the Cleric's equivalent of the Sorcerer, only with a better version of bloodlines and that means that unless they take the class in a completely new direction, there's likely going to be a lot of mechanical overlap between a divine sorc and an oracle.

Again, it's not that these classes are bad per se or don't deserve to be ported over. It's that as of right now PF2 already has spontaneous divine casting, mobile combatants that can fight with one handed weapons and roguish alchemists. One of the groups I'm in right now literally has all three of those things.

So when PF2 is announcing its first new classes beyond core, it's a little underwhelming for them to be releasing more of what we can already do instead of working on enabling concepts completely beyond the scope of the game as written right now.

That doesn't mean you can't like the oracle. It doesn't mean that PF2's oracle or swashbuckler will be bad, I assume they won't be. It just means I wish they did more with what they had.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Quandary wrote:
Mark Moreland wrote:
Joana wrote:
They specifically said Feiya was safe, so that leave Quinn, Lirianne, and Alahazra and her huge hat.
What would you say if I told you that we've already illustrated the new iconic and you've all seen them? And no, we're not updating an existing NPC to iconic status.

Oooooh... Well, I already had theory Paizo won't ever do Gunslinger, but will just fold it into Swashbuckler since weapon-specific stuff can mostly dwell in Archetypes like Duelist, so replacing the Swashbuckler with the Gunslinger Iconic would make sense if they both are being merged into same class... There's only room for one! (and they can swap weapons as needed per scenario)

Then I noticed you responded to Joana, who mistakenly stated Lirianne was candidate for replacing, when Lirianne is actually the Gunslinger and Jirelle is the Swashbuckler who is the actual candidate for replacement, i.e. the exact opposite, so you couldn't resist!
Also, Lirianne like Jirelle is Half-Elf, so this isn't reducing Half-Elf representation... So I'd say Lirianne as new Swashbuckler is good bet!

I still like my idea of it being Damiel, but I have to admit this is far more likely.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Mark Moreland wrote:
Joana wrote:
Rysky wrote:
It'd probably be Freiya if I have to guess, but then I'm not happy since design wise I love her, but then I love all of them.
They specifically said Feiya was safe, so that leave Quinn, Lirianne, and Alahazra and her huge hat.
What would you say if I told you that we've already illustrated the new iconic and you've all seen them? And no, we're not updating an existing NPC to iconic status.

Is the new iconic the friends we made along the way?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
PossibleCabbage wrote:
magnuskn wrote:

By the way... wasn't "Paizo surely will not oversaturate the new edition with fast releases of new splatbooks" one of the main arguments how this new edition would be super-duper newbie friendly?

I mean, it's just one new "essential" splatbook at this point, but having it announced already in the same week as the new edition launches kinda makes me wonder how the pacing over the next few years for more new hardcover splatbooks will look. Not that I would personally have a problem with that, but given the attitudes I encountered during the playtest, I wonder how other people see this aspect of such a fast announcement?

Where else are they going to announce the playtest that needs to happen in a few months for the book to come out in time for the next GenCon where it's going to get more attention than "the current GenCon"?

Not exactly the question I was asking. Announcing the APG right now and at GenCon makes all the sense in the world.


9 people marked this as a favorite.

What people want the splat books to come out slowly?!?! screw that give them all to me now!


7 people marked this as a favorite.

I mean if the difference between the divine sorcerer and the oracle is exactly the same as the relationship between the occult sorcerer and the bard, is that bad?

Like the bard gets, compared to the occult sorcerer-
- More HP
- Better Armor/Weapon Proficiencies
- Better saves
- Fewer Spells known and fewer slots
- A Unique mechanic (compositions) instead of bloodlines.

If we swap "compositions" for revelations, and add the curse in there we have a class every bit as worthy of existing as the bard.

Hell, just run the same program for arcane/primal too- so we have a d8 class with relevant armor/weapon proficiencies, LEE saves, fewer spells, and a couple of unique mechanics for every list. We could call them, I don't know, Magus and Shaman.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Weird opinion probably but I would kinda really love for PF2's spontaneous arcane caster to be based on the Silksworn Occultist.


swoosh wrote:
Quandary wrote:
Oracle was one of first "unique" classes in Pathfinder, and Paizo also established unique world role specifically tying in with the Class... So if you are against Oracle in APG... You are against Pathfinder. ;-)
An absurd statement, but also beyond the scope of this thread so I'll let it slide.

I thank you, because nothing is worse than aiming at absurdity and nobody picking it up.

Quote:
In any case, this has nothing to do with how great the Oracle supposedly is and more that mechanically the PF1 Oracle was the Cleric's equivalent of the Sorcerer, only with a better version of bloodlines and that means that unless they take the class in a completely new direction, there's likely going to be a lot of mechanical overlap between a divine sorc and an oracle.

Right now I am worrying about whether I can properly detect feigned absurdity or not, because that was exactly the essence of what I discussed re: Oracle. Oracle Mysteries and Divine Sorceror Bloodlines are pointed in almost entirely opposite directions, except for the Bones/Undead overlap which I noted... Mysteries pointing away from core Divine themes, and Divine Bloodlines all defined by explicitly divine creatures (Angels, Demons) and no indication anything would change that because the pattern is clear and a non-divine creature would not be valid source of Divine casting Bloodline, and Mysteries have never treated Divine Creatures as topic, right? So Undead/Bones is really the only thematic overlap between them, everything else is really unique to either side. Never mind that I don't see why Paizo necessarily need stick to "plain vanilla spontaneous casting" with 2E Oracle, there's lots of room for minor but substantial variations like Shaman did with Prepared Casting, even within Sorceror there is variations dependent on tradition (Arcane VS Primal VS Occult VS Divine Evolution) which seem significant to play style, so ignoring all of that to just claim "spontaneous divine is all the same" doesn't really feel plausible IMHO.

The rest of your reponse reads like you feel I was defending these from personal preference... Far from it, when I disparaged by them by citing mechanical overlap of all of them but Oracle, I really meant it. I was just approaching it from what should be surprising about Paizo's choices from Paizo's perspective, not my personal preferences, or even 'neutral mechanical analysis', because other things actually matter for a publishing company especially for very first expansion book. If I thought my preferences were relevant to the topic, I would be screaming SHAMAN SHAMAN SHAMAN non-stop... Did I say Shaman?

At a basic level, I don't think repeating the APG classes in APG 2E should be a surprise... Which itself covers Witch and Oracle. Alchemist was done in Core, but doing an Alchemy adjacent class with Investigator builds on that, which is point of having Alchemy in Core to build on. I speculated on Gunslinger/Swashbuckler up-thread, but suffice it to say if Alchemist was in Core so they could build on it, Guns being in APG with Archetype would be perfect way to build on it, and Swashbuckler may very well be just as much a vehicle for Gunslinger as for Duelist trope (which is Archetype distinct from Swashbuckler). Cavalier and Inquisitor are missing, but Cavalier was their cited example of something they will do with Archetypes (referencing Mounted combat AFAIK, I think teamwork/martial buffer with Order/Challenge could be class, but I digress) and I think Inquisitor falls in similar territory. They dumped Summoner, which is a class I've heard them suggesting they have plans for... Maybe they're not ready, and really it has absolutely no flavor unlike everything else they chose, it's literally just a class built around Summoning. In fact, it's fair to say including Summoner in APG was a mistake because they ended up Errata'ing it to hell with Unchained Summoner, so maybe they are trying to avoid that bad luck.

Anyhow, I do think you overlooked my point about Mystery / Divine (Creature) Bloodline divergence which I think is pretty key to Oracle... Although the low brow "Redoing 1E APG as much as possible can't go wrong" also works as rationale. Sorry if you didn't get my tone, I really was just having fun and spinning ideas around, many of which popped into my head as I was writing.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Dr. Johnny Fever wrote:
I was hoping magus and inquisitor would be two of the first to return, but at least Oracle is getting brought back quick

Inquisitor could be a new clerical doctrine, and Magus can be done with multiclassing.

The Oracle! Yay!
I wonder about the other classes, though. I thought they could be easily done as class archetypes. Do we need them as classes standing on their own?


Rarities would be nice, or regional rarities if they want to really get into it.

I already write up rarity lists for most fantasy games I run so having some of that built into the system would be nice.

(as it is I use two uncommon and one rare as a guideline for a group, the rare takes an uncommon slot if taken and people choosing those races must put in proportionally more effort to know their race. This is to counter "human in a cool costume" effect)


The Gleeful Grognard wrote:

Rarities would be nice, or regional rarities if they want to really get into it.

I already write up rarity lists for most fantasy games I run so having some of that built into the system would be nice.

(as it is I use two uncommon and one rare as a guideline for a group, the rare takes an uncommon slot if taken and people choosing those races must put in proportionally more effort to know their race. This is to counter "human in a cool costume" effect)

I like your take, really the Core Rarity system feels... off, I mean tons of gonzo mosnter languages on "always Common access" yet major imperial/trader languages like Kelesh and Qadiran are tightly regional/ethnic-specific. Or why is Orcish on Common access list, but Gnoll isn't when they're in Garund and Avistan? It just feels like it runs agaisnt claim Common list is based on commonality in Inner Sea countries, and it's more about "spy on / negotiate with vanilla D&D monsters" which ignores easiest way to learn language is to get along with people, not kill them.

I mean, it would be cool if for GMG they did a "more immersive language system" including region-specific lists (so, not limited to just majority human ethnicity, but giving gist of reasonable language access in that region, even reducing 'universal' inner sea Common list in favor of expanded yet distinct region lists, or even just clearly carving out Common assumption so people can play with it or without it. I think some of new megaadventures (1/3 AP) could even work using variant rules like that. ....?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Moreland wrote:
Joana wrote:
Rysky wrote:
It'd probably be Freiya if I have to guess, but then I'm not happy since design wise I love her, but then I love all of them.
They specifically said Feiya was safe, so that leave Quinn, Lirianne, and Alahazra and her huge hat.
What would you say if I told you that we've already illustrated the new iconic and you've all seen them? And no, we're not updating an existing NPC to iconic status.

So which kobold have we seen before will become the new iconic?


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Yes... who?


I highly doubt we'll see Paizo break their "Core Only" rule for iconics, so I'd put my money on the replacment iconic being a Goblin


11 people marked this as a favorite.
lakobie wrote:
I highly doubt we'll see Paizo break their "Core Only" rule for iconics, so I'd put my money on the replacment iconic being a Goblin

What I'm hearing is that kobolds should be core.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Aldarc wrote:
lakobie wrote:
I highly doubt we'll see Paizo break their "Core Only" rule for iconics, so I'd put my money on the replacment iconic being a Goblin
What I'm hearing is that kobolds should be core.

You sir are a very wise raccoon.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Sorry, Core is taken by Goblin promising to be on best behavior. Want to audition for "We Be Small Monstrous Race"? I hear they have an opening.


That's the problem they couldn't get the Kobolds to promise to be on best behavior. nor could they get them to focus for more then 10 seconds at a time.


Quandary wrote:

I like your take, really the Core Rarity system feels... off, I mean tons of gonzo mosnter languages on "always Common access" yet major imperial/trader languages like Kelesh and Qadiran are tightly regional/ethnic-specific. Or why is Orcish on Common access list, but Gnoll isn't when they're in Garund and Avistan? It just feels like it runs agaisnt claim Common list is based on commonality in Inner Sea countries, and it's more about "spy on / negotiate with vanilla D&D monsters" which ignores easiest way to learn language is to get along with people, not kill them.

I mean, it would be cool if for GMG they did a "more immersive language system" including region-specific lists (so, not limited to just majority human ethnicity, but giving gist of reasonable language access in that region, even reducing 'universal' inner sea Common list in favor of expanded yet distinct region lists, or even just clearly carving out Common assumption so people can play with it or without it. I think some of new megaadventures (1/3 AP) could even work using variant rules like that. ....?

Personally I will always adjust it per region (or for the setting) but I don't deal with PFS so it impacts me less.

I like the idea of baking it isn't the system and I am not sure how they would best be able to handle it with their page limits. My ideal probably would have had each major region have common and uncommon listed in it for races and languages rather than at the start of the book, but then it becomes a little more complex for new players and they are probably the people who need the most help.

I am glad that the CRB explicitly states in multiple places that the GM should change rarity to match the location. Calling out things like how Dwarven Weapons should not be uncommon in a dwarven stronghold and such.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Set wrote:
MaxAstro wrote:
Mark Moreland wrote:
What would you say if I told you that we've already illustrated the new iconic and you've all seen them? And no, we're not updating an existing NPC to iconic status.
...Damiel is the new iconic Investigator? :P

Could be something like that sample Iruxi, whom we've 'seen' on the blog, becomes an Iconic.

That was my immediate thought as well XD

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Mark Moreland wrote:
Joana wrote:
Rysky wrote:
It'd probably be Freiya if I have to guess, but then I'm not happy since design wise I love her, but then I love all of them.
They specifically said Feiya was safe, so that leave Quinn, Lirianne, and Alahazra and her huge hat.
What would you say if I told you that we've already illustrated the new iconic and you've all seen them? And no, we're not updating an existing NPC to iconic status.

*glaring intensifies*


3 people marked this as a favorite.

If we are looking for new iconic characters, we should probably look at the previews for the races in the playtest that were illustrated by Wayne Reynolds, or maybe the characters in the Tales of Lost Omens.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

And I just did it, and I found this two really interesting spellcasters, a gnome and a halfling. As the witch is safe, maybe we are saying goodbye to the oracle? Or maybe not...

I was also thinking that the investigator could be swapped out with the half-orc inquisitor iconic... Or maybe that's just how much I wanted the inquisitor and Imrijka to come back? I really liked the class and that iconic.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Hasn’t Shardra shown up in a preview illustration somewhere? She could be the new Oracle if it incorporates some shamanastic vibes.

Edit: Yep!

Edit 2: Shardra as iconic gives them one less human, a unique form of diversity that none of the others have, support to more Rivethun lore which they’ve been accelerating the last could years, and a hook for an updated and broadened Oracle. 90% it’s her.

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Combining the Inquisitor and Investigator together and setting it up similar to Monk, optional to add the divine stuff in, don't want it? Don't take it.

Certainly has an appeal.

For Shardra I foresee her remaining the Shaman or whatever that class becomes, as there's still space for a designated Spontaneous Primal caster counterpart to the Druid.


Rysky wrote:


For Shardra I foresee her remaining the Shaman or whatever that class becomes, as there's still space for a designated Spontaneous Primal caster counterpart to the Druid.

Cool, then the replacement iconic, if it’s not Shardra, must be one of the other old iconic we’ve already seen, like ____ or ____.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Rysky wrote:

Combining the Inquisitor and Investigator together and setting it up similar to Monk, optional to add the divine stuff in, don't want it? Don't take it.

Certainly has an appeal.

For Shardra I foresee her remaining the Shaman or whatever that class becomes, as there's still space for a designated Spontaneous Primal caster counterpart to the Druid.

Why would the Shaman be a spontaneous caster? That class is mostly a prepared caster in PF1.

And the Inquisitor is a spontaneous divine caster in PF1, not a prepared occult caster.

One thing is clear -- Classes will need to be distinguished by more than the combination of casting method and tradition, as many combinations will be repeated.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
David knott 242 wrote:
Rysky wrote:

Combining the Inquisitor and Investigator together and setting it up similar to Monk, optional to add the divine stuff in, don't want it? Don't take it.

Certainly has an appeal.

For Shardra I foresee her remaining the Shaman or whatever that class becomes, as there's still space for a designated Spontaneous Primal caster counterpart to the Druid.

Why would the Shaman be a spontaneous caster? That class is mostly a prepared caster in PF1.

It just feels like how they would go, I started thinking that after the overhaul to Bard.

Edit: Also I always thought they were a spontaneous caster in 1e so bias in mindset right there lol


Shaman and brawler are the two I would like to see but I’ve always been a bit weird. Though a close third would be witch.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Brawler I could see comming back as the manuever specialized class.

Also maybe take a note from certain archetypes it had plus the Warlord from DnD and let it buff their allies.


What spell-list do you think the witch will use? Prepared-Any doesn't seem too far-fetched, but what be their arcane patrons.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

With how weird the whole patron is and the fact that Hag bloodline in sorcerer uses the Occult spell list.

With bard changing to occult, I definitely can see the Witch being an occult caster.

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

I foresee Occult, it fits them way too well thematically (they were a blend of Arcane and Divine in 1e) with Patrons letting them nab spells from other lists.


Pathfinder Card Game, Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber
Gisher wrote:
I wonder if each of the new classes will come with a multi class archetype like the Core classes did.

I would say that is all but guaranteed, and likely part of the reason they chose the classes they did. Because the mixture of these mc archetypes along with the others covers the maximum amount of class design space.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Rysky wrote:
I foresee Occult, it fits them way too well thematically (they were a blend of Arcane and Divine in 1e) with Patrons letting them nab spells from other lists.

And it will help solidify the Occult tradition's narrative identity. I feel like divine and primal are in good spots for the kinds of stories that get associated with those traditions, but Arcane and Occult might need a bit of help.

101 to 150 of 295 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Paizo Products / Advanced Player's Guide playtest announced for October! All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.