Occult Classes Returning?


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 58 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.

From what I understand the Occult classes from Occult Adventures were a bit divisive. I was actually a big fan. Does anyone know if there has been, not necessarily confirmation, but serious talk from the developers on whether or not any or all of these classes (Kineticist, Medium, Mesmerist, Occultist, Psychic, Spiritualist) will be returning to PF2e eventually?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Considering how much Occultist feels like it was used as a basis for the new focus system, and that occult magic is literally a tradition of magic now, i would be surprised if we do not get some.

Kineticist is a fan favorite and occultist fits very well as a focus based caster. A case can be made for Psychic as the occult prepared caster (yes witch can be as well, but witch seems to kinda do the sorcerer variable thing), and medium fills such a unique role i would love to see how its done. Mesmerist honestly feels like it does not need to be made imo, though others may disagree as i feel bard can be made to do what mesmerist does down the line. Spiritualist many talk about folding into summoner and making a pick your tradition pet class user but i honestly HATE this idea, and would rather see it return as its own class that can be expanded.


Vorsk, Follower or Erastil wrote:
Kineticist is a fan favorite

Are you sure about this? Because everything I ever read about the kineticist online was about how terrible and underpowered the class was. I personally liked the concept and just couldn't get how a class that can emulate several spells at will with less restrictions than actual casting (even some 8th level ones like earthquake) was underpowered in any way.

There is still the problem of the magic tradition: 2E occult magic has no elemental spell at all, primal magic provides nearly every elemental spell with the exception of flame strike but nothing as esoteric as what aether and void would provide. The kineticist class needs to be reworked entirely to fit in 2E and will likely lose a part of its powers to get in line and not feel overloaded.


I suspect the Kineticist is a good bet for the spontaneous Primal caster.

Might overlap with oracles a bit with burn power focus, but I'm sure they could make it work.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think if kineticist comes back it won't be as a spellcaster. It wasn't really one before. Classes with "trick" level spellcasting like ranger and paladin aren't spellcasters anymore in PF2.

I do expect some occult classes to come back, but hopefully with significantly streamlined mechanics. Kineticist had needlessly complex mechanics for what it actually did. Medium and spiritualist and occultist were even worse. The only "simple" occult class was really the psychic, because it was just a sort of variant sorcerer. And it's weird when a 9th-level caster is "simple".


13 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Occult Adventures is hand's down the best book Paizo released for Pathfinder Classic, they'd be foolish not to redesign the classes for 2nd edition.


FlashRebel wrote:
Vorsk, Follower or Erastil wrote:
Kineticist is a fan favorite

Are you sure about this? Because everything I ever read about the kineticist online was about how terrible and underpowered the class was. I personally liked the concept and just couldn't get how a class that can emulate several spells at will with less restrictions than actual casting (even some 8th level ones like earthquake) was underpowered in any way.

There is still the problem of the magic tradition: 2E occult magic has no elemental spell at all, primal magic provides nearly every elemental spell with the exception of flame strike but nothing as esoteric as what aether and void would provide. The kineticist class needs to be reworked entirely to fit in 2E and will likely lose a part of its powers to get in line and not feel overloaded.

Kineticists are considered underpowered compared to the overall meta and some of the ceilings that some classes can hit when everything is taken into account - max system mastery

Playing in a normal games with relatively normal builds they are very powerful

I have GM’d one so far through to level 12 and they are most certainly not underpowered. More like the reverse in an average game

Levels 1 through 7 it was by far and away the most powerful character in my group and it wasn’t even really close. Best AC, best HP, best damage all from range
(Now we didn’t have a “traditional” archer character or 18 strength two handed fighter which might colour this view)

Magic traditions aren’t really an issue surely ? Even if they are primal isn’t a problem. Kineticists really having nothing to do with the Occult and actually stick out like a sore thumb amongst all those other classes

As to them coming back the oracle is good preview of what the new burn is likely to look like. Hopefully that means they can be untethered from Con as the key stat as that doesn’t really make sense in my opinion and more importantly isn’t balanced if they don’t take damage from using Burn anymore. Of course they might in a similar way to Life oracle now does ...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I would love to see the Occult classes in 2e. Spiritualist, Kineticist and Occultist were some of my favorite classes in 1e.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm guessing the kineticist will be some sort of super focus caster. Something 3 focus pool to start and ways to get focus back mid combat-likely in a similar method to the oracle's quasi-focus curse. I'd also guess it would be primal tradition and proficiency.

Not an occult class, but I'd think a spontaneous primal caster will be the new shaman.

The occultist/psychic I would think will be wrapped together into a prepared occult caster. They might even be able to wrap spiritualist into the same class by having phantom class feats alongside an occultists focus power feats.

Mesmerist sounds like a good candidate for a bard class archetype, especially if it comes with a large variety of variant class feats.

I have no idea what a medium might look like... selectable MCD feats at daily prep?


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Kineticists in PF1 have a more tightly bound power level than other classes. The floor is higher (i.e. hard to be too ineffective) and the ceiling is lower (i.e. hard to be too overpowering).

The theme and flavor, though, I think appealed to a lot of people.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I hope so. Occultist and Alchemist were my favorite classes in p1.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

All a P2E kinetcist needs to emulate its predecessor well is a scaling at-will blast or two that can be modified/boosted with class feats, and innate spells that fit a chosen theme picked from existing spells.

Focus points could be used for big effects like gather power or especially powerful innate spells.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

One of the problems I saw with the Occult class was that they truely were (with the exception of the psychic) pushing the system to it's very limit. Because P1 was a build out of D&D 3.5, there were some inherent flaws in the system that many options were designed to paper over or fix. The designers tried with the Occult classes to push these inherent flaws to the very limit without breaking the system itself. That's why it feels like the class designs are super cool and interesting, but exceedingly complicated to actually use in play. With the new and improved chassis of P2, I would expect to see these classes return in name, but in many ways be unrecognizable from a mechanics standpoint.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
vagrant-poet wrote:

I suspect the Kineticist is a good bet for the spontaneous Primal caster.

Might overlap with oracles a bit with burn power focus, but I'm sure they could make it work.

I think they would be a caster class in some degree. Make blasts a can trip you pick your first element at lv 1. If you pick fire, water, wood, earth, or air, you are treated as a primal caster, if aether or void, occult (kinda like how monks get to pick for ki abilities, and how witch is show with lessions). Blasts act as cantrips that use 2 actions to "cast" have a unique tag on them "Kinetic Blast" kinda like how bard ones have a composition tag that then get amplified by other class feats and abilities. Make it that eventually it can be heightened to using 3 actions to add other abilities to the blast or later on have composition blasts. Burn I could see either handled how new Oracle curses work off of focus powers


Quintessentially Me wrote:

Kineticists in PF1 have a more tightly bound power level than other classes. The floor is higher (i.e. hard to be too ineffective) and the ceiling is lower (i.e. hard to be too overpowering).

The theme and flavor, though, I think appealed to a lot of people.

Can confirm. My friend LOVES the class and has a hard time not playing one because of the flavor. I personally played one because it was the easiest way to do damage with water.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If these classes return mechanically similar to PF1e versions, I predict them to turn out as follows.

Thematically, the Kineticist is nearly identical to the Sorcerer. Therefore, if it returns, I see it playing very similarly to before: non-Vancian "Warlock" game play of spamming your basic blast attack, focus on a particular element, pick feats that shape your attacks or give you wild talents. I liked the idea of burn but from what I hear, they would have to make it far less complicated. I would expect focus points to be expended for your various wild talents and then a burn mechanic might kick in if you are out of focus but want to keep using wild talents.

I agree with Garretmander about the Medium maybe swapping out a few of the CRB multiclass dedications but I think if Paizo does bring back the Medium, it'll probably be something completely different; something that I'd never think of.

With the Bard being the core occult caster, the Mesmerist seems like it would be be implemented as a Bard archetype or muse, making stares and tricks new types of composition spells. Probably one of the easier conversions.

If half-casting ever returns, I see the Occultist as one using the Occult spell list. From there, they will be able to have a larger pool of focus points equal to 3x their number of implements. Their implements can hold up to 3 focus points. Their resonant powers scale based on current amount of focus in an implement. Focus powers are more varied and replicate more archetypal spells from other spell lists. Implements still focus on schools of magic. Since the Occultist is getting a larger focus pool, they only regain focus points on a "long rest".

Psychic is another easy one to remake for 2e: intelligence based, spontaneous occult caster. Could easily be a new archetype.

I think we'll have to see a return of the Summoner and get a good idea of how a strict pet class will work before we get the Spiritualist. As much as I agree with Vorsk that I would prefer the Spiritualist as its own class, with how classes are looking so far, I am expecting it to be rolled in with the Summoner, or as an archetype of the Summoner.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path Subscriber
Ravingdork wrote:

All a P2E kinetcist needs to emulate its predecessor well is a scaling at-will blast or two that can be modified/boosted with class feats, and innate spells that fit a chosen theme picked from existing spells.

Focus points could be used for big effects like gather power or especially powerful innate spells.

The witch playtest would like to have a word with you.

I'd expect a PF2 kineticist to basically get to blast as a Focus ability once every ten minutes, spend more than one Focus to improve the blast, and rely on melee/ranged weapons for the rest of their daily contribution to society. Unless... they just get telekinetic projectile as a cantrip and use Focus to occasionally make it as potent as a bow (which is close to what you're suggesting, but not quite).

I don't see room in the design-space for the massive damage-dealing at-will Gauss-cannon that was the PF1 kineticist.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Anguish wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:

All a P2E kinetcist needs to emulate its predecessor well is a scaling at-will blast or two that can be modified/boosted with class feats, and innate spells that fit a chosen theme picked from existing spells.

Focus points could be used for big effects like gather power or especially powerful innate spells.

The witch playtest would like to have a word with you.

I'd expect a PF2 kineticist to basically get to blast as a Focus ability once every ten minutes, spend more than one Focus to improve the blast, and rely on melee/ranged weapons for the rest of their daily contribution to society. Unless... they just get telekinetic projectile as a cantrip and use Focus to occasionally make it as potent as a bow (which is close to what you're suggesting, but not quite).

I don't see room in the design-space for the massive damage-dealing at-will Gauss-cannon that was the PF1 kineticist.

I would expect a scaling elemental cantrip to be the blast not focus . After all that is what it effectively was in 1E and the Kineticist is quite clearly a test for 2E within 1E . Scaling powers, lots of things built in, modular options every other level and a higher floor and lower ceiling. It is all there

Modifying blasts would get confusing but the space seems to be that this is what a focus pool is for with burn being similar to the negatives of oracle curse. The open question is whether their pool works exactly like oracle or whether they get a base one and pay a burn cost when they exceed it

I agree there is no design space for the “gauss cannon” you describe . But expect the fans of the class to really want that anyway. But that said there are people making house rule versions that happily ignore the fundamentals of the system by carrying over the overflow maths boosters and stat boosters that either aren’t needed or don’t exist for anyone anymore . I expect the Kineticist playtest to be one of the most acrimonious given the online narrative

I just hope they don’t “cast” off of con . The system doesn’t seem like it would support it because that is originally balance by burn that simply cannot work in the same way (net reduction in “effective” HP). Now if burn becomes persistent damage that would be a different story. But that would be brutal (although isn’t that the final stage life oracle curse?)

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.

For the kineticist, I would expect something like this:
- Kinetic blast is a special kind of ranged Strike, with damage that somewhat scales by level. It will be your main weapon, and probably costs 2 actions to use.
- There will be an item similar to handwraps of mighty fists that allows you to put some potency and striking runes on your kinetic blast. (Otherwise the class would avoid a major WBL sink.) Maybe with some property runes whitelisted as working with it, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
- Your first, second and third choice of element are done like class paths (rogue racket, druid order etc.)
- Infusions and wild talents are class feats.
- Utility talents perhaps done as focus spells.

I'm not entirely sure how they'd implement burn, but they could just have a separate damage pool for it.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I agree with Ascalaphus. That seems likely.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

My pet theory for Kineticist:

Blasts are focus cantrips.
Gather Power is a metamagic to reduce fovus cost.
Other modfiers are metamagic that consumes focus points
Class trait to allow stacking metamagic.

Burn is a class feature to take damage or something to gather power as free action.

And then you get your wild/utility/etc from some split of class feat and class features (first element acting like a path for some freebies?)

I think that covers it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I hope they do come out with a character who primarily uses cantrips to attack (maybe their own special one-action cantrips Ala bard), maybe gets some focus spells, and doesn't get any normal spellcasting. I think kineticist fits that well.


I personally love original kineticist so much that I really doubt the second edition one could appeal to me as much, which is really sad because I like 2e so much more than 1e. But it seems the way 2e is going is a lot less at will or long lasting powers, because cantrips and focus spells fill that void. The first thing I thought when I read the witch playtest is that kineticist is going to get the same treatment and felt defeated.

I personally feel that cantrips are entirely too weak for kineticist, and I would personally be disappointed if most of the blast powers and such were focus spells. I would also be sad if they needed items to improve their damage dice or attack. They never did in first edition, and there are some in second that don't care about weapon runes such as shapeshifters or most casters.

I'm aware that that's just one guys opinion and that's all it really is, but I just wanted to be heard.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I would prefer the Kineticist not be a slot-based caster at all; that feels like a betrayal of the concept of the class. You would probably want to give it some alternative focus mechanic, like the playtest oracle has.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I agree they shouldn't be slotted casters, but...

Everything was made so streamlined and refined with the release of P2E. Who the heck wants alternative mechanics to clutter up things?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:

I agree they shouldn't be slotted casters, but...

Everything was made so streamlined and refined with the release of P2E. Who the heck wants alternative mechanics to clutter up things?

You could give the Kineticist and the Oracle a shared mechanic where "when you channel more power, it hurts you" with different ways that it hurts you by the class, and just give the Kineticist more ways to mitigate this.

There were always going to be more subsystems and new mechanics. Complexity is the currency with which we buy depth.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
PossibleCabbage wrote:
There were always going to be more subsystems and new mechanics. Complexity is the currency with which we buy depth.

Yes, but...

1) I didn't think it would arrive as early as the second core hardback.
2) They would only appear as needed, such as when existing systems didn't adequately represent the new mechanic.

Making new systems just for the sake of having new systems leads to convolution and unnecesary bloat.

I feel that you could make both the Ooacle and the kinetist largely using the existing systems just fine.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
captain yesterday wrote:
Occult Adventures is hand's down the best book Paizo released for Pathfinder Classic, they'd be foolish not to redesign the classes for 2nd edition.

Not sure I'd call PF1E "Classic" just yet. :-)


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Kelseus wrote:
With the new and improved chassis of P2, I would expect to see these classes return in name, but in many ways be unrecognizable from a mechanics standpoint.

Which will probably result in a lot of complaints along the lines of "this class is nothing like the PF1E version", when the real question is "how does it play as a PF2E class?'


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Ed Reppert wrote:
captain yesterday wrote:
Occult Adventures is hand's down the best book Paizo released for Pathfinder Classic, they'd be foolish not to redesign the classes for 2nd edition.
Not sure I'd call PF1E "Classic" just yet. :-)

It sounds better than 1st edition. :-)

I like it at least.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I can see how the "burn" of each Oracle Curse should be different, but that doesn't have to mean that you need a lot of different burn mechanics for kineticists.

Although with how the rest of the game is set up with Treat Wounds and Refocus, it makes sense that getting rid of burn would be a 10 minute activity, not a night's sleep.


For the Kineticist, I see them having an at-will blast that scales up similar to a cantrip. Their class feats could change the way their blast works, such as turning it into a melee weapon, or an AOE blast. The class feats can also give them elemental based abilities like a climb/fly/swim speed for example.

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.

It the blast is pretty similar to a Strike with a sort of elemental ranged weapon (although neither quite a manufactured weapon or an unarmed strike), then just calling it a Strike may be the simplest thing.


I'm more interested in seeing how they port over Occultist than Kineticist. Focus powers were core to the class in 1e, as was investing in items. These worked very different mechanically but occupied a similar niche thematically to the mechanics in 2e. I don't think them being full casters really fits, but I still think they need access to occult magic to live up to the name. Maybe improved ways to play with focus points, and built-in occult spells scaling like the dedications? Feels too complicated though.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Anguish wrote:


I don't see room in the design-space for the massive damage-dealing at-will Gauss-cannon that was the PF1 kineticist.

I mean, we literally have scaling at-will magic damage baked into the game. I'm not sure how you can really say there's no design space to play around with that concept.

Sovereign Court

Paradozen wrote:
I'm more interested in seeing how they port over Occultist than Kineticist. Focus powers were core to the class in 1e, as was investing in items. These worked very different mechanically but occupied a similar niche thematically to the mechanics in 2e. I don't think them being full casters really fits, but I still think they need access to occult magic to live up to the name. Maybe improved ways to play with focus points, and built-in occult spells scaling like the dedications? Feels too complicated though.

I actually doubt we're going to see a straight comeback. We don't have a Primalist, Divinist or Arcanist either. The spell list name kinda gets in the way.

I mean, the occult spell list is probably a good fit for someone playing around with spooky objects. If it comes back I think the implements will be a big deal, maybe more in the sense of using the implements than depleting them. It's kinda playing with fire to allow any class to easily spend lots of focus in a single encounter, because that gets weird when they multiclass to borrow focus powers from elsewhere that were balanced around once per encounter use.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I don't really see any reason for the hybrid classes to return to 2nd Edition. They are represented really well by the new multiclass archetype system. Some of their more unique abilities can just be added in as new feats for existing classes or archetypes.

The occult classes though...now most of those were unique enough to warrant their own classes in the new edition.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:

I don't really see any reason for the hybrid classes to return to 2nd Edition. They are represented really well by the new multiclass archetype system. Some of their more unique abilities can just be added in as new feats for existing classes or archetypes.

The occult classes though...now most of those were unique enough to warrant their own classes in the new edition.

Swashbuckler and Investigator are both hybrids and are in playtest right now, so I'm thinking Paizo probably will bring more of them into 2e.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think the Shaman has a strong chance as coming back, as something other than the "Oracle/Witch hybrid". My bet is "the spontaneous analogue to the druid."

One of the reasons that the Kineticist as the spontaneous primal caster doesn't really work for me is that while the Kineticist can make walls of fire and cones of cold, there's a lot of stuff on the Primal list that's thematically inappropriate for the Kineticist (like all the summoning and shapechanging) since the kineticist isn't about plants, animals, or nature the kineticist is about the basic elements.

But make the Shaman the spontaneous primal caster, and I'm content.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Random thought: Occultist as prepared occult caster, that can also prepare new focus spells while refocusing.

Like, taking the feat: evocation implement gives you an evocation focus spell. Then you could take a illusion implement feat that gives you a second focus spell, but you choose which is available when re-focusing.

A later level feat would give you the advanced implement spells for all implements you own, then another one at level 12+ would give major focus spell for each implement.

It would make an interesting multiclass option.


Maybe the Occultist could be like the champion. No traditional spell list, but instead, a huge focus on focus spells, and maybe a quick way to gain focus back.

With the kineticist might have a powerful cantrip and then focus spells as well. But, can reduce the cost of focus spells by using actions.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Unpopular opinion time: Occultist as a Class was fiddly, overcomplicated mess and relied on equipment/magic items far too much. The entire class basically needed its own dedicated chapter that rewrote the whole Spellcasting and Magic Item rules just to make it work.

Well over 1/2 of the class is rooted in a system that was tested and wholesale scrapped as being, as i noted, fiddly and overcomplicated in the Playtest, Mental Focus -ala- Resonance and Investing in Magic Items.

The entire chassis of the Class needs to be torn down to its nuts and bolts and rebuilt from the ground up using the Focus system, and they'll need some kind of heavily modified Resocance-lite system all to themselves in order to achieve the kind of functions they accessed via their implements. Even with that, each and every Focus spell on their list will need to be carved up via Traits that are associated with specific types of implements and honestly... it's just too much work and too many moving parts for what will amount to very VERY little payoff considering how tight the math in the game is anymore.

I'm sure that SOMETHING could be done to "make it work" but from my perspective the Occultist in general (Looking back) seems to have been a kind of test of ... well pretty much ALL of the rules from the Playtest version of PF2 which were eventually scrapped because most people hated it.


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

I don't really see any reason for the hybrid classes to return to 2nd Edition. They are represented really well by the new multiclass archetype system. Some of their more unique abilities can just be added in as new feats for existing classes or archetypes.

The occult classes though...now most of those were unique enough to warrant their own classes in the new edition.

Swashbuckler and Investigator are both hybrids and are in playtest right now, so I'm thinking Paizo probably will bring more of them into 2e.

Swashbuckler has replaced one of its parent classes (Gunslinger) as a primary class.

There are several of us questioning whether the Investigator should be a class on its own, given that it does not have any unique game mechanic such as Inspiration. If they end up concurring with this feeling, I can't see any of the other hybrid classes surviving as distinct classes.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Themetricsystem wrote:

Unpopular opinion time: Occultist as a Class was fiddly, overcomplicated mess and relied on equipment/magic items far too much. The entire class basically needed its own dedicated chapter that rewrote the whole Spellcasting and Magic Item rules just to make it work.

Well over 1/2 of the class is rooted in a system that was tested and wholesale scrapped as being, as i noted, fiddly and overcomplicated in the Playtest, Mental Focus -ala- Resonance and Investing in Magic Items.

The entire chassis of the Class needs to be torn down to its nuts and bolts and rebuilt from the ground up using the Focus system, and they'll need some kind of heavily modified Resocance-lite system all to themselves in order to achieve the kind of functions they accessed via their implements. Even with that, each and every Focus spell on their list will need to be carved up via Traits that are associated with specific types of implements and honestly... it's just too much work and too many moving parts for what will amount to very VERY little payoff considering how tight the math in the game is anymore.

I'm sure that SOMETHING could be done to "make it work" but from my perspective the Occultist in general (Looking back) seems to have been a kind of test of ... well pretty much ALL of the rules from the Playtest version of PF2 which were eventually scrapped because most people hated it.

Couldn't disagree more. Occultist was fantastic. You wanna see a mess? Check out the Medium.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
HeHateMe wrote:
Couldn't disagree more. Occultist was fantastic. You wanna see a mess? Check out the Medium.

To be fair, the Medium was more a mess because it utterly failed at its own stated design goals more than because its rules were too complicated.

Although I never really got that from the Occultist either. "Occultist is too complex!" kind of feels like a meme perpetuated by people who never played or read the occultist. It has a unique mechanic, but the way that mechanic works isn't particularly complex. From my experience even relatively new players figured out the Occultist pretty quickly and it's a lot less cumbersome and demanding than, say, the Wizard.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

GM for a PF1 Occultist here. They really don't need me to hand them magic items 24/7. In fact every implement I've handed to them has been mundane. They make for really powerful gishes. Finding a way to challenge her in combat has been difficult to say the least.

They also don't seem to be that complex to build. Maybe the mental focus might be tricky each day but that's no more difficult than prepared spellcasting.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Squiggit wrote:
HeHateMe wrote:
Couldn't disagree more. Occultist was fantastic. You wanna see a mess? Check out the Medium.

To be fair, the Medium was more a mess because it utterly failed at its own stated design goals more than because its rules were too complicated.

Although I never really got that from the Occultist either. "Occultist is too complex!" kind of feels like a meme perpetuated by people who never played or read the occultist. It has a unique mechanic, but the way that mechanic works isn't particularly complex. From my experience even relatively new players figured out the Occultist pretty quickly and it's a lot less cumbersome and demanding than, say, the Wizard.

I agree, Occultist was no more complicated than any other class. It was beautifully modular and customizable.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Occultist was also my favorite. I do think it was more complicated than most other classes, but mostly just due to the book keeping of allocating and tracking your focus points on top of spell slots and your resonant powers possibly changing day to day. Just a matter of knowing your character which should be expected of you no matter your class. It's only real fault was a few of its focus powers were irredeemably terrible.

I also loved the concept of the Medium and always wanted to play one except it's faults always turned me away from committing to giving it a good try.

Something I found interesting between these two was their very high yet different forms of versatility. The Occultist was very like the 5e Warlock in that you could build it so many different ways but even more so. You could build a melee heavy gish, a sneaky assassin type, a caster, a necromancer (I played a necroccultist as a makeshift "Antipaladin" for PFS) and on and on. The Medium on the other hand was versatile throughout the characters life by being able to swap roles each day (or on the fly as a spirit dancer). I would almost want Paizo to combine both of these classes into one, though I'm not sure how that would even be possible.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
HeHateMe wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:

I don't really see any reason for the hybrid classes to return to 2nd Edition. They are represented really well by the new multiclass archetype system. Some of their more unique abilities can just be added in as new feats for existing classes or archetypes.

The occult classes though...now most of those were unique enough to warrant their own classes in the new edition.

Swashbuckler and Investigator are both hybrids and are in playtest right now, so I'm thinking Paizo probably will bring more of them into 2e.

They were hybrids in first edition. Not sure that makes them hybrids in second edition.

Seems likely the upcoming dual class option will take the place of hybrid classes.


I'm intrigued, what is the dual class option?

1 to 50 of 58 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / Occult Classes Returning? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.