Out of curiosity, what part of the Brawler can't you do via Monk? Maybe with some Fighter MC.
|
I liked the ability to switch out combat feats. I had a few different pre-selected sets along with the relevant stats adjustments. The flexibility was fun.
Putting that element aside, I could probably make a close enough approximation with some sort of combination of Monk and either Rogue or Fighter. Monk is a little more flavor locked than I’d prefer for this guy, who was a street fighting scoundrel, but at least the dedication would probably be necessary for now to fortify his fists.
While I agree monk tends to point toward a specific flavor, I don't think it's that hard to avoid that flavor either. Not much in the actual chassis nudges you down that path and you can just avoid stuff like Ki feats without feeling too bad about it, imo.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My personal viewpoint (YMMV) is that all unarmed fighters of the same extent are all doing what is essentially advanced martial arts, its just that they might not have developed it out of a traditionally monastic school.
Personally though, I wouldn't mind a street fighting Monk archetype to help people achieve a different flavor.
Personally though, I wouldn't mind a street fighting Monk archetype to help people achieve a different flavor.
What would you see that archetype doing, though? Because right now there's nothing in the core monk chassis that really nudges you toward that mystic, monastic flavor (outside mystic strikes, but it's not much of a feature to begin with).
Adding more options for people who don't want to be ki warriors seems more like a matter of just adding more feats, not a whole new archetype.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Personally though, I wouldn't mind a street fighting Monk archetype to help people achieve a different flavor.What would you see that archetype doing, though? Because right now there's nothing in the core monk chassis that really nudges you toward that mystic, monastic flavor (outside mystic strikes, but it's not much of a feature to begin with).
Adding more options for people who don't want to be ki warriors seems more like a matter of just adding more feats, not a whole new archetype.
I'd probably switch out Flurry of Blows for something to convey a hardy and rough street fighter- some kind of ability that triggers off a feint maybe? or maybe exchange the multi-hit flurry for a one-shot sucker punch? Then tie some feats up in that class archetype to enhance that ability in way different than flurry.
Though tbh, I'm having trouble imagining any class archetypes in a system this modular for the reason you're talking about, so maybe I misunderstand their purpose or something.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, class archetypes are for if you want to take something away from a class. So for a monk that would be one of: proficiencies, flurry of blows, powerful fists, incredible movement, mystic/metal/adamantine strikes, and perfected form.
Probably the most likely "brawlerish" monk archetype would be one with legendary unarmed strikes but only master unarmed defense (and maybe different saves). You don't want to take away things like "powerful fists" but maybe they're not incredibly fast.
|
|
While I agree monk tends to point toward a specific flavor, I don't think it's that hard to avoid that flavor either.
It’s a little more tied to flavor than I’d like, but I agree that it’s not unavoidable. More non-mystical feat choices would be nice, and I assume they’re coming.
Adding more options for people who don't want to be ki warriors seems more like a matter of just adding more feats, not a whole new archetype.
Speaking for myself, when I said an archetype I was thinking of an unarmed combatant archetype that isn’t tied to the Monk at all other than grabbing Powerful Fist and then throwing in a few other useful feat options. But like I said, a fistful of Monk feats would probably satisfy me.
|
|
Though tbh, I'm having trouble imagining any class archetypes in a system this modular for the reason you're talking about, so maybe I misunderstand their purpose or something.
Although Archetype feats tend to use class feat slots, Archetypes needn’t be tightly tied to class. We should have a better idea what that looks like once the APG comes out.
Though tbh, I'm having trouble imagining any class archetypes in a system this modular for the reason you're talking about, so maybe I misunderstand their purpose or something.Although Archetype feats tend to use class feat slots, Archetypes needn’t be tightly tied to class. We should have a better idea what that looks like once the APG comes out.
Well, we know that some archetypes explicitly will be tied to class and specifically operate by changing out a base class feature, and can reserve your level 2 slot despite taking effect at character creation. So while you're right, we do know that some archetypes are class specific.
Such archetypes are actually described in the Core Rulebook, albeit with no examples given.
Yeah, class archetypes are for if you want to take something away from a class. So for a monk that would be one of: proficiencies, flurry of blows, powerful fists, incredible movement, mystic/metal/adamantine strikes, and perfected form.
Probably the most likely "brawlerish" monk archetype would be one with legendary unarmed strikes but only master unarmed defense (and maybe different saves). You don't want to take away things like "powerful fists" but maybe they're not incredibly fast.
Ooh, I'd actually really love that, making them literally have more openings but hit frigging hard
Though tbh, I'm having trouble imagining any class archetypes in a system this modular for the reason you're talking about, so maybe I misunderstand their purpose or something.Although Archetype feats tend to use class feat slots, Archetypes needn’t be tightly tied to class. We should have a better idea what that looks like once the APG comes out.Well, we know that some archetypes explicitly will be tied to class and specifically operate by changing out a base class feature, and can reserve your level 2 slot despite taking effect at character creation. So while you're right, we do know that some archetypes are class specific.
Such archetypes are actually described in the Core Rulebook, albeit with no examples given.
Yeah, class archetypes are for if you want to take something away from a class. So for a monk that would be one of: proficiencies, flurry of blows, powerful fists, incredible movement, mystic/metal/adamantine strikes, and perfected form.
Probably the most likely "brawlerish" monk archetype would be one with legendary unarmed strikes but only master unarmed defense (and maybe different saves). You don't want to take away things like "powerful fists" but maybe they're not incredibly fast.
Ooh, I'd actually really love that, making them literally have more openings but hit frigging hard
I had something in mind along side the dynamic feats, where instead of picking a 1st level feat for a stance, you get a "sloppy style" slot, and during daily prep you pick 1 style you qualify for, and the next day you have to pick something different than the previous day's but otherwise have the same limitations, and then at higher levels you can tack on those "style enhancer" feats or a second style that day. Get a new cap stone where you can just pull any style out of a hat to fight with, no limit. I like Cabbage's proficiency swap, sounds quite fun because Weap Spec gives you flat damage with prof, and atm FIGHTERS do more min damage than monks because of this...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not sure if I've mentioned this on this particular thread, but another "new" class I'd like to see would be something along the lines of a Dragonfire Adept. It was an interesting class to me, since it offered an at-will aoe spell that scaled as you leveled, but required you to mix it up in melee. With a willing DM, this could also allow you to access metabreath feats to really take the builds to interesting places at the expense of your core ability for a few rounds.
Given the differences between PF2 and 3.5, I'm curious how this would translate over. I'm tempted to attempt a homebrew conversion, but I would also like to see something that took the mechanical niche and gave it a Golarian spin. Obviously, using the dragon breath flavor is right out, but there are other flavors.
My mind keeps happening onto an image from Netflix's "The Witcher", where a mage makes a fist and a bunch of soldiers in front of her crumple to the floor. A cone attack that dealt magical bludgeoning damage (no physical object, just pure magic bludgeoning everything inside the cone) intrigues me as something very different than currently offered by the current classes and spell lists, at least as a central attack. Closest would be the Ki Blast Focus power, which deals Force instead of a physical damage type.
I feel I should point out that, even if magical, this would not be inherently ghost touch and so wouldn't bypass incorporeal resistance. Wouldn't have to deal with the double resistance of a ghost, but would still be resisted.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes. The biggest problem is that you can only use the breath weapon once per rage. Once per round is more along the lines I was thinking, and starting from level 1 instead of 6.
Possibly too ambitious for PF2, but I'm going to 'brew out the first couple of levels anyways and see where it stands.
The biggest question I have is whether said breath weapon will be two-actions (like most spells, especially offensive ones) or a single-action, possibly with the Flourish trait (so it can only be used once per turn.) I think the latter would be cool, and would certainly allow for more interesting gameplay than "use two actions to do your cool thing and then have just one action left to be flexible with".
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Swordsages from 3.5e's Tome of Battle would definitely pique my interest. They're physical adepts who have mastered the Sublime Way. Basically, blade wizards. Not sure how they would replicate a discipline's maneuvers since they're closer to focus spells in design, but obviously that wouldn't be very viable given the limited focus pool.
A lot of martials have unique activities they can acquire via feats. I think it'd be pretty easy to give a hypothetical swordmage access to similar options, but with more overtly mystical flavor and mechanics.
The biggest question I have is whether said breath weapon will be two-actions (like most spells, especially offensive ones) or a single-action, possibly with the Flourish trait (so it can only be used once per turn.) I think the latter would be cool, and would certainly allow for more interesting gameplay than "use two actions to do your cool thing and then have just one action left to be flexible with".
Still in drafts, but I was thinking 2 action by default, with the flourish trait. At 1st or 3rd (haven't fully decided yet), you'd get a focus spell that would allow you to make it 1 action, but retain the flourish trait, letting you cast a cantrip and breath weapon in the same round. The focus spell would have a note "Heightened (10th): Breath also loses the {Flourish} trait." I had a different level 19 ability in mind, but it was one of those "half-asleep, in bed, but SURELY this time I'll remember this in the morning" things.
Edit: as a side note, man y'all weren't kidding about most "class" abilities outside of feats being just proficiency upgrades at various levels. I knew that was true, but I hadn't actually counted until I sat down over the weekend and started figuring out this class.
Most casters have like 4 class abilities that aren't either a feat, a proficiency bump, or their spells, with 2-3 at level 1 and 1 and level 19.
Martials are a little better, but not much. And Alchemists are just weird.
Swordsages from 3.5e's Tome of Battle would definitely pique my interest. They're physical adepts who have mastered the Sublime Way. Basically, blade wizards. Not sure how they would replicate a discipline's maneuvers since they're closer to focus spells in design, but obviously that wouldn't be very viable given the limited focus pool.A lot of martials have unique activities they can acquire via feats. I think it'd be pretty easy to give a hypothetical swordmage access to similar options, but with more overtly mystical flavor and mechanics.
I think the model for this would be something like "Wild Winds Style" as in- you spend a point of focus to enter the stance, and while you are in the stance you can do something supernatural (with no focus cost).
In addition to swapping out class features, class archetypes could presumably have a couple of feats specific to that archetype.
In addition to swapping out class features, class archetypes could presumably have a couple of feats specific to that archetype.Well, yes, they pretty inevitably will. The swapping features is just what makes them different from non-Class Archetypes.
And what makes people interested as there aren’t actually a lot of features to swap as a lot of them are the proficiency boosters
So I guess it is a case of moving them around? Like having a cleric that can get more reflex proficiency to be a rogue like one but giving up fort ? Why you would do that I am not sure but that being the idea...
|
Swordsages from 3.5e's Tome of Battle would definitely pique my interest. They're physical adepts who have mastered the Sublime Way. Basically, blade wizards. Not sure how they would replicate a discipline's maneuvers since they're closer to focus spells in design, but obviously that wouldn't be very viable given the limited focus pool.
A Warrior who prepared fighter combat feats each morning like a wizard prepped spells would be kinda neat (or even faster than every morning, like he had some special resource he could expend to swap a feat on the fly, but it took 24 hours to get that resource point back, so he couldn't necessarily swap out feats every fight...).
"Today, I shall be... an archer! Tomorrow... I'm gonna be super specialized in this weird magical scorpion whip we just found, and would have had to sell as overspecialized exotic trash, otherwise!"
As far as I see it, all (or at least almost all) martial classes have
1)Proficiency
2)Build-around headline features (think barb rage or monk flurry)
3)Auxiliary features (Features that are a nice little extra, partly there for flavor)
4)Number boost features (Features like powerful fists that serve as needed number boosts to the class rather than being mechanical build-arounds)
In general, I think most class archetypes will come out of 1 and 2, or a combination of both. Either granting the class an alternate base (such as an extra-defensive fighter), or altering the core mechanic of the class (changing flurry of blows to something else for a monk).
--------
For casters, it's a bit different. Getting full casting seems to require the sacrifice of most other class features, so I could see caster archetypes that give up some of their casting to gain additional features. For example, a sorcerer archetype that loses 1 spell/level to get some kind of additional bloodline powers.
Swordsages from 3.5e's Tome of Battle would definitely pique my interest. They're physical adepts who have mastered the Sublime Way. Basically, blade wizards. Not sure how they would replicate a discipline's maneuvers since they're closer to focus spells in design, but obviously that wouldn't be very viable given the limited focus pool.A Warrior who prepared fighter combat feats each morning like a wizard prepped spells would be kinda neat (or even faster than every morning, like he had some special resource he could expend to swap a feat on the fly, but it took 24 hours to get that resource point back, so he couldn't necessarily swap out feats every fight...).
"Today, I shall be... an archer! Tomorrow... I'm gonna be super specialized in this weird magical scorpion whip we just found, and would have had to sell as overspecialized exotic trash, otherwise!"
Funny thing is, this is fairly similar to how the talisman crafter mentioned upthread would work given how many talismans are "use this fighter feat once".
In addition to swapping out class features, class archetypes could presumably have a couple of feats specific to that archetype.Well, yes, they pretty inevitably will. The swapping features is just what makes them different from non-Class Archetypes.And what makes people interested as there aren’t actually a lot of features to swap as a lot of them are the proficiency boosters
So I guess it is a case of moving them around? Like having a cleric that can get more reflex proficiency to be a rogue like one but giving up fort ? Why you would do that I am not sure but that being the idea...
The Warpriest vs Cloistered Cleric might be an example of purely moving proficiency around. Many have surmised that Inquisitors will wind up a class path as well, so looking at the Warpriest doctrine would give good clues on how the build would go. I'm personally less convinced by that, but I'm prepared to be proved wrong, hopefully in a couple months when the APG comes out.
The Warpriest vs Cloistered Cleric might be an example of purely moving proficiency around. Many have surmised that Inquisitors will wind up a class path as well, so looking at the Warpriest doctrine would give good clues on how the build would go. I'm personally less convinced by that, but I'm prepared to be proved wrong, hopefully in a couple months when the APG comes out.In addition to swapping out class features, class archetypes could presumably have a couple of feats specific to that archetype.Well, yes, they pretty inevitably will. The swapping features is just what makes them different from non-Class Archetypes.And what makes people interested as there aren’t actually a lot of features to swap as a lot of them are the proficiency boosters
So I guess it is a case of moving them around? Like having a cleric that can get more reflex proficiency to be a rogue like one but giving up fort ? Why you would do that I am not sure but that being the idea...
I know little about Inquisitors (beyond trying to build one on my first try of the Kingmaker game, which I quickly respecced into a Paladin), but I have wondered if the new cleric option coming in the APG is an even more martial cleric with even weaker spell DCs. I think there would be a market for a master weapons or armor but expert divine casting version of the cleric (focusing on smites and buffs).
I wonder if Warpriest is something they would normally have made to be a class archetype, but didn't due to there not being any class archetypes in the CRB.
I wonder if Warpriest is something they would normally have made to be a class archetype, but didn't due to there not being any class archetypes in the CRB.
Maybe?
But I think the fluid nature between warpriest and cloistered leaves the cleric open for some really interesting new options that other casters can't have without class feats. Without a retconning archetype that limits their casting ability, bards or wizards or whoever can't end up losing some casting prowess to gain martial stuff.
I just think it's a strength of cleric, and I (if you couldn't tell) am pretty excited to see what they accomplish with it going forward!
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Funny thing is, this is fairly similar to how the talisman crafter mentioned upthread would work given how many talismans are "use this fighter feat once".
That could be neat. I could see several story options revolving around a character who carries charms commemorating various legendary warriors and heroes, and by focusing on one of them, he can sort of 'channel' that figure and, for a time, use fighting techniques similar to that warrior. Today, he's honoring the spirit of Yashinti, the Mad Reaver, who famously used two axes in battle, but yesterday, it was Pirate-Queen Qing, who was a notorious archer.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Funny thing is, this is fairly similar to how the talisman crafter mentioned upthread would work given how many talismans are "use this fighter feat once".That could be neat. I could see several story options revolving around a character who carries charms commemorating various legendary warriors and heroes, and by focusing on one of them, he can sort of 'channel' that figure and, for a time, use fighting techniques similar to that warrior. Today, he's honoring the spirit of Yashinti, the Mad Reaver, who famously used two axes in battle, but yesterday, it was Pirate-Queen Qing, who was a notorious archer.
This is basically the Medium and Occultist from P1.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As someone whose favorite class was the Arcanist for it's style of spellcasting, I'd love to see it come back somehow. So, if the Arcanist came back for arcane spells, I'd love to see a Primalist, a Diviner, and an Occultist come in as well. Give each their own unique twist (like Occultist having a feature that is similar to the PF1 equivalent, a Diviner some fortune telling abilities, and Primalist... shifter stuff? Not sure) but that style of spellcasting has always been my favorite, and I'd love to see it come back somehow.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
NGL, before the playtest I probably would have bet money that if Paizo ever made a PF2 the Wizard would look like the Arcanist, since the PF1 Arcanist is in a lot of ways just a patch on how mechanically awful a lot of the wizard's core features are (albeit the class had a lot of its own issues too).
Regarding stuff like the Arcanist, I'm really curious how much Paizo is going to be willing to flex their rules going forward. So far everything we've seen, including the stuff in the APG playtest, has been pretty standard... but obviously since everything is so new it's hard to tell if that standardization is just them establishing a core baseline or if Paizo is trying to generally standardize how things work more.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think Arcanist and etc could honestly fit in as a class archetype for the Wizard and potentially other classes as well, though I'm not sure what part of the Wizard it'd have to ditch to not be overpowered with that casting style.
But back to actually new classes-- I'm kinda hoping that being able to 'scrap' some pf1e classes might actually open up conceptual space by taking classes that didn't stand strong on their own, and maybe re-using their conceptual space, like we had a Shaman, and a Medium, but maybe those could be the same class, and it could pillage both classes for cool stuff?
Though really, it would still probably want to take on of their names.
Set a few posts up suggested an idea that was basically mashing the occultist and the medium together that I really, really think would be awesome to play and implement.
That's not technically new I guess, PF1 had the Haunt Collect Occultist, but you could do a lot more with the concept than that archetype actually did (which was basically just let you replace one type of bonus for another).
|
|
I really want to see a martial leader-type with the ability to give other characters bonuses. This seems very doable in the current system building off of an action that works ala Inspire Courage, plus tactician style movement options and the like (ala Liberator Champions). I definitely agree that combining this with some of the Order stuff from PF1 Cavalier sounds neat for a martial commander.
I am 100% for this. Not only have I long wished for such a Class. But I am also quite frustrated with the fact that you cannot get Inspire Courage before level 8 unless you are the master of Occult casting called the Bard.
Being able to demoralize enemies into fleeing with a mere glance would also fit such a martial master of leadership well, but maybe that is already doable.
I'm also really interested in what they're gonna do for a new Spontaneous Arcane caster, since Sorcerer no longer owns that design space. I dunno what it'll be but I'm excited to find out. I have a good idea of what a lot of the other 'missing' spellcaster combos will be, but I'm just lost on this one.
What about a PF2 version of the Arcanist? Even the name would fit :-D
Able to change their Spells known without making either the Wizard or the Arcane-list Sorcerers irrelevant.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am 100% for this. Not only have I long wished for such a Class. But I am also quite frustrated with the fact that you cannot get Inspire Courage before level 8 unless you are the master of Occult casting called the Bard.
Yeah, a non-magical Marshal or Warlord or Commander or whatever they decide to call it seems like a really solid idea that there's plenty of design space for.
Being able to demoralize enemies into fleeing with a mere glance would also fit such a martial master of leadership well, but maybe that is already doable.
It's already doable, but a Class could plausibly add additional tricks to the repertoire available for this, and that seems a valid idea for one path of the 'Marshal's' Class Feats.
What about a PF2 version of the Arcanist? Even the name would fit :-D
Able to change their Spells known without making either the Wizard or the Arcane-list Sorcerers irrelevant.
That'd be very tricky to balance and only debatably Spontaneous given how spell prep needs to work for consistency. Not impossible, but tricky.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Being able to demoralize enemies into fleeing with a mere glance would also fit such a martial master of leadership well, but maybe that is already doable.
Yeah, this is doable, it just takes Master Intimidate, 2 Skill Feats (Intimidating Glare and Terrified Retreat), and a Critical Success on Demoralize. And also only works on creatures lower level than you, but given it requires a Critical Success that was liable to be the case regardless. If you add another skill feat (Battle Cry) your presence is enough that merely entering combat with you is enough to potentially cause a creature to run screaming by combining all 3 feats.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am 100% for this. Not only have I long wished for such a Class. But I am also quite frustrated with the fact that you cannot get Inspire Courage before level 8 unless you are the master of Occult casting called the Bard.Yeah, a non-magical Marshal or Warlord or Commander or whatever they decide to call it seems like a really solid idea that there's plenty of design space for.
We had two classes for 1st Edition. It's called a Battle Lord or Commander. The Battle Lord for 1st Edition is in our book called Liber Influxus Communis was the most recent.
Legendary Games had a class as well.
Battle Lord for 2nd edition comes out tomorrow on DrivethruRPG. It's making it's way through the Paizo servers as I type this.
