Hellknight Armiger works this way with Hellknight and Hellknight Signifier, and I believe Pathfinder Adept works this way with Scrollmaster/Swordmaster/Spellmaster. So it seems highly likely we will see more of that.Any speculation / confirmation these Archetypes have similar "loyalty" that multiclass archetypes do?
(Ya know, the verbiage about "must choose 3 feats before leaving this archetype...)
That's standard on all Archetypes, and I strongly doubt we'll ever see on that doesn't have it.
...
There is the interesting case of the Magaambyan Attendant which makes an exception for the Halcyon Speaker Dedication.
You cannot select another dedication feat other than Halcyon Speaker Dedication until you have gained two other feats from the Magaambyan Attendant or halcyon speaker archetype.We might see more "Archetype Chains" like this one. Possibly when they introduce some of the "Prestige Archetypes." I'm thinking of how, in PF1, the Magaambyan Initiate Arcanist archetype was created to allow Arcanists to meet the prerequisites for the Magaambyan Arcanist prestige class.
Thanks! I didn't know about those.
|
Yeah, given that among those there are at least 1 Iconics who need updating for PF2 and I distinctly recall somebody chatting about how Red Raven will be making an appearance so more art can help make that possible and also give a bit more crunch to the Vigilante Archetype.
The same thing goes for Alain.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Logan Bonner mentioned a specific thing Fighters will be able to do is drag their enemies.
“Twitter” is a weird name for a fighter feat.
It was mentioned that Beastmaster would be able to get temporary Animal Companions depending of their current environment and in some occasions (focus spell maybe?) even being able to have two animal companions at the same time.
The impression I got was of being able to rotate between multiple companions, with the others hanging out in the woods in the interim, or something like that. I haven't gone back to review it, though.
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
The impression I got was of being able to rotate between multiple companions, with the others hanging out in the woods in the interim, or something like that. I haven't gone back to review it, though.
I think they are stored in tiny little balls which can fit into your bandolier.
I was forcibly reminded of the Summoner’s Summon Monster ability, and how you had to dismiss your eidolon to use that.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
The impression I got was of being able to rotate between multiple companions, with the others hanging out in the woods in the interim, or something like that. I haven't gone back to review it, though.I think they are stored in tiny little balls which can fit into your bandolier.
All I know is that I want to be the very best like no one ever was.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It was mentioned that Beastmaster would be able to get temporary Animal Companions depending of their current environment and in some occasions (focus spell maybe?) even being able to have two animal companions at the same time.
I hope it isn't like PF1 where you some archetypes allowed more than 1 animal companion, but they were ultra low level. There's no room for anything underleveled in a PF2 party.
It was mentioned that Beastmaster would be able to get temporary Animal Companions depending of their current environment and in some occasions (focus spell maybe?) even being able to have two animal companions at the same time.I hope it isn't like PF1 where you some archetypes allowed more than 1 animal companion, but they were ultra low level. There's no room for anything underleveled in a PF2 party.
With the way that PF2 minions work, two animal companions would not be gamebreaking, they are taking 2 of your 3 actions, a caster can't cast 95% of their spells and a martial will have to decide between attacking or moving.
I hope the Sentinel works like having a stance turned on which penalizes all opponents in your reach from hitting someone other than you (i.e. the 4.E Defender's Aura, which I consider the most elegant way of translating the art of RPG tanking so far). Hope getting such a feat as low level as possible...
Then again, knowing my luck, it might be a practical yet boring Armor Proficiency update archetype.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I really despise taunt mechanics, so I hope that it does nothing of the sort.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I hope the Sentinel works like having a stance turned on which penalizes all opponents in your reach from hitting someone other than you (i.e. the 4.E Defender's Aura, which I consider the most elegant way of translating the art of RPG tanking so far). Hope getting such a feat as low level as possible...
Then again, knowing my luck, it might be a practical yet boring Armor Proficiency update archetype.
Armor specialization is a must for sure, and i bet that if there's something like that it will be similar to the paladin reaction instead of an aura.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I really despise taunt mechanics, so I hope that it does nothing of the sort.
How do you visualize the concept of "really good at protecting others" working in a way that isn't "making it harder for the people you are protecting to get hit"?
|
All I know is that I want to be the very best like no one ever was.The impression I got was of being able to rotate between multiple companions, with the others hanging out in the woods in the interim, or something like that. I haven't gone back to review it, though.I think they are stored in tiny little balls which can fit into your bandolier.
So, is Tarzan a Beastmaster Ape Instinct Barbarian or Ranger?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I really despise taunt mechanics, so I hope that it does nothing of the sort.How do you visualize the concept of "really good at protecting others" working in a way that isn't "making it harder for the people you are protecting to get hit"?
For me, I like it when protecting others is expressed primarily in battlefield control and area denial and threat of physical harm. Passive auras that arbitrarily reduce enemy attack effectiveness against targets other than you are so boring and tacky they make me want to vom.
Champion reactions are about as far in that direction I'm willing to go, and even then I don't like them.
I absolutely loathe having enemies nickle and dimed into attacking the "correct" target, or worse, given a massive arbitrary penalty that makes it a non-decision.
I really despise taunt mechanics, so I hope that it does nothing of the sort.How do you visualize the concept of "really good at protecting others" working in a way that isn't "making it harder for the people you are protecting to get hit"?
With old school AOO I'll whack them for trying to run past me! Ideally with something like "Stand Still" to block their movement.
And yeah, Tangled Forest Stance is really cool for this.|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
What is the difference between class and multiclass?
There isn't one, in terms of who has one. All Classes get a Multiclass Archetype. Which you use to give, say, a Wizard a dash of martial prowess by giving them a Fighter Multiclass Archetype. Or whatever other combo you want.
I thought that those 4 would have been like the other basic classes ( fighter, monk, champion, etc... )
They will be, but Fighter Multiclass is an archetype, and thus Investigator Multiclass will be, too.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As others have said, there’s better ways to do it.
Taunt mechanics inherently limit actions implicitly with direct “you can’t do this” type implementations, and apart from that being an agency limiter (limiting actions directly as opposed to indirectly) it’s also usually not realistic in the slightest.
Me yelling at someone really loud isn’t going to make them mandatory attack me over everything else.
And taunt mechanics in their original conception only exist as a means to control AI, something that is not present in a TTRPG.
Taunt mechanics are lazy substitutes for tactics you can employ to limit actions indirectly.
Of course, all of this is my opinion. There’s good ways to do the tank thing in TTRPG, but taunt mechanics IMO are the antithesis of a TTRPG since they were literally created to solve a problem TTRPGs do not need to deal with. I am more speaking of the wow taunt mechanic, not standard tactics to defend other players, literal actions the compells enemies to attack you for no other reason than you have an ability that makes them do that as if they were under a spell.
As others have said, there’s better ways to do it.
Taunt mechanics inherently limit actions implicitly with direct “you can’t do this” type implementations, and apart from that being an agency limiter (limiting actions directly as opposed to indirectly) it’s also usually not realistic in the slightest.
Me yelling at someone really loud isn’t going to make them mandatory attack me over everything else.
And taunt mechanics in their original conception only exist as a means to control AI, something that is not present in a TTRPG.
Taunt mechanics are lazy substitutes for tactics you can employ to limit actions indirectly.
Of course, all of this is my opinion. There’s good ways to do the tank thing in TTRPG, but taunt mechanics IMO are the antithesis of a TTRPG since they were literally created to solve a problem TTRPGs do not need to deal with. I am more speaking of the wow taunt mechanic, not standard tactics to defend other players, literal actions the compells enemies to attack you for no other reason than you have an ability that makes them do that as if they were under a spell.
See when you said it originally, I assumed you meant marking mechanics that allow a defender-type character to penalize enemies for not attacking them. I can't even think of any TRPGs that force it that way.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
See when you said it originally, I assumed you meant marking mechanics that allow a defender-type character to penalize enemies for not attacking them. I can't even think of any TRPGs that force it that way.As others have said, there’s better ways to do it.
Taunt mechanics inherently limit actions implicitly with direct “you can’t do this” type implementations, and apart from that being an agency limiter (limiting actions directly as opposed to indirectly) it’s also usually not realistic in the slightest.
Me yelling at someone really loud isn’t going to make them mandatory attack me over everything else.
And taunt mechanics in their original conception only exist as a means to control AI, something that is not present in a TTRPG.
Taunt mechanics are lazy substitutes for tactics you can employ to limit actions indirectly.
Of course, all of this is my opinion. There’s good ways to do the tank thing in TTRPG, but taunt mechanics IMO are the antithesis of a TTRPG since they were literally created to solve a problem TTRPGs do not need to deal with. I am more speaking of the wow taunt mechanic, not standard tactics to defend other players, literal actions the compells enemies to attack you for no other reason than you have an ability that makes them do that as if they were under a spell.
The original version of Antagonize in P1 was... rather horrific.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don’t even like errata antagonize. But pre errata antagonize is quite sickening.
Heh, when I think of taunt mechanics in TRPGs, I think of the Marks from 4e, and it's... not bad, but lackluster, continuation in 5e once the Knight and the Ancestral Guardian Barbarian came out.
I think that proper marking mechanics are something that 2e is great for- the Champion Reaction is in that kind of vein already by making enemy attacks worthless if they don't target the Champion while in range, and by stacking other punishments on top.
I'm fully in support of those mechanics, they're just great in play, where it really helps to let you feel like you have a real role in the party beyond 'tough beefcake'
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The game kinda have some type of taunt with this Focus spell - Dutifully Challenge .
Swashbuckler in the Playtest had Antagonize, if you demoralized an enemy the frightened condition would not go down below 1 until the enemy attacked the swashbuckler.
Barbarian have a feat that makes them flatfooted to incentive enemies to attack them as well.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The game kinda have some type of taunt with this Focus spell - Dutifully Challenge .
Swashbuckler in the Playtest had Antagonize, if you demoralized an enemy the frightened condition would not go down below 1 until the enemy attacked the swashbuckler.
Barbarian have a feat that makes them flatfooted to incentive enemies to attack them as well.
None of those are really the same though. There is a difference between incentivising an attack and forcing it
Perhaps the defender archetype can have something like you mention. But not a “pass a skill check” or “fail a save” and you must come and attack me
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The game kinda have some type of taunt with this Focus spell - Dutifully Challenge .
Swashbuckler in the Playtest had Antagonize, if you demoralized an enemy the frightened condition would not go down below 1 until the enemy attacked the swashbuckler.
Barbarian have a feat that makes them flatfooted to incentive enemies to attack them as well.
None of those are really the same though. There is a difference between incentivising an attack and forcing it
Perhaps the defender archetype can have something like you mention. But not a “pass a skill check” or “fail a save” and you must come and attack me
Indeed.
If you look at Redeemer's Reaction, it's about as far as I'd go:
- The trigger includes a range, and a short one at that, of 15ft incentivizing positioning of the Champion to be close to the opponent and the ally
- It allows the enemy the choice of dealing no damage or taking a penalty and applying a resistance
- It occurs after the enemy has already decided to attack someone the Champion does not want them to attack
Those three aspects mean the person who's subject to the Reaction actually has more choices than they did before (because as far as I know, dealing damage after you hit is required otherwise).
And even in the case that the creature decides to carry on their action as per normal, they can still carry on actions (albeit at huge minuses).
It's an extremely strong reaction, and it certainly creates "attack me or else" incentives, but it does it in a way that actually heightens agency and informs enemies on how to respond (if the Champion is with 15ft of the enemy, position yourself more than 15ft and if you can't attack someone else).
It's honestly really well designed IMO.
If the new Antagonize is something similar (can't remove a Demoralize until you attack the Swashbuckler) and it follows similar patterns, then I will actually probably like it.
That's the beauty of Paizo's conditions. Because minuses matter so much "forced attacks" aren't really necessary. A -1/-2 is still enough to incentivize but not enough to remove agency.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My 2 coppers are on some kind of Fascinate ability. Perhaps a limited one, forcing a flat check instead of guaranteeing they can hit you and only you, but that's the debuff I assume they'll use as a base.