Class Upgrades / Archetypes / Feat Chains?


Secrets of Magic Playtest General Discussion


1 person marked this as a favorite.

What are you hoping to see come out in this book to boost the classes? Currently hoping to see:

- Bloodrager as an instinct.
- more Druidic Orders
- Arcanist. Somehow. Some way. I love that style of spellcasting


Honestly the idea of alternate casting styles is top of the list for me. Never was a fan of Vancian casting, which is why i drifted heavily towards Spheres of Power in pf1


TheGoofyGE3K wrote:

What are you hoping to see come out in this book to boost the classes? Currently hoping to see:

- Bloodrager as an instinct.
- more Druidic Orders
- Arcanist. Somehow. Some way. I love that style of spellcasting

Yes! I absolutely love Bloodrager, and I'd like to see what they would do to turn it into an instinct.

SoulknifeFan420 wrote:
Honestly the idea of alternate casting styles is top of the list for me. Never was a fan of Vancian casting, which is why i drifted heavily towards Spheres of Power in pf1

Agree here. We know there will be magic systems. But what? I believe there's some speculation on a Spheres-style system, but I am very doubtful that would happen.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Shifter archetype. If Cavalier, Brawler, and Vigilante can be brought over as archetypes, then so can the Shifter.


Brawler is easier to be brought back as an Archetype because its core ability were Flurry of Blows, weaker Monk AC, Awesome Blow, and flexible feats. Fighter now has flexible feats, Monk has the Flurry. So what the Brawler can give is relatively limited as far as PF1 classes go.

Shifter on the other hand gives things that are more unique. So they have a higher chance of being a full class.

Vigilante stopped being a class because Vigilante would either: Be a super weak jack of all trades master of none, or make all other classes invalid. It was just too much for the new system to be brought wholesale.

Cavalier is a weird one because of the whole mounted fighter vs commander vs challenge.


Temperans wrote:
Brawler is easier to be brought back as an Archetype because its core ability were Flurry of Blows, weaker Monk AC, Awesome Blow, and flexible feats. Fighter now has flexible feats, Monk has the Flurry. So what the Brawler can give is relatively limited as far as PF1 classes go.

Brawler just works well from the Martial Artist archetype, Fighter Martial Artist for more of a boxer/brawler type, Rogue Martial Artist for a Ninja feel or other martial classes all work well for having slightly different flavours with the archetype. This is something I love about the archetype system.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Apellosine wrote:
Temperans wrote:
Brawler is easier to be brought back as an Archetype because its core ability were Flurry of Blows, weaker Monk AC, Awesome Blow, and flexible feats. Fighter now has flexible feats, Monk has the Flurry. So what the Brawler can give is relatively limited as far as PF1 classes go.
Brawler just works well from the Martial Artist archetype, Fighter Martial Artist for more of a boxer/brawler type, Rogue Martial Artist for a Ninja feel or other martial classes all work well for having slightly different flavours with the archetype. This is something I love about the archetype system.

Always remember this is just a better Variant Multiclassing. They took all bad bits about it and polished it.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Temperans wrote:
Shifter on the other hand gives things that are more unique. So they have a higher chance of being a full class.

I don't know what it would mean for Shifter in relation to the prior edition, but in PF2 this feels very in line with other "feat chain" style archetypes (Mauler, Martial Artist, etc).

I'd expect the Dedication to give the Wildshape focus spell, and then access to the appropriate Druid feats at min level +2. Add in a couple of archetype exclusive feats as gravy and call it a day.


My favorite thing in Pathfinder ever is the kineticist, so I died a little inside when I saw it isn't coming out next year. But I would be happy if we got mechanics that could bring casters closer to that style of play. Metamagic could easily work like infusions, and cantrips like blasts. There would probably have to be a trade off somewhere, in addition to costing feats. I see something like a cantrip master archetype; requires spell slots and at least one attack cantrip known, and it's a line of feats that is basically metamagic that can only be applied to attack tagged cantrips. Maybe doing damage in a line, increasing damage, etc at the cost of an action. And possibly costing one spell slot per level you can cast (except for 10th).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gaulin wrote:
My favorite thing in Pathfinder ever is the kineticist, so I died a little inside when I saw it isn't coming out next year. But I would be happy if we got mechanics that could bring casters closer to that style of play. Metamagic could easily work like infusions, and cantrips like blasts. There would probably have to be a trade off somewhere, in addition to costing feats. I see something like a cantrip master archetype; requires spell slots and at least one attack cantrip known, and it's a line of feats that is basically metamagic that can only be applied to attack tagged cantrips. Maybe doing damage in a line, increasing damage, etc at the cost of an action. And possibly costing one spell slot per level you can cast (except for 10th).

In case you're not aware, there are a number of homebrew kineticists out there for 2e. If you want something published, Legendary Kineticist is something to check out. But there are also at least 3 other homebrews I'm aware of. This is, of course, assuming that homebrew/3pp is something you're interested in/okay with.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hoping for actual class archetypes to trade out class features.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, LO Special Edition, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber

Legendary Kineticist looks pretty good.

There are apparently not going to be as many base classes in PF2E as there were in PF1E. I wonder which ones we might still see?

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Ed Reppert wrote:

Legendary Kineticist looks pretty good.

There are apparently not going to be as many base classes in PF2E as there were in PF1E. I wonder which ones we might still see?

Legendary kineticist is amazing!

I do hope they create kineticist for PF2e sometime.


I hope arcanist becomes an archetype that gives a slot and changes how you cast giving spells 1 per level. Like if you are a prepared caster you gain a spell where you can heighten freely and one spell that you can cast spontaneously per slot. And if you are spontaneus you can prepare 1 spell per slolt.


Ed Reppert wrote:

Legendary Kineticist looks pretty good.

There are apparently not going to be as many base classes in PF2E as there were in PF1E. I wonder which ones we might still see?

Considering 4-6 classes have dropped from the pool isn't that statement already true even if all the other classes get implemented?

Also I think Omdura might be ones of the ones left behind due to being a tie in product, few lore connections, few unique class abilities (that I remember), etc.

Vampire Hunter is in a similar position. That class was a tie in class and receive very little support.

So thats already 4-8 fewer classes.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Temperans wrote:
Ed Reppert wrote:

Legendary Kineticist looks pretty good.

There are apparently not going to be as many base classes in PF2E as there were in PF1E. I wonder which ones we might still see?

Considering 4-6 classes have dropped from the pool isn't that statement already true even if all the other classes get implemented?

Only if they do not create any completely new ones....

_
glass.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
glass wrote:
Temperans wrote:
Ed Reppert wrote:

Legendary Kineticist looks pretty good.

There are apparently not going to be as many base classes in PF2E as there were in PF1E. I wonder which ones we might still see?

Considering 4-6 classes have dropped from the pool isn't that statement already true even if all the other classes get implemented?

Only if they do not create any completely new ones....

_
glass.

I want to say there was an interview where they said they wanted to make new classes, not just port over all the old 1e classes.


cjgrimm wrote:
glass wrote:
Temperans wrote:
Ed Reppert wrote:

Legendary Kineticist looks pretty good.

There are apparently not going to be as many base classes in PF2E as there were in PF1E. I wonder which ones we might still see?

Considering 4-6 classes have dropped from the pool isn't that statement already true even if all the other classes get implemented?

Only if they do not create any completely new ones....

_
glass.

I want to say there was an interview where they said they wanted to make new classes, not just port over all the old 1e classes.

I also remember this, although I'm not sure exactly when they said this.


They said that during the APG panel.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, LO Special Edition, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber

Well, there ya go. New classes would be interesting, I guess.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

They've said it on numerous occasions, actually. Pretty much when pressed, so far, every Paizo person has expressed an interest in adding and creating new things for Pathfinder instead of just porting over old stuff.

And frankly, they had better do so, in my opinion.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Reticent wrote:
Temperans wrote:
Shifter on the other hand gives things that are more unique. So they have a higher chance of being a full class.

I don't know what it would mean for Shifter in relation to the prior edition, but in PF2 this feels very in line with other "feat chain" style archetypes (Mauler, Martial Artist, etc).

I'd expect the Dedication to give the Wildshape focus spell, and then access to the appropriate Druid feats at min level +2. Add in a couple of archetype exclusive feats as gravy and call it a day.

Hopefully coupled with them resolving how wild shape interacts with various other rules.

Whether or not an item bonus to hit works when wild shaped via the focus spell is probably the most important. But whether rage, sneak attack, etc etc apply is also pretty important.


pauljathome wrote:


Hopefully coupled with them resolving how wild shape interacts with various other rules.

Absolutely! We shouldn't even need to wait for a supplement to get that, tbh. They could probably clear up 99% of the rules questions about polymorphs with a 3 sentence paragraph.


Sporkedup wrote:

They've said it on numerous occasions, actually. Pretty much when pressed, so far, every Paizo person has expressed an interest in adding and creating new things for Pathfinder instead of just porting over old stuff.

And frankly, they had better do so, in my opinion.

Yeah, but they still need to port the core stuff everyone likes first. Probably they will keep porting but adding smaller new things with it until they port everything that is needed. But i do want new things compatible with the system instead of porting the old. With the new action system they can make so much more than just old rehashs.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber
TheGoofyGE3K wrote:

What are you hoping to see come out in this book to boost the classes? Currently hoping to see:

- Bloodrager as an instinct.
- more Druidic Orders
- Arcanist. Somehow. Some way. I love that style of spellcasting

The Anti-druid with tech/machine shape

Grand Lodge

New class options
Inquisitor Doctrine for the Cleric
More Druid orders
Bloodrager Instinct for Barbarian, Rage-Based Focus Spells
Maybe get the Neutral aspects for Champions, though I can see waiting for a Secrets of Combat for those.

Arcanist Archetype, A lot of metamagic Focus Spells for any tradition.


Sporkedup wrote:

They've said it on numerous occasions, actually. Pretty much when pressed, so far, every Paizo person has expressed an interest in adding and creating new things for Pathfinder instead of just porting over old stuff.

And frankly, they had better do so, in my opinion.

I wonder if the Paizo crowd consider the Investigator and Swashbuckler to be new stuff - I would, at least the Swashbuckler. Really nothing in common with the original iterations other than the name and the theming.


There is a need to port over old stuff because past the core classes and some prestige classes most of it was Original.

Not only that but many of those classes are incredibly popular and they would be shooting themselves in the foot not providing access to something that fills those roles.

Not to mention that OF2 is canonically a continuation of Golarion were all those old classes existed. And one of their stated goals for the game was "telling the same stories", which is impossible if you dont have the classes for it.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Temperans wrote:

There is a need to port over old stuff because past the core classes and some prestige classes most of it was Original.

Not only that but many of those classes are incredibly popular and they would be shooting themselves in the foot not providing access to something that fills those roles.

Not to mention that OF2 is canonically a continuation of Golarion were all those old classes existed. And one of their stated goals for the game was "telling the same stories", which is impossible if you dont have the classes for it.

I don't think anyone is for completely leaving existing classes behind. But beyond having one of the biggest and best fantasy RPG design teams in existence, they also have a proprietary world that they can use to design entirely new and unique classes for it. There is so, so much open room to try new things and I personally would be beyond disappointed if they stopped at "what worked before" and never delve into anything new or wild!


Oh I never said they shouldn't make new things.

But those old classes are very important for the lore of Golarion, you can't just cut them out.

If PF2 was not tied to the Golarion setting it would be a different matter. But since they are connected the need for the ports are there.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Back to the original post purpose:

1) more Oracle mysteries
2) Other non-school wizard traditions
3) new wizard thesis and feats to support all wizard thesis
4) some way of wizards sacrificing a higher level spell slot to cast a lower level spell they have prepared at a higher level.
5) An archetype that works for a wizard alchemist hybrid with feats to combine alchemy and magic
6) A witchlike option for the magus - a martial that has made a deal with a patron for power - fighter + witch archetype doesn't quite cut it. Be good if their 'familiar' was an intelligent weapon (yes I know that could just be done via flavour).
7) Good options for non vancian casting.
8) A construct eidolon option for the summoner
9) better wizard focus spells
10) Better/more attack roll based spells that don't also allow a save
11) Effective feats to buff shape changer wizards - seriously a transmuter focus spell that granted temp HP, AC and Att Bonus while polymorphed would go a long way.
12) An underground thematic druid order - order of caves or fungi or something
13) Eldritch Knight prestige class, something similar to Eldritch archer but melee flavoured.
14) An archetype that worked something similar to the Echo Knight fighter option from Explorer's Guide to Wildemount.
15) Chronomancy options
16) Seeker of the song type archetype
17) Sorcerer evolution feats similar to dragon disciple but for the other bloodlines.
18) Cleric Inquisitor Doctrine or inquisitor feat chain
19) More focus spell options for non caster classes, Rangers got some great stuff be nice if Champions got more love.
20) More focus spells not tied to a domain for clerics. Sadly there are too many domains to support with specific class feats.
21) A shifter archetype
22) More ancestry magic feats and focus spells
23) A necromancer archetype that makes a good option for Clerics, Wizards or Wizards
24) More rituals - seriously there is a lot of room here to put in some super cool stuff then limit it via rarity
25) Dirge/funeral Bard muse.

Wayfinders

Cyder wrote:
25) Dirge/funeral Bard muse.

Yes please! Thanks to the excellent "compositions are spells" convention, the exception for mind-affecting effects would actually work in this edition. I want to play a character who has good reason to sing SPG's Ghost Grinder in-character. Is that so much to ask?


Cyder wrote:

14) An archetype that worked something similar to the Echo Knight fighter option from Explorer's Guide to Wildemount.

I had to look this up, but damn that sounds fun.


Mystic Theurge, maybe.

as an archetype, I guess.

perhaps Beguiler, too.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cyder wrote:

Back to the original post purpose:

8) A construct eidolon option for the summoner

Good news, Paizo may have already beaten you to that one. From the Eidolons intro in the playtest, right before the "Reading an Eidolon's Entry" portion:

Summoner Playtest wrote:
Arcane eidolons are usually formed of mental essence, also known as astral essence. They include dragon eidolons, the astral echoes of ancient dragons; construct eidolons, astral beings formed into a simple construct shape through arcane magic; and amalgam eidolons, scientifically crafted magical experiments built carefully out of astral thoughtforms.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

For myself most of the things I was looking forward to have already been announced, so everything else is just gravy on top of that. I would like there to be some way to become a viable construct crafter, though. I was really hoping that with tighter action economy on summons that owning a golem buddy would be doable this time round, and then they got called out as being specifically unsuitable in the Bestiary. Sad times.
Some more necromancy stuff would be neat, too.
I'd like to see a bloodrager-style instinct, though I'd be worried that trying to pack that much potential variety into just one instinct would strip away a lot of what makes the bloodrager fun to play. I'd also like to see some of the other totems come back, like fiend.

Also, because it got brought up, I'm really looking forward to when the design team gets to start making new stuff. I say gets to because it feels like they are at least in part porting over old classes because we want to play X, but in 2E. It'd also mean no more dealing with the mental hurdle of "It didn't work that way in 1E!" that can frustrate some people.

CrimsonKnight wrote:
TheGoofyGE3K wrote:

What are you hoping to see come out in this book to boost the classes? Currently hoping to see:

- Bloodrager as an instinct.
- more Druidic Orders
- Arcanist. Somehow. Some way. I love that style of spellcasting

The Anti-druid with tech/machine shape

Golaricons, roll out!

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Secrets of Magic Playtest / General Discussion / Class Upgrades / Archetypes / Feat Chains? All Messageboards
Recent threads in General Discussion