| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
1.) Better editing/layout
2.) More support for existing classes
3.) Rules for generic/modern classes and such, (like d20 Modern)
4.) More meta-magic-esque feats a la "Spell Trickster"
5.) Much less setting fluff.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What I most want is just more general feats and skill feats. Some skills really need more love.
Other than that, I’m infatuated with 2e, and I can’t wait for more APs to come out!
The Swashbuckler's mechanics, feats and overall style are distinct enough from the Investigator that I think this is a supremely unsatisfying answer.
I am aware it is mechanically different, I am just saying that intelligence and those skills don't lead to a swashbuckler mechanics style of play naturally to me, it just doesn't fit the thematics of a person who fights with keen insights and planning imo.
I think there's enough space for Shaman as a Primal Wave Caster, mixing in the Shifter into its chassis. Subclasses could be Shifter (wildshapey), Invoker (summoney), Cursebreaker (utility), and Augur (diviney).
That is a concept I hadn't considered, a Shaman being the chassis for a shifter, but personally I still don't think it is really needed over just giving the shifter a full class to work with (more flexibility in theme for the shifter then).
The more I think about it the more I think witches are the best route for a Shaman option, although I do think they would want more patron options (And an option for mask/tattoo/item as a familiar similar to PF1e options).Although I do lean towards preferring less new classes at this point and more options for existing ones.
1) Bounded-casting classes of other traditions. Maybe shifter as the primal one and Inquisitor as the divine one.
2) More frequent errata.
3) More support for existing classes
4) More skill feats.
5) Mythic rules
1) Draconic ancestries, including a full dragon and a draconic heritage, akin to the planar scions or beastkin, but taking the true dragons as their origin.
2) Planar dragons.
3) Chronicles of the Righteous Hardcover
4) Concordance of Rivals Hardcover
5) Lost Omens Arcadia
Got my 4) More ways for Monks to get circumstance bonuses to AC to bring an alternative to shield use.
If Nimble Dodge, Dueling Parry, Dodge Away were Monk feats, I'd take any of them 100% of the time even if it could be suboptimal or if they were toned down versions, just so I can say "oh, this feat is why I don't want a shield."
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
mythic rules or whatever the pathfinder2e equivalent would be that's all I want!!!
Mythic seems like it would be super easy to implement in PF2.
It would just be a series of free mythic archetype feats which are granted as story beats but ultimately work like any archetype feat.
You'd pick your starting mythic dedication feat (Tricker dedication, Archmage dedication, etc.) There would be general mythic feats you could pick at certain levels and then ones devoted to your dedication. Captsone to top it off.
Easy!
- At least one class that lets me play a slotless caster. Two would be even better. Shifter+Kineticist would be *great*.
I almost think I can dream up 5 slotless classes that I’d like to see.
1. Kineticist
2. Shifter
3. Mistweaver - the Starfinder nanocyte reflavored to use mist as its power source instead of nanites, though with an option to have it be nanites for sci fi characters.
4. The witchwarper area and target effects? Give me a ton of those. Also the precog’s paradoxes. Flavor it as either: tapping into the realm of dreams, or channeling outer planes into this world. As I homebrewed a class along the first lines, I’m now partial to the second.
5. ??? Profit? Though I’d count this or the thaumaturge as close enough:
- Bombardier - someone with the alchemist "perpetual" ability to create bombs as an at-will action, who's balanced to be able to hang with the martials on overall battlefield impact just by creating and throwing bombs. Selling off most of the alchemist utility factor is fine
Vaguely related, but I also want perpetual level 0 consumables that the alchemist can craft using only their perpetual alchemy ability, but from level 1.
Edit: forgot to add, but I’d do, in order, 1. Arcane, 2. Any tradition, 3. Primal, 4. Divine or Occult (depending on flavor), 5 whichever is not chosen for 4.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
More flexibility for focus spells. I mean, they system is great, but spell choices are extremely limited in most cases.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
1. A shapeshifter class that leans towards skills to the same degree as Bard, focused on Deception. I want to imitate specific people, and at least be able to create the illusion of being a dragon long enough to fool people. It was disappointing when Shifter had the exact same flavor as Druid.
It's pretty common for shapeshifters in mythology and pop culture to be tricksters, but there's been very minimal support for that in classes- it's pretty much just been a races-and-ancestries thing.
2. Kineticist. Lemme magical rail gun giant chunks of scenery at people again.
3. Bloodrager. I just want Glutton's Maw on a Barbarian without all the hoops, preferably combined with activating rage.
4. Rakshasa bloodline. I'm just a sucker for it, and it's especially important now that everything of a remotely similar flavor is Divine-exclusive.
5. Aberration eidolons. I'd really like to see occult Summoners branch out into other things, since phantoms are missing their main tricks. Not to say there aren't more phantoms I'd enjoy, but something a little more cosmic horror would be nice.
Just thought of another thing I’d like: some kind of Codex book. In my opinion, those were some of the most useful books of PF1, and I’d really like to see one come back. I feel it would slot perfectly into the “Not!Bestiary” spring slot, but it could also be a Lost Omens book. Although as I’d rather see it paired with a more robust NPC and hazard creation appendix, as well as about 100 theme templates, it might be a bit too rules focused for the LO line.
I kicked around the idea of an “Encounter Codex”, where you take a map and the book details 3-4 encounters that can take place on that map, not all of them hostile.
The way I see how they could make the Kineticist:
1) Give them the corresponding cantrip for free to represent the Kinetic Blast;
- Acid Splash (Acid)
- Chill Touch (Negative energy)
- Divine Lance (Divine)
- Electric Arc (Electricity)
- Gale Blast (Air)
- Haunting Hymn (Sonic)
- Produce Flame (Fire)
- Puff of Poison (Poison)
- Ray of Frost (Cold)
- Scatter Scree (Earth)
- Spout (Water)
- Tanglefoot (Wood)
- Telekinetic Projectile (Aether)
2) Give them spell slots and special lists, BUT expand it so that they can change the damage type according to their selected cantrips. For instance, they could get Fireball, but dealing a different damage type.
3) Expand some of the elements, because right now, we don't have a poison-type damage dealing cantrip, or a wood-related cantrip. The same can be said for Void, Positive energy and even Force.
4) They get the expanded element feature, with the corresponding mix-and-match combos.
5) As a revamp, give them the ability to channel their cantrips through weapons, and make it that the additional energy damage can be delivered if the attack would hit the Touch AC. Seriously, both Kinetic Blade and Whip were pretty broken...
I believe you might have misunderstood what this thread was about.
Also, I disagree with most of your things, as stated in the recent Kineticist thread. The only point I agree with is number 4.
Actually, the Kineticist is one thing I'd like to see in P2E, in addition of 2) the Viligante, 3) Wyvarans, Dragonkins and/or Dragon-like ancestries, 4) Cavalier/Samurai specializations for Fighters and 5) even more specializations for Fighters.
Also, if the Alchemist can now enhance regular alchemical items, including splash weapons (alchemical bombs), why couldn't the Kineticist utilize the cantrips? These are literally "kinetic blasts" that scale in power according to your level.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think it's fair to say most people don't want caster kineticist. As someone who follows any kineticist discussion they can find, it's pretty split between caster and martial preferences. Thematically I feel magical makes more sense, but the way martials work mechanically in this edition, a martial version would likely be stronger.
I did say "most" don't.
Yes, I'm aware. That's why I said I don't think it's fair to say most don't want caster kineticist. From what I've seen it's a pretty even split
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
1) A barbarian instinct like the aberrant bloodrager where your body contorts in weird ways.
2) Fungus druid order
3) A bow with the monk trait
4) A Kineticist class that interacts with neither focus points nor spell slots.
5) Primal/Occult Gish class.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah.
It's just anecdotal but the people I see keep suggesting Kineticist be a slotted caster are primarily people who admit they don't actually like the kineticist at all or want to see it in PF2 (which usually segues into 'just play an elementalist druid' or something).
Slotted spells are anathema to both its mechanical and thematic cores.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah.
It's just anecdotal but the people I see keep suggesting Kineticist be a slotted caster are primarily people who admit they don't actually like the kineticist at all or want to see it in PF2 (which usually segues into 'just play an elementalist druid' or something).
Slotted spells are anathema to both its mechanical and thematic cores.
I get why people keep trying to build PF1 classes out of mechanics we have in PF2, but if we look at classes like the Swashbuckler, Inventor, Investigator, etc. then we should realize that we can just make new mechanics for new classes to make them work. Like you could make a Swashbuckler based on focus as the metacurrency, but the panache mechanic is just more fun.
If you have to homebrew a new class for whatever reason, then sure built it out of systems we have already, but for the professionals we can trust them to make new stuff when they need/want it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
things I would like seeing (some of these are packages)
1 Kineticist and inquisitor would round out the classes i feel need to be in the game, inquisitor might be in the form of an archetype class or otherwise but should be there in some form.
2 Please give arcane list a few more interesting unique things, not even necessarily powerful just things you can point at as being arcane
3 some ancestries need a tad more love, the grippili is especially dire but a lot of new additions are a bit... bare
4 some firearms support for non gunslingers, specifically rangers, inventors and fighters should probobly have a basic reload feat somewhere
5 more oricle mysteries please their options are so thin at the moment
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
1) Inquisitor. I don't even need Inquisitor as player-facing options, those would be fine but all I'm particularly looking for is making NPC inquisitors because they slot into villainous archetypes better than clerics IMO.
2) Shapeshifter class. Not a spellcaster that can shapeshift, someone who focuses their energies on changing shape and honing that particular skill entirely. Would really like it to not be an extension of druids with the nature theme we got from Shifter in 1e, and having some trickster abilities would be amazing too. This I can do fine with NPCs as a GM, I specifically want the class version.
3) Kineticist as an at-will blaster class option without spell slots. I want this for two of my players in two different parties who really want to play blaster characters for the aesthetic of throwing fire and lightning and rocks at people rather than hitting them with a sword, but also aren't great with spell slots as a mechanic. Focus spells would be fine but not necessary, and I think I'd prefer kinetic blasts hew closer to cantrips than martial stances personally but overall as long as they aren't slotted casters and are blasters I'm fine with it. Spell slots would render the class useless for this purpose and drop it considerably lower on my list of things I want in PF2. Not off the list, but much further down.
4) More guidance on using stuff post level 26 in the game in some way. Mythic and explicitly level 26+ hazards/creatures would work, but I'm also cool if we get robust guidelines for making lower-level hazards that represent indirect means of struggling against the level 26+ creatures that the party cannot handle in a direct fight. Both are cool ideas, just need more to work with for if when my parties turn the campaign towards Care Bears Find and Kill Dagon and I need them to fight against demon lords and not just cultists.
5) More skill feats that are not part of archetypes. Just aren't enough of them, and some skills are more hurting for feats than others. If we're going to get them every other level, I'd like to see a bunch more options for a lot of skills where they get pretty sparse.
I've never played a Warlock and P1 didn't have a Warlock (well that Vigilante archetype thingy I guess?) so I know little and care less about the Warlock.
On the other hand Kineticist WAS in P1, and has plenty of ground work to build off of for implementing it in P2.
You can keep trying to shoehorn DnD's stuff in, but don't be surprised when people continue to not care.
Ok, here's the rundown:
The Warlock was a class introduced in D&D 3.5's Tome of Magic. It was designed as a caster-like without spell slots, but had the Eldritch Blast, which was an at-will ranged touch attack dealing untyped damage. Instead of spells, the Warlock receives invocations, which replicated certain actual spells and allowed them to alter their Blast in various ways, such as making it a line or dealing fire damage. The Blast itself scaled in power with levels, and it could be used to counter spells if it was high enough. The Warlock was apparently so popular that it returned early in 4E and was made a core class in 5E, similar to how the Alchemist was made a core class in P2E.
What parallels can we find with the Kineticist?
- Both have at-will ranged attacks (blasts).
- Both have ways to change their properties.
- Both have extras that replicate spells (invocations and talents).
- Both Blasts can be used for counterspell.
What differences can we find between the two?
- The Warlock receives its powers from a fiendish source / The Kineticist is all about elemental power.
- The Warlock's Blast is magical in nature / The Kineticist's Blast is elemental.
- The Warlock's invocations have no drawback / The Kineticist's talents require Burn points.
That's why I compared the Kineticist to the Warlock.
3.5 Warlock is relevant only for people who are stuck with 3.5 or PF1, and that's a dwindling group that won't buy anything from Paizo since The Great Betrayal anyway.
|
Eh, they're different but also similar. Kineticist clearly gives a big nod to bending from Avatar, and the power source tends to be more impersonal. But there was enough archetype support for more uncanny types of energy to throw around so you could certainly make a good facsimile of a warlock with it. And both classes catered to the "blast all day" niche.
Personally I think Stance feats are a good way to approach it. They allow you to let players be fairly free in how devoted to a single element you want to be, but do put in a bit of that specialization. The PF1 kineticist was a bit rigid in what you got when, PF2's more modular feat system can improve on that.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not sure if I'm singular here, but I don't like the Warlock thematically (IIRC Charisma based all-day blaster due to a pact with something that's probably bad news) but I do adore the Kineticist thematically (because their power comes from somehow running elemental energy through their bodies, which puts strain on you).
Like the Warlock has baggage because the thing you made a deal with is probably not a thing you should trust, whereas the Kineticist is entirely neutral thematically. The PF Witch can at least make their pact with something that is probably trustworthy (in PF1 you could have your patron be something like "nature" or "a good-aligned outsider" or "the collective unconscious because you're an empath"). But FWIW I'm also not a big fan of the sorcerer thematically being someone "who has special blood."
|
I've never played a Warlock and P1 didn't have a Warlock (well that Vigilante archetype thingy I guess?) so I know little and care less about the Warlock.
On the other hand Kineticist WAS in P1, and has plenty of ground work to build off of for implementing it in P2.
You can keep trying to shoehorn DnD's stuff in, but don't be surprised when people continue to not care.
Ok, here's the rundown:
The Warlock was a class introduced in D&D 3.5's Tome of Magic. It was designed as a caster-like without spell slots, but had the Eldritch Blast, which was an at-will ranged touch attack dealing untyped damage. Instead of spells, the Warlock receives invocations, which replicated certain actual spells and allowed them to alter their Blast in various ways, such as making it a line or dealing fire damage. The Blast itself scaled in power with levels, and it could be used to counter spells if it was high enough. The Warlock was apparently so popular that it returned early in 4E and was made a core class in 5E, similar to how the Alchemist was made a core class in P2E.
What parallels can we find with the Kineticist?
- Both have at-will ranged attacks (blasts).
- Both have ways to change their properties.
- Both have extras that replicate spells (invocations and talents).
- Both Blasts can be used for counterspell.What differences can we find between the two?
- The Warlock receives its powers from a fiendish source / The Kineticist is all about elemental power.
- The Warlock's Blast is magical in nature / The Kineticist's Blast is elemental.
- The Warlock's invocations have no drawback / The Kineticist's talents require Burn points.That's why I compared the Kineticist to the Warlock.
Correction: Warlock was introduced in Complete Arcane.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
3.5 Warlock is relevant only for people who are stuck with 3.5 or PF1, and that's a dwindling group that won't buy anything from Paizo since The Great Betrayal anyway.
Great Betrayal? Wha... ?
Eh, they're different but also similar. Kineticist clearly gives a big nod to bending from Avatar, and the power source tends to be more impersonal. But there was enough archetype support for more uncanny types of energy to throw around so you could certainly make a good facsimile of a warlock with it. And both classes catered to the "blast all day" niche.
I thought this as well, but then Paizo actually explained that it was inspired by Carrie O_O
It's... probably safer to assume that the Kineticist works "better" for Elsa from Disney's Frozen, any X-Men character or any anime protagonist :P
Correction: Warlock was introduced in Complete Arcane.
Oh, you're right. Tome of Magic had 3 classes: one about binding vestiges, one about shadow magic and one about true names.
The reason why I suggested spell slots is because it would probably eliminate Burn points. If you're instead limited to how many times you can alter your Blast, that would be less punishing.
Of course, they could always have 2 charts: one for infusions and one for utility talents. However, my major gripe is that shape infusions were not evenly distributed, with some Blasts getting more shapes than others... By giving "Fireball" to all elements, that would help as well.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
While I am genuinely interested in the kineticist chat, we probably want to move it to one of the threads already about the class rather than clogging up this one.
While I am genuinely interested in the kineticist chat, we probably want to move it to one of the threads already about the class rather than clogging up this one.
You've TOTALLY promoted your own topic XD
But yeah, I agree. Still, the Kineticist is one class I'd love to see in P2E, and its elemental manipulation could mesh well with other classes as an archetype. I mean... Hadoken-throwing monks anyone :P ?
