| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
Like I said. I generally love 2e, and the creativity that we are seeing coming out of the design team in these themed books, and I do not want this to stop. But I am starting to notice that it feels like things get released and then almost forgot about. Especially if it is not apart of the core set. You can see this in the amount of options for core vs non-core classes or ancestries (poor Shoony), And even in things like entire categories of items/mechanics (like grimoires and ritual spells).
I like how these themed books are pushing creativity in ways towards the theme. But I wonder how much it might be stifling creativity in other ways. One of my favorite things about Pathfinder 1e was all the quirky, almost random seeming archetypes that existed for each class. Now I wonder if we will see these kinds of class options, because they happen to never fit the theme of the books coming out.
So basically, I don't want the theme books to stop, but I wonder if there shouldn't be some non-themed random books as well. Books that are allowed to build more on what exists in the non-core set, even though it goes against the current business philosophy of Paizo. I love what Paizo has been doing, and I don't want these great ideas to just get buried under the next set of great ideas.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem that you are noticing but not identifying is thats random things that you are wrinting about are coming inside the APs (the Shoony as you used as example). But many (if not mostly) tables rarely allows and use APs content due the risk of spoil something, due they aren't a full rulebooks (just some pages is about new things and rules) and due this many ignore them, also their balance is questionable (mostly buggy and banned/restricted content from PFS for example comes from APs) and is more easily accessible via AoN than any other place making them more easily used in VTTs than in face-to-face games.
Maybe in the future Paizo may release these random AP content compiled in one book and revised. But now if you want some random content they are in APs.
| 25 people marked this as a favorite. |
The lack of continued support is something I'm a little worried about too.
We keep getting more archetypes, but there are a lot of existing ones that are so thin it's hard to build a character around and I wish they'd have more options.
... The Investigator is two years old now and has only gotten one single new feat (an AP-specific capstone) since then (kind of surprised Dark Archive of all books had literally zero support for them, if not there, when?).
I think the investigator is mostly okay, but it seems to highlight that the old adage of waiting for more material isn't really a viable strategy in PF2. If you have a problem with a class' feat progression, that's just how it's going to be. If you like a class, but wish there was a subclass/path that fit your style more, don't expect it to happen. If you're not happy that Searing Restoration is the only second-level feat a weapon inventor can take... oh well.
and as OP points out, pretty much every post-core ancestry is really thin. Sometimes I feel almost obligated to take a versatile heritage because you have so few choices within the ancestry.
The problem that you are noticing but not identifying is thats random things that you are wrinting about are coming inside the APs
I think that's only a small part of the overall issue. Like Shoony are neat, but as OP points out they're kind of undersupported.
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the big thing they need to figure out how to address is "ancestry feats for the non-core ancestries." Since essentially "I can choose between several good options at every relevant level if I'm an Elf, but I have exactly one choice at level 17 if I'm a Shisk" serves to make people regret playing the less common ancestry -or- it has the knock on effect of "every gnoll PC is also an aasimar" as people are just picking versatile heritages to keep their options open.
The lack of continued support is something I'm a little worried about too.
We keep getting more archetypes, but there are a lot of existing ones that are so thin it's hard to build a character around and I wish they'd have more options.
... The Investigator is two years old now and has only gotten one single new feat (an AP-specific capstone) since then (kind of surprised Dark Archive of all books had literally zero support for them, if not there, when?).
I think the investigator is mostly okay, but it seems to highlight that the old adage of waiting for more material isn't really a viable strategy in PF2. If you have a problem with a class' feat progression, that's just how it's going to be. If you like a class, but wish there was a subclass/path that fit your style more, don't expect it to happen. If you're not happy that Searing Restoration is the only second-level feat a weapon inventor can take... oh well.and as OP points out, pretty much every post-core ancestry is really thin. Sometimes I feel almost obligated to take a versatile heritage because you have so few choices within the ancestry.
The problem that you are noticing but not identifying is thats random things that you are wrinting about are coming inside the APsI think that's only a small part of the overall issue. Like Shoony are neat, but as OP points out they're kind of undersupported.
I think the big thing they need to figure out how to address is "ancestry feats for the non-core ancestries." Since essentially "I can choose between several good options at every relevant level if I'm an Elf, but I have exactly one choice at level 17 if I'm a Shisk" serves to make people regret playing the less common ancestry -or- it has the knock on effect of "every gnoll PC is also an aasimar" as people are just picking versatile heritages to keep their options open.
As for the ancestries I don't think they intend to add much more content to them. PF2 is already unique in this aspect of making races customizable. Few books really expand on them, and that must be intentional. So much so that humans, supposedly the main ancestry of the game, actually only receive feats from 3 books.
The lack of ongoing IMO support is a natural consequence of how new content is added.In the topic about class archetypes I write the IMO the APG classes could have been class archetypes with changes in chassis mechanics and with the feats of these classes consequently shared with others. One of the reasons I said this is because if Paizo had done it that way the new content would be much easier to integrate. But due to Paizo's choice to add more and more classes we started to have many classes vying for the attention of designers.
As it stands most of this content at its best will be accessible only through archetypes to existing content. If they had focused more on class archetypes, most of the content would have been interchangeable between classes.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree that ancestries are probably hurting the most, but it could get fixed if our lost omens books went to places that had new, interesting civilizations of other ancestries and not just always new ancestries that will only get enough feat support to build into 3 or 4 classes.
Paizo seems to be taking some along for the ride, like Leshy, and some are so open ended that they could easily get this support (like sprites, and fleshwarp), but Gnolls, Lizard folk, hobgoblins will need some lost omens love.
Classes are trickier to fit in, and I am also a little disappointed Dark Archive didn’t have more on recalling knowledge, research, and investigation in it. Neither Treasure Vaults nor Rage of Elements seem like good candidates for any of this.
Here’s hoping we can get a kingdoms or intrigue book that will hopefully be able to add a fair bit of this.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
On the contrary, this avoids the problem of having "old" classes with massive support as opposed to "new" classes which get less. Just ask any PF1 Shifter fan how they feel about a class that was published towards the twilight moments of the system.
The other problem this avoids is decision paralysis/material overload with having to choose one of 24 level 2 class feats.
I prefer having more classes to choose, each with a limited amount of material, than having fewer classes and then having to work with a zillion options for each of them.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have a feeling that the intent in this direction is that they want to get ALL of the Classes knocked out that they have plans for with the edition before they really dig into opening up a whole new serious batch of Feats, Class Archetypes, "Paths/Sub-Classes" and the like.... or at least that is my hope.
I have a feeling that the intent in this direction is that they want to get ALL of the Classes knocked out that they have plans for with the edition before they really dig into opening up a whole new serious batch of Feats, Class Archetypes, "Paths/Sub-Classes" and the like.... or at least that is my hope.
Maybe some unchained class versions?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm pretty frustrated by the lack of new content for older ancestries/classes, and even the core rulebook ancestries aren't necessarily spared from the lack of new content. I was playing an elf in Fists of the Ruby Phoenix, and when I hit level 17, I found one feat that was utterly useless to me available. I had to go all the way back to level 5 to find a feat that might be useful, and it never got used in the campaign. I compared it to the automaton and a few other more recent ancestries, and felt like I was getting the short end of the stick.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
On the contrary, this avoids the problem of having "old" classes with massive support as opposed to "new" classes which get less. Just ask any PF1 Shifter fan how they feel about a class that was published towards the twilight moments of the system.
The other problem this avoids is decision paralysis/material overload with having to choose one of 24 level 2 class feats.
I prefer having more classes to choose, each with a limited amount of material, than having fewer classes and then having to work with a zillion options for each of them.
I see your point, and I don't think fighters lack options as an example. But beyond that ? I disagree.
I really like the inventor but they don't got alot of feat support, and they still got alot of design space left. Overdrive feels like it could be incorporated into the rest of the class' kit way more. Currently it's kind of rage but with stuff, and it dosent really interact with the class at all.
Magus sorely needs some action compressors, and maybe some feats that made arcane cascade, well, not suck etc.
Analysis paralysis can be a thing, but the post CRB classes definitely don't suffer from that issue in regards to feats.
And the kineticist being released dosent help the inventor/Magus/drifter/investigator.
So yeah I'd personally love to see paizo slowing down on the new classes after the inquisitor and shifter is made.
Not that I actually care about either, but it seems the community does
It seems to me what you are interested in is actually things that "fix" the classes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have a feeling that the intent in this direction is that they want to get ALL of the Classes knocked out that they have plans for with the edition before they really dig into opening up a whole new serious batch of Feats, Class Archetypes, "Paths/Sub-Classes" and the like.... or at least that is my hope.
I think it's extremely unlikely that they will ever be done making new classes. Classes have always been the money maker player options, the thing that makes non-GM's buy the books. When they stop making classes it'll be time for PF3 and the cycle to start again.
I'm pretty frustrated by the lack of new content for older ancestries/classes, and even the core rulebook ancestries aren't necessarily spared from the lack of new content. I was playing an elf in Fists of the Ruby Phoenix, and when I hit level 17, I found one feat that was utterly useless to me available. I had to go all the way back to level 5 to find a feat that might be useful, and it never got used in the campaign. I compared it to the automaton and a few other more recent ancestries, and felt like I was getting the short end of the stick.
This problem about not having "useful" feat in ancestries is like the problems of 3.5/PF1 feats. A lot of bloat! Many feats few of them are really attractive.
The problem os simply add more feat is that this will add even more bloat to ancestry feats. IMO this is more a question of rewrite (ancestries unchained?) to remove some bloat and add more interesting feats instead.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
This problem about not having "useful" feat in ancestries is like the problems of 3.5/PF1 feats. A lot of bloat! Many feats few of them are really attractive.
The problem os simply add more feat is that this will add even more bloat to ancestry feats. IMO this is more a question of rewrite (ancestries unchained?) to remove some bloat and add more interesting feats instead.
With all due respect, it absolutely is. The skeleton ancestry, just as an example, has two feat choices at 9, 13, and 17 respectively. That is not "too much feat bloat"
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would totally be down for some new content for existing Ancestries, classes, and archetypes!
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
This problem about not having "useful" feat in ancestries is like the problems of 3.5/PF1 feats. A lot of bloat! Many feats few of them are really attractive.The problem os simply add more feat is that this will add even more bloat to ancestry feats. IMO this is more a question of rewrite (ancestries unchained?) to remove some bloat and add more interesting feats instead.
There is one elven feat at level 17. It allows the character with it to not count against the total number of targets of teleportation spells that target more than one character, and guarantees that teleport arrives no more than a mile off-target. Compared to catfolk getting three options, such as to use their Cat's Luck reroll once per hour, or getting a DC 17 flat check to ignore death, or a reaction to move after an opponent misses and it doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity. Or several ancestries getting permanent flight. Or gaining a permanent enlarge effect.
Just a couple of examples. I don't care about bloat if the feats that are granted to older classes feel worthless in comparison... which for me, they do. Though having seen Squiggit's reply, yes, having looked at Skeleton, they're even worse off (and gnolls get no level 17 feats, which sucks).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Inquisitor and Shaman are the last two classes I feel antsy about getting back, so hopefully it’s not too many years before we see them. I can’t think of too much else to clamor for after that - the Envoy/Warlord/Herald, maybe, but that’s about it.
Another Ancestry Guide could go a long way towards soothing Ancestry woes, though I’ve heard that book was kind of a bear to make.
I would definitely welcome some new Investigator toys, though.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Another Ancestry Guide that boosts all the ancestries options (and re-prints the Shoony ancestry so it's not trapped in an AP line) would be really cool. I know we're unlikely to see that kind of book from the Lost Omens line any time soon, but it'd be the most direct way to address the issue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another Ancestry Guide that boosts all the ancestries options (and re-prints the Shoony ancestry so it's not trapped in an AP line) would be really cool. I know we're unlikely to see that kind of book from the Lost Omens line any time soon, but it'd be the most direct way to address the issue.
It’s also a good way to get some Ancestries into print who otherwise would be waiting a long while, like how the first one gave us Androids back remarkably early in the edition. Drow would definitely move product, while my oddball requests (Lashunta, Minotaur, Sekmin, Wyrwoods) might not otherwise have a place to be printed.
The ethnicities and culture non-core Ancestries received in LOAG are some of my favorite material in 2e.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Uh, I don't really agree with that at all. I absolutely want more options for Fighters and Rogues (and other things).
And tbh, while I absolutely would like more Wizard and Witch and Oracle and Sorcerer and etc. feats, spellcasters and alchemists are some of the only characters that have gotten consistent support, because Paizo's been more willing to publish spells and items than feats. So it feels weird to me to say that those are the ones that are the most lacking.
edit: the post I replied to seems to be gone but was essentially saying that they should prioritize new options specifically for spellcasters and alchemists because martials didn't need them.
When I talk about many bloat I'm talking about ancestries feats in general, all levels. I'm considering things like Stonecunning. I know this is a feat that give a classic racial ability from PF1 and D&D but I never saw anyone taking it when there are less situational feats. (maybe someone can take it from lore reasons)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We're halfway there yet. A playtest for Starfinder 2e hasn't even started yet, so don't expect anything from a PF3 yet.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I seem to recall a Paizo person (can't remember their name) stating that most editions have a roughly 7 year lifespan.
Perhaps these are all questions/changes for PF3 since we will be hitting the 7 year mark not too far from now
I believe that very same quote talked about how PF2 was built much more intentionally than most, allowing it to last longer than that. I don’t expect an end to PF2 any time soon.
D&D 5e is also lasting a full decade, with the next thing coming in 2024.
Has any class gotten much support since the Advanced Player's Guide? I've seen a very small smattering of class feats pop up in Book of the Dead and what have you, but I don't think the core classes have truly had dedicated feat support either.
Ancestries (core and otherwise) got a pretty big infusion with the Lost Omens Ancestry guide, so I wouldn't expect to see another soon but don't see why they couldn't do another eventually. But I'm not sure WHERE Paizo would publish class feats. APs can give you a trickle, but the main line needs things thematically tight.
I also think there might be some diminishing returns for class feats, even beyond decision paralysis. Take the alchemist. They already have too many staple feats. I can't justify taking something like Demolition Charge with Quick Bomber and calculated splash right there.
I dunno. I'd like it if newer classes got more support too, I'm just not sure where to expect it from.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think a lot of class support comes through archetypes. Archetypes like Archer, Martial Artist, Dandy, Ritualist, Sentinel, etc. let you make pretty massive shifts in classes.
Ancestries can *kinda* do something similar with adopted Ancestry, but we would need at least a pool of not-ancestry cultural feats that could be taken by any ancestry that is a member of X society culture to really accomplish the same thing as archetypes for class feats.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah I think the way this works is that if you wanted to print more Fighter feats, you'd have to figure out a thing that fighters currently aren't able to do well that you want to give them a way to do. But when you've identified that, then you ask "is this just a thing fighters should be able to do? Or should anybody with the training be able to do it?" at which point it becomes an archetype.
The class that's probably gotten the most feat support in the most books is the Monk since there's always a "what about this stance/style?" Particularly when this is an AP that involves showing someone using it, who can then teach it to you.
For other classes, probably the most reasonable kind of post-release support is "new subclasses". New oracle curses, new barbarian instincts, new druid orders, etc. This sort of thing has been spotty.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Lastwall gave us a handful of fighter feats. Secrets of Magic gave us Druid and Monk feats.
Archetypes are cool, but since they're all mutually exclusive with each other, there's severe diminishing returns in terms of how much new archetypes can benefit characters.
But the issue of feat support extends to archetypes too, imo. There are a lot of cool archetypes that only have like one page of feats which makes it really hard to lean into and those could use expanding too.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Archetypes being mutually exclusive doesn't seem that bad since we already have the issue where most of the time a PC takes all of the feats specific to its subclass or its tactic that you chose. Like if you're a Giant Barbarian you take the stuff to get as big as you can get, if you are a Ranger/Druid with an animal companion you take the animal companion feats, etc. It's just that unlike subclasses you can fit several archetypes in, hypothetically at least.
Archetypes are cool, but there's a several issues IMO:
- dedications/archetypes first frat being mostly a tax feat
Agree. Including that's why IMO many homebrew tables uses Free Archetypes.
- extremely slow progression ( this is very impactful considering many adventures end by lvl 8/12 ). Meaning that to give color to a character through archetypes in terms of gameplay it may require several levels.
I'm not sure if this is a specific problem about archetypes. This problem happens to casters without any archetype too. Their best spells and flexibility happens after lvl 10.
So it isn't a PF2 exclusive, it's a limitation for all D20 systems where some builds only works in mid to later levels. The currently solution for this is try to start from level 11 or 13. This will allow your archetype and spellcasters beginning way more useful.
- too much thematic and niche feats that would probably be skipped, unless a very dedicated campaign and a well rounded master able to give then a reasonable space.
And that's precisely why I was talking about bloat.
I have some players who just don't like to spend hours looking for feats in the books and unfortunately the themed feats don't help.For those who like to charfound the books analyzing all the available options OK. But many players simply get lost when choosing an ancestry, for example. There are many ancestry and there are many feats to read before deciding which player is best suited or which is simply mechanically more efficient for what he wants to do.
So I think that improving the number of feats is cool, but the quality of the feats and the efficiency of the gameplay are more important. I don't want it to happen again what happens in PF1/3.5 where we have literally thousands of feats most can be and are completely ignored, but getting in the way and many players wasting hours looking for something good or just ignoring and looking for some meta on the internet.
In the end I tend to agree with Totally Not Gorbacz by focusing on new classes Paizo avoids decision paralysis and the player is forced to dive into a huge amount of feats, something that currently happens in the ancestries if you want to choose one for her full potential. Because at least in classes you have a mechanical and thematic grouping first, after which you look for which talents you want to use.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not sure I can agree with the premis.
We currently got what, 22 base classes ?I'm fairly certain that having 36 would turn off more players, than 15 new feats for each of the current classes would.
I might be off base here. But I suspect most of the players that try pf2e and then quits, are overwhelmed from the get go. And that's why they never give it an honest shot.
I doubt X class getting two new feats per level would be the primary culprit in that case.
I also have a sneaking suspicion that future archetype, feats, items etc become harder and harder to balance, if they keep pumping out new classes.
I completely disagree with this premise that have many classes drive players away. For the simple reason that each class can be easily defined even in a single sentence. Which facilitates and is commonly used by players when choosing with what they will play. Even this is one of the things that Paizo got the most right when making each class, conceptually and mechanically they are in fact unique, and not variants of each other.
To give you an idea the basic definitions are what facilitate a quick choice are:
- - Alchemist: Is an expert in non-magical consumable items.
- - Barbarian: Martial who dives into his rage to crush opponents
- - Bard: A support for the whole party, debuffer and occult spellcaster
- - Champion: Tanker and protector of party members
- - Cleric: Specialist in magic healing and divine spellcaster
- - Druid: Primal spellcaster with strong connection to the elements and nature
- - Fighter: A man-at-arms expert in combat of various styles
- - Gunslinger: Specialist in firearms
- - Inventor: Specialist in the creation and use of normally permanent and experimental tech items
- - Investigator: A mystery solver skilled in several areas of knowledge
- - Magus: A martial and spellcasting hybrid for those who don't want to be just one of them.
- - Monk: Expert in extremely skilled unarmed combat even without weapons and armor.
- - Oracle: Divine spellcaster who was basically "born" overwhelmed by divine power.
- - Psychic: Occult spellcaster who controls magic with just the power of his mind.
- - Ranger: A survival specialist in the natural world extremely skilled in fast-paced 2-handed combat and bows/crossbows.
- - Rogue: Specialist in covert-ops skilled in dealing with all kinds of unexpected dangers and an extremely lethal assassin.
- - Sorcerer: Specialist in spellcasting in different traditions (including even a mixture of them) able to cast all kinds of magic naturally and efficiently.
- - Summoner:
Master DigimonController and semi-caster master of a magical entity that fights side-by-side with it
- - Swashbuckler: Light and flashy fighter who specializes in powerful finishing blows
- - Thaumaturge: Martial expert in mysticism and exploiting the weaknesses of his opponents
- - Witch:
Nerfed WizardA caster guided by a supernatural entity specialized in weakening his opponents.
- - Wizard: A conjurer who studies arcane magic, able to use it very flexibly based on their theses and magical specialties.
As I said, it is based on these basic premises that most players choose their classes. They don't usually feel overloaded with options at this stage, because each class is unique and clear about what it proposes to do and in fact it does exactly what it proposes to do.
Even at this point I venture to say that PF2 is even simpler and clearer than D&D 5e. Since in D&D, in practice, those who end up defining what the class really is are the subclasses, while in PF2 this definition is much clearer and the "subclasses" and archetypes define more how that character of that class proposes to do what the class defines.
The biggest problem I see my players having is more with ancestry than anything else. For ancestries do not have clear definitions. Basically any race can be anything, and this leads many players to have to deal with a myriad of ancestries, heritages and feats to find the what best suits to what they want to do.
This is what fundamentally generates the most complaints related to PF2 options overload. Since in the class selection stage they usually uses the above definitions, in the part of the skill feats the player is already limited to choose the skills that he will specialize in due to the prerequisites, in the part of the general feats, they are few, and on the part of archetypes, although they add an extra complication, they are fully optional, as the classes work perfectly fine without them. So players who don't want to worry too much about too many options can easily ignore them.
Returning to the issue of class talents, what bothers me about them is that some classes have an extremely useful list of feats, such as the cleric, fighter and summoner for example, to the point that several times the problem is not having enough slots to do what you want, while others, usually most spellcasting classes, have many levels where you look and don't find any really interesting talents to use.
That's why I've been focusing here on the issue of quality and avoiding bloat. Feats already exist in droves, now feats you want to use, that's another story.
Ps.: I agree that curiously several ancestries don't have lvl 17 feats. But at the same time they have several low level feats. For me this is also a mistake in the quality of the features offered. It's like I said it's very bloat and not much interesting or useful.
I believe they have simply moved the design of the classes/ancestries away from "Here's our initial presentation to be expanded later" to "This is the class/ancestry as-is and in complete form, and unless there is some specific reason germane to a later idea it will not be expanded".
I prefer it this way thus far.
Na verdade eles já confirmaram isso numa entrevista anterior (não me perguntem a fonte, mas sei que isso é conhecido aqui pelo fórum). De que não pretendem fazer mais nada parecido com um novo APG e que todos os novos livros devem ser temáticos de alguma forma.
Então talvez tenhamos alguma coisa como um Barbaro da Fúria dos Elementos e alguns talentos relacionados a isso no próximo livro de regras. Mas é isso, novo conteúdo relacionado a um tema especifico. Nada diretamente relacionado a expandir as classes atuais por simplesmente expandi-las.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dear Paizo,
Hey there, love ya. That said, I don't suppose you would be interested in kinda shifting this into a prefect system? Perfect by my consideration of course. That'd be neat. If you ask me, there is too much...and not enough..., ya know what I mean?
Sincerely,
Passionate Pathfinder Player
P.S. I still don't understand why most of the dev team stays off of these forums. We are always so positive.
For me I love archetypes like martial artist and mauler and want to see more archetypes that give better than 1/2 rate access to certain class feats but from a more limited and thematic pool.