What do you still need?


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion

251 to 300 of 753 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Wayfinders Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Oh yeah, Eddie had a tumor familiar! I almost forgot about that. Everytime Eddie leveled, the whole gaming group would go, "Ewwwwwww!"


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm really hoping they're saving all the funtime boddy horror stuff with alchemists for a book that delves into fleshwarping as part of its subject matter.


need a book on daemons a lost omens saga lands & a lost omens shackles book +mythic


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Oh, right, I'd almost forgotten, but I did a count recently and it turns out there's exactly three classes that have the ability to take Wisdom as their Key Ability Score - Clerics, Druids, and Magical Trickster Rogues (who kind of cheat by virtue of taking either a Cleric or Druid multiclass dedication :p). Monks and Rangers have significantly decreased their reliance on it between editions, and the end result is that it's the least commonly-used ability score besides Constitution for classes. I get that Wisdom is a pretty good stat since it applies to Perception, Will saves, and Medicine, but I'm honestly a bit thrown that of the eleven classes we've gotten since the CRB, not one of them actually uses Wisdom. I'd really love to see a new non-caster class that centers Wisdom in their kit!

Contributor

5 people marked this as a favorite.
keftiu wrote:
What do you still need?

Interesting question!

While there are definitely a lot of great class concepts out there that I would really appreciate seeing in Pathfinder 2E, I think the thing I can definitely say that I need more than anything else is that I need a hero.

I'm holding out for a hero until the end of the night. He's gotta be strong (key ability: Strength), he's gotta be fast (+10 Speed bonus for sure), and he's gotta be fresh from the fight (maybe something to help him regain Hit Points after an encounter?).

Yeah, definitely think I need a hero, and I'll be holding out for one until the end of the night. Gotta double down on the Strength and the Speed. Ooh, I know! Maybe something to give him enlarge person? My PC really needs to be larger than life.

... wait. I just described a giant instinct barbarian, didn't I? Hm. I'll have to think more on this tomorrow.


LuniasM wrote:
Oh, right, I'd almost forgotten, but I did a count recently and it turns out there's exactly three classes that have the ability to take Wisdom as their Key Ability Score - Clerics, Druids, and Magical Trickster Rogues (who kind of cheat by virtue of taking either a Cleric or Druid multiclass dedication :p). Monks and Rangers have significantly decreased their reliance on it between editions, and the end result is that it's the least commonly-used ability score besides Constitution for classes. I get that Wisdom is a pretty good stat since it applies to Perception, Will saves, and Medicine, but I'm honestly a bit thrown that of the eleven classes we've gotten since the CRB, not one of them actually uses Wisdom. I'd really love to see a new non-caster class that centers Wisdom in their kit!

shaman would be nice with rage of element

but seems like shaman isn't happening any time soon

always thought shaman should be core class instead of druid

but pathfinder have many cumbersome tradition inherited from dnd

like druidic and druid couldn't wear metal armor

how does any of it still make sense


Lots of swarm related archetypes, spells, companions, etc.

Expanded guns & gears - with more archetypes, innovations, technology.

Something maritime focused.


A master of many styles archetype where you get the feats much earlier.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Shaman, please. I'm hurting for it.


9 people marked this as a favorite.

For a more conservative pick, I'd say spears need some love. I love spears both from a fantasy perspective and from what little training I had with them. So it is kind of sad to see so few good variations (imo) of it here. At my table, they see so little use that I actually forgot they have their own crit spec.

For a more wild thing, I want more magitech. Automatons were an amazing addition, especially now that STR isn't hard-coded into them anymore. Same with sky ships and hopefully starmetal guns in the future. So I want more of that good stuff. Not necessarily too much into the Starfinder direction - i.e. very futuristic stuff - but rather things that are more fantasy, usually relics of an ancient civilization. Pseudo-staffs ("spell lances"?) that are functionally a ranged weapon instead of a regular casting device. Ancient superweapons are always a great trope. So are ancient constructs in general, which is a vibe I'm missing from the otherwise excellent clockwork enemies. Artificial limbs and such that can also give you appendages you didn't have before - non-gamebreaking ones like a tail, wings or replacing your lower half with a mechanical scorpion. You know, normal things :D. I'm currently blanking on more, but there is a lot to explore here.

Something related to that is a class archetype for the Inventor that gives it a more impactful innovation and gets rid of the explode feature would also be great. And the option for it to be augmenting yourself, because mad science clearly hasn't gone far enough yet ^^.

Anyway, sign me up for aberration and body-horror stuff as well. Imagine living in a world with so many entities that are so vastly more potent than you. Magic is a thing, so the idea of "I'll have some of that, please" is quite understandable and interesting to explore.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

More polearms would be welcomed, such as the Lucerne Hammer, Bec-de-corbin, Bardiche and some new Blunt weapons.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I really, really want a one handed reach spear as the baseline "one handed reach weapon" that all others should be compared against.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
WatersLethe wrote:
I really, really want a one handed reach spear as the baseline "one handed reach weapon" that all others should be compared against.

Ignoring real-life practicality for a moment, this really seems like a no-brainer from a fantasy perspective. The "short spear and shield" combo wins hard on looks alone.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Karmagator wrote:
WatersLethe wrote:
I really, really want a one handed reach spear as the baseline "one handed reach weapon" that all others should be compared against.
Ignoring real-life practicality for a moment, this really seems like a no-brainer from a fantasy perspective. The "short spear and shield" combo wins hard on looks alone.

Bringing back the real-world practicality, Spear and Shield has been a staple of human combat and warfare for thousands and thousands of years, and the spear in those combos most certainly had a reach advantage.

One nice video on the subject is by Lindybeige.


WatersLethe wrote:
Karmagator wrote:
WatersLethe wrote:
I really, really want a one handed reach spear as the baseline "one handed reach weapon" that all others should be compared against.
Ignoring real-life practicality for a moment, this really seems like a no-brainer from a fantasy perspective. The "short spear and shield" combo wins hard on looks alone.

Bringing back the real-world practicality, Spear and Shield has been a staple of human combat and warfare for thousands and thousands of years, and the spear in those combos most certainly had a reach advantage.

One nice video on the subject is by Lindybeige.

Thanks for the video, I haven't seen that one yet ^^.

And yeah, fair point (heh), I should have been more specific ^^. Spear and shield is amazing in a group formation, because there it doesn't really matter how agile your weapon is or how varied your attack patterns can be. In the Pathfinder context we are talking what is basically a duel or at least you are unlikely to fight in formation. In that context, the combination is rather poor.

Edit: I think that is demonstrated rather well in the video ^^


On the spear front, the new Broadspear being Advanced was a real bummer. I'd gladly lose Sweep and Versatile S to just get 1d10 Piercing on a stick as a Martial weapon.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

didn't understand why polearm and spear was 2 group

dueling spear filcher fork are pretty good

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alexander Augunas wrote:
keftiu wrote:
What do you still need?

Interesting question!

While there are definitely a lot of great class concepts out there that I would really appreciate seeing in Pathfinder 2E, I think the thing I can definitely say that I need more than anything else is that I need a hero.

I'm holding out for a hero until the end of the night. He's gotta be strong (key ability: Strength), he's gotta be fast (+10 Speed bonus for sure), and he's gotta be fresh from the fight (maybe something to help him regain Hit Points after an encounter?).

Yeah, definitely think I need a hero, and I'll be holding out for one until the end of the night. Gotta double down on the Strength and the Speed. Ooh, I know! Maybe something to give him enlarge person? My PC really needs to be larger than life.

... wait. I just described a giant instinct barbarian, didn't I? Hm. I'll have to think more on this tomorrow.

My first PFS character is a cavern elf Champion of Torag, Adopted by Dwarves with Barbarian (Giant) multiclass. He seems to fit your description.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Perpdepog wrote:
I'm really hoping they're saving all the funtime boddy horror stuff with alchemists for a book that delves into fleshwarping as part of its subject matter.

YES. Fleshwarping for PCs is at the top of my list. I would love it in a book about the Darklands, Drows and Aberrations.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:

didn't understand why polearm and spear was 2 group

dueling spear filcher fork are pretty good

You often thrust with a spear, while you often swing with a polearm, that's why.


8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
keftiu wrote:
What do you still need?

For the greedy overlords at Hasbro/WotC to get boycotted/sued out of existence. #opendnd #longlivepaizo


1 person marked this as a favorite.
keftiu wrote:
On the spear front, the new Broadspear being Advanced was a real bummer. I'd gladly lose Sweep and Versatile S to just get 1d10 Piercing on a stick as a Martial weapon.

I was confused over the Advanced trait being so liberally applied to Impossible Lands weapons in general. In fact I'm still pretty confused on why so many weapons feel Martial but are listed as Advanced. I'm sure there's something I'm missing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Theoretically advanced means it's like 1-2 traits stronger than an equivalent martial weapon.

The Visap is a really strange one, it's basically a dagger with injection instead of thrown, but daggers are simple weapons. That basically means they value injection as good as 3-4 normal traits? That doesn't feel right.

Zulfikar is also weird. Strictly speaking it has the right trait budget for an advanced weapon, but with a big asterisks insofar as that Sweep is a significant downgrade from Agile (which the shortsword it's comparable to has) and disarm is the worst positive trait in the entire game. Feels bad, especially for something they decided to crib the name of a legendary and culturally significant weapon for.


visap need a deadly d6 or become martial instead of advanced


just remember the lack of brutal weapon for player

oversized throw should be a brutal attack

maybe barbarian can get a two handed d8 brutal thrown 30 weapon eventually


More shoony from around the world. That don't look like pugs. Also some offical art like a magic user shoony. Shoony adventurers art. That's what I want


1 person marked this as a favorite.
WatersLethe wrote:
I really, really want a one handed reach spear as the baseline "one handed reach weapon" that all others should be compared against.

I think Treasure Vault has something along those lines:

OrmEug wrote:
keftiu wrote:
Do we know the identity of those Hobgoblin weapons yet?

There is a video showing 2 of them (not sure if they're final) in some sample build.

Breaching Pike - One-handed d6 piercing martial weapon with the Hobgoblin, Reach, and Razing (+2 damage per damage die vs. objects, ex. a shield used for Shield Block) traits.

Phalanx Piercer - Advanced d10 piercing bow with a range increment of 60 feet. Has the Hobgoblin, Concussive, Propulsive, Razing (see above), and Volley (20 ft.) traits.

see the video here.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:

just remember the lack of brutal weapon for player

oversized throw should be a brutal attack

maybe barbarian can get a two handed d8 brutal thrown 30 weapon eventually

Not sure I agree. Most people seem to value strength builds higher than Dex builds. Giving strength range options won't help there.


Well my wish is sort of to late. The game is in my opinion suffering from feat bloat. There are near two dozen classes and an at least 40 feats for each class. Not only are there way too many classes (just make them archtypes of subclasses of actual clases) there are way too many feats of which 90% are less than useful due to being so conditional.

So what do I want I would wish for more quality over quantity


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Erk Ander wrote:

Well my wish is sort of to late. The game is in my opinion suffering from feat bloat. There are near two dozen classes and an at least 40 feats for each class. Not only are there way too many classes (just make them archtypes of subclasses of actual clases) there are way too many feats of which 90% are less than useful due to being so conditional.

So what do I want I would wish for more quality over quantity

I'm curious - what classes would you fold into others? Most have a pretty unique mechanical identity.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
keftiu wrote:
Erk Ander wrote:

Well my wish is sort of to late. The game is in my opinion suffering from feat bloat. There are near two dozen classes and an at least 40 feats for each class. Not only are there way too many classes (just make them archtypes of subclasses of actual clases) there are way too many feats of which 90% are less than useful due to being so conditional.

So what do I want I would wish for more quality over quantity

I'm curious - what classes would you fold into others? Most have a pretty unique mechanical identity.

swashbuckler and investigator just feels like scoundrel and mastermind rogue stretch into two class

all rely on precision damage means there are three class can not handle ooze

look at exploit weakness

does it feels like something investigator should have

implement feels far more creative than innovation

paizo are getting better and better at creating new class

psychic and thaumaturge are just about the best non core class they made

this also make early class like witch swashbuckler and investigator look even worse


9 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

My weapon inventor has one single level 2 inventor class feat they qualify for at level 2, do not get the idea that there's too much class feat bloat. Going any smaller than that and classes would have next to no choice at any given level, which sounds really bad and already how a lot of classes feel.

Archetype bloat might be worth talking about though. Despite only having one level 2 class feat, that same inventor qualifies for 70 dedication feats, some of which only have 3-4 additional feats to choose from.

Feel like Paizo missed an opportunity to have fewer archetypes but maybe write in some all-class feat options instead.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:
keftiu wrote:
Erk Ander wrote:

Well my wish is sort of to late. The game is in my opinion suffering from feat bloat. There are near two dozen classes and an at least 40 feats for each class. Not only are there way too many classes (just make them archtypes of subclasses of actual clases) there are way too many feats of which 90% are less than useful due to being so conditional.

So what do I want I would wish for more quality over quantity

I'm curious - what classes would you fold into others? Most have a pretty unique mechanical identity.

swashbuckler and investigator just feels like scoundrel and mastermind rogue stretch into two class

all rely on precision damage means there are three class can not handle ooze

look at exploit weakness

does it feels like something investigator should have

implement feels far more creative than innovation

paizo are getting better and better at creating new class

psychic and thaumaturge are just about the best non core class they made

this also make early class like witch swashbuckler and investigator look even worse

Doesn't sound you agree with Erk that they should be making less classes then, if they keep getting better and better at it.


Captain Morgan wrote:
25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:
keftiu wrote:
Erk Ander wrote:

Well my wish is sort of to late. The game is in my opinion suffering from feat bloat. There are near two dozen classes and an at least 40 feats for each class. Not only are there way too many classes (just make them archtypes of subclasses of actual clases) there are way too many feats of which 90% are less than useful due to being so conditional.

So what do I want I would wish for more quality over quantity

I'm curious - what classes would you fold into others? Most have a pretty unique mechanical identity.

swashbuckler and investigator just feels like scoundrel and mastermind rogue stretch into two class

all rely on precision damage means there are three class can not handle ooze

look at exploit weakness

does it feels like something investigator should have

implement feels far more creative than innovation

paizo are getting better and better at creating new class

psychic and thaumaturge are just about the best non core class they made

this also make early class like witch swashbuckler and investigator look even worse

Doesn't sound you agree with Erk that they should be making less classes then, if they keep getting better and better at it.

obviously paizo should keep making new and better content

and scrap the one doesn't work and fold them into new content

like how alchemist should have become part of the inventor

and if there is any hope of fixing witch the current version would have nothing left but chassis of standard caster


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Meanwhile, I'm still annoyed that the inventor hasn't gotten any new innovations since the existing options feel woefully incomplete.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Meanwhile, I'm still annoyed that the inventor hasn't gotten any new innovations since the existing options feel woefully incomplete.

God, mood. Investigator is heading toward three years with no new methodology.

Impossible Lands finally gave it some new non-capstone feats, but they're all rare and part of a really specific chain.


Has anyone taken the time to quantitatively assess the options - feats, talents, suites etc available to every class and work out which ones are “bursting with enough options we would love more but don’t need them” and which ones are “please, sir, cood oi av an option?” And then ask Paizo to make a book with options for the latter. Because one of the many refrains I see that rubs shoulders with FAQ is making the game solid and giving support to last year’s shiny, instead of just all the oo new shiny that is upcoming in next week’s blog, is all the rage of elements until rage of elements comes out and then goes in the dustbin of witchstory.


Squiggit wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Meanwhile, I'm still annoyed that the inventor hasn't gotten any new innovations since the existing options feel woefully incomplete.
God, mood. Investigator is heading toward three years with no new methodology.

But at least the Investigator has the excuse of "we just haven't come up with a good idea for the subclass yet" meanwhile I've been wanting to play an Inventor with a one-of-a-kind repeating heavy crossbow since the playtest for the class and the game has thoroughly denied me at every turn


OCEANSHIELDWOLPF 2.0 wrote:
Has anyone taken the time to quantitatively assess the options - feats, talents, suites etc available to every class and work out which ones are “bursting with enough options we would love more but don’t need them” and which ones are “please, sir, cood oi av an option?” And then ask Paizo to make a book with options for the latter. Because one of the many refrains I see that rubs shoulders with FAQ is making the game solid and giving support to last year’s shiny, instead of just all the oo new shiny that is upcoming in next week’s blog, is all the rage of elements until rage of elements comes out and then goes in the dustbin of witchstory.

even if a class only have 40 feat it still have more than 400 archetype feat to pick

as long as a class have good chassis they can grow with the archetype pool

that is the beauty of archetype system

magus and gunslinger can more or less do this

investigator and swashbuckler can not


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:
25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:
keftiu wrote:
Erk Ander wrote:

Well my wish is sort of to late. The game is in my opinion suffering from feat bloat. There are near two dozen classes and an at least 40 feats for each class. Not only are there way too many classes (just make them archtypes of subclasses of actual clases) there are way too many feats of which 90% are less than useful due to being so conditional.

So what do I want I would wish for more quality over quantity

I'm curious - what classes would you fold into others? Most have a pretty unique mechanical identity.

swashbuckler and investigator just feels like scoundrel and mastermind rogue stretch into two class

all rely on precision damage means there are three class can not handle ooze

look at exploit weakness

does it feels like something investigator should have

implement feels far more creative than innovation

paizo are getting better and better at creating new class

psychic and thaumaturge are just about the best non core class they made

this also make early class like witch swashbuckler and investigator look even worse

Doesn't sound you agree with Erk that they should be making less classes then, if they keep getting better and better at it.

obviously paizo should keep making new and better content

and scrap the one doesn't work and fold them into new content

like how alchemist should have become part of the inventor

and if there is any hope of fixing witch the current version would have nothing left but chassis of standard caster

I cannot fathom a scenario where REMOVING classes from the game is a viable option.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Squiggit wrote:
Investigator is heading toward three years with no new methodology.

What? You're kidding!

Seems like inventor has only been out for about a year to me. Surely 2e hasn't even been out for much more than three years.

Old age and the pandemic isolation must be causing me to lose my sense of time.

Edit: Guns & Gears has only been out for ~1.5 years. It would be more accurate to say...

Oh, you said investigator, not inventor...

Never mind! :P


Captain Morgan wrote:
25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:
25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:
keftiu wrote:
Erk Ander wrote:

Well my wish is sort of to late. The game is in my opinion suffering from feat bloat. There are near two dozen classes and an at least 40 feats for each class. Not only are there way too many classes (just make them archtypes of subclasses of actual clases) there are way too many feats of which 90% are less than useful due to being so conditional.

So what do I want I would wish for more quality over quantity

I'm curious - what classes would you fold into others? Most have a pretty unique mechanical identity.

swashbuckler and investigator just feels like scoundrel and mastermind rogue stretch into two class

all rely on precision damage means there are three class can not handle ooze

look at exploit weakness

does it feels like something investigator should have

implement feels far more creative than innovation

paizo are getting better and better at creating new class

psychic and thaumaturge are just about the best non core class they made

this also make early class like witch swashbuckler and investigator look even worse

Doesn't sound you agree with Erk that they should be making less classes then, if they keep getting better and better at it.

obviously paizo should keep making new and better content

and scrap the one doesn't work and fold them into new content

like how alchemist should have become part of the inventor

and if there is any hope of fixing witch the current version would have nothing left but chassis of standard caster

I cannot fathom a scenario where REMOVING classes from the game is a viable option.

that was the problem of 1e isn't it

useless stuff neverendingly pile on to each other

imagine a mad scientist wielding flame thrower character

what class it will be

alchemist if the flame thrower use alchemist fire

inventor and the flame thrower could be powered by anything

after reading inventor it was obvious if inventor subclass are research field and one of them are alchemy and mutation then everything of value of alchemist class can be added into inventor

alchemist would have nothing of value to offer

no value would be lost if alchemist are just a specific subclass of inventor

but this unthinkable but obvious improvement can not happen

because player resistance just make any effort no worth the trouble


Squiggit wrote:

My weapon inventor has one single level 2 inventor class feat they qualify for at level 2, do not get the idea that there's too much class feat bloat. Going any smaller than that and classes would have next to no choice at any given level, which sounds really bad and already how a lot of classes feel.

Archetype bloat might be worth talking about though. Despite only having one level 2 class feat, that same inventor qualifies for 70 dedication feats, some of which only have 3-4 additional feats to choose from.

Feel like Paizo missed an opportunity to have fewer archetypes but maybe write in some all-class feat options instead.

It's a little interesting that this is where the status quo ended up. I see it said (mainly by fans, but I wouldn't be surprised if Paizo rules designers had said it at points as well) that one of the benefits of PF 2e giving you a short list of class feats is that you don't have to deal with as much decision paralysis, compared to PF 1e's big chaotic mess of every feat at once. But the common refrain for archetypes vs more class feats, class paths, or class archetypes is that archetypes are accessible to more classes at once, so archetypes get printed more often than other class options (even if, in many cases, they're only really useful for one or two classes at a time).

The result of all this is that many classes have this choice between having very few options at some levels (or only one, in the case you mentioned), or they have to wade into a mess of archetypes reminiscent of the 1e days.


Squiggit wrote:
My weapon inventor has one single level 2 inventor class feat they qualify for at level 2

I still remember when there were fewer Druid Orders available. I had a player that didn't want a familiar or animal companion or to shapeshift, so went with Storm Order. There were zero level 4 Druid class feats available at the time that met that requirement. The choices were either pick another lower level feat, Order Explorer to Leaf, Animal, or Wild order, or Archetype Dedication.

25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:
even if a class only have 40 feat it still have more than 400 archetype feat to pick

I'm trying to come up with a scenario where a player would actually have 400 archetype feats to pick between at any given level. I'm not coming up with one.

Now, if you are theorycrafting a build, sure - you have a ton of options that you could get to eventually. But that is what theorycrafting and build optimizing is.

For a player that just wants to play a fun character that meets their theme, they pick a class that matches, and maybe pick an archetype or two that adds to it. And at each level, there are a reasonable amount of options to choose between.

Radiant Oath

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Something just crossed my mind; a Small-size catfolk heritage, kind of like the ant gnoll, would be nice at some point. Not just as a way to roleplay something like Antonio Banderas' Puss-in-Boots, but also because there's a bunch of wildcats that are efficient hunters despite being much smaller than a lion or cheetah, like the rusty spotted cat, sand cat or black-footed cat!


Starting this hobby with 4E, I have a real softspot for the Warlord.

I'd like to see PF2 do a take on a class whose core identity is leadership, tactics and inspiration purely from a non-magical standpoint.

Aside from that, I think PF2 can afford slow down the new shiny classes and add more subclasses, feats and other options to the existing ones.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Animakuro wrote:

Starting this hobby with 4E, I have a real softspot for the Warlord.

I'd like to see PF2 do a take on a class whose core identity is leadership, tactics and inspiration purely from a non-magical standpoint.

Aside from that, I think PF2 can afford slow down the new shiny classes and add more subclasses, feats and other options to the existing ones.

Have you seen the Marshel archetype?


maybe regalia

how magical are implement

anyway why non magical

barbarian can stomp a earthquake that sounds pretty magical

why not just warrior bard


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
Something just crossed my mind; a Small-size catfolk heritage, kind of like the ant gnoll, would be nice at some point. Not just as a way to roleplay something like Antonio Banderas' Puss-in-Boots, but also because there's a bunch of wildcats that are efficient hunters despite being much smaller than a lion or cheetah, like the rusty spotted cat, sand cat or black-footed cat!

OH we would love this for now I will have to deal with beastkin on small sized ancestries.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I've got another one - I want the Mastermind Rogue racket to be as powerful as its vibes. The Thaumaturge demonstrated that these mechanics can be done well :)

251 to 300 of 753 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / What do you still need? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.