| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You may want to take a look at the Chronoskimmer archetype.
The Time Mage archetype as well, while you're at it.
(I saw these archetypes when they first came out, but I didn't read a lot into them at the time. They are so cool. Chronoskimmer having no prerequisites besides getting your GM on board with the narrative especially makes for a fascinating variety of time skipping characters)
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
We need a Warlord.
Lots of ex D&D players are asking for it. Marshal is nice but a full class or at least more options would be really appreciated.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Chronomancer...You may want to take a look at the Chronoskimmer archetype.
I did, and to me, it's a good start, bot not what I wanted. This archetype reads like most of the 1/2 class archetypes out there, covering the basics of personal magic, but not fully fleshed out. For me, the chronomancer should be able to do more than hop through a few seconds of time one way or another, but also "borrow" things from the timeline, or maybe have some minor summons ability to pull creatures out of time (mostly a variant of summon monster/nature's ally/etc.)
Just my thoughts on it
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Time Mage archetype as well, while you're at it.
Saw this as well (yes, I DO own a copy of Dark Archive ;-P), and again very nice, but still 1/2 or even 1/3 of what I envision a full class would be. Both archetypes seem like minor versions of a full class, as if Paizo HAS an idea in mind for a chronomancer class, but is testing the waters by offering these archetypes first, then reverse engineering the class itself. This line of thinking has also got me wanting Timescape setting, like MCU's Time Police headquarters, or a certain city in the center of the planar multiverse we can't mention due to copyright infringement, where time-related beings and entities (and maybe gods?) oversee the timeline and make sure nobody messes with it, which of course there are those who most certainly DO mess with it (chro9nomancer being just one of those).
As I sit here writing this, I see a campaign unfolding before me revolving around this entire concept...
Man, I would LOVE to to be part of buidling that
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A real, proper, Winter Witch archetype, and a Voidworm familiar.
This isn't even really about the problems with the Witch being under-tuned. Yes, I'd like the Witch to be better than it is, but I'd much rather my character have the right design than be heavily optimal.
The character who is my most important, whose name is my username, and who I have recreated in 3.5, PF1, and 5th edition, has always been a Winter Witch. And to me, that means discovering the occult and strange forms of Winter and utilizing the meaning and intent of coldness beyond the form of coldness.
Basically, I need an archetype that says "Your magic tradition is Occult, but you can also pick any spell with the Cold trait". And then they'd have some Archetype feats to do things like, move through your own Magically created Ice, throw Cold based curses on enemies, and that would re-flavor a bunch of Occult spells in a cold-like way (Synethesia works by making incredibly tiny pathways through your brain out of frost that connects the brain centers for difference senses, ect).
I'd be willing to drop the Witch down to 2 spell slots per level in order to get this, since I know that adding cold spells to the Occult spell list for them would do a lot to cover the biggest deficiency of the Occult spells list, and a lot of those other abilities are pretty strong as well.
And then Vali also needs a Voidworm familiar as he has always had, but while I'm at it, gimme familiars for all the level 1 outer planer creatures. The Cassisian Angel, and the Lyrakien and all that.
Since I didn't get it in Treasure Vault, I want more L19 & L20 Alchemical Consumables that aren't Poisons.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I definitely feel the need for:
-Protean Sorcerer Bloodline.
-Monitor aligned Champions, especially CN and LN
-Some more Evil Champion feats that makes them a bit better, especially for NE and CE which are lacking right now.
-Some rule for fallen Champions
-More Occult Mysteries (would love to see the Lunar Mystery back)
-More Rituals
I waited basically the entirety of PF1E to have a historical Kensei-type warrior – unarmored master of katana, because I'm a chanbara film nerd.
The Warrior Poet archetype was perfection.
Sadly it was never allowed for PFS play...
I'd love to see a version for PF2E! Either based off the Swashbuckler or the Monk, at least a version at all...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I waited basically the entirety of PF1E to have a historical Kensei-type warrior – unarmored master of katana, because I'm a chanbara film nerd.
The Warrior Poet archetype was perfection.
Sadly it was never allowed for PFS play...I'd love to see a version for PF2E! Either based off the Swashbuckler or the Monk, at least a version at all...
Huh. Yeah... all you'd really need is some way for a swashbuckler to treat a katana as a finesse weapon, but as it stands....
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I’ve been pretty spoiled by 2e when it comes to plant options. At this point, the only thing I could really ask for is more options that give the plantmancer vibe through subclasses. The Druid has never filled this hole for me, even outside 2e The Plant Summoner does though, and I love it. I wouldn’t mind more of that.
I don’t even care which classes get a plant-themed subclass. I’d take as many as I can. Sorcerer and Oracle would probably be the most likely out of the casters; I’m really fishing for cool low level plant focus spells. Maybe Alchemist and Barbarian for the martials?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I’ve been pretty spoiled by 2e when it comes to plant options. At this point, the only thing I could really ask for is more options that give the plantmancer vibe through subclasses. The Druid has never filled this hole for me, even outside 2e The Plant Summoner does though, and I love it. I wouldn’t mind more of that.
I don’t even care which classes get a plant-themed subclass. I’d take as many as I can. Sorcerer and Oracle would probably be the most likely out of the casters; I’m really fishing for cool low level plant focus spells. Maybe Alchemist and Barbarian for the martials?
Excited for Wood Kineticists? You'll have them in August.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Excited for Wood Kineticists? You'll have them in August.
Absolutely! I just don’t know which plant ancestry I’ll pair it with first.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Huh. Yeah... all you'd really need is some way for a swashbuckler to treat a katana as a finesse weapon, but as it stands....I waited basically the entirety of PF1E to have a historical Kensei-type warrior – unarmored master of katana, because I'm a chanbara film nerd.
The Warrior Poet archetype was perfection.
Sadly it was never allowed for PFS play...I'd love to see a version for PF2E! Either based off the Swashbuckler or the Monk, at least a version at all...
The Aldori Dueling Sword is a pretty decent facsimile of a finesse katana. Sword Lords are definitely in the same thematic wheelhouse as the warrior poet.
Really kinda wish Iron wasn't two hand specific. There's no real reason it needs to be and have had a few characters who would have otherwise liked to try it.
Something I just realized I'd like to see today is a switch-hitting magus hybrid study. The one magus I got to be in 1E used a bastard sword, and I'd like to be able to replicate them.
Inexorable Iron doesn't fit because it wants you to have a two-handed weapon all the time, and Laughing Shadow doesn't feel like a great fit because its benefits are meant for a free-hand fighter. I'd love to see something that's in the middle, though I admit I have no idea what such a hybrid study would look like.
This would have to be a specific synergy thing for Two-Hand weapons, right? Like Fighter's Dual-Handed Assault? Actually you could probably just make a Magus version of that feat rather than dedicating a whole hybrid study to it.
Speaking of which, I do think there need to be more payoff feats like Dual-Handed Assault for the more niche weapon traits that aren't quite worth a die size but kinda have to be priced as if they were. Forceful is begging for some way to capitalize on the effect because as it stands the scimitar is just not as good as any of the other weapons in the same class.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Something I just realized I'd like to see today is a switch-hitting magus hybrid study. The one magus I got to be in 1E used a bastard sword, and I'd like to be able to replicate them.
Inexorable Iron doesn't fit because it wants you to have a two-handed weapon all the time, and Laughing Shadow doesn't feel like a great fit because its benefits are meant for a free-hand fighter. I'd love to see something that's in the middle, though I admit I have no idea what such a hybrid study would look like.
This would have to be a specific synergy thing for Two-Hand weapons, right? Like Fighter's Dual-Handed Assault? Actually you could probably just make a Magus version of that feat rather than dedicating a whole hybrid study to it.
Speaking of which, I do think there need to be more payoff feats like Dual-Handed Assault for the more niche weapon traits that aren't quite worth a die size but kinda have to be priced as if they were. Forceful is begging for some way to capitalize on the effect because as it stands the scimitar is just not as good as any of the other weapons in the same class.
Duel-Handed Assault was what put it in my head, yeah. Someone mentioned it in another thread and I started thinking how neat it'd be for my old magus to be able to do that.
I feel as though it's still in an awkward spot for fitting into the other studies though, rather than being its own. Inexorable Iron turns off when you're not two-handing, and Laughing Shadow partially does. I imagine the benefit would be tied to how many hands you have on your weapon, maybe something like Twisting Tree's altering of traits for a staff. (Not that exactly because then you'd be recreating Twisting Tree, but more versatile, which I don't see the point of.)
So I really like Maguses and this is one of the subtle things about Laughing Shadow-- a lot of the benefits aren't there to force your play style to be light weapon based, they're there to compensate you for using light weapons with a low-hit-count play style because the natural advantages of a heavier weapon / armor with the milder benefits of LS are already good enough to use it... especially the level 10 dimensional assault cancel into flatfooted spellstrike it can do.
You could actually start combat double gripping, do your first big hit two handing, trigger arcane cascade off that, release your grip, and benefit from the bonus if it pleased/benefitted you for whatever reason.
The Aldori Dueling Sword is a pretty decent facsimile of a finesse katana. Sword Lords are definitely in the same thematic wheelhouse as the warrior poet.Huh. Yeah... all you'd really need is some way for a swashbuckler to treat a katana as a finesse weapon, but as it stands....I waited basically the entirety of PF1E to have a historical Kensei-type warrior – unarmored master of katana, because I'm a chanbara film nerd.
The Warrior Poet archetype was perfection.
Sadly it was never allowed for PFS play...I'd love to see a version for PF2E! Either based off the Swashbuckler or the Monk, at least a version at all...
I'm not necessarily worried about the Finesse part in PF2E. If I need to spec into STR that's fine.
I just liked that the specific character fantasy was acknowledged, but it felt so fleeting.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Recently I went about building a pixie character that had the corgi mount feat (grants a corgi familiar you can ride as a tiny character).
And now I have realized how much stuff is hard coded for animal companions and not familiars, which makes building the character more challenging.
I would like to see an option that lets you have a familiar, that can transform into an animal companion form. Even if it's basically like needing all the familiar master archetype abilities and grabbing the appropriate animal companion feats as well (whatever you want grab to advance them) but so you can narratively have 1 companion that works with the various parts of the rules.
I want to have a familiar that can speak and have thumbs when out of combat, but transform into a more appropriate combat form when the time comes.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, a way to maintain medium size cat animal form while maintaining full combat effectiveness in melee combat.
I just want to be a combat cat. I wanna claw and bite and kill things as a cat, then pop out in human form when combat is over. Or not! Same for Bear form.
Also would like to do so as Orca (Shark) or Eagle Form. Just want to be an effective druid in melee combat, as a cat, as medium size my entire characters career 1-20. Is that so much to ask.
Yeah, having a way to maintain an increasing attack, damage, and AC while in a smaller form should be an option.
The spells as currently written don't leave that as a possibility.
I think that most in homebrew games the GM would allow to keep the companion size while progress it's feats. There's no power creep in this. Only PFS games and the mostly restrictive and orthodox GMs may enforce that your companion needs to grow.
Yet that's a good thing to implement in a errata. It's very easy to implement and don't add much text just need to add a "can" before the "grow" term.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Summoning has a few problems. Only the very few best monsters work well. So if you do your homework and dig through the manuals or just go use a guide someone else wrote you can have an OK summons. That is not fun for many players.
Even with that you run out of top level spell slots very quickly so it’s a short adventuring day. The concept really needs a focus spell, for a couple of generic monsters that the designers are happy are balanced.
Please give us an Conjurer archetype with a focus spell to summon a generic animal/ soldier/ golem/ undead/ fiend/ celestial, distributed amongst the appropriate spell casting traditions. Give the summoned creature no major special abilities to cause problems. We also need to carefully look at the way it scales at higher levels. The gap between caster level and total level grows too wide. Maybe an entry level feat for a level 1 summons, another feat to allow it to scale at all, then a much higher level feat to fix the top end problems.
If people want a specific creature they can spend a spell slot.
Summoning has a few problems. Only the very few best monsters work well. So if you do your homework and dig through the manuals or just go use a guide someone else wrote you can have an OK summons. That is not fun for many players.
Even with that you run out of top level spell slots very quickly so it’s a short adventuring day. The concept really needs a focus spell, for a couple of generic monsters that the designers are happy are balanced.
Please give us an Conjurer archetype with a focus spell to summon a generic animal/ soldier/ golem/ undead/ fiend/ celestial, distributed amongst the appropriate spell casting traditions. Give the summoned creature no major special abilities to cause problems. We also need to carefully look at the way it scales at higher levels. The gap between caster level and total level grows too wide. Maybe an entry level feat for a level 1 summons, another feat to allow it to scale at all, then a much higher level feat to fix the top end problems.
If people want a specific creature they can spend a spell slot.
The ideal is an archetype that's is able to summon like druids is able to shapeshift, using focus spells. Also a shapeshifter archetype is also welcome.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Summoning has a few problems. Only the very few best monsters work well. So if you do your homework and dig through the manuals or just go use a guide someone else wrote you can have an OK summons. That is not fun for many players.
Even with that you run out of top level spell slots very quickly so it’s a short adventuring day. The concept really needs a focus spell, for a couple of generic monsters that the designers are happy are balanced.
Please give us an Conjurer archetype with a focus spell to summon a generic animal/ soldier/ golem/ undead/ fiend/ celestial, distributed amongst the appropriate spell casting traditions. Give the summoned creature no major special abilities to cause problems. We also need to carefully look at the way it scales at higher levels. The gap between caster level and total level grows too wide. Maybe an entry level feat for a level 1 summons, another feat to allow it to scale at all, then a much higher level feat to fix the top end problems.
If people want a specific creature they can spend a spell slot.
The whole "summon a creature with a custom stat block rather than something from the bestiary" idea was actually proposed, but narrowly didn't make it. People seem to like summoning exactly the monster they could have fought, so that won. But yeah, I'd like to have the other option as well. Not as a focus spell, because then the power budget would be too low, but as a regular spell.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The whole "summon a creature with a custom stat block rather than something from the bestiary" idea was actually proposed, but narrowly didn't make it. People seem to like summoning exactly the monster they could have fought, so that won. But yeah, I'd like to have the other option as well. Not as a focus spell, because then the power budget would be too low, but as a regular spell.Summoning has a few problems. Only the very few best monsters work well. So if you do your homework and dig through the manuals or just go use a guide someone else wrote you can have an OK summons. That is not fun for many players.
Even with that you run out of top level spell slots very quickly so it’s a short adventuring day. The concept really needs a focus spell, for a couple of generic monsters that the designers are happy are balanced.
Please give us an Conjurer archetype with a focus spell to summon a generic animal/ soldier/ golem/ undead/ fiend/ celestial, distributed amongst the appropriate spell casting traditions. Give the summoned creature no major special abilities to cause problems. We also need to carefully look at the way it scales at higher levels. The gap between caster level and total level grows too wide. Maybe an entry level feat for a level 1 summons, another feat to allow it to scale at all, then a much higher level feat to fix the top end problems.
If people want a specific creature they can spend a spell slot.
If I understand correctly, the point behind calling for a summoning focus spell is that it would be possible for a summoner to conjure creatures in a fight multiple times per day without using up all of their top-level spell slots. Much how Druid can use wild shape to cast several polymorph spells on a recharge.
If I understand correctly, the point behind calling for a summoning focus spell is that it would be possible for a summoner to conjure creatures in a fight multiple times per day without using up all of their top-level spell slots. Much how Druid can use wild shape to cast several polymorph spells on a recharge.
Yeah, I know and I'm saying that any kind of focus spell like that would be too weak to bother with ^^.
Think about it, summoning a creature 3-4 levels below your own costs one of your highest level spell slots. Focus spells are generally weaker than real spells. That isn't going to change because you can summon one with a custom stat line. Wild Shape can work like it does, simply because it replaces what you can do at that moment, usually a full caster with a discount martial. Summoning spells add to what you can do by virtue of giving you an additional team member. Yes, you have to give up one action per turn, but two actions still allow you to cast.
So yeah, I wouldn't hold my breath :/
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I understand correctly, the point behind calling for a summoning focus spell is that it would be possible for a summoner to conjure creatures in a fight multiple times per day without using up all of their top-level spell slots. Much how Druid can use wild shape to cast several polymorph spells on a recharge.Yeah, I know and I'm saying that any kind of focus spell like that would be too weak to bother with ^^.
Think about it, summoning a creature 3-4 levels below your own costs one of your highest level spell slots. Focus spells are generally weaker than real spells. That isn't going to change because you can summon one with a custom stat line. Wild Shape can work like it does, simply because it replaces what you can do at that moment, usually a full caster with a discount martial. Summoning spells add to what you can do by virtue of giving you an additional team member. Yes, you have to give up one action per turn, but two actions still allow you to cast.
So yeah, I wouldn't hold my breath :/
Druid wild shape is identical to actual on-level spells, though it costs feats to keep it scaling. Though I suppose a focus spell to summon trap fodder is somehow out of bounds.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
If I understand correctly, the point behind calling for a summoning focus spell is that it would be possible for a summoner to conjure creatures in a fight multiple times per day without using up all of their top-level spell slots. Much how Druid can use wild shape to cast several polymorph spells on a recharge.Yeah, I know and I'm saying that any kind of focus spell like that would be too weak to bother with ^^.
Think about it, summoning a creature 3-4 levels below your own costs one of your highest level spell slots. Focus spells are generally weaker than real spells. That isn't going to change because you can summon one with a custom stat line. Wild Shape can work like it does, simply because it replaces what you can do at that moment, usually a full caster with a discount martial. Summoning spells add to what you can do by virtue of giving you an additional team member. Yes, you have to give up one action per turn, but two actions still allow you to cast.
So yeah, I wouldn't hold my breath :/
Yep I get it. I am saying the designers have the balance wrong. I think the community has enough experience to make that claim now.
Yep I get it. I am saying the designers have the balance wrong. I think the community has enough experience to make that claim now.If I understand correctly, the point behind calling for a summoning focus spell is that it would be possible for a summoner to conjure creatures in a fight multiple times per day without using up all of their top-level spell slots. Much how Druid can use wild shape to cast several polymorph spells on a recharge.Yeah, I know and I'm saying that any kind of focus spell like that would be too weak to bother with ^^.
Think about it, summoning a creature 3-4 levels below your own costs one of your highest level spell slots. Focus spells are generally weaker than real spells. That isn't going to change because you can summon one with a custom stat line. Wild Shape can work like it does, simply because it replaces what you can do at that moment, usually a full caster with a discount martial. Summoning spells add to what you can do by virtue of giving you an additional team member. Yes, you have to give up one action per turn, but two actions still allow you to cast.
So yeah, I wouldn't hold my breath :/
And I would absolutely agree ^^
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yep I get it. I am saying the designers have the balance wrong. I think the community has enough experience to make that claim now.If I understand correctly, the point behind calling for a summoning focus spell is that it would be possible for a summoner to conjure creatures in a fight multiple times per day without using up all of their top-level spell slots. Much how Druid can use wild shape to cast several polymorph spells on a recharge.Yeah, I know and I'm saying that any kind of focus spell like that would be too weak to bother with ^^.
Think about it, summoning a creature 3-4 levels below your own costs one of your highest level spell slots. Focus spells are generally weaker than real spells. That isn't going to change because you can summon one with a custom stat line. Wild Shape can work like it does, simply because it replaces what you can do at that moment, usually a full caster with a discount martial. Summoning spells add to what you can do by virtue of giving you an additional team member. Yes, you have to give up one action per turn, but two actions still allow you to cast.
So yeah, I wouldn't hold my breath :/
Considering how strong summoning used to be, summoning multiple creatures in a fight (without action economy loss) and even under level summon spells contributing enough through special abilities I think the devs reacted and tried to clamp down, but they overreacted to the point that if you try to make a summoning focused character it feels very unrewarding.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Considering how strong summoning used to be, summoning multiple creatures in a fight (without action economy loss) and even under level summon spells contributing enough through special abilities I think the devs reacted and tried to clamp down, but they overreacted to the point that if you try to make a summoning focused character it feels very unrewarding.
As long as they keep the action economy in mind we should be fine. That is the main limit that keeps summoning under control. Three action cast and the sustain cost. Obviously a summoned monster needs to be a bit weaker than a PC. Perhaps half hit points and down 2 points on AC and attack. It can't overshadow a martial or an Eidolon but maybe close to an animal companion.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
A giant book of expanded class feat options for all classes. I want this more than any other book.
1) New wizard thesis and feats - wizard still feels bare.
2) The missing sorcerer bloodlines - plant, aberrant etc
3) More support for warpriest doctrine in feats it seems to suffer more than Cloistered does but both could have more to differentiate them.
4) Rogue racket for barber with wisdom and medicine feats/abilities. More support for eldritch trickster and some kind of fix for mastermind. A ninja class archetype that gets shinobi focus spells would be cool too.
5) LN and CN champions.
6) Fungal & Urban druids
7) A bard class archetype that uses bounded casting but gains master weapon and armour proficiencies - this could be how to achieve Skalds.
8) Body horror alchemist options. Master Chymist alchemist class archetype that loses quick alchemy and maybe has more restrictions on what they can use reagents for.
9) Ranger feats to support 2 handed weapons or an urban ranger archetype
10) Demon, Fey and Celestial totem barbarians.
11) Similar treatment for the classes in the Advanced players Guide.
Bonus points for more options to fill out the smaller more generic archetypes.
Other than that more setting support for alien world travel. We have Castrovel and Akiton but I want the other Pact Worlds. Triaxus could give us an in lore version of Dragonkin.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
[LOTS OF STUFF]
I'd honestly be happy with a LV1/LV2 defensive reaction for Monks that gives a circumstance bonus to AC to compete with Shield Block.
With all the new items with Treasure Vault and the new errata process I have most of what I want with the game, however I really wish we could get some book that expands skill feats. It really feels like there is one piece missing.
If skill feats were all "eh, they only do minor things" I could just ignore them but you have Intimidation and Medicine feats which are super strong, Kip Up as well which gives you a lot of power.
If all skills had similar feats then that would give characters a whole new vector of customization rather than feeling like it doesn't matter at all for many skills.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would love a telekinetic martial. I wouldn't say no to a heavily armoured version or something like "psychic weapons" (e.g. Psylocke or Protoss). What I really want, though, is something lightly armoured that can play with range a bit. A character who, for example, can "levitate" a sword away from his body and fight with that. Something that does interesting things, maybe with the thrown weapon formula. Ofc, it doesn't have to be Yondu (from Guardians of the Galaxy) from the start, but that is the picture I have in my head.
Well there is already a psychic weapon archetype called Mind Smith. It starts out as melee only, but eventually you can make ranged attacks with it with the right feat, although perhaps not as good as a true ranged weapon.
Check out the archetype, it may be what you're after, more or less.
Well there is already a psychic weapon archetype called Mind Smith. It starts out as melee only, but eventually you can make ranged attacks with it with the right feat, although perhaps not as good as a true ranged weapon.
Check out the archetype, it may be what you're after, more or less.
Yeah, I know, sadly that isn't it at all :/. Mind Smith is more "I summon a weapon" and then only really deals with improving that weapon. It lacks the whole telekinesis aspect and vibe. The ranged aspect is also very, very lackluster.
Stuff like that really has to happen at a class or at least class archetype level to work.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well there is already a psychic weapon archetype called Mind Smith. It starts out as melee only, but eventually you can make ranged attacks with it with the right feat, although perhaps not as good as a true ranged weapon.
Check out the archetype, it may be what you're after, more or less.
Yeah, I know, sadly that isn't it at all :/. Mind Smith is more "I summon a weapon" and then only really deals with improving that weapon. It lacks the whole telekinesis aspect and vibe. The ranged aspect is also very, very lackluster.
Stuff like that really has to happen at a class or at least class archetype level to work.
It's probably not quite the mechanics you want, but a psychic with the Distant Grasp conscious mind has telekinetic projectile with an amp to increase it's damage and range. It might not be the exact set of mechanics you were hoping for, but honestly I think this fits the description you gave pretty well.
It's probably not quite the mechanics you want, but a psychic with the Distant Grasp conscious mind has telekinetic projectile with an amp to increase it's damage and range. It might not be the exact set of mechanics you were hoping for, but honestly I think this fits the description you gave pretty well.Well there is already a psychic weapon archetype called Mind Smith. It starts out as melee only, but eventually you can make ranged attacks with it with the right feat, although perhaps not as good as a true ranged weapon.
Check out the archetype, it may be what you're after, more or less.
Yeah, I know, sadly that isn't it at all :/. Mind Smith is more "I summon a weapon" and then only really deals with improving that weapon. It lacks the whole telekinesis aspect and vibe. The ranged aspect is also very, very lackluster.
Stuff like that really has to happen at a class or at least class archetype level to work.
If I was making a character right now, that is exactly what I'd do. In fact, I've got one of those lying around as a backup :D. It doesn't have the mechanics, but the fantasy is on point ^^
Yeah, with PF2 I've found that there is often a mismatch of my expectation for mechanics and flavor.
I can find mechanics I like, but they don't have the flavor I'm looking for. Or conversely, I can find something that has the flavor but the mechanics aren't what I was looking for.
I expect that you're looking for a character built as a class with a more martial inclination like a Fighter or Ranger, but that uses telekinetic powers to hurl objects at enemies. Or uses a sword at melee range that functions kind of like the spiritual weapon spell, but again not those exact mechanics.
Greater verisimilitude between mechanics and player expectations would likely resolve a lot of what people, myself included, keep asking for. There are things a reasonably trained warrior should be able to do that are gated behind classes and feats in a way that can feel unsatisfying both in play and while building a character. Some of these could cause balance issues and/or make for a more complicated system with feats gated by proficiency rather than just class and level but in a system as wordy and rule-heavy as Pathfinder 2 I think there's room to make it work.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Greater verisimilitude between mechanics and player expectations would likely resolve a lot of what people, myself included, keep asking for. There are things a reasonably trained warrior should be able to do that are gated behind classes and feats in a way that can feel unsatisfying both in play and while building a character. Some of these could cause balance issues and/or make for a more complicated system with feats gated by proficiency rather than just class and level but in a system as wordy and rule-heavy as Pathfinder 2 I think there's room to make it work.
Like... what, exactly?
I mean, when there's a conflict between simulationism, narrative, and game balance, Paizo pretty much chooses the latter two every time, and if you like simulationism a lot I could see how that might get frustrating, but I'm not actually tracking on anything that I'd say that "a reasonably trained warrior should be able to do" that isn't possible as a level 1 fighter.