Pf2E - Advanced Class Guide - its about time

[Verzen]

One of the things I think this game needs to release is an advanced class guide. Many classes need more support, more feats, supporting spells etc to make them work better.

For example. The lack of Tempest oracle spell support damages the concept tremendously.

I am betting composite kineticist will only have 1 composite blast per combination which will greatly limit choice selection etc.

It's a book I think we desperately need.

Plus - Synthesis summoner. =)

[steelhead]

This is a great idea! It could fill some of the niche archetypes that people have been asking for, expand options for some classes, and ‘fix’ others by adding options to make up for some of their weak spots. The last of these should only be examined after we’ve all had some time with the remaster to try out the newer class options.

[Megistone]

More options are always welcome, but I think two areas are lacking them dearly.
The first is ancestry feats (especially high level ones); having a single option for lvl 17 is underwhelming. This is easily fixable by just printing more.
The second is focus spells, in particular those that are tied to class choices (like domains, wizard schools, witch lessons, etc.). I think that getting a single focus spell out of an important decision like that is... not exciting, especially when the domain/school/lesson you like gives you a very situational spell, or one that you find poor. It should be a character-defining ability, not something that you end up using once or twice during a whole campaign. I'm eager to see what will happen to this aspect of the wizard schools in the remaster, but my preferred solution would be giving at least a couple spells for stuff like that (with one focus point only).

[Easl]

Ideally, I'd prefer the new core I &II books to give more feats etc. for each covered class rather than an APG or ACG adding feats to all of them. But since Core I is basically done and no suggestions here is going to change it, we will just have to wait and see whether it does so or not.

[keftiu]

I’d wait until after Player Core 1 and 2 are out before demanding this.

[Xenocrat]

Verzen wrote:

I am betting composite kineticist will only have 1 composite blast per combination which will greatly limit choice selection etc.

There will definitely be only one composite impulse per combination, they're getting two pages for the fifteen options, same as the two pages for impulses that every element gets.

There will be zero composite blasts unless there's a feat to grant something that mixes the two blasts together, but that's not going to allow different options in how they mix.

[Sanityfaerie]

I'm in the "let's see how much the remaster fixes" camp on this one. I expect that it will fix a fair bit. In particular, I expect some fixing for the things like "lack of Tempest Oracles spell support" that cause intended-functional builds to be... less functional.

Synthesis Summoner isn't going to come for a while. By my estimate, we're in the early part of middle PF2, clicking over to the middle part of middle PF2 once RoE and the full set of base remaster books drop. Synthesis Summoner is going to be one of those "remix and/or merge classes via class archetypes" things, and I honestly wouldn't expect those to start showing up until we hit late PF2. So... give it a few years, maybe? Two, maybe three?

That's my estimate, anyway.

[Arachnofiend]

Synthesist Summoner has to wait in line behind another couple dozen technically generic archetypes that are so extremely niche no one will ever build a character with them

[Eldritch Yodel]

I really feel that if people are interested in an Advanced Class Guide books, it'd probably seem smart to come up with a narrative for the book's theming, as Paizo said outside of the "Core set" (So with the old set, that's CRB, APG, GMG, and the Bestiaries, and with the new is the ones they outright chucked "core" in the title for), they don't plan on making any ultra-mechanically focused books without a narrative through-line; even Treasure Vault what'd be the closest we've had to one of those has the whole narrative of Purepurin & Valashinaz talking about their vault. Just listing some possible themes might make it seem a bit more appealing to make than if we just say what mechanics we're after.

That said, a rulebook which does have such a narrative throughline that effectively just trades the book's space for either a class slot or bestiary for just various things expanding on pre-existing player options does sound incredibly appealing, so I would be on board (though that's not the same thing that the PF1 ACG was in any way really).

[Verzen]

Eldritch Yodel wrote:

I really feel that if people are interested in an Advanced Class Guide books, it'd probably seem smart to come up with a narrative for the book's theming, as Paizo said outside of the "Core set" (So with the old set, that's CRB, APG, GMG, and the Bestiaries, and with the new is the ones they outright chucked "core" in the title for), they don't plan on making any ultra-mechanically focused books without a narrative through-line; even Treasure Vault what'd be the closest we've had to one of those has the whole narrative of Purepurin & Valashinaz talking about their vault. Just listing some possible themes might make it seem a bit more appealing to make than if we just say what mechanics we're after.

That said, a rulebook which does have such a narrative throughline that effectively just trades the book's space for either a class slot or bestiary for just various things expanding on pre-existing player options does sound incredibly appealing, so I would be on board (though that's not the same thing that the PF1 ACG was in any way really).

ACG in the form of an academy lecture book of forgotten, peculiar, or newly researched abilities, spells, class archetypes, and feats... all written under the direction of Professor Theodore Dimsly, a Gnome of peculiar tastes. Even more peculiar still are his table manners, preferring to eat with his feet rather than his hands, for his hands are too busy flipping through the pages of long lost and ancient literature.

Here is where you'll find blood magic, Synthesis summoner, many divine wind and air damaging spells. This is where new and ancient schools of magic reside as well as long and lost forgotten Cleric doctrine, such as the Shadow Cultist doctrine, where your channel energy instead channels the void.

Within the void chapter is where a void kineticist resides as well. The void chapter is one of dark mysteries and speculation, written in a lost and unknown tongue. But professor Theodore Dimsly is certain he can translate it between bites of chicken, cooked with elvish brine. Let's hope he can overcome the maddening voices that inevitably warp the minds of far lesser men than Theodore.

[Totally Not Gorbacz]

No, thanks, I'd prefer the game to grow horizontally, not vertically.

[Megistone]

Easl wrote:

Ideally, I'd prefer the new core I &II books to give more feats etc. for each covered class rather than an APG or ACG adding feats to all of them. But since Core I is basically done and no suggestions here is going to change it, we will just have to wait and see whether it does so or not.

keftiu wrote:

I’d wait until after Player Core 1 and 2 are out before demanding this.

That's for sure. I don't think that they will have enough space to expand on options more than we have got now, though.

Totally Not Gorbacz wrote:

No, thanks, I'd prefer the game to grow horizontally, not vertically.

Aren't more options a horizontal grow? And regardless, why do you think it's not worth it to give ancestries a different possible pick for their feat when they only have one?

[KaiBlob1]

Totally Not Gorbacz wrote:

No, thanks, I'd prefer the game to grow horizontally, not vertically.

I disagree with this. I can only play one class at a time, so if I'm in the middle of a game adding new classes does functionally nothing for me, as cool as it is. More feats for my current class, however, are absolutely super valuable and provide more options for me to grow my character.

[Totally Not Gorbacz]

Horizontal growth - more classes
Vertical growth - more material for existing classes

PF2 should avoid the player option glut of PF1 - if I want to play a Fighter, I want to pick stuff from Core 1, Core 2 and MAYBE one more RPG line book, not have to worry about Advanced Class Guide adding 20% more and then ACG v2 on top of that. Decision paralysis was a major issue in PF1 and having to help players who were overwhelmed by 42456 feats available for them to choose at any given level is not something I want back in any form.

[Temperans]

Totally Not Gorbacz wrote:

Horizontal growth - more classes

Vertical growth - more material for existing classes

PF2 should avoid the player option glut of PF1 - if I want to play a Fighter, I want to pick stuff from Core 1, Core 2 and MAYBE one more RPG line book, not have to worry about Advanced Class Guide adding 20% more and then ACG v2 on top of that. Decision paralysis was a major issue in PF1 and having to help players who were overwhelmed by 42456 feats available for them to choose at any given level is not something I want back in any form.

Too bad I guess? PF2 decided that each class will have its own feat and each archetype will have its own feats. You cannot stop the bloat.

Also more options is not vertical growth, Vertical growth is stronger options. A class getting more options to support things that were not properly supported previously should be encouraged.

Not to mention that they already said that they would limit the number of classes.

[Totally Not Gorbacz]

Temperans wrote:

Totally Not Gorbacz wrote:

Horizontal growth - more classes

Vertical growth - more material for existing classes

PF2 should avoid the player option glut of PF1 - if I want to play a Fighter, I want to pick stuff from Core 1, Core 2 and MAYBE one more RPG line book, not have to worry about Advanced Class Guide adding 20% more and then ACG v2 on top of that. Decision paralysis was a major issue in PF1 and having to help players who were overwhelmed by 42456 feats available for them to choose at any given level is not something I want back in any form.

Too bad I guess? PF2 decided that each class will have its own feat and each archetype will have its own feats. You cannot stop the bloat.

Also more options is not vertical growth, Vertical growth is stronger options. A class getting more options to support things that were not properly supported previously should be encouraged.

Not to mention that they already said that they would limit the number of classes.

No mention of how all classes were treated equally but Wizards got of course shafted after they got nerfed and left behind and it will happen again because nobody at Paizo cares about Wizards? You're losing your touch, Temperans.

[Pieces-Kai]

I think more class based feats/options tied to one class is fine but I do think Archetypes in PF2e feel a lot more overwhelming to me

[Verzen]

Totally Not Gorbacz wrote:

Horizontal growth - more classes

Vertical growth - more material for existing classes

PF2 should avoid the player option glut of PF1 - if I want to play a Fighter, I want to pick stuff from Core 1, Core 2 and MAYBE one more RPG line book, not have to worry about Advanced Class Guide adding 20% more and then ACG v2 on top of that. Decision paralysis was a major issue in PF1 and having to help players who were overwhelmed by 42456 feats available for them to choose at any given level is not something I want back in any form.

So you don't want things like damaging air and water divine spells that actually make Tempest oracle playable?

[Verzen]

Pieces-Kai wrote:

I think more class based feats/options tied to one class is fine but I do think Archetypes in PF2e feel a lot more overwhelming to me

Agreed. I actually think pf2e needs LESS archetypes and more feat options and subclass support.

[magnuskn]

Totally Not Gorbacz wrote:

Horizontal growth - more classes

Vertical growth - more material for existing classes

PF2 should avoid the player option glut of PF1 - if I want to play a Fighter, I want to pick stuff from Core 1, Core 2 and MAYBE one more RPG line book, not have to worry about Advanced Class Guide adding 20% more and then ACG v2 on top of that. Decision paralysis was a major issue in PF1 and having to help players who were overwhelmed by 42456 feats available for them to choose at any given level is not something I want back in any form.

Funnily enough, "too many new classes" is exactly what happened with a good lot of my PF1E players, who flatly refuse to even look at the Occult classes and are very wary of Advanced Class Guide classes, although in that case they suspect more that they have too much power creep (and are not wrong in some of those cases).

[Verzen]

magnuskn wrote:

Totally Not Gorbacz wrote:

Horizontal growth - more classes

Vertical growth - more material for existing classes

PF2 should avoid the player option glut of PF1 - if I want to play a Fighter, I want to pick stuff from Core 1, Core 2 and MAYBE one more RPG line book, not have to worry about Advanced Class Guide adding 20% more and then ACG v2 on top of that. Decision paralysis was a major issue in PF1 and having to help players who were overwhelmed by 42456 feats available for them to choose at any given level is not something I want back in any form.

Funnily enough, "too many new classes" is exactly what happened with a good lot of my PF1E players, who flatly refuse to even look at the Occult classes and are very wary of Advanced Class Guide classes, although in that case they suspect more that they have too much power creep (and are not wrong in some of those cases).

Honestly what a mistake they made. The medium and kineticist were amazing.

[magnuskn]

Verzen wrote:

magnuskn wrote:

Totally Not Gorbacz wrote:

Horizontal growth - more classes

Vertical growth - more material for existing classes

PF2 should avoid the player option glut of PF1 - if I want to play a Fighter, I want to pick stuff from Core 1, Core 2 and MAYBE one more RPG line book, not have to worry about Advanced Class Guide adding 20% more and then ACG v2 on top of that. Decision paralysis was a major issue in PF1 and having to help players who were overwhelmed by 42456 feats available for them to choose at any given level is not something I want back in any form.

Funnily enough, "too many new classes" is exactly what happened with a good lot of my PF1E players, who flatly refuse to even look at the Occult classes and are very wary of Advanced Class Guide classes, although in that case they suspect more that they have too much power creep (and are not wrong in some of those cases).

Honestly what a mistake they made. The medium and kineticist were amazing.

That may be, however I just wanted to point out that "too many new classes" also puts some type of players off, just as much as "too many options". It's a different kind of option paralysis.

[The Raven Black]

Archetype bloat is definitely a thing in PF2.

[Verzen]

The Raven Black wrote:

Archetype bloat is definitely a thing in PF2.

Yeah I honestly ignore 99% of new archetypes in pf2e. I'd rather they focus on fleshing out current classes.

[Temperans]

Totally Not Gorbacz wrote:

Temperans wrote:

Totally Not Gorbacz wrote:

Horizontal growth - more classes

Vertical growth - more material for existing classes

PF2 should avoid the player option glut of PF1 - if I want to play a Fighter, I want to pick stuff from Core 1, Core 2 and MAYBE one more RPG line book, not have to worry about Advanced Class Guide adding 20% more and then ACG v2 on top of that. Decision paralysis was a major issue in PF1 and having to help players who were overwhelmed by 42456 feats available for them to choose at any given level is not something I want back in any form.

Too bad I guess? PF2 decided that each class will have its own feat and each archetype will have its own feats. You cannot stop the bloat.

Also more options is not vertical growth, Vertical growth is stronger options. A class getting more options to support things that were not properly supported previously should be encouraged.

Not to mention that they already said that they would limit the number of classes.

No mention of how all classes were treated equally but Wizards got of course shafted after they got nerfed and left behind and it will happen again because nobody at Paizo cares about Wizards? You're losing your touch, Temperans.

No need saying that classes need more support is enough.

Also, not sure if that was meant to be a strawman or you just helping my case that some classes really do need one or more books dedicated to them.

[PossibleCabbage]

I mean the stated reason for making "you can do x" into an archetype rather than a set of class feats, is that this allows you to enable any class to do x without having to print a bunch of bespoke class feats.

Put another way, if you were to print a new Barbarian instinct the only people who would be affected by that are "people who are making a new Barbarian character" (since your existing Barbarian probably won'retrain their instinct.)

There's also some value in making the number of places you need to look for "all the druid feats" manageable instead of having them spread across 18 different books.

[Temperans]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I mean the stated reason for making "you can do x" into an archetype rather than a set of class feats, is that this allows you to enable any class to do x without having to print a bunch of bespoke class feats.

Put another way, if you were to print a new Barbarian instinct the only people who would be affected by that are "people who are making a new Barbarian character" (since your existing Barbarian probably won'retrain their instinct.)

There's also some value in making the number of places you need to look for "all the druid feats" manageable instead of having them spread across 18 different books.

Except that every book comes with some items or feat that helps one class or another. Specially with APs which have a lot of "here is a feat for this class".

[Verzen]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I mean the stated reason for making "you can do x" into an archetype rather than a set of class feats, is that this allows you to enable any class to do x without having to print a bunch of bespoke class feats.

Put another way, if you were to print a new Barbarian instinct the only people who would be affected by that are "people who are making a new Barbarian character" (since your existing Barbarian probably won'retrain their instinct.)

There's also some value in making the number of places you need to look for "all the druid feats" manageable instead of having them spread across 18 different books.

Yes, but there are so many archetypes that I don't even want to look at them.

https://2e.aonprd.com/Archetypes.aspx

Look at how many there are? It's absolutely overwhelming to look at each one, so I ignore that most exist. Meanwhile there are cool class concepts I can't even play because there is no support for it (like
tempest oracle)

[KaiBlob1]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

There's also some value in making the number of places you need to look for "all the druid feats" manageable instead of having them spread across 18 different books.

you can find every druid feat ever printed in any book all in one place on AON for free though, so not really sure that this is a pertinent argument.

[Easl]

Temperans wrote:

Too bad I guess? PF2 decided that each class will have its own feat and each archetype will have its own feats. You cannot stop the bloat.

An expanded set of core abilities is IMO very different from planning a (neverending?) series of books that continue to add feats and archetypes. The former is not bloat. The latter is (IMO).

Quote:

Also more options is not vertical growth, Vertical growth is stronger options. A class getting more options to support things that were not properly supported previously should be encouraged.

Given PF2E's tight math, I doubt any writer will *intentionally* try for vertical growth. But we all know that it is very easy to unintentionally do. The new offered options are not playtested as well as the original material, and even when they are, there is simply no way Paizo's writing and test community can explore all the combinatorials that a power gamer will take advantage of. So in a practical sense, unending horizontal growth IS vertical growth, because there is no such thing as power-growth-free game expansion absent an unrealstic and unacceptably high cost amount of pre-publication playtesting.

To step away from being a curmudgeon for a bit, I think they've done a pretty good job with offering AP-specific backgrounds and things in the AP books. But I think designing well-balanced AP-specific abilities for an AP-specific setting is much easier (and easier to playtest!) than designing an Advanced Player Guide set of abilities that is supposed to be balanced when combined with any and all other published material.

In any event, my personal preference leans more towards "few rules books and done", with additional material being setting, antagonists (i.e. monsters) and adventures. So I view the problems with horizontal expansion as not worth the benefit. And I really don't like the business model of you have to buy the latest book to keep your deck/character/whatever on the power curve. I recognize that for other folks with different preferences, the coolness of new archetypes, subclasses, feats, etc. is totally worth potential problem of power growth they might bring.

Of course for Paizo, maybe none of that matters. I expect that for them, the question of whether to publish an adventure vs. monster manual vs APG question is largely about keeping the game living, the community engaged...IOW a "will it sell well" decision.

[Temperans]

Easl wrote:

Temperans wrote:

Too bad I guess? PF2 decided that each class will have its own feat and each archetype will have its own feats. You cannot stop the bloat.

An expanded set of core abilities is IMO very different from planning a (neverending?) series of books that continue to add feats and archetypes. The former is not bloat. The latter is (IMO).

Quote:

Also more options is not vertical growth, Vertical growth is stronger options. A class getting more options to support things that were not properly supported previously should be encouraged.

Given PF2E's tight math, I doubt any writer will *intentionally* try for vertical growth. But we all know that it is very easy to unintentionally do. The new offered options are not playtested as well as the original material, and even when they are, there is simply no way Paizo's writing and test community can explore all the combinatorials that a power gamer will take advantage of. So in a practical sense, unending horizontal growth IS vertical growth, because there is no such thing as power-growth-free game expansion absent an unrealstic and unacceptably high cost amount of pre-publication playtesting.

To step away from being a curmudgeon for a bit, I think they've done a pretty good job with offering AP-specific backgrounds and things in the AP books. But I think designing well-balanced AP-specific abilities for an AP-specific setting is much easier (and easier to playtest!) than designing an Advanced Player Guide set of abilities that is supposed to be balanced when combined with any and all other published material.

In any event, my personal preference leans more towards "few rules books and done", with additional material being setting, antagonists (i.e. monsters) and adventures. So I view the problems with horizontal expansion as not worth the benefit. And I really don't like the business model of you have to buy the latest book to keep your deck/character/whatever on the power curve. I recognize that for other folks with...

1) adding more options is not "needing to buy books to keep up with the curve". The whole point is to make as many character be available as possible. You need more options to enable more characters. That is just how a crunchy rules focus game works.

2) more setting is good and all but people like pathfinder because it has hard rules. If you wanted a game that was just lore there are other systems available for that. If you want just the Golarion lore you can just get that. But for the people who like Pathfindet the TTRPG you need the rules.

3) balancing for the general game is much easier than balancing for an AP. It is well known that Paizo AP material is not balanced the same way as regular rulebooks.

4.a) Paizo has shown that they actually undershoot when creating new options. Meaning that they are in general no better than what is available in core. There are very few exceptions to classes getting stronger.

4.b) The fact that a play style become available because paizo released more options is not vertical power. That is the definition of increasing horizontal power.

[Gortle]

Verzen wrote:

Yes, but there are so many archetypes that I don't even want to look at them.

https://2e.aonprd.com/Archetypes.aspx

Look at how many there are? It's absolutely overwhelming to look at each one, so I ignore that most exist.

Search for want you want. I'd have thought that was intuitive to most people now, we have been googling for so long now.

Verzen wrote:

Meanwhile there are cool class concepts I can't even play because there is no support for it (like

tempest oracle)

There are options for Air and Water spells. The traits are even indexed. Briny Bolt is a perfectly good staple. Besides which it is a secondary feature.

I'm sure there are more releasing soon.

[Verzen]

Gortle wrote:

Verzen wrote:

Yes, but there are so many archetypes that I don't even want to look at them.

https://2e.aonprd.com/Archetypes.aspx

Look at how many there are? It's absolutely overwhelming to look at each one, so I ignore that most exist.

Search for want you want. I'd have thought that was intuitive to most people now, we have been googling for so long now.

Verzen wrote:

Meanwhile there are cool class concepts I can't even play because there is no support for it (like

tempest oracle)

There are options for Air and Water spells. The traits are even indexed. Briny Bolt is a perfectly good staple. Besides which it is a secondary feature.

I'm sure there are more releasing soon.

Can you please list for me every single air or water damaging spell, please?

There aren't much.

[Gortle]

Verzen wrote:

Can you please list for me every single air or water damaging spell, please?

There aren't much.

https://2e.aonprd.com/Traits.aspx?ID=165

https://2e.aonprd.com/Traits.aspx?ID=165

That deal physical damage with a non-cantrip air or water spell?

Blazing Dive, Bralani Referendum, Buffeting Winds, Cataclysm, Elemental Annihilation Wave, Elemental Confluence, Flame Vortex, Gritty Wheeze, Gust of Wind, Petal Storm, Storm of Vengeance, Unseasonable Squall, Whirlwind

Aqueous Blast, Briny Bolt, Crashing Wave, Flowing Strike, Frigid Flurry, Geyser, Holy Cascade, Hydraulic Push, Hydraulic Torrent, Sea Surge

Plus there are focus spells you can get.

[Themetricsystem]

Arachnofiend wrote:

Synthesist Summoner has to wait in line behind another couple dozen technically generic archetypes that are so extremely niche no one will ever build a character with them

Why do you wound us so?

At this point I think that there was probably one or two people within Paizo who championed Class Archetypes as a feature and really understood them, maybe even concepted them initially and they either left the company or got overruled by a majority vote whenever they tried to make themleves heard.

The concept space for them is IMMENSE but as a mechanical concept in PF2, it is treated like the last favorite foster child at the orphanage in an already overcrowded 1920s Detroit suburb.

[The Raven Black]

Gortle wrote:

Verzen wrote:

Yes, but there are so many archetypes that I don't even want to look at them.

https://2e.aonprd.com/Archetypes.aspx

Look at how many there are? It's absolutely overwhelming to look at each one, so I ignore that most exist.

Search for want you want. I'd have thought that was intuitive to most people now, we have been googling for so long now.

Verzen wrote:

Meanwhile there are cool class concepts I can't even play because there is no support for it (like

tempest oracle)

There are options for Air and Water spells. The traits are even indexed. Briny Bolt is a perfectly good staple. Besides which it is a secondary feature.

I'm sure there are more releasing soon.

Searching the evergrowing boatload of archetypes does NOT help with knowing what they provide to specific builds.

You cannot search for what you do not know exist.

[Tactical Drongo]

Keep the archetypes coming
bloat as much as you like, I love them

GMs might have to regulate the options or help their players to find the right one, maybe AoN needs more ways to sort them

but I am SO DANG MUCH for new options
if paizo would make a 500 pages book for archetypes (and focus spells for them I guess) and nothing else I would buy it in a heartbeat

[Karmagator]

keftiu wrote:

I’d wait until after Player Core 1 and 2 are out before demanding this.

While I understand the reasoning, we have to keep in mind that products are decided on well over a year in advance. So if we want this anytime soon, we have to make that known early and continuously.

[The Raven Black]

Tactical Drongo wrote:

Keep the archetypes coming

bloat as much as you like, I love them

GMs might have to regulate the options or help their players to find the right one, maybe AoN needs more ways to sort them

but I am SO DANG MUCH for new options
if paizo would make a 500 pages book for archetypes (and focus spells for them I guess) and nothing else I would buy it in a heartbeat

One problem I see with archetypes is that they are mutually exclusive. Especially in PFS.

I wish they could make some Transverse Feats that any Class could take as a Class feat without needing to invest in an archetype.

[Tactical Drongo]

The Raven Black wrote:

Tactical Drongo wrote:

Keep the archetypes coming

bloat as much as you like, I love them

GMs might have to regulate the options or help their players to find the right one, maybe AoN needs more ways to sort them

but I am SO DANG MUCH for new options
if paizo would make a 500 pages book for archetypes (and focus spells for them I guess) and nothing else I would buy it in a heartbeat

One problem I see with archetypes is that they are mutually exclusive. Especially in PFS.

I wish they could make some Transverse Feats that any Class could take as a Class feat without needing to invest in an archetype.

I don't even have options to play society so I don't really care for that part *cough*

[Captain Morgan]

I'm confused about why we need another advanced class guide when the original is about to be replaced and other books will have errata to match it.

[Themetricsystem]

Captain Morgan wrote:

I'm confused about why we need another advanced class guide when the original is about to be replaced and other books will have errata to match it.

Advanced Class Guide, not Advanced Players Guide. The APG is absolutely being taken out behind the shed since there are new puppies inbound but the Advanced Class Guide was a PF1 book that took the lessons learned in the first half of the lifespan of PF1 and made a bunch of really awesome new hybrid Classes and features that were generally well balanced against the level of powercreep that occurred up to that time. Admittedly the ACG had options that were definitively just BETTER than basically everything in the PF1 CRB but that was just a side effect of how 3.X game systems had to make and push out content and make new stuff interesting since it heavily leaned into number-fixing options and feats.