| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Muscle magic reminds me of that doom patrol series. They had a guy which such perfect muscle control he was basically a wizard by flexing or twitching the right muscles.
I mean, the first thing that comes to my mind when I think of magic and muscles is...
ALEX LOUIS ARMSTRONG!!!
From Fullmetal Alchemist.
|
Been there. Done that. XDI mean, the first thing that comes to my mind when I think of magic and muscles is...
ALEX LOUIS ARMSTRONG!!!
From Fullmetal Alchemist.
Your link does not appear to be working.
Community & Social Media Specialist
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I can't really give an answer yes or no to this as it would be spoilers, and we don't do spoilers, but what i can say is this:
Probably! We like making stuff! To limit our creativity would be to limit the game, and we never want to do that! We don't have any news right now on what's to come, but stay tuned, and thanks for your support!
|
|
Classes sell books. I'm pretty sure that as long as Second Edition is still in active development, we can expect about two classes each year. That's been their business model so far, at least.For me it is not so much about classes but new archetypes that I am looking for especially if they recreate some of the flavor from fist edition Pathfinder which can be added back.
For instance there was an archetype modification of the bard that was an archeologist ala Indiana Jones. It would be great to see that as an archetype one could multiclass into with the second edition rules.
I don't think they need more than 25 classes. They can achieve what they want and more with more archetypes.
There is an Archeologist archetype though.
You guys need another Constitution-based class...
I'm legit surprised that 1) the Kineticist is so far the only one, 2) the Soldier in Starfinder 2E uses Constitution and 3) the Guardian doesn't use Constitution, when its job is to tank hits like crazy, not to deal damage using Strength.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I believe the reason the guardian has Strength as the key ability score is because it is focused on wearing heavy armor and probably using a shield (possibly a tower shield). A guardian needs high Strength to lug all of that around.
What would another con based class look like?
maybe a con based wave caster? One that is not actually focused on hitting with weapons as its balance with spells, but instead maybe proficiency with class related abilities (closer to a mix of a caster and a kineticist but different power source concept) that are not so easily understood or explained like with elemental planes? probably would mean much more limited array of abilities with a simple focused path per subclass than a kineticist but they supplement them with wavecasting from occult spells.
Like something really occult weird.
Like a class concept of drawing power from the unexplainable and obscure.
Subclasses might delve into being exposed to extraplanar or strange ancient forces that changed you giving you strange power that is infused with and emerges from your vitality essence rather than directed by your mind or force of will.
Aberrant exposed might have been to ancient Alghollthus magical device.
Astral exposed could have been visited by a Shining Child at birth.
Fey exposed could really have many different iterations but it really would need representation for a new occult class.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the guardian isn't Con-based I don't think we can expect a Con-based class in the future. I think the soldier is Con-based just because Starfinder 2e went for a "one class per attribute" approach for their core rulebook because the soldier would kinda make more sense a Dex or Str/Dex IMO.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
What would another con based class look like?
maybe a con based wave caster? One that is not actually focused on hitting with weapons as its balance with spells, but instead maybe proficiency with class related abilities (closer to a mix of a caster and a kineticist but different power source concept) that are not so easily understood or explained like with elemental planes?
Personally, I think a PF2 version of the shifter would be a good candidate for a Con-based class. Basically, the body fueling transformations and powering the effects via "stamina."
There are some ideas in Howl of the Wild (grafts, morph options for druids/animal instinct barbarians, the wild mimic archetype) that could be used as starting points and/or benchmarks for class features/feats.
The kineticist is essentially a Con-based pseudo-caster. It would be nice to have a Con-based martial that has a different way of being an "unarmed" combatant than a monk or an animal instinct barbarian.
|
I think a mesmerist, or mesmerist-like class with a different name, would be a cool addition. Their method of implanting abilities in their friends via their mental tricks, sort of setting up multiple tiny contingency spells, and locking down a singular enemy with their stare could blossome into something to really help them stand out from other casters.
Assuming they stayed casters at all. I think you could make a fun mesmerist who doesn't do any slotted spellcasting and have a cool mesmerist.
I found the Mesmerist to be an embarrassment of riches. I would have *loved* a Mesmerist AT that focused *entirely* on Tricks, implanting them all day long in multiple allies, etc. but had no spells at all.
OR another Mesmerist who focused entirely on the Stare abilities, and, again, no need for spells. A 'Basilisk' AT that could focus Stares on two people at a time, and take extra Stare feats, and just gaze of doom enemies!
Much like the Alchemist (bombs or mutagens), before it, or the Druid (wild shape or animal companion), even before that, it was a class that had multiple class abilities that would, IMO, have been a great chassis for an entire class, with all the other stuff feeling like it just split the focus and made it not really great at the one thing I wanted to focus on (or any of the other things, it seemed, too many very distinct class features, that often didn't synergize particularly well).
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What would another con based class look like?
A 'Vitalist' that manipulates life-force to damage others (by draining their life force), heals allies (by infusing them with their own life force), buffs allies (more vitality!), debuffs foes (fatigue, etc.) and enhances themselves (burn that excess vitality for Rage like benefits) could be interesting.
Somewhat more adjacent abilities could allow them to manipulate people's or animals feelings (depress or energize them), or cause plants to grow or wither, or food to decay or freshen. A bit of 'psychic vampire' on the side, perhaps, able to bring down a room, or get a crowd pumped.
I believe the reason the guardian has Strength as the key ability score is because it is focused on wearing heavy armor and probably using a shield (possibly a tower shield). A guardian needs high Strength to lug all of that around.
This is probably the answer. Guardian would have been a good CON based class, giving it straight up the most HP in the game to fuel Intercept Attack.
Doing that would have required also giving it an ability to treat armor STR requirements differently (probably by substituting CON) and I guess they just didn't think it was worth it.
Personally, I think a PF2 version of the shifter would be a good candidate for a Con-based class. Basically, the body fueling transformations and powering the effects via "stamina."
I'd be all over that!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
PF2 relies much more heavily on melee damage than SF2.
Hence why the Soldier can work without being STR.
The Guardian just cannot. Any PF2 Martial needs to max its attack stat, which is either STR or DEX. And those who do not have STR as KAS have other features that up their melee damage.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ooh con based shifter sounds like a really fun idea.This could be something. The Shifter concept is much more amenable to damage boosts than the Guardian one IMO.
Though Unarmed martial with a big bag of HPs does sound pretty similar to an Animal Barbarian.
In my mind, the distinction would be the shifting aspect. Unlike barb, you adopt parts of various animals (or even more) for both encounter and exploration mode.
I've seen "Wolverine Vs Beast Boy" used to explain it and it's pretty spot on.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes.
Instead of being focused on a single animal like the animal instinct barbarian, the shifter should (IMO) be able to "mix and match" aspects of different animals (and even magical beasts, which is why I referenced the wild mimic) in different circumstances. Granted, the flexibility will probably be greater at higher levels.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'll plug my homebrew Shifter class here as I do think it's relevant to the current discussion (Con-based class with a lot of HP, can opt into mixing and matching aspects of different battle forms), but in terms of requesting the Shifter in PF2e: I'd very much like to see the class brought to 2e by Paizo, and believe there's a major unexplored niche to be filled with a dedicated shapeshifting class. The Animal Barbarian sort of morphs animal features, but thematically that's not really the same as transforming completely into a different creature, let alone one of a large variety of creatures, and leveraging their abilities to the fullest.
I also agree with BotBrain that a dedicated shapeshifter ought to use their transformation not just for combat, but for exploring too, because part of the fun of turning into a different creature is that you get new senses, Speeds, and other abilities to play with that come in handy in a variety of circumstances. "What creature can I transform into that gives me the abilities I need for this situation?" is a question the Shifter ought to be uniquely positioned to ask themselves constantly, and be able to answer as well by pulling either a whole polymorph effect or a partial morph to get the thing they want. Barbarians and other martials tend to have a lot of power budget dedicated to their Striking power, whereas I think the Shifter ought to be defined much more by their versatility through transformation. Battle forms are known for letting casters approach martials in Striking power, but not normally exceed them, and while that can be disappointing for many, the benefit here is that if a Shifter, a dedicated martial class, ends up dealing battle form-grade damage, that would be more likely to register as acceptable, and would leave plenty more room for other forms of power.
What would another con based class look like?
A 'Vitalist' that manipulates life-force to damage others (by draining their life force), heals allies (by infusing them with their own life force), buffs allies (more vitality!), debuffs foes (fatigue, etc.) and enhances themselves (burn that excess vitality for Rage like benefits) could be interesting.
Somewhat more adjacent abilities could allow them to manipulate people's or animals feelings (depress or energize them), or cause plants to grow or wither, or food to decay or freshen. A bit of 'psychic vampire' on the side, perhaps, able to bring down a room, or get a crowd pumped.
This is a Necromancer, or at least it's almost exactly the necromancer I played in a Mutants and Master mind game.
Obviously I love this idea,especially paired with Commander.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This reminds me of the wisdom based martial I recommended, which was based on the old concepts like the four humors, Chi, and Chakra.
And the Shifter being brought up leads right back into the "What is a shifter" discussion. Because I see people talking past each other because some are thinking beast boy (A Wild Form Druid without the casting and more shapeshifting), or like a Werewolf (we have an archetype specifically for that, not to mention several classes that do something like that.) And what I'm always advocating a class that is somewhere between Mystique and Plastic Man
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
PF2 relies much more heavily on melee damage than SF2.
Hence why the Soldier can work without being STR.
The Guardian just cannot. Any PF2 Martial needs to max its attack stat, which is either STR or DEX. And those who do not have STR as KAS have other features that up their melee damage.
Solider is even weirder that their primary attack is based on their class DC with their area attacks.
I think a PF2 class could work with some of the soldiers con fix things that counts as str for things like bulk of armor/weapon/carrying capacity and certain athletics maneuvers.
Unfortunately, the SF1 versions of the "shifter" didn't really fit, either.
Biohacker had some theorems that could temporarily allow a character to inject serums with transformative effects, but more along the lines of a PF2 alchemist's elixirs and mutagens.
Evolutionist was pretty much focused on "powering up" augmentations (grafts in PF2 Howl of the Wild) in combat and not about changing form.
Nanocyte would probably come closest, IMO, but even then the options from either the Discorporation or the Transmutation faculties were extremely limited.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, so for the "Beast Boy" version of a shifter what is keeping the Wild Order Druid from fulfilling that role? Serious question. Not down playing that desire at all.
For the Werewolf-ish Shifter, what is keeping the Beastkin VHeritage, the Werewolf Archetype, and the Animal Barbarians from fulfilling that role?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Unfortunately, the SF1 versions of the "shifter" didn't really fit, either.
Biohacker had some theorems that could temporarily allow a character to inject serums with transformative effects, but more along the lines of a PF2 alchemist's elixirs and mutagens.
Evolutionist was pretty much focused on "powering up" augmentations (grafts in PF2 Howl of the Wild) in combat and not about changing form.
Nanocyte would probably come closest, IMO, but even then the options from either the Discorporation or the Transmutation faculties were extremely limited.
Given what we have already seen with the astrazoan I think Paizo may be more willing to really lean into a shifter type character now than they were in the past.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, so for the "Beast Boy" version of a shifter what is keeping the Wild Order Druid from fulfilling that role? Serious question. Not down playing that desire at all.
For the Werewolf-ish Shifter, what is keeping the Beastkin VHeritage, the Werewolf Archetype, and the Animal Barbarians from fulfilling that role?
The beast boy comparision is limited, I just use it to emphasise the difference between barb and a hypothetical shifter.
Druids are still spellcasters, so you don't get to commit fully to the fantasy of this blurring of man or beast as you swap forms freely in battle.
Untamed form is also very limited, you get a small pool of fixed options, instead of a wider pool of options to pick from.
Would my hypothetical shifter be derivative of wild order druid? Yes. But a lot of classes have a decent amount of overlap and I don't see the difference here.
If you want to see what I'm on about, Teridax's shifter is essentially my pitch, though i would prefer it remain purely animalistic, at least at first. There's not really any reason for that, I just like the flavour of PF1e's shifter.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If we have the investigator which is almost a (bad) carbon copy of the rogue then we could have a class that expands upon the concept of the untamed form druid.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, so for the "Beast Boy" version of a shifter what is keeping the Wild Order Druid from fulfilling that role? Serious question. Not down playing that desire at all.
Wild/Untamed looks like it should fill the fantasy on the surface, but it's bad at it. Beast Boy is a frontline fighter: he turns into forms and that's where his power is. He's not flinging magic around and occasionally also turning into an animal to back up Starfire.
Untamed Druid is a full spellcaster that can also change forms. The forms are versatile and useful and a character build on it can be a very good character, but if you try to play it like a frontline martial, you'll be very, very disappointed because it's not that and it doesn't at all keep up with the actual martials (as my wife learned the hard way). It's still a caster first. It also has a weird feature where you can use your own attack modifier and get a +2 if you do, but only if your attack modifier already exceeds that of the form you're in... which at most levels is impossible for a Druid to do unless you're using a lower rank form.
The D&D Movie druid is another good example: her big thing is being an Owlbear and wrecking things, not strong spellcasting.
You can't build this character in PF2 right now because Untamed Druid is a C-tier martial and you're locking out your A-tier spellcasting when you do it. That's the idea behind Shifter: weaken or remove the spellcasting entirely and make a full martial shapeshifter that actually can keep up.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is my personal opinion that spellcasting on a Shifter in 2e ought to be optional, rather than mandatory: the 1e Shifter wasn't inherently a caster, and in my opinion spellcasting doesn't inherently jive all that well with battle forms that, by default, prevent you from casting spells. I do think there's a really cool fantasy out there for a character that can cast certain spells while shapeshifted, and that definitely could be an option for the class, but I also think a lot of players will want to focus purely on the transformation aspect.
It's also for similar reasons that I find the question of "what kind of Shifter do people want?" to be largely academic: suppose that the Shifter we get can only turn into one pre-canned battle form, but has the option to turn into battle forms from spells and morph portions of those benefits via feats. That by itself satisfies some, but not necessarily all prospective Shifter players, so using PF2e's framework, we can easily start creating class archetype: suppose class archetype #1 removes the pre-canned battle form, and in exchange lets you transform into spell battle forms right off the bat and gives you a few starting forms to play with. Already, that's many more players satisfied! Now, suppose class archetype #2 also removes the pre-canned battle form, and instead gives you that mix-and-match morph ability by default and lets you mutate your teammates to boot: suddenly, that's a whole other range of players satisfied, and you've probably got your Starfinder evolutionist there too! So much like the Shifter themselves, things don't have to stay in just one form in PF2e, because the system is made to be super-malleable and can recombine the same elements to open up new avenues of character-building.
So maybe something like the Cleric Class archetype. reduce them to a spell casting similar to the Magus and Summoner, and enhance their martial proficiencies to let them take advantage of their battle forms (and make sure they always have access to battle forms without cooldown)
Its possible, but its still got Druid proficiency and HP, which is where part of the problem is. It's still got spells that it can't cast while in forms, and as Untamed is already feat intensive to keep up with the forms, you don't have a lot of room for new class archetype feats unless the archetype itself is also granting the form feats.
It'd be better than nothing, but I think this might be a case where a full class is better to really do it justice. At that point you can remove the spellcasting entirely and start with a martial chassis, then add the form changing/morphing and whatever else you want it to be able to do without having to try to fit it into how Druid works. Optional focus spells that work while shifted (or work only while shifted) are a way to add that option without dealing with stuff like "Godzilla casts Moment of Renewal" because there's no spell slots to worry about (just say non-Shifter spells can't be cast while shifted and even if someone takes a casting archetype it won't work while shifted).
Plus that gives them a new class to put into a future book.
It is my personal opinion that spellcasting on a Shifter in 2e ought to be optional, rather than mandatory: the 1e Shifter wasn't inherently a caster, and in my opinion spellcasting doesn't inherently jive all that well with battle forms that, by default, prevent you from casting spells. I do think there's a really cool fantasy out there for a character that can cast certain spells while shapeshifted, and that definitely could be an option for the class, but I also think a lot of players will want to focus purely on the transformation aspect.
It's also for similar reasons that I find the question of "what kind of Shifter do people want?" to be largely academic: suppose that the Shifter we get can only turn into one pre-canned battle form, but has the option to turn into battle forms from spells and morph portions of those benefits via feats. That by itself satisfies some, but not necessarily all prospective Shifter players, so using PF2e's framework, we can easily start creating class archetype: suppose class archetype #1 removes the pre-canned battle form, and in exchange lets you transform into spell battle forms right off the bat and gives you a few starting forms to play with. Already, that's many more players satisfied! Now, suppose class archetype #2 also removes the pre-canned battle form, and instead gives you that mix-and-match morph ability by default and lets you mutate your teammates to boot: suddenly, that's a whole other range of players satisfied, and you've probably got your Starfinder evolutionist there too! So much like the Shifter themselves, things don't have to stay in just one form in PF2e, because the system is made to be super-malleable and can recombine the same elements to open up new avenues of character-building.
I suspect if they do a 2e Shifter doing them as a wave type caster along the lines of magus seems most likely. Some spell casting but limited.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If Shifter gets spell slots, it's already failed.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Frankly, I agree, no matter which of the three versions we're talking about, Spell slots don't really fit (Focus spells maybe)
Seeing something built around being just a shapeshifter and having to "master" certain forms. Subclasses built around the use to which you put your shapeshifting.
Dopple: you specialize in impersonation of actual beings. You gain a limited number of "Mastered forms" which you get a massive deception bonus to pretend to be, or maybe just auto succeed on those forms.
Lurker: You specialize in using your shapeshifting to hide, letting you use your charisma instead of dexterity for stealth checks and your mastered forms are objects made of specific materials (anything else, and a close examination would reveal your wood grain makes no sense, the metal still has the wrong texture, etc)
Warp: You've specialized in combat using your malleable body to switch between physical damage types, give yourself reach, and grapple and engulf. Your "mastered forms" would be unarmed weapon stances
Couldn’t shifter be made as a class archtype though?
The dedication would give untamed order’s focus spell.l but give them an exception allowing them to use thier ac if its higher than the forms ac.
When you start as a martial class you would already use your attack bonus when its higher than animal forms.
Then the rest of the feat line can make them better at fighting with those forms.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I made my own shifter class archetype for the druid a while ago, but I agree that ideally the shifter shouldn't have spells. What people want out of the shifter is a martial class that can take on the shape of certain animals, potentially mixing them up too at some point. If it had spells it would inevitable have a decent size of its budget spent on spellcasting which is exactly what people don't want because if people wanted spells they would be playing a druid instead (ignoring the fact that you can't use spells while using untamed form, but I digress).
Speaking of class archetypes, here's a homebrew Evolutionist class archetype that's based on the above homebrew Shifter class, effectively as a means to illustrate how a Shifter based on one single aspect could easily be turned around to instead turn into a bunch of different battle forms and morph their body at will.
Although you could include spellcasting as a core part of the class, I agree with the other posts here that that would likely take up a lot of their power budget while needing extra adjustments to fit in with battle forms. I also believe that the versatility of spells might take focus away from the versatility of battle forms themselves, and a martial class that shines through the different abilities it can gain from battle forms may not need spells to already be quite versatile in its own right. Conversely, this versatility could really help the class distinguish itself from competitors like Animal Barbarians, who can sort of shapeshift but whose power still mostly comes from heavy Strikes rather than adaptability on the fly.
Regardless if people would or wouldn't accept a druid archetype as a shifter, I'd love to see a wave caster druid that had a more marshal bent. TBH I love to see a more marshal bard wave caster also.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Couldn’t shifter be made as a class archtype though?
The dedication would give untamed order’s focus spell.l but give them an exception allowing them to use thier ac if its higher than the forms ac.
When you start as a martial class you would already use your attack bonus when its higher than animal forms.
Druid has caster armor proficiency so if you're using on-rank forms, the character's AC is almost never above form AC, so that would do nothing. Druid already has the same problem with attack modifier: Untamed can use its own attack modifier if its higher (and get a +2 in that case), but at most levels it's literally impossible for a Druid to achieve that with on-level forms even if they are maxing out their attack.
The whole thing would work way better if that +2 was just baked in rather than being conditional, because right now it only really does anything if you're using forms that have othrewise fallen behind (and as they lose out on damage/AC/skill progression, they still fall behind)... and Fighters taking Druid archetype who can easily get it.
Then the rest of the feat line can make them better at fighting with those forms.
Keeping up with forms is feat intensive already, so there won't be a lot of spare feats to take anything like this unless those feats also give access to forms (and do some other stuff).
A class archetype of this doesn't address the issues very well because they're issues core to the class. So the archetype would have to change a LOT of things, including the class weapon/armor proficiency scaling. At that point it probably makes more sense for it to just be a class and not carry all the Druid baggage along.
Couldn’t shifter be made as a class archtype though?
The dedication would give untamed order’s focus spell.l but give them an exception allowing them to use thier ac if its higher than the forms ac.
When you start as a martial class you would already use your attack bonus when its higher than animal forms.
Then the rest of the feat line can make them better at fighting with those forms.
That would fit some people's vision of the shifter but not everyone's. A lot of people advocate being able to shapeshift individual bodyparts in different combinations.
For example: shifting the head into a spitting cobra to spew venom at people; shifting the arms into wings to fly; and shifting the legs into squid tentacles to grapple. All at the same time.