An adjustment to the Free Archetype variant

[A Butter Idea]

Offer Free Archetype feats at every odd-numbered level including 1st, instead of every even-numbered level. Also, lower the level requirements of Archetype feats by 1.

Here are my reasons for this change.
1.) It makes class archetypes such as the Avenger, Runelord, and Spellshot less awkward to implement at 1st level. Under RAW, you have to select the subclass at 1st Level, and then wait until 2nd Level to make a forced selection of the class archetype Dedication feat. With this adjusted Free Archetype variant, you can get all of this squared away at 1st level.
2.) Character concepts which rely on the free archetype no longer have to wait until 2nd level to get all of their core features online. The best example of this is any masked superhero character, which depends on the Vigilante archetype to establish their secret identity. Under RAW, you don't have the capacity to keep your mild-mannered alter ego under wraps until you hit an arbitrary level-up point.
3.) It nicely interleaves the standard class feats you get on even levels. At 2nd level, you get a class feat; at 3rd level, a free archetype feat; at 4th level, class feat; 5th, free archetype feat, and so on. The odd levels already tend to be lighter on feat selection anyway, so it's a nice way to give players more things to choose on those levels.

[Teridax]

I quite like this idea mainly for how it would provide a class feat at every level. I do agree that it's a bit awkward for certain thematically important dedications to be unavailable at character creation, and while this front-loads the power of those dedications and archetypes in general, it could make character-building a fair bit smoother.

[WatersLethe]

I did basically this for the first year or so of PF2, but ended up moving away from it because the mental adjustment wasn't really worth the effort with Pathbuilder and everything that would need to be adjusted.

[Claxon]

The only thing I don't like about it is that many feats become available at those same even levels when you gain feats. Meaning at level 3 I get that class feat, but without further adjustment I can only take level 1 or 2 feats.

But I was just looking at the Acrobat dedication for example.

By default the dedication is at 2. And then the next available feat is at level 4.

Under your system...this just break.

You would have to adjust all the feats down or...

Modify your approach slightly, you get the dedication at level 1.

You get nothing at level 2 or 3. Get your next free dedication feat at 4.

I realize this doesn't smooth out the rate at which feats are gained, which is nice conceptually.

But also I think shifting down the required level by 1 for all feats isn't a good solution. It's not huge, but arguable those feats are designed to be available until that level. So characters might be more powerful than expected.

[A Butter Idea]

Claxon wrote:

The only thing I don't like about it is that many feats become available at those same even levels when you gain feats. Meaning at level 3 I get that class feat, but without further adjustment I can only take level 1 or 2 feats.

But I was just looking at the Acrobat dedication for example.

By default the dedication is at 2. And then the next available feat is at level 4.

Under your system...this just break.

You would have to adjust all the feats down or...

Modify your approach slightly, you get the dedication at level 1.

I think there's been a misunderstanding here. What you're describing is exactly the change I'm suggesting. Every feat's level requirement is reduced by 1.

So at Level 1, you can take the Acrobat Dedication Feat. At Level 3, you can take Contortionist. At Level 5, you can take Dodge Away. And so on.

Quote:

But also I think shifting down the required level by 1 for all feats isn't a good solution. It's not huge, but arguable those feats are designed to be available until that level. So characters might be more powerful than expected.

Personally, I think that archetype feats are too delayed per RAW. My personal pet peeve example goes to any archetype feat which grants spellcasting benefits; they unlock spell ranks 3 to 5 whole levels later than a natural spellcaster would get them. Really, it should be just 2 levels later, especially since archetype benefits are so heavily feat-taxed and offer only one spell slot per rank.

Nevertheless, if it ends up being as big a problem as you worry it might, the GM can account for it by slightly ratcheting up the diffculty of encounters and challenges to accomodate the player party's abilities. Typically, the greater breadth of abilities provided by Free Archetype (with or without level adjustment) is akin to playing with a more experienced group of players that have a better grasp of all the options at their disposal. In both cases, the GM can accomodate their player's skill level just by adding an extra enemy here or increasing a hazard's DC by 1 there.

[Claxon]

A Butter Idea wrote:

I think there's been a misunderstanding here. What you're describing is exactly the change I'm suggesting. Every feat's level requirement is reduced by 1.

So at Level 1, you can take the Acrobat Dedication Feat. At Level 3, you can take Contortionist. At Level 5, you can take Dodge Away. And so on.

Alright, I understand now. You're resolving that issue, but I am personally concerned about the power level of those feats. It's not huge, but some of them may be a little too good at the level you receive them. If you're not worried or concerned about it, it will work.

I simply wouldn't do it that way, because generally I like to make as small a change to the game as possible to achieve the goal.

In my mind, the problem is "certain thematic archetypes not be available until level 2 make characters awkward to start". Your masked hero example is a great example of this.

Okay, simplest solution is allow the dedication at level 1, but stop the change there.

You're solution does that, but then goes on to even out progression more. Which is nice. But also risk some things being a little too potent.

If in your opinion those dedication feats aren't strong enough (which is how I'm interpreting your statements) then you are additionally resolving that problem with your solution.

I don't necessarily agree with that, and it goes against my concept of "make as small a change as possible" but I can understand and follow the logic of your solution.