Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 106
  1. #11
    Senior Member Mat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    274
    Quote Originally Posted by Perpetual Nothing View Post
    So, please, tell me what you think about this. Had I explained it well? Do you disagree with these thoughts of mine? Your feedback may decide the fate of some archetypes in question later on when we will be making decisions on the final archetype list for Magus. Ask your questions, and I will try to answer them, although please understand, that my answers may be severely delayed, for I visit forums occasionally and while I can spend a lot of time there, occasions like this one happen not as often as I would like them to.

    Also, tell me whether this format of discussion it suitable and whether you will want to hear about other classes and their archetypes. Or maybe about something else.
    This is an excellent, insightful post. Even though I have no plans to play a Magus I appreciate the thought process involved with deciding on which archetypes to include/exclude. If this is how every class is approached, I think the results will be best-case scenario. Some players will be unhappy with the omission of their favorite archetype(s) no matter what, but at least you explain why they can't make it in.

    You explained everything well and I agree with the thoughts you put forward. I'll echo what Stratagemini said and just put out that I would love for Sorcerers to be tackled next. I want to know which bloodlines you plan on implementing and whether or not the Eldritch Heritage feat is feasible.

    Thanks for your time and engaging with the community! :)
    Last edited by Mat; 07-28-2017 at 03:31 PM.

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Riga, Latvia
    Posts
    222
    A great post and I hope to see one for each class!

    I am slightly disappointed with the lack of racial archetypes, I was hoping for at least one for each race :( Ah well, maybe in addons/sequels!

    Automatic Bonus Progression or Innate Item Bonuses seem to provide solutions for the item-dependend archetypes?

    I second your love for the Skirnir and shield mastery in general. I think a CRPG is actually a better avenue for such characters because the enemy AI usually cannot match a cunning GM and "tanking" enemies with the shield becomes a viable tactic, unlike in PnP.

  3. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    2
    I really like this format and I would like to thank you for being so open about your design decisions. Even though the bladebound magus is definitely my top pick your reasoning makes it clear that it would be a pain to implement. It would be like having to create 9 new npcs for one archetype. There are two points I would like to make in it's defense. Unlike other intelligent items the black blade always has it's wielders alignment. This means there is no need to include the ego possession mechanic that intelligent items have (since disagreements between the wielder and the black blade would be rare). Secondly, I personally would still play a bladebound even if it was weaker than other classes. The concept is interesting enough to make up for the disadvantage.

    I would like to hear more about other classes in this same fashion. The sorcerer in particular should be interesting to see (since it doesn't really have normal archetypes).

  4. #14
    Member Ulfgeir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Borås, Sweden
    Posts
    14
    Very good post. I like the arguments you do put forth, and it will be very interesting to see these writeups for all classes. One question though, would it be possible for you to makethe classes in such a way, that you later on could add more classes/archetypes as DLCs? And also reuse the current ones if you do make more APs?
    --
    I have not lost my mind, it is backed up somewhere on disc...

  5. #15
    Developer
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    35
    Thanks to everyone for your warm reception.

    To HenriHakl: When I said that Esoteric intrudes into monk’s domain – I meant mostly that he extensively uses some monk class features, while archers are similar in style and concepts, not in specific abilities of theirs. Although, I should say that I am not exactly ready to defend this position of mine, for I can imagine esoteric and monk being completely different.

    We want to make an exotic weapon, although not all types of them, and we will place a set of them throughout the game. But the problem of a staff magus is of a different sort – ideally he wants a staff that both contains useful spells and has great combat properties. And I am not even ready to say that there will be not enough of staffs like these in the game – it’s just that his appetite for weapons is extremely limited, which limits this archetype. Since it is already quite limited – it may lead to every staff magus being very similar to any other staff magus, and I want to avoid this.

    So, what I want to say – when you want to make a character specialized in an exotic weapon – that’s your choice, it provides you with a list of exotic weapons to choose from and so on. While this decision will undoubtedly limit your selection of weapons, but that was a decision that you have made. It is the choice you make when selecting a Kensai, for example. But staff magus comes predestined to be only interested in staffs; it was limited to a narrow selection without you – so we have to back this up by adding staffs through the game. Otherwise, there’s just no point of adding such an archetype to the game and not supporting it properly.

    To Stratagemini: There will come a time to talk about Sorcerer and Monk.

    To Mat: We hadn’t yet made any decisions about Eldritch Heritage. It is feasible since bloodline abilities will be implemented anyway.

    To CyberMephit: I think that both bonus progressions simplify the magic item system, and I want to avoid simplification of it without a pressing necessity.

    To Glass Half Full: Yeah, the concept is cool, but without a serious investment he is just a magus with a leveling weapon. And I don’t think that this will just be fair to the Bladebound to become like this.

    To Ulfgeir: The system we will develop for the archetypes is supposed to be quite versatile, but we do not have any far reaching plans like these at this point.

    To Kekmaster ACR: Yeah, that’s approximately what I meant when I said “working with Sorcerer bloodlines.”

    To splugar: We hadn’t yet decided on a particular archetype selection process, so I cannot say anything at this point. Our current understanding is that we want to provide some of the archetypes for the voting, but not all of them and not very soon.

  6. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Sochi, Russia
    Posts
    69
    Well, on second thought, regarding the Eldritch Scion - i think in case of most bloodrager bloodlines you can implement them for Scion as they are. since their features are mostly similar to those of Sorcerer's, with differences only in numbers of % fortification, numbers of AC\resistances, etc., except for maybe Arcane and a couple others. With same level progression(1\4\8\12\16\20)

  7. #17
    Member Dr. Dre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    28
    For spell dancer i just want to ask would it be more palatable for it as an option if you were to remove the racial restriction from the class or in general have an option to remove flavor restrictions from game? Because for spell dancer nothing mechanically screams elf. I also get that flavor is inherent part of why you would not do it because why bother with most of the system if you were not going to use it for things such as flavor. I also thought of racial requirements for archetypes as always a bad way to do it though because it flavor at the cost of mechanics for no reason since just like spell dancer most racial archetypes don't have anything that mechanically says this archetypes does not make sense if you do not go this race.


    All in All get why spell dancer will most likely not make it in but it does make me wonder how how big doing something like removing the racial requirements is? Do you have to get permission from Paizo? Have they given you a list of things you can and cannot change? Essentially I guess I'm asking how involved is Paizo when it comes to the development of the game?

  8. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    29
    Perpetual Nothing, your reasoning is sound. That is all that matters to me, as I am sure that Pathfinder: Kingmaker offers ample enough choice for me anyway.

    The only advice I can offer is that you might consider drawing up a roster of all archetypes for all classes in the game, the ones that you have under close consideration, and then have a process for selecting/voting with the entire roster in mind. Sort of balancing the entire roster against the game's need and the players' preferences to support a wide variety of playing styles.

  9. #19
    Senior Member Wraith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by Perpetual Nothing View Post
    Stuff
    Well put. I love the logic, reasons given, and agree with all of them. As to the Eldritch Scion, if you chose to implement it, I think that choice to utilize the sorcerer bloodline would work well.

    Thank you so much for making this game, then turning to the community to help implement additional features. This also allows us to engage with the game in a manner that is much close to pen and paper, where we all can agree on certain rules before we sit down and roll dice.

    Quote Originally Posted by Forcy View Post
    I also love the Spire Defender Archetype.. is a strong magus wothout armor (amazing for a dervish dance build...).. and i think it's easy to make.
    Technically, this is an elven archetype and comes from the Mordant Spire.

    "Spire defenders are magi who train themselves to accompany sages and archaeologists who venture from the Mordant Spire, acting as aids and bodyguards." and "Most spire defenders are elves—it’s exceptionally rare for a non-elf to be granted access to the training required to take this archetype (nonelves need GM approval to take this archetype)."
    [I]Vivat Grendel![/I]

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Riga, Latvia
    Posts
    222
    Quote Originally Posted by Perpetual Nothing
    To CyberMephit: I think that both bonus progressions simplify the magic item system, and I want to avoid simplification of it without a pressing necessity.
    .
    Thank you for taking the time to read and respond to the community! However, I respectfully disagree on two levels:
    1) I don't think that simplification should be avoided - on the contrary, I think that complexity should be avoided without a necessity. Simplification must not sacrifice diversity and player agency, that is true - but see the next point.
    2)I believe that the default magic item system actually trivializes the player choice, because it requires sacrificing too much combat effectiveness in order to get interesting flavourful, situational or otherwise unique options. I am strongly in favor of the alternative magic item systems because they do away with it - but it would be an equally valid compromise to, say, add an extra +1 'Big 6' bonus to the items with unique properties for free, in order to make them viable alternatives.

Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •