pathfinder

225 readers

5 users here now

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

What classes does Pathfinder 2e not yet have that you would like to see? (aussie.zone)

submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

19 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Either a specific named class from 1e, D&D, or another game, or a general concept.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Im curious why your conception of a warlock must be able to be confused with a wizard or sorcerer from an outside perspective. That has never been an aspect of warlocks in 5e that I valued, or something I particularly wanted to emphasize.

To me, a warlock character could be made using any number of classes present in pf2, including the aforementioned sorcerer, wizard and witch, but also the psychic or oracle. The fantasy of having a patron is not something that must be expressed mechanically IMO, because it ultimately boils down to "you have a connection with this powerful NPC and you need to consider their wants/needs/demands or else there may be consequenses"

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

why your conception of a warlock must be able to be confused with a wizard or sorcerer from an outside perspective

To me those three classes form a little triangle of being the "main" arcane spellcasting classes. Wizards cast through study. Sorcerers are just naturally magical. And warlocks get their spells through a patron. But all are general spellcasters, unlike, say, the nature flavour of a druid, religious flavour of a cleric, or the martial side of the magus.

The oracle is, in terms of its subclasses and feats, really good for this (with some reflavouring of the Mysteries to be applied to a specific individual patron, which is explicitly not what Mysteries are in the text). Its biggest problem mechanically is the core class using the divine spell list rather than arcane. And unfortunately that's a pretty big drawback to making the warlock fantasy work. But the bigger problem is the whole design of the Mysteries.

The fantasy of having a patron is not something that must be expressed mechanically

I just fundamentally disagree with this view. The patron of a warlock is critical to the warlock fantasy for me. It's like suggesting you could play a rogue fantasy by being a fighter with high dex and a finesse weapon. Like, yeah...you could. But having a proper class that more accurately represents the fantasy would be so much better.