2e Advanced Player's Guide Archetype list

[stack]

APG pdfs are hitting the wild. Found this list of archetypes floating around.

Acrobat
Archaeologist
Archer
Assassin
Bastion
Beastmaster
Blessed One
Bounty Hunter
Cavalier
Celebrity
Dandy
Dragon Disciple
Dual Weapon Warrior
Duelist
Eldritch Archer
Familiar Master
Gladiator
Herbalist
Horizon Walker
Investigator (Multiclass)
Linguist
Loremaster
Marshal
Martial Artist
Mauler
Medic
Oracle (Multiclass)
Pirate
Poisoner
Ritualist
Scout
Scroll Trickster
Scrounger
Sentinel
Shadowdancer
Snarecrafter
Swashbuckler (Multiclass)
Talisman Dabbler
Vigilante
Viking
Weapon Improviser
Witch (Multiclass)

Thought it might be of interest to the PF2 people here. Both of you.

[Psyren]

Investigator (Multiclass)
...
Oracle (Multiclass)
...
Swashbuckler (Multiclass)
...
Witch (Multiclass)

Uh, could you elaborate on these? Are they no longer standalone classes in PF2?

Thought it might be of interest to the PF2 people here. Both of you.

Ha!

[catagent101]

Uh, could you elaborate on these? Are they no longer standalone classes in PF2?

No, just multiclassing in PF2 works differently. First, some background. Each class gets a class feat and a skill feat every even level (except the rogue which gains a skill feat every level and some classes get an additional class feat at 1st level). Think the Vigilante, except you gain social talents the same time you gain vigilante talents. "Archetypes" in PF2 refers to a set of class feats (or occasionally skill feats) that you gain access to once you take the archetype's dedication feat, which also gives you some of the basic features of the archetype itself and forbids you from taking another dedication feat until you have gotten two of the archetype's feats (there are exceptions for archetypes in the same organization). Multiclass archetypes give you access to a set of feats that allow you to gain additional class features of the class, as well as feats to access the class's class feats. It might remind you a bit of Variant Multiclassing, though it's not as strict. I hope that makes sense.

Based off of the list, it seems like the Vigilante and the Cavalier are both not classes in PF2 anymore. I'm a little surprised, but I guess both classes didn't have a particularly distinct identity (especially given that every class in PF2 is structured somewhat like the vigilante).

Also, there are three of us, count please.

[Eldonauran]

Also, there are three of us, count please.

Three and a half, based on my interest...

[stack]

As explained above, every class gets a multiclass archetype for other classes to use to poach features, kind of like VMC in PF1, since there is no open, level by level multiclassing. There are four new classes, so four multiclass archetypes also.

Curious to see the eldritch archer, since gish options are thin at this point.

[NightbringerGGZ]

I'm actually mostly playing PF2e at this point myself. I have some players who are newer to table-top gaming and they're frankly loving this version over both PF1e and D&D 5e.

As for the class archetypes: multiclassing, prestige classes and archetypes are completely handled via feats in a very similar manner to how D&D 4e handled multiclassing. The high number of feats you get in PF2e make it fairly viable to pick these up, and I'm actually running with the "Free archetype" rules as I've found it gives the players more flexibility without substantially increasing power.

As for the archetypes, from what's already been shared or leaked many of these archetypes are intended to help with specific build concepts. For example, the Champion class doesn't have a ton of specific weapon style feats, but some of the archetypes could help offset that. Alternatively, there are a couple archetypes that are focused on increasing durability.

[catagent101]

The one I'm most curious about is the linguist. I feel like the Core Rulebook covered that ground more or less so I'm curious as to what this archetype adds.

[stack]

The one I'm most curious about is the linguist. I feel like the Core Rulebook covered that ground more or less so I'm curious as to what this archetype adds.

I haven't been impressed with many of the previously released archetypes; I have suspicions that linguist will go on the 'forget it was ever printed' pile.

[Asmotherion]

Uh, could you elaborate on these? Are they no longer standalone classes in PF2?



Ha!

Practically, there are "multiclass" combinations that are called archetypes.

In a nutshell, multiclass in Pf2 is what we call gestalt in other systems. And specific "gestalt" combinations have diferent names, thus "archetypes".

[Psyren]

Practically, there are "multiclass" combinations that are called archetypes.

In a nutshell, multiclass in Pf2 is what we call gestalt in other systems. And specific "gestalt" combinations have diferent names, thus "archetypes".

Is it really gestalt? When I hear "gestalt" I think double spell slots, double class features, best of both worlds saves and HD etc - not just scaling advancement on both sides.

[catagent101]

I haven't been impressed with many of the previously released archetypes; I have suspicions that linguist will go on the 'forget it was ever printed' pile.

Yeah, I can't say I will be too surprised if that happens either. I hope they realize that being able to speak to any creature is just a high-level skill feat but... maybe not. It just feels like an obvious enough screw-up that it could also mean they had a good idea there.

Is it really gestalt? When I hear "gestalt" I think double spell slots, double class features, best of both worlds saves and HD etc - not just scaling advancement on both sides.

It's not 3e gestalt rules, no. Playing those kinds of characters is a separate variant rule.

[NightbringerGGZ]

Is it really gestalt? When I hear "gestalt" I think double spell slots, double class features, best of both worlds saves and HD etc - not just scaling advancement on both sides.

No, archetypes are not Gestalt characters. The ruleset is D&D 4e "multiclassing" where you spend class feats to gain abilities of another class at a slower pace or in reduced power. For instance, a Fighter who picks up Wizard will at most of have 2 spell slots for each level and won't have the highest level magic options.

PF2E does have "Dual-Class PC" rules which is traditional Gestalt rules. You pick two classes and gain all the features of each, using the highest proficiency granted for a given stat. This includes the boost to a primary ability score so you can get two 18s this way. You also get all spell slots / spells known of either class if you pick two spell casting classes. You don't double up on ability boosts or general/skill/ancestry feats that everybody gets at certain levels.

[NomGarret]

I wonder how many of these are limited to specific classes or if they’ve given up on that idea. I’m also curious how they’ll balance against the multi class archetypes. What’s the difference between an archer and a multi class ranger, for instance?

[stack]

I wonder how many of these are limited to specific classes or if they’ve given up on that idea. I’m also curious how they’ll balance against the multi class archetypes. What’s the difference between an archer and a multi class ranger, for instance?

Prior to this, no archetypes where class locked. I would be surprised if any of these are. I believe there was mention of things that change features in base classes, but I don't know if the APG has them.

The multiclass archetypes usually have a few feature poaching options, then a generic "take a class feat as if you were that class but half your level". I expect a dedicated archer would instead get a focused selection of feats that would be more on par with the level you get them. Aldori duelist vs multiclass fighter, for a comparison of previous material.

[stack]

Whole thing is on nethys now.

[NomGarret]

Credit where credit is due: these do look more interesting than the options in the core book. If someone offered to run a PF2 game, I might say yes without trying to talk them into another system first.

Also, not sure if I missed something. Are the categories of archetypes strictly an organizational thing, is it a tag, or is there some rule element regarding them?

Oh, and the number of small races keeps growing, but the number of even thematically large-ish races remains...orc.

[Psyren]

So... Witches have to spend "focus points" to use their hexes, of which they start with just one (recoverable on a short rest 10-minute commune with the familiar) and it says they can spend feats to increase this pool, but it can never hold more than three points. So a PF2 witch gets a maximum of 3 hexes per combat (after feats), instead of PF1's unlimited amount with no feats.

Is that right, and if so, why? Were hexes that much of a problem?

[Ssalarn]

So... Witches have to spend "focus points" to use their hexes, of which they start with just one (recoverable on a short rest 10-minute commune with the familiar) and it says they can spend feats to increase this pool, but it can never hold more than three points. So a PF2 witch gets a maximum of 3 hexes per combat (after feats), instead of PF1's unlimited amount with no feats.

Is that right, and if so, why? Were hexes that much of a problem?

There's actually two different tiers of hexes, kind of like bard compositions. The cantrip hexes, like clinging ice, can be used an unlimited number of times. More powerful hexes, like life boost, take focus points. Both types count towards your limit of 1 hex per round.

[NomGarret]

So... Witches have to spend "focus points" to use their hexes, of which they start with just one (recoverable on a short rest 10-minute commune with the familiar) and it says they can spend feats to increase this pool, but it can never hold more than three points. So a PF2 witch gets a maximum of 3 hexes per combat (after feats), instead of PF1's unlimited amount with no feats.

Is that right, and if so, why? Were hexes that much of a problem?

Oracles have a similar problem, as do all casters really. Most of the time you’ll be an arcane caster, but rarely will you be clearly a sorcerer. It makes them all quite samey.

[Ssalarn]

Oracles have a similar problem, as do all casters really. Most of the time you’ll be an arcane caster, but rarely will you be clearly a sorcerer. It makes them all quite samey.

Really depends on your point of reference. PF1 wizards, sorcerers, psychics, clerics, etc. were far more "samey" than their PF2 equivalents, which all have significantly more points of meaningful customization. Compared to like, PF1 3pp, sure they're not as diverse, but core to core there's a lot more variety in potential builds for PF2 full casters.

[NightbringerGGZ]

Also, not sure if I missed something. Are the categories of archetypes strictly an organizational thing, is it a tag, or is there some rule element regarding them?

These seem to be something AON invented, probably to help organize things on the website.

So... Witches have to spend "focus points" to use their hexes, of which they start with just one (recoverable on a short rest 10-minute commune with the familiar) and it says they can spend feats to increase this pool, but it can never hold more than three points. So a PF2 witch gets a maximum of 3 hexes per combat (after feats), instead of PF1's unlimited amount with no feats.

Is that right, and if so, why? Were hexes that much of a problem?

So, a few different things here. Nearly any character can gain a focus pool, either from their class feats or from archetypes. You start with one point as soon as you gain a focus power and most feats which grant a new power boost your pool size up to a max of 3. This system is Paizo's take on 4e's per-encounter abilities, where you have some flexibility in which power you choose to use. Note, regaining focus usually requires you to have completed an encounter and only restores one point, though most casters have feats that allow for improved recovery.

Witches work a lot like bards, in that they have Focus Cantrips... which don't cost Focus points. Why are they tied to the Focus pool at all? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ You're currently locked to only one patron, and therefore only one hex cantrip, which also sets your spell list. This is technically in response to playtest feedback, but rather overshot the mark on what players asked for. I think this system is strictly worse than the playtest version and am already homebrewing a feat for extra access to those cantrips and allowing my players to mix & match patrons & hexes.

As for if at-will hexxing was too powerful, no clue on what the Paizo team thinks there. The Witch does have some good options though. Evil Eye at-will is one of the more powerful single-target debuffs you can have in the game (-1 or -2 to all checks and DCs) while stripping out the normal mechanic that reduces the penalty each round. I think the main issue the class currently faces is that it needs some better feats as there are some levels where you're better off grabbing an arcetype that grants extra spells. Runescarred is my current favorite as innate spells get to use your classes casting proficiency.

[NomGarret]

Really depends on your point of reference. PF1 wizards, sorcerers, psychics, clerics, etc. were far more "samey" than their PF2 equivalents, which all have significantly more points of meaningful customization. Compared to like, PF1 3pp, sure they're not as diverse, but core to core there's a lot more variety in potential builds for PF2 full casters.

I certainly didn’t think core PF1 casters played all that different from one another, so I certainly don’t mean to claim any sort of regression. What I do think is that the distinctions between PF2 casters are bigger on paper than they are at the table. This is what I’ve seen in my, admittedly limited, exposure.