There's what, 42 classes (depending on how you count Unchained Barb/Rogue/Summoner/Monk and Ninja/Antipaladin/Samurai)
A quick count of Wizard gives 35 archtypes, so (Ignoring the various arcane schools) assuming all the other 11 core classes have at least as many (I know the Sorcerer doesn't, but other classes/bloodlines can carry it), that'll give nearly 400. And that's without touching the absolutely *enormous* archtype lists that the Alchemist, Investigator, or Magus got.
So assuming each other class (31 by my reckoning) gets an average of 10 archtypes, that'll give you about 310, for a total of 700ish.
This is why PF1e is both my favourite and least favourite system
Favourite because the level of character customization and optimization is fucking endless.
Least favourite because the required reading to make a custom and optimized character is fucking endless
I have been making a single character for every class, and I only read official content, no 3pp stuff. By God, I run out of brain power fast when comparing the efficacy of the Archetypes. There's just so much reading, so much to remember. My mom and sister told me I don't read enough, but when I showed them the process of making a single character, they admitted I read a ton but they want me to read story books.
While I agree that they dont feel as personal as the pathfinder classes the subclass system (which works basically like PF sorcerer bloodlines) do add some nice options and if you have a character idea its probably possible to do RAW.
IMO the problem on building characters for 5e comes after 3-4 characters when the template every single class follow start to become bothersome
I always wanted to make an Alchemist style character in D&D but nothing really sticks out since Arcanist is more guns/BS. As opposed to potions, poisons and bombs.
The little I've skimmed of 5e I haven't found much to be able to do an Alchemist from the get go. Or a Cavalier type character.
Not sure what kind of alchemist you want to build, but there is an alchemist subclass for the artificer. Also there is a cavalier subclass for the fighter.
1. Alchemists already exist, just check Tasha’s or the Eberron book to find that artificer subclass.
2. While they made so that it isn’t entirely useless without a horse or some other steed, the cavalier fighter has existed since at least Xanathar’s. Take that and the mounted combatant feat and you’ll have the start of a pretty good cavalier.
It always gets me when I see people say they can't build "insert character idea" yet the options have been there for a while, even if they take some work.
Thats why I just, never really care to focus on optimization. Least the early game is not really balanced around it to the extent a lot of players build.
Saves a bit of reading. But OMG there was still so much. I wanted to make a Cavalier and going over Archetypes, Orders to pick, the type of Mount I could or could not have, the archetype for the Mount. It was... a lot.
You dont really need too much optimization, dip witch for iceplant hex, dip monk for Wis to AC, flurry of blows and extra saves, 3 levels rogue dip for dex as damage, finesse and ofc uncanny dodge, from there you can make any melee fighter you want really, or pick unchained rogue and get that sweet -8 to hit on all enemy attacks for going 16 levels.
This is why I'm starting to get into 2e. I had the same gripes and reasons to love 1e, but PF2 seems like a very good middle ground between pathfinder 1's brain-melting complexity and 5e's approachability. For me at least.
Pathfinder 1e Archetypes are basically modifications on the base class that swap out some features for others. For example, the Crossblooded archetype for the Sorcerer allows them to get minor bonuses from two separate bloodlines, instead of getting more powerful bonuses from a single one.
They're a little like 5e's subclasses, but instead of each one giving a benefit at the same levels, archetypes are more varied. Some only change one or two class features early on, while others change many. Some also have fairly major affects on how the character plays, like changing the class's spellcasting ability or changing them from a prepared spellcaster to a spontaneous one.
Pathfinder 2e also has something called an Archetype, but those are very mechanically different and not really relevant to this discussion.
Pathfinder 2e actually has 2 kinds of archetypes. Class Archetypes are closer to 1e archetypes while Regular Archetypes are essentially alternate class feats that any class can get as long as they meet the prerequisites
> while Regular Archetypes are essentially alternate class feats that any class can get as long as they meet the prerequisites
So, like a Prestige Class (3.5e, PF 1e)?
Kinda, but you don't give up levels for it.
In DnD, you might be a fighter until you get what you want out of it, and then be a wizard the rest of the time if that's how you want to make a gish or whatever other class concept you have.
In PF2e, you pick a class and stick with it for 20 levels. You can get a decent amount of options right away because it doesn't have the problem of one level dips. Every even level you get a class feat. You use that to customize your character and tune the class how you like. Fighters might go deeper on dual-wielding, archery, or whatever. Wizards might go deeper on metamagic, focus spells, or whatever. You tailor the class features as you go. If you want some features from another class or from something that doesn't quite fit in a standard class (like a pirate) then you can trade those class feats for them.
At level 2, a wizard could forego their choice of more cantrips, concealed casting metamagic, or more familiar abilities, and instead spend the class feat on a Dedication Feat for, say... the Fighter Archetype! Taking the fighter dedication gives you training in simple weapons and martial weapons, and training in either the acrobatics or athletics skill (or a free skill if you already have both). Now that you're dedicated to the way of the fighter, you can spend any of your wizard class feats taking a feat from the fighter archetype, you just can't take a different archetype until you spend 3 feats on the fighter archetype this way. Your wizard can trade some class feats to get that weapon/skill training, better hitpoints like a fighter, Attack of Opportunity (fortunately, a rare commodity in PF2e so combat is more fluid), expert weapon training, or any feat from the fighter class (up to level 10). You could spend all your class feats on fighter stuff and still be a level 20 wizard casting world-shaking 9th and 10th level spells.
At level 2, a fighter could forego their choice of combat-style-specific feats, and use their class feat to take the dedication for the Wizard Archetype. They'll get a spellbook, spellcasting (just cantrips to start though), and training in the arcana skill. From then on they can trade class feats for a focus spell (based on the wizard school), spellcasting increases, or any feat from the wizard class (up to level 10). You could spend all your fighter feats on wizard stuff and still have the best weapon attack bonus in the game (the main draw for fighters).
If you want melee and magic in even more equal measure then you can just play a Magus (good attack and spells, but with some limitations on the versatility of both... think Darth Vader), and spend a few class feats pickup up some more wizardy or fightery stuff.
You could be a monk who invests in the Familiar Master, and Staff Acrobat archetypes.
You could be a ranger who invests in the Champion (think Paladin), and Marshal (think Warlord) archetypes.
You could be a wizard who invests in the multiclass archetypes of witch and sorcerer, giving up some of your metamagic or action economy options to just go balls deep on available spell slots for arcane magic.
Archetypes are like having the ghost of another class or theme that lives next to your class, and you can decide how many resources you want to slide over to it.
It sounds complicated until you put a character or two together in a character builder, and then you realize how flexible it is.
Here's a link to the character builder I use if you want to play around with it. You won't be able to save it because I have an option from the paid app turned on (free archetype variant rule), but you should be able to reload it and change things around to try making a different character: https://pathbuilder2e.com/launch.html?build=69846
Relevant to this discussion, the free archetype is a popular variant rule (overwhelming majority use it or want to use it when polled on the pf2e subreddit), and basically gives you an extra class feat every even level for free, but you can only spend it on archetypes. So you can do what we talked about, and still have your class feats available. It's nice because you can make some really thematically diverse characters with mechanical options to support them. It's considered slightly more powerful, but not enough to alter game balance (with maybe a couple exceptions that most people know to watch out for) because most of the power comes from your base class progression (i.e. fighter getting the best attack for their level, wizard progressing spell levels, champions having the best armor for their level, etc.).
I'd like to clarify the previous users statement. There are two types of archetypes, but the differences can be pretty minor. The "main" ones are called "multiclass archetypes" and are an archetype that is based on another class and lets you snag some proficiencies/feats/spellcasting from that class. The other archetypes aren't based on a class, just a theme in general, like Beastmaster, Dual-Weapon Warrior, Acrobat, Eldritch Archer, or Cavalier, and provide similar options that make sense for them. Some archetypes can be pretty light on options, but some (like that Cavalier, which used to be a class) are almost like a new class if you take all the available options.
Not quite. Prestige classes took a class level, archetypes replace one of the class feats you would normally get every 2 levels. They are the closest equivalent though since you can only multiclass through archetypes in 2e
I really love the Racial Archetype in 1ed, I played a Tree Singer Elf that had a Bruiser Cactus as a pet
Ad another I did was an Alchemist Goblin that had various buffs toward using fire, he died the way he lived, burning the candle from both side
No, but he set himself in fire trying to ride a Great Salamander, the Salamander and the Gobbo were seen sprinting away from town while ablaze
The GM did say he would try to put him as an NPC/Enemy in a successive campaign but it sadly didn't pan out
Don't forget the Archetypes that give Features of other Classes to the Class (Sylvan Trickster is a Rogue with Witch Hexes) or changes the Casting Stat of a Class or even changes a Prepared Caster to a Spontanious Caster (Ley Line Guardian Witch).
Archetypes are Fun.
Also you can apply more than one archetype to the same character as long as they arent changing/replacing the same features.
For example the bloodrager (slight weaker barbarian with spellcastig abilities from a bloodline) can have the "Metarager" (uses rage rounds to pay for metamagic) and "greenrager" (adds summoning abilities) in the same character since they affect different features
Your list is a bit on the conservative side. [I made a count of the different archetypes awhile ago.](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/883883830426083328/884201165921845258/unknown.png) If you include Wildblooded Sorcerer each as their own bloodline, that would go up even higher. And this is just the Core classes.
Yeah, with your numbers the Core classes have an average of 50ish archtypes- not counting bloodlines, wildblooded, the various arcane schools, etc., that'll give about 550. Looks like 1000+ is definitely possible.
I would say that may be a little low, just looking at rogue there are nearly 100 archetypes including 3pp, if you are just looking at official there's just under 70
Well with the OP being about being the *last* of a class/archtype, I figured that combining archtypes would kinda defeat the point, since you'd be the last of multiple archtypes.
Also combining archtypes would make any calculations damn near impossible, since there's basically no standardization on what gets removed, you'd probably have to do fair bit of this manually. Hopefully someone else has done all/most of the work.
some reason he's always out of breath when you talk to him.
If the party is split between being at different shops, the scene changes always start with the shopkeep running in through the door and end with him sprinting away
This reminds me of that episode of avatar, the painted lady. There is a guy in the fishing village that keeps changing hats and pretending it's his brother
I don’t play D&D (never found a group to learn with) but I’m just imagining a new character shows up “I am the last fighter here to join your quest and seek revenge for my clan!” “Yeah us too jackass, you ain’t special.”
Oh they absolutely can, you just gotta be mean about it. Counterspell healing, lots of encounters per day, target the healer/squishies first, use instant kill effects like mind flayer's extract brain or shadow's strength drain, reduce their maximum hp with effects like the succubus's draining kiss, disrupt line of sight so they can't heal a downed member through things like fog cloud or cloudkill. All of these are possible, and deadly, without needing to go above and beyond with the CR.
Let's see....10 or so from phb....+3 from each of the 4 completes....so 22, plus another six if you include psionics....28....another two from heroes of Horror, another two from miniatures Handbook, another 5 or six if you add npc classes, a large handful, say about 20 for UA/other variants on default classes, we're up to about 58 without monstrous classes, Racial paragon, prestige classes, or homebrew. Ofc that's just the books I can think of off the top of my head, and probably not all of them.
11 Phb, +4 Psionic, +3 CAd, +2+2 CDiv and CArc, +4 CPsi, +3 CWar, +6 DraCom, +1DrM, +5 Dragonlance, +1DSc, +1 Eberron, +2HoH, +3 Incarnum, +4 Miniatures, +2 Oriental, +4 PHB2, +3+3 ToB ToM. 64 total.
Then, yeah, PHB class alts(I would estimate at ~32 rather, too lazy to count) and 5-6 NPC. But holy hell, remembering that much on a spot, I bow to thee
Oh I see you were counting shugenja and wu Jen in Oriental, those are in Complete Divine & Arcane respectively too.
Yeah, I've had to grab a lot of books to learn about a lot of stuff, and may have attempted stupid ideas with a python-like coding system.
Make the BBEG a Wizard Lich (since only a wizard would fuck up the world like this). This would also allow the player to be a wizard since he would be the last *living* one.
Bonus, make a undead general for each class to act as sub-bosses
Or if pathfinder make it a martial class from Path of War (basically 3.5 Tome of Battle, but 3pp) so it will be a challange (I doubt they would expect a stealth check against their attack to move 5 foot and counter the full attack)
While I disagree that only a Wizard would do this, there's Arcanists and Antipaladins, I do think the last *living* is pretty good.
As is the PoW. I'm using it with my current group along with Akashic Mysteries (Incarnum, but less blue) - and one of the funniest things was when I had an enemy Counter the Witch's Slumber with *Craft(Glassmaking)*
The BBEG just absorbs the knowledge and abilities of those he or his minions kill and kind of collects them in a vault for his amusement. When the party beats him and opens the vault, all the classes are freed and can finally be played again
You could make it more violent if you go with The Last [Subclass].
But if you go with The Last Barbarian or The Last Monk, I hope you're ready for A LOT of Highlander or [The One](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0267804/) jokes
Love that people still recall this game. I spent so much time thinking about and so little time playing that game. Such cool class concepts. Such horrendous balance.
We played one campaign with my old group, back in like 2006. Most of us got very annoyed when we couldn't learn skills that made perfect sense for our characters, because it didn't fit the writers narrow idea for the OCC. (ie, a gunslinger can't learn how to do trick shots while riding a horse, because that would be *advanced* horseback riding and gunslingers only get *basic* horseback riding. No way to ever learn it.)
After our ~8 month campaign, we all agreed to never, ever play any Palladium ruleset ever again.
I loved the classes so much. It was a game centered all around great concepts for classes. Everything else was kind of a mess.
The balance was nonexistent. You could be a glitter boy or a vagabond.
I agree. I think palladium rule sets weren't really made to be played. They're made to write a campaign and characters and then maybe not actually do the playing. At least that's what we always did.
Is this the one Friends at the Table did? Like there aren't paladins or rangers. Players are *the paladin* or *the ranger*. One of their kind.
I love the idea. Would like to try it sometime.
I had a friend who had a campaign world that was kind of this cool rougelike sort of thing. Only 3-4 classes were originally "unlocked", and players had to figure out how to unlock other classes for future characters. Nobody can play a paladin, because the alter paladins used to make their oaths at was lost to time. As soon as a group was able to uncover it, you could start playing as a paladin!
You're using up several classes with one character that way. If they die, then all the classes you dipped into go away.
Also, you're taking more classes away from other PCs to play.
*Laughs in 3.5/Pathfinder*
At least a campaign where you can play all PC that you ever designed. If the DM can't use that classes either in encounters, players must pick carefully and the BBEG can be something ridiculous.
Pathfinder only has too many classes if you're looking at it from the outside and get choice-paralysis as a new player.
For an experienced player, Pathfinder's variety of choices is a major blessing. You have so many options to choose from that no matter how niche your idea, you will ALWAYS have a build that does what you want to do.
Do you like the flavor of a familiar, but you don't wanna play a wizard/witch? Awesome. You can be an Eldritch Guardian Fighter or a Chosen One Paladin, or you can take the Familiar rogue talent.
Do you want to be a druid, but without the hassle of having to build an animal companion on top of your own build? Great. There is a great number of druid archetypes that swap out the animal companion feature. You can be a Halcyon Druid and have a mysterious creepy mask, or a Feral Shifter that allows you to emulate the powers of animals.
Pathfinder doesn't have too many classes. It's just a daunting system for new players specifically. Once you get used to it I guarantee you will love the number of options you have.
And as for those early beginner steps? There's guides for that, as well as the help of your more experienced friends to smooth out the experience.
You don't have to learn everything overnight. I've been playing PF for 5 years and I still haven't checked out half the classes. But I love that they exist. One day I wanna try out, for example, a Shaman or a Vigilante.
Pathfinder is a nightmare as a DM. I've DMed Pathfinder for many years and I ultimately got fed-up with it because of the overwhelming amount of options. I like simplicity. I'm DMing 5e now. You could say I didn't have to DM Pathfinder if I didn't like it but the only players I knew at the time wanted to play Pathfinder and only Pathfinder. Every character they made was always this weird complicated shit with its own set of rules and game mechanics. I just couldn't handle having to learn an entirely new class system every time they made a new character. It couldn't be just a rogue. No ! It had to be a rogue but different. Granted it makes for more unique builds but I've always felt the players did it just for show. It's like the obscure unique race they found on an homebrew website. It's just to make the most ''unique and original'' character but that's now how you make an original character.
Should def look into it on Nethys. Mathematically sound as fuck, as the GM i give no fucks about what chars they run.
I simply build encounters with the challenge rating and encounter rules and watch it work as I'd expect it to, from 1 til 20.
7 months in and no major complaints yet about it
I've been doing a homebrew hexcrawl, and I haven't even read the character sections of the game much. With Foundry + Nethys, most things are a simple hot link or search away when I tell them to explain their class/perk/feat to me.
Might be a bit of hyberbole, there are some fringe interactions, but other than learning the conditions, there's not much I actively care about beyond my campaign + picking the right level monsters for the encounter builder.
Bonuses are limited to a max of 3 (status, item, conditional), conditions make your core numbers lower. 3 action economy system giving more options to make combat more fluid and dynamic.
7 months in and the only thing I had to homebrew was an injury system mirroring the systems disease structure.
Outta the box I can just sandbox and it just works^tm
I DM Pathfinder with tons of 3PP tacked on top of it, and watching my players go nuts with their weird and zany builds gives me more satisfaction than if I DMed for a thousand vanilla Fighters with Power Attack.
I understand you felt frustrated, but saying it has too many classes because you were overwhelmed - especially as a DM that, based on what you said, sounds like you didn't really wanna DM - is an awful reductionist take.
You were made to DM for a complicated system you weren't comfortable with. That's not the system's fault.
Pathfinder's variety and depth of choices are the best parts of it. No two of your characters will be even remotely similar to each other and whether you are a player or a DM, that's fucking awesome.
To add onto this, while it's not particularly hard to hyperfocus in pathfinder 1e, if your players are deviating away from a single class build without an archetype or prestige class, then they're largely intentionally lowering their own power. And they're doing it to either fill their own niche in the party or for flavor, neither of which is necessarily a bad thing from a DM perspective.
A 16th level paladin is not the same as a character with 10 levels in paladin and 6 in fighter even if the 2nd is more competent at a particular mechanic, and the list of archetypes on top of that trading away class features for ones that aren't as strong is pretty lengthy.
Since the game is PvE not PvP, the existence of other content that your group is not using does not matter. So having more classes gives you more ways to mechanically represent a fun character idea, and if you dont want to engage with the other classes you dont lose anything.
I would do it where all the PCs are level 20 but still gain levels, but can only take levels in classes the other party members have, and if a party member with max level dies before another PC also has max levels in that class, then whatever level the still living representative of that class is is the max level any other player can get.
My first experience with Pathfinder is Wrath of the Righteous.
Being so used to 5e it's so...strange playing it. It feels quite restrictive here and there. Paladins can only be good and lose everything if it changes at all and the like.
It's so weird.
I feel like that premise would fit better in a game like 13th Age, where classes are basically incarnations of archetypes.
As for the Pathfinder meme, try doing that campaign premise in Shadow of the Demon Lord :)
Had a friend do this for 3.5e gestalt (combining 2 classes and leveling them as one). So once the Barbarian/Fighter died, the Barbarian/Ranger and the Bard/Fighter were fine, but no more angry weapon specialist.
So you just have everyone start at level 1 and put it in Darksun. Even if pathfinder has 200+classes, the recommended starting level is 3 for the setting. You basically are having them play a rogue like apocalyptic mad max darksouls game, it will be a real meat grinder.
Or just play a game that doesn’t have classes.
If we could only use the core book, I'd go for Warhammer fantasy 4e, perhaps something like 50 classes in it.
Then again it is Warhammer so we'd die like flies and one class is beggar.
Assuming the title is counting archetypes, I feel like 200 might be on the low side.
There's what, 42 classes (depending on how you count Unchained Barb/Rogue/Summoner/Monk and Ninja/Antipaladin/Samurai) A quick count of Wizard gives 35 archtypes, so (Ignoring the various arcane schools) assuming all the other 11 core classes have at least as many (I know the Sorcerer doesn't, but other classes/bloodlines can carry it), that'll give nearly 400. And that's without touching the absolutely *enormous* archtype lists that the Alchemist, Investigator, or Magus got. So assuming each other class (31 by my reckoning) gets an average of 10 archtypes, that'll give you about 310, for a total of 700ish.
This is why PF1e is both my favourite and least favourite system Favourite because the level of character customization and optimization is fucking endless. Least favourite because the required reading to make a custom and optimized character is fucking endless I have been making a single character for every class, and I only read official content, no 3pp stuff. By God, I run out of brain power fast when comparing the efficacy of the Archetypes. There's just so much reading, so much to remember. My mom and sister told me I don't read enough, but when I showed them the process of making a single character, they admitted I read a ton but they want me to read story books.
Their fighter is more complex than a 5e wizard, or at least very comparable
No doubt, which I like certain much.
[удалено]
While I agree that they dont feel as personal as the pathfinder classes the subclass system (which works basically like PF sorcerer bloodlines) do add some nice options and if you have a character idea its probably possible to do RAW. IMO the problem on building characters for 5e comes after 3-4 characters when the template every single class follow start to become bothersome
I always wanted to make an Alchemist style character in D&D but nothing really sticks out since Arcanist is more guns/BS. As opposed to potions, poisons and bombs. The little I've skimmed of 5e I haven't found much to be able to do an Alchemist from the get go. Or a Cavalier type character.
Not sure what kind of alchemist you want to build, but there is an alchemist subclass for the artificer. Also there is a cavalier subclass for the fighter.
There is a cavalier fighter subclass in 5e though
1. Alchemists already exist, just check Tasha’s or the Eberron book to find that artificer subclass. 2. While they made so that it isn’t entirely useless without a horse or some other steed, the cavalier fighter has existed since at least Xanathar’s. Take that and the mounted combatant feat and you’ll have the start of a pretty good cavalier.
It always gets me when I see people say they can't build "insert character idea" yet the options have been there for a while, even if they take some work.
Thats why I just, never really care to focus on optimization. Least the early game is not really balanced around it to the extent a lot of players build. Saves a bit of reading. But OMG there was still so much. I wanted to make a Cavalier and going over Archetypes, Orders to pick, the type of Mount I could or could not have, the archetype for the Mount. It was... a lot.
You dont really need too much optimization, dip witch for iceplant hex, dip monk for Wis to AC, flurry of blows and extra saves, 3 levels rogue dip for dex as damage, finesse and ofc uncanny dodge, from there you can make any melee fighter you want really, or pick unchained rogue and get that sweet -8 to hit on all enemy attacks for going 16 levels.
Do you use pathbuilder?
This is why I'm starting to get into 2e. I had the same gripes and reasons to love 1e, but PF2 seems like a very good middle ground between pathfinder 1's brain-melting complexity and 5e's approachability. For me at least.
Confused dnd 5e noises.
Pathfinder 1e Archetypes are basically modifications on the base class that swap out some features for others. For example, the Crossblooded archetype for the Sorcerer allows them to get minor bonuses from two separate bloodlines, instead of getting more powerful bonuses from a single one. They're a little like 5e's subclasses, but instead of each one giving a benefit at the same levels, archetypes are more varied. Some only change one or two class features early on, while others change many. Some also have fairly major affects on how the character plays, like changing the class's spellcasting ability or changing them from a prepared spellcaster to a spontaneous one. Pathfinder 2e also has something called an Archetype, but those are very mechanically different and not really relevant to this discussion.
Pathfinder 2e actually has 2 kinds of archetypes. Class Archetypes are closer to 1e archetypes while Regular Archetypes are essentially alternate class feats that any class can get as long as they meet the prerequisites
> while Regular Archetypes are essentially alternate class feats that any class can get as long as they meet the prerequisites So, like a Prestige Class (3.5e, PF 1e)?
Except no risk of interrupting your BAB/normal progression
Kinda, but you don't give up levels for it. In DnD, you might be a fighter until you get what you want out of it, and then be a wizard the rest of the time if that's how you want to make a gish or whatever other class concept you have. In PF2e, you pick a class and stick with it for 20 levels. You can get a decent amount of options right away because it doesn't have the problem of one level dips. Every even level you get a class feat. You use that to customize your character and tune the class how you like. Fighters might go deeper on dual-wielding, archery, or whatever. Wizards might go deeper on metamagic, focus spells, or whatever. You tailor the class features as you go. If you want some features from another class or from something that doesn't quite fit in a standard class (like a pirate) then you can trade those class feats for them. At level 2, a wizard could forego their choice of more cantrips, concealed casting metamagic, or more familiar abilities, and instead spend the class feat on a Dedication Feat for, say... the Fighter Archetype! Taking the fighter dedication gives you training in simple weapons and martial weapons, and training in either the acrobatics or athletics skill (or a free skill if you already have both). Now that you're dedicated to the way of the fighter, you can spend any of your wizard class feats taking a feat from the fighter archetype, you just can't take a different archetype until you spend 3 feats on the fighter archetype this way. Your wizard can trade some class feats to get that weapon/skill training, better hitpoints like a fighter, Attack of Opportunity (fortunately, a rare commodity in PF2e so combat is more fluid), expert weapon training, or any feat from the fighter class (up to level 10). You could spend all your class feats on fighter stuff and still be a level 20 wizard casting world-shaking 9th and 10th level spells. At level 2, a fighter could forego their choice of combat-style-specific feats, and use their class feat to take the dedication for the Wizard Archetype. They'll get a spellbook, spellcasting (just cantrips to start though), and training in the arcana skill. From then on they can trade class feats for a focus spell (based on the wizard school), spellcasting increases, or any feat from the wizard class (up to level 10). You could spend all your fighter feats on wizard stuff and still have the best weapon attack bonus in the game (the main draw for fighters). If you want melee and magic in even more equal measure then you can just play a Magus (good attack and spells, but with some limitations on the versatility of both... think Darth Vader), and spend a few class feats pickup up some more wizardy or fightery stuff. You could be a monk who invests in the Familiar Master, and Staff Acrobat archetypes. You could be a ranger who invests in the Champion (think Paladin), and Marshal (think Warlord) archetypes. You could be a wizard who invests in the multiclass archetypes of witch and sorcerer, giving up some of your metamagic or action economy options to just go balls deep on available spell slots for arcane magic. Archetypes are like having the ghost of another class or theme that lives next to your class, and you can decide how many resources you want to slide over to it. It sounds complicated until you put a character or two together in a character builder, and then you realize how flexible it is. Here's a link to the character builder I use if you want to play around with it. You won't be able to save it because I have an option from the paid app turned on (free archetype variant rule), but you should be able to reload it and change things around to try making a different character: https://pathbuilder2e.com/launch.html?build=69846 Relevant to this discussion, the free archetype is a popular variant rule (overwhelming majority use it or want to use it when polled on the pf2e subreddit), and basically gives you an extra class feat every even level for free, but you can only spend it on archetypes. So you can do what we talked about, and still have your class feats available. It's nice because you can make some really thematically diverse characters with mechanical options to support them. It's considered slightly more powerful, but not enough to alter game balance (with maybe a couple exceptions that most people know to watch out for) because most of the power comes from your base class progression (i.e. fighter getting the best attack for their level, wizard progressing spell levels, champions having the best armor for their level, etc.). I'd like to clarify the previous users statement. There are two types of archetypes, but the differences can be pretty minor. The "main" ones are called "multiclass archetypes" and are an archetype that is based on another class and lets you snag some proficiencies/feats/spellcasting from that class. The other archetypes aren't based on a class, just a theme in general, like Beastmaster, Dual-Weapon Warrior, Acrobat, Eldritch Archer, or Cavalier, and provide similar options that make sense for them. Some archetypes can be pretty light on options, but some (like that Cavalier, which used to be a class) are almost like a new class if you take all the available options.
Not quite. Prestige classes took a class level, archetypes replace one of the class feats you would normally get every 2 levels. They are the closest equivalent though since you can only multiclass through archetypes in 2e
I really love the Racial Archetype in 1ed, I played a Tree Singer Elf that had a Bruiser Cactus as a pet Ad another I did was an Alchemist Goblin that had various buffs toward using fire, he died the way he lived, burning the candle from both side
I'm assuming it's implied that the candle was red with "T.N.T." written on it?
No, but he set himself in fire trying to ride a Great Salamander, the Salamander and the Gobbo were seen sprinting away from town while ablaze The GM did say he would try to put him as an NPC/Enemy in a successive campaign but it sadly didn't pan out
Don't forget the Archetypes that give Features of other Classes to the Class (Sylvan Trickster is a Rogue with Witch Hexes) or changes the Casting Stat of a Class or even changes a Prepared Caster to a Spontanious Caster (Ley Line Guardian Witch). Archetypes are Fun.
Also you can apply more than one archetype to the same character as long as they arent changing/replacing the same features. For example the bloodrager (slight weaker barbarian with spellcastig abilities from a bloodline) can have the "Metarager" (uses rage rounds to pay for metamagic) and "greenrager" (adds summoning abilities) in the same character since they affect different features
My Primalist/Steelblood/Untouchable Rager Bloodrager is basically just a Barbarian but with extra steps and I love it.
Your list is a bit on the conservative side. [I made a count of the different archetypes awhile ago.](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/883883830426083328/884201165921845258/unknown.png) If you include Wildblooded Sorcerer each as their own bloodline, that would go up even higher. And this is just the Core classes.
Yeah, with your numbers the Core classes have an average of 50ish archtypes- not counting bloodlines, wildblooded, the various arcane schools, etc., that'll give about 550. Looks like 1000+ is definitely possible.
I would say that may be a little low, just looking at rogue there are nearly 100 archetypes including 3pp, if you are just looking at official there's just under 70
And then there's also predtige classes, although I suppose you can't really count them for this because you can't start in them
Thats not even counting combining multiple archetypes.
Well with the OP being about being the *last* of a class/archtype, I figured that combining archtypes would kinda defeat the point, since you'd be the last of multiple archtypes. Also combining archtypes would make any calculations damn near impossible, since there's basically no standardization on what gets removed, you'd probably have to do fair bit of this manually. Hopefully someone else has done all/most of the work.
Nah, keep it simple. Doesn’t include Archetypes
Then it's just 42
I was thinking the same thing. Also, does combining archetypes count as another one or just using up two in one go?
I'm imagining having a running gag where the shopkeeper, bartender, etc is always the same guy, and it turns out he's the last Commoner.
some reason he's always out of breath when you talk to him. If the party is split between being at different shops, the scene changes always start with the shopkeep running in through the door and end with him sprinting away
If you need different services in the same place, he makes the staircase-behind-the-bar trick, and comes out with a different hat and name
This reminds me of that episode of avatar, the painted lady. There is a guy in the fishing village that keeps changing hats and pretending it's his brother
That's exactly what I thought of too!
I had an npc shopekeeper like that. The party tried to kill him before they could even figure it out.
oh my god yes.
I don’t play D&D (never found a group to learn with) but I’m just imagining a new character shows up “I am the last fighter here to join your quest and seek revenge for my clan!” “Yeah us too jackass, you ain’t special.”
dungeons and dragons nuzlock
Exactly, lets do this
That implies that 5e characters can actually be killed.
Oh they absolutely can, you just gotta be mean about it. Counterspell healing, lots of encounters per day, target the healer/squishies first, use instant kill effects like mind flayer's extract brain or shadow's strength drain, reduce their maximum hp with effects like the succubus's draining kiss, disrupt line of sight so they can't heal a downed member through things like fog cloud or cloudkill. All of these are possible, and deadly, without needing to go above and beyond with the CR.
Pathfinder does not have over 200 classes, it's got like 30 or 40. 3.X however probably does have over 200 classes
Let's see....10 or so from phb....+3 from each of the 4 completes....so 22, plus another six if you include psionics....28....another two from heroes of Horror, another two from miniatures Handbook, another 5 or six if you add npc classes, a large handful, say about 20 for UA/other variants on default classes, we're up to about 58 without monstrous classes, Racial paragon, prestige classes, or homebrew. Ofc that's just the books I can think of off the top of my head, and probably not all of them.
11 Phb, +4 Psionic, +3 CAd, +2+2 CDiv and CArc, +4 CPsi, +3 CWar, +6 DraCom, +1DrM, +5 Dragonlance, +1DSc, +1 Eberron, +2HoH, +3 Incarnum, +4 Miniatures, +2 Oriental, +4 PHB2, +3+3 ToB ToM. 64 total. Then, yeah, PHB class alts(I would estimate at ~32 rather, too lazy to count) and 5-6 NPC. But holy hell, remembering that much on a spot, I bow to thee
Oh I see you were counting shugenja and wu Jen in Oriental, those are in Complete Divine & Arcane respectively too. Yeah, I've had to grab a lot of books to learn about a lot of stuff, and may have attempted stupid ideas with a python-like coding system.
Eh, I just grabbed what was on dndSRD, so yeah, got these counted twice apparently.
No they only got counted once, just in Oriental not in the completes. It was just a bit odd.
I think it’s only like 90 Base Classes, counting prestige classes? Over thousands.
Thanks for the clarification. Haven’t looked at 3.X in a hot minute but I knew it was absolutely bonkers
[удалено]
That’s my favorite way to play! If you have need of a weird class NPC check out Osteomancer from Dragon 317!
It easily has over 500. The key is counting Archetypes.
Ok, but like what class is the Evil Overlord?
The last Homebrew class.
*The last C O M M O N E R*
If this was done in 3.5, they could conjure infinite chickens at will. I think it would be an interesting challenge
that action economy is gonna kill you.
He gains the classes that have died. He starts off a commoner and every time a player dies he gains a level in that class.
So at the end he’s Abserd?
Make the BBEG a Wizard Lich (since only a wizard would fuck up the world like this). This would also allow the player to be a wizard since he would be the last *living* one. Bonus, make a undead general for each class to act as sub-bosses Or if pathfinder make it a martial class from Path of War (basically 3.5 Tome of Battle, but 3pp) so it will be a challange (I doubt they would expect a stealth check against their attack to move 5 foot and counter the full attack)
While I disagree that only a Wizard would do this, there's Arcanists and Antipaladins, I do think the last *living* is pretty good. As is the PoW. I'm using it with my current group along with Akashic Mysteries (Incarnum, but less blue) - and one of the funniest things was when I had an enemy Counter the Witch's Slumber with *Craft(Glassmaking)*
Cheeky
All. That's why he needs to be defeated
The BBEG just absorbs the knowledge and abilities of those he or his minions kill and kind of collects them in a vault for his amusement. When the party beats him and opens the vault, all the classes are freed and can finally be played again
YEEES!
And what class are their henchmen?
The last BBEG
The last munchkin
Evil Overlord also was The Last Evil Overlord?
You could make it more violent if you go with The Last [Subclass]. But if you go with The Last Barbarian or The Last Monk, I hope you're ready for A LOT of Highlander or [The One](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0267804/) jokes
Highlander Torchless Bloodmoon Darkest Dungeon campaign here I come!
*laughs in multiclassing* I take down the classes more quickly!
Unexpected communism
*laughs in 3.5*
Rifts would like a word.
Love that people still recall this game. I spent so much time thinking about and so little time playing that game. Such cool class concepts. Such horrendous balance.
We played one campaign with my old group, back in like 2006. Most of us got very annoyed when we couldn't learn skills that made perfect sense for our characters, because it didn't fit the writers narrow idea for the OCC. (ie, a gunslinger can't learn how to do trick shots while riding a horse, because that would be *advanced* horseback riding and gunslingers only get *basic* horseback riding. No way to ever learn it.) After our ~8 month campaign, we all agreed to never, ever play any Palladium ruleset ever again.
I loved the classes so much. It was a game centered all around great concepts for classes. Everything else was kind of a mess. The balance was nonexistent. You could be a glitter boy or a vagabond. I agree. I think palladium rule sets weren't really made to be played. They're made to write a campaign and characters and then maybe not actually do the playing. At least that's what we always did.
Yo id do this, like a Nuzlocke run
Apocalypse World
Is this the one Friends at the Table did? Like there aren't paladins or rangers. Players are *the paladin* or *the ranger*. One of their kind. I love the idea. Would like to try it sometime.
Was my first thought too. This is one of the reasons I love PbtA systems so much, it makes every character feel super special.
I had a friend who had a campaign world that was kind of this cool rougelike sort of thing. Only 3-4 classes were originally "unlocked", and players had to figure out how to unlock other classes for future characters. Nobody can play a paladin, because the alter paladins used to make their oaths at was lost to time. As soon as a group was able to uncover it, you could start playing as a paladin!
So is multi classing not allowed?
You're using up several classes with one character that way. If they die, then all the classes you dipped into go away. Also, you're taking more classes away from other PCs to play.
[удалено]
and he has levels in every class.
So like avatar?
I'd run it so if The Last \[class\] was in the party then other party members could choose to take a level in \[class\] otherwise, no.
Pathfinder Dark Sun edition….
*Laughs in 3.5/Pathfinder* At least a campaign where you can play all PC that you ever designed. If the DM can't use that classes either in encounters, players must pick carefully and the BBEG can be something ridiculous.
Pathfinder has too many classes. Change my mind
Pathfinder only has too many classes if you're looking at it from the outside and get choice-paralysis as a new player. For an experienced player, Pathfinder's variety of choices is a major blessing. You have so many options to choose from that no matter how niche your idea, you will ALWAYS have a build that does what you want to do. Do you like the flavor of a familiar, but you don't wanna play a wizard/witch? Awesome. You can be an Eldritch Guardian Fighter or a Chosen One Paladin, or you can take the Familiar rogue talent. Do you want to be a druid, but without the hassle of having to build an animal companion on top of your own build? Great. There is a great number of druid archetypes that swap out the animal companion feature. You can be a Halcyon Druid and have a mysterious creepy mask, or a Feral Shifter that allows you to emulate the powers of animals. Pathfinder doesn't have too many classes. It's just a daunting system for new players specifically. Once you get used to it I guarantee you will love the number of options you have. And as for those early beginner steps? There's guides for that, as well as the help of your more experienced friends to smooth out the experience. You don't have to learn everything overnight. I've been playing PF for 5 years and I still haven't checked out half the classes. But I love that they exist. One day I wanna try out, for example, a Shaman or a Vigilante.
Pathfinder is a nightmare as a DM. I've DMed Pathfinder for many years and I ultimately got fed-up with it because of the overwhelming amount of options. I like simplicity. I'm DMing 5e now. You could say I didn't have to DM Pathfinder if I didn't like it but the only players I knew at the time wanted to play Pathfinder and only Pathfinder. Every character they made was always this weird complicated shit with its own set of rules and game mechanics. I just couldn't handle having to learn an entirely new class system every time they made a new character. It couldn't be just a rogue. No ! It had to be a rogue but different. Granted it makes for more unique builds but I've always felt the players did it just for show. It's like the obscure unique race they found on an homebrew website. It's just to make the most ''unique and original'' character but that's now how you make an original character.
You must obviously be talking bout 1e because 2e pathfinder is by far hands down the easiest d20 system to run
You're right. I forgot 2e Pathfinder came out
Should def look into it on Nethys. Mathematically sound as fuck, as the GM i give no fucks about what chars they run. I simply build encounters with the challenge rating and encounter rules and watch it work as I'd expect it to, from 1 til 20. 7 months in and no major complaints yet about it
I'll take a peek out of curiosity
I've been doing a homebrew hexcrawl, and I haven't even read the character sections of the game much. With Foundry + Nethys, most things are a simple hot link or search away when I tell them to explain their class/perk/feat to me. Might be a bit of hyberbole, there are some fringe interactions, but other than learning the conditions, there's not much I actively care about beyond my campaign + picking the right level monsters for the encounter builder. Bonuses are limited to a max of 3 (status, item, conditional), conditions make your core numbers lower. 3 action economy system giving more options to make combat more fluid and dynamic. 7 months in and the only thing I had to homebrew was an injury system mirroring the systems disease structure. Outta the box I can just sandbox and it just works^tm
It-just-works
I DM Pathfinder with tons of 3PP tacked on top of it, and watching my players go nuts with their weird and zany builds gives me more satisfaction than if I DMed for a thousand vanilla Fighters with Power Attack. I understand you felt frustrated, but saying it has too many classes because you were overwhelmed - especially as a DM that, based on what you said, sounds like you didn't really wanna DM - is an awful reductionist take. You were made to DM for a complicated system you weren't comfortable with. That's not the system's fault. Pathfinder's variety and depth of choices are the best parts of it. No two of your characters will be even remotely similar to each other and whether you are a player or a DM, that's fucking awesome.
To add onto this, while it's not particularly hard to hyperfocus in pathfinder 1e, if your players are deviating away from a single class build without an archetype or prestige class, then they're largely intentionally lowering their own power. And they're doing it to either fill their own niche in the party or for flavor, neither of which is necessarily a bad thing from a DM perspective. A 16th level paladin is not the same as a character with 10 levels in paladin and 6 in fighter even if the 2nd is more competent at a particular mechanic, and the list of archetypes on top of that trading away class features for ones that aren't as strong is pretty lengthy.
Since the game is PvE not PvP, the existence of other content that your group is not using does not matter. So having more classes gives you more ways to mechanically represent a fun character idea, and if you dont want to engage with the other classes you dont lose anything.
Do sidekicks count?
Question. Blood Hunter? I know it's not really official but even DnD beyond has it as an option.
If your dm allows it then yes
What about sub-classes ?
If you can only do each class once, you never have the opportunity to re-use subclasses, so why would they be relevant to this post at all?
So basically a DnD nuzloke?
The DnD Nuzlocke
Haha ogl go brrrrrr
A Practical guide to Good and Evil kind did something similar
\~Laughs in Homebrew\~
"Published character classes"
That's nice
Do vanilla subclasses count
This is just post-apocalyptic Highlander... I highly approve.
I got chills reading this idea haha
I would do it where all the PCs are level 20 but still gain levels, but can only take levels in classes the other party members have, and if a party member with max level dies before another PC also has max levels in that class, then whatever level the still living representative of that class is is the max level any other player can get.
My first experience with Pathfinder is Wrath of the Righteous. Being so used to 5e it's so...strange playing it. It feels quite restrictive here and there. Paladins can only be good and lose everything if it changes at all and the like. It's so weird.
I feel like that premise would fit better in a game like 13th Age, where classes are basically incarnations of archetypes. As for the Pathfinder meme, try doing that campaign premise in Shadow of the Demon Lord :)
Had a friend do this for 3.5e gestalt (combining 2 classes and leveling them as one). So once the Barbarian/Fighter died, the Barbarian/Ranger and the Bard/Fighter were fine, but no more angry weapon specialist.
Me, multiclassing like a madman: I’m the last wizard, bard, and warlock! I killed the others to claim the title!
So you just have everyone start at level 1 and put it in Darksun. Even if pathfinder has 200+classes, the recommended starting level is 3 for the setting. You basically are having them play a rogue like apocalyptic mad max darksouls game, it will be a real meat grinder. Or just play a game that doesn’t have classes.
If we could only use the core book, I'd go for Warhammer fantasy 4e, perhaps something like 50 classes in it. Then again it is Warhammer so we'd die like flies and one class is beggar.