Pathfinder 2E What to call PF1-style Archetypes in PF2?

[Starfox]

Archetypes in PF2 are groups of feats on a theme.

But if I want to design PF1-style archetypes, that actually trades class abilities (not just feats) for other abilities, what should I call those?

I guess this thread will also discuss if such old-style archetypes for PF2 is a bad idea, nad that's ok. But its not my topic - its a matter between me and my publisher.

And about publisher... I've been writing mainly for Trailseeker and for Purple Duck Games, but they are making their own Pathfinder 1.1 called the Porphyra Roleplaying Game. I will likely continue writing for them, but I think I will also want to play around with PF2, and I am wondering if any publisher here would be interested? This is likely best resolved in messages. Here is an ego search for my name on RPGNow. Disregard any titles pertaining to editions before Pathfinder, not sure why they are on there. Also, a lot of older titles seem to be missing from the search.

 

[zztong]

I suppose you could, but some classes have very few locked-in class abilities. Take Ranger, for instance. The only thing to replace is "Hunt Target." The class is basically just some Feat chains. I assume Paizo is just setting themselves up to release more Feat chains and you could follow that pattern. But yes, OMG the Rangers needs more. IMO, its a uninspired class in PF2.

Thanks for the mention of Porphyra, BTW. One of the games in which I run/play might be interested in something billing itself as PF1.1.

 

[Henry]

But if I want to design PF1-style archetypes, that actually trades class abilities (not just feats) for other abilities, what should I call those?

Nonexistent.

More seriously, I'm with zztong on this - as designed, there's nothing to trade out, except for the most basic of features, without which there's not point to call it a member of that class. Might as well design an all-new class for it - in fact, to me that's where efforts to do PF1-style archetypes in PF2 should be better spent.

I do feel that the third-party market will offer abundant opportunity for alternative class feats -- despite the complaints that "there is no feat path for bow users" even though the majority of bow feats in PF1 took away restrictions. However, there's ample room for flavorful Bow-wielding feats that do not just stack on +'s to attack and damage. How about bow feats which allow the user to pin a target to a nearby surface for one round? Bow feats that allow users to manipulate objects from a distance, to work a lever or release a rope? Bow feats to let the user use the bow like a shield as a reaction, at the cost of 1 or more dents?

Archetypes are great for lumping multiple class feats together as a theme, and restricting very powerful class feats behind a dedication so that someone cannot cherry-pick all feats at will, but I would argue their PF1 purpose is obviated by PF2's class feats structure, much like trying to sell ice boxes after refrigerators are commonplace - situationally useful, but rarely.

 

[zztong]

I see now I didn't really address the question of what to call something that replaces non-class feat portions of a class. Some ideas:

An Alternative Class, or Alt-Class?
Subclass?
Variant Class, Class Variant, Class Variation?

I'd make the ZZ-Ranger Alt-Class that replaced "Hunt Target" with a revamped "Favored Enemy", "Favored Terrain", "Fighting Style", "Tracking Bonus", probably more and Spells.

 

[Starfox]

Paizo say they developed PF2 to specifically have "design space" - another word for creating a market for future splat books. This is nice for 3rd party publishers too, but sometimes you should think outside the box and not stay within the original designer's paradigm.

 

[Kaodi]

Archetypes performed the, uh, archetypal act of murderhobo on prestige classes. And now, in turn, they shall be murderhoboed!