I picked up the Advanced Player's Guide to PF, thanks to a handy 50% off coupon from Borders. The game introduces half a dozen new classes. Typically I am skeptical of new classes, but there were two in particular that I'd like to get into my game as replacements for two of my least favorite classes.
I believe cavalier should replace paladin and witch should replace sorcerer.
Paladins have always been kind of a problem for me, conceptually. in my mind, the paladin and the cleric kind of trip over each other; holy warriors imbued with divine power, taking up a deity or a cause and devoting themselves to it. (I also find the barbarian and the ranger to crowd each other in a somewhat similar fashion, pre-3rd edition) The cavalier gives me that champion knight in shining armor, but without the divine power stuff that seems to infringe upon the cleric. I plan on making the switch in my game, which will be easy to do because none of the PCs are paladins and they haven't met any NPC paladins, either.
Now, on to sorcerer... I actually love the idea of the sorcerer. However, in execution, I've always disliked them. I think that sorcerers should have at least a somewhat divergent spell list from wizards, and I think sorcerers should feel distinctly different, rather than just guys who don't have to list their spells in advance. Although Pathfinder has made the sorcerer a bit more appealing with bloodlines and Eschew Materials as a freebie, I still think they came up with a better solution in the form of the witch class. This also clicks with me conceptually because sorcerers were often referred to as witches, witch=blooded, or witch-folk in many of my college 3.0 campaigns. The witch has a different spell list, has some different abilities, and uses Intelligence as her primary casting stat. (I have never been sold on Charisma based magic, except for the bard, and only then grudgingly so.) The witch learns spells through her familiar, which is her link to primal, unknown powers. The witch fits that "scary hedge magic" slot that I used to shoehorn sorcerers into, but they feel separate enough from wizards for me. This is also a switch I can make, because I have no PC sorcerers.
For now, I think I'm going to pass on the other optional classes. I like the idea of the alchemist and the inquisitor, but I see them more in an early gunpowder/slightly post-fantasy era as replacements for the wizard and the paladin, respectively. (It might be the inquisitor's bitchin' Puritan-style hat)
The APG also has a spell-less ranger variant that I might mandate as the default ranger in my game. I have come to love rangers that are all skill and no spell. Pathfinder isn't the first time I've seen a no-magic ranger offered up, but it might be the only one I've ever seen that I kind of liked in execution as well as idea.
...damn, now I've got ideas for an Arcanum-esque D&D campaign. Again.
At any rate, I could change my mind about any of this before Friday... so I guess the paladin and sorcerer are in the box with Schrodinger's cat.