Jason Bulmahn wrote:
I really think the player should get to choose Cleric or Druid list upon character creation.
Lasher: Swashbuckler archetype with deeds specific to the whip.
Savant Investigator archetype, can spend inspiration to mimic other's class features.
Trapper Hunter archetype, trades beast aspects for trap creation, for terrain control and damage.
Right now the Arcanist is master of shutting down opposing spell casters. This is probably by design, but in a playtest last night (a free for all between a worm that walks Arcanist, two universalists, a necromancer, a transmuter, a clockwork mage and a sorcerer).
When the Arcanist turned his attention to shutting down a spell-caster, he had zero trouble doing so. Yes it meant he didn't get quickened spells next turn, but frankly he didn't need them.
Proposed Investigator Talent:
Either as a talent, or baked right into the Studied Strike feature THAT would make it feel like the Sherlock Holmes style of combat. In my opinion.
Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
I'm more thinking about abilities similar to the Buccaneer archetype for Gunslinger.
I think it's more thematic as precision damage. Also I don't want to see people building around crits to take advantage of the studied strike, between Magus, Swashbuckler, fighters and their ilk, there's plenty of that.
Valkyn Highwind wrote:
This link only goes to the Hunter.
I think the alchemist is too far on the high end of power and versatility, the investigator should aim for a notch or two below that.
In any case I'm in agreement studied strike needs work. 1/2 Int mod is ridiculous, and frankly at this point the Investigator does need more of a kick to be combat relevant especially at low-levels.
Again, my argument is that dismissing the idea that the Investigator must be compared to a rogue, not just the alchemist since:A) It should not be strictly better than the parent class at everything the parent class does (as the previous version was)
B) the alchemist (and its various archetypes) is an incredibly powerful and versatile class. Another alchemist isn't what the investigator should aspire to be.
Please don't put words into my mouth.
My argument is that many, including the designers of the game don't see the rogue as unplayably bad. The Investigator is half rogue and shouldn't outshine the rogue in its schtick.
The Studied Strike ability does need work, but people looking for "the rogue replacement" aught to recalibrate expectations.
Yet many tables (both PFS and at home) feature rogues. There's more to the game than theorycrafter's opinions.
Comparisons to one of the most powerful classes in the game doesn't produce anything useful really.
Also this means if a Swashbuckler ripostes a melee warrior he can't use his Charmed Life ability in the same round. Again a bummer.
Please consider swapping the Parry and Riposte to the following:
"If a swashbuckler has at least one Panache he may use an Attack of Opportunity to Parry. If his parry is successful he can spend a panache as a reaction to use an Attack of Opportunity against that foe."
It's a small change, but I think it makes for a cleaner flow of actions and action economy for the swashbuckler.
At this point a Swashbuckler can ONLY Riposte 1/round, as the Riposte is an immediate action and thus eats the Swift action of the next round (a character only gets one Swift action per round).
While this solution is more elegant than the previous, it does mean that the Swashbuckler doesn't get to counter-attack quite as often as I think they should.
Also please remove the size penalty thing, Swashbucklers should be the ideal melee class for Small characters, but that size penalty to Parry is such a bummer.
Weird question: male gamers role-playing female characters...how do you handle speaking "in character?"
I watched ASM recently and while I loved it in the cinema, upon second watching it didn't hold up. Peter comes across as more of a vengeance driven butthead than truly heroic character. Plus a little of the "Everyman" quality was lost when they hit the parents backstory stuff.
That said, it wasn't the worst superhero movie, and while it's no Spider-Man 2 (the perfect Spider-Man movie), it's leagues ahead of Spider-Man 3.
This movie would do well to focus on Peter trying to graduate, in the midst of all these super villains. Don't make big deals of their origins, just montage that shizz, and get to the important conflict: Peter trying to balance his relationship, school, family and friendships with his higher responsibilities of being Spider-Man.
I think this is a situation where you might encourage your players to think of non-linear solutions to their problems.
A gunslinger can solve 90% of his combat problems in the game by shooting it to death. Which is good, but now he's out of his comfort zone he should think about every resource he has and try to make use of it.
I would suggest to him: "Okay there's an invisible foe, do you have anything on you that might negate that advantage? Take a look through your inventory."
A bag of flour (or in this case a handful of Gunpowder) would make it easier to find the Invisible Stalker. Add to that some alchemist's fire and you have a recipe for dead invisible stalker.
Talk to your player about not limiting his own actions, and thinking about creative solutions to tricky problems.
Less Lawful, More Good wrote:
But that's not accurate. Nowhere does it say you can't use a shield to block if you aren't proficient.
If you aren't proficient with a shield then any round you gain an AC benefit from it you take a penalty to attacks.
A -1 Penalty for a light shield or a -2 for a heavy shield.
A brawler doesn't need Shield Proficiency because all he takes is a minor penalty to his attack rolls if he uses a shield.
Stop using Captain America for a moment, because he's a superhero not a level 1 character.
At level 1 a Brawler can wear a shield giving him +2 AC and -2 Attack.
At level 3 he can afford a Masterwork Shield (+2 AC and -1 Attack).
At either of those levels he can take Shield Proficiency as a Feat.
He could also take Throw Anything, and toss his shield as a ranged attack.
All this arguing over a problem that does not exist is distracting from the actual discussion about the class.
Prince of Knives wrote:
According to the rules, if you don't have Shield Proficiency you still gain the AC bonus from a shield, you just take the Shield's armor check penalty to attack rolls too. Most shields have a -1 armour check penalty.
I'm not understanding what the drama is here?
Marc Radle wrote:
I like to think of it as the Abstract.
Anyway this is off-topic.
I think if the class is a hunter it should get traps, I think it should work something like this:
Hunter's Traps (Ex) 3 + Wis Mod times per day: As a standard action a Hunter may lay a trap within 30 ft. This trap takes up a single 5 ft square. Any creature that steps into that square takes 1d6 + Hunter's Wisdom Modifier slashing/piercing or bludgeoning damage (chosen when trap is set). This damage increases by 1d6 at third level and every two levels thereafter. These traps can be disabled with a successful Disable Device check and 1d4 rounds of work. The DC is 10 + Hunter level + Wisdom Modifier. The hunter and his companion do not set off the trap. The trap lasts for an hour per level. A hunter may recollect the pieces of an unsparing trap as a full-round action.
Hunter's Talents At level 2 and every two levels thereafter the Hunter may choose a talent. (Some of these can be drawn from the skirmishes ranger), other ones can include changing the traps to energy damage. Making hidden traps, increasing the trap size and shape of the blast when activated and perhaps selective traps.
I did a short mock adventure with a Hunter the other day. Nothing fancy, just a lvl 5 Hunter vs some goblins, goblin dogs and wolves.
I think the Hunter needs Wild Empathy, both its parent classes have it, and it fits the class.
Second: I'd rather see the Hunter gain Trapmaking than their wild aspect. Trapmaking woulod give the hunter some battlefield control and nifty tricks. It would also make the class more suited for "solo" play or smaller party play since it would have the Animal Companion, some battlefield control and some spells for buffs and heals.
A two-man party of a Hunter and Summoner should be able to play through an AP with relatively little trouble. Right now the Hunter has an unthematic ability.
The Inquisitor was more a rogue/cleric hybrid.
I once TPK'd a party with a random tiger encounter. IT HAUNTS ME TO THIS DAY.
Back to the point, yep that was too brutal. It's a learning experience and now the next group of PCs can go looking for the first group of PCs, kill the goblins and loot their corpses.
I learned to roleplay by reading Jack Chick's Dark Dungeons and watching Tom Hanks in Mazes and Monsters.
I roleplay so intensely that when I die in the game I die in real life.
I ROLEPLAY WITH THE INTENSITY OF A THOUSAND EXPLODING SUNS!
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
Investigator Archetype: Paranormal Investigator.Frank: "Who CARES what evil lurks in the hearts of men?"
Sadie: "So long as they're carrying the martini tray darling."
You mean the Bard?
Prince of Knives wrote:
I think that your perception of spellcasters is skewed by your GM's leniency. If APL CR combats in my game had the wizard twiddling his thumbs 3/4 of the time there would be a problem.
I have a Wizard AND a Sorcerer in my group of players, and they usually spend more than one spell a combat. They aren't dumb players, they just need to contribute meaningfully to the challenges at play.
This means that at levels 5+ on an average day of adventuring (5 encounters) they are going to be low on spells.
The Arcanist is going to face some real problems when it comes to meaningfully contributing to combat every round.
Prince of Knives wrote:
The average combat lasts 4 rounds. What do you do with the other three?
Rubber Ducky guy wrote:
Quit complaining, you had a replacement character waiting in the very next encounter.
Prince of Knives wrote:
Remind me to tell you about the time that a Tiger TPK'd an APL 3 party and ended the entire campaign. It was a randome encounter. Tigers pounce.
R.I.P - The OG Treehouse Player Characters.