Summoner is the far better comparison point for Hunter than Druid honestly.
I mean, it still fails that comparison pretty miserably too, but still.
My biggest issue with the Hunter is the way its iconic is portrayed as a fighter-esque character despite it being not really any better in a fight than the baseline druid.
Warpriest suffers from the same issue to a degree.
The classes themselves are fine (Being druid-1 and cleric-1 when druid and cleric are probably at least a little borked isn't a bad thing), but the clash of imagery annoys me.
Regarding the OP's complaints
-Arcanist.. spell issues make it probably worse than a wizard in high-op, so if you're allowing the Wizard I'm not seeing the power issue. From a design issue I'd probably go the other way and ban the core class, since at least the arcanist has class features.
That actually leaves me conflicted on the Arcanist. On the one hand it's almost absurdly derivative in design... on the other it pulls it off better than its counterparts, so it's hard to stay mad at it.
-Brawler Not terrible. Not much else to say about it. If you don't like scaling dice I guess that's that, but it seems like a weird reason to ban the class outright
-Bloodrager Half agree with you, half disagree. I think it might be slightly better than a Barbarian, but ultimately from a power perspective it's not going to be significantly problematic.
HOWEVER. The class does suffer from being hideously bland, relies on the most boring flavor of gish (the pre-buff then pretend I'm a fighter flavor) and ultimately does very little to differentiate itself from the core barbarian. Still don't see it as banworthy
-Shaman Can agree it's not a bad class.. but I disagree on the assessment. It's kind of... bland and suffers very heavily from having "Hey, isn't that just an oracle/witch class feature?" syndrome. A too large chunk of its abilities are just stapled on from its parent classes. It feels the most like a mashup, but possibly the least like a new idea
-Skald OP's assessment of the class outright confuses me. It's certainly a niche class, but its ability to spread out rage powers is an almost absurd force multiplier in a melee heavy group. Can't understand the sentiment that it fails.
-Swashbuckler Kind of.. not good. Action economy issues suck. Damage is ok, but nothing special. Fails to be a mobile fighter. Has crippling survivability issues. Probably the least disappointing (imo) design wise because they did so little with the concept.
Already touched on Warpriest.
Personally I think the most well executed class in the book is the Investigator.
Design Manager
|
Summoner is the far better comparison point for Hunter than Druid honestly.
I mean, it still fails that comparison pretty miserably too, but still.
My biggest issue with the Hunter is the way its iconic is portrayed as a fighter-esque character despite it being not really any better in a fight than the baseline druid.
It has weapon and armor proficiencies like the Ranger and gains a whole swath of teamwork feats, some of the most potent feats in the game, and a free murderbeast to help trigger them. It's combat abilities are much more potent than the druid's through the first half of the game, and when the advanced wildshape abilities really start to push on that it has built-in access to some of the big action economy boosters to keep it's combat edge up. It also has numerous free boosts on its pet, overcoming many of the natural disadvantages of maintaining an AnC.
The only thing the class really suffers from is the odd habit of undervaluing teamwork feats you see on the forums.
"Must include 2 spells we thought would fit in previous category but upon scrutiny will turn out to be so hideously broken that 15% of new PFS characters will be built around exploiting it until it gets nerfed."
Which two spells?
Contingent Action and Contingent Scroll?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Summoner is the far better comparison point for Hunter than Druid honestly.
I mean, it still fails that comparison pretty miserably too, but still.
My biggest issue with the Hunter is the way its iconic is portrayed as a fighter-esque character despite it being not really any better in a fight than the baseline druid.
Animal Focus isn't getting enough love. Its an incredibly versatile ability (both for the hunter and the AC). Need to stealth, heres a +6 to it. Invisible enemies, gain scent (and later blindsense). Going into combat, well Con, Strength & Dex are all pushed as if I had a relatively expensive item, twice since we each have it.
And there are truly some gems getting both the druid and ranger spell list. I went through them and found a few treats on the ranger list, some getting 2-3 levels early:)
I was meh on the hunter at first, but the more I look at it the more solid I feel it is.
Contingent Action and Contingent Scroll?
They seem very versatile and quite powerful spells, but what's the broken aspect? I don't see anything wrong at first glance.
I'm not too fond of animal focus because it grants numbers instead of stuff to do.
Contingent Action and Contingent Scroll?They seem very versatile and quite powerful spells, but what's the broken aspect? I don't see anything wrong at first glance.
Spells are good. Action free spells you cast in advance are even better. Contingent Mirror Image for example is cheap to maintain for Wizards who get Scribe Scroll at level 1 anyway.
|
I might put in something on the other classes later, but first
The Skald- I don't even know...They tried? This thing fails as a barbarian, as a bard and worst of all, it fails as it's own idea. It feels like the cut out the charts for bard and barbarian and just threw them on a page with now rhyme or reason for their blend. Spell kening is an awesome idea for a bard...not this.
Well, yes, it fails as a barbarian. In fairness though, so do a lot of classes(see fighter), because Barbarian is build around basically loading up on a ton of free-action buffs, and then destroying anything it sees. Yes, it fails as a bard, because the Bard is built around being able to pass as a bunch of different roles successfully while sharing buffs with everyone. A single Bard with the right build can be the Frontline Fighter, Rogue, Knowledge Monkey, Party Healer, or even Control Caster in a pinch.
The Skald isn't built to scarf his buffs quickly and go to town or to buff everyone and spread around the class roles, he's built to buff his comrades that are fighting in the front ranks with him, buff them beyond what others can, and then lay out some damage that helps him hold his own as well. Rage Powers play a big role in this, giving Pounce to all his friends, or another similarly nice buff(reckless abandon, Beast Totem(not greater), etc). I agree with spell kenning not quite fitting in thematically, but I personally think that this is to thematically keep him from being quite as mindlessly brutish and his barbaric cousin, and mechanically to allow access to some spells that the Bard doesn't get but (IMO) the Skald, as an arcane warrior more skewed towards combat than the bard, should, like Enlarge Person.
I love the Primal Companion Hunter (but very much dislike the cheese going on with regard to 'killing your animal' so you can get those evolutions). My imagination started thinking of how to make a big cat into a displacer beast (one of the few things I miss about D&D...). Cool.
Bloodrager finally gets me interested in the rage aspect of the game. Especially since it can qualify for rage powers as feats, if you feel the need to spend them on such.
Slayer is amazing. Grave Warden and Stygian Slayer really intrigue me.
Problems are mostly editing oversights, IMO. The only issues I have with classes are the goodies given to Skald that should have been a Bard's repertoire: Spell Kenning in particular.
plz stop point out how good hunter is i am scared my players may read your post and all play one at the same time:}
the only down side is how mad they are
i like warprest i will have so much fun hitting a pc with a dagger that dose a 1d8 only for them to find out after the fight it just a dagger
|
Design Manager
|
I'm not too fond of animal focus because it grants numbers instead of stuff to do.
Except for the one that grants Evasion/Improved Evasion and the one that grants the scent ability. And I really don't think critical boosts to important stats or skills fail to qualify as "things to do"; Tiger is a big part of maximizing the return on Combat Reflexes, the skill boosts make a big difference in what you can reliably do, and the fact that your AnC gets a couple of them for free is a big money saver (a huge factor in pet classes who typically have to spend a much higher chunk of their WBL on armor and stat boosters since they're equipping for two), and more cash equals more functionality for an adventurer.
plz stop point out how good hunter is i am scared my players may read your post and all play one at the same time:}
And it'd totally work! They'd have healing, damage, skills, one or two could pick up the control side of things, one or two of them could share the "tanking" role while a couple of them cover ranged combat, and they'd all have action economy to spare!
I was afraid shaman was too good. After building a pure casty type shaman I confirmed this. The ability to get spells from other spell lists makes the class horribly OP. It's basically the best of the witch, wizard, cleric, druid all rolled into one.
If you allow the Human FCB to work, yes they are very strong. I have been saying they were being underrated for quite awhile now. Super spell list thievery plus all the best witch hexes, plus two "flex hexes" with Wandering Spirit and Spirit Talker. And more spells per day then Witches with minor spontaneous casting via Spirit Magic off once again flexible lists.
Investigator this class gets the most skills in the game "But the rogue gets 8+int!" Well this has int as a core class skill. Inspiration makes this solidly dominate the skills area. It isn't terrible in combat thanks to 6th level spells. A solid creation which finally makes a rogue as players envision the rogue.
Bard is still the winner unless you don't count Versatile Performance (and doubly so if you count Pageant of the Peacock).
Bard is still the winner unless you don't count Versatile Performance (and doubly so if you count Pageant of the Peacock).Investigator this class gets the most skills in the game "But the rogue gets 8+int!" Well this has int as a core class skill. Inspiration makes this solidly dominate the skills area. It isn't terrible in combat thanks to 6th level spells. A solid creation which finally makes a rogue as players envision the rogue.
Barring Pageant of the Peacock (which is acceptable to assume its banned considering its banned in PFS and every person I know running bans it) I'd have to respectfully disagree here. Not to mention a large number of players I see take archetypes which loose versatile performance(I personally would try and keep it and thats a major negative on an archetype to me), but thats not important to this discussion.
Anyway, Lets assume they both have 12 Intelligence (which no investigator will have below a 16 IMO). So they both get 7 skill points a level, and I'll highlight the level the bard gets the advantage, rather than when the investigator does. This is also giving the bard a leg up, saying there is no overlap in skills picked with versatile performance. As he likely has at least a rank or two in every skill he gains versatile performance in past the one gained at 2nd level these results are showing the bard even more favor. I never really plan my build around more than 3 versatile performances, and consider the 10th level one as useful but not over powering and the 14th level one meh at best.
Level 2 Comparison.
Bard: Bardic Knowledge is +1 to all knowledge skills, and 1 skill point is worth 2 skills (in highly specialized area) :10(Bardic Knowledge) + 12 + 4 (Versatile performance x2) = 26 skill points
Investigator: By this point he should (mine does) have one point in each knowledge skill. He also gains trap finding. Assuming average rolls for inspiration: 35 (Inspiration) + 14 + 1 (Trapfinding) = 50 skill points
Level 2 Winner: Investigator by nearly double.
Level 6 Comparison:
Bard: 30 (Bardic Knowledge) + 30 + 24 (versatile performance x2)= 84 points
Investigator: He now has a rank in spellcraft and linguistics. He has also picked up either expanded inspiration or underworld inspiration. As they both add 5 skills its moot which one is picked. 59.5 (Inspiration) + 3 (Trap finding) + 42 = 104.5
Level 6 Winner: Investigator by 20 points.
Level 10 Comparison:
Bard: 50 (Bardic Knowledge) +40 + 60 (Versatile Performance) = 150 points
Investigator: he now rolls D8's for inspiration and has the other inspiration expanding ability: 99 (Inspiration) + 5 (Trap Finding) + 70 = 174.
Level 10 Winner: Investigator by 24 points.
At level 14 the bard will finally pull ahead of the investigator. But, he's got a much more limited skill array, and thats assuming no points are wasted in versatile performance, which has never been a case I've seen. Either way, unlike with the rogue, the investigator is clearly ahead through most of their careers, and arguably all of it, as I consider assuming level 14 versatile performance is worth nearly any skill points is likely a fallacy unless starting at that level. Of course he can do things like skill focus a Perform skill, but then the investigator could be a half elf using FCB to increase inspiration too (Which adds 17 on the 6th level build and 34 on the 10th). Also, the investigator is int based, and will likely have at least a 16 (with possible bumps, or at least headbands), where a 14 is pretty high for a bard, and usually its at 12. Oh, and most investigators will be empiricist, which makes a lot of not important stat skills ping off Intelligence. You could throw student of Philosophy in there to be a very rounded face/skill monkey even with negative charisma.