To me the only way dual identity makes sense is if the change time is a free action or at most a swift action.
This doesn't seem reasonable or likely at all.
The BEST you may hope for would be dropping it to a standard action... but I do feel that kills the 'feel' of the ability. Master Chymist, Druids... They have 'alternate modes' that are Standard actions.
Master Spy can cut the disguise time in half... but that's 1d3x10 minutes...
Swift or Free?? That'll never happen.
To me the only way dual identity makes sense is if the change time is a free action or at most a swift action.This doesn't seem reasonable or likely at all.
The BEST you may hope for would be dropping it to a standard action... but I do feel that kills the 'feel' of the ability. Master Chymist, Druids... They have 'alternate modes' that are Standard actions.
Master Spy can cut the disguise time in half... but that's 1d3x10 minutes...
Swift or Free?? That'll never happen.
*shrug* It only takes a barbarian a free action to get mad, why should it take longer for an 'alternate modes'? They state in the ability that it's NOT about the disguise as magic doesn't speed it up, it's all about your state of mind. As such, a free action makes as much sense as a standard.
Yes the continual commentary on the uselessness of the 5 minute change is bordering on the chronic.
The PDT have said that it will be changed.
Though I still maintain that there . Over and over. That has been tagged. For change.
Guys they've already said they're changing the mechanic...
Yep, changing it to...? Since what the change will be is up in the air, I fail to see how debating what form it should take isn't one for the playtest. For all I know, the 'big fix' is 1d4+1 minute changes... :P
Oceanshieldwolf: Agreed on the new playtest and sticky. Heck, I didn't even know about the mystery interview where it was said this was going to be fixed until Mark asked why I didn't believe it. Can't believe something I didn't see... :P]
My only disagreement is I think it's fine to talk about the way you'd like the 5 minute change fixed.
Yes the continual commentary on the uselessness of the 5 minute change is bordering on the chronic.
The PDT have said that it will be changed.
Though I still maintain that there . Over and over. That has been tagged. For change.
Yeah, that would be handy. The fact that so far the only real feedback on the playtest we've gotten is an off-site interview is a long way from ideal.
Yeah, that would be handy. The fact that so far the only real feedback on the playtest we've gotten is an off-site interview is a long way from ideal.Yes the continual commentary on the uselessness of the 5 minute change is bordering on the chronic.
The PDT have said that it will be changed.
Though I still maintain that there . Over and over. That has been tagged. For change.
Yep, and it's labeled a 3 HOUR interview. That's why I haven't seen it yet, as I don't have the data to burn watching something THAT long for a blurb on changing this feature. It's a shame really that relevant parts of the interview aren't transcribed unto the forum and we have to rely on word of mouth about it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wait, guys, hang on. I wanted to raise a concern. Not sure if this has been brought up before, but the dual identity switch time feels long. Also, what's up with that split personality doohickey? Also, Batman reference.
Wait, guys, hang on. I wanted to raise a concern. Not sure if this has been brought up before, but the dual identity switch time feels long. Also, what's up with that split personality doohickey? Also, Batman reference.
You just have to search off site for all those answers I guess. Nothing to see here...
Yep, and it's labeled a 3 HOUR interview. That's why I haven't seen it yet, as I don't have the data to burn watching something THAT long for a blurb on changing this feature. It's a shame really that relevant parts of the interview aren't transcribed unto the forum and we have to rely on word of mouth about it.
Only the first 1 and a half are an interview with Jason.
Oh, really? That makes all the difference.
Oh, really? That makes all the difference.
Considering 1.5 hours is a lot easier to fit into a busy schedule than 3 hours, it does make a difference. There is no reason to be rude.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Guys they've already said they're changing the mechanic...I know they said they were looking into changing the time to switch identities. I am just trying to get a handle on what this mechanic means fluff wise.
If it represents something like batman or Zorro or other examples of people hiding their true ability, then not having abilities in social identity makes zero sense. There could be consequences to the social identity for using the vigilante abilities, but that should be a choice of the player whether to use the abilities or not.
If it represents some type of mystical training that allows someone to have multiple personalities, then I could understand it somewhat - in terms of dual identity not being grounded in anything we might be aware of, so they can make up whatever rules they like.
In my mind, I see it as an evolution of a 'Paladin Code'... but without THAT can of worms.
It's easy to say 'secret IDs should be left to the character to keep'... but the reality then would be that nobody would actually HAVE one past the first social encounter.
Batman... Zorro... Pimpernel... the Secret ID DOESN'T break his cover. He does EVERYTHING in his power to keep that hidden unless he ABSOLUTELY has to... In an 'actual' game... the first time a guard tries to detain someone... they're rolling initiative. In the vigilante stories... they play the violence down, talk their way out of it, then come back and kick their enemies butt later.
So yeah, I can understand a mechanic that 'like the paladin code' tries to 'force' the character to stay in his role. Just without any particular Alignment or code debates.
When you go in to do THIS... you have these abilities, when you go to do THAT... you have THOSE abilities. They explained that it's a mental and physical shift. It's part disguise part mental preparation. Bruce ditches the playboy attitude and gets into bone breaking growly voice mode doesn't happen in 6 seconds.
Even Tony Stark in his armor is a vastly different skill set then Tony Stark standing before congress in a business suit.
I like the fluff concept. I think it can be tweaked, but I hope they don't lose it completely.
Considering 1.5 hours is a lot easier to fit into a busy schedule than 3 hours, it does make a difference. There is no reason to be rude.Oh, really? That makes all the difference.
No, he's COMPLETELY right. If I watch the 1.5 hours, it's going to buffer the other 1.5 hours so it's going to drain the entire amount out of my data plan. Might as well watch the whole thing if I'm paying for it. :P
Now if I'd have said I was short on time, I'd agree. My issue is the MB's it's going to eat up.
No, he's COMPLETELY right. If I watch the 1.5 hours, it's going to buffer the other 1.5 hours so it's going to drain the entire amount out of my data plan. Might as well watch the whole thing if I'm paying for it. :P
Now if I'd have said I was short on time, I'd agree. My issue is the MB's it's going to eat up.
... That's a pretty sucky system you have then. When I watched it, it only buffered the 5 minutes before the section I was in so that sort of issue wouldn't have happened.
To be fair, what kind of s#!+ty internet do you have that loading a single video eats all your data?
Is your only source one of those wireless Verizon hotspots with like 1 GB a month or something?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yep, and it's labeled a 3 HOUR interview. That's why I haven't seen it yet, as I don't have the data to burn watching something THAT long for a blurb on changing this feature. It's a shame really that relevant parts of the interview aren't transcribed unto the forum and we have to rely on word of mouth about it.Yeah, that would be handy. The fact that so far the only real feedback on the playtest we've gotten is an off-site interview is a long way from ideal.Yes the continual commentary on the uselessness of the 5 minute change is bordering on the chronic.
The PDT have said that it will be changed.
Though I still maintain that there . Over and over. That has been tagged. For change.
Yeah, I made a thread: Playtest Feedback
the fourth point in the initial post of that thread was:
I'd also really like the designers to comb the threads and see where the disparities and disagreements are occurring in the fans minds/feelings. Some really excellent feedback has appeared on the nature of specialisations; the need for universal talents; the thought that the Avenger and Stalker should be mashed together; that the social identity needs to function on its own/not be hampered; or that the secret identity need not, actually be secret.
If the designers/devs could make a list like this, that they see as important (though that will obviously deviate from the fanbase) while determining those things that they are not interested in changing, then the amount of doubling up of similar ideas in multiple threads might decrease, making the reading less onerous, and the ability to move on down the design path more fruitful.
I've mentioned elsewhere the strangeness of the fact that the only real solid feedback I know of comes from Know Direction, rather than a discrete post (or thread!) here.
...Part of the current issue is that, in social mode, the Vigilante has basically no abilities. Which I guess is why there is no penalty for violating it. Social mode already has the same features as a fallen paladin.
If there were actual trade offs, action abilities in action mode, and good face abilities in social mode, a decent change time might actually be acceptable.
As is, except for when you have to be in social mode for some reason, there is never a reason not to be in action mode. People talk most about dual identity protecting action mode, but it works the other way to, you can stay in action mode the majority of the time, and switch to social only when absolutely necessary.
I'd even be okay with 5 minute change times if I could switch between the Vigilante modes. Sure I might have to prep 4 or 5 character sheets, but that could be fun to be able to do, and have a different ID for each one. Which leads me to think, how do people think this would play out. Too OP, or too easily leading to too much bookwork to be worthwhile. It sounds fun to me.
LOL!
Yeah... that could be fun! Man of 1000 faces or whatnot :DI've seen similar things done with the Alchemist and I once ran a level 7 gnome who multiclassed seven times... The sheet would PROBABLY look like that and just be a headache to keep straight. It doesn't SOUND OP... You could still only play one character at a time. It just sounds like it'd be too much paperwork for me... I'd also be concerned about stepping on the toes of the REST of the party. Though that could happen with Multiclass too...
It seems that most of the complaints are that Social mode doesn't get access to the combat to Combat abilities... With a side complaint that Social doesn't get enough cool stuff to do on their own?...
What kind of stuff would people like the Social side to get? What could they get that in their mind would justify losing access to the combat stuff?
It feels like we already have abilities we only get half the time... Splitting them up even more??? I just don't see that pleasing anyone...
These kind of class features work better in GURPS.
But then again, a lot of non-combat stuff works better in GURPS.
|
I like the idea of having a mechanic that your cover can be blown to whomever is seeing you perform your vigilante talents while in social persona often. Perhaps it's something akin to misfire values, perhaps it is easier to blow your cover in your area of renown. I like access to abilities, and an amount of risk seems fun too.
i feel like this thread is starting to turn into baggage.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
i feel like this thread is starting to turn into baggage.
I believe that all these playtest threads are turning into garbage, the same points keep coming up that we know are getting changed and we just keep circling the drain. The developers need to do a major post so we can actually get new stuff to work with.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To be fair, what kind of s!$$ty internet do you have that loading a single video eats all your data?
Is your only source one of those wireless Verizon hotspots with like 1 GB a month or something?
I live in a dead zone so my only internet option is satellite. The basic plan is 5 gigs per month. 3 hours of video could be anywhere from a few hundred MD to several gigs worth of video. [I have NO way to know without starting the video] It may not kill all my data, but it could wipe out a majority of it for the whole month.
And I don't think I should have to go offsite to find out rulings about the playtest. The 3 hour video just makes it particularly galling and irksome. If I see it, I'll waste a fast food places data and not my own.
To me the only way dual identity makes sense is if the change time is a free action or at most a swift action.This doesn't seem reasonable or likely at all.
The BEST you may hope for would be dropping it to a standard action... but I do feel that kills the 'feel' of the ability. Master Chymist, Druids... They have 'alternate modes' that are Standard actions.
Master Spy can cut the disguise time in half... but that's 1d3x10 minutes...
Swift or Free?? That'll never happen.
Personally, I think that the Quick Disguise rogue talent should be baked into the ability; your dual identity's disguise takes a full-round action to done for minor details, or longer for major details.
i feel like this thread is starting to turn into baggage.I believe that all these playtest threads are turning into garbage, the same points keep coming up that we know are getting changed and we just keep circling the drain. The developers need to do a major post so we can actually get new stuff to work with.
Maybe I can perform a ritual and summon a beaten dead horse.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To be fair, what kind of s!$$ty internet do you have that loading a single video eats all your data?
Is your only source one of those wireless Verizon hotspots with like 1 GB a month or something?
I live in a dead zone so my only internet option is satellite. The basic plan is 5 gigs per month. 3 hours of video could be anywhere from a few hundred MD to several gigs worth of video. [I have NO way to know without starting the video] It may not kill all my data, but it could wipe out a majority of it for the whole month.
And I don't think I should have to go offsite to find out rulings about the playtest. The 3 hour video just makes it particularly galling and irksome. If I see it, I'll waste a fast food places data and not my own.
Luckily a local provider started up a terrestrial microwave ISP which averages around 4 megabit and doesn't limit usage. And, even more awesomely, ATT just dropped fiber on our property (18 years after the neighborhood came to be, it is the first media provider to run lines) for Uverse and gigabit Internet. I literally cannot express in words how thrilled I am to finally be done with directv and get some decent frakking internet.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
i feel like this thread is starting to turn into baggage.I believe that all these playtest threads are turning into garbage, the same points keep coming up that we know are getting changed and we just keep circling the drain. The developers need to do a major post so we can actually get new stuff to work with.
Yup. As I said upthread and in a thread in which I discuss this specific point :
Ok, but what I'm saying is rather than keep such a list to yourselves, post it on the threads with some direction
- show the readers what you are and aren't interested in changing,
- and those things that you are interested in changing, indicate how you might proceed, and ask for feedback on that.That way the playtest fans aren't spinning their wheels griping endlessly and harping on about the same couple of things across multiple threads, and could be more usefully engaged moving forward on what will be working. Those things you've decided are staying. Which, seems to be everything. Merely tweaked.
Maybe the PDT aren't agreeing that the playlists are turning into garbage, and that the same things aren't being mentioned again and again. But they aren't saying anything either way. Which is...frustrating.
Hmm...
I understand that this thread seems more about the battling aspect of the dual identity, but what I really don't get is why the dual identity has to be a class. Typically, a class has a core concept to it that can't be replicated by character concept alone. Really, really broadly, say that wizards are defined by learning to cast spells. If I were a normal NPC, I couldn't just write that mechanical advantage into my character.
I COULD write a dual identity into my character, though. A basket salesman could easily slip into the identity of some masked vigilante with no mechanical advantage being built into his character. Couldn't a wizard be a vigilante without taking levels in this class? All he needs is to not cast spells when doing his daily underwater basket weaving job, and make a disguise check to change his appearance when he wants to cast spells. The core concept of the vigilante to me seems to be the dual identity, and I feel like characters shouldn't have to BE an official vigilante just to have two identities.
This class just seems to have a really weak core concept going here. I hope that my above disjointed rambling makes some semblance of sense to you guys...
Hmm...
I understand that this thread seems more about the battling aspect of the dual identity, but what I really don't get is why the dual identity has to be a class. Typically, a class has a core concept to it that can't be replicated by character concept alone. Really, really broadly, say that wizards are defined by learning to cast spells. If I were a normal NPC, I couldn't just write that mechanical advantage into my character.
I COULD write a dual identity into my character, though. A basket salesman could easily slip into the identity of some masked vigilante with no mechanical advantage being built into his character. Couldn't a wizard be a vigilante without taking levels in this class? All he needs is to not cast spells when doing his daily underwater basket weaving job, and make a disguise check to change his appearance when he wants to cast spells. The core concept of the vigilante to me seems to be the dual identity, and I feel like characters shouldn't have to BE an official vigilante just to have two identities.
Yeah, the class is only really necessary if you're so committed to your role that some jerk casting scry ruins the whole character. Which works for some PCs, but surely not everyone who wants to play a vigilante plans to go that far?
Paizo has said they intend to modify the secret identity. Hopefully they'll let us take a crack at it.
|
The Dual Identity feature does a little bit more than the Reputation rules, but fundamentally is very similar.
The core of this class is the marriage between the two ideas: other classes + Reputation/Identity = Vigilante.
Right now it seems like the two don't intermingle as much as they should. Perhaps there are some other mechanics that tie into Ultimate Intrigue that we are missing where we might see more overlap, but as is, I would like to see the Dual Identity play more of a role in the mechanics of this class. (I'm admittedly not sure specifically what at this point, but I'll keep thinking on it.)
I agree with this. The talents are all abilities that other classes get. The dual identity is the only thing the vigilante really has going for it that other classes don't.
I don't know what exactly should be done with it, but I think it should somehow have scaling abilities, maybe something along the lines of "every X level, you may use one more talent while in social guise. this talent must be chosen at the level this ability is gained, and can not be changed after it is set".
I'd like to see a little more in the way of talents that feel unique, as well, perhaps even talents that apply solely to the social guise.
first of all... yes I'm noting something on page 2... I already read to the end of page nine, yet I feel this is most valid to my idea...
I think that the Social identity should get it's own point system and "specializations"... the SI point system should give one point each level, and be much more modular than the combat side, actually starting out with more points than that at a characters true level one to represent your backstory/childhood to benefit Pure builds as opposed to dipping.
The "Specializations" should represent what your SI is... for example: "rich" could cost a larger amount of points while "middle class" costs just one and "poor" actually gives you an extra point for your "SI pool". "Rich"...
I partially agree. After reading the new round 2 build, I feel like the social identity should just be designed like the vigilante specialization. Right now, the social still feels like something I don't really need or have a real temptation to use. I'll have to give it another go in a session though.
The whole secret identity thing seems more like some kind of mechanic that should be given to ALL players (classes) that play in a given adventure. If an adventure path is created that makes good use of this social mechanic, other classes that don't have the "social" mechanic will be left behind or killed off quickly without this mechanic. So if this were an overlay that all classes could enjoy, I think it would be better.
So the vigilante class should be developed without the "social" mechanic.
Though I do like the idea of a party consisting of the usual mix of classes with that "social" mechanic in an adventure path that can utalize it fully.