I've got to wait 96 hrs (and counting!) to get my mitts on the PDF but I thought I would create a thread dedicated to discussing Ultimate Intrigue archetypes that could be used by all! I hear there's loads of them!
I'm in the same boat as you, HQ. Waiting for Wednesday to come around so I can grab the PDF. I'd love to hear more about the archetypes as well!
Im a glutton for punishment..I'm ordering the hardback from Amazon too !!
Im a glutton for punishment..I'm ordering the hardback from Amazon too !!
I did exactly the same thing lol
I'm a just pdf's person. If they had a pdf only subscription, alas...
I'm going to do an archetype review (excluding the Vigilante) when I get my hands on the PDF...
Was looking though an UI pdf with my gaming group (still waiting on my Amazon hardback!) - just my 2 cents....
Alchemical Sapper
Idea: Like the concept - an explosives expert definitely fills a niche within the class.
Delivery: Seems to be reasonably balanced against the original class with a different flavour to it.
Overall: Applicable to a lot of settings - worth playing.
Interrogator
Idea: A bit of chemical interrogation! Good concept - fits well with the spy theme of the book.
Delivery: Not bad but not great - I think the injections should have had some way to make ranged attacks. In addition I think that the archetype gives up too much in exchange for its abilities.
Overall: OK but due to balance issues probably more suited to an ‘UI’ (Ultimate Intrigue) style campaign.
I am particularly curious what you think about the Courtly Hunter.
Courtly Knight
Idea: OK - quite UI specific but I can see how a niche could arise
Delivery: On the whole good but I didn’t like ‘Grand Boast’ as its benefit to the Cavalier will in all likelihood be quite minor seen as encounters don’t generally last much longer than 1 minute anyway.
Overall: Good - worth playing in a few settings.
Daring General
Idea: Like it - has a real ‘Who Dares Wins’ vibe to it.
Delivery: Average - the ‘Aides de camp’ looks interesting although it is a bit waffly. Instead of it being follower based, I was hoping for something more tactical/initiative based. The idea of assigning roles was good but again I thought they should have been more geared towards ‘winning the encounter through daring use of troops’.
Overall: OK but very reliant on GM tolerance for Leadership feat antics.
Impervious Messenger
Idea: Solid concept.... bit of a bizarre name. It does seem like Paizo is running out of adjective/noun combos!!!
Delivery: Good overall, not quite sure that everything trades off evenly but I can definitely see its use in a UI setting.
Overall: Sound... but nothing to get excited about.
Masked Performer
Idea: Straying a bit into Vigilante territory makes it slightly dubious
Delivery: Not great - I didn’t like the ‘Dual Identity’ ability - seemed like a bit of a fudge. And TBH a lot of the abilities really seemed like a bit of a stretch conceptually.
Overall: Poor IMO - a definite case of ‘archetype for the sake of archetype’.
I respectfully disagree about the Masked Performer. I believe that the idea is a super actor who can become his chosen role. The special performances that they gain at levels three and five are all about being so good at acting that you actually develop the abilities that you pretend to have. Also, look at what they give up. All of those features are ones that would give you a reason to take ranks in a performance besides acting. While Multiplicity of Masks is an odd fit, I believe that the archetype does what it was designed to do quite well.
Battle Scion
Idea: TBH I always thought the concept of the Skald was flimsy in the first place, so I wasn’t immediately impressed.
Delivery: Mostly good - I thought ‘Courtly Presence’ and ‘Battle Prowess’ were well thought out but I didn’t like ‘Once and Future Scion’ - really cant see the realness.
Overall: OK - I don’t like the Skald as a class in the first place but how the archetype was put together was quite good.
Bold Schemer
Idea: Similar to above but at least I could see a niche within a UI setting
Delivery: Poor - thought ‘Skald of Twists and Turns’ was a bit limp in terms of real useage and couldn’t see how ‘Bold Strategy’ had any realness.
Overall: Not good - too many other classes have features/archetypes geared towards sneaky stuff.
Cloaked Wolf
Idea: Like it - very apt for a member of the Inquisition
Delivery: OK - I do think ‘Always Wary’ takes too much in comparison to what it gives but then I really liked ‘Unleashed Fury’ in terms of its relevance and effect.
Overall: Good - quite niche but useable in a lot of campaign settings.
Faith Hunter
Idea: Not a fan - many of the existing archetypes are already geared towards a very specific enemy.
Delivery: Not great although I did quite like the ‘Enemy Revealed’ ability.
Overall: Poor - it just goes to show how vital the notion of archetype ‘realness’ is.
Code Runner
Idea: Like it - very appropriate for the book.
Delivery: Not great the abilities don’t trade off well against those for the standard Ranger.
Overall: OK I suppose but due to balance issues I would only play it in a UI themed campaign.
Dandy
Idea: Worst name ever! I don’t like the concept either - just not suited to the ranger class.
Delivery: Poor - didn’t like a lot of the trades, especially ‘Favoured Nation’ and ‘Hobnob’. ‘Dandy Spells’ did make sense though and does add a different twist.
Overall: Poor - was doomed from the start due to the dodgy concept IMO.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Disagree about the Dandy. The ranger is the ideal class to embody a social predator. Favored Nation makes sense for an intrigue game. Otherwise every ranger would just take humanoid(human). Now it is meaningful if there are various factions in play. Hobnob also closely aligns with intrigue play.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fair enough.
In my mind Ranger screams rough and ready outdoorsman with very little time for nonsense and finery.....the Dandy is the absolute antithesis of that IMO and thus lame.
Its like having a druid archetype that is all about expertise and giving advice with house cats, labradors and budgies in cages !
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Fair enough.
In my mind Ranger screams rough and ready outdoorsman with very little time for nonsense and finery.....the Dandy is the absolute antithesis of that IMO and thus lame.
Its like having a druid archetype that is all about expertise and giving advice with house cats, labradors and budgies in cages !
@Harleequin - to many people, a "class" is a collection of game mechanics to which theme and flavor can be attached to fit the campaign setting. So a "court predator" is absolutely a fantastic use of the Ranger chassis. You may not like the term "Dandy" but categorising the archetype as "lame" without any reason other than an aesthetic bias does nothing to draw people to your opinions. By all means, have a bias - I most definitely do too - just recognise it for what it is and don't let it stop you from a healthy examination of any particular concept.
Your druid archetype sounds awesome.
@Harleequin - to many people, a "class" is a collection of game mechanics to which theme and flavor can be attached to fit the campaign setting. So a "court predator" is absolutely a fantastic use of the Ranger chassis. You may not like the term "Dandy" but categorising the archetype as "lame" without any reason other than an aesthetic bias does nothing to draw people to your opinions. By all means, have a bias - I most definitely do too - just recognise it for what it is and don't let it stop you from a healthy examination of any particular concept.
Fair enough... we will agree to disagree.
If you re-read my post I do give some specific examples regarding their abilities.... so its not just the name.
And if categorising an archetype as "great" is acceptable then so is categorising it as "lame" acceptable.
Up/down, left/right, good/bad.... cant have one without the other.
Next up.... Shadow Caller and Zeitgeist Binder
Shadow Caller
Idea: Like it - very dark. Has a real mystery and intrigue feel to it.
Delivery: Yes seems OK - I have to say I’m no expert regarding the Occult Classes but it seems well balanced.
Overall: Good - a definite archetype niche filled
Zeitgeist Binder
Idea: Not keen, don’t like the concept of a phantom representing the emotions of a community....a bit flaky.
Delivery: Settlement aspect was OK but just in general I didn’t like its overall feel or flavour.
Overall: Can’t really see a place for it.
Feyspeaker
Idea: Great - I always felt that this was the kind of archetype that should exist for Druids. Disappointed to see that it wasnt a spontaneous caster.
Delivery: OK but I do feel that the balance of gains vs losses is off. I think the bonus Wiz spells should have been reworked in that you could take a spell 1 level lower than the max you could cast. Plus I think there should have been a couple more tweaks to balance the scales.
Overall: Good idea but power balance is a bit off. Should really have been a new base class with spontaneous casting. Shame.
Uroshiol
Idea: Love it - a poison arrow tree frog! Very Druid/UI!
Delivery: Good I thought, very thematic. I did think that there could have been a bit more variety in terms of the poison effects, especially in terms of being able to affect mental stats. Perhaps as well 1D3 damage is a bit too weak....1D5 has more relevance.
Overall: Yup not a bad job overall I think.
Tyrant
Idea: Love it - I always thought the standard Anti-paladin should be LE. He (or she :)) may be evil but he still follows a code.... a much more cerebral approach to evil.
Delivery: Good - changed what needed to be changed and nothing more.
Overall: Lovely.....K.I.S.S !
Cardinal
Idea: Great - the scheming Cardinal plotting behind the scenes!! And for some reason in my mind always dressed in red?!?!
Delivery: OMG..... an archetype this bad can only mean one thing. It is meant for NPC only!
Overall: Terrible.....poorly balanced. Aside from a really (and I do mean really) specific UI style campaign, why would you play one?!
Maverick
Idea:Like it....straight out of Hollywood. James Garner as the role model!
Delivery:Trades are reasonable although as expected tailored more towards a more ‘sneaky’ style campaign.
Overall:Yeah good - I would definitely play one.
Courtly Hunter
Idea:Not keen, much like the notion of the Dandy (worst name ever!)
Delivery:Better than I expected, the changes are pretty fair and quite thematic. I like the idea of being able to disguise your animal companion.
Overall:Not bad at all.