Ultimate Intrigue—Vigilante Playtest!

The link in the blog wasn't working for me. To everyone else, you can find the product page for the playtest here.

Scroll down. It's not a direct link.

We don't need even more base classes!

We don't need even more base classes!

Lies! *hungrily downloads playtest doc*

The link in the blog wasn't working for me. To everyone else, you can find the product page for the playtest here.

This should be behaving correctly now :)

We don't need even more base classes!

Bah! Speak for yourself! This is exactly what I had wanted for a rogue! Or heck, ANY of my potential Curse of the Crimson Throne characters.

I approve of the Warlock Vigilante's ability to hide spellcasting. I really like the design of the class so far :D

OK, I'm at work, so I don't have a chance to dig deep into the character class, but already I've noticed something.

With the Occult playtest, I was in a similar situation, I gave each class a quick go over, less than ten minutes, as a whole. I think the only class I saw that I wasn't quite sure about was the occultist. It looked complicated and I had a hard time wrapping my head around it, in the quick overview. I will admit, it's shaded my opinion of the occultist ever since. I'll be interested to see what changes in the final version. Perhaps it will overcome my first impression of the class.

That being said, I looked at the vigilante class, quickly. I'm sorry, but what the...? This class looks way too complicated to introduce in a standard game. It's a rogue like character, that can also be a fighter, or a ninja, or a wizard, or a paladin? I mean, the customization can be cool, I guess, but as a start out the gates "build"? I think it falls flat.

It looks, so far, like the class is trying to be too much of everything all at once. It's the very definition of power creep when it comes to character classes.

I'll have to give it a once over later, but the lack of focus to the class really turns me off from it.

We don't need even more base classes!

Speak for yourself. I need this class like I need wattamelon rolls.

Succulent, delicious wattamelon rolls....

*drools*

SQUEE!

Owow! Warlock and Zealot... Owow!
Now I want an inquisitor archetype using Zealot talents and a Warlock who can use the witch's spell list and have a familiar...
What about a number of " universal" talents available to all Vigilantes, just as the "universal" hexes for shamans? Choosing rogue/ninja talents as an option, like investigators and slayers, seems fit too.

OK, I'm at work, so I don't have a chance to dig deep into the character class, but already I've noticed something.

With the Occult playtest, I was in a similar situation, I gave each class a quick go over, less than ten minutes, as a whole. I think the only class I saw that I wasn't quite sure about was the occultist. It looked complicated and I had a hard time wrapping my head around it, in the quick overview. I will admit, it's shaded my opinion of the occultist ever since. I'll be interested to see what changes in the final version. Perhaps it will overcome my first impression of the class.

That being said, I looked at the vigilante class, quickly. I'm sorry, but what the...? This class looks way too complicated to introduce in a standard game. It's a rogue like character, that can also be a fighter, or a ninja, or a wizard, or a paladin? I mean, the customization can be cool, I guess, but as a start out the gates "build"? I think it falls flat.

It looks, so far, like the class is trying to be too much of everything all at once. It's the very definition of power creep when it comes to character classes.

I'll have to give it a once over later, but the lack of focus to the class really turns me off from it.

The class has tons of focus. Its the Super Hero class. Avenger is the "martial superhero," stalker is the "rogue superhero," warlock is the "magical superhero," and zealot is the "gods-based superhero."

For example:
— Captain America is an Avenger.
— Batman is a Stalker.
— Doctor Strange is a Warlock (although he'd be a little bit better if there was an option that meshed Warlock with the Occultist Implement system.)
— Shazam is the Zealot.

You don't get to be ALL the things, you only get to be ONE of the things. You pick one specialization and call it a day. So when you're a player / GM, you only ever have to worry about one specialization at a time. Its no more complicated for a GM then, say, a sorcerer is with her bloodlines. The only difference is that the vigilante's "bloodlines" are focused on themes rather than party roles.

First impresion is this class has way to much going on (Basically 4 classes attempted to be put in the one) Also they all seem like something that could be coverd by making archetypes (Zealot for Inquisitor for example.)

Owow! Warlock and Zealot... Owow!

Now I want an inquisitor archetype using Zealot talents and a Warlock who can use the witch's spell list and have a familiar...
What about a number of " universal" talents available to all Vigilantes, just as the "universal" hexes for shamans? Choosing rogue/ninja talents as an option, like investigators and slayers, seems fit too.

We intend to include universal talents, which will likely be focused on the social identity. However, we knew many of those would intermesh with not-yet-written rules that come out in the book, and we wanted more focus on each specialization, so we didn't release them yet. That said, we'd love to hear your ideas for more universal specializations to add to our list, and one of us will probably make a thread specifically for those at some point!

You get all four of us together for one class this time, for maximum designer interaction!

While not terribly pertinent to the playtest, the "An Intriguing Playtest" blurb by JB has a few typos:

At the bottom of the second paragraph "We think you will find that this class gives you a number of interesting ways (to) challenge your players."

And at the top of the second column continuing over from the bottom of the first column: "I should stress that while we do want to you here your opinions and thoughts...." Should probably read 'I should stress that while we do want to hear your opinions and thoughts...'

It looks, so far, like the class is trying to be too much of everything all at once. It's the very definition of power creep when it comes to character classes.

It has a lot going on, but the class is limited by what role you choose. It also appears to be designed to be a little worse than the standard version of all of its roles. For example, the "rogue" type vigilantie only gets D4 sneak attack dice when it is flanking.

Saying this class has way too much going on for a standard game is like saying a sorcerer is too much for a standard game because his class has access to several books of spells, while the character really only gets to choose a few spells out of hundreds.

Of course, I could to be totally wrong since I have only skimmed the class so far. It could totally be overpowered ;)

Okay, I love this so far, but I have a question because there's something I think I'm missing.

How does the Warlock Vigilante spell casting interact with armor?

— Captain America is an Avenger.
— Batman is a Stalker.
— Doctor Strange is a Warlock (although he'd be a little bit better if there was an option that meshed Warlock with the Occultist Implement system.)
— Shazam is the Zealot.

Batman is totally a Gestalt Avenger/Stalker ;)

It really feels like four classes instead of one.

With that said, the Stalker seems a lot weaker than than the other three. The Avenger has full BAB. The Warlock and Zealot have spells and other magic tricks. The Stalker has a weaker sneak attack and some other abilities.

Bardess wrote:

Owow! Warlock and Zealot... Owow!

Now I want an inquisitor archetype using Zealot talents and a Warlock who can use the witch's spell list and have a familiar...
What about a number of " universal" talents available to all Vigilantes, just as the "universal" hexes for shamans? Choosing rogue/ninja talents as an option, like investigators and slayers, seems fit too.

We intend to include universal talents, which will likely be focused on the social identity. However, we knew many of those would intermesh with not-yet-written rules that come out in the book, and we wanted more focus on each specialization, so we didn't release them yet. That said, we'd love to hear your ideas for more universal specializations to add to our list, and one of us will probably make a thread specifically for those at some point!

You get all four of us together for one class this time, for maximum designer interaction!

DEAD INSIDE! DEAD INSIDE! :D

ShepherdGunn wrote:

OK, I'm at work, so I don't have a chance to dig deep into the character class, but already I've noticed something.

With the Occult playtest, I was in a similar situation, I gave each class a quick go over, less than ten minutes, as a whole. I think the only class I saw that I wasn't quite sure about was the occultist. It looked complicated and I had a hard time wrapping my head around it, in the quick overview. I will admit, it's shaded my opinion of the occultist ever since. I'll be interested to see what changes in the final version. Perhaps it will overcome my first impression of the class.

That being said, I looked at the vigilante class, quickly. I'm sorry, but what the...? This class looks way too complicated to introduce in a standard game. It's a rogue like character, that can also be a fighter, or a ninja, or a wizard, or a paladin? I mean, the customization can be cool, I guess, but as a start out the gates "build"? I think it falls flat.

It looks, so far, like the class is trying to be too much of everything all at once. It's the very definition of power creep when it comes to character classes.

I'll have to give it a once over later, but the lack of focus to the class really turns me off from it.

The class has tons of focus. Its the Super Hero class. Avenger is the "martial superhero," stalker is the "rogue superhero," warlock is the "magical superhero," and zealot is the "gods-based superhero."

For example:
— Captain America is an Avenger.
— Batman is a Stalker.
— Doctor Strange is a Warlock (although he'd be a little bit better if there was an option that meshed Warlock with the Occultist Implement system.)
— Shazam is the Zealot.

You don't get to be ALL the things, you only get to be ONE of the things. You pick one specialization and call it a day. So when you're a player / GM, you only ever have to worry about one specialization at a time. Its no more complicated for a GM then, say, a sorcerer is with her bloodlines. The only...

I can see what you're saying. Understand, what I'm trying to get across is the fact that when my players (who actually have not played Pathfinder much) are handed the books with the character classes in them, they can open up a book, look at the title of the class, the level break down, and possibly the first paragraph, and decide if they're going to want to play that character. This is how it normally breaks down.

Player 1 (doesn't know what they want to play)- flips through the book until they find something that attracts their fancy

Player 2 (doesn't know the class, but has an idea) - flips through the books that has classes that are similar to their idea, and then goes from there.

Player 3 (has a definite character they want to play) - goes straight for the book they know the class is in.

The thing is, the two players that are flipping through books are going to see the Vigilante and not want the hassle. The same happens with the Shaman class. While it's a very cool class, it's just too much "stuff" to keep track of. You have to WANT to play a Shaman.

I think the Vigilante is going to be one of those classes that you will have to WANT to play. You're not just going to pop open the book and go, "Oh! I want that bundle of paperwork!".

Also, so far what I have seen, I think can easily be approached through either rogue, swashbuckler, inquisitor, or monk archetypes. I just am not impressed with it at first glance.

I will take a better look at it later, and maybe my opinion will change.

Also, can a Warlock combine Mystic Bolts with two weapon fighting? Mystic Bolts takes the place of an attack, so it seems like it would be possible.

What about an Amateur Vigilante feat? You wrote that there won't be an Extra Vigilante Talent feat, but something like Spirit Talker, enabling other classes to choose ONE Vigilante talent? Maybe with limitations, like, a fighting class could choose only Avenger talents, and so on...

In regards to the stalker, I think part of the problem is that most vigilante talents are clearly worth more than a feat, but the number of stalker talents available to you seems balanced around the assumption that you're taking rogue talents, which are either as good as feats or worse, generally speaking.

Also, the stalker's rogue talent option doesn't note whether you can take standard rogue talents, unchained rogue talents, or both. It doesn't cite Pathfinder Unchained, so I'm leaning towards standard rogue talents. That said, there are clearly some abilities that I would rather have unchained (like the major / minor magic talents) and some that I would rather have the standard (such as offensive defensive).

Also, can a Warlock combine Mystic Bolts with two weapon fighting? Mystic Bolts takes the place of an attack, so it seems like it would be possible.

You can create/fire only one mystic bolt at a time, so you can two-weapon fight with a mystic bolt and a different weapon, but you can't two-weapon fight with two mystic bolts.

I was going to say it feels to me like the Vigilante should be a prestige class that you can only gain access to by already being pretty competent at your base build....

...then I thought of "Mystery Men" and all those bumbling wanna-be superheros stumbling around trying to do the right thing, and I totally want to run that adventure where each PC is a Vigilante with a different specialization.

OMG. Edge of Anarchy with 4 Vigilantes. And Blackjack is Captain Amazing. So want to try it.

What about an Amateur Vigilante feat? You wrote that there won't be an Extra Vigilante Talent feat, but something like Spirit Talker, enabling other classes to choose ONE Vigilante talent? Maybe with limitations, like, a fighting class could choose only Avenger talents, and so on...

I feel like if an Amateur Vigilante feat become a thing, it should probably start by giving you Dual Identity. I think that's good enough to be worth a feat.

Also, can a Warlock combine Mystic Bolts with two weapon fighting? Mystic Bolts takes the place of an attack, so it seems like it would be possible.

As written, it looks like weapon + bolt is an option, but I don't think you could two-weapon fight solely with bolts. (I don't think you "wield" them in a given hand.)

Okay, I love this so far, but I have a question because there's something I think I'm missing.

How does the Warlock Vigilante spell casting interact with armor?

The spells are arcane with no call-out, so they suffer ASF, as usual. We've been jotting down ideas, and Logan told me he's liking the idea of putting ignoring light armor's ASF into a talent though!

The warlock and zealot look like they are almost completely incompatible with caster-based prestige classes. Not because they can't get in, but because they can't advance their casting once they do. This seems like a possible issue.

kamenhero25 wrote:

Okay, I love this so far, but I have a question because there's something I think I'm missing.

How does the Warlock Vigilante spell casting interact with armor?

The spells are arcane with no call-out, so they suffer ASF, as usual. We've been jotting down ideas, and Logan told me he's liking the idea of putting ignoring light armor's ASF into a talent though!

Even if they're dead words, you might want to slip the "vigilantes suffer ASF" back into the text for the final version of the class. Everyone notices an omission, but no one ever seems to agree upon what it means. :-P

Alexander Augunas wrote:

— Captain America is an Avenger.
— Batman is a Stalker.
— Doctor Strange is a Warlock (although he'd be a little bit better if there was an option that meshed Warlock with the Occultist Implement system.)
— Shazam is the Zealot.

Batman is totally a Gestalt Avenger/Stalker ;)

Batman doesn't have a 3/4 BAB. He's totally a Slayer/Stalker or Brawler/Stalker.

The warlock and zealot look like they are almost completely incompatible with caster-based prestige classes. Not because they can't get in, but because they can't advance their casting once they do. This seems like a possible issue.

They would advance their spellcasting in terms of caster levels and spells per day. A PrC vigilante just wouldn't unlock higher-level spell levels.

I have to admit that I'm not too thrilled that the playtest is from today until July 20th. That's incredibly short. I know it's coming out early next year, but one month of testing? I would have thought at least two. I hope at least that the PFS chronicle sheet will go beyond that.

Matrix Dragon wrote:

Alexander Augunas wrote:

— Captain America is an Avenger.
— Batman is a Stalker.
— Doctor Strange is a Warlock (although he'd be a little bit better if there was an option that meshed Warlock with the Occultist Implement system.)
— Shazam is the Zealot.

Batman is totally a Gestalt Avenger/Stalker ;)

Batman doesn't have a 3/4 BAB. He's totally a Slayer/Stalker or Brawler/Stalker.

Avenger is full BAB.

Matrix Dragon wrote:

Alexander Augunas wrote:

— Captain America is an Avenger.
— Batman is a Stalker.
— Doctor Strange is a Warlock (although he'd be a little bit better if there was an option that meshed Warlock with the Occultist Implement system.)
— Shazam is the Zealot.

Batman is totally a Gestalt Avenger/Stalker ;)

Batman doesn't have a 3/4 BAB. He's totally a Slayer/Stalker or Brawler/Stalker.

Avenger vigilantes gets to treat its vigilante levels as his BAB (and it'll add fine with BAB of other classes). It keeps the d8 Hit Die though.

I have to admit that I'm not too thrilled that the playtest is from today until July 20th. That's incredibly short. I know it's coming out early next year, but one month of testing? I would have thought at least two. I hope at least that the PFS chronicle sheet will go beyond that.

The second month does include playtesting, but basically not with as much back-and-forth. You playtest for another month and then give us your rundown at the end of that time.

Shisumo wrote:

The warlock and zealot look like they are almost completely incompatible with caster-based prestige classes. Not because they can't get in, but because they can't advance their casting once they do. This seems like a possible issue.

They would advance their spellcasting in terms of caster levels and spells per day. A PrC vigilante just wouldn't unlock higher-level spell levels.

Okay, yes. I should have said, "they can't meaningfully advance their casting once they do."

Heads up on the stalker: Any references to dealing "half" hidden strike damage should say you use d4s instead (such as twisting fear). I'll get this up somewhere, but it's official errata as far as playtesting this class (basically, they all used to be half or full, and changed to d6 and d4, so this is just a case where a change was missed).

its an Emulator. if there wasnt more classes, this would probably rocks!!
If paizo tells me that this will be the kind of classes for pathfinder 2 i will gladly play it (it looks much to the blue rose game, and warlok looks like if he had take it the shadowcaster spell system)

Good paizo, i like the class at all, i hope you dont make it multiclass feats that mess with the specialty and unique ability for a class (like you did with ACG and the same formula).

I feel like this is an interesting system, but I don't see how it will work well in a mixed party with non vigiantees. I also don't see the benefit to rebuilding the other classses as pick and choose.

Would't this have been better as a VMC that could be added onto any other base class? Or even just a stand alone rule system independent of class, that could be used in intrigue games?

Also, with all these pick and build class options, at what point is it time for PFS to just bite the bullet and admit that what it really needs is a robust Class Builder system that lets players just pick which class features they want at each level, possibly with a price break depending on your "focus"

Bardess wrote:

Matrix Dragon wrote:

Alexander Augunas wrote:

— Captain America is an Avenger.
— Batman is a Stalker.
— Doctor Strange is a Warlock (although he'd be a little bit better if there was an option that meshed Warlock with the Occultist Implement system.)
— Shazam is the Zealot.

Batman is totally a Gestalt Avenger/Stalker ;)

Batman doesn't have a 3/4 BAB. He's totally a Slayer/Stalker or Brawler/Stalker.

Avenger vigilates gets to treat its vigilate levels as his BAB (and it'll add fine with BAB of other classes). It keeps the d8 Hit Die though.

Whooops. Sorry. I'm reading and writing at the same time. Batman's more a Stalker than an Avenger though. Ok, this calls for a Secondary Specialization feat/archetype.

Alexander Augunas wrote:

Shisumo wrote:

The warlock and zealot look like they are almost completely incompatible with caster-based prestige classes. Not because they can't get in, but because they can't advance their casting once they do. This seems like a possible issue.

They would advance their spellcasting in terms of caster levels and spells per day. A PrC vigilante just wouldn't unlock higher-level spell levels.

Okay, yes. I should have said, "they can't meaningfully advance their casting once they do."

PrCs are already a poor choice for casters. That they are even poorer for vigilantes is not really an issue.

First thought: Dual Identity - well, that's ONE solution to the "scry & fry" "problem"... :)

-TimD

Hey there all,

As a note, we fully understand that there are a lot of classes in the game and that you can emulate nearly any concept with the existing options available to you. That said, the Vigilante is actually quite unique in a number of ways and we are interested to see how it plays at the table. The vigilante can certainly emulate a given role in a party, but it has some other unique ways of adding to the group as well. Some of those are already present, others will rely on other systems set to appear in Ultimate Intrigue (if your group decides to add them to the game).

That said, give it a try and let us know. We look forward to seeing your feedback.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

I feel like this is an interesting system, but I don't see how it will work well in a mixed party with non vigiantees.

I think this is definitely a class that cries out for an adventure being built around it, rather than picking the adventure first and then trying to run a vigilante in it. Either start with the idea of a team of heroes, or a single hero with allies to support him and help keep his identity secret.

Then again, I played in a game a few years ago where one PC's concept was that he was a mild-mannered herbalist by day, dashing gentleman cat-burglar by night. I don't see any reason he couldn't have played a Vigilante and had some mechanical back-up for his concept rather than just play a rogue with a fluff background.

I think the thing that may make this a hard sell for many campaigns is that they tend not to stay in the same vicinity but be more wide-ranging.

Is there some reason why we don't have a psychic vigilante? I seriously feel like a vigilante class that can't give me a real close approximation of The Shadow, in the wake of Occult Adventures in particular, has missed the mark.

I just realized, the Vigilante makes the best 'evil advisor' type villain ever. Their class features give them a good reputation, and the Dual Identity lets them have a good standing identity as an advisor to a lord and a super villain identity that can be the main villain.

Is there some reason why we don't have a psychic vigilante? I seriously feel like a vigilante class that can't give me a real close approximation of The Shadow, in the wake of Occult Adventures in particular, has missed the mark.

This has come up. Remember, this is the first iteration of the class...and the tools you are talking about has not seen release. Thus a lack of occult in this document.

I just realized, the Vigilante makes the best 'evil advisor' type villain ever. Their class features give them a good reputation, and the Dual Identity lets them have a good standing identity as an advisor to a lord and a super villain identity that can be the main villain.

To be honest, as a guy who enjoys GMing more than he does playing, that's one of the things that makes me super excited for this class.