Ultimate Intrigue—Vigilante Playtest!

Friday, June 19, 2015


Illustration by Miroslav Petrov

The streets of almost every large city are rife with corruption. Greedy merchants, cruel guards, and bloodthirsty gangs oppress the poor common folk and those who dare to stand up against them find themselves with the dagger in the back more often than not. That is where the vigilante comes in. With their true identity hidden behind a secret persona, the vigilante is unafraid to take the fight to the powerful. Of course, not all vigilantes fight for what is good and just. Some use their secret identity to commit acts of depravity, unburdened by guilt or consequence.

Due to release in early 2016, Ultimate Intrigue includes a new base class for the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: the vigilante. By participating in this playtest, you can help us make this class a fun, vibrant part of the game.

Starting today, you can download a playtest version of the vigilante right here! Create a vigilante, use it in your games, and then head over the playtest forums to tell us what you think. Tell us what works with the class and what other abilities you think it should have. We need your thoughts and ideas to refine this class and get it ready to stalk through the shadows of game tables everywhere. We have two subforums for you to use: one for general discussion about the class and the playtest and another specifically for feedback based on actual play.

For the Pathfinder Society players, the playtest version of this class opens as a character option. And there will be a special Chronicle sheet available soon that allows you to gain benefits that increase in future utility the more sessions that you play a vigilante for the playtest, or GM a game with at least one vigilante player at the table.

This playtest will remain open until Thursday, July 20, 2015. Although the forum discussions will close as that time, we'll be setting up a “Final Thoughts” thread. That thread will remain open until August 17, 2015 and you can post in that thread once with your final comments and feedback from the playtest. As always, we ask that you check for an existing thread that covers your topic before starting a new one. Remember that we are all here to make a better vigilante, so please be polite and civil to your fellow playtesters and community members.

We are truly excited to see your thoughts and feedback on the vigilante. It's a class unlike any other that we've ever done and we hope it will make for an exciting addition to your game. See you on the boards!

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Miroslav Petrov Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Vigilantes
401 to 450 of 578 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>

Rynjin wrote:
Dobreev wrote:
Quote:
Barbs have had lv10 pounce for a long time, and yet there are still other martials.
Didn't know that, but the point still stands. Expanding the list of classes that get Pounce tacked on without really considering the martials that are getting left out in a cold, doomed to only swing only once if they have to move while Barbarians and Vigilantes put out 4x their damage in the same situation, is going to start to suck for them eventually.
It's sucked for them since the game released. It not sucking for some classes anymore doesn't change that.

At least it sucked relatively evenly for most melee.

Quote:
I'm thinking you don't deal with Pounce that often if you think all 4 attacks are gonna hit.

I've run with enough pre-Unchained eidolons to know that all the attacks don't really need to hit... just most.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Moment of silence for all the class features that now have to wait till level 7 to pounce. R.I.P. Until level 7. Then RIP YOUR FOES TO SHREDS.

Or Mobile Fighters. Any Dervish Archetype. There's like a million of em. A bunch of Animal Companions. A Magus with that one spell, all mythic martials. Anybody with a words of power caster in their party with the Accelerate word. Or Mythic Haste. Somebody with a Hero Point?

But yes. Rest in peace all other pouncing options spread across a variety of classes and options and situations, because the ability to pounce at level 12 at -6AC is here to invalidate you.

This comes across really snarky, but I mean no harm. Just sort of listing off Pounce-like options. It started with a Summoner joke, and then I think accidentally got mean. But no. There's a lot of options all around. Some banned at certain tables, understandably, and some obscure. This is a good option, but it hardly breaks things.


Dobreev wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
Dobreev wrote:
Quote:
Barbs have had lv10 pounce for a long time, and yet there are still other martials.
Didn't know that, but the point still stands. Expanding the list of classes that get Pounce tacked on without really considering the martials that are getting left out in a cold, doomed to only swing only once if they have to move while Barbarians and Vigilantes put out 4x their damage in the same situation, is going to start to suck for them eventually.
It's sucked for them since the game released. It not sucking for some classes anymore doesn't change that.

At least it sucked relatively evenly for most melee.

Quote:
I'm thinking you don't deal with Pounce that often if you think all 4 attacks are gonna hit.
I've run with enough pre-Unchained eidolons to know that all the attacks don't really need to hit... just most.

Thankfully those eidolons are now an endangered species. Let's hope they get wiped out.


Protoman wrote:
Dobreev wrote:
I've run with enough pre-Unchained eidolons to know that all the attacks don't really need to hit... just most.
Thankfully those eidolons are now an endangered species. Let's hope they get wiped out.

That won't happen, actually. Unchained Eidolons can have the same number of natural attacks, and still get access to the Pounce evolution. The only thing that Pathfinder Unchained actually managed to fix about the Summoner was the spell list. They even let Master Summoner remain an option, because that archetype was totally balanced.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm going to test Vigilante in PFS-game, so can Identities have different Factions? If not, must leader of the Faction know who you really are?


Yeah, the AC penalty on the Vigilante's pounce is... really, really bad. It works out fine for Barbarians because they have access to alternative means of defense (read: absurd amounts of DR/-) but the Vigilante doesn't have anything like that.

I was about to say "maybe the Vigilante would be a good choice for a Lightning Stance build", but then I looked at what the feat requires to work again. What were they even thinking who would use this


Extra Anchovies wrote:
Protoman wrote:
Dobreev wrote:
I've run with enough pre-Unchained eidolons to know that all the attacks don't really need to hit... just most.
Thankfully those eidolons are now an endangered species. Let's hope they get wiped out.
That won't happen, actually. Unchained Eidolons can have the same number of natural attacks, and still get access to the Pounce evolution. The only thing that Pathfinder Unchained actually managed to fix about the Summoner was the spell list. They even let Master Summoner remain an option, because that archetype was totally balanced.

Well damn. Oh well. Eidolons are always gonna be someone else's problem. I'm glad there's another pounce option overall. Some previous classes don't have it? Whatever, they got other stuff.

Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Chris Ballard wrote:
Does the zealot have to worship a deity?

I'm a bit on the fence about that one, and looking into my magic scrying bowl, I think there will be stronger rules about this in the final iteration of the class, but for right now, for the purposes of the playtest, assume that you do not have to.


Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
Chris Ballard wrote:
Does the zealot have to worship a deity?
I'm a bit on the fence about that one, and looking into my magic scrying bowl, I think there will be stronger rules about this in the final iteration of the class, but for right now, for the purposes of the playtest, assume that you do not have to.

So what happens with domains? Are they stuck with alignment ones or pick any that suits character?


I'm not sure if this has been said yet but there's a spelling error in the 2nd-to-last line of the first paragraph under "Renown" that says "This renown grants him favorable treatment in civilized
company and lends and air of menace while facing down
his enemies." that should be "and lends AN air"

Just helping for the final release :)


Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
Chris Ballard wrote:
Does the zealot have to worship a deity?
I'm a bit on the fence about that one, and looking into my magic scrying bowl, I think there will be stronger rules about this in the final iteration of the class, but for right now, for the purposes of the playtest, assume that you do not have to.

I think it would be a shame if you couldn't play a brass bowl-wielding zealot who follows a transcendental path.

If you did, then you would need another vigilante variant, for a vigilante oracle.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Why would a vigilante superhero inspired class need a deity?

You introduced the "Spells from a concept" thing, so use it for once.

"FOR JUSTICE!"

Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Protoman wrote:
Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
Chris Ballard wrote:
Does the zealot have to worship a deity?
I'm a bit on the fence about that one, and looking into my magic scrying bowl, I think there will be stronger rules about this in the final iteration of the class, but for right now, for the purposes of the playtest, assume that you do not have to.
So what happens with domains? Are they stuck with alignment ones or pick any that suits character?

For purpose of playtesting, feel free to pick a domain you think will be interesting. I'd rather see a good spread (or an organic clumping) of chosen domains.


Hmmm, aside from the dual identities thing, I am trying to figure out why you would want to play this class over any of the classes that it is based on. They have a few nice tricks, but each type of Vigilante seems to be significantly worse than what they are based on.

The problem essentially seems to be that, unless I am mistaken, the entire class is missing an accuracy booster. You know, that scaling +1 to +5 attack bonus that every martial class has regardless of its Hit Dice?

Edit: My recommendation - all vigilantes get a scaling accuracy bonus whenever they are in their vigilante identity, but have their talents apply when they are in their social identity. Basically, they have all their abilities in social mode (using them risks their identity getting found out), but need to be in their vigilante mode/mindset to be fully effective in combat.


Lanitril wrote:

Moment of silence for all the class features that now have to wait till level 7 to pounce. R.I.P. Until level 7. Then RIP YOUR FOES TO SHREDS.

Or Mobile Fighters. Any Dervish Archetype. There's like a million of em. A bunch of Animal Companions. A Magus with that one spell, all mythic martials. Anybody with a words of power caster in their party with the Accelerate word. Or Mythic Haste. Somebody with a Hero Point?

But yes. Rest in peace all other pouncing options spread across a variety of classes and options and situations, because the ability to pounce at level 12 at -6AC is here to invalidate you.

This comes across really snarky, but I mean no harm. Just sort of listing off Pounce-like options. It started with a Summoner joke, and then I think accidentally got mean. But no. There's a lot of options all around. Some banned at certain tables, understandably, and some obscure. This is a good option, but it hardly breaks things.

You're a bit of a dick, but point taken.


Mark Seifter wrote:
GeneticDrift wrote:
Matrix Dragon wrote:
I approve of the Warlock Vigilante's ability to hide spellcasting. I really like the design of the class so far :D

I dislike the hidden spell casting. A spell cast with no components is not hidden so this doesn't do much. If it is intended that magic can be hidden by hiding the components (V/S/M) and any caster can do it then, I will just go into the corner and grumble about it.

It would be awesome to be able to secretly buff the party. PC drinks some water, secretly cast fly. PC opens door, secretly cast close. PC mentions your preferred deity in a positive way, secretly cast guidance or other cantrip.

A spell cast with no components isn't hidden, that's correct, but this ability specifically allows you to hide spells (which so far I think mainly only the bard can do with that one feat).

Actually anyone can do it if you are willing to get silent spell using "Secret Signs" you do also have to invest in sleight of hand to make it work as there is an opposed perception check.

Liberty's Edge

Chris Mortika wrote:
...can the Social persona have a non-Good alignment, without the Paladin needing continual atonement spells.)

I had a similar question on another thread, as in what happens to alignment-dependent aspects like prestige classes, feats or improved familiars. Do they disappear until the alignment changes back? And if so, at what cost to the vigilante?

That thread went unaddressed.


Pathfinder Companion, Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Æthernaut wrote:
I had a similar question on another thread, as in what happens to alignment-dependent aspects like prestige classes, feats or improved familiars. Do they disappear until the alignment changes back? And if so, at what cost to the vigilante?

You can't select them as part of your build in the first place, by my reading.

Playtest document wrote:

For the purposes of meeting

a qualification for a feat, class, or other ability, he is only
eligible if both of his alignments meet the requirements.


Dobreev wrote:
You're a bit of a dick, but point taken.

Thanks for taking that better than you had to. :) I just can't turn off the rudeness inherent to myself sometimes. I try, but it's still often present.

So, Designers, any chance on an actual VMC for dual identity and maybe some renown? A couple of talents to go with it?

Even if there's no Extra Talent feat, is there maybe a chance that some of the weaker but more flavorful ones could be available as a feat in general? Maybe some that aren't even necessarily weak, but work thematically on other classes too? Even a bit later than a vigilante could take it, if that balances that out. I don't know which ones these might be, but Mystic Bolt comes to mind as being not grossly overpowered for a Wizard or Sorcerer to gain.

If not by feat, some other method that isn't level dipping?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The class looks quite promising. The only problem I have so far is with the renown mechanic. It's too limited in size, and too urban oriented. I see the logic, but one of the archetypical vigilantes is the Lone Ranger, who was known throughout the southwest (though I concede that not everybody in the region had heard of him).

Shadow Lodge

I'm currently playing in a PFS PbP Playtest, and I had an idea for the class that I thought might be kind of cool. I noticed a lot of the abilities and Talents are very limited in uses per day. They do not get many spells for example, and a lot of others are 1/Day or even 3/day or so.

I thought it would be pretty cool if maybe that changed so that every time the Vigilante swapped personalities, their pools refilled, and if that was modified to make it a little harder to swap identities to kind of compensate for that. Even if it's les of a rule and more along the lines of being able to rest in a dungeon, where the focus is on how impractical it is. Maybe the Vigilante needs to have a specific place, a Bat Cave of sorts that they can change, and doing so outside of that, if possible at all, takes a lot more time. Stepping into the bathroom or a janitor closet can work, but it's so risky that (in game terms at least) it takes more time and effort, and you don't have all the normal implements you may need, (like Iron Man's automated armor removal machines).

In a sense it kind of feels a bit more like 4th Eds "Short Rest", and I think it might add another level of complexity, especially in a game where not everyone is a Vigilante. It might even require some of the Talents that would be reset to be reduced in the number of uses they normally get.

Another thing I was thinking is that, is something the DM added in as a bit of a joke. An NPC handed us her pack (which is part of the scenario), and inside of it, we found a pair of normal looking glasses. Putting the glasses on resulted in us "suddenly looking a bit more ordinary, like a mild-manored citizen of Absalom". I thought that would work really well in as a part of the class, where maybe the Social Identity could have a sort of personalized implement that separates them from their vigilante identity. Clark Kent's glasses, Donald Blake's walking stick, Peter Parker's camera ( bit of a stretch), Matt Murdock's blindman's cane, etc. . . These could either just be a Masterwork Tool, but I think there is enough room that it could be a Class Feature as well, and specifically one that only works on the Social Identity. There is even a bit of this in Golarion already, from Nester Rese's limp and cane to Grantmaster Torch's steam baths. Something the Social Identity is well known for that helps them to distance themselves from their superhero identity.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It would be nice if the class could function as well in non-urban areas. Maybe a nature based path would be good for that.


Dragon78 wrote:
It would be nice if the class could function as well in non-urban areas. Maybe a nature based path would be good for that.

I suspect trading renown for favored terrain will be a simple archetype to allow such robin hoods to happen.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Pawns, Rulebook Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Abraham spalding wrote:
Dragon78 wrote:
It would be nice if the class could function as well in non-urban areas. Maybe a nature based path would be good for that.
I suspect trading renown for favored terrain will be a simple archetype to allow such robin hoods to happen.

*nod* Some of the things I've heard people mention as missing from the class - a Lone Ranger reference somewhere, for instance - I think would be better suited to an archetype (such as, perhaps, the "lone rider," which gets a mount and a much greater area of renown).


The class only has cleric, fighter, rogue, and wizard options. It wouldn't hurt to have a nature themed (druid, hunter, or ranger) one. Maybe even a swashbuckler, brawler, alchemist, and/or psychic related one as well.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Pawns, Rulebook Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

The psychic option is apparently something already on the table...

Grand Lodge

Speaking of psychic. How well does vigilante compare against the upcoming medium?

Medium can do all four of weaker rogue, weaker fighter, weaker arcane and divine caster and then some. He got casting built in from the beginning and can benefit the party. All that with lots of tasty for roleplaying.

I am not bashing vigilante - I love the idea. But the mechanics seem to lack either versality or, forgive the pun, speciality. Too much loaded into that specialty choice, too little in utility terms in class itself.

This is a first read reaction, not based on playtest and is offered in hopes for a productive discussion.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think this is a really cool class overall. I'm completely underwhelmed by the Zealot though. Maybe I'm just missing it, but I don't see any advantage to playing that specialization, unless you're going to be doing a really RP heavy campaign and the flavor just seems to fit. It's 100% sub-par to the other 3 for PFS in my opinion, and I'd say it's sub-par to a standard Cleric or Inquisitor for PFS as well. Granted, this is just based on my reading of the abilities and not actually playing it, but there's nothing about it that makes me say "Oooh, cool."

It would seem to me that an actual Vigilante with a divine slant would be more akin to a Paladin than a Cleric. Someone with a burning desire inside to right the wrongs of the world. Seems like they should, at a minimum, get some bonuses when going after targets that are opposite in alignment from themselves.

Outside of this....I was kind of surprised that Acrobatics was not a class skill across the board, but I think I understand the flavor for that choice.

I'm kind of curious how the designers expect the Social/Vigilante identity business to play out in a PFS scenario. PFS adventures so often occur all over Golarion, and it's not unusual to start in one city, travel all across the country side (well out of the several mile radius for Renown) and have essentially an all-day long adventure without an easy way to handle the 5-minute re-disguise stuff. So there likely won't be any way for PFS Vigilantes to take advantage of Renown. They will most likely end up stuck in Vigilante mode all the time, because you don't know when combat is going to break out, and they won't ever get to take advantage of the Quick Change ability (lvl 13). I'm on board with Dual Identity, and I love the RP flavor of it. I just think it will cause so much hassle for PFS players, that you will see people mostly ignore it. Perhaps instead if the class had penalties to combat abilities while in Social mode, or penalties to social abilities while in Vigilante mode. Would allow you to still utilize them, but you'd have to plan appropriately.

As for playing in a PFS table with a Vigilante....How would people plan to handle this? If you are the Vigilante PC, would one of your identities need to be hidden from other Pathfinders? Should Venture Captains know who you are in either guise? If you try to hide one, but not the other, would that even work?

I'm picturing the scene from the live action version of The Tick where he doesn't recognize fellow super hero The Champion when he dons his glasses. :P


2 people marked this as a favorite.

There's really no reason to actually playtest the Zealot.

Its BaB is the same, its saves are worse, and it has the spellcastng and the same class features as the Inquisitor...but less of them (lacking Bane, Judgement, Solo Tactics, Monster Lore, and the improvements to all of these).

It has no particular advantage over the Inquisitor unless you think Breath of Life as an SLA is enough to get you to play the class on its own.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Hopefully part 2 of the playtest will have a real big surprise with what they will do for the zealot. Like change everything about it! :-D


Rynjin wrote:

There's really no reason to actually playtest the Zealot.

Its BaB is the same, its saves are worse, and it has the spellcastng and the same class features as the Inquisitor...but less of them (lacking Bane, Judgement, Solo Tactics, Monster Lore, and the improvements to all of these).

It has no particular advantage over the Inquisitor unless you think Breath of Life as an SLA is enough to get you to play the class on its own.

Actually, it even has worse casting - 4/4/4/4/4/1 instead of 5/5/5/5/5/5.

Zealot not only has no reason to be playtested, it has no reason to exist.


I realize that the vigilante has specializations, but why not get rid of the specialization and make this the Gish Class of all Gishs.

Im thinking leave in the base talent the specializations have as they are pretty straightforward, however once the specialization is chosen allow people to choose from any of the talents from any of the specializations. I want to be a Stalker that can cast Invisibility, throw smoke bombs (I realize you cant actually have the smoke bombs but ya), and use a shield bash if cornered, and maybe pick up the pounce.

Just think about that. You cast invisibility on yourself, get close enough to drop a smoke bomb, then rush in and strike, then use the shield bash to knock the opponent back so you make a get away, perfect hit and run character. (im sure there were better options I could have listed but these are the ones I remember)

If this class is based on superheroes then it stands to reason that it should have the most diverse of options for the player as all superheroes have a diverse array of powers. each has their base ability of course but to be honest with all the super powers known, Superman could honestly be recreated an infinite number of different ways.


Extra Anchovies wrote:
Rynjin wrote:

There's really no reason to actually playtest the Zealot.

Its BaB is the same, its saves are worse, and it has the spellcastng and the same class features as the Inquisitor...but less of them (lacking Bane, Judgement, Solo Tactics, Monster Lore, and the improvements to all of these).

It has no particular advantage over the Inquisitor unless you think Breath of Life as an SLA is enough to get you to play the class on its own.

Actually, it even has worse casting - 4/4/4/4/4/1 instead of 5/5/5/5/5/5.

Zealot not only has no reason to be playtested, it has no reason to exist.

Your casting is off, it's actually 4/3/3/3/2/1 or 4/3/3/3/3/1 so even worse than you thought

Scarab Sages

You have incredible versatility in the spells available to cast, but your actual slots per day are barely better than a bloodrager.


Rynjin wrote:


Its BaB is the same, its saves are worse, and it has the spellcastng and the same class features as the Inquisitor...but less of them (lacking Bane, Judgement, Solo Tactics, Monster Lore, and the improvements to all of these).

It has no particular advantage over the Inquisitor unless you think Breath of Life as an SLA is enough to get you to play the class on its own.

It's really hard to see how a vigilante (zealot) X is better than a vigilante zealot) 1 / inquisitor X-1.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Still no play test Chronicle Sheet? I only ask because I have a con this week end... and being able to make off 3-5 slots in 2 days would be nice.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Gamerskum wrote:

Still no play test Chronicle Sheet? I only ask because I have a con this week end... and being able to make off 3-5 slots in 2 days would be nice.

I have similar concerns


I'm surprised the Vigilante doesn't have a cause or ideal that they fight for. Perhaps a list of ideals or causes the vigilante can choose from to gain some benefit at first level?


enrik wrote:

I'm surprised the Vigilante doesn't have a cause or ideal that they fight for. Perhaps a list of ideals or causes the vigilante can choose from to gain some benefit at first level?

Noooooooo. Leave that in control of the players, or if you really have to, make it a Cavalier/Vigilante hybrid archetype.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Sounds like 5th Edition..... :-D

Shadow Lodge

Arachnofiend wrote:
enrik wrote:

I'm surprised the Vigilante doesn't have a cause or ideal that they fight for. Perhaps a list of ideals or causes the vigilante can choose from to gain some benefit at first level?

Noooooooo. Leave that in control of the players, or if you really have to, make it a Cavalier/Vigilante hybrid archetype.

How is it not in the player's control?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
DM Beckett wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
enrik wrote:

I'm surprised the Vigilante doesn't have a cause or ideal that they fight for. Perhaps a list of ideals or causes the vigilante can choose from to gain some benefit at first level?

Noooooooo. Leave that in control of the players, or if you really have to, make it a Cavalier/Vigilante hybrid archetype.
How is it not in the player's control?

By definition a list of possible ideals cannot cover every possible ideal a player could want his character to fight for.

Therefore, it is not in the player's control.


Well then perhaps as an option for the Zealot? Though I tend to imagine that specialization as more of an enlightened freedom fighter with the backing of the divine.


enrik wrote:

I'm surprised the Vigilante doesn't have a cause or ideal that they fight for. Perhaps a list of ideals or causes the vigilante can choose from to gain some benefit at first level?

I've been trying to push for a similar idea in another thread. Basically to define Specializations as Origin Stories to justify the dual identity and grant somewhat of a purpose. Its a lot of design space because for campaign settings it can be specific like Blade's dhampir heritage, or for the main class vague like Vengeance or Redemption.


Interesting concept for a class. Some non-urban options would be nice in the final version. But I see this class as a good option for a more urban based campaign in it's current form. Bring the pulp action super heroes into the mix, lots of story options, though it might seem that in a pulp hero campaign, the pally gets reduced to the Jim Gordon role.

Shadow Lodge

Rynjin wrote:
DM Beckett wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
enrik wrote:

I'm surprised the Vigilante doesn't have a cause or ideal that they fight for. Perhaps a list of ideals or causes the vigilante can choose from to gain some benefit at first level?

Noooooooo. Leave that in control of the players, or if you really have to, make it a Cavalier/Vigilante hybrid archetype.
How is it not in the player's control?

By definition a list of possible ideals cannot cover every possible ideal a player could want his character to fight for.

Therefore, it is not in the player's control.

I don't see why not.

*Fight against _______ government.
*I don't care about ________, I'm just focused on the people caught in the crossfire.
*I Do This For Taldor!!!!!
*________ is MY BACKYARD.
*I just can't standby and allow __________ to continue.
*I just happened to be standing here when the _________ spilled on me. Sorry, I know you wanted more, but nope, I was just there.
*The Balance!!! Um, sure. just pretend I actually care about something and lets call it something cool. The Balance works.
*I am a Knight of ___________.
*As long as _________ continues, I shall fight against it.
*Yah, I got drunk and went to jail, and water spilled on me and puff!!!


I didn't read through the other feedback - while I value my fellow playtesters' opinions, it would distract me from posting my own. After some reading the PDF the following is my first impression:

a) I like the obvious Batman etc. reference.

b) The class seems interesting but overloaded. More than 11 pages without images? Phew. I'd cut some content at the four specializations, especially when it duplicates other classes. That way the vigilante core features will be more visible also.

c) The fluff text so far covers good and evil vigilantes, but no other alignments. I find the chaotic neutral version the most difficult to imagine.

d) There are some great feat ideas, for instance Living Shield and Mockingbird. Bond of Blood sounds nice too, but is quite complicated. The same goes for Hidden Strike: It's not that different to sneak attack, so why introduce a bunch of new rules for it instead of simply giving him sneak attack? Another Day is listed as extraordinary and supernatural - not sure whether it's intended (and if, what the consequences are).

I will try to squeeze a real playtest into my Giantslayer campaign.


SheepishEidolon wrote:

b) The class seems interesting but overloaded. More than 11 pages without images? Phew. I'd cut some content at the four specializations, especially when it duplicates other classes. That way the vigilante core features will be more visible also.

Yea, the Vigilante is in this weird place where it is both overloaded and doesn't have enough options to support what it is trying to accomplish. I'm thinking that the best option would be to make all the Vigilante Talents be universal. Allow all specializations to pick any Vigilante Talent, maybe with just a few restrictions.

There are several advantages to this:

1. You can reduce the total number of Talents and save page space.
2. You don't have to worry about cases where a Talent is thematically appropriate for more than one specialization.
3. You will be able to add more specializations down the road without having to come up with 20 more talents.
4. You can add new talents without having to link them to a single specialization.

At the very least I think a large number of the talents could be moved into a 'universal' pool rather than having to be specialization specific.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Combine Avenger and Stalker, with an option to choose either full-BAB or (a fixed/revamped) Hidden Strikes that's just small scaling bonus accuracy/damage on creatures with conditions (like sickened, fatigued, etc.). The talents are cool, but separated from one another you're either a bad Rogue or a bad Slayer.

Combine Zealot and Warlock into one, choosing divine or arcane as the first spell talent. Allow for both arcane and divine talents to use the same spells per day/spells prepared pool, so that the class can essentially opt into being a base class mystic theurge.

Make the identity take 2-3 rounds to swap, and allow vigilante abilities to be used in the social persona (though using them could blow your cover, at DM's discretion).


2 people marked this as a favorite.

No reason not to combine all of them together. Give the players the toolbox to make the super hero type character they want. There is no point I can see to divide the Vigilante up into 2-4+ "specializations". If the point of the class is the dual personality thing, make that shine. As it stands now, the "specializations" are what's shining. One class, open up the talents. Make dual personality awesome.

401 to 450 of 578 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Ultimate Intrigue Playtest / General Discussion / Paizo Blog: Ultimate Intrigue—Vigilante Playtest! All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.