Ultimate Intrigue—Vigilante Playtest Round 2!

I think that the Divine Power ability could be simplified a lot if instead of outsider races, the vigilante was imbued with a domain, and different talents required different domains (or subdomains based upon their domain). That would leave them a lot more flexible and making adding new talents less of a nightmare. (As written, if you wanted to add a Div divine power, you'd need an entire set of all-new zealot talents to go with it.)

For example, say a powerful demon lord wants to sponsor a vigilante. He chooses one of his domains and that domain becomes the source of the vigilante's power. The vigilante adds that domain's domain spells (up to 6th level) to his list of domain spells known and gains that domain's domain powers. In the long run, that would likely save a LOT of wordage for the zealot class and would make the addition of new domain powers easier.

In addition, you could add the choice of allowing a vigilante to choose an animal or terrain domain instead of a cleric domain (as a druid), and if the vigilante chooses Animal, Plant, or an animal or terrain domain, they can use the hunter spell list (druid + ranger) instead of the inquisitor spell list to determine their spells known. That way you could have a guardian animal spirit or a spirit of nature or something as the source of your divine power. (CAPTAIN PLANET VIGILANTES!!!!) End it by saying that any animal domain counts as the Animal Domain for talent prerequisites and any terrain domain counts as the Plant Domain for terrain prerequisites.

In this manner, the vigilante still gets something unique and cool (Charisma-based spellcasting that is backed by a specific deity, plus getting to be the only 6th-level spellcaster that adds domain spells to her list of spells known), but its also something that's a lot easier to expand from a freelancer standpoint and also doesn't give an entirely new submechanic to one specialization.

It's like this guy is a well known member of the community that delves into the background mechanics of the game, designs his own freelance products, is an intelligent designer and also writes an awesome blog. Weird huh?

Both Seemless Guise and the Everyman social talent grant a +20 circumstance bonus to disguise checks. This means that they do not stack.

Usually, a bonus has a type that indicates how the spell grants the bonus. The important aspect of bonus types is that two bonuses of the same type don't generally stack. With the exception of dodge bonuses, most circumstance bonuses, and racial bonuses, only the better bonus of a given type works (see Combining Magical Effects).

yeah, circumstance bonus do stack if they come from different conditions

Wait so correct me if I'm wrong, but with the Avenger Vigilante's base ability, maxed out at lvl 20, your BAB will only ever be +20? That seems kinda underpowered. Yeah you get a really good chance to hit, but what about full attacks? You'll only ever be swinging once.

Wait so correct me if I'm wrong, but with the Avenger Vigilante's base ability, maxed out at lvl 20, your BAB will only ever be +20? That seems kinda underpowered. Yeah you get a really good chance to hit, but what about full attacks? You'll only ever be swinging once.

Every 5 BAB you get an Iterative attack.

Tristan Bloxham wrote:

Wait so correct me if I'm wrong, but with the Avenger Vigilante's base ability, maxed out at lvl 20, your BAB will only ever be +20? That seems kinda underpowered. Yeah you get a really good chance to hit, but what about full attacks? You'll only ever be swinging once.

Every 5 BAB you get an Iterative attack.

The real problem seems to be that the Avenger doesn't have any attack/damage boosters. They need something like favored enemy or weapon training, because right now they would be the lowest damage full bab class in the game (unless I am mistaken).

Wait so correct me if I'm wrong, but with the Avenger Vigilante's base ability, maxed out at lvl 20, your BAB will only ever be +20? That seems kinda underpowered. Yeah you get a really good chance to hit, but what about full attacks? You'll only ever be swinging once.

Base Attack Bonus (BAB): Each creature has a base attack bonus and it represents its skill in combat. As a character gains levels or Hit Dice, his base attack bonus improves. When a creature's base attack bonus reaches +6, +11, or +16, he receives an additional attack in combat when he takes a full-attack action (which is one type of full-round action—see Combat).

[Link]

PIXIE DUST wrote:

Tristan Bloxham wrote:

Wait so correct me if I'm wrong, but with the Avenger Vigilante's base ability, maxed out at lvl 20, your BAB will only ever be +20? That seems kinda underpowered. Yeah you get a really good chance to hit, but what about full attacks? You'll only ever be swinging once.

Every 5 BAB you get an Iterative attack.

The real problem seems to be that the Avenger doesn't have any attack/damage boosters. They need something like favored enemy or weapon training, because right now they would be the lowest damage full bab class in the game (unless I am mistaken).

Brawlers aren't great. No built in accuracy and damage die increases are worth much less than static increases.

It's like this guy is a well known member of the community that delves into the background mechanics of the game, designs his own freelance products, is an intelligent designer and also writes an awesome blog. Weird huh?

Thanks for the shout-out to my blog!

PIXIE DUST wrote:

Tristan Bloxham wrote:

Wait so correct me if I'm wrong, but with the Avenger Vigilante's base ability, maxed out at lvl 20, your BAB will only ever be +20? That seems kinda underpowered. Yeah you get a really good chance to hit, but what about full attacks? You'll only ever be swinging once.

Every 5 BAB you get an Iterative attack.

The real problem seems to be that the Avenger doesn't have any attack/damage boosters. They need something like favored enemy or weapon training, because right now they would be the lowest damage full bab class in the game (unless I am mistaken).

Brawlers and unchained monks don't get any special abilities that grant them attack roll bonuses. Antipaladins and paladins don't gain bonuses outside of smite, which has a limited number of uses per day and doesn't help if you're not fighting opponents of the character's opposed alignment. Cavaliers also don't get bonuses on attack rolls unless they belong to a specific order (like the order of the cockatrice) that grants them one. Those bonuses are usually situation (i.e. be the only person threatening your opponent) or tied to the challenge class feature or some other limited uses per day ability.

So no, the vigilante not getting attack boosts is not unusual. Fighters, barbarian, bloodragers, and slayers are the only full BAB classes that can get those attack bonuses with any amount of assurance.

Brawlers and unchained monks don't get any special abilities that grant them attack roll bonuses. Antipaladins and paladins don't gain bonuses outside of smite, which has a limited number of uses per day and doesn't help if you're not fighting opponents of the character's opposed alignment. Cavaliers also don't get bonuses on attack rolls unless they belong to a specific order (like the order of the cockatrice) that grants them one. Those bonuses are usually situation (i.e. be the only person threatening your opponent) or tied to the challenge class feature or some other limited uses per day ability.

So no, the vigilante not getting attack boosts is not unusual. Fighters, barbarian, bloodragers, and slayers are the only full BAB classes that can get those attack bonuses with any amount of assurance.

Paladins and Rangers get spells that increase their BAB and monks and brawlers get extra attacks.

Round 2 is a great improvement Paizo. I'm still worried about the one level dip immunity to scrying problem though. Please scale it with vigilante level in a manner similar to nondetection caster level checks. Thank you! ...and keep on truckin'!

likes:
- Bruce Wayne can now defend his girlfriend on a date
- Avenger is one tough bastard to kill
- Quick change is great, and technically you don't even need it if you build a social identity that has a very high disguise check
- Many guises at 5th instead of 9th is awesome; if you ever fail your disguise check when using abilities in social id mode, you can have a "hiding" place much sooner than level 9 and get away with your unmasked situation...

question: is there a way to reset your social id or vigilante id if you get unmasked? i.e. get a new spider-man costume and tell everyone you're from the future or something? and socially, fake your own death and begin anew under a different name? etc.

Round 2 is a great improvement Paizo. I'm still worried about the one level dip immunity to scrying problem though. Please scale it with vigilante level in a manner similar to nondetection caster level checks. Thank you! ...and keep on truckin'!

No, please dont make it scale. Besides it doesn't make you immune to scrying. If you are in your social form, you can be scryed if they are seeking your social form. If you are in your vigilante form, you can be scryed if they are seeking your vigilante form. In addition, changing forms takes a minute and it must be done out of sight. So it isn't foolproof as it is.

Besides, I have no issue with players doing one level dips with this class in particular. If this class is being dipped for dual identities only, well then they better be careful on when they change between their forms.

Brawlers and unchained monks don't get any special abilities that grant them attack roll bonuses. Antipaladins and paladins don't gain bonuses outside of smite, which has a limited number of uses per day and doesn't help if you're not fighting opponents of the character's opposed alignment. Cavaliers also don't get bonuses on attack rolls unless they belong to a specific order (like the order of the cockatrice) that grants them one. Those bonuses are usually situation (i.e. be the only person threatening your opponent) or tied to the challenge class feature or some other limited uses per day ability.

So no, the vigilante not getting attack boosts is not unusual. Fighters, barbarian, bloodragers, and slayers are the only full BAB classes that can get those attack bonuses with any amount of assurance.

Cavaliers have an increased attack roll bonus when charging.

Purple Dragon Knight wrote:

Round 2 is a great improvement Paizo. I'm still worried about the one level dip immunity to scrying problem though. Please scale it with vigilante level in a manner similar to nondetection caster level checks. Thank you! ...and keep on truckin'!

No, please dont make it scale. Besides it doesn't make you immune to scrying. If you are in your social form, you can be scryed if they are seeking your social form. If you are in your vigilante form, you can be scryed if they are seeking your vigilante form. In addition, changing forms takes a minute and it must be done out of sight. So it isn't foolproof as it is.

Besides, I have no issue with players doing one level dips with this class in particular. If this class is being dipped for dual identities only, well then they better be careful on when they change between their forms.

many guises makes it foolproof at 5th

Grovestrider wrote:

Purple Dragon Knight wrote:

Round 2 is a great improvement Paizo. I'm still worried about the one level dip immunity to scrying problem though. Please scale it with vigilante level in a manner similar to nondetection caster level checks. Thank you! ...and keep on truckin'!

No, please dont make it scale. Besides it doesn't make you immune to scrying. If you are in your social form, you can be scryed if they are seeking your social form. If you are in your vigilante form, you can be scryed if they are seeking your vigilante form. In addition, changing forms takes a minute and it must be done out of sight. So it isn't foolproof as it is.

Besides, I have no issue with players doing one level dips with this class in particular. If this class is being dipped for dual identities only, well then they better be careful on when they change between their forms.

many guises makes it foolproof at 5th

Yes, but a 1-level dip wont be foolproof. And a 5-level dip is a much more potent investment.

A 5 level dip, will:
o cause High Casters to lose access to 9th level spells.
o cause Mid Casters to lose access to 6th level spells.

I think that the Divine Power ability could be simplified a lot if instead of outsider races, the vigilante was imbued with a domain, and different talents required different domains (or subdomains based upon their domain). That would leave them a lot more flexible and making adding new talents less of a nightmare. (As written, if you wanted to add a Div divine power, you'd need an entire set of all-new zealot talents to go with it.)

For example, say a powerful demon lord wants to sponsor a vigilante. He chooses one of his domains and that domain becomes the source of the vigilante's power. The vigilante adds that domain's domain spells (up to 6th level) to his list of domain spells known and gains that domain's domain powers. In the long run, that would likely save a LOT of wordage for the zealot class and would make the addition of new domain powers easier.

In addition, you could add the choice of allowing a vigilante to choose an animal or terrain domain instead of a cleric domain (as a druid), and if the vigilante chooses Animal, Plant, or an animal or terrain domain, they can use the hunter spell list (druid + ranger) instead of the inquisitor spell list to determine their spells known. That way you could have a guardian animal spirit or a spirit of nature or something as the source of your divine power. (CAPTAIN PLANET VIGILANTES!!!!) End it by saying that any animal domain counts as the Animal Domain for talent prerequisites and any terrain domain counts as the Plant Domain for terrain prerequisites.

In this manner, the vigilante still gets something unique and cool (Charisma-based spellcasting that is backed by a specific deity, plus getting to be the only 6th-level spellcaster that adds domain spells to her list of spells known), but its also something that's a lot easier to expand from a freelancer standpoint and also doesn't give an entirely new submechanic to one specialization.

I've really been trying to figure out how I'd address the Zealot. I think you've hit it on the nose. Elegant, versatile, and built on a foundation that everyone knows. I hope this gets a real good look.

o Give Avenger specialization access to the Stalwart and Improved Stalwart abilities. In addition regardless if you are including feats that allow minor mixing of the specializations, I feel that the avenger should have a talent like the following:

- Adaptive Talent: The avenger may choose a single talent from another specialization. The avenger may count his avenger level as his stalker level when meeting stalker talent prerequisites. The avenger may count 1/2 his avenger level as warlock or zealot levels when meeting their talent prerequisites. The Avenger still must meet all other perquisites when choosing the talent. This talent may be chosen multiple times.

o Give Stalker specialization the following talent:
- Adaptive Talent: The stalker may choose a single talent from another specialization. The stalker may count his stalker level as his avenger level when meeting stalker talent prerequisites. The stalker may count 1/2 his stalker level as warlock or zealot levels when meeting their talent prerequisites. The stalker still must meet all other perquisites when choosing the talent. This talent may be chosen multiple times.

o Give Warlock specialization the following talent:
- Adaptive Talent: The warlock may choose a single talent from another specialization. The warlock may count his warlock level as his zealot level when meeting zealot talent prerequisites. The warlock may count 1/2 his warlock level as avenger or stalker levels when meeting their talent prerequisites. The warlock still must meet all other perquisites when choosing the talent. This talent may be chosen multiple times.

o Give Zealot specialization the following talent:
- Adaptive Talent: The zealot may choose a single talent from another specialization. The zealot may count his zealot level as his warlock level when meeting warlock talent prerequisites. The zealot may count 1/2 his zealot level as avenger or stalker levels when meeting their talent prerequisites. The zealot still must meet all other perquisites when choosing the talent. This talent may be chosen multiple times.

Too complicated. Too prone to abuse. (It also requires your other change of making mystic bolt a base skill instead of a talent...don't need stalkers running around with ranged touch attacks.)

Maybe something like:
Adaptive Talent: You may select a talent from another specialization. You must meet all prerequisites and you count as a vigilante of four levels lower when qualifying for these talents.

Still mixed on the multiple times clause. I'm leaning no.

Another simple consideration...

Has it been thought about to swap social and vigilante levels? Have vigilante stuff on odd levels (meaning that a vigilante gets into their fighting form a level earlier) and then have the socials on even levels (meaning a two level dip to get social advantages.)

Level one vigilantes would be the guys who go bust people up early, but haven't bothered to build a convincing cover story yet. After a little success (reaching level 2) they decide they better do something before trouble starts coming to them.

(I'm still in favor of simply adding 1 vigilante talent at level 1 as a bonus. I think that would still do well in play balance for the class. Just not compatible with the other change. No double vigilante talents at level 1.)

Would it hurt for the class to add it's Cha mod to AC in hero mode or at least have a unarmored path that gets monk like AC bonuses.

Actually I think getting CHA to AC in your *Social* identity would be cooler.

Questions, Comments, and Concerns!

Favored Maneuver: You gain the feat, but what happens if you don't qualify for the feat? For example, if I don't have Combat Expertise, and choose Trip, am I able to use Improved Trip? Normally abilities like this carry language that stats whether or not they must qualify for the feat, or be able to use it without qualifying (see Fighter bonus feat vs Ranger bonus feat). This one lacks any such language.

Fist of the Avenger: Nitpick, but it specifies using a fist or gauntlet, what about using a kick, or elbow, or brass knuckles? (You know this is going to come up at some point)

Mad Rush: How does Close the Gap work in conjunction with this ability?

Hide in Plain Sight: Isn't this ability useless? You can already make stealth checks to hide as long as you have concealment. This ability only allows you to make stealth checks if you're within 10 ft. of dim light, so someone without this ability could just move the 10 ft. needed to hide.

At the same time, how does it work? For example, let's say I'm in a dimly light jail cell after being caught, or the GM had the BBEG capture us to prevent a TPK. The Jailer comes by and checks my cell, but because there's dim light within 10 ft. I can make stealth checks and he can't see me? It specifies I can't hide within my own shadow... but can I hide in an allies shadow? Does this let me hide in the shadow of a Wizard and then we can pretend to be a Summoner and Eidolon duo?

Huh... wonder why these thoughts never crossed my mind before.

Perfect Fall: -_- It's still better than what the monk/Unchained gets...

Rogue Talent: Curious... will Rogues/Ninja/Investigator/Slayers get 'Vigitlante Talent' letting them take Vigilante talents in place of their normal choices? I know the Rogue Talent list often gets pilfered for other classes, maybe they should start giving back?

Also, is this meant to be only selectable once? Vigilante Talents can be chosen only once unless specified otherwise, and doesn't carry such language.

Twisting Fear: This... actually became more powerful. Before, Stalker's got d6 for Hidden Strike and dealt half their Hidden Strike damage with Twisting Fear. Meaning a 10th level Stalker did ~9 points of damage with Twisting Fear. Now it uses the reduced damage die (d4) but deals all of the damage dice. So at 10th level, he deals 5d4 points of damage with Twisting Fear (~15 points of damage).

The Stalker could go for the Dazzling Display feat ASAP and be able to do some respectable AoE damage to trash mobs pretty early on. You're 7th level and got a horde of 1st level mooks between you and the BBEG? Dazzling Display every round and intimidate them into unconsciousness.

I'm just going to go ahead and fall this FusRoDa and be done with it.

Up Close and Personal: So if I attempt a check, I get the free attack? If I succeed on the check, it deals full damage, but if I fail, I deal reduced damage? Pretty nifty.

Elemental Battle Armor: Is it just me, or is this strictly better than the Pyrokineticists Kinetic Defense? If I recall, the Pyrokineticist's Kinetic Defense only applies against natural weapons or unarmed strikes, but scales in damage (a lot, to be honest), however it doesn't grant resistance to the energy type, or apply against manufactured melee weapons.

Mystic Bolt: Can I use Rapid Shot with this since it's a ranged weapon? If so, this sounds like a fun little ability. Also, it very much so reminds me of the generic 'ki attack' from the Dragon Ball franchise, like whenever they unleash an absurd number of energy attacks that deal very little damage. TWF, ITWF, GTWF, Rapid Shot, Hasted full attack attack with Mystic Bolts? Yes please.

Hmm... perhaps a Vigilante/Kineticist Gestalt would finally let someone play a DBZ-esque character for real...

Social Simulacrum: This kind of makes me want to see a more powerful talent that lets the Warlock make actual simulacrums, but only of himself, that are temporary, lasting for a number of round equal to half his Vigilante level, or something. Perhaps limited to a number of Simulacrums equal to his Intelligence modifier? Useable a number of times per day equal to 3+half his level. Would be a really cool ability to be able suddenly create a bunch of half-level copies of himself to fight off weaker enemies or attempt to overwhelm one really strong one.

Probably too powerful of an ability, to be certain, but it sounds like something that would be fun for a Homebrew game (and one that would definitely be banned in PFS).

Tattoo Chamber: This ability makes me want the Warlock to have the ability to activate spell-trigger items as a swift action. So he could do something like have a Wand of Fireball in his chamber, and then go into a full on Ki Barra– Mystic Bolt full attack, finishing it will a fireball.

Maybe make it so that he can only activate items at a certain rate equal to when a Sorcerer would be able to quicken the spell? So at 10th levle he could Swift action activate a wand of a first level spell, at 12th he could Swift action activate a wand of a 2nd level spell etc.

=============================

So I was going to do a bit for the Zealot, but I decided that the Zealot probably needs it's own post as I go more into the class itself instead of just it's talents.

Zealot Smite: Will this count as 'Smite Good' for the purpose of feats, items or class abilities that require Smite Good? I'm thinking, specifically, of the silver smite bracelet for the Zealot.

Zealot Specialization: I dunno this feels like it needs something... more? It doesn't really have anything to fall back on during a fight. Unlike other 6th level classes, it doesn't really have the class features to fall back when it runs out of spells, or to augment the effectiveness of it's spells. The Warlock, at least, can opt to have Mystic Bolt, or even Alchemist Bombs, so it can do something instead of casting a spell, but the Zealot doesn't really have that.

The problem with many of the 'Divine' classes, is you need the whole class for it to really work. Most divine classes have a lot of synergy that builds together, no one aspect of the class (except the Cleric) is what makes it truly powerful. Neither Judgement, nor bane, nor spellcasting makes the Inquisitor a good class individually, but put the three together and you've got some real good synergy going. Each part of the class acts as a force multiplier for each other, all adding up to something amazing. Same with the Paladin, or Druid, or Warpriest etc.

Zealot just doesn't have that. Arguably the worst casting of the 6th level casters, and with little in the way of real class abilities to back up his casting, he's just missing something. I'm not sure what he's missing, but he doesn't seem to really have his own 'niche'. He's just too much 'hodgepodge' of other divine classes.

Certainly the other three classes are much the same way, but each of them builds off each other, or has something to fall back on. All of the Avenger abilities build each other adding together to make a pretty decent martial. All of the Stalker abilities add together to make him the best ambush assassin in the game. While the spell casting for the Warlock is a total resource sink, he's still got things like Bombs, or Mystic Bolt that he can do when he's not casting to continue supporting the team; he's got a fall back.

The Zealot is just... lacking.

The biggest problem with the Zealot, I think, is that the Inquisitor just has that whole niche firmly locked down, so anything you do is going to compare him to the Inquisitor.

That said, a 'divine vigilante' springs to mind some sort of 'holy avenger' esque character. Or, like a Paladin/Rogue hybrid. Instead of Smite, he should have a 'Mark of Vengeance' or something, that allows him to mark a target, and gain various bonuses, similar to judgmenets, but not as powerful. Make his Mark of Vengeance a fall back, or amplifier, but let it be an 'all day' ability. Let him use Mark of Vengeance at will, but only on one target (gaining more targets as he levels). Like a divinely empowered combination of Studied Target and Challenge.

For example, he could have access to talents that grant him abilities against those Marked for Vengeance, but not against anyone else (unlike Judgement which lasts for an entire combat). Mark of Vengeance itself should add to his attack and damage (like a scaled down smite), but the talents come with additional bonuses. Like allowing him to deal half his damage as positive/negative energy, or adding special weapon abilities, or bypassing damage reduction, or adding debuffs.

I don't know, anything for certain, the Zealot just really feels like it needs something more to stand out as it's own specialization instead of knock-off!Inquisitor or knock-off!Paladin.

I think the Warlock/Zealot spell casting needs a little bit of an overhaul (as suggested by Alexander Augunas), but other than that, I think the Warlock has some neat stuff. Some things I'd like to see for the Warlock:

- A teleportation focused abilities. Now is the perfect time to build a Nightcrawler class.
- Polymorphing abilities, like the arcane counterpart to Wildshape.
- Instant, but short duration Simulacrums as suggested above.
- The ability to swift action activate spell trigger items would really add to the Warlock, I think.

I don't know what to do about the Zealot. Either way, I think the Stalker and Avenger are mostly fine, but the Warlock and the Zealot (especially) could perhaps use a 3rd round of testing.

Tattoo Chamber: This ability makes me want the Warlock to have the ability to activate spell-trigger items as a swift action. So he could do something like have a Wand of Fireball in his chamber, and then go into a full on Ki Barra– Mystic Bolt full attack, finishing it will a fireball.

Maybe make it so that he can only activate items at a certain rate equal to when a Sorcerer would be able to quicken the spell? So at 10th levle he could Swift action activate a wand of a first level spell, at 12th he could Swift action activate a wand of a 2nd level spell etc.

You could give them a talent that allows them to apply metamagic to Wands ADHOC by costing an extra amount of charges equal to the increased spell level.

so quicnkening a fireball wand in the chamber, would cost it 4 or 5 charges (I forget if quicken is 3 o 4 increase)

I've played games that allowed that, and 3rd party material that has classes that allow it.
it didn't really break anything since it still cost to have those. It does lead the ability to burn several thousand gold in a min trying to nuke things though.. so that might be messy at higher levels.. though you'd sbe burning feats on metamagic..
when your casting levels dont' really allow for a whole lot of metamagicing

for warlocks in general.
Making the mystic line semi equal to the potential of the casting talents might be good.

Maybe even making mystic line into two possible paths for folks.
The full attack path for those who want the vegeta or goku feel. Not sure what to add to that as levels go up, I guess damage buffs, slightly more than current, or if the combat feats let it keep up (I dunno yet) then not.

or a focused beam with debalities (idk maybe "hold the beam" on target for scaling damage and making the debaltiy dc's go up. I mentioned it more in a different thread, no clue how to balance it or whatever but it would be nice for those who dont' want to be "spam shotters" with mystic bolt) which basically lets you make Piccallo or Krillian instead. Take a lot from the Pool Strike magus arcanas, but not costing.

Would a metamagic rod be considered an activated item? If so, having a rod in your tatoo chamber to metamagic stuff could be cool. Leaves your hands free to continue your bolt assaults.

Bolt-bolt-bolt-bolt activate quicken rod...spell

With regards to the PFS chronicle sheet, does a tier 4-5 scenario still count towards the 5+ Scenario reward if you're a 5th level character at the time?

How is vengeance strike is supposed to work? It states that it is a standard action to study an opponent, but it never declares the type of action needed to actually make a vengeance strike after you've studied that opponent. Also, it doesn't state whether it applies only to a single attack or to all attacks made during the next turn (although the singular word 'strike' certainly implies the former).

With that said, vengeance strike would be an awesome mechanic if you got it at X level and it allowed you to study an opponent for 1 round, plus 1 additional round for every 5 levels attained thereafter (maximum 5 rounds). Currently, it feels like its scrunched up at the end of the class rather than having been allowed to progress naturally.

Heck, if vengeance strike was pulled down in level and spread out throughout the class, startling appearance, frightening appearance, and stunning appearance could be reworked so they were riders to vengeance strike.

Oh! Vengeance strike could be a 1st-level ability, with an extra round added to the duration at 5th level, 10th level, 15th level, and 20th level, sort of like favored enemy or studied target. That would TOTALLY give the vigilante that "opener burst" mechanic that is missing at low levels.*

* When I say, "missing at low levels," one of Jason's original design goals for the vigilante, as stated on Know Direction, was that it was supposed to be a class whose niche was being awesome on the first round of combat. Currently, none of the specializations start to realize that goal until level 5 when they receive startling appearance and all of the specializations could use a cool, combat-based ability at 1st level that sets them appart from other classes. Spreading out vengeance strike and making a new capstone would definitely help meet that goal. The new capstone could be something ridiculous like, "When you appear, enemies that fail their saving throw against stunning appearance need to make another save or fall unconscious instead." The idea that you're so scary that people pass out when they see you is pretty awesome. :D

For the purposes of the Chronicle sheet, I just want to make sure I'm understanding this correctly. For every 1 standard scenario ran with a vigilante or played as a vigilante, you can fill in two lines. So, if you do three tier 1-2 PFS scenarios, the GM fills in six lines. All before July 20th. Yes?

Purple Dragon Knight wrote:

Grovestrider wrote:

Purple Dragon Knight wrote:

Round 2 is a great improvement Paizo. I'm still worried about the one level dip immunity to scrying problem though. Please scale it with vigilante level in a manner similar to nondetection caster level checks. Thank you! ...and keep on truckin'!

No, please dont make it scale. Besides it doesn't make you immune to scrying. If you are in your social form, you can be scryed if they are seeking your social form. If you are in your vigilante form, you can be scryed if they are seeking your vigilante form. In addition, changing forms takes a minute and it must be done out of sight. So it isn't foolproof as it is.

Besides, I have no issue with players doing one level dips with this class in particular. If this class is being dipped for dual identities only, well then they better be careful on when they change between their forms.

many guises makes it foolproof at 5th

Yes, but a 1-level dip wont be foolproof. And a 5-level dip is a much more potent investment.

A 5 level dip, will:
o cause High Casters to lose access to 9th level spells.
o cause Mid Casters to lose access to 6th level spells.

m'kay....

I still think it's pretty nasty and I'm expecting this is the beginning of the rise of the martials... if everyone with a one dip in Vigilante can escape the scrutiny of high level wizards this means a pretty big change in the status quo at the society level.

I'm mostly worried that this will encourage lazy storytelling.

I haven't done an in-depth comparison with how much more powerful this is than Master Spy prc...

I really like Renown and Safe House, but whenever I think about them I can't help but feel they're too restricted by the community size, setup time, and focus on the term "community". When brainstorming for character concepts, I really enjoyed the thought of a Warlock whose social identity is an illusionist working in a varisian caravan, or a Stalker whose social identity is the captain of a well-known ship. How does renown work when the "community" is mobile? What happens when your ship docks at port or your caravan passes through a small town for supplies?

I really like Renown and Safe House, but whenever I think about them I can't help but feel they're too restricted by the community size, setup time, and focus on the term "community". When brainstorming for character concepts, I really enjoyed the thought of a Warlock whose social identity is an illusionist working in a varisian caravan, or a Stalker whose social identity is the captain of a well-known ship. How does renown work when the "community" is mobile? What happens when your ship docks at port or your caravan passes through a small town for supplies?

I think it behooves us to make sure you can use a mobile community, and right now nothing technically prevents it. If you do and a mobile community is smaller than what you would normally get for a limit, I would say you can upgrade to a larger set of people after a week of your ship or caravan being there (or just a few hours with Instant Recognition). Instant Recognition seems perfect here; the dread pirate who's so famous that just showing up in port has everyone quaking in their boots!

LuniasM wrote:

I really like Renown and Safe House, but whenever I think about them I can't help but feel they're too restricted by the community size, setup time, and focus on the term "community". When brainstorming for character concepts, I really enjoyed the thought of a Warlock whose social identity is an illusionist working in a varisian caravan, or a Stalker whose social identity is the captain of a well-known ship. How does renown work when the "community" is mobile? What happens when your ship docks at port or your caravan passes through a small town for supplies?

I think it behooves us to make sure you can use a mobile community, and right now nothing technically prevents it. If you do and a mobile community is smaller than what you would normally get for a limit, I would say you can upgrade to a larger set of people after a week of your ship or caravan being there (or just a few hours with Instant Recognition). Instant Recognition seems perfect here; the dread pirate who's so famous that just showing up in port has everyone quaking in their boots!

LuniasM's question does raise a question for me, which is: is there a balance-related reason why renown goes away? At the moment, the costs involved in generating renown (spending a week of game-time, say) seem high enough that for most campaigns, renown that doesn't expire will probably be self-limiting. The party and the GM are probably going to get impatient if one party member wants to hang out for a month in one place to build up his reputation, but at the same time this would let the party member enjoy renown in maybe two or three areas where she's been active without always having to spend a week telling the same old stories all over again.

If you rebuilt renown to be something more like a profession or craft check--like "with a week's time and a successful diplomacy or intimidate check, you gain renown in a new community of X size" and remove the "may maintain renown in only one or two communities at a time" bit--what happens?

Renown is what happens when designers give mechanical rules to role-playing elements. When role-play is defined by mechanics, you lose access to player immersion.

It's like saying no one knows who Superman is outside of Metropolis, despite the fact that everyone knows who Superman is.

Player: I want to spread my renown in this town, so we'll need to take a little bit of a rest.

GM: Okay, but if you do so, you'll lose renown in your home city.

Player: What? Why?

GM: Because that's what the rules say.

Player: So the people of Gotham are just going to forget that I'm the Goddamned Batman? That's stupid.

Never give mechanics to role-playing elements. It just doesn't work and you end up with weird, dumb stuff like the Vigilante class.

Never give mechanics to role-playing elements. It just doesn't work and you end up with weird, dumb stuff like the Vigilante class.

I think I may have to disagree with you on the basis of the core rulebook. Also other rulebooks for other tabletop games. And also many peoples' general dislike for 4th edition, but that's neither here nor there.

Not every GM is going to be able to make up balanced mechanics on the fly, and not every player is going to be good at roleplaying every character or aspect of a character. Written mechanics can bridge the gap between our skills, and the characters or scenes we aspire to create but cannot. The nice thing about tabletop RPGs is that if you don't like a set of mechanics you can toss them or rewrite them to fit the skills of you and your group.

Whether or not these particular mechanics achieve their intended design goal, and whether or not that design goal is an appropriate goal to work towards, are separate questions that the playtest is hopefully helping to answer.

Renown is what happens when designers give mechanical rules to role-playing elements. When role-play is defined by mechanics, you lose access to player immersion.

It's like saying no one knows who Superman is outside of Metropolis, despite the fact that everyone knows who Superman is.

Player: I want to spread my renown in this town, so we'll need to take a little bit of a rest.

GM: Okay, but if you do so, you'll lose renown in your home city.

Player: What? Why?

GM: Because that's what the rules say.

Player: So the people of Gotham are just going to forget that I'm the G~%%$$ned Batman? That's stupid.

Never give mechanics to role-playing elements. It just doesn't work and you end up with weird, dumb stuff like the Vigilante class.

"

Alternatively, never present Roleplaying elements as Rules, because RP should never be forced on players (which is a major reason why the Paladin gets hate).

Renown works much the same way Famous does for the Celebrity Bard, or the way Fame & Reputation work, at least on the very surface.

The big difference between Renown and Famous/Reputation is that Renown is/was a basic ability - Celebrity Bard and Fame/Infamy are optional rules that the DM can easily say "nope, not allowed" and still leave open a whole world of options to the player.

So much of the class is devoted to Renown, when Renown should be relegated to an Archetype at best, leaving much more design space wide open for more general mechanics.

Not every GM is going to be able to make up balanced mechanics on the fly, and not every player is going to be good at roleplaying every character or aspect of a character. Written mechanics can bridge the gap between our skills, and the characters or scenes we aspire to create but cannot. The nice thing about tabletop RPGs is that if you don't like a set of mechanics you can toss them or rewrite them to fit the skills of you and your group.

I'd second this in a heartbeat.

The major issue I've found is that people have a pretty poor understanding of what "roleplaying" is.

What your character DOES, that's not roleplaying; those are aspects that can be mechanically-defined and broken down into hard values.

Who your character IS - THAT is roleplaying. If your character is surly, if your character is a shrinking violet, if your character is scatter-brained... that's all you. A Character's personality should be primarily chosen by the player.

Personality can STILL be defined in game terms (mostly the Alignment rules), but even those terms are loose enough to allow for any personality to fall into those rules.

Some things are a gray area, as well - you as a player may be great at bluffing, even if your character has a poor Bluff score, and you can convince the DM (and thus NPCs) of things that just aren't true; on the other hand, you as a player may suck HARD at bluffing, yet your character is so fantastic at Bluffing that they can lie to God convincingly. Social skills have existed since 1st Ed in order to accommodate this very problem.

The problem with Renown is that, thematically, we know what it should be and what it's not.

A lv20 Vigilante has only enough Renown that a small city would know well of them, despite the fact that major superheroes (who realistically start at around lv20) are world-famous at those levels.

Renown just does not have the scope it should, which creates a lot of snarls with players and with logic as a whole.

It was also forced on players originally, and even in Round 2 Renown is required for so many Talents that you're effectively taxed a tremendous number of options. Not everyone WANTS a widely-renowned, high-society character as their Vigilante (instead they want to play Peter Parker) but they still feel like they're being punished for not playing the character that the devs want you to play, both in the Mechanical AND RP sense.

Player: So the people of Gotham are just going to forget that I'm the G~!*#!ned Batman? That's stupid.

People think he's died all the time when he leaves or almost dies. He is then remembered only by a few people and has to kick serious @$$ to remind people who's boss when he returns/recuperates.

Renown seems to be a mechanism that performs two roles:
1. Tracking the areas in which your exploits have earned you notoriety, respect, fear, etc. And,
2. Granting the Vigilante bonuses in those areas in which she's earned that notoriety/respect/etc.

The challenges I've got with renown are almost entirely in part 1, and I think that opinion seems to be shared across most of the population of forum-goers and playtesters who have expressed concern with it.

As an adventurer, one of the most fun things you can do is return to that myconid colony you saved from the drow ten levels ago and be welcomed there; return to the logging camp you saved from the green dragon and get the heroes welcome and a free breakfast; return to your home port a pirate legend and scare your old rivals with tales of your prowess. That sort of thing.

We can't really do that with renown as written. The problem isn't the extra bonuses the class gets, which do seem like they would be better-off as a general note in the broader skill section of Ultimate Intrigue. The problem--as I see it--is the explicitness, the rules-ness even (as you sort of pointed out), of gaining and losing renown in a community. If the Adamantine Abolitioner saves a village of halfling slaves and repatriates them to a Varisian port city, he loses his renown with that population as soon as he returns home to Absalom. Which is kind of silly.

That said, I don't have a problem with them defining the concept of renown, because that gives everyone a term we can use consistently to refer to this sort of thing. I don't mind this class having particular bonuses to it, either. And I don't think the framework is a bad one. I just think there are a lot of details that need to be worked out. A lot of details that I hope get changed between now and the ultimate release.

As an adventurer, one of the most fun things you can do is return to that myconid colony you saved from the drow ten levels ago and be welcomed there; return to the logging camp you saved from the green dragon and get the heroes welcome and a free breakfast; return to your home port a pirate legend and scare your old rivals with tales of your prowess. That sort of thing.

We can't really do that with renown as written.

Probably because that sort of thing applies to all classes. Renown is presumably meant to model something else. Being welcomed by people you helped in the past isn't a vigilante class ability, it's common sense.

Tels wrote:

Player: So the people of Gotham are just going to forget that I'm the G~!*#!ned Batman? That's stupid.

People think he's died all the time when he leaves or almost dies. He is then remembered only by a few people and has to kick serious @$$ to remind people who's boss when he returns/recuperates.

Has batman ever left for a week and suddenly every person in the city forgets about him and is no longer willing to aid him? Because that's what Renown does.

Renown takes the whole rolepaying option away from the Vigilante when it comes to accumulating favor. A Rogue, or Bard, or any other class can spend time talking with people, doing favors and increasing their 'public image' anywhere they go. Vigilante can't do this without using their Renown.

The whole Vigilante class gives mechanics to something that used to just be role-played out. If someone wanted to play Batman previously, they would just play Batman. There wasn't really any rules for having the Bruce Wayne alter ego, you just did it. It didn't need mechanics behind it.

Once you give mechanics to something like this, you take away options from the game that used to exist. Now, for all other purposes, a character cannot have two identities or personalities without playing a Vigilante because the rules say so.

Previous examples of roleplay/mechanics were kept very vague and intentionally up to the GM, which is how it's supposed to be. Even when there was a big thread about Charm Person and the ability to order someone around, and they FAQ'd it, they still left the answer deliberately vague.

Giving rules to roleplay mechanics is a bad idea. Guidelines, sure, those are good as it helps focus the roleplay. But actual rules? No. It almost always flops on it's face. Even ones that work still have crazy stuff associated with it, like the current social skills system. The only thing that can actually keep the current social skill rules in check, is the GM saying, "No."

Personally, I don't care whether or not the Vigilante becomes the most well designed and balanced class to ever exist. As long as it continues to give rules mechanics to roleplaying, I will never allow it to be played at a table; including when I run PFS (though I rarely do that).

Terminalmancer wrote:

As an adventurer, one of the most fun things you can do is return to that myconid colony you saved from the drow ten levels ago and be welcomed there; return to the logging camp you saved from the green dragon and get the heroes welcome and a free breakfast; return to your home port a pirate legend and scare your old rivals with tales of your prowess. That sort of thing.

We can't really do that with renown as written.

Probably because that sort of thing applies to all classes. Renown is presumably meant to model something else. Being welcomed by people you helped in the past isn't a vigilante class ability, it's common sense.

The playtest document seems pretty clear to me--there is a huge amount of overlap between renown and reputation--although one could argue that renown is artificial while the reputation stuff is "legitimate" somehow. But then, you don't get your renown benefits from the "legitimate reputation," which you'd think you would.

While he gains renown in an area using his social identity, he also spreads rumors and tales about his vigilante identity.

Renown seems to be a mechanism that performs two roles:

1. Tracking the areas in which your exploits have earned you notoriety, respect, fear, etc. And,
2. Granting the Vigilante bonuses in those areas in which she's earned that notoriety/respect/etc.

The challenges I've got with renown are almost entirely in part 1, and I think that opinion seems to be shared across most of the population of forum-goers and playtesters who have expressed concern with it.

As an adventurer, one of the most fun things you can do is return to that myconid colony you saved from the drow ten levels ago and be welcomed there; return to the logging camp you saved from the green dragon and get the heroes welcome and a free breakfast; return to your home port a pirate legend and scare your old rivals with tales of your prowess. That sort of thing.

We can't really do that with renown as written. The problem isn't the extra bonuses the class gets, which do seem like they would be better-off as a general note in the broader skill section of Ultimate Intrigue. The problem--as I see it--is the explicitness, the rules-ness even (as you sort of pointed out), of gaining and losing renown in a community. If the Adamantine Abolitioner saves a village of halfling slaves and repatriates them to a Varisian port city, he loses his renown with that population as soon as he returns home to Absalom. Which is kind of silly.

That said, I don't have a problem with them defining the concept of renown, because that gives everyone a term we can use consistently to refer to this sort of thing. I don't mind this class having particular bonuses to it, either. And I don't think the framework is a bad one. I just think there are a lot of details that need to be worked out. A lot of details that I hope get changed between now and the ultimate release.

I probably would hate the class less if Renown were some sort of optional system introduced in Ultimate Intrigue to track reputation gains and losses in various locations.

For example, a "Robin Hood" style Vigilante would gain massive bonuses with the poor and less fortunate, but the wealthy would become very displeased with him and "Robin Hood" would find himself very unwelcome in their areas, even if they aren't directly enemies.

It would also be able to help with the countless stories of 'wandering heros' that range all over locations, aiding people but no one knows who their name is. Like Zorro, for example. Zorro wasn't limited to just a single city, or village, or district; Zorro ranged all over California. His area of influence was huge, and people knew who he was and what he stood for no matter where he went.

Personally, I don't care whether or not the Vigilante becomes the most well designed and balanced class to ever exist. As long as it continues to give rules mechanics to roleplaying, I will never allow it to be played at a table; including when I run PFS (though I rarely do that).

Banning it from PFS tables seems like particularly bad form to me. Are you getting a little too worked up over a mechanic that many of us agree does need some work?

Just because one class has a particular mechanic doesn't mean that nobody else may ever attempt anything remotely similar to that ever again without using that exact same mechanic.

Tels wrote:

Personally, I don't care whether or not the Vigilante becomes the most well designed and balanced class to ever exist. As long as it continues to give rules mechanics to roleplaying, I will never allow it to be played at a table; including when I run PFS (though I rarely do that).

Banning it from PFS tables seems like particularly bad form to me. Are you getting a little too worked up over a mechanic that many of us agree does need some work?

Just because one class has a particular mechanic doesn't mean that nobody else may ever attempt anything remotely similar to that ever again without using that exact same mechanic.

I think you fail to underestimate how much I hate the fact they designed rules mechanics for having a separate identity and building your reputation in a town. The fact that a large part of the class is built around means I can't just ban that one aspect.

If it were certain options the class could take, that'd be one thing (such as Synthesis Summoner). However, all Vigilante classes will have a dual identity, and with the current limited options, all Vigilante will be using Renown.

That's not to say there aren't things I like about the Vigilante, because there are. I love the modular nature of the class, and going forward, I would like to see more of this come up in design. I liked the Warlock option for Mysitc Bolt and I would love to see the Warlock delve into it's own niche instead of knock-off!Wizard.

But the dual identity and Renown annoys the crap out of me to no end, these mechanics completely ruins the entire class for me. Even should they create an archetype that trades them away, I'm still probably going to ban the class entirely.

[Edit] Damn wandering finger...

I hate the fact this idea was even suggest; I hate it even more that it made it to print. I hate what this represents for the company. I hate that this will set a precedent for giving role-playing aspects mechanical rules. Next thing you know, they're going to come out with point base alignment system and each action is going to give you points increasing/subtracting your good/evil and chaos/law axis. Not only that they'll back it into a class that revolves around it.

I'm totally doomsaying in this part, but you have to see why I don't like it. I don't like the fact it's going to set a precedent that might usher in more mechanics like it. I don't want this game to devolve into a rules element for every aspect of play. It makes it boring and unchanging. If I wanted rules based roleplaying, I'd be in a VRPG right now*.

But I'm not. I'm here, on the forums, and I'm seeing something that I despise coming into fruition in the game. It drives me up the wall and rankles my nose get wind of it. I want to see this class fail, I want to see it crash and burn and be utterly reviled by the community so that Paizo NEVER attempts a something like dual identity and renown again. At the same time, doing so would stop Paizo from delving more more into modular game design, which irks me as well. I hate the fact that this whole entire class is so utterly experimental; so that if one part fails, it all fails.

The dual identity and Reknown is just bad game design and it's bad for the industry to go through with it.

*I'm not saying VRPGs are bad, I thoroughly enjoy them. But the role playing in said games is limited and can't really be changed or altered that much.

For the purposes of the Chronicle sheet, I just want to make sure I'm understanding this correctly. For every 1 standard scenario ran with a vigilante or played as a vigilante, you can fill in two lines. So, if you do three tier 1-2 PFS scenarios, the GM fills in six lines. All before July 20th. Yes?

Bump

kevin_video wrote:

For the purposes of the Chronicle sheet, I just want to make sure I'm understanding this correctly. For every 1 standard scenario ran with a vigilante or played as a vigilante, you can fill in two lines. So, if you do three tier 1-2 PFS scenarios, the GM fills in six lines. All before July 20th. Yes?

Bump

Yes the GM can have all 6 of the level 1+ lines filled if he judges tables with vigilante PCs for 3 scenarios until July 20th. For the later lines, the vigilante character the GM assigns the chronicle to needs to be in the right level range otherwise no lines gets filled.

After the 20th and until Aug 17, the GM/player would only fill out 1 level-appropriate line per scenario played.

kevin_video wrote:

kevin_video wrote:

For the purposes of the Chronicle sheet, I just want to make sure I'm understanding this correctly. For every 1 standard scenario ran with a vigilante or played as a vigilante, you can fill in two lines. So, if you do three tier 1-2 PFS scenarios, the GM fills in six lines. All before July 20th. Yes?

Bump

Yes the GM can have all 6 of the level 1+ lines filled if he judges tables with vigilante PCs for 3 scenarios until July 20th. For the later lines, the vigilante character the GM assigns the chronicle to needs to be in the right level range otherwise no lines gets filled.

After the 20th and until Aug 17, the GM/player would only fill out 1 level-appropriate line per scenario played.

Good. Just wanted to make sure we were doing it right. Doing a whole table of vigilantes, and we finished three tier 1-2 scenarios, a level 2 module, and then one 3-4 tier. So that's eight lines. The hard part will be the next three.

Another simple consideration...

Has it been thought about to swap social and vigilante levels? Have vigilante stuff on odd levels (meaning that a vigilante gets into their fighting form a level earlier) and then have the socials on even levels (meaning a two level dip to get social advantages.)

Level one vigilantes would be the guys who go bust people up early, but haven't bothered to build a convincing cover story yet. After a little success (reaching level 2) they decide they better do something before trouble starts coming to them.

(I'm still in favor of simply adding 1 vigilante talent at level 1 as a bonus. I think that would still do well in play balance for the class. Just not compatible with the other change. No double vigilante talents at level 1.)

I agree with this seeing how it they are basing it off of barman like so many ppl say, he not always Bruce Wayne and barman occasionally. Its actually the other way around he barman first and Bruce Wayne is his social comterpart he choice to make as is (minus his name of course)

Thrawn007 wrote:

Another simple consideration...

Has it been thought about to swap social and vigilante levels? Have vigilante stuff on odd levels (meaning that a vigilante gets into their fighting form a level earlier) and then have the socials on even levels (meaning a two level dip to get social advantages.)

Level one vigilantes would be the guys who go bust people up early, but haven't bothered to build a convincing cover story yet. After a little success (reaching level 2) they decide they better do something before trouble starts coming to them.

(I'm still in favor of simply adding 1 vigilante talent at level 1 as a bonus. I think that would still do well in play balance for the class. Just not compatible with the other change. No double vigilante talents at level 1.)

I agree with this seeing how it they are basing it off of barman like so many ppl say, he not always Bruce Wayne and barman occasionally. Its actually the other way around he barman first and Bruce Wayne is his social comterpart he choice to make as is (minus his name of course)

Give them the choice to make. They can gain social at odd, and vigilante at even, or they can gain vigilante at even, and social at odd. Once chosen, the choice is permanent.

Now you can play your Batman and your Peter Parker.