Oh, wow that link to a summary of the APs was EXACTLY what I was looking for Thanks!

Yes. They do suck.

I started writing out a big long suggestion that tried to get studied strike usable while weaker than sneak attack and then realized that it would still suck. I love the concept of the rogue, I even occasionally play a rogue (well Ninja) but for the love of all that is system balance don't start with a baseline assumption of "Rogue-equivalent or worse at combat." That is a losing proposition.

While I have seen a number of Rogues played all of them have around 11th+ (at the latest) required some serious optimizing to keep themselves relevant at all in combat. That is not a happy place to be. Now while I understand that you want to balance the addition of extracts with reduced combat power,that really isn't needed.

Instead balance the addition of Inspiration to the Vivisectionist. when not played as a natural attack monster the Viv. seems to be an excellent class when I have played it/seen it played. The sneak attack can keep you relevant in combat in many situations. rarely the star player, but usually relevant as long as the conditions are met. And extracts can be used when those conditions are not met to still be useful. It did not excel at combat or magic but was competent in both as a happy medium, the investigator should be in a similar happy place, not trading an interesting useful mechanic for combat uselessness.

you know what, screw balance issues: those are almost impossible to fix and can occur to an amazing degree even within one class due to the system mastery of the players involved. This class makes magic more fun and less frustrating, that seems to be good for the game.

I feel that the only people who will stop playing Monks are the people who didn't want half of the monk class anyway but it was the only decent way to make an unarmed warrior.

My first impression was "Holy crap this is OP!" then I started comparing it to classes that were not the rogue class... I really do think that this class will almost completely replace the rogue for anybody who cares about system mastery. Its' very existence makes rogue a 'Trap option.' That being said I think it is time I gave up on the rogue being a valuable party member and jumped on this Investigator thing.

Things I love: The panache system, these deeds are great, exactly the sort of thing I was hoping for with this class.

Things I dislike:
(1) Limited weapon selection. Requiring piercing one handed makes little to no sense. Look at any of the various robin hood movies to see somebody finessing a longsword, this doesn't really feel like a necessary balance issue here, Piercing weapons are not usually inherently weaker than slashing or bludgeoning, so this is a flavor thing that ends up causing problems cut it.

(2) dervish danceing. I know that this class isn't really the problem, the real problem is that there is only 1 non-mythic way to get the ability to do dex to damage before you can afford a +2 weapon. But when you combine the aforementioned weapon restrictions with the benefits of dervish dancing it produces a clear advantage for scimitar based builds.

Things that drive me crazy: FOR THE LOVE OF GOD IF YOU ARE GOING TO MAKE A DEX FOCUSED CLASS AND GIVE IT WEAPON FINESSE GIVE IT AT LEVEL 1! right now you have at least one level of completely sucking before you can actually play the class as it sees it was meant to be played.

This spell preparation mechanic is everything I wanted from Wizard but never got. I personally don't particularly like vancian magic, and have frequently found myself really frustrated with true prepared casters for this very reason. This feels very much like a step forward, enough prep that you can have some of the choice of situational spells like a wizard, but not be completely useless if you guess wrong.

The Blood Focus mechanic feels weird and clunky, trying too hard to be a blend of Wizard and Sorcerer when it should be trying to be its' own thing. Also feels very bland. Overall I think that this class will appeal to players who like the idea of wizards, but hate seeing their prep work end up screwing them. All in all this looks like a lot of fun to play, and not uber-powerful or anything. I mean sure, I will always choose this over wizard, but that is more because I find pure prepared spellcasting to be very limiting and not to my preferred playstyle, I think that the three classes are still distinct (I know that there will still be some characters that I want to be sorcerers, and others that I would want to play as arcanists).

Play an effective high level character who doesn't light up like a chirstmas tree under detect magic.

For various reasons my plans to play an EK in our next game have fallen through, and I'm looking to build a dex-based fighter. I'm going to go with a Dervish dance build, and the weapon master archetype, build so far looks like:

Human Fighter (Weapon Master) 2
STR: 10
DEX: 20 (18+2)
CON: 12
INT: 13
WIS: 10
CHA: 8

Feats:
1: Weapon Finesse
1: Dodge
1: Weapon Focus
2: Dervish Dance

This should give me an AC of 19 (in studded leather)
and an attack of +9, 1d6+5, 18-20x2

My plans for future levels is:
3: Piranha Strike
4: Weapon Specialization
5: Iron Will
6: ?
7: Toughness
8: Greater Weapon Focus
9: Additional Traits
10: ?
11: ?
12: Greater Weapon Specialization
13: Penetrating Strike
14: ?

I'm not sure it will go much past this but if so I can probably manage, maybe pick up mobility with one of my remaining feats and go into duelist.

The one thing I'm not sure about is the order of Piranha strike and weapon focus, I;m thinking that at low levels (the 2 we are starting at the +1 will be more useful than a -1/+2. Any comments would be appreciated.

Cheapy wrote:

Quote:

A character is balanced when thinking about it creates a big expectation of fun.

That sounds like he's just applying the word "balance" to what he wants it to mean, rather than trying to figure out what it is. That doesn't even make sense.

There is no definition of "balance" which makes sense.

The closest we can get is that everyone gets an equal chance to shine. But, everyone's need to shine is different. Some people like to play the supporting role (maybe they had a rough day at work and don't want to put much effort into their character tonight).

PLAYERS sre almost always what gives a character the ability to shine. Most of the favorite moments in my gaming group have very little to do with rules at all, but are clever/awesome things that players think of that are a bit outside the box.

Really, if you let a character take a crafting feat then let them use it! otherwise that is a wasted feat (usually on a casting build that doesn't have too many spares). I've never been in a game that didn't allow crafters to make an item at 1/2 market price. It usually works out fine, one character usually picks up several of the feats and then uses downtime / ring of Sustenance and those extra 6 hours a night, to get a fair amount of crafting done. Usually they look to their own needs first, then offer their services to the rest of the party, sometimes at cost, sometimes at 2/3 or even 3/4 market value. There is nothing wrong with this. A character has gained power (wealth) at the cost of a feat, seems reasonable.

Meh, still not as bad as some spells in other systems. Take Exalted's Impenetrable Frost Barrier. When you read the text you realize that it is not Impenetrable, does not involve frost, and is not actually a barrier.

I'd say cost it as if it were a slotless magic item; you're effectively removing the necessity of wielding it seperately, which is a large advantage. And THEN apply the cost increase for adding additional abilities to an existing magic item.

It should not be cheap.

I think just the normal cost increase for 2 different abilities would be fine, it is already substantail.