Mark Seifter wrote:
Even though it did not really come into play, the fewer HPs gave the impression of being weaker. The saving throw differences did not come up at this particular table. The Fighter's Armor and Weapon Training abilities also might give a bit of an edge over the Avenger. OTOH, though, many of the Avenger's Talents are Feats with a little something extra so the two classes may be closer competitively than first appearances would indicate. Will
I playtested a level 1 Human Avenger Vigilante at a PFS Game Day last Saturday. Most of the notes I made are PFS-specific and so I will not discuss them here. The biggest question that was not PFS-specific was how many of the Vigilante's abilities are shared between identities. Page 3 states that "Many of the class features of the vigilante are usable only when the vigilante is in one of his two identities, as noted in the ability." This, however, does not cover Feats, Skills, or Traits. The GM at the table and I agreed that these were shared, but Feats went inactive if the prerequisites were not met. For example, the level 1 Avenger Vigilante has the Assault Training ability which gives +1 BAB/ Vigilante level. My PC took Power Attack and Furious Focus for his two Feats. If he was not in his Vigilante identity, he would not receive the benefits of Assault Training and thus could not use either Feat. Were we correct in this? In play itself, as expected, the Avenger Vigilante was a weaker Fighter. The loss of 1 HP was negligible as the one encounter that took him to negatives would have taken him down regardless. Attacks went the same as they would have for a 1st-level Fighter. The additional skills, particularly the Charisma-based ones, are a welcome sight. I did have the brief opportunity to use his Social identity to go into town and do party business without tying the activity back to the party. I suspect that he will do a number of investigative tasks in his Social identity in the future. I look forward to playing him some more and leveling him up during the playtest period. Thanks, Will
I had assumed that they were until I got the latest beta from PCGen, which they explicitly removed them from PCs for PFS. I looked at the Additional Resources and it does not indicate anything about this, which usually means that they are not PFS-Legal. Is there another place that I can look to nail this down one way or the other? Thanks, Will
thistledown wrote:
Exactly. Thanks, Will
Brett Carlos wrote: On assigning a higher level chronicle played with a pregen to a low level character: simply replace earned gold with a generic amount that's level appropriate for character. Say 500 gp for a 1st, 1200 for a 3rd, etc. GM could sign off on gold amount on chronicle. That also makes sense and eliminates the need for using the last Chronicle played. This idea is shaping up. Will
John Compton wrote:
First of all, thank you for responding. Second, I need to think about this a bit more before having a proper proposal. Upon reflection, I agree with you that addressing the issue with pregens only lessens the duration of inconvenience/"suckage". I can understand the lack of value, both personal and business, of expanding the range. Any solution, therefore, has to be more holistic in nature, of value to players, developers, and Paizo. It may be that a shorter duration is the only way of improving this situation. Given that it is not that much of a value add, the campaign may not be able to go down that path. Resources are indeed a fixed commodity and such a proposal would to need to work within these parameters. I acknowledge that my suggestion needs some more work. Please allow me to think on it some more and get back with you. Thanks again, Will EDIT: Just read BNW's idea as he posted while I was posting this. The idea of an immediate use option is intriguing to me. It is no more jarring than applying the Chronicle to a 1st level for 500 gp with regard to character progression. There would be no need to modify the existing pregen structure to implement it, thus freeing the resources you mentioned for other things. A flaw I see with this is when the player does not have the Chronicles for the PC available for the GM to check so that the GP/XP/PP ends up correct. Maybe this is a third option? Option 1) The player wants to apply the Chronicle to a PC and has that PC at the table. The GM can, as BNW suggests, look at the last Chronicle for the PC and, if the PC is of lower level than the pregen, use the last GP amount awarded. XP and PP stay the same. Option 2) The player wants to apply the Chronicle to a PC, but does not have it at the table. Current rules then apply. The suckage remains, but then again, Option 1 would reward a player who plans ahead. Option 3) The player wants to apply the Chronicle to a new PC. Current rules apply. I still want to think about this more, but the idea is interesting.
CRobledo wrote:
Truth be told, re: it being an unlikely change, you are probably right. :) Still, it is good every so often to tilt at windmills. Will
CRobledo wrote:
One minute for a GM to do the math using paper and pencil, less if you have a calculator (which IIRC every smartphone/tablet has). CRobledo wrote:
That encounter, IMO, is a bad design. Using your example, a party of 6 level 3 characters would have a hard time with that CR 7. Better to design the encounter with the lowest common denominator in mind. Will that mean more of a cakewalk for that level 4 party? Sure, but how is that really a problem? CRobledo wrote:
Ah, so you believe that, because you suffered that inconvenience, everyone else should as well? OP should never be about paying dues, but about improving player experience. Where the campaign can make a situation better, it IMO is duty-bound to do so. After all, if it isn't fun, why do it? From the company's perspective, it is just good customer service. As a customer and consumer of this product, I have made a recommendation for improvement. I respect you, Carlos, as you should be well aware at this point. On this, however, I disagree with you. Will
CRobledo wrote:
1) Out-of-tier gold is not shabby and, if a GM can't do a simple average for seasons 0-4, well, that's another problem. Sorry, I have no sympathy for this point. 2) You are making the assumption that every table should play as high as possible. My position is that there should be a pregen available to make a table at the lowest level for each tier. If we are running with tiers 1-5, 3-7, 5-9, and 7-11, it seems to me that pregens should be at the lowest level for each of these tiers. Besides, aren't we supposed to be getting away from always going for the higher tiers? 3) Waiting three levels before applying a Chronicle to a PC simply sucks. Applying it to a 1st level only sucks slightly less. Will
John Compton wrote:
If and when you get a chance to reexamine pregens, can you consider getting rid of the level 4 pregens in favor of a level 3 and a level 5? Given how the tiers break down now, it would make more sense to have 1, 3, 5, and 7 rather than 1, 4, and 7. Thanks, Will
I have an Alchemist that has Blood Transcription in his formulae book. This spell is now banned in the recent Additional Resources document. Do I just remove the spell from the formulae book or do I get to swap that spell for another one of the same level? Reading the PFS Guide did not make this clear to me. Thanks, Will
CRobledo wrote:
Thanks. Will
Hello, I started out my Alchemist with no archetype and was thinking about adding the Grenadier archetype from the Field Guide. I have some questions regarding retraining. For clarity, I only need these questions answered for PFS: 1) Do I have to do all of the archetype feature retraining on one Chronicle or can I spread it out over several Chronicles? 2) W.r.t. the Brew Poison > Martial Weapon Proficiency retraining, I assume that, for PFS, this is a Extra Bombs > Martial Weapon Proficiency retraining, right? 2) W.r.t the Poison Use > Precise Bombs retraining, if I picked up Precise Bombs at 2nd level, do I have to retrain the discovery at the same time I retrain the Poison Use class feature? Thanks, Will
|