Codifying the investigator

I really enjoy the concept of this class. My issue becomes in how it goes at the table.

Every table I've played at has either the GM sighing over the million questions that get asked in attempt to gain a lead and keep it applicable to future encounters yet unknown. Or they don't allow them because of how much this can slow down a session.

That's not to say the general impact at the table when other players feel like your slowing things down or taking up too much of the time.

Basically in a game that's gone above and beyond in many ways to codify and create rules. Investigator sticks out like a sore thumb.

So how do you codify it? How do you change it to work smoothly in a party without the constant "GM may I?" Situation.

I think one issue is das being so tied to persue a lead. Why does the investigator need them to be subject of a lead to devise a stratagem? They are basically analyzing their opponent for an opening or weakness. Let it be that, maybe give them a to hit bonus or something else when they are subject of their lead.

Das and therefore the classes precision damage being tied to a once an attack per round option is fine. But that option needs to be more consistent then

Also making it a fortune effect makes little sense
Your observation and strategy is not divine guidance or luck.

I wish I could say I had great ideas on this. So instead I ask you all. How would you run, interpret, or change this class to smooth it out.

I've never had an issue iwth investigators on either side of the table. I just tell the GM, "I'm now pursuing a lead of X" or ask when we get into a fight, "is Y related to my investigation of X so I can Devise a Strratagem as a free action?" and get a yes or no answer, and we move on.

The main issue of the Investigator is how GM-dependent and campaign-dependent it is.

If the GM plays the investigation game, it can be quite rewarding. If the GM is nitpicky on your lead, it can become an endless frustration.

Similarly if the campaign is a lot about investigation and if it's fine allocating a lot of time to investigation then a lot of your feats (especially low level ones) may prove really useful and the whole class should work fine. On the other hand, if there's not much investigation in the campaign you will have to create an investigation when there's none and it can, again, feel frustrating.

I expect a lot of different experiences around the Investigator. One that is rather common is that it's not a combat beast.

The GM should respond to the players. If there is an investigator in the party and the GM doesn't lean into it he is a bad GM.

The GM should respond to the players. If there is an investigator in the party and the GM doesn't lean into it he is a bad GM.

It's more complicated than that. I've seen many GMs being nice with the Investigator player, allowing them to get free action DaS and Pursue a Lead bonus outside the precise scope of RAW. On the other hand, nitpicky GMs following RAW to the letter will in general punish the Investigator.

Per strict RAW:
You don't get free action DaS unless your lead is specifically a single creature. I've seen many GMs allowing the Investigator to pursue larger leads, like "a gang" or "the robbers", and allowing free action DaS when facing members of this group. Similarly, if you investigate the stolen artifact I've seen GMs allowing free action DaS against the robber.
You only get the Pursue a Lead bonus if you are investigating your lead. I've seen many GMs giving the bonus when we were adventuring to solve the lead, even if it was not strict investigation. For example, if you are trying to convince the guard to let you in, you are not "investigating your lead" but some GMs allow the +1 if, obviously, the ultimate goal is to solve the investigation.

Hilary's answer is rather enlightening: "is Y related to my investigation of X so I can Devise a Stratagem as a free action?"
Y being related to the investigation of X doesn't allow a free action DaS per RAW, you only get free action DaS against X. Similarly, asking the GM is pointless as you need to be aware that the creature is X to get free action DaS.

I personally have difficulties with Investigators as a GM as on one side I'm fully aware the class is rather weak and that if I play it too strictly my player will get a rather bad experience but I also dislike to get too far away from RAW, especially in a PFS environment where I'm supposed to be rather impartial.

The GM should respond to the players. If there is an investigator in the party and the GM doesn't lean into it he is a bad GM.

I greatly agree with this for homebrew campaigns. For APs, I'd suggest that the player do some of the 'heavy lifting' by coming up with some investigation-rich plot hooks during chargen, so that the GM has some things they can work with. "I'm going into Abomination Vaults because the Duke has hired me to find his kidnapped son Examplo. There was a ransom note left by Grognach an infamous criminal, but the son's betrothed Cinderpunzel disappeared at the same time, so the Duke's hired me not only to find the boy but also determine if this is a real kidnapping or the kids themselves trying to run away."

Or whatever. Your GM is already doing a lot of work preparing each session. If it's a homebrew campaign, a standard part of that work will be thinking about how to include story elements the players will like and the characters will be motivated to engage with. But for canned adventures, the GM may be plenty busy just setting up the standard scenes. So help them out if you can by making it easy on them to incorporate your character's personal goals, strengths, etc. Good GMs make good stories, but supportive players make good GMs better. :)

I greatly agree with this for homebrew campaigns. For APs, I'd suggest that the player do some of the 'heavy lifting' by coming up with some investigation-rich plot hooks the GM can use when they generate their character. "I'm going into Abomination Vaults because the Duke has hired me to find his kidnapped son Examplo. There was a ransom note left by Grognach an infamous criminal, but the son's betrothed Cinderpunzel disappeared at the same time, so the Duke's hired me not only to find the boy but also determine if this is a real kidnapping or the kids themselves trying to run away."

I have the feeling you should read the Investigator more in detail. Because making up stuff won't help you at all. The main issue of the Investigator is to get the day to day bonuses, not the big end of plot ones.

As a side note, big end of plot leads are a trap. If, from your example, you follow the lead of Examplo and Grognach, then you'll be an Investigator during roughly 2 fights in the entire campaign and a featureless martial during the rest of it (not completely featureless, but with a significant lack of abilities). The main issue for the Investigator is to get a lead on the next fight, not on the last fight.

I have the feeling you should read the Investigator more in detail. Because making up stuff won't help you at all. The main issue of the Investigator is to get the day to day bonuses, not the big end of plot ones (that are a trap, unless your GM plays the class very nicely).

I've read it. It's still much easier for the GM to plant a relevant lead on this room's bad if you offer them suggestions on what sort of things could count as leads. If your GM is not willing to change encounters even one smidge, yeah, you're right. But then see Gortle's post for that situation.

I've read it. It's still much easier for the GM to plant a relevant lead on this room's bad if you offer them suggestions on what sort of things could count as leads. If your GM is not willing to change encounters even one smidge, yeah, you're right. But then see Gortle's post for that situation.

We posted back to back. I was editing my previous message, as your example is the perfect trap for an Investigator player:

"As a side note, big end of plot leads are a trap. If, from your example, you follow the lead of Examplo and Grognach, then you'll be an Investigator during roughly 2 fights in the entire campaign and a featureless martial during the rest of it (not completely featureless, but with a significant lack of abilities). The main issue for the Investigator is to get a lead on the next fight, not on the last fight."

I don't hold much truck with the bad GM commentary.

Because if you want to try to get your free action das as much as possible it goes kinda like this

I'm making that noise I heard a lead

That smell I sniffed a lead

That barbarian seems angry I'm going to make him a lead

Or it goes as was said. I get to be a featureless martial most of the time.

I don't think its going to happen, but I would really like the investigator to get a rework in Player Core 2.

The investigator pretty much shares the same chassis as the rogue. Both have skill increases every level, skill feats at every level, and a pseudo-sneak attack, though unlike a rogue the skill increases and skill feats are limited to Intelligence-, Wisdom-, or Charisma-based skills, and their pseudo-Sneak Attack forces them to attack once per turn, or not even that if they roll low in their Devise a Stratagem check. The only thing an investigator does arguably better than a rogue is being more "accurate" with their skills due to Pursue a Lead, but taking into account circumstance bonuses are not that uncommon in the system I feel the highs hardly outwight the lows. I guess pre-Remaster investigators had access to martial weapons, though rogues also have access to them now.

First, I think Pursue a Lead needs serious changes. It IMO should work like a ranger's Hunt Prey, requiring only an action and don't having a frenquency attached to it, allowing an investigator to change his lead as many times as they want. If Pursue a Lead happened to be a 100% out of combat feature I wouldn't have a problem with it, but since it affects your action economy with Devise a Stratagem I think its restrictions hamper how the whole class feels and plays. Which leads me...

Second, Devise a Stratagem should be a free action, always, and it should work like the thaumaturge's tome intensify vulnerability works. Rolling your DaS only to be forced to use a roll of 4 is one of the worst feelings in the system and needs to change. The thaumaturge's version allows you to roll a dice and use it if you want which is a much better implementation of something that is supposedly planning ahead rather than being forced into a situation. Free action DaS would also allow investigators to have more actions to use in skill actions, which I feel is the intention of the class since you have a boost to all skill checks due to Pursue a Lead. I don't think both of this buffs should be applied to DaS necesarily, but at least one of them should IMO.

Third, Strategic Strike should deal more damage. If you play a mastermind rogue and take Investigator Dedication and Analyze Weakness you'll effetively be playing an investigator that deals twice as much sneak attack damage and that in the process leaves the target off-guard (and is allowed to make a free RK check if you take Known Weakness). I don't know if damage should be doubled for Strategic Strike or not, or make it a baseline of d8 like with insight coffee, but even then I feel its not that much damage when taking into account a rogue can deal as much damage and multiple times per round.

Keen Recollection is a poor man's Esoteric Lore. This one is simple; make it scale somehow. Make it that at 7th level your bonus is equal to 2 + your level, then at 15th level increase it to 4 + your level. This would make it similar to something like Loremaster Lore or Bardic Lore.

Methodologies need to be revised. They feel...inconsequential? Interrogation feels like not having a subclass at all, Forensic Medicine is nice I guess but with skill feats alone you are a fantastic healer so its not that useful honestly, Empiricism is nice too but way worse than Alchemical Sciencies which is kinda a must have if you want to have free insight coffees to deal some decent damage. Either make all methodologies to be on par with Alchemical Sciencies or (if you buff the investigator's baseline damage) put all of them on par with each other.

My girlfriend ran an Investigator in our Abomination Vaults game. We eventually grew tired of determining if her lead was relevant or not and just had the buff on all the time. It didn't change much and was much less relevant than the extreme amounts of precision immunity in that dungeon.

I find that it is very difficult by RAW to get the free action Devise against any enemies. For the reasons SuperBidi mentioned.

But that isn't the biggest problem that I have. My biggest problem is actually with 'That's Odd'. Constantly having to remind the GM that I have that is annoying. Basically I have to mention that the ability exists every time the party enters a new location. And since the result is usually, "there is nothing Odd here", it becomes very forgettable for even me.

My girlfriend ran an Investigator in our Abomination Vaults game. We eventually grew tired of determining if her lead was relevant or not and just had the buff on all the time. It didn't change much and was much less relevant than the extreme amounts of precision immunity in that dungeon.

What was your experience with permanent free action das?