I don't think i'll make it through to the next round but, like many other people on the forum i've started work on a couple of archetypes just in case. As i was completing one it occured to me that it was a bit of a meat-and-potatoes archetype - kind of necessary and obvious for the class.
So i was wondering, which archetypes in the APG would people consider Superstar and which ones are there because - they kind of had to be?
Do you mean out of the ones currently in the APG?
Do you mean out of the ones currently in the APG?
Yes
I think the most Superstar ones I've seen are the three fighter archtypes from the Inner Sea Primer. Here are some thoughts about what is in the APG. It's rather late so I may not make the most sense.
Barbarian Brutal pugilist is probably my favorite of these. The rest just seem to enhance a specific aspect of the barbarian.
Bard Arcane duelist really brings a lot to the bard class helping make it a lot more viable as a fighter while still keeping that magical edge. It's something that was needed, but done very well.
Druid I find the druid archtypes to be very boring, except for the blight druid. That is the only archtype that does anything different. The rest just fill a terrain/animal niche.
Fighter Most of these are of course weapon niches but Savage Warrior sticks out to me as being rather interesting with what it adds to an unarmed/natural fighter.
Monk Zen Archer is easily one of the best archtypes in the book. It alters the class massively while keeping the feel of a monk. This one proves you can really shake the foundation of a class and still keep it's feel.
Paladin I quite like the Warrior of the Holy Light, it brings a unique feel to the paladin class. A paladin who actually acts like they are infused by their deity's holy power.
Ranger The infiltrator and shapeshifter archtypes are similar, but offer a special flavor to the ranger class that I think make them special.
Rogue While the rogue archtypes are all rather simplistic I do fancy the cutpurse. This one really brings some great feeling abilities to the class.
Eh... I feel that if I overshoot and make it TOO different, it would be more of a new class or prestige class.
The tricky thing, as far as thinking with the contest in mind is concerned, is that most of the APG archetypes that I think are really superstar (zen archer, arcane duelist, sandman, etc.) are also long, and by long I mean "longer than 450 words."
Oh, no... Not again!
Let's nip this right in the bud. We are not turning this into a "450 words or ___________ (insert your own rules/judges' comment) is not fair" and these are the reasons why!
I know "we" wouldn't, but just as a warning to those who might want to jump on that band-wagon.
Peace.
For what it's worth, I think 450 words is completely fair -- making a really great archetype in 450 words is hard, but I think that's also the point. 16 competitors need to be cut in that round, so the heat gets turned up and difficult design decisions are forced. Do you create a very solid archetype that fits cleanly in 450 words, or do you shoot for something spectacular, maybe only to fail because too much of your vision is lost to fit?
(Or do you somehow come up with a way of making something as cool as the Sandman within 450 words and clear the other competitors for a round easily?)
You could also make something really awesome with just a couple abilities, like the cutpurse.
You could also make something really awesome with just a couple abilities, like the cutpurse.
Honestly, I think if Cutpurse were a RPGSS entry it would get seriously beat up during judging/voting for seemingly botching or misunderstanding the rules. (Stab and Grab is a full-round action that "normally" can only be used in a surprise round... and you don't get a full-round action in a surprise round.)
Depending on the competition it might still squeak into the top 8 on flavor, though.
|
You could also make something really awesome with just a couple abilities, like the cutpurse.Honestly, I think if Cutpurse were a RPGSS entry it would get seriously beat up during judging/voting for seemingly botching or misunderstanding the rules. (Stab and Grab is a full-round action that "normally" can only be used in a surprise round... and you don't get a full-round action in a surprise round.)
Depending on the competition it might still squeak into the top 8 on flavor, though.
Well, isn't that the point of the archtype? To allow a class to do something better than the normal player? Yes, it's "normally" only allowed during a surprise round, but the Cutpurse can do it anytime during combat.
I think if I saw the Cutpurse in the RPGSS I'd be impressed that they created something unique for the Rogue under the 450 word count.
Well, isn't that the point of the archtype? To allow a class to do something better than the normal player? Yes, it's "normally" only allowed during a surprise round, but the Cutpurse can do it anytime during combat.
I think if I saw the Cutpurse in the RPGSS I'd be impressed that they created something unique for the Rogue under the 450 word count.
The problem isn't the ability -- it is the fact they got the terminology incorrect. The ability is sound -- but in order for it to be used on a surprise round it has to be either a standard or a move action. As a full round action that can only be used on a surprise round you can never perform the ability because it doesn't give you the ability to perform a full round action on a surprise round.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
(Stab and Grab is a full-round action that "normally" can only be used in a surprise round... and you don't get a full-round action in a surprise round.)
(You can with the "Lookout" Teamwork Feat.)
Well, isn't that the point of the archtype? To allow a class to do something better than the normal player? Yes, it's "normally" only allowed during a surprise round, but the Cutpurse can do it anytime during combat.
I think you're misunderstanding me, or the cutpurse text; I'll try again.
Stab and Grab is a special full round action just for cutpurses.
Its text indicates that normally it can only be done during the surprise round to a target that hasn't acted yet but that it also could be done when sneak attack is valid. Ignore the second half of that for the moment.
You can't do a full round action in a surprise round. Thus, as written, the cutpurse cannot use this ability as it's seemingly meant to be used.
A sentence which added "Even though normally this is a full round action, a cutpurse can also perform it as a standard action in a surprise round." would allow what you're saying -- that text isn't there.
Overall it seems to indicate that a detail got missed or lost in editing, or the writer didn't really understand or think through the rules they were playing with. Any of those could be a big flaw in a Superstar entry.
|
|
Well, isn't that the point of the archtype? To allow a class to do something better than the normal player? Yes, it's "normally" only allowed during a surprise round, but the Cutpurse can do it anytime during combat.
I think you're misunderstanding me, or the cutpurse text; I'll try again.
Stab and Grab is a special full round action just for cutpurses.
Its text indicates that normally it can only be done during the surprise round to a target that hasn't acted yet but that it also could be done when sneak attack is valid. Ignore the second half of that for the moment.
You can't do a full round action in a surprise round. Thus, as written, the cutpurse cannot use this ability as it's seemingly meant to be used.
A sentence which added "Even though normally this is a full round action, a cutpurse can also perform it as a standard action in a surprise round." would allow what you're saying -- that text isn't there.
Overall it seems to indicate that a detail got missed or lost in editing, or the writer didn't really understand or think through the rules they were playing with. Any of those could be a big flaw in a Superstar entry.
Then I must be mis-interpreting the rules. The Surprise round is a "round". During that round you can take a standard or move action or a full-round action. It doesn't state the full-round action, but if you interpret the rules, you can take a full-round action during the surprise round, you just can't couple it with a standard or move action. Just like you could perform any of the Full-Round actions listed on page 187-188.
I'll try to end my inadvertant thread-jack after this:
The Surprise Round: If some but not all of the combatants are aware of their opponents, a surprise round happens before regular rounds begin. In initiative order (highest to lowest), combatants who started the battle aware of their opponents each take a standard or move action during the surprise round. You can also take free actions during the surprise round. If no one or everyone is surprised, no surprise round occurs.
So, RAW, no full-round actions in a surprise round.
Dire's right, the archtype is a bit flawed. The action should be standard or they should have stated an exception to the rule. However I brought up the archtype because it does a good job of showing how just two substitutions can add a lot of flavor and mojo to a class. More is not always better.
|
|
I'll try to end my inadvertant thread-jack after this:
So, RAW, no full-round actions in a surprise round.
The Surprise Round: If some but not all of the combatants are aware of their opponents, a surprise round happens before regular rounds begin. In initiative order (highest to lowest), combatants who started the battle aware of their opponents each take a standard or move action during the surprise round. You can also take free actions during the surprise round. If no one or everyone is surprised, no surprise round occurs.
And, as per the description listed here: http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/combat.html
under Full-Round Action: Some full-round actions can be taken as standard actions, but only in situations when you are limited to performing only a standard action during your round. The descriptions of specific actions detail which actions allow this option.
Which a surprise round restricts you to a standard action. And the description for the Stab and Grab says you can do it. So there is no need to re-iterate it in the ability description.
EDIT: And I don't see this as high jacking or taking this thread off topic. We are discussing the Archtypes. And we are studying the Archtypes in the AGP for our entries. If they are wrong, then we need to know so we dont make the same mistakes in our entries.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
,
Star Voter Season 6
|
Good catch Lachlan!
As to round 2. I don't envy y'all. This is likely to be the toughest round two ever. Compared to making a base class or a new monster or something like that, this is hard.
Look at the Sable Company Ranger, to see how the back and forth on an archtype can go.
under Full-Round Action: Some full-round actions can be taken as standard actions, but only in situations when you are limited to performing only a standard action during your round. The descriptions of specific actions detail which actions allow this option.
The way I see it is that, per the bit you're quoting above, full round actions that you can do as standard actions in some cases always detail how that works in their description.
For example, part of the Charge action description text on that same PRD page reads like this:
If you are able to take only a standard action on your turn, you can still charge, but you are only allowed to move up to your speed (instead of up to double your speed) and you cannot draw a weapon unless you possess the Quick Draw feat. You can't use this option unless you are restricted to taking only a standard action on your turn.
It says that you can do that specific action as a standard, and details how that works and how it differs from the norm.
Stab and Grab exists in a kind of limbo state. Clearly the designer was envisioning it being done in a surprise round, but the way they've described Stab and Grab really does not follow the established pattern for how you lay out the rules for a special full-round action that can sometimes be done as a standard. To me, it feels like the Cutpurse designer either just did not fully understand how a surprise round works, or omitted a bit of key text that would make how the ability is supposed to function unambiguous.
But, as you say, I think that archetype does do a great job of creating a lot of flavor in few words. Based on reading some of the voting rounds of previous contests, I could completely imagine something like the Cutpurse being posted, several of the judges posting "This has rules problems/inconsistencies/ambiguity, I do NOT recommend it advance." followed by the entry winning a spot in the next round anyway based on voting popularity and flavor.
EDIT: And I don't see this as high jacking or taking this thread off topic. We are discussing the Archtypes. And we are studying the Archtypes in the AGP for our entries. If they are wrong, then we need to know so we dont make the same mistakes in our entries.
Oh I know, I just wanted to reiterate my point so it wasn't totally glazed over because of the discussion about the mechanics.
Look at the Sable Company Ranger, to see how the back and forth on an archtype can go.
What do you mean? Like about it's abilities or was there some discussion over it?
Look at the Sable Company Ranger, to see how the back and forth on an archtype can go.What do you mean? Like about it's abilities or was there some discussion over it?
There's some discussion of it in the thread where it's posted from last week -- it's worth a read.
The highlights that I remember are:
- Discussion over whether it really should be an archetype and not a prestige class or feat, and
- Sable Company Marine loses favored terrain; the ranger class has several abilities which work only in the ranger's favored terrain, such as hide in plain sight. It's not clear whether the SCM should be considered to technically lose those abilities as well. One reason it matters is that you can stack archetypes on a character as long as your two archetypes don't replace the same abilities.
IMHestO,
I'd refrain from calling into question the "undestanding of the rules", as the book made it to print and obviously wnet through several edits and proof reads.
So, you're questioning everyone up and down the chain. Are we failing our Diplomacy checks, people?!
But, heck... not here to brown-nose. There's a grammatical error (or typo) in Ki Mystic Monk, but you didn't hear it from me!
;)
Love you guys... and you guys, too!
Peace.
Stab and Grab is worded correctly.
Stab and Grab (Ex): At 3rd level, as a full-round action, a cutpurse can make an attack and also make a Sleight of Hand check to steal something from the target of the attack. If the attack deals sneak attack damage, the rogue can use Sleight of Hand to take an item from the creature during combat; otherwise this ability can only be used in a surprise round before the target has acted. If the attack is successful, the target takes a –5 penalty on the Perception check to notice the theft. This ability replaces trap sense.
The bolded part is referring to using the sleight of hand skill.
...You cannot use this skill to take an object from another creature during combat if the creature is aware of your presence.
While a creature is flat footed in the the surprise round they are unaware and therefore you can use sleight of hand on them.
After that point in time if you want to take something from another creature you have to use Disarm or Steal. Which are combat manuevers, so you need a good CMB check to get past there CMD
What Stab and Grab allows you to do is when you sneak attack them do one attack, hurt them and then use slieght of hand DC 20 to take the item. Yes the creature gets the pereception check to notice it occur but if the rogue makes the DC 20 check even if his CMD is 50 the item is taken.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
,
Star Voter Season 6
|
Look at the Sable Company Ranger, to see how the back and forth on an archtype can go.What do you mean? Like about it's abilities or was there some discussion over it?
Yes :-)
There was some discussion/clarification in the blog post, as others have mentioned. That's why I said I don't envy the round 2 folks. I mean you're really breaking into uncharted territory. Here there be game design demons.
Also take this away from the Sable Company archtype. What makes perfect sense to your reading, might not to the public.
I just went and read through that. I always forget about Blog posts somehow, even though they are usually full of great information. Especially that one. I'm intrigued by the idea of removing a base ability ie. favored terrain and having it remove other abilities it is based on later on ie. hide in plain site. It's a little vague but that precedent clears some things up.
Stab and Grab is worded correctly.
Stab and Grab (Ex): At 3rd level, as a full-round action, a cutpurse can make an attack and also make a Sleight of Hand check to steal something from the target of the attack. If the attack deals sneak attack damage, the rogue can use Sleight of Hand to take an item from the creature during combat; otherwise this ability can only be used in a surprise round before the target has acted. If the attack is successful, the target takes a –5 penalty on the Perception check to notice the theft. This ability replaces trap sense.The bolded part is referring to using the sleight of hand skill.
But you're glossing over the "as a full-round action" part of that, which is the sticky part.
|
|
But you're glossing over the "as a full-round action" part of that, which is the sticky part.Stab and Grab is worded correctly.
Stab and Grab (Ex): At 3rd level, as a full-round action, a cutpurse can make an attack and also make a Sleight of Hand check to steal something from the target of the attack. If the attack deals sneak attack damage, the rogue can use Sleight of Hand to take an item from the creature during combat; otherwise this ability can only be used in a surprise round before the target has acted. If the attack is successful, the target takes a –5 penalty on the Perception check to notice the theft. This ability replaces trap sense.The bolded part is referring to using the sleight of hand skill.
Well the part I think you are glossing over is where an ability or power can override the rules. This ability says "or it can only be used in a surprise round". Since this power came out -after- the core rules, it is superseding that rule. I'm sure it could have been worded a little differently. But, as it's description stands, it's legal and clear. Just as there are some Full-Round actions in the core book that can be used in the Surprise Round, so can this one because it's ability says it can.
I'd refrain from calling into question the "undestanding of the rules", as the book made it to print and obviously wnet through several edits and proof reads.
So, you're questioning everyone up and down the chain. Are we failing our Diplomacy checks, people?!
Well, two things:
Another possibility (which I did raise upthread) is that something was accidentally cut or lost somehow through the editing process.
Based on posts in other conversations by Paizofolk, I think they'd be the first to admit that sometimes a mistake is made or something gets missed that will be errata'd and corrected in later printings, and I don't think they'd take it at all personally.
(And really, I think you can make pretty reasonable/easy RAI calls on this ability -- but it's also the kind of thing that we have seen the judges ding in previous years for RPGSS. It's a very good archetype, albiet one with a flaw as currently printed.)
But you're glossing over the "as a full-round action" part of that, which is the sticky part.
Nope, not at all. I am going to requote and break into its sections.
I think a lot of people have a false assumption about the ability.
Stab and Grab (Ex): At 3rd level,
as a full-round action, a cutpurse can make an attack and also make a Sleight of Hand check to steal something from the target of the attack.If the attack deals sneak attack damage, the rogue can use Sleight of Hand to take an item from the creature during combat(normally you cannot use sleight of hand to take things during combat you need to use disarm or steal); otherwise this ability (refering to sleight fo hand) can only be used in a surprise round before the target has acted (creature is unaware and aka flat footed).
If the attack is successful, the target takes a –5 penalty on the Perception check to notice the theft.
This ability replaces trap sense.
You can use stab and grab any round, not just during the surprise round, which is where I think people are trying to apply the ability. It is a full round action useable in every round except the surprise round.
The other major difference between this and disarm and steal is it is possible the creature is unaware you just took something from them. You stab the cleric in his kidneys causing him to double over in pain for a split second and the thief takes his holy symbol, due to the pain he never noticed his holy symbol was taken until he goes to grab it to cast spells.
That is how I read the ability. Just break it into its logical sections. Full round action refers to one attack and sleight of hand, while the surprise round part is about sleight of hand checks.
Huh. That's not at all how I read it.
Can we agree that it's, at the least, worded at least a little ambiguously and that if you currently were to create a PFS cutpurse, you shouldn't be surprised to find different GM rulings on Stab and Grab from table to table? (And that this is the kind of thing you shouldn't be surprised to see judges raking an archetype over the coals a bit over?) That's really the whole of my point.
|
|
If the attack deals sneak attack damage, the rogue can use Sleight of Hand to take an item from the creature during combat(normally you cannot use sleight of hand to take things during combat you need to use disarm or steal); otherwise this ability (refering to sleight fo hand) can only be used in a surprise round before the target has acted (creature is unaware and aka flat footed).
Well, that's a problem if that's how you read it. Sleight of Hand is not an ability, it's a skill, whereas Stab and Grab is an ability. I totally agree it's not very clear in it's wording.
Huh. That's not at all how I read it.
Can we agree that it's, at the least, worded at least a little ambiguously and that if you currently were to create a PFS cutpurse, you shouldn't be surprised to find different GM rulings on Stab and Grab from table to table? (And that this is the kind of thing you shouldn't be surprised to see judges raking an archetype over the coals a bit over?) That's really the whole of my point.
I agree that the ambiguity around "this ability" really throws a monkey wrench in the works... what ability?!?! Due to the ambiguity it makes only logical sense to apply it to the most recent thing "this" could apply to which is the ability to use sleight of hand to take stuff.
I do agree that it should not make it into the next round due to the sheer confusion of wording. Should have used a few more words to make things clear. Since the creator would not be able to clarify the wording without getting DQ'd.
Make sure things are not ambigious.
|
|
I agree that the ambiguity around "this ability" really throws a monkey wrench in the works... what ability?!?! Due to the ambiguity it makes only logical sense to apply it to the most recent thing "this" could apply to which is the ability to use sleight of hand to take stuff.
But, that's the thing. You are reading too much into it. "this ability" refers to the ability that this description is in. Appendix 1 in the core rule book shows what "abilities" are.
Take this sorcerer ability for instance: "Long Limbs (Ex): At 3rd level, your reach increases by 5 feet whenever you are making a melee touch attack. This ability does not otherwise increase your threatened area. At 11th level, this bonus to your reach increases to 10 feet. At 17th level, this bonus to your reach increases to 15 feet."
It too says "This ability". But you wouldn't presume they mean the melee touch attack, would you?
Just to get the thread back on track,.... :)
I like the cutpurse. It's a great archetype, well designed (mostly) and with good flavour. However, if i saw it in Superstar i'd be tempted to say that the concept is,.. kind of obvious. What i mean is that if you're designing a thief archetype then a pickpocket-style archetype isn't all that imaginative, it kind of has to be there. - Anyone could have come up with the concept. So is it good? - Yes. Is it Superstar? - I'm not so sure.
For instance i'd say the Bard "Archivist" archetype is something which not anyone would have thought of. That's what says Superstar to me.
|
|
Just to get the thread back on track,.... :)
:) Again. I don't think we are getting off track. We are discussing what makes a great Archtype and the ability to get it done under 450 words. They are saying that the Cutpurse needed more wording, where I am saying that although it could have been clearer, it -is- worded properly if you look at all aspects of what the ability is saying.
The reason for this, is one of the Auto-rejects was not to re-iterate the rules in your submission. There is no need to put in the Cutpurse description (if it was an entry) "although you normally can't use full-round actions in a surprise round". Because (a) there are exceptions to that rule in the core rule book and (b) that's reiterating the rules.
But, that's the thing. You are reading too much into it. "this ability" refers to the ability that this description is in. Appendix 1 in the core rule book shows what "abilities" are.
Take this sorcerer ability for instance: "Long Limbs (Ex): At 3rd level, your reach increases by 5 feet whenever you are making a melee touch attack. This ability does not otherwise increase your threatened area. At 11th level, this bonus to your reach increases to 10 feet. At 17th level, this bonus to your reach increases to 15 feet."
It too says "This ability". But you wouldn't presume they mean the melee touch attack, would you?
He isn't arguing over the ability -- he's saying that if one of us were to summit this as our archetype then we would probably be dinged points for the flaws that he pointed out.
Yeah that is official material that is flawed -- but your entry shouldn't be -- after all they've been working on more than just that archetype, were we haven't (in an official capacity). Therefore the archetype that you present should be better.
But, that's the thing. You are reading too much into it. "this ability" refers to the ability that this description is in. Appendix 1 in the core rule book shows what "abilities" are.
Take this sorcerer ability for instance: "Long Limbs (Ex): At 3rd level, your reach increases by 5 feet whenever you are making a melee touch attack. This ability does not otherwise increase your threatened area. At 11th level, this bonus to your reach increases to 10 feet. At 17th level, this bonus to your reach increases to 15 feet."
It too says "This ability". But you wouldn't presume they mean the melee touch attack, would you?
Nope.
Here are the two ways of looking at the problem.
1) That the developer made the mistake of saying in the surprise round you can make a full round action.
2) That the developer used the word ability instead of skill.
I lean toward a typo using the wrong word over making a game mechanic error. Typos and miss use words are easy, making a fundamental break in game rules is not.
Read the ability with just changing ability to skill.
Stab and Grab (Ex): At 3rd level, as a full-round action, a cutpurse can make an attack and also make a Sleight of Hand check to steal something from the target of the attack. If the attack deals sneak attack damage, the rogue can use Sleight of Hand to take an item from the creature during combat; otherwise this skill can only be used in a surprise round before the target has acted. If the attack is successful, the target takes a –5 penalty on the Perception check to notice the theft. This ability replaces trap sense.
Stab and Grab (Ex): At 3rd level, as a full-round action, a cutpurse can make an attack and also make a Sleight of Hand check to steal something from the target of the attack. If the attack deals sneak attack damage, the rogue can use Sleight of Hand to take an item from the creature during combat; otherwise Sleight of Hand can only be used in a surprise round before the target has acted. If the attack is successful, the target takes a –5 penalty on the Perception check to notice the theft. This ability replaces trap sense.
Makes perfect sense now, at least to me. Also can see how the ambiguous word cropped in as well and could be overlooked in editing.
|
|
Stab and Grab (Ex): At 3rd level, as a full-round action, a cutpurse can make an attack and also make a Sleight of Hand check to steal something from the target of the attack. If the attack deals sneak attack damage, the rogue can use Sleight of Hand to take an item from the creature during combat; otherwise this skill can only be used in a surprise round before the target has acted. If the attack is successful, the target takes a –5 penalty on the Perception check to notice the theft. This ability replaces trap sense
.
Well, you are right, but both wordings are correct, if you break it down:
Stab and Grab (Ex): At 3rd level, as a full-round action, a cutpurse can make an attack and also make a Sleight of Hand check to steal something from the target of the attack.
That's the ability. You can attack and try to steal.
If the attack deals sneak damage, you can use the Sleight of Hand to take an item from the creature during combat;
Your attack can deal sneak damage under various circumstances through out the round.
otherwise this ability can only be used in a surprise round before the target has acted.
The ability is to attack and try to steal. So, it's saying, if you are in the middle of combat (past the surprise round) and you cannot deal Sneak damage to the opponent, then you cannot attack -and- try to steal (which is a full round action).
So, both iterations are correct. What you are saying in the re-wording is correct, but the original wording is also correct.
Just to get the thread back on track,.... :)
I like the cutpurse. It's a great archetype, well designed (mostly) and with good flavour. However, if i saw it in Superstar i'd be tempted to say that the concept is,.. kind of obvious. What i mean is that if you're designing a thief archetype then a pickpocket-style archetype isn't all that imaginative, it kind of has to be there. - Anyone could have come up with the concept. So is it good? - Yes. Is it Superstar? - I'm not so sure.
Agreed that it may be obvious and originality deflated in five words : Final Fantasy ability MUG. That being said, it is the first time I've seen MUG translated from digital to pencil and paper.
Combined with Measure the Mark makes it sweet enough to be vote worthy.