I know everyone will be screaming "Empiricist!!!!", because that is the literal best Investigator Archetype for any skill monkey build... That being said, I'd much prefer playing something less Meta and more knowledgeable than the Empiricist Investigator... I've already theory crafted enough using that as my base for most skill monkey builds I have.
My biggest question now is: Cryptid Scholar or Questioner?
Questioner (possibly stacking with Relentless Tracker) is unique, in the fact that it gains Eidetic Recollection at level 5 as a BONUS TALENT... This means Take 10 on Knowledge Check, and I can spent 1 Inspiration Point to Take 20 instead. They also trade their Alchemy skill for the use of Bard Spells using their Intelligence Mods. Lastly, +1 to all Knowledge based checks at level 2 and every 3 levels after.
Stacking with the Relentless Hunter, they also gain 1/2 Level to Intimidate and Sense Motive skills, +1 to Perception and Will Checks at 3rd level (+2 at 9th, +3 at 15th), and Relentless Pursuit at 5th level.
However, it seems Cryptic gives more team party buff shenanigans, despite his inability to take 20 on Knowledge Checks. Either way, I'll have to wait until Level 12 to get my favorite Talent.
Race: Human | Alternate Racial Traits: Comprehensive Education
Racial Traits List:
* Ability Score: +2 Racial Bonus to one Ability Score of choice. (+2 INT Score).
* Bonus Feat: Gain a bonus feat at 1st level.
* Comprehensive Education: All Knowledge Skills as Class Skills, +1 to Knowledge Skills already gained as Class Skills. (*Replaces Skilled*)
* Languages: Begin play speaking Common. Learn any language, other than secret languages.
Ability Scores:
STR: 7 (-2) | DEX: 16 (+3) | CON: 11 (+1)
INT: 18 (+4) | WIS: 10 (+0) | CHA: 13 (+3)
Level 4: +1 INT | Level 8: +1 INT | Level 12: +1 INT
Feat List:
Level 1 (Bonus): Weapon Focus (Rapier), Weapon Finesse (Rapier)
Level 1 (Human): Noble Scion (of Lore)
Level 1: Noble Scion (Cheliax: Leroung)
Level 3: Fencing Grace
Level 5: Extra Talent
Level 7: Combat Reflexes
Level 9: Exploit Lore
Level 11: Improved Critical
Race: Human | Alternate Racial Traits: None
Racial Traits List:
* Ability Score: +2 Racial Bonus to one Ability Score of choice. (+2 INT Score).
* Bonus Feat: Gain a bonus feat at 1st level.
* Skilled: Gain +1 Skill Rank per Level.
* Languages: Begin play speaking Common. Learn any language, other than secret languages.
Ability Scores:
STR: 7 (-2) | DEX: 16 (+3) | CON: 11 (+0)
INT: 18 (+4) | WIS: 10 (+0) | CHA: 13 (+3)
Level 4: +1 CON | Level 8: +1 INT | Level 12: +1 INT
Feat List:
Level 1 (Bonus): Weapon Focus (Rapier), Weapon Finesse (Rapier)
Level 1 (Human): Noble Scion (of Lore)
Level 1: Cunning
Level 3: Fencing Grace
Level 5: Extra Talent
Level 7: Combat Reflexes
Level 9: Exploit Lore
Level 11: Improved Critical
Pros:
* Know-it-All bonus to Knowledge (+4 at 11th Level)
* +7 to ALL Knowledge Checks (+5 PFS Legal).
* Know-it-All FREE Eidetic Recollection (Take 10, or Take 20 Knowledge)
* Access to Studied Combat + Studied Strike
* Cast Spells Spontaneously
Cons:
* Forced Level 3 Talent (w/ Relentless Inspector)
* Required Extra Talent at level 3
* No Team Buffing until 11th Level
* Studied Combat + Studied Strike online at Level 5
* Cannot use Mutagens
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Race: Human | Alternate Racial Traits: None
Racial Traits List:
* Ability Score: +2 Racial Bonus to one Ability Score of choice. (+2 INT Score).
* Bonus Feat: Gain a bonus feat at 1st level.
* Skilled: Gain +1 Skill Rank per Level.
* Languages: Begin play speaking Common. Learn any language, other than secret languages.
Ability Scores:
STR: 7 (-2) | DEX: 16 (+3) | CON: 12 (+1)
INT: 17 (+4) | WIS: 12 (+1) | CHA: 13 (+3)
Level 4: +1 INT | Level 8: +1 INT | Level 12: +1 INT
Feat List:
Level 1 (Bonus): Weapon Focus (Rapier), Weapon Finesse (Rapier)
Level 1 (Human): Noble Scion (of Lore)
Level 1: Combat Reflexes
Level 3: Fencing Grace
Level 5: Cunning
Level 7: Exploit Lore
Level 9: ???
Level 11: Improved Critical
Pros:
* Combat Ready by Level 3 and better Combat Stats
* Wisdom and Intelligence to Monster Checks
* Take 10 on Knowledge Checks
* Can take Mutagens
Cons:
* Overall lower Knowledge Scores, no Take 20 for Knowledge Checks.
* No Studied Combat or Studied Strikes (No Talents).
* Requires Successful Knowledge Check for abilities.
* Lower Attack Bonus (no Studied Combat).
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
So what do you guys think? Questiner or Cryptid Scholar? Or something else? Please let me know what you think, I'd really enjoy some help building this knowledge beast.
And for those of you who must know, my Empiricist is a Linguilist Specialist who dabbles in Knowledge Checks, but mainly performs as the class Rogue's replacement.
I would have used Bard VMC for the PFS Non-Legal Builds, but I'm sleepy and getting to the end of my candle wick sadly....
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
An issue with the Questioner is that they do suffer from arcane spell failure. They don't inherit a bard's ability to cast in light armor without problems, and unlike extracts, ASF is an issue for bard spells.
I'm fairly sure that's an oversight while writing (it'd be the only class ever to gain an armor proficiency with which they have ASF), it's an issue in PFS. In a home game, talk to the GM about it.
There's ways to get insipiration outside the investigator class, and some of them come with advantages towards knowledges.
e.g. An inspired chemist alchemist, or a mindchemist alchemist. The advantage is being able to get the intuitive understanding discovery for augury or divination, and that they can refresh inspiration by brewing another inspiring cognatogen. Inspired chemists can get two investigator talents for a discovery, or a mindchemist gets double int mod to knowledges (explicitly, so it should overrule the general no double ability mod rule.)
e.g.2. A psychic searcher lore oracle can get revelations which allow you to retry a knowledge check at +10, or to make a knowledge check at +20 after a few rounds. Also they're a full caster with access to a spell list which includes many divination spells including find fault.
Prerequisites: Monster lore class feature, base attack bonus +11.
I don't see how you're getting this feat. Is there another with the same name? This version's from Ultimate Magic.
Edit: of the two above I like the cryptid scholar. The bard list is intended for bards and works best for them IMO.
@Ascalaphus - Ah, forgot about Arcane Failure.... welp, Questioner pretty much got turned into a hands-down "no" for this build, even if it gave me some pretty tasty knowledge checks...
@ AVR - Problem with both of those is that I require the Cognatogen in order to be effective at that, and I'm not wanting to make a druggy character when said drugs are only used to make me smarter lol.
I saw the Psychic Searcher Oracles, which was something I was tempted to grab... but sadly, I'm not someone who wants to build a Divine character (had my taste of that when making my other characters, I'd like something different that's more Martial, less Arcane/Divine. Investigators and Alchemists are something I've taken a shining towards based on their flavor). Exploit Lore was an oversight on my end.
Are there any Knowledge Skills that would be effective for this build? For Non-PFS Legal Builds, would VMC Bard be a good template to add to this character ideal? Funny enough, my Non-PFS Legal Empiricist has VMC Bard, and I've been having a blast using him.
Please forgive any mistakes in my original build, all three of them were rough drafted in ~1 hour for all three, and I was running out of feat ideas...
Ooh, a very apt thread for me. On Sunday, I managed to kill off the empiricist I was running for our Ire of the Storm module and there's no way to raise him. I wanted something a bit different this time, but his role is still "skill monkey" to the party (we are a party of only 3 but with strong builds). Unfortunately, it seems I was correct that ASF is an issue. It has to be a mistake since they are considered at least partially melee characters, and they don't even get mage armor or shield. Sigh... Rule 0, but somehow I feel like I'm cheating even though I'm the GM.
I went this route because I get trapfinding sooner than the bard (archaeologist) - though I wonder how much this matters at low levels since magic traps aren't that common. I also liked the thought of a guy that has innate magic, but he's smart instead of charismatic (which I never liked in sorcerors and bards anyway). With the right traits, he can still do diplomacy and UMD, though his other charisma based skills are lacking.
|
|
I think with the Questioner it's really an oversight - casting in-armor happens to be written down under the bard's armor proficiencies, not spellcasting.
While playing a home game or in campaign mode I'd totally "fix" that by saying the Questioner can cast in armor exactly like a bard. In PFS, they've (sadly) not given me the authority to fix obvious mistakes off the cuff :P
I wound up going with a bard (detective), which is a bit outside my norm, but I agree. It's very similar to the questioner, and since I'm starting at 2nd level (once the remaining party returns from their mission, they'll go up) she doesn't miss out on trapfinding. I wonder what the OP went with?
As the person who wrote the questioner, go questioner.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think with the Questioner it's really an oversight - casting in-armor happens to be written down under the bard's armor proficiencies, not spellcasting.
While playing a home game or in campaign mode I'd totally "fix" that by saying the Questioner can cast in armor exactly like a bard. In PFS, they've (sadly) not given me the authority to fix obvious mistakes off the cuff :P
If you want to see something fixed for PFS, the best thing to do is to post in the Campaign Clarifications thread.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you want to see something fixed for PFS, the best thing to do is to post in the Campaign Clarifications thread.I think with the Questioner it's really an oversight - casting in-armor happens to be written down under the bard's armor proficiencies, not spellcasting.
While playing a home game or in campaign mode I'd totally "fix" that by saying the Questioner can cast in armor exactly like a bard. In PFS, they've (sadly) not given me the authority to fix obvious mistakes off the cuff :P
As the creator of this archetype, did you intend to exclude ASF exception or did you miss that they didn't get it? If we know what author's intent was it can go a long way to getting people rallied to change if it's wrong. But right now we have no indication, similar to Investigators and wands. Many thought it was simple oversight but it was intended. So if it was an oversight of the author then there's more reason to think it's something that is wrong and needs to be fixed.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As the creator of this archetype, did you intend to exclude ASF exception or did you miss that they didn't get it? If we know what author's intent was it can go a long way to getting people rallied to change if it's wrong. But right now we have no indication, similar to Investigators and wands. Many thought it was simple oversight but it was intended. So if it was an oversight of the author then there's more reason to think it's something that is wrong and needs to be fixed.If you want to see something fixed for PFS, the best thing to do is to post in the Campaign Clarifications thread.I think with the Questioner it's really an oversight - casting in-armor happens to be written down under the bard's armor proficiencies, not spellcasting.
While playing a home game or in campaign mode I'd totally "fix" that by saying the Questioner can cast in armor exactly like a bard. In PFS, they've (sadly) not given me the authority to fix obvious mistakes off the cuff :P
Personally, I don't think my intent is going to help as much as you think it will--in my experience, fans tend to take freelance intent and just batter the developers with it. Basically a case of, "Mommy says 'No,' but weird Uncle Alex who has absolutely no guardianship over me says 'Yes.'"
You laugh, but it's happened before and it's SUPER embarrassing for me. So regardless of what I may or may not think, you won't see me post about it publicly.
Well, given that it essenilly makes the archetype unplayable...
and gives no reason to think that it's in error and just an oversight.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
and gives no reason to think that it's in error and just an oversight.
Whelp, the last time I commented that I made a mistake publicly, a community member decided to drudge up that comment from a blog post and proceeded to demand for a change like I was some kind of messiah that the folks at Seattle had to obey. It was extremely embarrassing for me, and I don't intend to answer this question if even the slightest chance of it happening again exists.
My apologies.
Id take the cryptid scholar build, but go full helpful halfling with it, talents like effortless aid and inspirational expertise, the helpful(halfling) and Battlefield discipline traits. If you dont move more than 5 feet you'll be able to grant the cryptid ac and save bonus, aid another for +4 to attack rolls or ac and inspirational expertise for an additional +4 to one persons attack roll.
|
|
If you want to see something fixed for PFS, the best thing to do is to post in the Campaign Clarifications thread.I think with the Questioner it's really an oversight - casting in-armor happens to be written down under the bard's armor proficiencies, not spellcasting.
While playing a home game or in campaign mode I'd totally "fix" that by saying the Questioner can cast in armor exactly like a bard. In PFS, they've (sadly) not given me the authority to fix obvious mistakes off the cuff :P
I have posted about it on that thread at length, but after a while you start to sound shrill.
As for author intent statements. As it happens I'm in one of the VO groups that do background research on possible clarifications. And I can tell you that author/editor explanations on how an ability was meant to work are definitely valuable to us when we're discussing what to recommend to Tonya/John.
For example, if the author says "well I wrote it one way, but it changed in editing" that's different than "hey, that's odd, I did forget that this part of the ability was defined in a different ability. It was supposed to go together" - this tells us it's probably not an intentional nerf by the editor, but an oversight that passed multiple people.
|
I definitely feel you on the wanting to play something other than Empiricist.
I've been playing a Questioner, and it's a blast. I don't usually like the Swash dip but I do think it's very valid to cover the armour issue and loss of Barkskin/Mutagen (Mirror Image is still really strong). Mine just hit level 6 and with the Half-Elf FCB I've been having fun taking 20 for scores ranging between and 34-45. It's often in excess but still very valuable to have.
I actually went with an arcane strike/bodyguard build with my feats.
How does Swashbuckler cover the armor's arcane spell failure chance issue? That, not proficiency, is the problem.
and gives no reason to think that it's in error and just an oversight.Whelp, the last time I commented that I made a mistake publicly, a community member decided to drudge up that comment from a blog post and proceeded to demand for a change like I was some kind of messiah that the folks at Seattle had to obey. It was extremely embarrassing for me, and I don't intend to answer this question if even the slightest chance of it happening again exists.
My apologies.
Fair enough, but the trade is nobody using your idea.
EDIT: and an otherwise good one at that.
Lol, still working on the build tbh, the DM cancelled last game night. Thinking about going armorless questioner. My DM is pure RAW (he is a newbie with these types of things, so he doesn't wanna fiddle with rules) , but he had allowed VMC. I might go Swash to cover my AC problem with Parry, and go Questioner VMC Bard for somw insain knowledge checks. I also get to skip intimidate due to a feat at level 5. :D
Been wanting to use this feat for a long while. Lol