Revised Investigator Discussion


Class Discussion

701 to 750 of 830 << first < prev | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | next > last >>

cuatroespada wrote:
Javaed wrote:
well clearly you've already assumed the STR build's second attack will always miss, so i see no reason not to do the same for the DEX build. also, if you give the DEX build arcane strike, why wouldn't you give the STR build another feat to add damage? it's like you're being intentionally misleading...

Not so. I probably should have included my feat selection, with the Str build I took Furious Focus but not with the Dex build. The Str build's second attack was at a -7 compared to the first, and honestly it probably had a fair chance of hitting. What was really hurting the Str build was some poor planning on gear selection coupled with not using Kirin Strike correctly. I blame that on trying to think this all out at 2am =P

I've adjusted the gear on both builds so they have the same total on their offensive stats are are able to use the same round 1 buff. The Strength build comes ahead offensively in this situation, but is a bit behind defensively when compared to the Dexterity build.

The Strength build has a bit more flexibility in feat selection, especially during early levels. If you pick up Kirin style you can expect a 3 round sequence on any enemy: 1)Activate Studied Combat, 2)Study your target with Kirin Style and 3)Finish the target with a Studied Kirin Strike combo.

The Dex build has a slower start offensively buy has significantly higher AC. The soonest you'll pick up Power Attack is level 5 and most builds will have trouble using a Style Feat line. You could opt for an Agile weapon instead, but you'll want to use strength extracts and mutagens up till level 7 and then make the switch. This isn't a bad idea, as you wind up with a more survivable character at cost of damage.

Neither build is bad, which I really like. The hardest build to put together is actually a Two-Weapon Fighting build due to the lack of feats. A Rogue is able to manage these builds using talents that grant feats, but none of those are available to the Investigator.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lord_Malkov wrote:
MrSin wrote:
Trout wrote:
Heladriell wrote:
Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
Wait, I thought there was ALREADY a Talent to reduce Inspiration for attack rolls to a single use instead of two?
There is. I believe the argument is to get rid of that talent or modify it and to make that talent's inspiration cost for attack rolls the default.

Why don't we do this:

Inspired Strike(Ex): When the Investigator hits a target with a melee attack he may spend an inspiration point. If he does so, he adds 1d6 extra damage. This damage increases to 2d6 at 3rd level and adds another d6 every two levels after. If the investigator is attacking with a weapon he's proficient, he may also add his INT bonus.

This would make a damage source balanced with the alchemist's, and give the investigator better usefulness in combat.

I like that!

(I assume the INT bonus doesn't multiply on a crit) I'd like it even more if the extra damage was classified as an insight bonus.
Its not actually that balanced. You'll burn inspiration like crazy and you probably won't be like the alchemist who gets it for free on every attack that qualifies. Not a big fan of putting a limit on a basic and necessary combat function either, especially not with a shared pool for your other abilities that are supposed to allow you to shine.

Also, lets just avoid any more classes that can nova at will during important encounters... this sort of burst attack might be cool for the slayer (who consequently has less sneak attack dice) but Studied Combat is already excellent right where it is.

It is worse than sneak attack overall, particularly when you consider things like Sap Master, Scout Archetype, and High initiative ranged rogues etc... But it fits the class very well, the accuracy bonus helps to deal with the MAD issues, and the static damage is very fair.

You have to remember that Studied Combat is not even remotely as conditional as sneak attack...

Studied strike is very conditional. Requires the investigator to burn an action, to be in melee with the target, to be the first time using it against him for that day, to be within the short span of round he has to deliver the blow.

It is immensely inferior to sneak attack in flexibility, damage, reliability, and option support. It provides damage that is no longer significant when given, and worse, only once.

Sneak attack has lots of conditions to be triggered, some very easy to achieve.

A class feature like that has no purpose, as it offers nothing to be desired by the player. As a concept, though, it is a great idea, and I would really like to see a remade useful version.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Heladriell wrote:
Sneak attack has lots of conditions to be triggered, some very easy to achieve.

Could you imagine an ability that lets you get sneak attack constantly against most foes? Good thing no class gets that and sneak attack!


Heladriell wrote:
Lord_Malkov wrote:
MrSin wrote:
Trout wrote:
Heladriell wrote:
Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
Wait, I thought there was ALREADY a Talent to reduce Inspiration for attack rolls to a single use instead of two?
There is. I believe the argument is to get rid of that talent or modify it and to make that talent's inspiration cost for attack rolls the default.

Why don't we do this:

Inspired Strike(Ex): When the Investigator hits a target with a melee attack he may spend an inspiration point. If he does so, he adds 1d6 extra damage. This damage increases to 2d6 at 3rd level and adds another d6 every two levels after. If the investigator is attacking with a weapon he's proficient, he may also add his INT bonus.

This would make a damage source balanced with the alchemist's, and give the investigator better usefulness in combat.

I like that!

(I assume the INT bonus doesn't multiply on a crit) I'd like it even more if the extra damage was classified as an insight bonus.
Its not actually that balanced. You'll burn inspiration like crazy and you probably won't be like the alchemist who gets it for free on every attack that qualifies. Not a big fan of putting a limit on a basic and necessary combat function either, especially not with a shared pool for your other abilities that are supposed to allow you to shine.

Also, lets just avoid any more classes that can nova at will during important encounters... this sort of burst attack might be cool for the slayer (who consequently has less sneak attack dice) but Studied Combat is already excellent right where it is.

It is worse than sneak attack overall, particularly when you consider things like Sap Master, Scout Archetype, and High initiative ranged rogues etc... But it fits the class very well, the accuracy bonus helps to deal with the MAD issues, and the static damage is very fair.

You have to remember that Studied Combat is not even remotely as

...

I'm ok with Studied Strike being worse overall damage than Sneak Attack, as the Studied Combat mechanic more than makes up for it. The melee attack bonuses are significant and you're already getting some static damage bonuses. Once the ability becomes a swift action you'll always have these bonuses on your current target and can deal bonus damage every 2-3 turns. That's about as often as most Rogues get to sneak attack in my experience, though Rogues can easily dual-wield for extra attacks and they deal more damage when doing so.

On the whole, I think the abilities are about on par.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Javaed wrote:
On the whole, I think the abilities are about on par.

Sneak attack is one of the worst combat abilities to be honest. A once per day per person sneak attack that has a slightly more to hit, devours action economy and bonuses and a daily resource sounds erm... not so hot.


MrSin wrote:
Javaed wrote:
On the whole, I think the abilities are about on par.
Sneak attack is one of the worst combat abilities to be honest. A once per day per person sneak attack that has a slightly more to hit, devours action economy and bonuses and a daily resource sounds erm... not so hot.

But you are more or less hitting like a fighter on that first attack every round until you put the hay-maker down. That seems fine to me. If you have friends around, no one enemy should be lasting 3 rounds unless it is a real deal big bad. I think it is solid enough.


Javaed wrote:
The Strength build can really climb ahead with Kirin Style, but you want to activate it on round 2 instead of round 1. This may not be the strongest style to use though, as in practice you're only likely to get to use it every 3rd round, usually coupled with your Sudden Strike. A Hasted Full-Attack isn't worth giving up, so you've got multiple options competing for that swift action.

what else is regularly competing for that swift action? i feel like i'm missing something...


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Excaliburproxy wrote:
MrSin wrote:
Javaed wrote:
On the whole, I think the abilities are about on par.
Sneak attack is one of the worst combat abilities to be honest. A once per day per person sneak attack that has a slightly more to hit, devours action economy and bonuses and a daily resource sounds erm... not so hot.
But you are more or less hitting like a fighter on that first attack every round until you put the hay-maker down. That seems fine to me. If you have friends around, no one enemy should be lasting 3 rounds unless it is a real deal big bad. I think it is solid enough.

Fighters get more attacks, more to hit, and more static damage. As you level that disparity will only get worse.


Excaliburproxy wrote:
MrSin wrote:
Javaed wrote:
On the whole, I think the abilities are about on par.
Sneak attack is one of the worst combat abilities to be honest. A once per day per person sneak attack that has a slightly more to hit, devours action economy and bonuses and a daily resource sounds erm... not so hot.
But you are more or less hitting like a fighter on that first attack every round until you put the hay-maker down. That seems fine to me. If you have friends around, no one enemy should be lasting 3 rounds unless it is a real deal big bad. I think it is solid enough.

The Investigator won't't get anywhere closer to a fighter than someone using a 1st level spell(besides he can't afford the same STR). Those bonus to hit are not worth much in a fight.


MrSin wrote:
cuatroespada wrote:
MrSin wrote:
Javaed wrote:
Good point on using a reach weapon for some distance. So I crunched some numbers on two builds. First a Strength build using a Greatsword and Kirin Style and second a Dexterity build using a Scimitar and Dervish Dance. I built the characters out to level 9 and assumed, both characters took Power Attack and both buffed up before combat with only a Mutagen. Both builds have the Accelerated Drinker trait and walk around with their round one buff extract in hand.
Heads up, but accelerated drinker does nothing to extracts. It does work with potions you brew yourself though.
but you can't brew potions yourself because you aren't a caster and you didn't get the feat as part of your class.
Was speaking for alchemist. Does investigator really not have access to brew potion? That probably needs fixed.

Agreed on this. The oddities of 'extracts aren't really spells' has already messed up some thematically-appropriate Alchemist concepts (like the golem-making Alchemist); probably should head that off right now and note in the Alchemy section for the Investigator that their extracts qualify them for item creation feats (or at least thematically-appropriate ones).


MrSin wrote:
Excaliburproxy wrote:
MrSin wrote:
Javaed wrote:
On the whole, I think the abilities are about on par.
Sneak attack is one of the worst combat abilities to be honest. A once per day per person sneak attack that has a slightly more to hit, devours action economy and bonuses and a daily resource sounds erm... not so hot.
But you are more or less hitting like a fighter on that first attack every round until you put the hay-maker down. That seems fine to me. If you have friends around, no one enemy should be lasting 3 rounds unless it is a real deal big bad. I think it is solid enough.
Fighters get more attacks, more to hit, and more static damage. As you level that disparity will only get worse.

What are you talking about? At level 6,

Fighter-specific Accuracy:
6 (BAB) + 1 (weapon training)= 7
Investigator-specific Accuracy:
4 (BAB) + 3 (studied combat)= 7

Fighter-specific damage boosts:
2 (weapon specialization) + 1 (weapon training)=3
Investigator-specific damage boost:
3 (studied combat)=3

At 12,
Fighter-specific Acc:
12 (BAB) + 3 (weapon training) + 1 (greater weapon focus)=13
Invest-specific Acc:
9 (BAB) + 6 (studied combat)=15

Fighter-specific damage boosts:
4 (weapon specializations) + 2 (weapon training)=6
Investigator-specific damage boost:
6 (studied combat)=6

At 20,
Fighter-specific Acc:
20 (BAB) + 4 (weapon training) + 1 (greater weapon focus)=25
Invest-specific Acc:
15 (BAB) + 10 (studied combat)=25

Fighter-specific damage boosts:
4 (weapon specializations) + 4 (weapon training)=8
Investigator-specific damage boost:
10 (studied combat)=10

Yeah they get extra attacks later but they don't need to be quite as fighter-y as fighters. Also: the last attack in the full attack misses a lot anyways.

Though in general, odd level fighters are a little better than what I have listed, I think, "fights roughly as well as a fighter as a swift action" is fair, especially taking into account that the swift action buys a hay-maker too.

In fact: it is weirdly fair.

Investigators are gonna be MAD and use morningstars (or buy into an exotic weapon like falcata), but w/e; there are extracts and inspiration and stuff.


Excaliburproxy wrote:
MrSin wrote:
Excaliburproxy wrote:
MrSin wrote:
Javaed wrote:
On the whole, I think the abilities are about on par.
Sneak attack is one of the worst combat abilities to be honest. A once per day per person sneak attack that has a slightly more to hit, devours action economy and bonuses and a daily resource sounds erm... not so hot.
But you are more or less hitting like a fighter on that first attack every round until you put the hay-maker down. That seems fine to me. If you have friends around, no one enemy should be lasting 3 rounds unless it is a real deal big bad. I think it is solid enough.
Fighters get more attacks, more to hit, and more static damage. As you level that disparity will only get worse.

What are you talking about? At level 6,

Fighter-specific Accuracy:
6 (BAB) + 1 (weapon training)= 7
Investigator-specific Accuracy:
4 (BAB) + 3 (studied combat)= 7

Fighter-specific damage boosts:
2 (weapon specialization) + 1 (weapon training)=3
Investigator-specific damage boost:
3 (studied combat)=3

At 12,
Fighter-specific Acc:
12 (BAB) + 3 (weapon training) + 1 (greater weapon focus)=13
Invest-specific Acc:
9 (BAB) + 6 (studied combat)=15

Fighter-specific damage boosts:
4 (weapon specializations) + 2 (weapon training)=6
Investigator-specific damage boost:
6 (studied combat)=6

At 20,
Fighter-specific Acc:
20 (BAB) + 4 (weapon training) + 1 (greater weapon focus)=25
Invest-specific Acc:
15 (BAB) + 10 (studied combat)=25

Fighter-specific damage boosts:
4 (weapon specializations) + 4 (weapon training)=8
Investigator-specific damage boost:
10 (studied combat)=10

Yeah they get extra attacks later but they don't need to be quite as fighter-y as fighters. Also: the last attack in the full attack misses a lot anyways.

Though in general, odd level fighters are a little better than what I have listed, I think, "fights roughly as well as a fighter as a swift action" is fair, especially taking into account that the...

I don't remember studied combat providing a fixed damage bonus. The fighter benefits from superior STR distribution, feats, weapon selection. Don't get me wrong, the fighter is supposed to be stronger, but the Investigator is so weak in damage right now that every class can outdamage him.


I am operating on this version:

Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:

Okay,

So studied combat and studied strike have been weigh on my mind a lot lately. People like the flavor and there seems a general condenses that it does not do enough damage, or at least consistent damage.

Here are my current thoughts on how to change the ability.

Studies strike stays the same (sort of, see below).

Studied combat becomes a move action to activate (with the quick study bumping it down to a swift). You then gain a half your investigator level bonus to melee attack rolls (as it is now) and as precision damage to the target (not multiplied on critical hits). You gain that precision damage even when you make studied strike. In other words there will be some wording that needs to be changed in studied strike to make that clear, because its time does not.

Thoughts?

emboldening is my own


Back a couple of pages, Stephen (the designer) said that for the next iteration of Studied Combat, he was pondering having the insight bonus granted not only to attack rolls but also to damage rolls (as precision damage, which would stack with damage from Studied Strike but would not be multiplied on a crit).

It's not an official change yet but Stephen made it sound like his most likely route for improving Studied Combat at the time.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Excaliburproxy wrote:

I am operating on this version:

Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:

Okay,

So studied combat and studied strike have been weigh on my mind a lot lately. People like the flavor and there seems a general condenses that it does not do enough damage, or at least consistent damage.

Here are my current thoughts on how to change the ability.

Studies strike stays the same (sort of, see below).

Studied combat becomes a move action to activate (with the quick study bumping it down to a swift). You then gain a half your investigator level bonus to melee attack rolls (as it is now) and as precision damage to the target (not multiplied on critical hits). You gain that precision damage even when you make studied strike. In other words there will be some wording that needs to be changed in studied strike to make that clear, because its time does not.

Thoughts?

emboldening is my own

I see, but this is not an official update, it does make it slightly better, while still not making the class viable until level 4.

Studied combat should be 1st level with the damage bonus and whthout the 24h limitation (and still would be missing the "wow!" element).


Heladriell wrote:
Excaliburproxy wrote:

I am operating on this version:

Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:

Okay,

So studied combat and studied strike have been weigh on my mind a lot lately. People like the flavor and there seems a general condenses that it does not do enough damage, or at least consistent damage.

Here are my current thoughts on how to change the ability.

Studies strike stays the same (sort of, see below).

Studied combat becomes a move action to activate (with the quick study bumping it down to a swift). You then gain a half your investigator level bonus to melee attack rolls (as it is now) and as precision damage to the target (not multiplied on critical hits). You gain that precision damage even when you make studied strike. In other words there will be some wording that needs to be changed in studied strike to make that clear, because its time does not.

Thoughts?

emboldening is my own

I see, but this is not an official update, it does make it slightly better, while still not making the class viable until level 4.

Studied combat should be 1st level with the damage bonus and whthout the 24h limitation (and still would be missing the "wow!" element).

I dunno. Investigator is just kind of wizard/sorceror-y in combat until level 4. I may be more fine with this because I don't play below level 4 often. I still think a small resource of alchemical poisons (int+3) would be cool (even though you could comically poison yourself at level 1).

But you are correct in asserting that the actual document version of the ability is thoroughly churned hot garbage.


I am confident that this has come up already, so I apologize for redundancy. I'm currently playtesting a 2nd level Investigator as a GM PC through Rise of the Runelords. She is a monster when it comes to skills (which is very appropriate), but that feels currently like all she has to contribute. As a GM PC, it works: particularly as a way to have her make knowledge checks to understand some of the omens. If this was my very own PC, I would very much wish to have some more offensive class abilities before 4th level I'd recommend Studied Combat to happen at 2nd level. Studied Strike can still occur at 4th.


cuatroespada wrote:
Javaed wrote:
The Strength build can really climb ahead with Kirin Style, but you want to activate it on round 2 instead of round 1. This may not be the strongest style to use though, as in practice you're only likely to get to use it every 3rd round, usually coupled with your Sudden Strike. A Hasted Full-Attack isn't worth giving up, so you've got multiple options competing for that swift action.
what else is regularly competing for that swift action? i feel like i'm missing something...

Studied Combat as a swift action, but it'll last 2-4 rounds.

Kirin Style is a swift action to make a Knowledge check and "identify" the target. This grants you a +2 AC bonus against the target.
Kirin Strike is a swift action to add double your Intelligence bonus as extra damage. It requires that you first identify the target.

So the way the combat style works out, you spend 2 rounds worth of swift actions to gain bonuses in combat against them. On the third round the target should be close to death, so you use your swift action to Kirin Strike at the same time you make your Studied Strike and finish off the target.

On round 4 of combat you pick a new target and repeat the process. Against a really tough critter you can use Kirin Strike on consecutive rounds, saving your Studied Strike for the final round.


Quote:

I dunno. Investigator is just kind of wizard/sorceror-y in combat until level 4. I may be more fine with this because I don't play below level 4 often. I still think a small resource of alchemical poisons (int+3) would be cool (even though you could comically poison yourself at level 1).

I will also note that these poisons (blinding or staggering the enemy or something) would make the poison use ability useful right when the investigator gets it rather than much later when it is a finally affordable option.

It also makes poison use a more viable argument for being a range option later on (if the DC of the poisons scaled with the investigator's level and intelligence).

Please agree with me and use peer pressure to make this a true thing~


Heladriell wrote:
Excaliburproxy wrote:

I am operating on this version:

Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:

Okay,

So studied combat and studied strike have been weigh on my mind a lot lately. People like the flavor and there seems a general condenses that it does not do enough damage, or at least consistent damage.

Here are my current thoughts on how to change the ability.

Studies strike stays the same (sort of, see below).

Studied combat becomes a move action to activate (with the quick study bumping it down to a swift). You then gain a half your investigator level bonus to melee attack rolls (as it is now) and as precision damage to the target (not multiplied on critical hits). You gain that precision damage even when you make studied strike. In other words there will be some wording that needs to be changed in studied strike to make that clear, because its time does not.

Thoughts?

emboldening is my own

I see, but this is not an official update, it does make it slightly better, while still not making the class viable until level 4.

Studied combat should be 1st level with the damage bonus and whthout the 24h limitation (and still would be missing the "wow!" element).

With smart extract use you're perfectly viable at first level. You need a 16 and your to-hit stat and a flanking buddy for those first two levels is all. That's the same place Bards, Rogues, Clerics and other 3/4 fighters find themselves in. At level 3 you can grab your mutagen for those tough fights. Not as great as a full BAB class at pure melee combat, but you bring a lot more to the table.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Javaed wrote:
Not as great as a full BAB class at pure melee combat, but you bring a lot more to the table.

Depends on your expectations and who your comparing too. Fighters for instance have poor skills and utility and get flak for it. Rangers depending on their level get quiet a bit, and barbarians get abilities fighter would kill to have. Slayer gets plenty of skill points and does a good job killing. As levels go on skill points matter less and less too because spells can outright replace them and you start to hit caps. Extracts of course help, but would you rather have a vivisectionist or an investigator? There are still other 3/4 BAB classes to compare to too, and some of those do great in combat and may very well do better outside too!


Javaed wrote:
Heladriell wrote:
Excaliburproxy wrote:

I am operating on this version:

Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:

Okay,

So studied combat and studied strike have been weigh on my mind a lot lately. People like the flavor and there seems a general condenses that it does not do enough damage, or at least consistent damage.

Here are my current thoughts on how to change the ability.

Studies strike stays the same (sort of, see below).

Studied combat becomes a move action to activate (with the quick study bumping it down to a swift). You then gain a half your investigator level bonus to melee attack rolls (as it is now) and as precision damage to the target (not multiplied on critical hits). You gain that precision damage even when you make studied strike. In other words there will be some wording that needs to be changed in studied strike to make that clear, because its time does not.

Thoughts?

emboldening is my own

I see, but this is not an official update, it does make it slightly better, while still not making the class viable until level 4.

Studied combat should be 1st level with the damage bonus and whthout the 24h limitation (and still would be missing the "wow!" element).

With smart extract use you're perfectly viable at first level. You need a 16 and your to-hit stat and a flanking buddy for those first two levels is all. That's the same place Bards, Rogues, Clerics and other 3/4 fighters find themselves in. At level 3 you can grab your mutagen for those tough fights. Not as great as a full BAB class at pure melee combat, but you bring a lot more to the table.

I will note that they bring less to the fight table in the first 3 levels than bards (bonuses from insp. courage), rogues (sneak attack), and clerics (domains and better spells) do. I would more argue they are kinda maybe the weakest level 1 class. And they are bad at range for life more or less (you got no poisons and probably no feats at lv. 1-4, no accuracy ever, and the DCs are too low 15+ even with concentrating them).

Hence the built-in poison solution.

But I dunno. I can almost think of the investigator being a utility only caster at levels 1 through 3. No range at 15-20 is more a weakness than no melee at 1-3. I am not melting over either, really.


MrSin wrote:
Javaed wrote:
Not as great as a full BAB class at pure melee combat, but you bring a lot more to the table.
Depends on your expectations and who your comparing too. Fighters for instance have poor skills and utility and get flak for it. Rangers depending on their level get quiet a bit, and barbarians get abilities fighter would kill to have. Slayer gets plenty of skill points and does a good job killing. As levels go on skill points matter less and less too because spells can outright replace them and you start to hit caps. Extracts of course help, but would you rather have a vivisectionist or an investigator? There are still other 3/4 BAB classes to compare to too, and some of those do great in combat and may very well do better outside too!

1-3 I want the vivisectionist unless there are traps everywhere.

Past that, I want the investigator probably. I like the skills (chosen to minimally overlap with spells) and the above listed version of studied combat more than I like sneak attack. And I like detecting and disabling traps forever.


MrSin wrote:
Javaed wrote:
Not as great as a full BAB class at pure melee combat, but you bring a lot more to the table.
Depends on your expectations and who your comparing too. Fighters for instance have poor skills and utility and get flak for it. Rangers depending on their level get quiet a bit, and barbarians get abilities fighter would kill to have. Slayer gets plenty of skill points and does a good job killing. As levels go on skill points matter less and less too because spells can outright replace them and you start to hit caps. Extracts of course help, but would you rather have a vivisectionist or an investigator? There are still other 3/4 BAB classes to compare to too, and some of those do great in combat and may very well do better outside too!

From level 1 to 3? Vivisectionist is a better class pretty much.

4+? I would rather be an investigator. A vivisectionist is more combat oriented, but considering that the investigator has inspiration and the vivisectionist doesn't, that makes a lot of sense.

Trap finding is awesome... the investigator's skills are awesome.. and studied combat (if it changes in all ways proposed by Stephen) is awesome.

I don't get how anyone can overlook +1/2 level to attack rolls. That is a HUGE deal. Sure your damage is lower... who cares? You are actually going to hit things with a 3/4 BAB!!! That last iterative is going to work! You can functionally dual wield!!!!

Man alive, I can't see what more you would want from this class. The ONLY reasonable argument coming out is that studied combat is 4th level... and that does kind of suck... It could be reasonably moved to 2nd level (since it is +1/2 level that would start it off at +1) but the investigator is already a bit frontloaded.

My only actual issue is that you don't get an inspiration talent until 3rd and you are getting these at the same time as feats.... I would much prefer that you get one at 2nd and then every even level.


Heladriell wrote:

I see, but this is not an official update, it does make it slightly better, while still not making the class viable until level 4.

Studied combat should be 1st level with the damage bonus and whthout the 24h limitation (and still would be missing the "wow!" element).

I have to point out (again) that the person who actually has seen all the play test surveys and is paid to read over all the play test posts regarding the class (Stephen) feels that it is viable pre-4th.

On some level I agree that it looks like the Investigator would be too weak at low levels, but the truth is that we don't see all the collected data. That said, I feel like basing any idea around boosting the class's low level combat skills because they "aren't viable" is probably just going to get the suggestion ignored at this point.


Javaed wrote:
cuatroespada wrote:
Javaed wrote:
The Strength build can really climb ahead with Kirin Style, but you want to activate it on round 2 instead of round 1. This may not be the strongest style to use though, as in practice you're only likely to get to use it every 3rd round, usually coupled with your Sudden Strike. A Hasted Full-Attack isn't worth giving up, so you've got multiple options competing for that swift action.
what else is regularly competing for that swift action? i feel like i'm missing something...

Studied Combat as a swift action, but it'll last 2-4 rounds.

Kirin Style is a swift action to make a Knowledge check and "identify" the target. This grants you a +2 AC bonus against the target.
Kirin Strike is a swift action to add double your Intelligence bonus as extra damage. It requires that you first identify the target.

So the way the combat style works out, you spend 2 rounds worth of swift actions to gain bonuses in combat against them. On the third round the target should be close to death, so you use your swift action to Kirin Strike at the same time you make your Studied Strike and finish off the target.

On round 4 of combat you pick a new target and repeat the process. Against a really tough critter you can use Kirin Strike on consecutive rounds, saving your Studied Strike for the final round.

yeah, i know all that, i just meant that you could be using your move action to begin studied combat. i also thought you were implying the kind of competition for swift actions that swashbucklers had last i checked. apparently i was wrong.


Xaratherus wrote:
Heladriell wrote:

I see, but this is not an official update, it does make it slightly better, while still not making the class viable until level 4.

Studied combat should be 1st level with the damage bonus and whthout the 24h limitation (and still would be missing the "wow!" element).

I have to point out (again) that the person who actually has seen all the play test surveys and is paid to read over all the play test posts regarding the class (Stephen) feels that it is viable pre-4th.

On some level I agree that it looks like the Investigator would be too weak at low levels, but the truth is that we don't see all the collected data. That said, I feel like basing any idea around boosting the class's low level combat skills because they "aren't viable" is probably just going to get the suggestion ignored at this point.

Well, I feel like I have been pretty moderate on liking or disliking the first 3 levels, but I sure do wish someone would tell me the mechanism through which investigators contribute at low levels.

True story: they will only have 1 use of inspiration for the purpose of combat or weak strength (and thus no damage).

Maybe there is something I am missing? Have any of these people said how they are doing better in melee combat than (let's say) an elven wizard (who get long swords and rapiers) at levels 1 and 2?

"Feelings" without mechanisms are what dumb people believe in. I want to believe there are mechanisms. I do not see mechanisms, though.

That said: if they are weak then they are weak. *shrugs*
I think they have some really good out of combat utility even if they are the worst class in combat at levels 1 through 3. I just need to be told that this is the design conceit.


Javaed wrote:
With smart extract use you're perfectly viable at first level. You need a 16 and your to-hit stat and a flanking buddy for those first two levels is all. That's the same place Bards, Rogues, Clerics and other 3/4 fighters find themselves in. At level 3 you can grab your mutagen for those tough fights. Not as great as a full BAB class at pure melee combat, but you bring a lot more to the table.

Agreed. Go with a human Investigator (13\16\10\12\10 from a 20-point buy). Get Weapon Finesse and wield a rapier. Take Shield as your extract. You're getting a +3 to hit at that point, which is average for the level, and dealing 1d6+1, with an AC (completely unarmored) of 17 with Shield up. And you still have a feat and two traits left at that point.

[edit]
Alternatively, go with a STR build and do more damage (swap to 16\13 STR\DEX) and count on the fact that you can wear light armor to grant you the AC you need.

Excaliburproxy wrote:
Well, I feel like I have been pretty moderate on liking or disliking the first 3 levels, but I sure do wish someone would tell me the mechanism through which investigators contribute at low levels.

I don't see them as failing to contribute in the range in which they're intended to operate for combat purposes, which is that of a second-string melee combatant.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Lord_Malkov wrote:
Trap finding is awesome...

Really? Since when? Are traps suddenly fun exciting events and trap finding not keeping other classes from doing things for a poorly conceived niche protection?


Anyways. Proposed Noir archetype:

Replace the normal weapon and armor proficiencies with ONLY leather armor, simple weapons, unarmed strikes (fisticuffs!), saps, and firearms.

The Noir investigator loses one extract of every level (only having extracts from high intelligence when this reduces the number of extracts to zero).

However, she does gain a battered pistol as a level 1 Gunslinger and the point-blank shot feat.

lv 2: replace poison lore with Amateur Gunslinger (with grit going to a maximum of the Noir Investigator's Intelligence instead of wisdom)

Replace poison resistance with "extra grit". At level 2, the investigator starts with two grit points a day (instead of the normal 1 from amateur gunslinger) up to a maximum of her intelligence modifier. Every 2 levels thereafter, the Noir detective increases her starting grit per day by 1 (still up to a maximum of her intelligence modifier though).

At level 4: she gains studied combat and studied strike as normal except they only functions with unarmed strikes and saps.

The precision damage from studied combat AND studied strike applies to firearms as well, but not the accuracy bonus. HOWEVER, she can only maintain a steady enough hand for this when she indulges a vice. A vice can be anything (smoking a pipe, drinking alcohol, or gambling), but must cost the Noir investigator at least 1 gp that day. If she has not indulged her vice that day, then the precision damage still only applies to saps and unarmed strikes.

The Investigator loses Swift alchemy and instead gains the gunsmith feat. If she already has this feat she may choose a grit feat instead.

As an inspiration, the investigator may choose rapid reload or a grit feat.


Xaratherus wrote:
Javaed wrote:
With smart extract use you're perfectly viable at first level. You need a 16 and your to-hit stat and a flanking buddy for those first two levels is all. That's the same place Bards, Rogues, Clerics and other 3/4 fighters find themselves in. At level 3 you can grab your mutagen for those tough fights. Not as great as a full BAB class at pure melee combat, but you bring a lot more to the table.

Agreed. Go with a human Investigator (13\16\10\12\10 from a 20-point buy). Get Weapon Finesse and wield a rapier. Take Shield as your extract. You're getting a +3 to hit at that point, which is average for the level, and dealing 1d6+1, with an AC (completely unarmored) of 17 with Shield up. And you still have a feat and two traits left at that point.

[edit]
Alternatively, go with a STR build and do more damage (swap to 16\13 STR\DEX) and count on the fact that you can wear light armor to grant you the AC you need.

Excaliburproxy wrote:
Well, I feel like I have been pretty moderate on liking or disliking the first 3 levels, but I sure do wish someone would tell me the mechanism through which investigators contribute at low levels.
I don't see them as failing to contribute in the range in which they're intended to operate for combat purposes, which is that of a second-string melee combatant.

One fight a day they are not made of glass and land a blow that would have missed. Then back to sword fighting like a wizard at levels 1 and 2.


So for the first 3 levels, sure a Vivisectionist is stronger than an Investigator. I'm just saying the Investigator isn't absolutely hopeless. Frankly, I think it works better for the first couple of levels than a Dex-based Swashbuckler currently does =P.

Also Excaliburproxy, you should have at least 2 first level extracts per day at first level, and gain an additional extract at levels 2 and 3. If you want to use those in combat plan on using 1 per fight and they can stretch out the day. You also can get a mutagen at third level which can last for multiple fights. That's significantly more than just one combat a day and you should be pretty dominant during the out of combat stuff.

The class does have some early level issues, I just don't think they're absolutely crippling. Now, a few pages back I did make some suggestions that I think should be applied to class that help out those early levels.

1) Start talent progression at level 2

2) Allow selection of the Rogue talents that grant combat oriented feats. This change would also give us some viable options other than Mutagen for our first Talent.

3) Move Studied Combat to level 1 while leaving Studied Strike and the bonus precision damage at level 4. I've recently become ok with this suggested change, mostly because I like the idea of players getting used to the mechanics of Studied Combat at an earlier level.


Excaliburproxy wrote:

Anyways. Proposed Noir archetype:

Replace the normal weapon and armor proficiencies with ONLY leather armor, simple weapons, unarmed strikes (fisticuffs!), saps, and firearms.

The Noir investigator loses one extract of every level (only having extracts from high intelligence when this reduces the number of extracts to zero).

However, she does gain a battered pistol as a level 1 Gunslinger and the point-blank shot feat.

lv 2: replace poison lore with Amateur Gunslinger (with grit going to a maximum of the Noir Investigator's Intelligence instead of wisdom)

Replace poison resistance with "extra grit". At level 2, the investigator starts with two grit points a day (instead of the normal 1 from amateur gunslinger) up to a maximum of her intelligence modifier. Every 2 levels thereafter, the Noir detective increases her starting grit per day by 1 (still up to a maximum of her intelligence modifier though).

At level 4: she gains studied combat and studied strike as normal except they only functions with unarmed strikes and saps.

The precision damage from studied combat AND studied strike applies to firearms as well, but not the accuracy bonus. HOWEVER, she can only maintain a steady enough hand for this when she indulges a vice. A vice can be anything (smoking a pipe, drinking alcohol, or gambling), but must cost the Noir investigator at least 1 gp that day. If she has not indulged her vice that day, then the precision damage still only applies to saps and unarmed strikes.

The Investigator loses Swift alchemy and instead gains the gunsmith feat. If she already has this feat she may choose a grit feat instead.

As an inspiration, the investigator may choose rapid reload or a grit feat.

I actually rather like this idea. My main comments would be that the archetype should grant proficiency with Armored Coats (Combat Trench Coat) and that an extra Grit point every 2nd level would be way more Grit than most Grit-based classes get naturally.


As was mentioned previously. I think that 3+int poisons would be awesome little thing, maybe with the poison lore thing. With int based DC, either standard damage (I dunno what that would be.. Maybe upgrade through the poisons based on level) or maybe some status effect stuff. That would give people some of the debuffs they wanted, and would give the (admittedly small) poison loves some fun.
Edit: damage, sleep, or generic debuffs would be some interesting ideas.

also I wanted to ask since a few posts mentioned it.
Is Free Action (for studied strike) the action type that east your next rounds swift actin? or is it literally just free?

edit:
I dont have a lot of problems at low level stuff.. but my characters have almost always been weako at low levels since I favor casters or rogue/alchemist types. The poison thing could be a nifty lil helper.


I would love to see Investigator pick up Brew Potion as a bonus feat, if not at 1st level. Maybe 3rd or later? Or make it an Investigator Talent maybe?


Excaliburproxy wrote:
One fight a day they are not made of glass and land a blow that would have missed. Then back to sword fighting like a wizard at levels 1 and 2.

That +3 is constant; it's not dependent on your extracts at all; it's coming from either your STR or your DEX (depending on whether you're going a finesse build or a damage-dealing build).

Note again that the 17 AC isn't including any armor. Since you can wear light, you can pick up a chain shirt for a +4, giving you an AC of 21 (with shield up) or 17 (without), which is wholly sufficient for a first level character. If it seems too low you can get Combat Expertise and Threatening Defender and have an 18 with no penalty to attack rolls. And it leaves you both your extract slots open for whatever you choose.

Generally speaking, I don't see casters with a constant +3 to hit at 1st level. It either requires expending far more points in STR than a decent Wizard build would, or (if you go the DEX route) requires burning a feat on Weapon Finesse (which will be of little use a few levels down the road).

So I disagree; that's a consistent build that is the average AC for a martial character that doesn't have medium armor at 1st, and who has a decent bonus to attacks for a second-string martial combatant. It's not a Wizard fighting with a sword.

Could it be better? Of course. Would it be balanced to up its combat capability? According to the person designing the class, and who actually has the most raw data to analyze - nope.


I don't think McFarland said it would be unbalanced to raise his combat ability at lower levels. Just unnecessary.


Rynjin wrote:
I don't think McFarland said it would be unbalanced to raise his combat ability at lower levels. Just unnecessary.

Yes, you're right. I assumed that, "It seems okay where it is," meant that anything more would be too much, but that may not be absolutely true.


Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
TarkXT wrote:
Hmmm, while I can see where you're right about this that does leave us with a class who has no real ranged options to use with his abilities (save buffs from his extracts and inspiration).
You mean except for inspiration and poison use? And the fact that he is proficient in hand crossbows and other ranged weapons? Sure. He is no archer, but he is not really designed to be one.

Poison use is generally considered an evil option. I find it can't really be included in balancing for a class unless that class is intended to be played as evil, and in general think it should be one of several options for that reason.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:

Okay,

So studied combat and studied strike have been weigh on my mind a lot lately. People like the flavor and there seems a general condenses that it does not do enough damage, or at least consistent damage.

Here are my current thoughts on how to change the ability.

Studies strike stays the same (sort of, see below).

Studied combat becomes a move action to activate (with the quick study bumping it down to a swift). You then gain a half your investigator level bonus to melee attack rolls (as it is now) and as precision damage to the target (not multiplied on critical hits). You gain that precision damage even when you make studied strike. In other words there will be some wording that needs to be changed in studied strike to make that clear, because its time does not.

Thoughts?

This is a BIG step in the right direction. Now if you could get Studied Combat at 1st or second and have some way to get around the 24 hour thing, it'd be pretty much perfect.

Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:


Given our playtest data to this point, the investigator is pretty darn viable at early levels. There is even some mild concerns that it is rather front-loaded. Putting studied combat at an earlier level has a very low likelihood of occurring.

Really? *blinks* Really?

Having given the class a spin at levels 1-3, I'd say they where anything but. Light armor needs dex, damage needs str, class abilities use int, hp need con. Getting enough physical stats to be 'pretty darn viable' takes gutting your mental stats and calling it quits after your few extracts are used.

Now you CAN get by if you hide someplace and take potshots but any focus you use in ranged combat to live through 3rd is useless at forth when your class abilities force you to melee combat. Now if you get a free retraining at forth, maybe it could work...

Side by side levels 1-3, rogue and investigator, the poor investigator is sadly outmatched... And by monks... Heck, even by clerics! (full armor + shield + big weapon) Let's face it. In combat, they are 99.99% an npc class (the Expert) and it feels like it when you play it. For combat, your only 1st level extracts are a +4 ac for a few min or shrink for a few min.

Out of combat worked quite well. It would have been nice to have a talent at 1st to give characters a personal feel from the start. If feels a bit odd that they wait till 3rd when most other classes that get abilities like this start with them (alchemist get mutagen at 1 and discovery at 2, witch hex 1 and 2, wizard school ability at 1, sorcerer bloodline 1, domains at 1, ect). Or 2nd if 1 too 'frontloaded'.

Extra points:
#1 I'd like to see a talent/ability to cast cantrips (NOT SLA but cast). Even better would be a cantrip book!
#2 Poison Lore: Good work! Though not too sure how useful poison use is in the long run...
#3 Item Lore? Maybe if the class didn't get ID...
#4 Keen Recollection? By third you should have a point in all of those skills. As such, it's pretty useless.


On topic of ranged
It would be neat if you could pick up a talent or something to boost range.
Just have the accuracy but not hte extra damage bonus if it's terribly worried about the damage bonus boosting the ranged "machinegun" style fighitng. Though still allow the strike on ranged since its one hit for the whole hting

I was really loooking forward to building a ranged version of this before. With either vital strike or that precise shot (I think? the one that adds int damage). This is lead by some fluff ideas though. I like the measured one hit versus the machinegunning. It's always weaker than machine gunning but I find it a lot more amusing in the head movie


Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
Kevin Mack wrote:
Could you perhaps explain what you mean of more ranged damage dealing potential than typical character of this type because honestly not trying to be argumentative but I have a hard time thinking of any outside of an NPC class

By ranged damage abilities for a character of this type I mean sneak attack or precise strike (which has its own limits on ranged based on weapon type). I just have to pick a target, readiness or position means nothing to the investigator. If the proposed changes occur, you gain half your level in bonus damage and a fairly high base attack bonus, compared to that of the rogue. And you gain that ever time, along with what you can choose with your studied strike. If we then add condition adding talents along with that, you can apply those as well. Add poison and firearms to the mix, and we start getting into territory that is squarely outside the role we want the inquisitor to fill.

Hence, no ranged attack on studied attack and studied strike in the class itself.

I'd rather have the damage lowered and ranged attacks apply. You want something that allows consistent, effective damage than something that rarely works for a big hit of damage. The main complaint of many players is an inability to be consistently effective in combat which makes up such a large portion of the game.


Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
Adam B. 135 wrote:


Would you consider allowing Investigators to use Studied Combat more than one pert target per 24 hours? Like maybe 1 time with an additional use every few levels? Or maybe even infinite uses?

Absolutely. It was one of the things I brought up when we started discussing this option. I think my current favorite is by expending a use of inspiration when you studied combat, you can use it again on the same target.

We have a lot of different options on the table, and we are looking into which one solves the issues the best.

You know, spending an inspiration for that sounds a lot more fair than my thoughts of letting it be infinite. I vote to allow it to be reapplied with the use of inspiration. Though I believe it should either be part of the studied combat rules themselves, or rolled into the Quick Study talent. I do not believe it should be its own talent as that feels like an unnecessary tax. If anything should be its own separate talent, there should be a talent to do studied combat for free, but not to gain the option of using it again.


Adam B. 135 wrote:
You know, spending an inspiration for that sounds a lot more fair than my thoughts of letting it be infinite. I vote to allow it to be reapplied with the use of inspiration. Though I believe it should either be part of the studied combat rules themselves, or rolled into the Quick Study talent. I do not believe it should be its own talent as that feels like an unnecessary tax. If anything should be its own separate talent, there should be a talent to do studied combat for free, but not to gain the option of using it again.

Agreed on either rolling it into the base ability or making it part of Quick Study, assuming it's going to cost Inspiration. If you allow it to be done for free, then sure, make it a talent that unlocks (probably at mid-level); otherwise, the limited Inspiration uses already act a a balance mechanic making the 'talent tax' unnecessary (in my opinion).

Grand Lodge

Xaratherus wrote:

I have an Investigator in The Moonscar game I'm running so I'll try to have some feedback in the next week or so.

I would have it function thus:

Studied Combat is gained at 1st level; it starts as a move action and improves to a swift at 8th. Studied Defense gets built into the Studied Combat feature; you gain a number of points of insight bonus from Studied Combat that can be allotted to your AC or attack rolls, divvied up at the time you use Studied Combat. Otherwise, Studied Combat remains the same.

Studied Strike would be changed so that it can be performed once per round for the duration of Studied Combat.

Still working through this but yeah. Will be making more comments soon.

Grand Lodge

Rynjin wrote:
Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
But I have. I clearly explained in that post that the majority of the playtest data showed us that progression of sneak attack was too good. We gained that data from a mix of comments, playtest feedback, and survey results. We knew that we would either have to scale back the rate in which the investigator gains sneak attack, or replace it with an ability that allowed him to do something like sneak attack at the same progression, but with limitations.

Not to be rude, but did it? Did it REALLY?

Or did it just show that the Investigator was more powerful than the Rogue?

Anywho...there are a bunch of good ideas for Studied Combat that may work and be better thematically than what you have now. First and foremost, it should probably be moved to a Move or a Swift action. Second, it needs to be active from 1st level.

Third, I like what people have been suggesting for it to be a debuff rather than an attack boost. Or perhaps have it be an option. Hmm, lessee here:

Studied Combat (Ex): With a keen eye and a calculating mind, an investigator can measure the mettle and combat skill of his opponent, and take advantage of any gaps in talent or training. Starting at 1st level, an investigator can take a Move action to study single enemy that he can see. Upon doing so he adds half his Investigator level (minimum 1) to attack rolls against that opponent for a number of rounds equal to his Intelligence modifier, or until he chooses to make a Studied Strike, whichever comes first.

^Those are the changes that probably NEED to be made to Studied Combat.

However, I would add something else:

Starting at 5th level, an Investigator may instead choose to impart a penalty to AC and Saves to his opponent equal to his Intelligence modifier.

^This lets him work somewhat like a Witch, or a Void Wizard (but much less effective than that one), and help his party rather than just himself.

In keeping with that theme, I'd change Studied...

And this... With a possible need to burn inspiration to do so.

I love the discussion changing the class but to be able to be a debuffer in lieu of the DPR makes the class both valuable/ useful to play in combat AND flavoursome. Conditions inflicted and debuffs on the enemy rather than DPR is just what this class needs.

If we can get this in I'd be lining up to play one.


Xaratherus wrote:
Excaliburproxy wrote:
One fight a day they are not made of glass and land a blow that would have missed. Then back to sword fighting like a wizard at levels 1 and 2.

That +3 is constant; it's not dependent on your extracts at all; it's coming from either your STR or your DEX (depending on whether you're going a finesse build or a damage-dealing build).

Note again that the 17 AC isn't including any armor. Since you can wear light, you can pick up a chain shirt for a +4, giving you an AC of 21 (with shield up) or 17 (without), which is wholly sufficient for a first level character. If it seems too low you can get Combat Expertise and Threatening Defender and have an 18 with no penalty to attack rolls. And it leaves you both your extract slots open for whatever you choose.

Generally speaking, I don't see casters with a constant +3 to hit at 1st level. It either requires expending far more points in STR than a decent Wizard build would, or (if you go the DEX route) requires burning a feat on Weapon Finesse (which will be of little use a few levels down the road).

So I disagree; that's a consistent build that is the average AC for a martial character that doesn't have medium armor at 1st, and who has a decent bonus to attacks for a second-string martial combatant. It's not a Wizard fighting with a sword.

Could it be better? Of course. Would it be balanced to up its combat capability? According to the person designing the class, and who actually has the most raw data to analyze - nope.

Then what you are saying is that the class gives as much combat power as a commoner. There is no combat mechanic there, only "be happy using atributes and feats" Since we are here to discuss the class, I think only class features should be weighted. And since those, in this class, give no combat support until the 4th level, and even then an unsatisfying one, I dare to say this class(right now) is weaker than any other.


Heladriell wrote:
Then what you are saying is that the class gives as much combat power as a commoner. There is no combat mechanic there, only "be happy using atributes and feats" Since we are here to discuss the class, I think only class features should be weighted. And since those, in this class, give no combat support until the 4th level, and even then an unsatisfying one, I dare to say this class(right now) is weaker than any other.

The Commoner has no armor proficiency. It has proficiency with a simple weapon only. It's most likely not going to have a 20-point buy. It doesn't get extracts (which I used in the original scenario I painted), it doesn't get the chance to burn Inspiration to turn a miss into a hit (which I didn't call out, but it is there).

So no - it's more effective than a Commoner.

All that said, present your arguments to Stephen. People have been doing so since several pages ago, and despite that his feeling is (from the play test data) that the Investigator is fine. I'm sure that you'll have better luck than everyone else.

Or you could focus on the areas of the class that still have some likelihood of change. That's really been my point with my repetition of "The designer's said that low levels are fine and most likely won't change."

Sczarni

Xaratherus wrote:
Heladriell wrote:
Then what you are saying is that the class gives as much combat power as a commoner. There is no combat mechanic there, only "be happy using atributes and feats" Since we are here to discuss the class, I think only class features should be weighted. And since those, in this class, give no combat support until the 4th level, and even then an unsatisfying one, I dare to say this class(right now) is weaker than any other.

The Commoner has no armor proficiency. It has proficiency with a simple weapon only. It's most likely not going to have a 20-point buy. It doesn't get extracts (which I used in the original scenario I painted), it doesn't get the chance to burn Inspiration to turn a miss into a hit (which I didn't call out, but it is there).

So no - it's more effective than a Commoner.

All that said, present your arguments to Stephen. People have been doing so since several pages ago, and despite that his feeling is (from the play test data) that the Investigator is fine. I'm sure that you'll have better luck than everyone else.

Or you could focus on the areas of the class that still have some likelihood of change. That's really been my point with my repetition of "The designer's said that low levels are fine and most likely won't change."

Yet you are the only one who feels it necessary to repeat this sentiment ad nauseam, despite pages of people requesting otherwise. If anything, the sheer number of people requesting an alteration to the Investigator's level 1-3 combat effectiveness should be enough to at least get Stephen to reconsider his position.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

similarly to how the position of "dex to damage is too powerful; we didn't even want it as a mythic feat" is being reconsidered thanks to pages of protest from people in the swashbucker discussion. i suppose it could still not happen, but it's being considered because people feel strongly about it despite people like you, Xaratherus, telling them they should just give up.

701 to 750 of 830 << first < prev | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Advanced Class Guide Playtest / Class Discussion / Revised Investigator Discussion All Messageboards