Alright, you have me. I have no experience of the content at all, didn't do the math for any others I have played (which is shameful, because I mainly play 2e), and I have just started playing PF. I guess I just needed to blow off steam for some reason.I agree that class bloat is annoying, it shows in the ACG sometimes. I look at the Hunter and can't help but scratch my head. A wilderness warrior who uses druidic magic and an animal companion? I could have sworn we had one of those.
Similar, albeit to a lesser extent with say, the Warpriest: We have melee clerics, fighter-clerics, paladins and now Warpriests all being heavily equipped holy warriors.
But I do think that subscribing to a number as to when we have enough as wrong, as long as the ideas are good (Which they are in some cases!) might as well keep 'em coming.
But Paladins aren't fighting Cleric as Clerics cast better, fighter better once buffed, and can any alignment.
Warpriest cast better than Paladins as well, heal self as a swift action, and make any weapon do better base damage to sum them up.Pals don't matter based on god (same code): Clerics and War Priest do since they get domains.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Paladins are not martial clerics, they're champions of Law and Good. Who they worship doesn't really matter to the mechanics of their class.
Clerics are the full casters of a God and the instruments of their will. They are the voice and the ears of their God.
Warpriests are the weapon and shield of their God. They fight the wars, and defend the servants of their God.
While Warpriests and Clerics can both do similar things, one is better at something than the other. Warpriests are probably going to be better at fighting than Clerics, while Clerics will be better at casting than Warpriests.
Remember, there are no NG, CG, LN, N, CN, LE, or NE Paladins in the game. Faiths of those alignments, up to this point, have had no 'Paladin' that serves those alignments. Warpriest fills that niche.
As it stands, you basically make a full party of Divine characters to play as.
For Skill Monkeys, you have Inquisitors and Rangers.
For full Casters, you have Clerics, Oracles and Druids.
For Martials you have Rangers, Warpriests and Paladins.
There isn't really an Arcane analogue, but another full Divine Caster with the right class choices can fill in some of the Arcane niche (especially Druids).
I would love to see a party consisting of an Inquisitor, Warpriest, Cleric and Druid in action. It'd be a pretty mean little combination as each one would be capable of healing each other if they need to.
Honestly despite how critical I've sounded the only class I really dislike in the ACG is the hunter.
I agree, I don't think the Hunter really fills a niche that hasn't adequately been filled by others. Although, I think the Arcanist gives the Hunter a run for his money for 'unneeded class'.
I'd have much rather seen like a Barbarian/Witch combo (or something like that) to represent a Warlock or a Wizard/Cleric class.
I like the idea that the hunter shares teamwork feats with his AC. But besides that I didn't really pay attention to "another ranger type".
Worst part is that's not even really unique.
Inquisitor with the Animal Domain pretty much has that already. And 6 level spells, Judgement, Bane, etc.
The Hunter as a whole was pretty poorly thought out. I don't think anyone really liked it a whole ton.
Hunter was a way to give rogues full BAB
Hunter was a way to give rogues full BAB
That's Slayer. Slayer's pretty nice.
It didnt help that the dev in charge of Hunter was really against almost all the feedback given.
yea i confused the two.
Well their animal companion does get permanent enhancement bonuses through aspect, but that felt like something a druid archetype with diminished spellcasting could do.
The Ranger has a better animal companion since they get favored enemy and you should always take boon companion.
Druid animal companion doesnt get anything, but he's hanging out with a full caster.
The hunter is only better than a Druid or Ranger at level one. Past that the Hunter is BAD. They should have balanced Hunter arou d the Summoner, not the rogue.
Yea, how about no. We don't need any more classes of the summoner's power level.
I wouldn't be surprised if there were some more drastic changes to the hunter. I think the "nature rogue" is needed, but I'd have been more a fan of a druid/inquisitor type.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
One thing to note, though, is that the hunter combines solid armor/weapon proficiencies (including metal armor) with the full list of companion choices from level 1.
The ranger can have a fully-leveled companion (at the cost of a feat), but it's from a restricted list and starts late.
The druid can access any animal at 1st, but has limited weapon proficiencies and the armor restriction.
So if you want to fight in melee yourself and also have an exotic companion, the hunter fills that niche from level 1. For example, if I wanted to make some kind of "sky knight" who charges with a lance from the back of his dire bat mount, hunter would be the way to go. The ranger needs an archetype before he can even get that type of mount, and even then waits until (effectively) 5th level before being the character you wanted. The druid gets the companion immediately, but has armor issues and needs feats or dipping to get the lance.
Now, whether that niche is big enough to justify another class is another question altogether, but I just wanted to throw that out there.
Sky night? You mean a level 7 Ranger with a flying Animal companion?
Dude who fights in melee with his Animal companion? You mean a Druid or Ranger?
The hunter fills no niche. He is only better than a Ranger in spellcasting. He is only better than a Druid in archery.
What he should have been is "the natury beast master class" and for that his companion needs to be as good as an Eidolon. The dev in charge wouldn't have any of that and instead put his fingers in his ears and went "nah nah nah I'm not listening"
You may be able to "do unique things" as a Hunter, but you can't do them well
It didnt help that the dev in charge of Hunter was really against almost all the feedback given.
It probably seemed that way because so much of the feedback was about the same one or two things ("We don't like animal aspect! Change/get rid of spellcasting!").
To my recollection, though, he was pretty open about a lot of the feedback that wasn't focused on those areas, and implemented some of the ideas (one of which was a suggestion by me. Yay!)
The problem was that the feedback that he didnt like was about the core problem of the class, but because the dev liked the core feature so much he ignored the flaws.
Because of this the core feature is weak and so is the class because of it.
Who was in charge of the Hunter?
Now, whether that niche is big enough to justify another class...
It isn't. The Hunter is a pretty good example of the basic ridiculousness of the 3.5/PF approach of making a new class for every little variation of everything you might think about wanting to do, rather than going in a far more sensible Star Wars Saga (or dare I suggest Hero System) direction and condensing or dispensing with classes.
Partially I think they do this because some people can't seem to wrap their heads around the idea of reskinning. Personally, I hope that eventually people will stop shopping for prepackaged classes and start off saying "I want to play a guy that does X; let's see which combinations of mechanics do that most interestingly."
This would also, one hopes, go some way to eliminating the suspension-of-disbelief-destroying silliness of people acting as though they posses in-game knowledge about what it means to be a "Summoner" rather than a "Conjurer" or a "Fighter/Oracle" rather than a "Warpriest," et al.
EDIT: The basic multiclassing conceit of 3.5 is one that lends itself, in a lot of ways, to a simulationist attitude toward character creation. I often get the feeling, however, that perhaps the Paizo crew that inherited the system are largely non-sim oriented gamers. They seem at times to scorn multiclassing, and to do things both systematically and culturally to discourage it. Which is, to my way of thinking, counter-productive and even a bit disrespectful. Dance with the one that brought you, I say.
Who was in charge of the Hunter?
I've avoided saying his name because the mods are very brutal to anyone who even suggests that its possible for him to make mistakes.
He did make the Skald and Slayer who were great successes! I think he used up all his creative juice making those classes good and didnt have anything left for the Hunter.
He also did Brawler.
Another hint: As of March he no longer works at Paizo. Filling his job requires at least 5 years as a designer, furthering tabletop gaming into a tight circle and keeping new talent from getting real positions at a major player of the industry.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Who was in charge of the Hunter?
Guess.
Who was in charge of the Hunter?I've avoided saying his name because the mods are very brutal to anyone who even suggests that its possible for him to make mistakes.
He did make the Skald and Slayer...He also did Brawler.
Unless it was God, that's a silly reaction. And interesting. The Slayer and Brawler seem to me like really solid (if kind of uninspired) classes. The Skald is sort of meh (why isn't it just an archetype or reskinned basic Bard?). And the Hunter, well...in that case I have sympathy. The designer was stuck between a rock and a caster/martial disparity place.
Skald is solid rules wise within its own niche.
Same with Slayer
Brawler could use some tweaks, but I see it getting stronger between now and full deplo.
The Hunter was rotten in its core mechanic. Hard to fix that.
Considering hoe many posts I've had deleted for mentioning certain things my caution is justified.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
even suggests that its possible for him to make mistakes.
put his fingers in his ears and went "nah nah nah I'm not listening"
Your inability to tell the difference between these two concepts has more to do with the deletion of your posts than any "brutality" on the part of the moderators.
Considering hoe many posts I've had deleted for mentioning certain things my caution is justified.
Totally. I meant harshness and deleting your posts for being critical of the designs of whoever it is (assuming those posts weren't outright insulting) was the silly reaction.
Dude have you seen the Hunter thread? Pages upon pages of "man that core mechanic blows, you should fix it"
Shrugged off because he disagreed. He was wrong on that one.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Dude have you seen the Hunter thread? Pages upon pages of "man that core mechanic blows, you should fix it"
Shrugged off because he disagreed. He was wrong on that one.
Shrugged off because he disagreed, or because the most helpful commentary people could manage to articulate was "that blows, fix it"?
Sorry if I'm being any ammount vitriolic, just a little jaded from the ACG playtest and how a lot of feedback was treated.
When all these classes were just names and 1-2 sentence descriptions I was most excited for the Hunter and Skald. Thought that Warpriest had no place and that the investigator was gonna blow.
Post test I can see that the Warpriest and Investigator were so well handled and that the devs properly responded to feedback to create amazing classes.
All the while watching the Hunter stagnate as a terrible,un needed class.
Shrugged off because he disagreed, or because the most helpful commentary people could manage to articulate was "that blows, fix it"?Dude have you seen the Hunter thread? Pages upon pages of "man that core mechanic blows, you should fix it"
Shrugged off because he disagreed. He was wrong on that one.
I summarized it. A lot of the "that blows" were comparative Druid and Ranger builds, DPR calculations, and encounters vs CR appropriate monsters. None of which showed an advantage for Hunter.
Shrugged off because he disagreed, or because the most helpful commentary people could manage to articulate was "that blows, fix it"?Dude have you seen the Hunter thread? Pages upon pages of "man that core mechanic blows, you should fix it"
Shrugged off because he disagreed. He was wrong on that one.
Because he disagreed. There were quite a few alternate suggestions thrown out that were ignored as either unneeded or too different from what was already there.
Which wouldn't be so bad if he would have at least acknowledged that there was a problem with said core mechanic and that he'd find SOMETHING to do with it instead of dressing up the minor bits around it in the hopes of hiding that it wasn't good.
Similarly, many things were brought up to spruce up the Brawler, but all were ignored, bar one (Awesome Blow being moved back from "Capstone, and therefore unusable in most cases" to "16th level class ability most still won't be able to use and doesn't warrant that high of a level").
There was a lot of feedback like that yes, but there was an equal ammount of feedback that wasn't like that and was focused on making the Hunter decent.
I suspected, but I didn't want to call it out until I knew better. There's no reason to be cautious about dropping Sean's name, especially considering his stances on the classes have been pointed out multiple times as being 'unyielding' on multiple classes in this playtest.
Personally, I think Stephen's input was fantastic in the playtest, he was very receptive of criticism, input and alternate ideas and was willing to talk about the whys and why nots of different ideas.
My overview on the Advanced class guide playtest
Stephen: Was very considerate and treated players with lots of respect as he worked together with the players to create fun and awesome classes.
Jason: More hands off, but based on changes made in the second draft it's obvious that he read through the entire thread and worked very hard to deliver something fun and flavorful
SKR: Ignored and hand waved criticisms, talked down to players,and went on his merry way. Based on changes in the second draft it's obvious that SKR doesn't care much for the Hunter or Brawler considering how bad both those classes are.
That was my feedback at the top of page 3. Stephen was abasolutely amazing. Jason didn't respond much, but his changes for draft 2 showed he paid attention.
He who shall not be named had very small changes between each classes first and second draft. This is reflective of his overconfidence in the viability of his work despite evidence to the contrary.
Who was in charge of the Hunter?I've avoided saying his name because the mods are very brutal to anyone who even suggests that its possible for him to make mistakes.
He did make the Skald and Slayer who were great successes! I think he used up all his creative juice making those classes good and didnt have anything left for the Hunter.
He also did Brawler.
Another hint: As of March he no longer works at Paizo. Filling his job requires at least 5 years as a designer, furthering tabletop gaming into a tight circle and keeping new talent from getting real positions at a major player of the industry.
If it is who I think it is, I am no fan of his, but I think you are WAAAAAAY overboard and wrong on this one.
I also think you are counting FAR to much accordance to the board. (few but loud voices).
I think a LOT of the influence was ALSO what people responded to the survey, and without those results, you, me, and everyone else have no way to tell how many were actually unhappy with the hunter or any other class, or were happy with how it was, or thought it needed to be overpowered, underpowered, etc.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
5 years as a designer, furthering tabletop gaming into a tight circle and keeping new talent from getting real positions at a major player of the industry.
One could say that about literally any job listing, in any industry, that asks for experienced candidates.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
5 years as a designer, furthering tabletop gaming into a tight circle and keeping new talent from getting real positions at a major player of the industry.One could say that about literally any job listing, in any industry, that asks for experienced candidates.
Most industries don't have such a small pool of available candidates to draw from. In, say, the movie industry, you can find people who've been around for 5 years or more quite easily, because there are a LOT of candidates to choose from. The TTRPG industry is miniscule by comparison and is mostly made up of the same people who've been doing it for froever.
The way this is set up, when one designer leaves the only other options are the same designers that have been rotating out of the business for decades now.
Given how rarely Paizo hires new designers, this means it's effectively impossible to get fresh blood into the industry (at least in this venue. And given that they're currently the most successful company, that's an important venue.). And even the best designers need a breath of fresh air or a new perspective every now and then to stop the design process from turning into an echo chamber.
That was my feedback at the top of page 3. Stephen was abasolutely amazing. Jason didn't respond much, but his changes for draft 2 showed he paid attention.
He who shall not be named had very small changes between each classes first and second draft. This is reflective of his overconfidence in the viability of his work despite evidence to the contrary.
Stephen is the model Paizo needs to base their next playtest off of. Engaged, ready to explain WHY he made the design choices he did, flexible and willing to listen to criticism (regardless of tone. Though in an ideal world all criticism would be politely worded, it's not realistically the case, and it's good that he can recognize a nugget of good in a post made of pure hate), etc.
It accomplished everything a playtest should, leaving both the playtester and the designer happy with the possible end product and confident in the designer's abilities.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The lack of new design inspiration is why I've spent a lot of time reading DSP stuff. They've got a lot of stuff going on with Psionics, but they recently made a new set that is similar to old "tomb of Battle" but more in line with Pathfinder and with interesting class features. Anyway thats beyond this threads scope.
I really do think the playtest went well. I mean a bunch of classes I had no interest in ended up being super cool!
Most industries don't have such a small pool of available candidates to draw from. In, say, the movie industry, you can find people who've been around for 5 years or more quite easily, because there are a LOT of candidates to choose from. The TTRPG industry is miniscule by comparison and is mostly made up of the same people who've been doing it for froever.
The way this is set up, when one designer leaves the only other options are the same designers that have been rotating out of the business for decades now.
Given how rarely Paizo hires new designers, this means it's effectively impossible to get fresh blood into the industry (at least in this venue. And given that they're currently the most successful company, that's an important venue.). And even the best designers need a breath of fresh air or a new perspective every now and then to stop the design process from turning into an echo chamber.
Frankly, someone who hasn't been working in the industry for awhile isn't qualified to have Sean's job. They need someone who can slot into the existing rules team and work on high-profile, expensive, hardcover books with tight development timelines.
But also, there are ways to get industry experience without being hired at Paizo. Work for a 3PP, or found your own (like Owen Stephens did). Or apply for some other opening, that doesn't require industry experience, and get experience in the company that way (Rob McCreary and Mark Moreland didn't have industry experience when they were hired.)
Game design isn't the hermetic ivory tower you imagine it to be. It is a niche industry with a small pool of full-time employees. I'm sorry if you feel you're being excluded or you wish to be the 'breath of fresh air', but if you cannot see why they are looking for an experienced candidate then you have no idea how the game or publishing industries work.
I have personal disagreements about who is qualified to replace a certain dev.
I'd hope the goal is to find someone as good or better.
Not easy to achieve.
I have personal disagreements about who is qualified to replace a certain dev.
That's clear, and I've noted you didn't miss the chance to get another jab in, but shouldn't the point be to find the best candidate possible, regardless of who just vacated the position?
In terms of fluff, SKR is great. My favorite material (the stuff in adventure Paths on Deitys)was written by him. I don't think his rules mastery is as up to par. He's like anti matt ward (works for GW, is amazing at game crunch, terrible at story).
Anyway, this is getting off topic. We should get back on topic before mass deletions and a lock.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why do some folks act like Sean killed their pet?
I don't get it.
He could not have done possibly anything personal enough to random people on the internet to warrant the d-baggery that is on display sometimes.
Game design isn't the hermetic ivory tower you imagine it to be. It is a niche industry with a small pool of full-time employees. I'm sorry if you feel you're being excluded or you wish to be the 'breath of fresh air', but if you cannot see why they are looking for an experienced candidate then you have no idea how the game or publishing industries work.
I get that they want an experience candidate to replace an experienced designer who just left.
I don't get why they're averse to having less experienced designers GET experience.
They've artificially limited their candidate pool by a lot. Must live in Seattle and must have 5 years of experience (in the TTRPG industry) is limiting the candidates to maybe a handful of acceptable ones.
And no, I have no desire to work at Paizo myself. TTRPGs are a hobby to me, but I don't get the same spark of fun as when I work on something else game related.
Plus, I doubt personalities would mesh very well, if the mutual dislike SKR and I had for each other is any indicator.
I don't get why they're averse to having less experienced designers GET experience.
They're not. Lots of Paizo employees had no game-industry experience when they joined the company.
This just isn't the job for them to gain experience IN.
(The company is located in Redmond. How would you suggest they deal with needing a Seattle-area resident for an employee? Commute via teleported isn't an option yet, so far as I know.)
Why do some folks act like Sean killed their pet?
I don't get it.He could not have done possibly anything personal enough to random people on the internet to warrant the d-baggery that is on display sometimes.
Ok here is what I know he did, but it's not a comprehensive list. Proof is on these boards, just hard to find. There are screenshots too.
-Killed the Monk class
-Treated a lot of play testers badly in the play test
-Made a lot of very bad feats and class abilities
-Played a huge part in why Crossbows are so bad
-Helped nerf martial characters a lot
If you like Monks then yes, SKR did in fact kick your puppy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
None of that is personal.
(The company is located in Redmond. How would you suggest they deal with needing a Seattle-area resident for an employee? Commute via teleported isn't an option yet, so far as I know.)
Ideally, entry level positions that can support telecommuting. I understand that Paizo can't afford to fly people around for work, and I don't expect them to, but surely there are some jobs that can be done, at least short term (6 months to a year, perhaps) with the person working from home and staying in constant contact with the main team.
I understand that indirect communication is a bit hectic when it comes down to crunch time, which is why I don't suggest it for the core positions (like SKR's position, if we're being honest), but fringe positions like artwork, story outline, etc. shouldn't have as much of an issue.
Apologies if this is how it's already done, but the way things are worded on the "Apply Here" section or what have you implies this is not the case.