| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And yet, as we created characters last night for an upcoming Skull&Shackles game, my friend who is awesome at rogues is making a rogue. Despite all the ACG playtest classes being available, with the caveat that they would have to be updated when the book came out, no one picked one of them. The rogue player looked at and considered swashbuckler and slayer, and went with rogue instead.
Even with the new stuff the rogue still has effectiveness in the hands of a skilled player.
Slayer and rogue just do not play the same. Slayers are full attackers primarily while rogues are sneak attackers primarily. That reinforces very different play styles.
For slayer players: Would you ever feint with your slayer?
Because I know my rogue would rather feint and sneak attack than full attack and not sneak attack.
Do I think the rogue could stand a damage boost? Yes.
Would slayer being better than a rogue mean that players looking for the rogues play style would play the slayer? No.
Did everyone who tried to make the TWF assassin out of the rogue leap for joy upon reading the slayer? Probably.
um what...
You know WHT the rogue constantly tries to feint? Because he can barely hit anything otherwise... I mean... your logic is so .... wow...
Actually, I don't find that feinting helps with hitting all that much. Seems like most of the mobs I have barely have dex score.
No. You feint to sneak attack. Eventually you greater feint + opportunist to sneak attack more. The slayer just doesn't care all that much about sneak attacks if that means giving up a full attack.
Also the whole "rogues can't hit anything!" has not been true for me at all and my current rogue is lvl 11 in RotRL.
Having 3/4 BAB cancels out with power attack.
+2 from flanking or +2 from being unseen, or attacking a feinted opponent; All that really does boost the rogue's chance to hit.
EDIT: Also the feint example is just to point out that a rogue will take a single attack over a full attack if the former is a sneak attack and the latter isn't. Slayer doesn't do that. That makes the play styles very different.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Slayers get plenty of sneak attacks off their full attack routine. It's called cornugan Smash+ Shatter defenses.
And yet, as we created characters last night for an upcoming Skull&Shackles game, my friend who is awesome at rogues is making a rogue. Despite all the ACG playtest classes being available, with the caveat that they would have to be updated when the book came out, no one picked one of them. The rogue player looked at and considered swashbuckler and slayer, and went with rogue instead.
Even with the new stuff the rogue still has effectiveness in the hands of a skilled player.
Slayer and rogue just do not play the same. Slayers are full attackers primarily while rogues are sneak attackers primarily. That reinforces very different play styles.
For slayer players: Would you ever feint with your slayer?
Because I know my rogue would rather feint and sneak attack than full attack and not sneak attack.
Do I think the rogue could stand a damage boost? Yes.
Would slayer being better than a rogue mean that players looking for the rogues play style would play the slayer? No.
Did everyone who tried to make the TWF assassin out of the rogue leap for joy upon reading the slayer? Probably.
um what...
You know WHT the rogue constantly tries to feint? Because he can barely hit anything otherwise... I mean... your logic is so .... wow...
Actually, I don't find that feinting helps with hitting all that much. Seems like most of the mobs I have barely have dex score.
No. You feint to sneak attack. Eventually you greater feint + opportunist to sneak attack more. The slayer just doesn't care all that much about sneak attacks if that means giving up a full attack.
Also the whole "rogues can't hit anything!" has not been true for me at all and my current rogue is lvl 11 in RotRL.
Having 3/4 BAB cancels out with power attack.
+2 from flanking or +2 from being unseen, or attacking a feinted opponent; All that really does boost the rogue's chance to hit.EDIT: Also the feint example is just to point out that a rogue will...
I'm so sick of the "Rogue can't hit ever" meme on these boards--
Its like we have to judge a solo rogue with no party and pretend that's all there is to it.
Does Rogue benefit from the Bards song bonuses along with the rest of the party?
Does he benefit from Haste that the Wizard cast?
Its like people pretend this is a solo game and all those effects aren't there. I've never seen Rogue has issues hitting with at a minimum their top attack. Maybe they can't Power attack, but they get Sneak Attack damage instead.
Slayer and rogue just do not play the same. Slayers are full attackers primarily while rogues are sneak attackers primarily. That reinforces very different play styles.
This is perhaps digressing, but I feel the tangent is worth exploring.
I don't follow your logic here; if one wishes to make full use of sneak attack, one still seeks to make full use of full attack, do they not?For slayer players: Would you ever feint with your slayer?
For a campaign I will soon be joining, it was a genuine consideration building him. I then realised that only at late levels would this provide something meaningful for giving up an attack.
Because I know my rogue would rather feint and sneak attack than full attack and not sneak attack.
The fact the system places a situation where you should give up your attacks to use your class feature seems problematic though, as I gave above - I decided that, for the Slayer, this cost is only paid at higher levels.
For a Rogue, this is evidently different - feint being of use far earlier, however - you need to use a specific set of feats to pull it off. It reduces your options character building, and playing. Both of which are not good design, in my opinion.Sure, you can flank - but so can anyone .
Do I think the rogue could stand a damage boost? Yes.
Would slayer being better than a rogue mean that players looking for the rogues play style would play the slayer? No.
I agree to the first line, but the second sounds a bit too blanket a statement for comfort here.
Overall, the problem I have is everything the Rogue can get, so can the Slayer - at full BAB, more combat feats (in a sense), and with better armour.EDIT: Just saw your edit, fair point - they do play very very differently, all things considered. Which matters a lot.
I'm so sick of the "Rogue can't hit ever" meme on these boards--
Well, you were the only one to say "Rogue can't hit ever" in this thread, and rogues tend to hit less than other classes because they have 3/4 BAB with no way to raise it in class while every other class has a way to boost their to hit, be it through magic, performance, or some other form of class feature. Rogues do hit less than other classes.
I'm so sick of the "Rogue can't hit ever" meme on these boards--
Its like we have to judge a solo rogue with no party and pretend that's all there is to it.
Does Rogue benefit from the Bards song bonuses along with the rest of the party?
Does he benefit from Haste that the Wizard cast?
Its like people pretend this is a solo game and all those effects aren't there. I've never seen Rogue has issues hitting with at a minimum their top attack. Maybe they can't Power attack, but they get Sneak Attack damage instead.
It's not about a solo judgement, it is appreciated that the Rogue can be buffed, but...
How to put this?I'll use quantum physics.
Imagine a barrier - and a pair of electrons travelling towards it. We'll assume they don't interfere for argument. One has more energy than the other and hence, a higher chance to tunnel through the barrier.
We can add energy to this system, increasing the chance of tunneling with either electron, but the one which already had higher energy still has a better chance to pass through. Significantly moreso now (exponential decays, and all that jazz).
So to put it, you can boost the Rogue and it may beat the challenge, but you had a better baseline and final result using most other classes.
Back on topic: I really hope one can use inquisitions rather than blessings on the Warpriest. Un-optimised as it is, I wish to build a Half-Orc Warpriest with as many proficiencies as I can squeeze in.
Wouldn't a Warpriest with inquisitions just be an inquisitor?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Slayers get plenty of sneak attacks off their full attack routine. It's called cornugan Smash+ Shatter defenses.
Yeah and people built strength rogues to do the same trick. Now they can just build strength slayers.
Maybe I'll never see another strength rogue again. (one can dream)
Wouldn't a Warpriest with inquisitions just be an inquisitor?
As much as a cleric with inquisitions is an inquisitor. or a paladin.
More to the inquisitor than inquisitions. Inquisitions aren't even an inquisitor only class feature.
Wouldn't a Warpriest with inquisitions just be an inquisitor?
Partially covered by MrSin. Admittedly, I do wonder if the flavour overlaps too closely - but I think they are defined enough by the Warpriest being so combat focused and having heavy armour.
Plus, all the self-buffing working differently.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Neither the Brawler nor Slayer even touch on matching the fighter for a lot of roles. A Sword-and-Board character is still best as a fighter
Rangers and Slayers getting Shield Master at level 6 say what?
[spoiler]
"F&@&in' sweet, yeah!" is what they say, in case you're curious.[/ooc]
Wouldn't a Warpriest with inquisitions just be an inquisitor?
They still lack Judgement and Bane (and Solo Tactics, which I actually quite like), have a much more MAD design, are incapable of being a skill class, and do not benefit from having a spell list actually designed or a 6 level caster instead of a truncated 9th level list they'll never get near the full use of.
So, no. I don't think so.
Warpriests will be better at straight up fighting than the Inquisitor (by default, Judgement + Bane can probably spike Inquisitors higher X times/day), but the Inquisitor has the edge in skills, a custom designed spell list, and some other nifty tricks.
And he'll probably go first.
I'm so sick of the "Rogue can't hit ever" meme on these boards--
Its like we have to judge a solo rogue with no party and pretend that's all there is to it.
Does Rogue benefit from the Bards song bonuses along with the rest of the party?
Does he benefit from Haste that the Wizard cast?
Its like people pretend this is a solo game and all those effects aren't there. I've never seen Rogue has issues hitting with at a minimum their top attack. Maybe they can't Power attack, but they get Sneak Attack damage instead.
It's not about a solo judgement, it is appreciated that the Rogue can be buffed, but...
How to put this?
I'll use quantum physics.
Imagine a barrier - and a pair of electrons travelling towards it. We'll assume they don't interfere for argument. One has more energy than the other and hence, a higher chance to tunnel through the barrier.
We can add energy to this system, increasing the chance of tunneling with either electron, but the one which already had higher energy still has a better chance to pass through. Significantly moreso now (exponential decays, and all that jazz).
So to put it, you can boost the Rogue and it may beat the challenge, but you had a better baseline and final result using most other classes.
The problem with the analogy is that in these situations you are dealing with unequal items--
There is not equal value in buffing Fighter/Barbarian as there is in buffing Rogue.
Your Fighter/Barbarian electrons are already likely to tunnel through-- and the difference between tunelling through or "really really tunneling through" is arbitrary and gains no value. (i.e. the difference between hitting and hitting with 5 points to spare grants nothing additional)
Meanwhile buffing out Rogue electron more often means the difference between tunneling through or not-- and when it does tunnel through the result is more significant due to extra damage gained.
So if you have the option to grant +5 to hit, for instance, the Rogue is the most valuable class to do so to for the maximum gain to the party.
(This is the same reason that True Strike is more valuable to Wizards than it is to Gish/Magi-- the straight Wizard is far less likely to hit, so the +20 will mean the difference between a miss and a hit more often while for Magus it likely means the difference between a hit and wasted additional bonus)
To your other, a Warpriest Archetype with Inquisitions would be cool. . . I am probably most looking forward to seeing the archetypes they have in this thing. I hope there are some for other classes to get a taste of the new abilities-- perhaps an Inquisitor archetype who gets blessings, for instance.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
+5 to hit? So my entire full attack is gonna hit? Sounds more valuable than buffing a rogues single attack.
Rangers and Slayers getting Shield Master at level 6 say what?
Spoiler:"F*$+in' sweet, yeah!" is what they say, in case you're curious.
Alright, you have me there, though a lack of heavy armor proficiency, fighter specific feats, and simply having a lot of them all say "hi."
But for the most part, my best argument would be the same as I make for Monks - having a lot of archetypes to play with vs. very few grants the fighter a lot more niches to play with. And I do not expect that to change for a long time, if ever.The problem with the analogy is that in these situations you are dealing with unequal items--
There're lots more, but we'll go with the thread relevant, sure (I jest).
The thing is, the Fighter and Barbarian had a good chance of success before, almost guaranteed after buffing - whilst the Rogue merely achives a good chance of success.Granted, we're being:
a) Vague - and should get numbers
b) Sort of off topic now
c) The beaters of a very dead horse
If I come back later and find other threads/posts said the Rogue gets more, I'll admit I'm wrong, for now, I'm sceptical.
Alright, you have me there, though a lack of heavy armor proficiency, fighter specific feats, and simply having a lot of them all say "hi."
A lot of those around. I mean everyone's just pouncing on fighter for those fighter only feats! And you certainly can't get heavy armor prof without being a fighter, no sir!
Yeah... not really much there imo.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Alright, you have me there, though a lack of heavy armor proficiency, fighter specific feats, and simply having a lot of them all say "hi."A lot of those around. I mean everyone's just pouncing on fighter for those fighter only feats! And you certainly can't get heavy armor prof without being a fighter, no sir!
Yeah... not really much there imo.
Sorry I can't hear you over my lvl 7 fighter's poor perception and 9 feats!
|
I will still play rogues, because they are a balance between Investigator and Slayer.
I will still play Sorcerers because they still have something to them, at the least I will only need Cha with them where Arcanists need Int too.
Wizards, though, I will be less likely to play in the future, but then again I HATE the Vancian magic system. Though I'm sure I will find some idea that demands Wizard levels.
Realistically, any additional classes will cause others classes to be played less. Some times you compromise when you put together a character, to make the concept you want. New classes mean some of those ideas have a new more appropriate home.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry I can't hear you over my lvl 7 fighter's poor perception and 9 feats!Alright, you have me there, though a lack of heavy armor proficiency, fighter specific feats, and simply having a lot of them all say "hi."A lot of those around. I mean everyone's just pouncing on fighter for those fighter only feats! And you certainly can't get heavy armor prof without being a fighter, no sir!
Yeah... not really much there imo.
My Barbarian with 4 feats and 3 "feats on steroids" heard it just fine.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was rolling up a wizard until the arcanist came out, and I decided to make an arcanist instead.
I set it up and realised I really wasn't happy with how it was turning out - I couldn't work out how to optimise it. People are saying it's the go-to arcane class, but I don't understand why.
It might be that I just need to look at a guide, or maybe they rule out sorcerers but not so much with wizards?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was rolling up a wizard until the arcanist came out, and I decided to make an arcanist instead.
I set it up and realised I really wasn't happy with how it was turning out - I couldn't work out how to optimise it. People are saying it's the go-to arcane class, but I don't understand why.
It might be that I just need to look at a guide, or maybe they rule out sorcerers but not so much with wizards?
Wizards still get spells a level earlier than Arcanists. So no, they don't outrule Wizards at all.
Wizards still get spells a level earlier than Arcanists. So no, they don't outrule Wizards at all.I was rolling up a wizard until the arcanist came out, and I decided to make an arcanist instead.
I set it up and realised I really wasn't happy with how it was turning out - I couldn't work out how to optimise it. People are saying it's the go-to arcane class, but I don't understand why.
It might be that I just need to look at a guide, or maybe they rule out sorcerers but not so much with wizards?
Oh! I forgot about this.
When Ultimate Magic's roster was first announced, I remember people being worried that the Magus was going to invalidate the Eldritch Knight. Yet I still see players asking for advice on becoming Eldritch Knights. Why is that? The simple answer is that the Eldritch Knight is for different types of players than the Magus. That's that.
In the same manner, the Slayer, Investigator, and Rogue are all for different types of players. Not all Rogue players choose Rogue because they want to murderface things. Some people simply like skill points and being good at the Charisma skills. The Slayer doesn't have Charisma-based skills and it has fewer skill points than the Rogue. Meanwhile, the Investigator is for the character who wants to go full-out on his skills and doesn't care about dealing massive amounts of damage. On average, the rogue is going to out-damage the investigator: the rogue sits at the middle ground between death machine and skills master. And its okay for that middle ground to exist.
That said, I do think that the Advanced Class Guide is going to necessitate a slight power increase for rogue talents and rogue archetypes.
There is one other class that kills certain rogue concepts. If you want to play a high dex, charismatic rogue that can do a lot of debuffing, you want to play a swashbuckler. A swift action when you hit to demoralize at 3rd (and charisma is going to be your second best attribute), the ability to deny dex for your friends, stagger or trip your opponents at 7th, and an attribute bleed attack at 11th just whomps all over the rogue's tricks.
You only have 4+int skill points, so you are probably not going to be the trapfinder, but you should have enough to be the face guy, with a little left over for perception, sense motive or maybe sleight of hand.
When Ultimate Magic's roster was first announced, I remember people being worried that the Magus was going to invalidate the Eldritch Knight. Yet I still see players asking for advice on becoming Eldritch Knights. Why is that? The simple answer is that the Eldritch Knight is for different types of players than the Magus. That's that.
To be fair, magus vs. eldritch knight is a pretty big difference. Eldritch knight doesn't have much in the way of class features and his big thing is having access to the nine level casting while also being able to whack things pretty well, while the magus is a guy with a specific spell list that cast while full attacking with his 3/4 BAB and burns an arcane pool for additional bonuses. Its also a PrC vs. actual class thing.
There's no promise there won't be that wide of a gap for the other classes.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My eidolon is a bear. A six armed pouncing flying superbear that speaks dwarvish. Its like a bear+5. A +5 vorpal bear ftw!
I died laughing. I'm a laughing ghost now. I'm off to find a cleric to raise me, if I can stop laughing.
My eidolon is a bear. A six armed pouncing flying superbear that speaks dwarvish. Its like a bear+5. A +5 vorpal bear ftw!I died laughing. I'm a laughing ghost now. I'm off to find a cleric to raise me, if I can stop laughing.
Its based on a true story, that was made up. Of a gopher. A six armed flying super gopher. His summoner is... a dirt farmer.
Multiclassing full BAB characters just got more attractive.
Good bye dragon disciple. You can now play it from level 1
Multiclassing/dipping characters is a thing of the past.
Dip one level of full bab class and suddenly i can use all the wands? Sweet.
Warpreist opens up a lot of strange weapon options: like a cleric of calden cayden with a beer mug.
I am rather worried about the swashbuckler. So far the dervish dancing bard seems to be the best actual swashbuckler. The strength swashbuckler was far and away the best option for swashbucklers , and none of their abilities actually granted it mobility.
Umm what? Ranger animal companion is way stronger. Boon companion+favored enemy.Can't a hunter share Animal Focus with their companion? Those bonuses might not be as strong as Favored Enemy, but they're more reliable.
It's important to remind that Boon Companion is an Enhancement bonus (unless they change this after the playtest ended) and will not stack with any buffs from items.
So the Hunter has Boon Companion, and the Ranger has Favored Enemy and any buffs from items.
Umm what? Ranger animal companion is way stronger. Boon companion+favored enemy.Can't a hunter share Animal Focus with their companion? Those bonuses might not be as strong as Favored Enemy, but they're more reliable.It's important to remind that Boon Companion is an Enhancement bonus (unless they change this after the playtest ended) and will not stack with any buffs from items.
So the Hunter has Boon Companion, and the Ranger has Favored Enemy and any buffs from items.
You mean Animal Focus? I believe the design team specifically made Animal Focus an enhancement bonus so that the Hunter couldn't get major bonuses on himself or his companion making it far more powerful than normal.
You mean Animal Focus? I believe the design team specifically made Animal Focus an enhancement bonus so that the Hunter couldn't get major bonuses on himself or his companion making it far more powerful than normal.Umm what? Ranger animal companion is way stronger. Boon companion+favored enemy.Can't a hunter share Animal Focus with their companion? Those bonuses might not be as strong as Favored Enemy, but they're more reliable.It's important to remind that Boon Companion is an Enhancement bonus (unless they change this after the playtest ended) and will not stack with any buffs from items.
So the Hunter has Boon Companion, and the Ranger has Favored Enemy and any buffs from items.
Yeah, the only big thing he has going for his pet is buffs from druid casting and the teamwork feats and I guess a bit of saved cash until endgame where everyone can get a +6 belt. Most teamwork feats are bleh though, and there isn't really anything he can do a druid can't do better if your talking spells. Hopefully he'll get more for his gig later.
As a DM, the Slayer has already impacted my games. I remade every Fighter/Rogue multiclassed NPC from Skulls and Shackles into a slayer.Glad I'm not the only one. Even though Gortus Svard just kicked my crew's ass because of it (though to be fair I also rebuilt him to take advantage of delicious sword and board-age too...).
You know what is great? My party managed to fight Gortus twice. Once in book 2, and once in book 6!
Performance wise, I think Slayers may just make the best "thug npc" I have ever seen. I only use fighters to be heavily armored thugs now, and all lightly armored thugs are slayers. I may someday use the rogue again, to make a few purposely weaker thugs in a bandit group, but no major foe will ever be a rogue.
I may use hunter the same way I will use rogues unless he sees some major buffs.
Bloodragers will make interesting and cool "Special" npc fight dudes. Totally cool for a campaign I will be basing in Arcadia, with Aztec and Native American themes. (Using Dragon bloodline for a literal Coatl warrior NPC).
As an actual player, I really want to use a Bloodrager, Swashbuckler, and Skald at least once. Skald looks very good, though it requires a less diverse party than a bard. His rage song mostly benefits melee characters, but can provide a damage buff to characters with Adaptive bows. Therefore, I will have to wait for a campaign that has a lot of melee characters.
You mean Animal Focus? I believe the design team specifically made Animal Focus an enhancement bonus so that the Hunter couldn't get major bonuses on himself or his companion making it far more powerful than normal.Umm what? Ranger animal companion is way stronger. Boon companion+favored enemy.Can't a hunter share Animal Focus with their companion? Those bonuses might not be as strong as Favored Enemy, but they're more reliable.It's important to remind that Boon Companion is an Enhancement bonus (unless they change this after the playtest ended) and will not stack with any buffs from items.
So the Hunter has Boon Companion, and the Ranger has Favored Enemy and any buffs from items.
Bah! Yeah, I meant Animal Focus. :(
As to the logic, what it boils down to is the 3/4 BAB class has no inherent way to buff it's to-hit. (Druid List spells are Enhancement, Animal Focus is Enhancement, and Items are Enhancement, so nothing stacks.)
If that particular situation is what kills Rogues' effectiveness, then how does it not also kill Hunter's?
Alright, you have me there, though a lack of heavy armor proficiency, fighter specific feats, and simply having a lot of them all say "hi."A lot of those around. I mean everyone's just pouncing on fighter for those fighter only feats! And you certainly can't get heavy armor prof without being a fighter, no sir!
Yeah... not really much there imo.
Yeah, alright, I concede. Out of ammo to play advocate now. I had been thinking mileage exists in disruptive, etc. Considering DC scaling in a more awake mode, yeah...no.
I'm left rather stumped, is there any ground the fighter maintains use post ACG?On average, the rogue is going to out-damage the investigator: the rogue sits at the middle ground between death machine and skills master. And its okay for that middle ground to exist.
See, I'd agree - but I actually think as a game progresses, the Investigator comes out on top for damage. Almost entirely because it has a means to increase its chance to hit things. Killing a large amount of that middle ground.
Which, when something that little may do it, along with the incredibly close proximity of the Ninja in terms of roles/gameplay, makes me think the Rogue has much less ground than even that.So I am in full agreement - new talents are needed (and would be pleasantly surprised to be wrong about the current Rogue).
The fighters niche at this point is heavily armed and armored elite generic warrior*. It's a great starter class and pretty forgiving when it comes to just full-attack combat. With his plethora of bonus feats, it's easier to recover from a bad feat selection, though I personally advocate guiding the choices of new players and advising them against certain options (under no circumstances are you to take the Run feat).
The fighter is not a bad class, when it comes to melee combat, he holds his own well. His specific weaknesses (will saves, utility, resource drain) are all that holds him back from being a good class all things considered.
I mean, no one looks at the fighter class and says, "This guy can't fight" they look at the class and say, "How the hell am I supposed to do anything other than swing my sword?"; conversely, you do have that problem with the Rogue, and to some extent, the Monk.
Both Fighters and Monks got amazing archetype support in further products, while on the flip side, archetype support for other classes stole liberally from the Rogue leaving nothing for the Rogue himself.
*With the possible exception of his Order, none of the Cavaliers class abilities increase his accuracy unless he's mounted and charging; in addition, Challenge only functions for melee attacks. All things considered, the Cavalier is not 'generic' enough to fit the 'generic role' Fighter does.
See, I'd agree - but I actually think as a game progresses, the Investigator comes out on top for damage. Almost entirely because it has a means to increase its chance to hit things.
I never looked too closely at the Investigator until I read your post, and wow I have to agree. I also didn't realize what I was missing. The ability to swift action mark an enemy (because no one in their right mind would pass on that talent) and give yourself +1/2 your level to hit is incredible, especially when used in conjunction with Inspiration so missing by 1 is a thing of the past. Add on buffs via Extracts and you are dominating the Rogue on attack rolls... even more so than before. The ability to end the ability and apply a sneak attack is also a nice finisher.
See, I'd agree - but I actually think as a game progresses, the Investigator comes out on top for damage. Almost entirely because it has a means to increase its chance to hit things.I never looked too closely at the Investigator until I read your post, and wow I have to agree. I also didn't realize what I was missing. The ability to swift action mark an enemy (because no one in their right mind would pass on that talent) and give yourself +1/2 your level to hit is incredible, especially when used in conjunction with Inspiration so missing by 1 is a thing of the past. Add on buffs via Extracts and you are dominating the Rogue on attack rolls... even more so than before. The ability to end the ability and apply a sneak attack is also a nice finisher.
Supposedly, Studied Combat/Strike will get a little better once the ACG is released because as written, it doesn't work. The duration is half you Int mod, which means a minimum of an 18 Int is necessary just so you can make an attack with it. Stephen clarified that it would be changed to a duration = to your Int mod, but that still means it's only going to last ~3 rounds unless you go Int prime, which means your other stats are really going to suffer.
I think he mentioned it functioning sort of like getting your Int mod as bonus damage during Studied Combat, but you can end it with Studied Strike for a massive single hit burst.
[Edit] Also, don't forget the Investigator has access to Mutagens (plus extracts!) if he chooses that discovery. So he's going to be able to go all Dr. Jekyl while also using Studied Combat.
==========
Anyone else wanting to run a Slayer that eventually uses TWF with swords of subtlety? By the time you can afford both, around ~12th level, you'll be getting +7 to hit and damage when using Favored Target and Sneak Attacking. That would make for one mean TWF warrior, that's for sure!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
See, I'd agree - but I actually think as a game progresses, the Investigator comes out on top for damage. Almost entirely because it has a means to increase its chance to hit things.I never looked too closely at the Investigator until I read your post, and wow I have to agree. I also didn't realize what I was missing. The ability to swift action mark an enemy (because no one in their right mind would pass on that talent) and give yourself +1/2 your level to hit is incredible, especially when used in conjunction with Inspiration so missing by 1 is a thing of the past. Add on buffs via Extracts and you are dominating the Rogue on attack rolls... even more so than before. The ability to end the ability and apply a sneak attack is also a nice finisher.Supposedly, Studied Combat/Strike will get a little better once the ACG is released because as written, it doesn't work. The duration is half you Int mod, which means a minimum of an 18 Int is necessary just so you can make an attack with it. Stephen clarified that it would be changed to a duration = to your Int mod, but that still means it's only going to last ~3 rounds unless you go Int prime, which means your other stats are really going to suffer.
I think he mentioned it functioning sort of like getting your Int mod as bonus damage during Studied Combat, but you can end it with Studied Strike for a massive single hit burst.
[Edit] Also, don't forget the Investigator has access to Mutagens (plus extracts!) if he chooses that discovery. So he's going to be able to go all Dr. Jekyl while also using Studied Combat.
==========
Anyone else wanting to run a Slayer that eventually uses TWF with swords of subtlety? By the time you can afford both, around ~12th level, you'll be getting +7 to hit and damage when using Favored Target and Sneak Attacking. That would make for one...
Toothy Half orc TWF with two swords of subtly and cornugan smash+shatter defenses. Your first hit to intimidate them and then the rest of your attacks have sneak attack dice.
I didn't notice Mutagen was on the list. Very interesting. The buff to Int mod rounds should be adequate I think; honestly how likely is it to be standing after 3 rounds? That said I didn't notice the issue of 1/2 rounds minimum 1 when I first read it, but yeah I see what you mean now. That's what I get for missing the fine print :p
But TWF Slayer... I like it. Slayer in general makes me happy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It'll probably result in fewer '1-2 level dips' in various classes to get the character to try to fit into some specific role, as there are more classes now that are closer to those mixed roles.
The fighters niche at this point is heavily armed and armored elite generic warrior*. It's a great starter class and pretty forgiving when it comes to just full-attack combat.
...
Fair points in there, especially the archetype one (if only because I see that as validating one of the arguments I could summon for Fighters/Monks). Though on making the fighter do anything else...swing a hammer?
Yes the Investigator, for being the skill-monkey side of a Rogue, comes out with an extremely strong showing on combat. Studied combat having no apparent uses/day limit only leaves it a wonderful means to consistently sneak attack, which, alongside mutagens inspiration, etc - the Investigator just comes out straight-up stronger.
The Slayer is a beautiful machine. No questions about it. Though I do think the Ranger may remain equal/better with spells, animal companions, etc. - unless you play with a party that can deliver flanking a lot.
Yes the Investigator, for being the skill-monkey side of a Rogue, comes out with an extremely strong showing on combat. Studied combat having no apparent uses/day limit only leaves it a wonderful means to consistently sneak attack, which, alongside mutagens inspiration, etc - the Investigator just comes out straight-up stronger.
In the last version of the play test, the Investigator lost sneak attack completely. I'm not sure if something more has been said since then, but last I knew, the Investigator didn't perform exceptionally well in combat on it's own. Though it could probably be made to be acceptable, as it was written. That said, I expect the Investigator to get some love in the final release - probably some buff to his combat abilities. Hopefully not too much though.
Yes the Investigator, for being the skill-monkey side of a Rogue, comes out with an extremely strong showing on combat. Studied combat having no apparent uses/day limit only leaves it a wonderful means to consistently sneak attack, which, alongside mutagens inspiration, etc - the Investigator just comes out straight-up stronger.In the last version of the play test, the Investigator lost sneak attack completely. I'm not sure if something more has been said since then, but last I knew, the Investigator didn't perform exceptionally well in combat on it's own. Though it could probably be made to be acceptable, as it was written. That said, I expect the Investigator to get some love in the final release - probably some buff to his combat abilities. Hopefully not too much though.
They don't have "sneak attack" per say...
What they got was Studied Strike
choose to make a studied strike against the target of his
studied combat as a free action upon successfully hitting
with a melee attack to deal additional damage. The
damage is 1d6 at 4th level and increases by 1d6 for every
two investigator levels thereafter (to a maximum of 9d6
at 20th level). The damage of studied strike is precision
damage and is not multiplied on a critical hit; creatures
that are immune to sneak attack are also immune to
studied strike.
If the investigator’s attack used a weapon that deals
nonlethal damage (like a sap, whip, or an unarmed
strike), he may choose to have the additional damage
from studied strike be nonlethal damage instead of
lethal damage. If the investigator chose to make an attack
with a lethal weapon instead do nonlethal damage (with
the usual –4 penalty), the studied strike damage may also
deal nonlethal damage.
The investigator must be able to see the target well
enough to pick out a vital spot and must be able to reach
such a spot. An investigator cannot use studied strike
against a creature with concealment.
Studied Strike is pretty much sneak attack though, it is just behind by 1 dice and requires Studied Combat though to trigger
|
|
Wouldn't a Warpriest with inquisitions just be an inquisitor?As much as a cleric with inquisitions is an inquisitor. or a paladin.
More to the inquisitor than inquisitions. Inquisitions aren't even an inquisitor only class feature.
Yeah, Inquisitor is a good skill monkey with a good burst damage. The Warpriest is more good sustained damage with lousy skills. Both can cast spells so both have some self sufficiency. Neither of course can compare to a Paladin in defenses and survivability, but this is by design.
The swashbuckler is already a huge hit in my group. We had to change our characters in Council of Thieves because we were all playing them.
Fair points in there, especially the archetype one (if only because I see that as validating one of the arguments I could summon for Fighters/Monks). Though on making the fighter do anything else...swing a hammer?The fighters niche at this point is heavily armed and armored elite generic warrior*. It's a great starter class and pretty forgiving when it comes to just full-attack combat.
...
By 'swing a sword' I meant 'attack'. Outside of just attacking the fighter doesn't really bring much to the table. No skill points, no spells/spell-like abilities/supernatural abilities to use etc.
They don't have "sneak attack" per say...
What they got was Studied Strike
** spoiler omitted ***
Studied Strike is pretty much sneak attack though, it is just behind by 1 dice and requires Studied Combat though to trigger.
Eh... Studied Combat/Strike is better than Sneak Attack IMO because it also increases your accuracy. At the same time, Studied Strike ends Studied Combat once you use it and Studied Combat is limited to once per enemy per 24 hours. So you only want to use Studied Strike either one the last round of Studied Combat, or if you absolutely know you will kill the guy.
It's too bad Studied Strike isn't considered Sneak Attack or you could get really mean with a Knockout Artist/Sap Adept/Sap Master combo on your Studied Strike.
Well, thematically speaking, Bloodrager sorta does that. Which is what I assume he's talking about.Good bye dragon disciple. You can now play it from level 1I must have missed something. Explain, please...?
Yeah I guess he means draconic bloodline blood rager. My hope is to be able to do both, and allow the dragon disciples bloodline ability to extend blood rage, that would be fun. Dont know if we ever got an answer to that question in the playtest.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think the game will be "power creep" so much, though I do think there are going to be one or two classes that find their narrow niches getting a little bit narrower as the ACG classes step in to more successfully fill concepts that the core classes tried to step into previously.
I personally foresee a lot more demand for dark fantasy, steampunk, and Lovecraftian campaigns from my group. With the Brawler, Investigator, Gunslinger, and Alchemist all in the game now, there's a lot of core support for entire parties that are made up of non-traditional elements that aren't really classic fantasy but make great fits for campaigns that revolve around coal-powered airships, mysterious cults working from universities or advanced urban environments, etc.
I know one of my regular players is actually in the middle of putting together a Lovecraftian Pathfinder campaign as we speak.