| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, now that the ACG is out, I thought of rating the new classes in their published version. I expect that some of my opinions will probably be overruled by feats/abilities/items I have missed in my first perusal of the ACG.
Arcanist: Extremely powerful class. SAD, because you really don't need Charisma after all, since the really good exploits don't depend on that attribute. Seems to me that the guys at Paizo looked at the Schrödingers Wizard stereotype and said to themselves "I wonder if we can do that...". Some of the exploits are crazy good, like counterspelling as an immediate action. 10/10 for power; 1/10 for class design.
Bloodrager: Very solid melee class. I don't think that the spellcasting is as beneficial to the class as many would think, since you can't do it faster than normal (as the Warpriest can), but if you select some long duration buffs, it will still be beneficial. 8/10
Brawler: Again, a solid class, although I think that the limited charges per day on Martial Flexibility are not enough to use it as much as you would want to. Paizo has shown a great proclivity for implementing limited charge class abilities in their class design, but I think that here they may have calculated a bit low. 7/10
Hunter: I like redheads and wolves, so I am pre-inclined to like this class. :p However, upon looking at the class instead of the iconic(s), I think it still is underpowered. Since the class wants to do things by itself (and not only have the animal companion do them), it suffers from its 3/4 BAB and a lack of self-buff spells. The Animal Focus class feature does not seem to provide the necessary "ooomph" it would need. 5/10
Investigator: A very good skill monkey, with added versatility due to his alchemical expertise. As far as I can see, Studied Strike is a trap option, since it robs you of your far more important Studied Combat buff. This class seems far less predestined to be a ranged combatant than I felt the Alchemist to be and thus hulking up via mutagens seems far more appropiate to it. 8/10 and only so low because of the Studied Strike trap option.
Shaman: I guess it is a solid caster, since it gets full spellcasting. The spell list does not appeal to me very much, but my personal preference goes heavily to buffing other party members or blasting, so that will affect my perception. Others will probably love it much more than I do. 7/10
Skald: Okay, it's a bard with much less useful buffing abilities, overall. Probably a better martial combatant, but then again it runs into MAD problems. 6/10
Slayer: I like this class. It obsoletes the Rogue almost completely, but I like it. Because, what skill monkey class doesn't obsolete the Rogue, anyway? It's on the list of classes I might want to play someday. 8/10
Swashbuckler: I'm playing one right now at 14th level in a RotRL campaign (started with the last playtest version, which is mostly similar to this one), so I am biased in favor of it.
That having been said, the class is lovely and fun to play, but suffers from a glut of class abilities dependend on swift/immediate actions and the bad Fort/Will saves. You can get ahead of the bad Will save with the Steadfast Personality feat, but the feat to help with Fort saves is not as good. And the less said about the the dex-to-damage feat fiasco, the better. :-/ 7/10
Warpriest: Did it have to only get two skillpoints? :-/ It's a very solid divine melee class, but same as the Swashbuckler, it suffers from having too many class abilities which activate with swift actions. Since you can't "buy down" a move action into a swift action, that quickly becomes a problem when you want to do three or more things at once with it per round. But it does get around the whole "combat is already over when you are done buffing" problem melee monkey Clerics still have. 7/10
One last thing not related to the classes: The Divine Protection feat should be erased from the book. My goodness, what were you guys (the developers) thinking when you wrote it? No wonder PFS disallows it. 10/10 for powergaming, 0/10 for feat design (yes, worse than the Arcanist).
Nice thread! Still have to give the ACG a read, but my thought was you used Studied Strike as a finisher rather than for DPS - it was meant to hit that caster to get a ridiculously high concentration check, kill off that guard before the alarm sounds off, finish that ogre during the alpha strike...
Sure, that could be a way to use it. However, in the greater scheme of things it seems that it would be a better idea to not do that, since getting Studied Combat back on the same target costs you one use of Inspiration.
For a less combat focused game (i.e. "not AP's"), this class is great.
The arcanist casts less spells per day than a wizard, will often be a whole spell level behind be a level behind in spellcasting so casts even FEWER spells per day AND only gets to make up for these shortcomings through access to Quick Study and Dimensional Slide really. Not to mention being "unprepared" as a wizard is slowly becoming more and more difficult with every release; see Flexible Wizardry. I'd say the wizard is still the king of arcane magic; the 3 arcane full casters actually seem relatively close, with arcanist falling somewhere between wizard and sorcerer, with human sorcerers possibly edging it out.
Counterspelling as an immediate action is rather interesting, and something that really should appear more considering how lackluster counterspelling is compared to simply shooting the wizard in the face. Keep in mind you still have to succeed in a caster level check AND have a spell of a level higher (equal at level 11), which considering a solo spellcaster is likely to be a few levels higher than the party, I really don't see this being too much of an issue.
Otherwise I pretty much agree with all your assessments. The skald is deeply uninspiring, divine protection is in fact ridiculous for oracles and makes them possibly the most SAD class to ever exist but I do also think the hunter will prove quite a bit better than most people think with a bit of tinkering, it's not exactly the most obvious class.
Oh, I was notified of the Wizard also getting in on the Arcane Exploits fun with one of its new archetypes, so I am definitely not counting the class out. Sorcerers remain my favorite arcane spellcasting class, no matter how OP Arcanists are. :p
The counterspelling thing really irks me, because it very likely can break most single opponent encounters in AP's which involve spellcasters. I'll admit that I misread the section a bit and missed that you need a spell one level higher (until lvl 11 at least). So it is not as good as the mythic Flexible Counterspell. Until level 11.
I hope that people figure the Hunter out soon, I am rather disposed to liking the class. :p
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, the wizard is still a better pure caster than the arcanist, and wizards can now gain access to exploits through the exploiter wizard archetype, and buy more through feats. It may well end up being the case that the exploiter wizard with the master suite of exploits [counterspell, improved counterspell, potent magic and dimensional slide, at least] plus Flexible Wizardry ends up being stronger than the arcanist. Have to think about that one...
Nevertheless, the exploits are so strong that the wizard only achieves equality with the arcanist by stealing the best ones. Raising the ceiling of power for full-caster classes is bloat, pure and simple. The rich get richer.
Arcanist: Playtest for my groups show that Quick Study is mandatory because I hate 15 min workdays. In other games it may be too powerful. Why the heck does it get some magus options? I am NOT going to go into melee with a d6 hit die.
Bloodrager (and the new bloodrage magus archetype): Some Bloodlines have really stupid powers/bonus feats for a 1/2 BAB caster. Slapping a bloodline on a Magus or Bloodrager is a dream come true for me. I wish the wording made better distinctions between Bloodrager Bloodlines and regular bloodlines.
Brawler: I love it.
Hunter: I'm more excited about the archetypes than the class itself. Two of the archetypes are my favorites in the game.
Investigator: Love it.
Shaman: I haven't been interested in Shaman because flavor-wise I didn't need it. But I like it better than the druid in that respect so its okay.
Skald: The Skald is my least favorite because I don't really understand the reason it needs to exist beyond a Bard archetype. I mostly play fighty bards so I guess I'll eventually play it.
Slayer: Love it.
Swashbuckler: Mechanically I want to play this but i think the flavor doesn't have much design space unless the fighter moves further into 'big sword dude' territory and leave other playstyles out.
Warpriest: Aside from not being a full BAB 4/9 caster its the Paladin I always wanted. I like having a lot of little abilities instead of one huge one that I can use so few times a day, especially as a martial character.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Blade Adept Arcanist is meant to Prestige into Eldritch Knight, with the exploit that bases Black Blade progression on caster level instead of Arcanist level. It's just too bad they didn't give it proficiency with all martial weapons to remove the need for the one level dip. Also, it's still dependent on that one trait to raise its CL back up to HD. I was hoping the ACG would contain a Practiced Spellcaster equivalent.
.
|
I think you're under-rating the bloodrager and skald a bit. The bloodrager is, without a doubt, one of the most powerful classes ever created. I don't need a single spell from the spellcasting section other than ablative barrier (to put it on par with a barbarian) in order to break the hell out of it. The real power is in the bloodlines. I'd give it a 9 or 9.5.
The skald is definitely underpowered compared to the standard optimizer classes, but has its place. It's a lot better than a bard, and a very capable melee combatant. All I have to say is that at 15th level my ENTIRE PARTY just got 4 strength, 45 extra hit points, 2 AC, and pounce. I'd go with a 7 here.
Skald is definitely situational but it seems to potentially be an even better power amplifier than bard in a melee heavy party... that pounce.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Skald is the Bardbarian. Which makes it the best class ever 11/10.
i was enjoying this post, then i saw the divine protection feat hyperbole. the feat is ok. if that feat should be erased, then power attack should be removed from the game, because it is bar none the most powerful feat in the game period and exponentially more powerful and game changing than divine protection.
how is the white mage archtype? i always loved final fantasy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
i was enjoying this post, then i saw the divine protection feat hyperbole. the feat is ok. if that feat should be erased, then power attack should be removed from the game, because it is bar none the most powerful feat in the game period and exponentially more powerful and game changing than divine protection.
how is the white mage archtype? i always loved final fantasy.
Defensive options are infinitely more powerful than offensive ones. The Crane Wing fiasco simply confirmed this theory.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I disagree with it being okay that the arguably most powerful paladin ability just became a feat with meaningless prerequites for any divine caster.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Some of the exploits are crazy good, like counterspelling as an immediate action
I personally haven't found the counterspell exploit to be even passably good versus crazy good. My arcanist is 8th level.
Counterspell (Su): By expending 1 point from her arcane reservoir, the arcanist can attempt to counter a spell as it is being cast. She must identify the spell being cast as normal. If she successfully does so, the arcanist can attempt to counter the spell as an immediate action and by expending an available arcanist spell slot of a level at least one higher than the level of the spell being cast. To counterspell, the arcanist must attempt a dispel check as if using dispel magic.
To date, my arcanist has squared off against several wizards (both BBEG and non-BBEG).
Recent examples:
#1) While 6th level, faced a 6th level wizard hammering the party with lightning bolt. Sadly, didn't have 4th level spell slots to use here. Combat was over before the wizard even cast a 2nd level spell.
#2) While 7th level, faced an 11th level evoker. Party was being hit by chain lightning, quickened burning hands, ice storm and silent lightning. Sadly, didn't have a 5th level spell slot to counter any of the 4th-6th level spells flung at us.
I can probably go through a half-dozen other examples where my arcanist squared off against spellcasters. I believe the only thing I could have counterspelled to date may have been some magic missiles, where it wasn't really a big deal to have done so.
Requiring a higher level spell when you're behind the curve on spell level and you are regularly pitted against spellcaster BBEGs that will exceed your level by 3-4 sadly means not a lot of counterspelling. For this reason, I don't recommend the counterspell exploit in level 1-10 play.
ask yourself this question is anyone going to play an oracle because of this feat? the answer is no. the feat is ok, there is nothing special about, except people the omg, they stole paladin stuff.
no one is going to stop playing paladians and no more people are going to play an oracle before this feat. it's an ok feat. oracles are not going to get any more powerful, they are going to have a sacrafice was probably going to be an extra mystery (and those things are great, much better than this feat in my opinion, because many of those mysteries allow the oracle to things than under the normal rules you cannot do).
on the other hand, if you removed power attack, i guarantee you that alot of classes would be played a heck of lot less, and not only that, they would lose half there effectiveness.
and power attack is CRB feat, so i'm sorry all this talk about divine protection is much ado about nothing.
and the default assumption by paizo is that there is no balancing with feats.
|
|
It can be good against metamagic though, since metamgagic explicitly does not increase the level of a spell, only the level of the slot it takes.
Such is not the case in games we're playing, as we're using this FAQ which indicates the spell is indeed higher level.
I agree though, the arcanist class and counterspell exploit are amazing in a GM's hands, as the arcanist will be spending immediate actions to negate the party spellcaster's standard actions for at least the first couple rounds of combat. :)
FEAR THE ARCANIST BBEG!
Kyle Baird: Make this happen.
The Arcanist kills the Sorcerer and I'm pretty sure that the Shaman kills the Witch... As for Bard/ Skald, I'm not certain which one is better, or if both are good. Do you know if the Skald can use the Bard's feat like Spellsong? If they can also do charm spell when singing like nothin happened I think they kill the Bard.
It's only my opinions/fear, I hope the build's experts can tell me wrong, I hate this feeling of "update".
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
ask yourself this question is anyone going to play an oracle because of this feat?
The answer is yes actually. Hell I would dip into a divine class that provided an SLA to meet casting requirements for any charisma focused class except for perhaps the sorcerer, but even then it would be a possibilty worth considering under certain conditions. It is that good. The only thing stopping most people from dipping pally for it was the arbitrary code and alignment constraint.
But yeah getting an extra 5 to 10 on all saves is what thr fullcasting oracle really needed to stay relevant.
what does divine protection do?
what does divine protection do?
Pallys Divine Grace. Add charisma to all saving throws on top of everything else.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
what does divine protection do?
+Charsima to all saves. Requires Know:R 5 and access to second level divine spells.
ask yourself this question is anyone going to play an oracle because of this feat? the answer is no.
Actually I'm playing a nature oracle in my next game specifically because of this feat. If I can get her turned into a lich I'll get +charisma to everything except physical attacks and skills. Which is pretty cool and silly.
what does divine protection do?
Add your Charisma bonus as an untyped bonus to all saving throws. Requires 5 ranks in Knowledge: Religion, 2nd level Divine Spells, and (just in case you wanted to qualify for this with an SLA), a Domain, Mystery, or Blessing class feature.
I don't know what that one guy was talking about. People are going to build around this feat, even using a race with a Divine SLA and dipping a level of (say) Cleric to qualify.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Racial SLA plus a dip in dual cursed oracle for misfortune is where its at I think.
ask yourself this question is anyone going to play an oracle because of this feat?
The answer is yes actually. Hell I would dip into a divine class that provided an SLA to meet casting requirements for any charisma focused class except for perhaps the sorcerer, but even then it would be a possibilty worth considering under certain conditions. It is that good. The only thing stopping most people from dipping pally for it was the arbitrary code and alignment constraint.
But yeah getting an extra 5 to 10 on all saves is what thr fullcasting oracle really needed to stay relevant.
you would not. if you are martial, the oppurtunity cost is terrible. you nerf you best feat power attack, you nerf your best feature irritive attacks, you nerf all you combat feats, as many have bab requirements.
saves are more important to martial classes than any others, they are the ones that are often the target of spells, and it has been that way since 2nd edition. giving casters bonuses to saves is just not a big deal, mechanically in the game.
the only classes that are going to take this feat are oracles and clerics. and it has high cost for oracles because thier mysteries are quite frankly way more powerful than this feat, there mysteries allow them to do things that are impossible. you can get the same effect with this feat for a few thousand gold in a cloak.
which cha class would you consider this for?
are you going to nerf you eidelion for this? or undue the fact you get spells early for this? i dont think so.
are you going to take what amounts to a dead level as a bard for a bonus to saving throws, delay your spell progression, for saves? i dont think so.
the reason why this feat is just ok, is that classes were it would really be a power boost for, can't get to it, without serious cost.
what does divine protection do?Add your Charisma bonus as an untyped bonus to all saving throws. Requires 5 ranks in Knowledge: Religion, 2nd level Divine Spells, and (just in case you wanted to qualify for this with an SLA), a Domain, Mystery, or Blessing class feature.
I don't know what that one guy was talking about. People are going to build around this feat, even using a race with a Divine SLA and dipping a level of (say) Cleric to qualify.
LOL, no one is going to build around this feat.
dazing spell is a feat you build around.
power attack is a feat you build around.
combat expertise + manuver feat chain are feats you build around.
prefered spell is a feat you build around.
no oracle or cleric is going build around this feat. no martial class is going build around this feat.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oracles give up nothing but a feat, and some skill ranks they would probably have spent anyways. Some Mysteries have powerful enough Revelations to want to spend a feat on them, but each Mystery only has a few good Revelations anyways.
Also this is an untyped bonus, which stacks with a Cloak of Resistance and provides a much greater effect. An Oracle is going to have +4 to +6 Charisma by the time he qualifies for this feat. How soon before +4 Cloaks of Resistance start showing up? And it doesn't go away if anything happens to your gear.
Oracles and Clerics don't have to "build around" this feat, because they qualify almost automatically.
|
|
The Arcanist kills the Sorcerer ...
Eh, don't get me wrong, I really like the Arcanist class.
Depending on the group and their playstyle though, it can be vastly inferior to both the wizard and the sorcerer.
Our group regularly runs the treadmill from 1st to 8th level and typically spends the bulk of our time playing 4th-6th level.
Our typical adventuring day sees 40-60 rounds of combat, with 50 rounds being the norm.
We don't typically have any idea what we're preparing spells for in advance. The party is traveling down the road. They don't know if they are getting pulled into an undead-heavy crypt today or helping defend the town against marauding orcs. Thus, the day begins with the arcanist and wizard already selecting spells for "standard adventuring purposes".
A 5th level wizard contributes a 1st through 3rd level spell in 12 of our 50 rounds of daily combat.
A 5th level sorcerer contributes a 1st through 2nd level spell in 12 of our 50 rounds of daily combat, drawing from two 2nd and four 1st known (or more with bloodlines).
A 5th level arcanist contributes a 1st through 2nd level spell in 9 of our 50 rounds of daily combat, drawing from two 2nd and four 1st prepared.
Other tables will see a typical adventuring day span just 12 rounds and they'll know the "theme" of that day in advance. In that case, yes arcanist is certainly more powerful.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It can be good against metamagic though, since metamgagic explicitly does not increase the level of a spell, only the level of the slot it takes.Such is not the case in games we're playing, as we're using this FAQ which indicates the spell is indeed higher level.
I agree though, the arcanist class and counterspell exploit are amazing in a GM's hands, as the arcanist will be spending immediate actions to negate the party spellcaster's standard actions for at least the first couple rounds of combat. :)
FEAR THE ARCANIST BBEG!
Kyle Baird: Make this happen.
Doesn't that FAQ say use the spell level which is worse for the caster? Which in this case allows the caster to be counterspelled?
If i was a martial who for some reason had a high charisma i would dip for it in a second. Minus 1 to hit for increased saves from dipping plus from charisa for a massive defensive net gain? Yes.
Bard? Slight delay in Inspire Courage which can be overcome with other options for a massive defensive gain? Even with a spell level loss? Yep. Pass the kool aid.
Lose a couple evo points for massive save increase? I would seriously consider it.
Cha casting magus archetype? No hesitation.
And so on. There is also the fact that depending on how you do it you are looking at getting other powerful benefits from tbe dip (that dual cursed misfortune)... cha to saves just pushes it to a pretty good or decent deal to an amazing one.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
what does divine protection do?Add your Charisma bonus as an untyped bonus to all saving throws. Requires 5 ranks in Knowledge: Religion, 2nd level Divine Spells, and (just in case you wanted to qualify for this with an SLA), a Domain, Mystery, or Blessing class feature.
I don't know what that one guy was talking about. People are going to build around this feat, even using a race with a Divine SLA and dipping a level of (say) Cleric to qualify.
LOL, no one is going to build around this feat.
dazing spell is a feat you build around.
power attack is a feat you build around.
combat expertise + manuver feat chain are feats you build around.
prefered spell is a feat you build around.no oracle or cleric is going build around this feat. no martial class is going build around this feat.
Being in control of your character is a 100% damage increase. Only theorycrafters don't build around defenses.
An Oracle that cannot be targeted at ALL deals 100% more damage than a Fighter with Power Attack that gets subject to Hold Person for the whole duration of Christmas.
|
Hunter: I like redheads and wolves, so I am pre-inclined to like this class. :p However, upon looking at the class instead of the iconic(s), I think it still is underpowered. Since the class wants to do things by itself (and not only have the animal companion do them), it suffers from its 3/4 BAB and a lack of self-buff spells. The Animal Focus class feature does not seem to provide the necessary "ooomph" it would need. 5/10
Like so often happens for some reason with classes that utilize Teamwork feats, the Hunter is being massively underrated.
This a class that gets lead blades at first level, and a pet that basically gets what looks to be an unlimited version of an ability that was intended to replace Ranger spellcasting, again, right from 1st level. Like I pointed out earlier, it's not even hard to have an animal companion granting his master +6 to-hit and +1d6 damage whenever they're attacking the same target (Gang Up, Outflank, and Precise Strike with the pet using the Aiding Attack ability as one of its known tricks).
I'm also not sure where you get the idea that he doesn't have good buffing spells, since he has the full spread of Ranger spells much earlier than the Ranger, and all of the Druid spells up to 6, with many of the spells gained much earlier in the game than either parent class, and in some cases any class, can gain them.
Hunter is easily competing with the strongest non-full casters.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Arcanist kills the Sorcerer ...Eh, don't get me wrong, I really like the Arcanist class.
Depending on the group and their playstyle though, it can be vastly inferior to both the wizard and the sorcerer.
Our group regularly runs the treadmill from 1st to 8th level and typically spends the bulk of our time playing 4th-6th level.
Our typical adventuring day sees 40-60 rounds of combat, with 50 rounds being the norm.
We don't typically have any idea what we're preparing spells for in advance. The party is traveling down the road. They don't know if they are getting pulled into an undead-heavy crypt today or helping defend the town against marauding orcs. Thus, the day begins with the arcanist and wizard already selecting spells for "standard adventuring purposes".
A 5th level wizard contributes a 1st through 3rd level spell in 12 of our 50 rounds of daily combat.
A 5th level sorcerer contributes a 1st through 2nd level spell in 12 of our 50 rounds of daily combat, drawing from two 2nd and four 1st known (or more with bloodlines).
A 5th level arcanist contributes a 1st through 2nd level spell in 9 of our 50 rounds of daily combat, drawing from two 2nd and four 1st prepared.
Other tables will see a typical adventuring day span just 12 rounds and they'll know the "theme" of that day in advance. In that case, yes arcanist is certainly more powerful.
The truth is that I'm afraid as a DM of two exploits: the dommage one, which gives a lots of attack options for just one point, and the counterspell one who can ruin the castre boss. Plus, the roleplay of the class feels terrible. But I can understand that it's really fun to play, no doubt. Just seems overpowered for me (immediate counterspell come on!) you can ruin a runelord with a few points :(
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I honestly thing with the right feats the hunter will be more powerful then people think and its spell selection is fine. It has decent self buff and party/companion biff to do the job it was designed to do. I think once people see it in action they will be surprised.
The shaman was the class I was most excited about the shaman class but after seeing its spell list it's. The class I'm most disappointed with. Unless the ADVANCED CLASS OPTIONS doubles the spell list and actually offers me archetypes worth something I can't see myself playing this class. *Major heartbreak*Major sadface*
|
|
The truth is that I'm afraid as a DM of two exploits...
Are you playing above level 10? Short combats and short days?
I pointed out earlier that the level 1-10 arcanist w/the counterspell exploit pretty much has zero chance of affecting a "caster boss" in a combat... at least until the combat gets 6+ rounds deep and the "caster boss" is starting to resort to lower level spells.
Also note that an arcanist only begins the day with 3 + (1/2 their level) in pool points. For a 5th level arcanist, they have a whopping 5 points to hurl their damage abilities while still dealing with things like soft cover and melee penalties.
In a high rounds-per-day campaign without copious wands to drain for kicks, they really do run out of resources quite quickly and your 5th level arcanist is using daze and acid splash more than you'd expect (i.e. in ~30 of the rounds in our 50 round days).
Apparently people haven't realized yet that the true hot stuff counterspeller will be the Exploiter Wizard at levels 11+. Full casting progression + immediate action counterspelling is truly stupid, yes. Ultimately, the Exploiter Wizard will outshine the Arcanist in the hands of a smart player. Neither one of them should exist.
The truth is that I'm afraid as a DM of two exploits...Are you playing above level 10? Short combats and short days?
I pointed out earlier that the level 1-10 arcanist w/the counterspell exploit pretty much has zero chance of affecting a "caster boss" in a combat... at least until the combat gets 6+ rounds deep and the "caster boss" is starting to resort to lower level spells.
Also note that an arcanist only begins the day with 3 + (1/2 their level) in pool points. For a 5th level arcanist, they have a whopping 5 points to hurl their damage abilities while still dealing with things like soft cover and melee penalties.
In a high rounds-per-day campaign without copious wands to drain for kicks, they really do run out of resources quite quickly and your 5th level arcanist is using daze and acid splash more than you'd expect (i.e. in ~30 of the rounds in our 50 round days).
We'are playing Kingmaker (tome 5) and after that it'll be Baba Yaga or The Mummy. But like you said wait and see.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Apparently people haven't realized yet that the true hot stuff counterspeller will be the Exploiter Wizard at levels 11+. Full casting progression + immediate action counterspelling is truly stupid, yes. Ultimately, the Exploiter Wizard will outshine the Arcanist in the hands of a smart player. Neither one of them should exist.
I still prefer a counter-spelling system that isn't the load of garbage it was previously. At least now you aren't potentially losing a turn to try and counter a spell with less than 50% success on average and it's actually possible to have one of those epic spell battles that's always portrayed in books, movies, television, etc.
I honestly thing with the right feats the hunter will be more powerful then people think and its spell selection is fine. It has decent self buff and party/companion biff to do the job it was designed to do. I think once people see it in action they will be surprised.
You're absolutely right. My GM already reviewed the Hunter I built for our annual pre-PAX game and the first thing he said was "Are you kidding me right now? Isn't this class the weak one?"
|
|
We're playing Kingmaker (tome 5) and after that it'll be Baba Yaga or The Mummy. But like you said wait and see.
Kingmaker suffers from short-day syndrome more than any other AP. That said, a lot of the time there's no advance warning of what's coming in a hex and the arcanist has already committed to their prepared spells by the time the day's combat begins.
Reign and Mummy: it will depend on the GM on how long your adventuring days last. In either one you could be seeing 10-12 combats per day without rest, each lasting 3-6 rounds. In level 1-10 play, the arcanist's power relative to other casters increases depending on how much you're allowed to rest and how many encounters get cut to move through a chapter/area quicker.