Sounds great! Martial bards are quite cool. I look forward to this.
The Wizard does not fail at rending reality. Why should the Zealot fail at knocking an attack away or tripping somebody? They've both invested the same amount of time, effort and funds into being good at what they do. And, to me, "being good at what you do" means you don't fail 20+% of the time.
Anyway, that's all I have to add to that argument.
@DSP folks: Just wanted to let you guys know I adore what you do. Do you have any intentions on adding further Initiating archetypes for Paizo classes (such as the Bloodrager or maybe even the Bard)?
They do fail. When they're doing something significant against a level appropriate target, they usually fail a good 40% of the time. No-save spells on principle have weaker effects than spells that can fail.
What does everyone think of that new Ranger archetype? I see a lot of potential fun with it an its animal companion both initiating. I don'don't think I will miss favored enemy at all.
Design Manager
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with you on that. I'll go on record saying that I believe that PoW should not catered towards inexperienced GMs, and that it's 100% okay for the Warder and Warlord to completely obsolete the fighter like the inquisitor and magus already do.
Bolded the part I wanted to address. It's a forum fallacy that the Inquisitor and the Magus are better fighters than the Fighter. They are better adventurers over the course of 20 levels of play, certainly, but (assuming a 3 combat encounter adventuring day, as is the system expectation) the Fighter is still a more consistent damage dealer during the first 5 levels. If a Fighter can do 12-22 damage on a power attack with a greatsword and a Magus can do 14-30 with a shocking grasp spellstrike, that's fine. They're both probably going to drop their target, but the Fighter can do it on every attack he makes during all three encounters, and the Magus is ticking off limited resources that won't last the full stretch until much later in the game, especially if you're playing smart and dedicating some of your resources to defense and utility. When another class steps in though, and can do 14-30 with an unlimited resource, and only does 12-22 when that resource is recharging, there's probably some underlying mechanical issues.
(For the sake of the following statements, I'm assuming single-classed characters, since making classes viable 1-20 was a primary goal of Pathfinder)-
I've had the discussion before where I've noted that the Fighter isn't a bad class, he's an incomplete class. As far as to-hit and single target damage numbers go, he swaps in and out with the Barbarian as one of the best in the core game, finally leaving the Barbarian in the dust when his capstone comes online and his auto-confirmed crits push his numbers beyond what the Barbarian can compete with. The issue is that his bonus feats are balanced as though every one of them is potentially Whirlwind Attack or Thunder and Fang, when in reality probably half of them are going to be more like the stunningly mediocre Weapon Focus or the "I took it as a tax but will probably never use it" Combat Expertise. In a side-by-side with the Ranger, for example, any single Fighter bonus feat needs to be as good as an animal companion, an entire additional good save, an entire level of spells, or hide in plain sight (just to name a few) for the two classes to actually be balanced to each other. Obviously, that's just not the case. However, that's an issue of utility not damage.
Think about it like this- You've got (for the sake of argument) 5 categories-
Damage-dealing Efficacy - ability to remove a single target through damage or simulated damage (save or die)
Control Efficacy- ability to restrain multiple opponents' ability to act, or amplify allies'
Situational Combat Reactivity- ability to deal with things you can't beat with a sword (traps, magical walls, etc.)
Out of Combat Facility - ability to effectively contribute in the game outside of combat
Defense - ability to withstand common harmful effects, including melee and magical damage, poison, disease, and mental domination
You can have up to 5 in any given category and still be within the expected parameters of the game.
A low level Wizard, over the course of 3 encounters, probably has the capability of achieving 5 in up to 3 categories; a high level (10+) can effectively achieve 5 in all categories, and actually break 5 under the right circumstances. It's a broken class, but one that requires a fairly high degree of system mastery and understanding of math to break. Most players are trying to emulate things they've seen or read about and tend to make "themes" that are usually closer to 5 in one category and anywhere from 0-2 in the others.
A Ranger has something like
Damage-dealing Efficacy - 3 at low levels, 4 when his ability to magically enable his Favored bonuses regardless of enemy or environment comes online.
Control Efficacy- 2 with a few spells like entangle and a pet on the field
Situational Combat Reactivity- 2, dependent on careful spell selection or wealth expenditure
Out of Combat Facility - 3, with a well-built Rogue or Bard representing a 4 and a 9 level caster demarcating the limits of 5
Defense - 3, thanks to good AC, two good saves, and a secondary stat that shores up his only weak save.
The Fighter is something like-
Damage-dealing Efficacy - 5. If he can hit it, he's got the best single-target damage in the core game.
Control Efficacy- 1, unless you're a Dirty Fighter with Dirty Trick Master, then you're pushing 4
Situational Combat Reactivity- 0. You're either prepared for it going in, or you're not.
Out of Combat Facility - 1. You've got terrible skills and no OoC class features to make it any better.
Defense - 3. You've got the potential for the best AC and CMD in the game, but only one good save, and a terrible, highly situational Will booster.
So you end up with a god/Batman Wizard at 25, and a Ranger somewhere between 13 and 15. Inquisitors and Magii will also hit that 13-15 range, which is basically where well-designed classes and subsystems want to fall. The Fighter is a sad little 10, wondering why his makers forgot to give him goodies related to literally anything other than hitting stuff.
Let's look at the Warder-
Damage-dealing Efficacy - 5. Since any discipline can be accessed via the right organization, feat, or apparently upcoming traits, he'll be able to spike way above the Fighter, then leverage his ability to utilize his INT in multiple categories to keep from falling behind during recovery rounds.
Control Efficacy- 3. He's no spellcaster, but he's basically dual stat STR/INT reliant and can leverage a large number of AoOs with no opportunity cost, use no-fail maneuvers to inflict debilitating status effects or lower enemy defenses, etc.
Situational Combat Reactivity- 3. With the right counters and boosts, he is more reactive than his martial counterparts, though still not a spellcaster. Adaptive Tactics means he's always as ready for the combat at hand as he can be after 7th level.
Out of Combat Facility - 3. Basically on par with or better than the Ranger thanks to having 4+Int skills and being INT reliant.
Defense - 6. D12 hit die, two good saves with a weak save shored up by a primary stat, Defensive Focus, Armiger's Mark with its"f+!& casters in the earhole and make them fail at 1/5 of their spells cause I looked at them funny", Tactical Acumen, Clad in Steel, Extended Defense, Adaptive Tactics, Stalwart, Steel Defense, Born of Steel, Deathless Defenses (and now Aegis), plus all the counters that come with being an initiator.
The issue that some people are going to have with some Path of War classes and/or abilities is that, while they don't hit the "5 in every category" spread, they do kind of hit 6's, making them weird 18-20s on the spread. That's where some of the people who have issues with the skill-based maneuvers are having concerns; other than those, there is no such thing as a guaranteed effect against an opponent. Most SoS or SoDs have multiple fronts where they can be resisted or mitigated (Saves, SR, counterspell, dispel, immunities, etc.), uber-chargers have to compete against the terrain and brace weapons, etc. The Path of War classes aren't better than optimized spellcasters, but that's pretty much the only thing they aren't better than, and their optimization floor rests comfortably on the Fighter's ceiling, even in areas that the Fighter excels.
Now, I love Path of War and there's always at least one PW character at my table, but Warders are hands down the best tanks, putting Paladins to shame, Stalkers can do consistent damage on par with where a Paladin spikes when he's litany smiting, and a well-made Warlord simultaneously rivals a bard as a party buffer while crushing the Fighter as a damage dealer. If I weren't an experienced GM who'd done some game design, and if I hadn't personally playtested the classes to death to the point where I know how to deal with them at my table, I'd probably have the same knee-jerk reaction as a lot of newer GMs.
If I weren't an experienced GM who'd done some game design, and if I hadn't personally playtested the classes to death to the point where I know how to deal with them at my table, I'd probably have the same knee-jerk reaction as a lot of newer GMs.
Perhaps some thought should be given to providing those newer GMs with tips on how to deal with the classes. It would not have to be part of a book - in fact, that might be a poor choice if you are wanting to encourage them to use the material because they might not purchase it and therefore never see the tips.
A thread in the forum dedicated to the subject so said GMs could be directed to it comes to mind.
I know I would post in such a thread if there was one. I got a lot of tips because of the craziness my group can come up with.
A thread for DMs might not be a bad idea, or maybe a guide or something for people to watch out for, along with ways to incorporate PoW material into the game... I'll talk to the rest of the team about it, but you all should absolutely make a thread and get started on that. I look forward to seeing it!
I'm working on a guide for PoW newbies right now (aimed more at players than DMs, admittedly), and any ideas would be appreciated.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I know it's a different book, but... well, here's a character sheet for the Stalker, from the first Path of War: https://www.dropbox.com/s/m4mgz0ugnrvk9kt/stalker_sheet.zip?dl=0
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, this is pretty cool!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Somewhat late, but delivered
I'll take late over early any day if it means quality.
What about the Ultimate Path of War book that has all the stuff from both books plus some revisions & additions to the books? I'm guessing it's a year or two out since the expanded book is just going to be coming out.
What about the Ultimate Path of War book that has all the stuff from both books plus some revisions & additions to the books? I'm guessing it's a year or two out since the expanded book is just going to be coming out.
Though if there were an ultimate PoW, I expect it to have more than 2 books of content. Ultimate Psionics had more than 2 books, for example.
Some darn rogue archetype managed to sneak into the doc. See what you guys can do to get rid of him.
I remember there was someone who sneak attacked anyone suggesting ability to choose from a list of disciplines?
I remember there was someone who sneak attacked anyone suggesting ability to choose from a list of disciplines?
We are not an unchangeable bastion of uniformity. Sometimes new things have to be done in order to ensure that a concept works to its full potential.
In other news, I'm going through all the archetypes, specifically looking at their recovery mechanics to make sure that there are no issues. If any of you can spot anything unworkable, please let me know here.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Look at the sky," she said to her lover, gesturing at the night above her. "What do you see?"
"Stars," the young woman with her answered, in puzzlement. "And the moon, I suppose."
"Nothing else?" the candle knight pressed.
"No," the knight's lover said in confusion. "I mean...the constellations?"
The candle knight laughed and hugged the woman with her. "That's why evil is weak," she murmured happily. "You saw just a little bit of light, and the darkness around it wasn't important at all."
Just out of curiosity, are there plans to write a system for handle animal checks when a INT 3 animal companion decides to take the Martial Training line as bonus feats?
I was thinking something like FF12's gambits, where - as a trick - you teach your animal companion a set of rote stance change/maneuver combos that it activates in certain situations. Something like "when you see an enemy of this size or bigger, switch to stance X, activate boost Y, and use strike Z on the enemy. Then use S and T next turn."
Please make my dreams of teleporting dimensional dervish bearstigers a reality =p.
Some darn rogue archetype managed to sneak into the doc. See what you guys can do to get rid of him.
I don't particularly see what sets this guy apart from the Vigilante aside from Gambits.
Honestly I'd rather see these gambits go to the Steelfist Commando.
Some darn rogue archetype managed to sneak into the doc. See what you guys can do to get rid of him.I don't particularly see what sets this guy apart from the Vigilante aside from Gambits.
Honestly I'd rather see these gambits go to the Steelfist Commando.
Well, we're play testing this with the rogue archetype but I'm not opposed to allowing Commandos to access these either. Just testing them on the archetype here first.
-X
I have pushed out the fighter PoW:E Archetype into the Playtest Document, come check out the Myrmidon.
-X
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Errant, there was discussion a while back about saving throws in the first book being off. Can you please give me some official confirmation...are the Stalker and Warlord supposed to have good reflex saves, yes or no? And if yes, will that be released as official errata?
Well, we're play testing this with the rogue archetype but I'm not opposed to allowing Commandos to access these either. Just testing them on the archetype here first.
-X
I really like the rogue's gambits, and I feel that gambits work very well with the rogue mentality. Scouting is risky!
Though I do think all of those gambits should be allowed with the Warlord too, since they can multiclass to get the necessary features if they wanted.
I have pushed out the fighter PoW:E Archetype into the Playtest Document, come check out the Myrmidon.
-X
Love the Myrmidon. Very much the "everyman" initiator often requested. I am happy that it is so compatible with a bunch of other fighter archetypes. I love the implementation of grit and deeds too. Very nice choices there.
Later I'm gonna do some comparative builds for some of the archetypes. Namely Paladin and Ranger.
In general I understand that maneuvers generally strengthen a class, but those classes are widely considered top tier martials. I have suspicion that the Ranger Archetype is going to do terrible things, but a lot of people discard those suspicions outright till I actually stat something up.
Also I know both the Rogue and Fighter Archetypes are essentially class+, but honestly I'm perfectly OK with that. These classes were previously bottom of the barrel, so at most all these archetypes do is allow them to be viable choices.
The Myrmidon does a good job at fulfilling that everyman dudesoldier that people have been clammoring for.
Though for the Rogue archetype I can't help but feel it only exists to appease the people who are in love with writing "Rogue" at the top of their sheets since both the Vigilante and Steelfist Commando muscle in on the territory hard.
Also I know both the Rogue and Fighter Archetypes are essentially class+, but honestly I'm perfectly OK with that. These classes were previously bottom of the barrel, so at most all these archetypes do is allow them to be viable choices.
The Myrmidon does a good job at fulfilling that everyman dudesoldier that people have been clammoring for.
Though for the Rogue archetype I can't help but feel it only exists to appease the people who are in love with writing "Rogue" at the top of their sheets since both the Vigilante and Steelfist Commando muscle in on the territory hard.
Thank you for the feedback, I was worried that it was just going to be looked at as Fighter+ and instantly dismissed because it does pretty much softfix a few of the issues within fighter. As far as the rogue archetype, yeah, there is design space infringement for sure but at the same time, that happens everywhere. Mostly we're looking to see balance of power than role-infringement with regards to the rogue archetype. But thank you for the feedback! :)
Errant, there was discussion a while back about saving throws in the first book being off. Can you please give me some official confirmation...are the Stalker and Warlord supposed to have good reflex saves, yes or no? And if yes, will that be released as official errata?
It's been awhile since this came up so I'll tackle it again. It was my original intent in the final submission of the book to beef up the saving throws of Warlord and Stalker to match that of the Warder. I was going to give them both good Reflex saves as you stated.
Now that we're a fair amount of time into the release of PoW1, I am not entirely convinced its a necessary thing and I worry that it adds more power-issues than it solves. That said, I'd take feedback on that if anyone has any with regards to their warlords or stalkers needing a better Reflex save. I'm inclined to give it to Stalker but they can add their Wisdom modifier to Reflex saves, so that actually becomes a bit moot. Warlords get to add their Charisma to Will saves, so again, having a bad save is a thing that's needed. I know Warders get Int to Reflex and have good Fort/Will, but they're supposed to take the punishment and good saves helps them do their job.
So think of this as an official request for feedback on this subject. What do you think? Does the stalker and/or warlord need good Reflex save progression?
-X
I'm beginning some work on a new Harbinger and Zealot archetype now, and tuning up Mandala Adept. I'm kind of at a loss because the Mandala Adept is a huge archetype. Not sure if I want to make it a prestige class and make another stat-replacement archetype for Mystic. I dunno. Opinions? What do you all like?
Also, a new archetype has been added to the Mystic archetype roster, the Gunsmoke Mystic (submitted to us by Ironsides). Please let us know what you think!
-X
Has it been decided which disciplines should Harbinger have? Playtest doc still lists Primal Fury.
Would it break anything if Accursed Will was to grant minimum(INTmod; level) to hit, damage, fort and ref right at level 1?
Has it been decided which disciplines should Harbinger have? Playtest doc still lists Primal Fury.
Would it break anything if Accursed Will was to grant minimum(INTmod; level) to hit, damage, fort and ref right at level 1?
Primal Fury has, ultimately, stayed. Additionally, Accursed Will has seen some nerfs based on feedback from our three participating forums; ultimately, it was getting too internally synergistic. I want Harbi to be set-and-forget character building but there's such a thing as too tuned.
So, Mandala Adept is just enormous. Too enormous to in good conscience keep as an archetype anymore. It's 6 pages in google docs, and while it will shrink in book format, it's still going to be a couple of pages and that's just awful. I'm going to move the Knight-Chandler into the Mystic Archetype document as well.
So, I was either going to rework it into a full alternate class for Mystic OR I could rework it into a Prestige class. Opinions?
-X
Stalker and Warlord make me wish medium save progression was still a thing. Though if the choice is between good and bad reflex progression, I say their saves should stay the way they are. I personally want the Stalker to have more reflex, but not for its base save to double.
As for the Mandala Adept, please prestige class it? I think it would be a cool thing for any dabbler in animus to work towards. Though I really want a new archetype in its place to be charisma based for the Mystic. I am too in love with its sorcerer/bloodrager compatibility both thematically and in gameplay.
I'm almost done making a an initiating Ranger comparison using 4 rangers.
Mr. 2wf
Mr. Mounted combat
Mr. 2WF with initating
Mr. Mounted combat with initiating
I will post it on the GiTP boards within the next 30 minutes.
Also, to my surprise I saw that the Paladin Archetype keeps smite despite having access to a discipline that gives bonus damage to evil stuff. I'll get down to making a comparison for it later.
In general one of the primary difference between the 3 initiating classes in PW1 and Paizo martials is the lack atk/dmg steroid due to maneuvers covering that role. By keeping the Paizo class steroids you're just asking for abuse. A Smiting+initiating Paladin is going to do bad things and it's not pretty.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I weren't an experienced GM who'd done some game design, and if I hadn't personally playtested the classes to death to the point where I know how to deal with them at my table, I'd probably have the same knee-jerk reaction as a lot of newer GMs.Perhaps some thought should be given to providing those newer GMs with tips on how to deal with the classes. It would not have to be part of a book - in fact, that might be a poor choice if you are wanting to encourage them to use the material because they might not purchase it and therefore never see the tips.
A thread in the forum dedicated to the subject so said GMs could be directed to it comes to mind.
A thread for DMs might not be a bad idea, or maybe a guide or something for people to watch out for, along with ways to incorporate PoW material into the game... I'll talk to the rest of the team about it, but you all should absolutely make a thread and get started on that. I look forward to seeing it!
I made the thread! You can find it here. I hope everyone will share their experiences.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
For the Stalker I'd rather them have a good base Reflex and either get rid of the Wis to Ref ability, or swap it out for something else.
For the Warlord it's probably less needed overall, but I liked it for uniformity and symmetry between the classes.
If you decided to implement it, it would work out like this:
Warder: Fort and Will, Int to Ref
Warlord: Fort and Ref, Cha to Will
Stalker: Ref and Will, Wis to Fort (this is what you could swap out its Wis to Ref for).
Yay symmetry.
For the Stalker I'd rather them have a good base Reflex and either get rid of the Wis to Ref ability, or swap it out for something else.
For the Warlord it's probably less needed overall, but I liked it for uniformity and symmetry between the classes.
If you decided to implement it, it would work out like this:
Warder: Fort and Will, Int to Ref
Warlord: Fort and Ref, Cha to Will
Stalker: Ref and Will, Wis to Fort (this is what you could swap out its Wis to Ref for).Yay symmetry.
I really really like that actually.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I also think the saves should stay where they are. Warlords and Stalkers both have effectively two good saves already with their stat to saves - which is balanced with current PF material.
Warders should be the only base class with effectively three good saves, keeping with their theme as the most defensive of the three base classes.
New Archetype I wanna test out with you all. Gunfighter Warlord, the Desperado, is available for testing and feedback. I know there's been a cry for more gun support so I felt that warlord was a good chassis to build it on. Let us know what you think!
-X
Just one suggestion - I think Desparado should also count as a level - 4 gunslinger for the purposes of feats and prestige classes, since for some reason most of the important grit feats explicitly require gunslinger levels. (EDIT: Or maybe equal to their warlord level, rather than level -4, just for feats and prestige classes. For those who want it, Signature Deed at level 15 might be a little too late.)
Also, any chance of adding the Mysterious Stranger's "Focused Aim" deed to the deeds list that the archetype has access to?
Just one suggestion - I think Desparado should also count as a level - 4 gunslinger for the purposes of feats and prestige classes, since for some reason most of the important grit feats explicitly require gunslinger levels. (EDIT: Or maybe equal to their warlord level, rather than level -4, just for feats and prestige classes. For those who want it, Signature Deed at level 15 might be a little too late.)
Also, any chance of adding the Mysterious Stranger's "Focused Aim" deed to the deeds list that the archetype has access to?
Cool, I'll add that.
And likely no, we want to keep some of the special gunslinger stuff in their hands. We're just borrowing a little of their shine.
-X
So I have a new Harbinger archetype that I have written to introduce to you all, meet the Omen Rider, a harbinger that rides a spectral steed on his mission of malice. Enjoy.
-X
So I have a new Harbinger archetype that I have written to introduce to you all, meet the Omen Rider, a harbinger that rides a spectral steed on his mission of malice. Enjoy.
-X
How long does the mount last for? Until dismissed? Does dismounting it dismiss it? I mainly ask because you have a section in there about how you can call it to your side and I'm trying to work out when you would use this ability. It would be nice if it was just a way to get it past obstacles...
Since its functions as a druid's animal companion it will gain HD and stuff, thats good. I take it that it can also take the Companion Archetypes... Does Indefatigable (Ex) (Charger Companion Archetype, Companion becomes immune to fatigue) affect Ethereal Riders 10th level ability any? Does your mount using the full run not get fatigued/exhausted at the end and stay with you?
I find that ability a bit odd... I'm Going to run as fast as I can for 10 min to get to the target, then I'm going to rest for an hour because I'll be fatigued have no horse in spite of the fact that could have kept on running for days... Maybe I should get overrun and just repeatedly use that... I don't get fatigued if I don't stop running right?
Maybe change it to you have to rest for half (or 1/4) the time spent running, but no more than an hour.
As an outsider your mount cant get the Jumper animal companion feat. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/jumper)
Are there any special rules for Veiled moon and mounts? If the mount teleports it does take the rider with it right? *Mount uses [lunar Penumbra]* *PC is now riding BBEG*
Forge of the Will doesn't specify which +1 special qualities are allowed, and Bane is +1. Is it intentional?
New class templates have been added to the Class Templates Document for the Alchemist/Investigator and the Inquisitor/Warpriest. These will be replacing the old Warpaths and the Alchemist Discoveries in the archetype document.
So I have a new Harbinger archetype that I have written to introduce to you all, meet the Omen Rider, a harbinger that rides a spectral steed on his mission of malice. Enjoy.
-X
How long does the mount last for? Until dismissed? Does dismounting it dismiss it? I mainly ask because you have a section in there about how you can call it to your side and I'm trying to work out when you would use this ability. It would be nice if it was just a way to get it past obstacles...
Since its functions as a druid's animal companion it will gain HD and stuff, thats good. I take it that it can also take the Companion Archetypes... Does Indefatigable (Ex) (Charger Companion Archetype, Companion becomes immune to fatigue) affect Ethereal Riders 10th level ability any? Does your mount using the full run not get fatigued/exhausted at the end and stay with you?
I find that ability a bit odd... I'm Going to run as fast as I can for 10 min to get to the target, then I'm going to rest for an hour because I'll be fatigued have no horse in spite of the fact that could have kept on running for days... Maybe I should get overrun and just repeatedly use that... I don't get fatigued if I don't stop running right?
Maybe change it to you have to rest for half (or 1/4) the time spent running, but no more than an hour.
As an outsider your mount cant get the Jumper animal companion feat. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/jumper)
Are there any special rules for Veiled moon and mounts? If the mount teleports it does take the rider with it right? *Mount uses [lunar Penumbra]* *PC is now riding BBEG*
I've addressed these concerns and some others, thanks for responding on this! Much appreciated!!
-X