Anyone else find the vigilante to be exceedingly weak?


Ultimate Intrigue Playtest General Discussion


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

For those of you who have already statted out and/or played vigilante characters, do you find the class to be weak? Like, nearly core rogue level of weak?

It's certainly an interesting class, and has several neat tricks, but I fear the numbers just aren't up to snuff.

Discuss.


A bit weaker tbh


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I dunno. the stalker can tumble through someone's square, hit them with an attack, force a save for them to avoid being unconscious, and then hit their buddy and force a save for him to avoid being knocked unconscious in one full round. Oh, and if both are knocked out, it will be almost impossible for anyone else to know that the two people (guards, say) were even attacked.

The Warlock can hit you with multiple touch attacks in a round that require no ability to increase the damage on (since it's based on level rather than ability) and that same ability works with melee or ranged (much like produce fire). Also, they can cast fireballs and not be pinpointed as the caster.

The Avenger is a full bab 6+ skill point class, who can pounce. and greater vital strike on AoOs.

The zealot is probably the least focused specialization of the four, imo. They're kinda all over the place.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Avenger is fine, having a full bab, some tricks here and there and being able to pick up fighter feats. Avenger favors two-handed fighting style or sword and board. From the playtest so far, two-handed will probably be the style of choice.

Stalker suffers from the recent release of unchained rogue and also competing with Ninjas. It is okay but not great, definitely could use a boost.

Warlock and Zealot have okay features but like usual having access to good spell list, does make up for having okay class features. Sadly with 10 talents available, it means that if you want access to the spellcasting you will need to spend 5 of your talents to get the spells.

They did say to take into consideration that in the future release, we aren't going to get extra vigilante talent feat, so build ends up being pretty static. But the public identity part is hard to judge, from table to table, some people barely ever do any social interaction, while others spend a huge amount of time in urban campaign, so it could end being very strong to very weak from campaign to campaign. The limit on community size has to go tho.

Dark Archive

I feel like it's weak in that you can't really make it strong in more than one thing very often. I think that every single specialization can be up to snuff in one area, but otherwise can't really do much. As mentioned by someone else before(I don't remember who) if you chose the specialization but could choose from all the talents then this class would be both stronger and not a one trick pony.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Vrog Skyreaver wrote:
I dunno. the stalker can tumble through someone's square, hit them with an attack, force a save for them to avoid being unconscious, and then hit their buddy and force a save for him to avoid being knocked unconscious in one full round. Oh, and if both are knocked out, it will be almost impossible for anyone else to know that the two people (guards, say) were even attacked.

Please explain to me specifically how what you describe is possible. From what I can see, it isn't, as things are written now. Foe Collision and Mighty Ambush cannot be used together, and the latter only works once per round.

Even if that is possible, it doesn't look like it comes online until 10th-level at the earliest.

Eltacolibre wrote:
Avenger is fine, having a full bab, some tricks here and there and being able to pick up fighter feats. Avenger favors two-handed fighting style or sword and board. From the playtest so far, two-handed will probably be the style of choice.

I'm not seeing this either. An Avenger's poor Fortitude save is going to get him into a lot of trouble more often than not, and his full BAB and bonus feats does little to make up for the lack of something like favored enemy, rage, or weapon training. At a glance, his combat abilities look strictly weaker than that of a fighter (which is generally held in low regard already). Why not just play a fighter that invests in the disguise skill?


I wouldn't say the fighter's combat abilities are held in low regard. A fighter does very respectable damage. It's that the fighter can do little more than combat abilities and doesn't exceed all other classes in that field.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

From my reading (soon to be playtested):

Stalker is terrible. Interesting abilities, but terrible.

Avenger is boring, but workable. Needs a bit more oomph. Its damage output is likely to be lackluster and its Talents are for the most part "Here's some Feats, yo".

Zealot is technically decent (6 level casting alone does that), but given that almost everything it gets is poached from the Inquisitor...which gets Bane and Judgement and several other abilities on top of everything the Zealot can get, the Zealot is bad just by comparison. It is entirely outclassed in everything it can do by the Inquisitor.

Warlock is the stand-out here. It's got powerful, interesting, and varied abilities, many of which are unique (unlike the Avenger and Zealot). It's clearly where all the attention went.

Zealot and Avenger got the least love, their abilities uninspired and largely either Feats or abilities poached from other, better classes.

Stalker also obviously got a lot of creativity and attention put into it, but mechanically its abilities aren't up to snuff...likely because of this, sadly:

Mark Seifter wrote:
David Neilson wrote:
So can you tell us which of the Vigilante's aspects you have been put in charge of?
While we'll all be working together under Jason on the class, I was the one to whom we farmed out the stalker talents. It was quite a challenge; a class with strong Will saves that has a design goal to both avoid squashing the Unchained rogue and avoid being squashed by the Unchained rogue. Right now, a lot of that dynamic lives in the talents being quite strong compared to rogue talents.

Poor guy got stuck trying to put a good spin on "We're balancing this around the Rogue".


They should have made hidden strike work like, "A stalker vigilante can also deal hidden strike damage to a target that he is threatening, but in these cases, the damage dice are reduced to d4s."

Scarab Sages

Ravingdork wrote:
Vrog Skyreaver wrote:
I dunno. the stalker can tumble through someone's square, hit them with an attack, force a save for them to avoid being unconscious, and then hit their buddy and force a save for him to avoid being knocked unconscious in one full round. Oh, and if both are knocked out, it will be almost impossible for anyone else to know that the two people (guards, say) were even attacked.

Please explain to me specifically how what you describe is possible. From what I can see, it isn't, as things are written now. Foe Collision and Mighty Ambush cannot be used together, and the latter only works once per round.

Even if that is possible, it doesn't look like it comes online until 10th-level at the earliest.

It's possible because Foe Collision has a specific exception for the rule that hidden strike can only have one talent applied to it. "Unlike normal, this vigilante talent applies to any successful hidden strike."


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Poor Mark :( then again I believe he's the most likely to actually suceed at such a difficult task. I honestly believe he is the most talented person on that team, so I'd rather have him get the most mechanically difficult tasks.


I agree, though it is sad that he's being hobbled this way.


Rynjin wrote:
I agree, though it is sad that he's being hobbled this way.

No kidding. Balancing a new class against the rogue, even the unchained rogue, is not a good goal to be working towards.

They could at least be aiming toward the middle. We're not expecting the Vigilante to match up against Wizards, but it would be nice if our fantasy Batman class wasn't crippled out the gate.

Dark Archive

Some of the mechanics are a bit odd, certainly. The dual identities thing seems both weak and difficult to manage in a non-solo/all vigilante campaign. And why do Warlocks use Int as their caster stat while Zealots use Cha? It seems to me that it would make more sense for them to either be Int and Wis, respectively, or both Cha (probably the latter to help them be a little bit less Inquisitor-lite). As for the rest, I'm actually not too worried; seems to me that they presented a weaker baseline and will improve it based on the playtest, probably because people seem more accepting of boosts than of "nerfs".

Where I find the class to be exceedingly weak is in campaign role, not mechanics. This class is awesome for a few very specific types of campaigns, and really awkward and shoe-horny in all the rest. Overall, I think it would have been much more sensical to make it a prestige class, rather than a base class. It is my personal hope that we do not see terribly many more of this particular type of class, or at least that well-designed archetypes broaden the appeal of this one.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Imbicatus wrote:


It's possible because Foe Collision has a specific exception for the rule that hidden strike can only have one talent applied to it. "Unlike normal, this vigilante talent applies to any successful hidden strike."

Huh? Why on earth does it have an asterisk at all then???


I think the weaknesses have less to do about the specializations and more to do with every other class feature. Think about each class feature that either is a double-edged sword or doesn't help in a fight and look at how many of those are the only thing you get that level.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
AsmodeusUltima wrote:
Where I find the class to be exceedingly weak is in campaign role, not mechanics.

Do you happen to have any numbers that show it is a mechanically strong class? (As it compares to other classes in terms of being able to pull its weight while adventuring.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

My vigilante is definitely miles above a rogue, then again, he is a warlock going the magic thief route..... Illusion and Enchantment spells + social skills + lasers is pretty decent. Though it would be better if I knew what Living Shadow did.

Shadow Lodge

AsmodeusUltima wrote:
Some of the mechanics are a bit odd, certainly. The dual identities thing seems both weak and difficult to manage in a non-solo/all vigilante campaign. And why do Warlocks use Int as their caster stat while Zealots use Cha? It seems to me that it would make more sense for them to either be Int and Wis, respectively, or both Cha (probably the latter to help them be a little bit less Inquisitor-lite).

I'm baffled by this, too, honestly. I'd say swap the Warlock to Cha to avoid it getting the +Int boost to Skill Points we see in most Arcane Casters basically negating their otherwise low Skill Points and swap the Zealot to Wis to help focus on being a bit less MAD.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rynjin wrote:


Stalker also obviously got a lot of creativity and attention put into it, but mechanically its abilities aren't up to snuff...likely because of this, sadly:

Mark Seifter wrote:
David Neilson wrote:
So can you tell us which of the Vigilante's aspects you have been put in charge of?
While we'll all be working together under Jason on the class, I was the one to whom we farmed out the stalker talents. It was quite a challenge; a class with strong Will saves that has a design goal to both avoid squashing the Unchained rogue and avoid being squashed by the Unchained rogue. Right now, a lot of that dynamic lives in the talents being quite strong compared to rogue talents.

Poor guy got stuck trying to put a good spin on "We're balancing this around the Rogue".

So that is the problem. The rogue being a weaker class should not be a balancing point unless it is the low end of the balancing point to be avoided. If they don't get rid of that idea or Mark can sneak some good stuff in and hope Jason does not notice I know what I will not be playing.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Ravingdork wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:


It's possible because Foe Collision has a specific exception for the rule that hidden strike can only have one talent applied to it. "Unlike normal, this vigilante talent applies to any successful hidden strike."
Huh? Why on earth does it have an asterisk at all then???

Actually, looking at it again, you can't combine the two. The phrase you quoted means it will work while flanking too (normal talents that trigger on hidden strike only trigger when the foe is unaware of you or considers you an ally).

You were misreading it.

Stalker Talents general:
A stalker vigilante can apply only one talent marked with an asterisk (*) to a given hidden strike, and only when that hidden strike is dealt against a foe that is unaware of the stalker vigilante (or who considers him an ally), unless otherwise noted.

And

Foe Collision:
Unlike normal, this vigilante talent applies to any successful hidden strike.

Dark Archive

Ravingdork wrote:
Do you happen to have any numbers that show it is a mechanically strong class? (As it compares to other classes in terms of being able to pull its weight while adventuring.)

I apologize if I was unclear. I did not mean to imply that the class was mechanically strong, but rather that such a weakness is easily fixed by means of this very playtest. Astute members of the community such as yourself will point out in what ways the class is lacking, and the wonderfully responsive Paizo developers will address the issue. The point I was trying to make was that I am less worried by the easily remedied mechanical flaws, and more by the much more nebulous and difficult to contend with role flaws. To me, a base class that only fits thematically into a relatively small percentage of campaigns should not be a base class, but rather an archetype or a prestige class. I have heard similar arguments made against the gunslinger by those who do not wish for firearms in their fantasy, but I feel that, other than the specifics of their weapon of choice, the class fits in fine playstyle-wise next to any other ranged combatant, while the vigilante's dual-identity super-hero motif would be very difficult to fit organically into most campaigns.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:


It's possible because Foe Collision has a specific exception for the rule that hidden strike can only have one talent applied to it. "Unlike normal, this vigilante talent applies to any successful hidden strike."
Huh? Why on earth does it have an asterisk at all then???

Actually, looking at it again, you can't combine the two. The phrase you quoted means it will work while flanking too (normal talents that trigger on hidden strike only trigger when the foe is unaware of you or considers you an ally).

You were misreading it.

** spoiler omitted **

And

** spoiler omitted **

Huh, I missed the general line limiting hidden strike talents to unaware only. That... really makes the stalker terrible.


Ravingdork wrote:
Please explain to me specifically how what you describe is possible. From what I can see, it isn't, as things are written now. Foe Collision and Mighty Ambush cannot be used together, and the latter only works once per round.

You're right. I missed that Mighty Ambush was 1/round. I would probably throat jab his buddy then, unless I could find something that let me coup de grace as a standard action. And yes, you're looking at 10th level. Still, not horrible.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:


It's possible because Foe Collision has a specific exception for the rule that hidden strike can only have one talent applied to it. "Unlike normal, this vigilante talent applies to any successful hidden strike."
Huh? Why on earth does it have an asterisk at all then???

Actually, looking at it again, you can't combine the two. The phrase you quoted means it will work while flanking too (normal talents that trigger on hidden strike only trigger when the foe is unaware of you or considers you an ally).

You were misreading it.

** spoiler omitted **

And

** spoiler omitted **

That seems really bad... like they need to really buff the class with this limitation (never noticed that limit on those).


Am I the only one who read the entire entry under hidden strike:

Hidden Strike wrote:
Hidden Strike (Ex): Starting at 1st level, the stalker vigilante gains the ability to deal 1d6 extra precision damage on melee attacks (or ranged attacks from within 30 feet) against foes who are unaware of his presence (or who consider him an ally). This extra damage increases by 1d6 at 3rd level and every 2 vigilante levels thereafter. A stalker vigilante can also deal hidden strike damage to a target that he is flanking or that is denied its Dexterity bonus to AC, but in these cases, the damage dice are reduced to d4s. A stalker vigilante can deal hidden strike damage against targets with concealment (but not total concealment).

I'll grant that I'm not a fan of the damage dropping to d4s, but you can apply hidden strike to people in concealment, which costs rogues a talent, and you have a talent to apply it to people with total concealment (which presumably you would have total concealment from them as well).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

As for the specific combination of above, I'm not doing foe collision at all. I'm doing up close and personal + mighty ambush. Up close and personal let's you attack as a swift action with hidden strike after tumbling through someone's square.


Too bad you can't find a way to get more than one swift action: then you could do up close/personal twice, once with mighty ambush then second with foe collision.

Really, it seems like Vigilante would be better in the Unchained action economy (because then you get more than one swift action [they cost 1 act].

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Ultimate Intrigue Playtest / General Discussion / Anyone else find the vigilante to be exceedingly weak? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion