For the most part, actually playing the class isn't needed.
I think that pretty much says all anyone needs to know about you.
If you're not willing to even play the freaking class, why are you wasting anyone's time in the playtest feedback forums?
You don't need to actually play a commoner to know that it is worthless as a viable character. Same principle applies here.
phantom1592, you have to remember that the class is more than the Avenger. When people are saying it's like an NPC during social mode, it's taking ALL the specialization into account. Myself, I'm more interested in the warlock so I'm less concerned that the avenger is less affected by the social mode.
That's why my comment of the warlock stands. Social mode hits vigilantes HARD, dropping them below PC status. Avengers are hit less but the loss of bonus combat feats, heavy armor and other talents is still a big blow. Use any of those combat feats for prerequisites? While feat treats could turn off in social mode.
Then your complaints are misplaced as I AM playtesting it and other are too. It only take using social mode ONCE to find the class is horribly flawed. Have YOU playtested it before 'calling' people out' for not doing so? If not, you're time might be better spent doing that.
Um... I'm not the one complaining.
I'm calling out the typical snarky BS for not even taking the time to actually play test the class before squatting on it.
Yeah, I am playtesting it. I don't know how much you play in a week, but I barely had my character made, before the poo-poo brigade started their squawking.
I think the point I've been trying to make has not been... There are plenty of threads to offer feedback on this class. A thread this melodramatic is not really helpful. I wanna ask- what do you think would make this a better class, rather than just b~*+#ing about it? That is the point- constructive criticism.
So many posters here are just weird forum created ego-casting. Every day is a just a new pissing match they are hell-bent on winning.
Guys, don't bother. Arguing with Hex is just going to get the THREAD LOCKED. I know because I've been part of many many threads that have gotten locked for similar circumstances.
Just respond to constructive posts. If it's not constructive then scroll past it.
So many posters here are just weird forum created ego-casting. Every day is a just a new pissing match they are hell-bent on winning.
I may a thread detailing the major issues of the class as a whole, and simple fixes for them
You don't need to actually play a commoner to know that it is worthless as a viable character. Same principle applies here.
For the most part, actually playing the class isn't needed.
I think that pretty much says all anyone needs to know about you.
If you're not willing to even play the freaking class, why are you wasting anyone's time in the playtest feedback forums?
You're comparing the commoner to the vigilante- really?
Guys, don't bother. Arguing with Hex is just going to get the THREAD LOCKED. I know because I've been part of many many threads that have gotten locked for similar circumstances.
Just respond to constructive posts. If it's not constructive then scroll past it.
Not liking the class is the only way to be constructive?
So many posters here are just weird forum created ego-casting. Every day is a just a new pissing match they are hell-bent on winning.I may a thread detailing the major issues of the class as a whole, and simple fixes for them
You do have a good thread.
Constructive:
- I like the class because something it does right is finally allow someone in full plate to be able to participate in sneaking.
- Avengers don't really have a way to re-enter stealth despite the classes' focus on busting out of stealth to smack someone.
Non-constructive:
-Posts that don't have information about the class.
-Posts responding to posts that don't contain information about the class.
-posting multiple times in a row despite being able to edit the responses into one cohesive post.
I think the point I've been trying to make has not been... There are plenty of threads to offer feedback on this class. A thread this melodramatic is not really helpful. I wanna ask- what do you think would make this a better class, rather than just b&&%#ing about it? That is the point- constructive criticism.
What is wrong with saying what you don't like about a class in a playtest? Saying drastic changes need to be made to make it viable? (it does)
Negative or positive doesn't matter for constructive criticism. The OP may have been melodramatic, but I think he was making a point. The class needs MAJOR fixes and some of the DEV replies don't seem to mesh with what is on the playtest. (such as no extra talents feat, mystic bolts treated as rays but not weapons even though rays are treated as weapons, ect) Sometimes being blunt stands out more than another post that blends into the background.
Not liking the class is the only way to be constructive?
Giving criticism of the class is constructive. Complaining about other posters isn't. So far all you've said it that the class is awesome. Not exactly constructive/useful.
I think I'll have to agree with Insain Dragoon. This is most likely not going to lead anywhere other than a thread lock so I'll leave it here.
I can't even really think of a character concept that would fit the spellcasting vigilante concept...
In many settings, arcane magic is feared and it's practioners are hunted down. My own warlock vigilante is part of such a society.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You need to play the vigilante to offer actual feedback, so it can be playable for the final version.
I've DMed a game with a Vigilante, I've looked over the Vigilante, and I can say that, yes, comparing the Vigilante to a Commoner is, in fact, valid.
Social Personas are basically the Expert NPC class with a special ability that gives it a minor version of Skill Focus as a Bonus Feat, and immunity to Scrying made against its Vigilante Persona while in its Social Persona.
Okay, so in that way, it SEEMS better than an Expert NPC Class.
However, then you have the entire FIVE MINUTES TO CHANGE thing into your NON-NPC-level-of-power Class, meaning that it actually HAMPERS your ability to be an effective member of the Party.
On the other end of things, all 4 of the Specializations are weaker versions of already-existing classes.
They are weaker on the presupposition that somehow the Social Persona would make up for the weakness by giving it lots and lots of cool tricks.
The Social Persona does not, in the slightest, do that.
The Social Persona does nothing by itself.
And because it does nothing by itself AND because it takes 50 Combat Turns to transform from Social to Vigilante Persona, that means that everyone who's actually concerned with their character NOT dying horrible deaths, plus actually being a productive member of the Party will ALWAYS be in their Vigilante Persona.
And because the Vigilante Personas are mutated versions of existing Classes, that means you are 100% of the time playing 75% of an existing class while calling yourself a "Vigilante".
As it stands you are LITERALLY better off actually rolling and assigning Stats, writing up 2 Character Sheets, one for an Expert, and one for another Class, and playing those in place of the Vigilante, with your DM saying that it takes "N" Rounds to transform.
You end up getting the exact same experience of playing a Vigilante with a better result.
OR, on the other hand, perhaps people should play a Master Spy.
That Prestige Class already has many or MOST of the tricks that thematically should be applied to the Social Persona and the Vigilante Class as a whole.
Taking Cleaner Slayer or Mysterious Avenger for 7 levels and then entering into Master Spy will get you a better Avenger than the Avenger.
Taking a pure Rogue (assuming you use Unchained like a civilized human) for 7 layers and then entering Master Spy will yield you a better Stalker than the Stalker.
Playing a pure Magus will ultimately be a better Warlock than the Warlock, and Inquisitor will absolutely be a better Zealot than the actual Zealot.
---
I've seen this playtested by one of the most horrendous powergamers around (someone who has directly caused ERRATA in the SpyCraft game), I've read over it, and, yes, he, I, and everyone in our group still, surprisingly*, find the entire class hilariously sub-par.
The idea as a whole may be cool, but the overall execution right now is extremely poor.
*this is sarcasm
I can't even really think of a character concept that would fit the spellcasting vigilante concept...In many settings, arcane magic is feared and it's practioners are hunted down. My own warlock vigilante is part of such a society.
Or the divine caster that worships a god outlawed in the area. Or it's a vigilante that happens to have magic. Demon/fey/aberrant blood giving strange powers do to ancient pact with otherworldly powers before your family was banished... The concepts are endless.
phantom1592, you have to remember that the class is more than the Avenger. When people are saying it's like an NPC during social mode, it's taking ALL the specialization into account. Myself, I'm more interested in the warlock so I'm less concerned that the avenger is less affected by the social mode.
That's why my comment of the warlock stands. Social mode hits vigilantes HARD, dropping them below PC status. Avengers are hit less but the loss of bonus combat feats, heavy armor and other talents is still a big blow. Use any of those combat feats for prerequisites? While feat treats could turn off in social mode.
Fair enough.
I see the Specializations as Varied enough that it's really hard to lump them all into one playtest conversation.
I think the biggest problem with the class is people trying to force it into what it wasn't designed for. Social mode should be a bonus not a hinderance. Losing the combat feats and higher level ability shouldn't be an issue in social situations. When the Vigilante can't attack as well or is at half power... the fighter has also been disarmed and the Paladin isn't wearing his armor either.
There is a lot of fluff and flavor attached to the social mode that some people don't really care for. In our current Kingmaker game this would have come in a lot of handy. We have a master spy that could have had a lot of fun with this class.
They feel more like the hybrids with a 1/2 caster, 1/2 rogue-ninja or 1/2 fighter, 1/2 rogue.
Comparing them to NPC classes and commoners... I don't really see it. NPCs get NOTHING... While people may not be pleased with the Vigilante stuff.. there's still stuff. 2 good saves, decent to good BAB. 6+ skills. That alone blows all the npc classes away. And that's in the 'non-combat' mode.
If played well, they even get 'plot armor.' Why would the BBEG ambush Bruce Wayne?!? He's nothing. His disguise/scry protection/Renoun/ reputation has withstood massive investigation and he's nobody... No reason to send the ninjas after HIM...
I really like the Loyal aid ability. It reminds me of 'The Shadow's network of agents spread through out the city. Little experts in any field that help when he needs them...
I'd agree that the Warlock and Zealot REALLY need to get their spell levels as they level up... I can't really see a reason for them NOT to... Anything else just turns this into a dip class for a sorcerer.
With the first reading I immediately sent out an E-mail to my group saying I call this for the next city campaign we play. I believe it will shine there.
OUTSIDE of that very specific square hole... Vigilantes will be very difficult to work with. For random one night quests like PFS I see them as pretty useless even. But for that one niche... :D
I can't even really think of a character concept that would fit the spellcasting vigilante concept...
Dr. Fate
Doctor Strange
Etrigan the Demon
Pre-New52 Allen Scott Green Lantern
Zatanna Zatara
Star Sapphire
...
In most games I play there is such a huge divide in time between combat time and social time that the 5 minutes doesn't matter.
In Way of the Wicked it wouldn't have mattered at all in the first book. In the second it matters a bit because we're in our own villain lair with henchmen, so I'd have to stay in combat mode the entire time. Though when I visit town I would have the advantage of pinging as neutral instead of neutral evil.
I can't even really think of a character concept that would fit the spellcasting vigilante concept...Dr. Fate
Doctor Strange
Etrigan the Demon
Pre-New52 Allen Scott Green Lantern
Zatanna Zatara
...
Most of those would fall into the wizard category more then the Vigilante though. The people who claim that other classes do it better would have a point there.
MOST of them have nearly non-existant secret ids... and they rarely do anything WITH the social forms. Costumes are little more then a magicked up trenchcoat...
other then Etrigan... that's probably closer to an alchemist ;)
When the Vigilante can't attack as well or is at half power... the fighter has also been disarmed and the Paladin isn't wearing his armor either.
This just doesn't have to be. Glammered, shrinking, restful, comfort and other enchants are cheap and available meaning only the lowest level fighter or paladin don't have their weapon/armor. Simple weapon cords and locked gauntlets solve disarming. Vigilantes have NO recourse. They MUST throw away their abilities if they want to use their social 1/2 and they need 50 rounds to be allowed to do so...
Comparing them to NPC classes and commoners... I don't really see it. NPCs get NOTHING... While people may not be pleased with the Vigilante stuff.. there's still stuff. 2 good saves, decent to good BAB. 6+ skills. That alone blows all the npc classes away. And that's in the 'non-combat' mode.
LOL Better than NPC doesn't make them good enough to be PC's. Myself, I say less than PC. Almost as good as a core rogue?
I can't even really think of a character concept that would fit the spellcasting vigilante concept...Dr. Fate
Doctor Strange
Etrigan the Demon
Pre-New52 Allen Scott Green Lantern
Zatanna Zatara
...
Most of those would fall into the wizard category more then the Vigilante though. The people who claim that other classes do it better would have a point there.
MOST of them have nearly non-existant secret ids... and they rarely do anything WITH the social forms. Costumes are little more then a magicked up trenchcoat...
other then Etrigan... that's probably closer to an alchemist ;)
And I would agree with them entirely.
Doctor Strange is an Arcanist.
Doctor Fate is an Arcanist with a Bonded Object - i.e. the Helm of Nabu.
John Constantine is an Arcanist or POSSIBLY a Magus.
Zatanna is a Bard using Words of Power.
Etrigan is in no-way an Alchemist; Etrigan is magical by canon, and envelopes the body & soul of Jason Blood when being summoned. To that degree, it's arguable that Etrigan might ACTUALLY be a Warlock Vigilante, or perhaps something else entirely.
Madam Xanadu is probably a Witch.
Klarion is very likely a Sorcerer
Raven is a textbook Sorcerer if there ever was one.
Felix Faust is a Necromancer Wizard.
Arion MIGHT be a Wizard, or he might be an Arcanist.
The Phantom Stranger is... uh... good luck identifying THAT.
Allen Scott is probably the truest Warlock Vigilante.
---
That being said, a LOT of people try to make characters like Thor or Superman in PF using entirely-wrong classes and forgetting that BOTH characters have RP40+ races that are ACTUALLY giving them their power (while the Classes are Brawler for Superman and probably Fighter or something else for Thor).
The Warlock Vigilante doesn't perfectly simulate any of the heroes above (excepting Allen Scott), but it does let people make characters LIKE them, at least in very-general theme.
Constructive:
- I like the class because something it does right is finally allow someone in full plate to be able to participate in sneaking.
- Avengers don't really have a way to re-enter stealth despite the classes' focus on busting out of stealth to smack someone.Non-constructive:
-Posts that don't have information about the class.
-Posts responding to posts that don't contain information about the class.
-posting multiple times in a row despite being able to edit the responses into one cohesive post.
Fair enough.
What I like- I think the duel-identity features are cool. It extending to the point of the same person having differing alignments can make for a range of options that no other class has. As far as playtest goes-I've made an extremely fun psycho who can talk to his alter ego in a mirror, while the rest of the world has no clue. I don't see how that feature is boring or redundant considering other class features or feats.
The Specialization options give the class more diversity than almost any other class, without even taking an archetype.
Like I said from my first post, there is work needed to make these features and the mechanics behind them mesh to make this a functioning class. But I don't share the pessimistic view expressed here.
So yeah, I think this class is "incredible". Playing two different personas like this has not been possible before.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The simple fact of the matter is that the class NEEDS to change.. A LOT, and sure some people have mentioned there can be drastic changes like in books with lots of classes (ACG Hunter being an example) but thats the thing. This, as far as we are aware, has 1 class... That's it. 1 class and interesting new rules. The chances of a huge overhaul are small.
Add in on top of that, the dev's comments so far seem to be like they are completely missing the core problems. We mention that the social mode is pretty much a NPC and they tell us that they are also making Social specific talents, but they don't address the issue of the Vigilante pretty much being talent starved. In fact, they do the EXACT OPPOSITE and tell use they are most likely not creating a extra talent feat. THIS is like a suckerpunch to the face right there since LITERALLY EVERY OTHER CLASS THAT HAS SELECTABLE TALENTS HAS A EXTRA X FEAT.... ALL OF THEM... This will be the only class that does not. Add in the fact that they seem to be punishing you for wanting to be a caster (no armor casting (they said they are thinking of making it A FREAKING TALENT... i.e. wasting a precious class ability on something that every other 6-level arcane caster gets for free), waste half your talents to STILL be a worse caster than every other 6-level caster). So yeah, if they continue with this trend, this class will fall to way side as people just improvise things like Alchemists, Investigators, Inquisitors, Slayers, and Unchained Rogues...
Etrigan is in no-way an Alchemist; Etrigan is magical by canon, and envelopes the body & soul of Jason Blood when being summoned. To that degree, it's arguable that Etrigan might ACTUALLY be a Warlock Vigilante, or perhaps something else entirely.
Allen Scott is probably the truest Warlock Vigilante.
Actually, I think Summoner might be good for Etrigan. I picked ALchemist for the whole 'different body w/claws' demon he turns into... It's so much more then just 'costume change'... but Etrigan could be a kick butt Eidolon... maybe whichever one merged with the summoner.
There's a class in Occult Adventures that would be a pretty good Alan Scott. The one that unlocks the magical abilities in objects.
What about the people who wanted fighters to have more use out of combat?
Anyone here request that? What do you think of filling that slot? (Again Avenger...) has the bonus feats, Full BaB and 6+ skills. First look says that's pretty close!
Did this fill the gap that people wanted? Or is it still not good enough?
It's not even so much that it's Talent Starved - it IS, but that's a different problem.
The Social Persona NEEDS to have abilities unto itself.
It needs to have a reason for existing, for players to switch into their Social Personas. And those reasons NEED to be Mechanical.
Right now, the ONLY mechanical reason to be in a Social Persona is to have immunity to Scrying against your Vigilante Persona.
That's a poor reason that no-one really cares about much.
Beyond that, changing into your Secret Identity is entirely Roleplaying bait, and that's not a good way to design a class. There's nothing stopping a character from having an "alternate persona" or something similar with any other class, so what is the draw of being a Vigilante?
Social Personas need to have a mechanical identity just like any other class; they need to be worthwhile enough that players will actually WANT to be in Social Personas just as often as they do in their Vigilante Persona.
Social Personas can get Talents, fine - but more importantly they need to get HARD, UNIVERSAL ABILITIES that make the Social Persona just as important as, or even MORE THAN, the Vigilante Persona.
Social Personas are an open slate to make characters like Jim Phelps, Simon Templar, & Michael Westen - characters who are masters of infiltration, espionage, forging information, and then switching to ass-kickers when the moment is right.
Right now, Social Personas have NONE of that, and simply adding a small number of Talents is not the answer to that problem.
Fair enough.
What I like- I think the duel-identity features are cool. It extending to the point of the same person having differing alignments can make for a range of options that no other class has. As far as playtest goes-I've made an extremely fun psycho who can talk to his alter ego in a mirror, while the rest of the world has no clue. I don't see how that feature is boring or redundant considering other class features or feats.
So yeah, I think this class is "incredible". Playing two different personas like this has not been possible before.
THIS isn't even a brand new thing. You've been able to do this with the Master Chymist for years now.
What about the people who wanted fighters to have more use out of combat?
Anyone here request that? What do you think of filling that slot? (Again Avenger...) has the bonus feats, Full BaB and 6+ skills. First look says that's pretty close!
Did this fill the gap that people wanted? Or is it still not good enough?
Slayer's already did that. So did a lot of 3PP too.
Also The Avenger only has full BAB and few methods of making itself more effective at its job. I wouldn't be surprised if an Unchained Rogue could outfight an Avenger handily.
It's essentially like a Paladin who never smites/casts or a Cavalier without a horse and challenge.
What about the people who wanted fighters to have more use out of combat?
Anyone here request that? What do you think of filling that slot? (Again Avenger...) has the bonus feats, Full BaB and 6+ skills. First look says that's pretty close!
Did this fill the gap that people wanted? Or is it still not good enough?
Slayer beat them to it... just saying...
Joe Hex: First, thanks for the last post. If you'd have started out like that, you'd have gotten much less pushback. :)
On your points:
dual-identity features: A cool idea but I find the time factor killing it's usefulness. The differing alignments is also interesting, but as is doesn't work well as you still have to check both for prerequisites and they are only 1 step away. With 1 step only, you can't have a good vigilante in an evil society which would seem to be against the concept.
Specialization: Again cool idea. They need some major work though. 1/2 talents for casting is bad, no extra talents is bad, Hidden Strike needs help, lots of talents are just repackaged feats/abilities from other classes.
pessimistic view: As is, it's not ready for publication. How much Paizo is wiling to fix it will be the determining factor. That means everyone should post what they think needs fixed to let them know.
"incredible": It has incredible potential. It's current form though... Not so great. We'll have to see how much of our feedback they work in.
The rest: The issue was you came in complaining about people and not the issues. Of course that gets those people riled up. People here are complaining because they want the class to be awesome not because they hate the class or the people that made it.
What about the people who wanted fighters to have more use out of combat?
Anyone here request that? What do you think of filling that slot? (Again Avenger...) has the bonus feats, Full BaB and 6+ skills. First look says that's pretty close!
Did this fill the gap that people wanted? Or is it still not good enough?
As I pointed out, those bonus feats all go away in social mode. Having vanishing bonus feats isn't anywhere close to what I want from an improved fighter.
What about the people who wanted fighters to have more use out of combat?
Anyone here request that? What do you think of filling that slot? (Again Avenger...) has the bonus feats, Full BaB and 6+ skills. First look says that's pretty close!
Did this fill the gap that people wanted? Or is it still not good enough?
I hear the Slayer is a full BAB class with 6+ Skills and a whole host of abilities which include granting Bonus Feats.
I hear it also has abilities which increase your accuracy and damage, as well.
And I hear it has a d10 HD, as well.
I hear that the Slayer has been a better Avenger Vigilante than the Avenger Vigilante since before the Avenger Vigilante was even a thought...
dual-identity features: A cool idea but I find the time factor killing it's usefulness. The differing alignments is also interesting, but as is doesn't work well as you still have to check both for prerequisites and they are only 1 step away. With 1 step only, you can't have a good vigilante in an evil society which would seem to be against the concept.
I don't like the 1 step away rule either, because it doesn't work with a lot of the range of concepts players could come up with when playing a class this unconventional.
I really like the idea of a complete nut-job vigilante, who can't reconcile the brutality of what he/she does by night, with the compassion that led them to protect people in the first place. That kind of dichotomy needs enough flexibility at least to pull off a Lawful Good- Chaotic Neutral shift.
THIS isn't even a brand new thing. You've been able to do this with the Master Chymist for years now.
Fair enough.
What I like- I think the duel-identity features are cool. It extending to the point of the same person having differing alignments can make for a range of options that no other class has. As far as playtest goes-I've made an extremely fun psycho who can talk to his alter ego in a mirror, while the rest of the world has no clue. I don't see how that feature is boring or redundant considering other class features or feats.
So yeah, I think this class is "incredible". Playing two different personas like this has not been possible before.
Well you did leave out the entire middle of my post. All of which the Master Chymist can't do. But whatever.
I don't like the 1 step away rule either, because it doesn't work with a lot of the range of concepts players could come up with when playing a class this unconventional.
I really like the idea of a complete nut-job vigilante, who can't reconcile the brutality of what he/she does by night with the compassion that led them to protect people in the first place. That kind of dichotomy needs enough flexibility at least to pull off a Lawful Good- Chaotic Neutral shift.
Something else Master Cymist can do... so the mechanic is out there and NOT overpowered or anything. This should definitely happen.
dual-identity features: A cool idea but I find the time factor killing it's usefulness. The differing alignments is also interesting, but as is doesn't work well as you still have to check both for prerequisites and they are only 1 step away. With 1 step only, you can't have a good vigilante in an evil society which would seem to be against the concept.
I don't like the 1 step away rule either, because it doesn't work with a lot of the range of concepts players could come up with when playing a class this unconventional.
I really like the idea of a complete nut-job vigilante, who can't reconcile the brutality of what he/she does by night with the compassion that led them to protect people in the first place. That kind of dichotomy needs enough flexibility at least to pull off a Lawful Good- Chaotic Neutral shift.
Agreed 100000%
When I first heard multiple identities I thought something similar.
Well you did leave out the entire middle of my post. All of which the Master Chymist can't do. But whatever.THIS isn't even a brand new thing. You've been able to do this with the Master Chymist for years now.
Fair enough.
What I like- I think the duel-identity features are cool. It extending to the point of the same person having differing alignments can make for a range of options that no other class has. As far as playtest goes-I've made an extremely fun psycho who can talk to his alter ego in a mirror, while the rest of the world has no clue. I don't see how that feature is boring or redundant considering other class features or feats.
So yeah, I think this class is "incredible". Playing two different personas like this has not been possible before.
...None of which was relevant to what I was responding to, which is the uniqueness of the Dual Identity's ability to let you have a separate alignment and personality.
Of course, the middle part of that post was headscratching regardless.
Why would I choose a class with Specializations that give it unparalleled "diversity" when that diversity is simply aping the class features of other classes, but less well.
Why should I care that one class can mimic 4 other classes when those 4 other classes already exist?
Well you did leave out the entire middle of my post. All of which the Master Chymist can't do. But whatever.THIS isn't even a brand new thing. You've been able to do this with the Master Chymist for years now.
Fair enough.
What I like- I think the duel-identity features are cool. It extending to the point of the same person having differing alignments can make for a range of options that no other class has. As far as playtest goes-I've made an extremely fun psycho who can talk to his alter ego in a mirror, while the rest of the world has no clue. I don't see how that feature is boring or redundant considering other class features or feats.
So yeah, I think this class is "incredible". Playing two different personas like this has not been possible before.
...None of which was relevant to what I was responding to, which is the uniqueness of the Dual Identity's ability to let you have a separate alignment and personality.
Of course, the middle part of that post was headscratching regardless.
Why would I choose a class with Specializations that give it unparalleled "diversity" when that diversity is simply aping the class features of other classes, but less well.
Why should I care that one class can mimic 4 other classes when those 4 other classes already exist?
At this point, I don't think this has anything to do with the vigilante, and everything to do with you just liking to bark at me.
You've done this on every thread we've both been on. I doesn't matter what I post- you're always ready to fling some crap.
If it is about the vigilante- just don't play one.
Well you did leave out the entire middle of my post. All of which the Master Chymist can't do. But whatever.THIS isn't even a brand new thing. You've been able to do this with the Master Chymist for years now.
Fair enough.
What I like- I think the duel-identity features are cool. It extending to the point of the same person having differing alignments can make for a range of options that no other class has. As far as playtest goes-I've made an extremely fun psycho who can talk to his alter ego in a mirror, while the rest of the world has no clue. I don't see how that feature is boring or redundant considering other class features or feats.
So yeah, I think this class is "incredible". Playing two different personas like this has not been possible before.
...None of which was relevant to what I was responding to, which is the uniqueness of the Dual Identity's ability to let you have a separate alignment and personality.
Of course, the middle part of that post was headscratching regardless.
Why would I choose a class with Specializations that give it unparalleled "diversity" when that diversity is simply aping the class features of other classes, but less well.
Why should I care that one class can mimic 4 other classes when those 4 other classes already exist?
At this point, I don't think this has anything to do with the vigilante, and everything to do with you just liking to bark at me.
You've done this on every thread we've both been on. I doesn't matter what I post- you're always ready to fling some crap.
If it is about the vigilante- just don't play one.
Um actually, thus far it have been YOU that has posted a whole lot of nothing. I have yet to see a single thing you said that hasn't debunked by others or that hasn't amounted to "WELL I THINK THIS CLASS IS PERFECT AND ANYONE WHO DISAGRES IS BADWRONGFUN".. I mean, really?
At this point, I don't think this has anything to do with the vigilante, and everything to do with you just liking to bark at me.
You've done this on every thread we've both been on. I doesn't matter what I post- you're always ready to fling some crap.
You have an over-inflated sense of your own self importance if you actually think I even REMEMBER anything you've posted before, much less had it leave enough of an impression on me that I'd actually go out of my way to "bark" at you.
If I've disagreed with you before, it's because you said something I disagreed with.
If it is about the vigilante- just don't play one.
What a remarkably helpful piece of advice to give for a playtest.
"Yeah I know the entire point of this is to give feedback on the class and how it works, but basically if you don't like it you can f@~& off."
You have an over-inflated sense of your own self importance if you actually think I even REMEMBER anything you've posted before, much less had it leave enough of an impression on me that I'd actually go out of my way to "bark" at you.If I've disagreed with you before, it's because you said something I disagreed with.
."
Yeah, don't even try that... A few weeks ago, you tried giving me crap for something you said you thought you remembered me posting a YEAR ago about the Bard.
@Pixe Dust- I made my case for the class, in a far less over-the-top, manner you made yours against it. Go back and read what I posted before claiming it's "debunked".
You have an over-inflated sense of your own self importance if you actually think I even REMEMBER anything you've posted before, much less had it leave enough of an impression on me that I'd actually go out of my way to "bark" at you.If I've disagreed with you before, it's because you said something I disagreed with.
."Yeah, don't even try that... A few weeks ago, you tried giving me crap for something you said you thought you remembered me posting a YEAR ago about the Bard.
@Pixe Dust- I made my case for the class, in a far less over-the-top, manner you made yours against it. Go back and read what I posted before claiming it's "debunked" only because you disagree.
What case?
The Skilled fighter? Slayer did that...
The split personality thing? Congratulations, the Alchemist did it first...
The "diversity" of specializations? What diversity? The Zealot is literally ripping wholesale abilities from the Inquisitor, just worse... the class is just badly pretending to be many other classes and failed all across the board... You are simply deluding yourself...
I have yet to see a single point you have made that supports anything about the Vigilante, as it is, being an awesome class mechanically. At all. RP is just that, RP. You can roleplay anything if you try hard enough, so using "well roleplay!!!" when we barely know anything in UI and what we do have has nothing significant to offer that we could not do before is a poor argument.
So again, what did you have?
What case?
The Skilled fighter? Slayer did that...
The split personality thing? Congratulations, the Alchemist did it first...
The "diversity" of specializations? What diversity? The Zealot is literally ripping wholesale abilities from the Inquisitor, just worse... the class is just badly pretending to be many other classes and failed all across the board... You are simply deluding yourself...
I have yet to see a single point you have made that supports anything about the Vigilante, as it is, being an awesome class mechanically. At all. RP is just that, RP. You can roleplay anything if you try hard enough, so using "well roleplay!!!" when we barely know anything in UI and what we do have has nothing significant to offer that we could not do before is a poor argument.
So again, what did you have?
Well, I did enjoy creating my NPC vigilante, and playing him for a little bit when he came into the story. But by listening to you, I must have been doing something wrong because I had fun with the class.
Well, I did enjoy creating my NPC vigilante, and playing him for a little bit when he came into the story. But by listening to you, I must have been doing something wrong because I had fun with the class.What case?
The Skilled fighter? Slayer did that...
The split personality thing? Congratulations, the Alchemist did it first...
The "diversity" of specializations? What diversity? The Zealot is literally ripping wholesale abilities from the Inquisitor, just worse... the class is just badly pretending to be many other classes and failed all across the board... You are simply deluding yourself...
I have yet to see a single point you have made that supports anything about the Vigilante, as it is, being an awesome class mechanically. At all. RP is just that, RP. You can roleplay anything if you try hard enough, so using "well roleplay!!!" when we barely know anything in UI and what we do have has nothing significant to offer that we could not do before is a poor argument.
So again, what did you have?
Anecdotal evidence is rarely useful...
I can have fun playing a freaking expert, does that mean the class is a good class?
The class is broken. Simple as that. The fact that an Avenger can actually end up with LESS feats than everyone else in Social Guise is a problem (what happens when he used a bonus feat for a basic pre-req? Suddenly he can't use ANY feat down the tree that requires that feat...). The fact that the Zealot is literally an Inquisitor with WORSE spell casting, No Bane, No Judgements, no Solo Tactics and a rather pitiful Breath of Life SLA is the problem. The fact that the Warlock can't even use spells in armor when every other class that has 6-level spellcasting attack abilities (the magus, the bard, the skald, and the Bloodrager) without suffering from Arcane Spell Failure is a problem... The fact that the Stalker is barely better than a rogue (which has been recognized by PAIZO THEMSELVES as a broken class) is a problem.
The class is broken mechanically based upon what we have. To argue otherwise is simply being disingenuous or just simply belligerent.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why would I choose a class with Specializations that give it unparalleled "diversity" when that diversity is simply aping the class features of other classes, but less well.
Why should I care that one class can mimic 4 other classes when those 4 other classes already exist?
At this point, I don't think this has anything to do with the vigilante, and everything to do with you just liking to bark at me.
You've done this on every thread we've both been on. I doesn't matter what I post- you're always ready to fling some crap.
If it is about the vigilante- just don't play one.
That the Vigilante is little more than 4 muted copies of four other well-trodden classes is a valid criticism.
The entire point of base classes are to either:
A) Be something entirely new
or
B) Fill a niche concept extremely well that hasn't been covered just-as-well by other classes.
Obviously the 11 Core Classes are original.
Alchemist - pretty revolutionary; it's radically different than anything in the Core 11, especially having introduced Alchemy as a third route between Arcane and Divine magic.
Cavalier - a "Knight" class without the baggage of being a Paladin or magical, and being a non-magical answer to the Bard for player who want a mundane supporter; also an update to the old Marshall class from 3.5
Gunslinger - entirely unique, not just to Pathfinder but to D&D as a whole (excluding some 3pp products). Also fills the job of being a gunfighter better than a Fighter with pistols ever does, especially in allowing for crazy action moves & gun tricks you see in movies.
Inquisitor - sort of a "Holy Hunter". Before this, there weren't any 6/9 Divine Spellcasters. This was the class for people who wanted something like a Bard but wanted a Divine Flavor. Also filled the general role of "monster hunters" like Abraham van Helsing, and especially Solomon Kane.
Magus - the answer to anyone who wanted to play a Mage Knight, and thought the Bard wasn't the right flavor. Also was a stealth update to the Duskblade class, and the Hexcrafter Archetype is a near-direct update to the Hexblade class, as well. ALSO a Base-Class form of the Eldritch Knight, and the Myrmidarch is a Base-Class form of the Arcane Archer.
Summoner - People have always liked summoning monsters, usually using Wizards to specialize in Summon spells; this took that idea and ran with it like the Road Runner, even creating a "Super-Companion" in the Eidolon.
Oracle - Wizards have Sorcerers, so why not have a Spontaneous counterpart to the Cleric? Well, here it is. It's also got lots of gimmicks that make it thematically a "scarred holy-man" class.
Witch - Instead of refluffing a Wizard to be a traditional Witch, why not just make an honest-to-goodness Witch class? Well - here ya go; Hexes and Familiars and all.
---
Arcanist - for anyone who ever hated the Wizard for being stuck with exactly the spells they prepared in exactly the quantity they did, and who felt that even the Wizard wasn't exactly the "scholarly magician" they'd always wanted. Also for people who wanted the spontaneity of a Sorcerer with the available spell pool of a Wizard.
Bloodrager - who hasn't want to play a Rage-Mage? Well, here's your chance! Emphasis on the "Rage"; also a Base-Class form of the Dragon Disciple PLUS the added fun of allowing you to use ANY Bloodline, not just Draconic.
Skald - pretty much a corollary to the above: Rage-Mage, emphasis on the "Mage". Also further allowed for a Party to be made of 100% Ragers.
Brawler - for people who always wanted a "martial artist" or bare-knuckle character, but didn't want to be tied down to Lawful alignments; i.e., for anyone who ever wanted a standard Unarmed Action Hero character.
Shaman - always wanted a caster who spoke with Spirits, rather than with Gods or with Nature directly? Here ya go. Also, it generally fulfills the desire for a Divine or "White Witch" character to counterbalance the Arcane "Dark Witch"
Slayer - a general manhunter, and an answer for people who wanted a beefier Rogue or a more-skillful Fighter. Also a Base-Class form of the Assassin, with the added fun of not having the "Must be Evil" baggage.
Investigator - A class based around solving mysteries and especially catching foes. Obviously also the class for anyone who wanted to play a Sherlock Holmes clone. ALSO the answer to players who wanted to play an Alchemist, but didn't want a mutagen-swigging mad-bomber, and more a refined chemist instead.
Hunter - one part Divine counterpart to the Summoner, and one part fulfilling the desires of players to have a Ranger with more spellcasting and/or emphasis on your Battle Buddy. Also a Base-Class form of the Nature Warden
Swashbuckler - originally THE answer for natural Dex to Attack and Damage without magic; also allows for lots of non-Light weapons to become Finesse-able. Obviously is THE class for anyone who ever wanted to play a swashbuckling swordsman, ala D'Artangon, Errol Flynn, Jack Sparrow & Will Turner, etc. Also a Base-Class form of the Duelist.
Warpriest - both a more combat-focused Paladin and a Paladin with greater spellcasting abilities. Sort of bridge between the Cleric and the Paladin, without the Lawful Good baggage of the Pallie. Also allows for anyone to use their favorite weapon and deal decent damage with it; ALSO allows for players who wanted characters that "power up" during fights, ala a whole LOT of fighting-genre Anime out there.
Sacred Fist - a legitimate Magic Monk for anyone who ever wanted to play something like the Immortals of Chinese Mythology. Also lacks the Lawful restriction of the original Monk.
---
Ninja - you want to play a Ninja and not just a re-flavored Rogue? Okay! Here's a Ninja, complete with minor Monk qualities like a Ki Pool.
Samurai - It's a Samurai. Like, a legit sword-and-bow-riding-a-horse Samurai. Who makes battlecries and challenges enemies to one-on-one combat for glory. Like. A. Samurai.
Antipaladin - There isn't much explanation needed - this trope is as old as chivalric romances, and in this way we finally got a 20-level Base Class form of it (instead of a 10-level prestige class in 3.5)
---
The Vigilante COULD be the super-spy class.
It could easily be that if the devs bother to focus a lot more on Social Persona and give it abilities appropriate to be exactly that - a bold-faced lying, espionage & infiltration machine.
As it stands right now, however, the fluff is that "it's a class with a SECRET IDENTITY! OOOOOH!" and nothing else.
The only real "mechanic" portraying that is 99% RP fluff shoved onto the class with extremely few actually-defined gameplay effects.
The other half of the class is 4 pathetic copies of the Fighter, Rogue, Magus, and Inquisitor classes.
Nothing new and unique about these classes, either.
No "spontaneous Alchemist" shtick (like I suggested in another thread).
No Shadowdancer-In-Base-Class vibe going on (which would have been PHENOMENAL!)
No Master Spy-in-Base-Class motif, either, even though that really SHOULD be the sum and total of what the Social Persona should be.
Not even a "generalized Martial" that borrows from ALL the other Martials pretty equally in its talents that it ends up having a Build-A-Warrior feel to it, either.
No actual, mechanical uniqueness to the class whatsoever, barring very, VERY minor abilities which are so situational and forgettable that they barely even register on most peoples' radars (the Appearance abilities).
Yeah, don't even try that... A few weeks ago, you tried giving me crap for something you said you thought you remembered me posting a YEAR ago about the Bard.
You have an over-inflated sense of your own self importance if you actually think I even REMEMBER anything you've posted before, much less had it leave enough of an impression on me that I'd actually go out of my way to "bark" at you.If I've disagreed with you before, it's because you said something I disagreed with.
."
Wasn't I wrong about that?
I vaguely remember that from the Confessions thread but IIRC I had confused you with someone entirely different.
Well, I did enjoy creating my NPC vigilante, and playing him for a little bit when he came into the story. But by listening to you, I must have been doing something wrong because I had fun with the class.What case?
The Skilled fighter? Slayer did that...
The split personality thing? Congratulations, the Alchemist did it first...
The "diversity" of specializations? What diversity? The Zealot is literally ripping wholesale abilities from the Inquisitor, just worse... the class is just badly pretending to be many other classes and failed all across the board... You are simply deluding yourself...
I have yet to see a single point you have made that supports anything about the Vigilante, as it is, being an awesome class mechanically. At all. RP is just that, RP. You can roleplay anything if you try hard enough, so using "well roleplay!!!" when we barely know anything in UI and what we do have has nothing significant to offer that we could not do before is a poor argument.
So again, what did you have?
Anecdotal evidence is rarely useful...
If the anecdotal evidence consists of whether or not the players and the GM are having fun, I'd say it's pretty damn useful.
And seriously, stop telling people they are disingenuous or belligerent, for disagreeing with you. It's like the pot calling the kettle black.
Yeah, don't even try that... A few weeks ago, you tried giving me crap for something you said you thought you remembered me posting a YEAR ago about the Bard.
You have an over-inflated sense of your own self importance if you actually think I even REMEMBER anything you've posted before, much less had it leave enough of an impression on me that I'd actually go out of my way to "bark" at you.If I've disagreed with you before, it's because you said something I disagreed with.
."Wasn't I wrong about that?
I vaguely remember that from the Confessions thread but IIRC I had confused you with someone entirely different.
I don't remember- It really doesn't matter.
My head is just sorta spinning over how freaking awful these forums can get over simple disagreements.
Joe, you're the one who set the awful and beligerant tone and then perpetuated it. When you spit fire, expect fire back.
Lets just stop with accusations...
Either way, it's obvious from watching Know Direction that they are reading through all this feedback and it seems that the developers themselves agree on many issues that have been brought up.
I hope they respond accordingly, not only fixing the current issues but giving vigilante the extra content it currently desperately requires as right now it is lacking a certain... umph. Hopefully they will grow less timid about being a decent rogue, as while the stalker has rather cool abilities thematically, they are lacklaster. In general, it would be good if the thematic abilities (like the doorbreaking talent) were made more useful so that they actually have a decent chance of being taken.
Where's Chicken Little when we need him?
On one hand, the existence of the Vigilante is one of those things that basically takes away options from everyone else by existing. There are already things like Bluff, Diplomacy, Disguise, and various Illusion-ish style magics. Why not just focus on highlighting those and finding ways to allow skill starved classes, namely the Fighter, Cleric, and Paladin archtypes to pull this off rather than making yet another option that removes flavor options from everyone else?I still don't understand how it removed options for other classes. People keep saying it, but they still haven't explained how it removes options for other characters.
Guns are as old as the Inner Sea World Guide, while Gunslingers came out later (though the meat and potatoes of gun use did also get updated from the ISWG).
So before UC came out, I'll bet plenty of people who were using guns but not playing Gunslingers operated under the impression that everyone and their mother could shoot a tiny object and send it flying hither and yon. Would they have to roll pretty high to hit the tiny object? Sure. Would they have to beat the tiny object's AC by some additional amount to make it go flying in the specific direction they wanted, not just randomly? That's probably how many DMs handled it. So it might be difficult, but it's difficult for everyone equally and it's a stunt that everyone can attempt.
Also before UC came out, I'll bet that many players were under the impression that anyone and their mother could take a recently-fired gun (or for that matter, a flaming longsword) and use it to cauterize a wound. Would this be a Heal check requiring a bit of DM judgment (as cauterizing really isn't spelled out in the CRB)? Yes, but it's still a stunt that should have just been available to everyone who has the notion to give it a try.
Enter the Gunslinger class, who has those abilities and others that take stunts that a player could reasonably expect to be able to try using any character and codifies those abilities as something the Gunslinger is able to do by virtue of being a Gunslinger. Meaning that the Gunslinger and his newly codified abilities become invalidated if everyone else is still able to do those stunts as they were before.
So I'm worried. The Vigilante doesn't seem to have a good reason to exist, as nearly everything he can do can be done using any other class. And Paizo may well decide to validate the Vigilante by saying, "Hey, you know all those nifty things you used to be able to do anyway? Well, get ready to have them taken away just so you can regain them, only this time, you have to pay character resources."
|
That being said, a LOT of people try to make characters like Thor or Superman in PF using entirely-wrong classes and forgetting that BOTH characters have RP40+ races that are ACTUALLY giving them their power (while the Classes are Brawler for Superman and probably Fighter or something else for Thor).
The Warlock Vigilante doesn't perfectly simulate any of the heroes above (excepting Allen Scott), but it does let people make characters LIKE them, at least in very-general theme.
"I smite at thee, villain!!!!"