Ah. Been a long time since I've actually posted anything on here. Feels good.
Now, an idea:
Why not just hand out a progression of vigilante talents to all characters and let them choose which of the vigilante types they want to pick from?
For example, you have a PC running a barbarian who happens to have an avenger identity called Thundercrash.
The barbarian class is her "social identity" (which, I agree with almost everyone, is complete tripe), and Thundercrash is a very obvious "vigilante identity."
So, I guess my idea is to have vigilante types become sort of like mythic paths.
Maybe make this whole thing require a feat with little-to-no prereqs that grants the benefit of the social identity ability, plus a progression of talents.
This was probably longer and slightly more convoluted than needed, but there you have it.
If anyone would like to try this out just for kicks, please share your experiences. Slaanesh likes experience.
So I've seen ;)
But I've also seen folks say "why bother with this class? Why not just let everyone be a vigilante?"
This concept is more geared toward that end.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So I've seen ;)
But I've also seen folks say "why bother with this class? Why not just let everyone be a vigilante?"
This concept is more geared toward that end.
Because the head of Pathfinder himself has said:
1) The Vigilante is going to be a Base Class, no exceptions.
2) The Vigilante is going to be only ONE Class, not broken up into four Classes, no exceptions.
Since Word Of God is that we're stuck with one and only one Base Class and nothing else, we have to work with those parameters and make on suggestions that accommodate them.
Amateur Vigilante is a suggestion that works with that; unfortunately, breaking apart the class into a series of Talents doesn't, and still won't fix the problem.
Actually making the Class unique, useful, and desirable is far more constructive than simply leaving the class as an underpowered mess and giving its abilities to other classes as a Feat. Fixing the class itself will solve the problem of people asking "why not play X?"
---
The problems with the class right now are that it's far TOO dependent on Talents to try and function:
1) Social Identity has no functionality to it beyond a minor bump to Diplomacy and Intimidate, which can be replicated almost entirely with both Traits and Feats as-is; it's effectively an Expert NPC class.
2) Specializations are basically designed as some oddball Domain/Bloodline/Mystery-like... THING. You have one ability and everything else is a Talent.
3) The result of 2) is that you're left with 4 pseudo-classes that just act like poor versions of existing classes, rather than at least present new, interesting class ideas.
3) What Talents you can take are entirely dependent upon your Specialization, and you can't take more.
4) Because you have a Social Identity, it's assumed that this is grounds for making the Specializations only as powerful as a Bloodline, Mystery, etc. - it should be noted that things like Bloodlines, Mysteries, et all ARE good features, but only as icing on the cake of playing a full Spellcaster; the Vigilante is NOT a full caster, and thus its reliance on Specializations that are only as strong as similar features means that class is fairly well crippled, to the point of being as weak as the base Monk and Pre-Unchained Rogue.
---
The fixes for these problems have already been discussed, and the general, obvious fixes are:
1) Social Identity needs to be, like similar classes, the main (or at least a major) focus of the Class and gain lots of useful abilities unique to itself. Specializations and Talents are all well and good, but only as a supplement to a solid basic architecture.
2) Specializations themselves need to gain more than just 1 Ability and then be nothing but Talents thereafter. They need to be treated like the Mini-Classes they're trying to be, and that means that they need to follow the "no empty levels" theory that every other class follows.
3) The whole "Not-Fighter/Slayer," "Not-Rogue," "Not-Magus," and "Not-Inquisitor" setup of Specializations needs to be thrown into the shredder, and then burn the shredder. In order to end the ceaseless "why not take X instead?" questions, the 4 Specializations need to be designs and ideas unique to the Vigilante.
4) The Devs need to realize that shoving a Bloodline-like ability onto an otherwise-NPC class with only a handful on inconsequential, highly-situational effects sparsely distributed among the Levels does not put the Class on the same level of use as all the other Classes developed thus far. Making both the Social and Vigilante Personas equal in power to the Pre-Unchained Rogue - basically 75% of a balanced class - would add together to make a balanced, useful Base Class.
Nice summation chb.
Still waiting on PDT input.
*snip*
Since Word Of God is that we're stuck with one and only one Base Class and nothing else, we have to work with those parameters and make on suggestions that accommodate them.*snip*
Actually making the Class unique, useful, and desirable is far more constructive than simply leaving the class as an underpowered mess and giving its abilities to other classes as a Feat. Fixing the class itself will solve the problem of people asking "why not play X?"
*snip*
To that first point, I hadn't read everything on the boards. So, fair enough. The class sucks and we should suggest ways to fix it, not put forth new ideas.
To that second point, I wasn't saying that we should leave the class as is and hand out its abilities, thereby further ruining what little value it already has. I was saying just get rid of the blasted thing as the gimmickiest-of-the-gimmicky and have a feat that keeps the general spirit of this idea without adding a new class that may not even be necessary.
Although, yes. Excellent summation of the problems inherent with this class. Well done.
Of course, we have what... a year?... before this book is hitting print. So, no pressure or anything. I'm sure everything will be fixed before release.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Of course, we have what... a year?... before this book is hitting print. So, no pressure or anything. I'm sure everything will be fixed before release.
Unfortunately, that's not how releases work at all.
Say the Release date is March 24th, 2016.
They have to have the books in by, realistically, the beginning of March at the latest to process for shipping to stores, to subscribers, etc.
To have the books ready for March, they need to have the finalized books to the printers by early February.
To have the books finalized for February, they need receive a Proof by mid-January, which means they would have needed to send the first-run proof print document to the printers in China by early January.
In order to have the books ready by early January, all the formatting and final editing of the book need to be done by mid-to-late December, also assuming that they take off for vacation from Christmas Eve to after New Year's.
In order to have the Formatting and final editing by mid-to-late December, they need to have the final rules for the entire book completely written and edited by Mid-November. To say nothing of the various pieces of art needed for the book, which will have been commissioned and delivered throughout the entire process.
So, no - it's not a year; it's much more like "less than 6 months", which is what's troubling a LOT of people.
The class looks and plays like a half-finished thought-experiment that just mimics 4 other popular classes... and does so fairly badly.
What the class NEEDS in order to be a success and not be seen as a lazy & underpowered waste of potential, I've already stated and many others agree with the general ideas.
The problem is that the class basically needs a from-the-ground-up rewrite to include an entire half of the class that's being ignored, and 4-6 radically-new specializations that make the class stand out as wholly unique, rather than a pitiful copycat of the Slayer/Fighter, Rogue, Magus, and Inquisitor, and there's only half-a-year available for the Devs to do just that AND to get it out for a playtest.
It's very possible, but the window of opportunity is closing, and the fact that there has been next-to-no mention of a second round of playtests worries the s#*@ out of us, as it can easily be read as the Devs feel they don't need to make many changes and are going forward with the class largely unchanged, despite the fact that the overwhelming amount of feedback has been "this is bad," even from those who're kinder about their critiques than others (myself included - I'm pretty vehement about how much this class needs to be run through a meatgrinder and reformed, mainly because I know the class has a lot of potential and could be really, really awesome if they'd just drop the "it needs to be a superhero" mentality).
The last time the devs fell this silent on rules that obviously needed a complete redesign, we ended up with Mythic Adventures.
MA is still fun and playable, but only with itself or as a means to make Bosses more boss-y. You can't throw Mythic characters into a normal setting and not expect some serious issues.
All that is a fairly moot point, though - Mythic Adventures, and now Occult Adventures, players have figured out are massive rules variant books, designed around very-specific genres and entire campaigns. If they don't mesh completely with the basic rules, then that's understandable.
But this book isn't entitled "Intrigue Adventures" - it's "Ultimate Intrigue." Being an "Ultimate" Book means that it should be as integral and worthwhile an addition to the entire basic rules as the other Advanced X Guide and Ultimate Y books; it should be part of backbone rules of any campaign.
*wall of text*
I'm sure this will all sound sarcastic without me prefacing it with this, so here you have it: this is not meant to be sarcastic.
I'm glad that you are so well versed in the publishing of books. Thank you for sharing that very-close approximation of what I'm sure the process actually looks like. Quite informative.
Also, thanks again for restating the problems with this class and what would need to be addressed to fix it. I'm glad that you and "many others agree with those general ideas." Heck, I agree: the vigilante is heavily flawed. And without actual care from the devs, it will probably be pushed out just as it is.
If any mods see this, please just close this thread. It is quite clearly unnecessary and will soon become an exercise in redundancy.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think we all need to accept that not all gaming books coming out of Paizo are going to be a homerun. I have misgivings about this class, but I have no idea what the rest of the book looks like. I know they said there probably won't be an "extra talent" feat, but I'm sure there'll be feats that build on the Vigilante's other class features. Same goes for new spells, mundane gear and magic items I'm sure. I already mentioned in the playtest thread what I think is required for the Avenger to make her edible so I won't repeat it, but beside the nitpicks and the analyzes, there needs to be something more of a "bang" coming out of this book to make me interested.
Thieve Guilds would make me interested. But I'm not getting my hopes up. It's perfectly fine if I pass on a book every now and then. I absolutely love Unchained but there's part of the books I'll never use. You take some and you leave some...
I actually have high hopes for the book as a whole.
Skills need love in the same way that Combat, Magic, and Items do, so getting a book that's based on Skills and giving them new uses & tricks is really welcome.
I just want the Vigilante to be as cool as the Gunslinger and Magus. Lots of players want to play a "Super-spy" character, and the Vigilante has the potential to be that and more, but only if the class is given the love it needs.
|
|
The thing about skills is that they are supposed to be subtle in their game effects. They'll never be as sexy as feats or spells because you can't translate them to damage. Even if they find a way to translate skills to damage, like "You spider-man/parkour the crap out of that guy: roll Acrobatics instead of a melee attack roll. The result is the amount of bludgeoning damage you deal to the target," then you'll look at your character in dismay and be like, "Ok cool", but after a few game nights playing that guy you might find this repetitive and overly simple (like high STR fighters are too simple for most these days).
Most GM and players don't have the patience and focus and willingness to put effort in an elaborate dance of skills. Sometimes it's Friday night and you just want to roll some dice and kill some monsters. I get that. Also, some "new uses for skills" are sometimes just an excuse to kick out the roleplay out of the game entirely, so I'm afraid of that. However if they whip up a section devoted gambling and how Bluff, Sense Motive, Appraise, Diplomacy, Profession Gambler and Intimidate play into that, I'll be all ears. Even moreso if they provide a few pages to present a few sample "medieval poker games" we can actually use in-character. :)