The line in Unchained that says that the unchained monk can't take any archetypes.
Finally, with the exception of the monk, these classes should work with any of the archetypes from previous books as long as the classes still
have the appropriate class features to replace.
I actually have a question. People keep saying that unchained monk can't take normal monk archetypes, when that's completely untrue. Unchained monk has access to all quiggong monk abilities and therefore can just slot in any missing ability that is needed to qualify for normal monk archetypes. It's kinda janky admittedly and this usually means that the archetypes should really just say "replaces ki ability as level x", but they're still compatible. What am I reading differently here than everyone else.
Archetypes replace class features.
The Unchained Monk loses a whole bunch of class features and gets a pile of Ki Powers as new class features instead. Ki powers let you select abilities that the old monk had as class features, but they aren't themselves those class features. Hence you can't swap them out as part of taking an archetype.
Paizo devs have come into threads like these and clarified that the unchained monk is 100% (officially) not compatible with existing archetypes. Probably because letting new players deal with trying to slot in everything using quinggong power only to trade it out again for an archetype would confuse them, or because they're worried power gamers in PFS might break the system that way. Hard to tell.
That's really aggressively dumb. Why not just put out a quick pdf for PFS saying "this archetype replaces ki abilities at level x, y, and z"? It'd make unchained monk work as a perfect replacement rather than just a decent one.
Also to be pedantic it doesn't actually say "replaces monk ability called high jump" for things like most archetypes just "this ability replaces high jump".
As for unchained barbarian it really feels like they're just moving around deck chairs. Specifically it seems to just be an attempt to eliminate rage cycling and basically nothing else.
|
That's really aggressively dumb. Why not just put out a quick pdf for PFS saying "this archetype replaces ki abilities at level x, y, and z"? It'd make unchained monk work as a perfect replacement rather than just a decent one.
That's what they are doing for new monk archetypes, such as the Monk of the Mantis in the Dirty Tactics toolbox. Doing it for existing archetypes is far beyond the scope of Unchained, and would have added at least 10 pages to the monk section.
I actually have a question. People keep saying that unchained monk can't take normal monk archetypes, when that's completely untrue. Unchained monk has access to all quiggong monk abilities and therefore can just slot in any missing ability that is needed to qualify for normal monk archetypes. It's kinda janky admittedly and this usually means that the archetypes should really just say "replaces ki ability as level x", but they're still compatible. What am I reading differently here than everyone else.
Qinggong is nice, allowing you to trade away select abilities for different ones, but it is rather different from the custom, purpose built nature of a proper archetype.
It just gives you some ki powered SLAs, and a few other abilities (which might not be worth it... like with the feat ones). It doesn't expand your options like tetori does, where it allows you to grapple just about anything, even ghosts, nor is it like maneuver master, where you could chain various options to wreck an enemy in a round.
I know not all archetypes are that good, or gives you very many expanded options (feral child druid...) but few care for those. The outrage is where we used to be able to specialize in something and have vastly improved our ability to use that... and then we were denied the use of that option.
The only ki power that comes anywhere close to the effect of a typical archetype would be ki leech, which covers some of the main roles of hungry ghost and drunken master. And even then, it is a rather late game option for a lot of people (who might never get very far past mid levels).
Liking unchained rogue for at least acknowledging weapon finesse as a feat tax. Everything else is icing for me.
Never played a regular summoner before but i can see that the unchained eidolon is far more structured and less flexible than the original. I still find the class appealing though.
Barbarian didnt need to be unchained. Maybe just tweaked to give temp hp for rage. Oh well.
Unchained monk lost me at weak will save. Sure some of the combat options are neat. But the class just doesn't appeal to me the way the original monk did.
|
|
Except Unchained isn't an alternate class or archetype
Mark Seifter from the design team disagreed and said they should have been called out as alternate classes.
Danger sense specific rules says it is the same as trap sense,
It says it counts as Trap Sense, but fair enough.
rogue archetypes still work with the unchained rogue, and it took the Paizo team specifically calling out the ninja not working in PFS for this to come up.
The UnC Rogue still alters the Rogue Talents ability, which the Ninja replaced with Ninja Tricks, and it says right in Unchained "[...]these classes should work with any of the archetypes from the previous books as long as the classes still have the appropriate class features to exchange."
But this conversation is extremely pointless anyways because you just called the ninja "balanced and functional" when it is only functional. I'm fine with just leaving this here.
The Ninja is balanced to the other Tier 3 classes. It clicks right in with Bards, Inquisitors, Investigators, Magii, Mesmerists, Rangers, etc. It plays competitively with the Path of War classes who are all right in the Tier 3 to Tier 4 range and does well in and out of combat. Maybe it would help you understand the class better if you sat down with a more experienced player or designer and discussed the class, or read one of the better guides.
I highly disagree. Ninja is a solid Tier 4, maybe, but not Tier 3. It has a very small number of really neat tricks, but no REAL versatility like casters and Initiators have. It's a very specialized class.
Ninjas are barely better than Core Rogues, IMO.
|
|
I highly disagree. Ninja is a solid Tier 4, maybe, but not Tier 3. It has a very small number of really neat tricks, but no REAL versatility like casters and Initiators have. It's a very specialized class.
It still has 8+Int skills with CHA as a main stat, some built in skill boosters, a few sweet magical and extraordinary options, and some handy abilities like Sudden Disguise / Master Disguise, Undetected Sabotage, and the option to cherry pick from the few good Rogue Talents. It's easily as handy in and out of combat as any of the PoW classes (the Warlord may have a slight out of combat edge with his Presences).
Agree. The unchained eidolon has a lot of grand ideas that were not well thought out. It really could have used some form of open play testing.I'd prefer Chained Summoner with unchained eidolon choices. I liked the chained spell list.Yeah... The unchained Summoner's spell list is great, but its Eidolon options are too restrictive, IMO. Specially the ones with alignment restrictions.
After what happened with the Vigilante, I'm pretty sure that any attempt at an Unchained playtest would've just resulted in another "Shut up, armchair theorycrafters. Our product is perfect the way it is!" response out of Paizo.
On the topic of Intrigue, I think that it's early yet to decide the result of the vigilante playtest. No one on the design team thinks that the things we put out for playtest are perfect; otherwise we wouldn't playtest them (in fact, they aren't perfect even after playtest, no RPG product is). Not to issue a guarantee about anyone in particular liking the final vigilante, but wait until it's out before deciding how much we changed the final version (once it's out, if you read it and don't like it, then that's totally fair).
The Vigilante is a Martial, he's at best will be Tier 4. :P
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On the topic of Intrigue, I think that it's early yet to decide the result of the vigilante playtest. No one on the design team thinks that the things we put out for playtest are perfect; otherwise we wouldn't playtest them (in fact, they aren't perfect even after playtest, no RPG product is). Not to issue a guarantee about anyone in particular liking the final vigilante, but wait until it's out before deciding how much we changed the final version (once it's out, if you read it and don't like it, then that's totally fair).
Sorry Mark but when Jason pops into a thread and says "we aren't changing the #1 thing you are saying needs to be changed" I think it is quite resonable to say we know the result of the playtest.
To be fair...James is not a Designer.
I actually have a question. People keep saying that unchained monk can't take normal monk archetypes, when that's completely untrue. Unchained monk has access to all quiggong monk abilities and therefore can just slot in any missing ability that is needed to qualify for normal monk archetypes. It's kinda janky admittedly and this usually means that the archetypes should really just say "replaces ki ability as level x", but they're still compatible. What am I reading differently here than everyone else.
Even if an Unchained Monk could take the Qinggong Monk powers (which the Unchained Monk description sounds like it doesn't allow), this would just worsen the problem that these powers depend upon a small Ki pool, and even with Ki Leech (which takes all the way to 10th level before you can get it), you won't be able to replenish it very much unless you are fighting a horde of minions, and even then it probably still won't be enough unless they are minions from the Despicable Me universe.
To be fair...James is not a Designer.
He said Jason, nor James.
To be fair...James is not a Designer.He said Jason, nor James.
His edit certainly says that.
On the topic of Intrigue, I think that it's early yet to decide the result of the vigilante playtest. No one on the design team thinks that the things we put out for playtest are perfect; otherwise we wouldn't playtest them (in fact, they aren't perfect even after playtest, no RPG product is). Not to issue a guarantee about anyone in particular liking the final vigilante, but wait until it's out before deciding how much we changed the final version (once it's out, if you read it and don't like it, then that's totally fair).Sorry Mark but when Jason pops into a thread and says "we aren't changing the #1 thing you are saying needs to be changed" I think it is quite resonable to say we know the result of the playtest.
Link?
I want to know what this number 1 thing is. I can guess, but I would rather see the post for myself.
Sorry Mark but when Jason pops into a thread and says "we aren't changing the #1 thing you are saying needs to be changed" I think it is quite reasonable to say we know the result of the playtest.
It's this kind of thing that took me away from the playtest of the Vigilante class... I was going to try it out and say what I think, but I figured... What is the point? It's likely to get the Swashbuckler treatment anyway.
They will just nerf stuff that is better than Vigilantes at disguise and whatnot and tell us how awesome the new Vigilante class is. Happens all the time.
Even if an Unchained Monk could take the Qinggong Monk powers (which the Unchained Monk description sounds like it doesn't allow), this would just worsen the problem that these powers depend upon a small Ki pool, and even with Ki Leech (which takes all the way to 10th level before you can get it), you won't be able to replenish it very much unless you are fighting a horde of minions, and even then it probably still won't be enough unless they are minions from the Despicable Me universe.
Mark made sure that the Unchained Monk can get Qinggong powers.
Sorry Mark but when Jason pops into a thread and says "we aren't changing the #1 thing you are saying needs to be changed" I think it is quite reasonable to say we know the result of the playtest.It's this kind of thing that took me away from the playtest of the Vigilante class... I was going to try it out and say what I think, but I figured... What is the point? It's likely to get the Swashbuckler treatment anyway.
They will just nerf stuff that is better than Vigilantes at disguise and whatnot and tell us how awesome the new Vigilante class is. Happens all the time.
I doubt they will go that far, simply due to the sheer number of classes that beat the vigilante in it's niche. They aren't going to go to the effort of adding major errata to the majority of the main line RPG books in order to make the Vigilante look good. Not when sticking their fingers in their ears and singing "La, La, La, it's perfectly fine" works just as well from their perspective with a thousandth of the effort.
His edit certainly says that.To be fair...James is not a Designer.He said Jason, nor James.
Are we arguing nettiquette now?
Are we going to assign malice (switching his meaning when you showed him up) what we can attribute to mere accident ('Ja-' names)?
I know that I make liberal use of the edit button..and at times, that has caused confusion when I 'thought' there were no replies yet, when someone was actually just taking time with their rebuttal.
I believe that particular thread was in the playtest forum(which is now removed), I saw it, but Idr which of the 3-4 glaring issues it was about... I think it was either about DI(class skill) or the spell progression.On the topic of Intrigue, I think that it's early yet to decide the result of the vigilante playtest. No one on the design team thinks that the things we put out for playtest are perfect; otherwise we wouldn't playtest them (in fact, they aren't perfect even after playtest, no RPG product is). Not to issue a guarantee about anyone in particular liking the final vigilante, but wait until it's out before deciding how much we changed the final version (once it's out, if you read it and don't like it, then that's totally fair).Sorry Mark but when Jason pops into a thread and says "we aren't changing the #1 thing you are saying needs to be changed" I think it is quite resonable to say we know the result of the playtest.Link?
I want to know what this number 1 thing is. I can guess, but I would rather see the post for myself.
It's probably the spell progression.
I would speak my mind on that, but what I would say wouldn't be appropriate on a forum that is family friendly.
His edit certainly says that.To be fair...James is not a Designer.He said Jason, nor James.Are we arguing nettiquette now?
Are we going to assign malice (switching his meaning when you showed him up) what we can attribute to mere accident ('Ja-' names)?
I know that I make liberal use of the edit button..and at times, that has caused confusion when I 'thought' there were no replies yet, when someone was actually just taking time with their rebuttal.
Who's arguing malice? Or anything at all?
I responded to a post. That post was edited. Someone "corrected" me. I clarified.
Where's the argument?
Who's arguing malice? Or anything at all?
I responded to a post. That post was edited. Someone "corrected" me. I clarified.
Where's the argument?
Maybe I just read it cattier than it was intended.
With the kind of tone like "Well,hello....Brenda"
But hell, I have no idea if anyone is going to read that the way I said it to myself. C'est la vie...or C'est l'internet....
... I wish the original Book of Nine Swords was out on the web, but I haven't been able to find it yet, if so.
It's not free, but available here.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My take on the unchained classes -
Rogue is a clear improvement. I now consider core rogues to be NPC classes and unchained rogue the new norm in my games. This does leave the Ninja class in need of a step up. Ah well, one step at a time.
The unchained barbarian and monk classes are clearly different, I allow players to use either as long as they do not multiclass in a class of the same name (no core / unchained barbarian multiclass).
The "un"chained summoner is clearly a nerf. I've always allowed APG summoners in my campaign, and no one has yet to play one - leaving them as NPC opponents in my games, so no nerf was needed. For my future games I consider the unchained summoner like the core rogue - an NPC class.
Who's arguing malice? Or anything at all?
I responded to a post. That post was edited. Someone "corrected" me. I clarified.
Where's the argument?
Maybe I just read it cattier than it was intended.
With the kind of tone like "Well,hello....Brenda"
But hell, I have no idea if anyone is going to read that the way I said it to myself. C'est la vie...or C'est l'internet....
Tone is hard.
...The worst part is that can sound really b@*!@y and sarcastic too if left alone like that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
i choose to read everything rynjin types as ironic seduction
i choose to read everything rynjin types as ironic seduction
I have no idea what this even means but it sounds neat.
i choose to read everything rynjin types as ironic seductionI have no idea what this even means but it sounds neat.
It means that you make Sajan look like he worships Arshea.
My setting now includes a monastery full of hipster monks. This was a good use of my morning.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My setting now includes a monastery full of hipster monks. This was a good use of my morning.
Hipster pants are far too tight and binding to allow the range of movement a monk needs. Perhaps have them wear Hammer pants instead.
|
I was debating changing my first-level PFS barbarian to Unchained, but I decided not to do so. The rage power I want most, knockdown, now requires a move action to activate. That is enough to dissuade me.I mean, Knock Down was already a pretty crappy rage power to be honest. I think you would be better off just taking Dirty Fighting and Improved Trip.
Where is Dirty Fighting? Do you refer to the feat Improved Dirty Fighting?
I had not considered Improved Trip because of the INT 13 and Combat Expertise prerequisites.I am surprised by your opinion of Knockdown. My observation has been that a prone opponent is much less potent an adversary.
Dirty Fighting is a new feat from the latest book.
... I wish the original Book of Nine Swords was out on the web, but I haven't been able to find it yet, if so.It's not free, but available here.
Maneuvers are easy to find.
http://www.tob-tools.net/Plus, cards form on official website: http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20061225a
Warblade: http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060802a&page=2
http://dndtools.pw/classes/warblade/
Crusader: http://dndtools.pw/classes/crusader/
Swordsage: http://dndtools.pw/classes/swordsage/