| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not to bother anyone but one issue that I never saw raised during the last large "why is this banned thread" is the Constable, a Cavalier archetype listed in Heroes of the Streets that is currently not for Society play.
Since the last guy who posted a big "Why is this banned" thread posted his stuff in the form a rant, I will try a different tactic and post in the form of a polite inquiry among gentlemen.
One moment.
Ladies and gentlemen of the Pathfinder Society, I come before you today in the hope that you shall reconsider your ban upon the Constable Archetype. There is little reason for it's current status due to the fact that most of the Constable's main abilities are replicated else where in other classes. The grapple abilities are hardly game breaking and the badge merely functions as a variant form of banner, an aspect already included in the main class.
While an argument could be made that Quick Interrogator might be a reason to remove the class, it is a fourth level power and other classes already have clear mind control abilities by that level and thus giving out a normal diplomacy check to a largely martial class is hardly game breaking.
I recognize that our new coordinator is still deal with a back log but if you feel the opportunity to reexamine this matter, I will be eternally appreciative.
Thank you and good day.
Linda and I reviewed this one further at the community's request, and it will be appearing in the Additional Resources in the future.
Hooray!
No, wait, must be gentlemanly
Good show, Master Compton, Good show.
Developer
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Linda and I reviewed this one further at the community's request, and it will be appearing in the Additional Resources in the future.Hooray!
No, wait, must be gentlemanly
Good show, Master Compton, Good show.
The Pathfinder Society team makes these decisions, sometimes in conjunction with the books' lead developers. While I'm happy to tip my hat to your praise, I would be remiss not to acknowledge the contributions of Linda, Owen, and Crystal as we assess the Player Companions' content and deliver as much as we can for use in the organized play campaign.
Wait... Does this mean that angry ranting and name-calling doesn't work in getting a response from Campaign Leadership?
We must make this into either a Sticky or an FAQ.
I know, right? Like who knew?
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
The Pathfinder Society team makes these decisions, sometimes in conjunction with the books' lead developers. While I'm happy to tip my hat to your praise, I would be remiss not to acknowledge the contributions of Linda, Owen, and Crystal as we assess the Player Companions' content and deliver as much as we can for use in the organized play campaign.Linda and I reviewed this one further at the community's request, and it will be appearing in the Additional Resources in the future.Hooray!
No, wait, must be gentlemanly
Good show, Master Compton, Good show.
I am very happy for the fans of the constable, but without reviving the eldritch archer thread, is there still something we can do to lobby for its inclusion at this point ?
Concerning the Eldritch Archer, I would greatly appreciate an explanation as to why the decision was made not to include it. If you are concerned that such a response would cause agitation, then even a PM would be appreciated.
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
aka Ascalaphus
|
I wonder: if John published the reasons why some material is not added to the Additional Resources, would it affect the writers of new material?
Not that everything should be written with PFS in mind of course; some things just aren't meant for it (feral children archetypes, evil stuff).
But for things that get banned for power reasons, such a discussion might be useful for writers as well.
Likewise, a post-mortem on problematic/ambiguous rules that lead to banning might be of interest.
I wonder: if John published the reasons why some material is not added to the Additional Resources, would it affect the writers of new material?
Not that everything should be written with PFS in mind of course; some things just aren't meant for it (feral children archetypes, evil stuff).
But for things that get banned for power reasons, such a discussion might be useful for writers as well.
Likewise, a post-mortem on problematic/ambiguous rules that lead to banning might be of interest.
Another potential benefit would be to help players to plan on how they can use the new material before it unlocks. Which might help sales.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Concerning the Eldritch Archer, I would greatly appreciate an explanation as to why the decision was made not to include it. If you are concerned that such a response would cause agitation, then even a PM would be appreciated.
We knew that one was going to get banhammered. Its the magus with the benefits of range and no drawbacks: it would be the only archer and the only magus.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Linda and I reviewed this one further at the community's request, and it will be appearing in the Additional Resources in the future.
Great. I've been feeling really guilty for not posting my defense of this archetype yet, as I pledged to in another thread, but you just saved me the effort!
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
Concerning the Eldritch Archer, I would greatly appreciate an explanation as to why the decision was made not to include it. If you are concerned that such a response would cause agitation, then even a PM would be appreciated.We knew that one was going to get banhammered. Its the magus with the benefits of range and no drawbacks: it would be the only archer and the only magus.
I took the time to make quite a number of other magus characters, all with their own individual gimmick in that thread.
And there are plenty of drawbacks, not getting access to rapid shot and many shot, clustered shot.. etc. really hurts the eldritch archers .. as an archer. (I am aware that some people have confusing views regarding that one FAQ, but the issue already affects magus characters using cards or other thrown weapons. So we already have plenty of PFS legal options that run head first into that issue).
I might have to show my hunter as an alternative, a flaming pouncekitty with a caster behind her is likely a pretty good argument.
|
...wow. This thread floored me. I had the same reaction when I saw that Constable wasn't allowed, and was very disappointed. I don't think I ever realized it was possible to get an official response this quick on banning/unbanning new content.
I think I'll speak up the next time a book comes out with something that really looks like a good fit for PFS but wasn't included. Way to go, team.
On the topic of Eldritch Archers: There is absolutely no way an eldritch archer can handle my normal, up-close-and-personal magus in terms of damage (and with all her buffs, it's not like melee combat is putting her in danger or anything), and I really feel that they don't clash with a pure archer either, who is pumping out more attacks, with better feats, more static damage, and an inexhaustible per-day supply of power. It's a strong archetype to be sure, but it fits solidly where it was designed: A Magus/Archer hybrid. It doesn't overshadow either one, and I would love to see it in PFS.
Interestingly enough, the reaction of me and one of my VL buddies on reviewing this archetype and finding it was NOT on the additional resources was "good, it's horrifyingly broken in practice" because Instant Order isn't daily capped. The most similar ability in play is a 4th level bard spell... with the obvious daily use limits in 11 levels of play that implies.
(So, I'd be perfectly happy if the reversal was reversed, and I think the ban is entirely justified from only the 11th level class feature.)
I'd be very interested in hearing which situations the ability is broken, and how the fact that it isn't daily capped fits into that. I do not think having no daily cap by itself can be an issue since many actions/abilities are not daily capped, such as bonuses to swinging a sword.
I read Instant Order as an extremely situational ability. I'm assuming the spell you are comparing against is Heroic Finale. I'll point out that Heroic finale does not daze the target for 1 full turn from the time the spell was cast, forcing the target to lose its next turn completely. Heroic finale just trades one character's standard action for another player's standard action. Useful for a pseudo-pounce perhaps.
Instant Order on the other hand trades a standard action plus an entire turn, to get a standard action. How is an ability whose long term effect is to lose an entire character's turn worth of actions( including no AoOs, threatening squares, taking immediate actions, or even providing flanking bonuses), something you want to be doing every combat? Even if the combat ended immediately after that standard action, you've just traded one player's action for another. No net gain.
Is there something obvious I'm missing?
|
Developer
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Constable was made legal in the last update, but with the current update (Dec 2015), is now listed as not legal again. Was that on purpose?
I think perhaps the red lettering saying it became legal was removed but the original text saying it wasn't legal was never corrected.
What the...? I remember tweaking the text because it had been unclear whether or not it was legal before (it is legal), but it seems to say that it's not. That's something that I need to correct. Sorry about that.
[
And there are plenty of drawbacks, not getting access to rapid shot and many shot, clustered shot.. etc. really hurts the eldritch archers .. as an archer. (I am aware that some people have confusing views regarding that one FAQ, but the issue already affects magus characters using cards or other thrown weapons. So we already have plenty of PFS legal options that run head first into that issue).
The thing is... Zen Archers, martial archers depend on flinging lots of arrows to get multiple dice of damage. The magus only needs to put intensified shocking grasp on one to get that much dice or more of damage. And he's only used one arrow as opposed to the Zen Archer's six or more. And he can do all that damage as a standard action instead of full round.
What the...? I remember tweaking the text because it had been unclear whether or not it was legal before (it is legal), but it seems to say that it's not. That's something that I need to correct. Sorry about that.The Constable was made legal in the last update, but with the current update (Dec 2015), is now listed as not legal again. Was that on purpose?
I think perhaps the red lettering saying it became legal was removed but the original text saying it wasn't legal was never corrected.
I was literally about to complain about that lol, thank you John
|
The thing is... Zen Archers, martial archers depend on flinging lots of arrows to get multiple dice of damage. The magus only needs to put intensified shocking grasp on one to get that much dice or more of damage. And he's only used one arrow as opposed to the Zen Archer's six or more. And he can do all that damage as a standard action instead of full round.[
And there are plenty of drawbacks, not getting access to rapid shot and many shot, clustered shot.. etc. really hurts the eldritch archers .. as an archer. (I am aware that some people have confusing views regarding that one FAQ, but the issue already affects magus characters using cards or other thrown weapons. So we already have plenty of PFS legal options that run head first into that issue).
And all of that damage can be negated by a single feat with Deflect Arrows, Missile Shield, or Cut from the Air.
|
Organized Play Developer
|
And all of that damage can be negated by a single feat with Deflect Arrows, Missile Shield, or Cut from the Air.The thing is... Zen Archers, martial archers depend on flinging lots of arrows to get multiple dice of damage. The magus only needs to put intensified shocking grasp on one to get that much dice or more of damage. And he's only used one arrow as opposed to the Zen Archer's six or more. And he can do all that damage as a standard action instead of full round.[
And there are plenty of drawbacks, not getting access to rapid shot and many shot, clustered shot.. etc. really hurts the eldritch archers .. as an archer. (I am aware that some people have confusing views regarding that one FAQ, but the issue already affects magus characters using cards or other thrown weapons. So we already have plenty of PFS legal options that run head first into that issue).
More than that, more attacks means more opportunities to crit, and bows have pretty potent crit multipliers that factor in. I think the eldritch archer is actually very well balanced to the more "traditional" archery options.
|
And all of that damage can be negated by a single feat with Deflect Arrows, Missile Shield, or Cut from the Air.The thing is... Zen Archers, martial archers depend on flinging lots of arrows to get multiple dice of damage. The magus only needs to put intensified shocking grasp on one to get that much dice or more of damage. And he's only used one arrow as opposed to the Zen Archer's six or more. And he can do all that damage as a standard action instead of full round.[
And there are plenty of drawbacks, not getting access to rapid shot and many shot, clustered shot.. etc. really hurts the eldritch archers .. as an archer. (I am aware that some people have confusing views regarding that one FAQ, but the issue already affects magus characters using cards or other thrown weapons. So we already have plenty of PFS legal options that run head first into that issue).
Just like my Grenadier Alchemist, who flings Admixtured vials of Slime Grenade/Aratokan's Flame (3d6 acid/2d6 Fire) + Explosive Missile (up to 5d6+Int, varies by bomb) + medium/large arrows. He's a single shot archer. I put a LOT on the shot.. and it can get expensive at times.
The thing is... Zen Archers, martial archers depend on flinging lots of arrows to get multiple dice of damage. The magus only needs to put intensified shocking grasp on one to get that much dice or more of damage. And he's only used one arrow as opposed to the Zen Archer's six or more. And he can do all that damage as a standard action instead of full round.[
And there are plenty of drawbacks, not getting access to rapid shot and many shot, clustered shot.. etc. really hurts the eldritch archers .. as an archer. (I am aware that some people have confusing views regarding that one FAQ, but the issue already affects magus characters using cards or other thrown weapons. So we already have plenty of PFS legal options that run head first into that issue).
Eldritch Archers can't normally add Shocking Grasp to an arrow since it has a range of touch. They either have to wait until 9th level to get Reach Spellstrike (limiting them to close range) or use the Reach Spell meta magic feat (limiting them to close range unless they want to raise the spell level even further).
A Myrmidarch, on the other hand, can use a single application of Reach Spell to add Shocking Grasp to an arrow with no range limitation starting at 4th level. And they are already PFS legal.
+1 for eldritch archers. Maybe more approriate for it's own thread though.There is one, I might have spammed to many comparison builds (ways to received similar effects with other classes) but you can find a lot of good discussion there:
Great thread! Thanks for the link.
Archetypes: The constable and eldritch archer archetypes are not legal for playI thought this was supposed to be reversed? Am I mistaken?
It was reversed, but the reversal was accidentally removed from the web page. I'm not sure why it is taking so long to put it back.
|
What the...? I remember tweaking the text because it had been unclear whether or not it was legal before (it is legal), but it seems to say that it's not. That's something that I need to correct. Sorry about that.The Constable was made legal in the last update, but with the current update (Dec 2015), is now listed as not legal again. Was that on purpose?
I think perhaps the red lettering saying it became legal was removed but the original text saying it wasn't legal was never corrected.
This is still showing as being illegal, are there plans to have it fixed?
|
Pathfinder Society Lead Developer
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is still showing as being illegal, are there plans to have it fixed?What the...? I remember tweaking the text because it had been unclear whether or not it was legal before (it is legal), but it seems to say that it's not. That's something that I need to correct. Sorry about that.The Constable was made legal in the last update, but with the current update (Dec 2015), is now listed as not legal again. Was that on purpose?
I think perhaps the red lettering saying it became legal was removed but the original text saying it wasn't legal was never corrected.
I include those updates when we release new versions of the Additional Resources page. The January/February update is coming very soon.