Basically yeah. The summoner got a small nerf in power. With the barbarian my understanding was to simplify. The rogue.... yeah they needed the help.
Not for all
Unchained Summoner is meant to be a nerf
Unchained Barbarian is meant to be a lateral move to make the class simpler to play
Unchained Rogue is meant to be a buff
Unchained Monk is a redesign to make it more martial (so better at hitting things and tanking, but without some of the classic monk perks such as all good saves).
How well it succeeds.. well YMMV.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, the point is to make them easier to use out of the box and to streamline them. Each of the classes have varying success.
The unchained rogue is a flat upgrade across the board. The core rogue is the weakest class in the game, and unchained helps considerably. It's still a Tier 4 class, that is mostly outperformed in skills by investigators and bards, but it's not terrible.
The unchained Monk is a flat upgrade to the core monk. Several people don't like the low will save, but the fact is that unchained fixes several of the combat problems with the core monk that requires several archetypes and style feats to fix and made them part of the base class.
Unchained Barbarian is a side-grade. It has a little bit lower optimization ceiling, a little bit higher floor, and it stops barbarian sudden death syndrome. It is a downgrade for the the classic two-handed barbarian, but an upgrade for a two-weapon fighter barbarian.
The unchained summoner is a downgrade in power, but the original summoner was overpowered with a broken spell list.
The barbarian was not to weak, but too complex to many people. Summoner was considered too strong and generic for many players. Rogue and monk yes, that core classes were clearly too weak. Monk could be played with heavy archetype customization, but Rogue was just really, really weak.
|
No, the point is to make them easier to use out of the box and to streamline them. Each of the classes have varying success.
The unchained rogue is a flat upgrade across the board. The core rogue is the weakest class in the game, and unchained helps considerably. It's still a Tier 4 class, that is mostly outperformed in skills by investigators and bards, but it's not terrible.
The unchained Monk is a flat upgrade to the core monk. Several people don't like the low will save, but the fact is that unchained fixes several of the combat problems with the core monk that requires several archetypes and style feats to fix and made them part of the base class.
Unchained Barbarian is a side-grade. It has a little bit lower optimization ceiling, a little bit higher floor, and it stops barbarian sudden death syndrome. It is a downgrade for the the classic two-handed barbarian, but an upgrade for a two-weapon fighter barbarian.
The unchained summoner is a downgrade in power, but the original summoner was overpowered with a broken spell list.
What is a Tier 4 Class? optimization ceiling? floor? barbarian sudden death syndrome?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Tier 4.
Classes are divided into 5 tier
tier 1 - always have an option for the situation ex. wizard and cleric
tier 2 - often has an option for a situation - magus
tier 3 - Can be good at something and pretty good at backup options - bard and paladin
tier 4 - Can do one thing well - fighter and cavalier
tier 5 - can do one thing not well - core rogue and core monk
optimization ceiling and floor
floor is how good is the worse the character could be. If someone was playing for the first time how well would their character be, how obvious are the right choices.
Ceiling is how good can the class be if you know every rule and every item in every book.
Summoner is high floor, it's pretty obvious which eidolon abilities to pick to be good in combat.
Wizard is high ceiling, if you make poor choices of spells you don't do well, but if you pick your spells well and prep well and leave slots open then you can be super powerful.
barbarian sudden death syndrome
When a barbarian rages he gain HP, when he stops he loses this HP.
So a barb at lv1 has 12HP. Rages to 14. Takes 13 damage. He's a 1hp now, he stops raging and now he's at -1hp and is dying. Fast Forward to level 10.
Barb has 90* HP, when he rages he gains 20HP putting him at 110hp. If the barbarian takes 111 damage he's at -1 and falls unconscious, this causes him to stop raging and take 20 damage, putting him now at -21HP and dead. High level barbs never bleed out. They go from standing to dead.
The Barbarian was simple to use. Not as simple as fighter but a thousand times more simple than full caster.
I'd say the Barbarian was the weakest class after the monk and rogue. As more books came out and with some system master you could optimize a powerful barbarian. This created a small handful of complex barbarian builds while all other builds were weak and ineffective
Now with the Uchained barbarian I can't make those super optimized builds but all other builds now work well. You are almost as good a fighter now with Barbarian. I say that counting the Weapon Master and Armor Master books along with the goodies from Ultimate intrigue.
The Barbarian had a low floor and high ceiling. Once you figured out Rage Cycling, it became an extremely powerful option - perhaps too powerful - but before you did, you were great one turn per combat, and OK the rest of the time. The Unchained Barbarian raised the floor and lowered the ceiling. By eliminating the need to Rage Cycle, the Barbarian became more consistent. The default Barbarian is definitely better than Unchained, but Unchained made it so you didn't need system mastery to make a "good" Barbarian, and also made it easier to play less obvious builds, like ranged or TWF without neutering your combat effectiveness.
Here is what I can tell you from experience, after Unchained was published:
o I now recommend the monk to new players. It is solid, and well-crafted. The mechanics better match its theme. New and old players alike will have trouble going wrong. With the old monk, new players would read the theme, pile dex...
o The new barbarian has a stronger, more well-built chassis. The play is smoother. Barbarians join the ranks of swashbuckler and paladin for martial classes that have some form of damage mitigation. Most complaints about them can easily be fixed through the addition of more rage powers.
o The original summoner was an interesting class that broke new ground in a lot of ways. It always needed a 2.0.
Can you still be a Master Summoner with Unchained or is that one of the classes that doesn't work so well with archetypes now? It's a silly archetype but I always enjoyed it.
(I suppose this is as good of a place to ask as any)
|
|
I find it fascinating how ppl's opinions can differ so much.
I find it fascinating that a product can be so flawed (in some ppl's eyes - not mine) that classes have to jigged and re-jigged again and again to gain some degree of "balance" (whatever the hell that is).
if a particular person in the party was SO much weaker he felt left out (despite best efforts to encourage in char play and team work) (and this could happen to any race/class combination) the GM just gave him an appropriate item.....
|
|
No, the point is to make them easier to use out of the box and to streamline them. Each of the classes have varying success.
The unchained rogue is a flat upgrade across the board. The core rogue is the weakest class in the game, and unchained helps considerably. It's still a Tier 4 class, that is mostly outperformed in skills by investigators and bards, but it's not terrible.
The unchained Monk is a flat upgrade to the core monk. Several people don't like the low will save, but the fact is that unchained fixes several of the combat problems with the core monk that requires several archetypes and style feats to fix and made them part of the base class.
Unchained Barbarian is a side-grade. It has a little bit lower optimization ceiling, a little bit higher floor, and it stops barbarian sudden death syndrome. It is a downgrade for the the classic two-handed barbarian, but an upgrade for a two-weapon fighter barbarian.
The unchained summoner is a downgrade in power, but the original summoner was overpowered with a broken spell list.
oh, you know this "Ragues are weak" mantra? Have you dudes seen the Knife Master archetype?? Did you not like it?!
|
|
They're nice alternate classes, but none are inherently better than the other versions. It just depends on how you build the character.
I suppose, the new classes are better balanced for Organized play, like PFS, where combat is a large majority of the intended game.
The new rogue is more combat focused, with weapon finesse as a bonus starting feat.
The barbarian is easier to explain to new players and mostly unchanged in combat, but otherwise much worse in non-combat situations. I like the old version more.
And the new summoner is mostly just different. Forcing the eidolons to take subtypes grants a new thematic option that wasn't really part of the class before. Adds synergy with parties themed around certain deities or subtypes. I like the new one better, but I'm annoyed that the old archetypes don't all work with new class.
|
|
They're nice alternate classes, but none are inherently better than the other versions. It just depends on how you build the character.
I suppose, the new classes are better balanced for Organized play, like PFS, where combat is a large majority of the intended game.
The new rogue is more combat focused, with weapon finesse as a bonus starting feat.
The barbarian is easier to explain to new players and mostly unchanged in combat, but otherwise much worse in non-combat situations. I like the old version more.
And the new summoner is mostly just different. Forcing the eidolons to take subtypes grants a new thematic option that wasn't really part of the class before. Adds synergy with parties themed around certain deities or subtypes. I like the new one better, but I'm annoyed that the old archetypes don't all work with new class.
that phrase you used:
"...and mostly unchanged in combat, but otherwise much worse in non-combat situation"sure that should be left to char design/GM/setting etc?
I made a barbarian once with an intelligence of 14 because that is the char i wanted to play. Yes the fighter teased me throughout the whole campaign but that is the char i wanted to play. and a lot of fun was had by all.
Guess i am just a bit lost and disillusioned by the whole "balance-damage-balance-damage" infatuation that thow whole of Pathfinder is embroiled in.....
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Every group can play the game as they wish and with their own style, Morlaf. But many people (myself included) think that the characters must be useful on their own either inside and outside combat, and not require DM dependency to be on par with the rest of the party.
Knife master is a good archetype, but have the same problems as the basic rogue; low accuracy, low defense, too much dependency on the position of other parties members to land the sneaks attacks and low damage when sneak attack is not possible, wich is very usual.
|
oh, you know this "Ragues are weak" mantra? Have you dudes seen the Knife Master archetype?? Did you not like it?!
I love Rogues, a lot, but they really are weak. "Knife Master" effectively just gives you d8s instead of d6s for your attacks. Means that a Knife Master core rogue has no obvious dex to damage, so you'll either be a strength based rogue (and thus extremely bad at Disable Device - no Trapfinding or dex, bad at stealth, sleight of hand, etc) or go dex and strength based, in which case, let's compare damage at level 6 to a base 2-handed barb:
5th level Knife Master rogue, on a full attack, with sneak attack applied, using Kukri, that are both +1, with something like double slice applied (about as good as you'll get):
2x(1d6 (kukri) + 3d8 (sneak) + 3 (16 STR seems as high as you'll be here) + 1 (enchantment)) damage = 2d6+6d8+8 = 42 average damage in a round, if they hit.
Greataxe barbarian, 23 STR (20 + belt + 4th level inherent) that is +1:
2d12+9 (STR) + 1 (enchant) + 6 (power attack) = 2d12+32 = 45 average damage. For less investment. In comparison, the rogue has 16 dex = +3 to hit, +4 from BaB, +1 magic weapon = two attacks at +6 to hit. The barbarian has +6 BaB, +1 weapon, +6 str = +13 to hit for the first, and +8 to hit for the second. So will hit more, for more damage, and doesn't need to be sneak-attacking. And lots of other ways to optimize - that's just a bog-standard one. For an APL=CR fight, the average AC at this level is 19, giving the rogue a 35% chance to hit, and an average damage of 15 points of damage. The barb has a 70% hit chance on the first and 45% on the second, for an average of 26 points of damage - nearly double the rogue. Fighters, Slayers, Melee Rangers, melee paladins are all similar to the barbarian. Looking at bow attacks, you'll be way higher than both of these (6th level ranger can have 4 attacks (1 base, 1 BaB, 1 many shot, one multishot) for around 1d8+6, probably more depending on the type of archer (bard=arcane strike, ranger = favoured enemy, hunter = animal companion, fighter = weapon training, etc). The rogue's damage just can't compare.
So knife master rogue can't compare on damage. But it can out skill the barbarian! Except that any skills the rogue does are better on someone else - the bard is in the CRB, and will destroy a base rogue at skills, as with their Versatile Performance they effectively get 8+int skill ranks per level as well, but can use their very high CHA mods for ones that normally aren't available, and then have their spells to get crazy bonuses like +20 to bluff to lie. They can also serve the trap-spotting and disabling just as well, because all classes can spot magic traps, and bards can easily Dispel them. Even other martials are competitive here - a Slayer or a Ranger or a Hunter vs a Rogue is not a huge difference in skill-monkeyship, and bards and investigators are similar martial capabilities to a rogue really.
The core rogue has mediocre skills - no unlocks, so just the base of what they can do, with no reason to invest in CHA, and is pretty MAD (multi-attribute dependent) unless you spend ages waiting for Agile weapons for DEX to damage, or you have to go for weird things like Fencing Grace and that item that makes the weapon count as light. Your rogue talents don't give you anywhere near enough of a boost to make you comparable to other skill monkeys or martials.
I love rogues, but core rogue is by far the worst of the PC classes, and almost certainly worse than Adept. This isn't to say you can't have fun with it - if your GM gives you way more magic items than the rest of the characters, you can keep up, or if you simply don't care, or if your characters don't have someone else who can compare, it can still be great fun. You might just not mind you're not powerful, but it's definitely true.
Unchained gave them a significant buff - Skill Unlocks are normally unique to Rogues, gives them some nice bonuses - can go for Perception for long-distance vision (halves the distance penalty), or Intimidate for using it to give Frightened or Panicked instead of Shaken, Diplomacy for one-round Diplomacy checks, or something like that. You get dex-to-damage, so can stay at 10 STR and go to 14/16 CHA for face skills, WIS for will saves and trap spotting, or something like that. Also give pretty powerful debuffs on sneak attacks - -4 to hit the rogue and -2 to everyone else, or -4 to his AC for the rogue and -2 for everyone else, or even halve their speed. Archetypes can make it much better - eldritch scoundrel is much more powerful, but that's because its a mini-wizard.
|
|
Every group can play the game as they wish and with their own style, Morlaf. But many people (myself included) think that the characters must be useful on their own either inside and outside combat, and not require DM dependency to be on par with the rest of the party.
Knife master is a good archetype, but have the same problems as the basic rogue; low accuracy, low defense, too much dependency on the position of other parties members to land the sneaks attacks and low damage when sneak attack is not possible, wich is very usual.
I don't entirely agree.....
we cannot all be equal all the time - in fact ever.as for the non-GM dependancy that is a bit silly.
He, in co-operation with the players, should address grotesque imbalances in character effectiveness if it becomes an issue.
|
|
oh, you know this "Ragues are weak" mantra? Have you dudes seen the Knife Master archetype?? Did you not like it?!I love Rogues, a lot, but they really are weak. "Knife Master" effectively just gives you d8s instead of d6s for your attacks. Means that a Knife Master core rogue has no obvious dex to damage, so you'll either be a strength based rogue (and thus extremely bad at Disable Device - no Trapfinding or dex, bad at stealth, sleight of hand, etc) or go dex and strength based, in which case, let's compare damage at level 6 to a base 2-handed barb:
5th level Knife Master rogue, on a full attack, with sneak attack applied, using Kukri, that are both +1, with something like double slice applied (about as good as you'll get):
2x(1d6 (kukri) + 3d8 (sneak) + 3 (16 STR seems as high as you'll be here) + 1 (enchantment)) damage = 2d6+6d8+8 = 42 average damage in a round, if they hit.
Greataxe barbarian, 23 STR (20 + belt + 4th level inherent) that is +1:
2d12+9 (STR) + 1 (enchant) + 6 (power attack) = 2d12+32 = 45 average damage. For less investment. In comparison, the rogue has 16 dex = +3 to hit, +4 from BaB, +1 magic weapon = two attacks at +6 to hit. The barbarian has +6 BaB, +1 weapon, +6 str = +13 to hit for the first, and +8 to hit for the second. So will hit more, for more damage, and doesn't need to be sneak-attacking. And lots of other ways to optimize - that's just a bog-standard one. For an APL=CR fight, the average AC at this level is 19, giving the rogue a 35% chance to hit, and an average damage of 15 points of damage. The barb has a 70% hit chance on the first and 45% on the second, for an average of 26 points of damage - nearly double the rogue. Fighters, Slayers, Melee Rangers, melee paladins are all similar to the barbarian. Looking at bow attacks, you'll be way higher than both of these (6th level ranger can have 4 attacks (1 base, 1 BaB, 1 many shot, one multishot) for around 1d8+6, probably more depending on the type of archer (bard=arcane strike,...
i think your mistake (in my opinion) started with the sentence:
"...let's compare damage at level 6 to a base 2-handed barb:"I did not read anymore of your post.
The game is more.... SHOULD be more.....
Every group can play the game as they wish and with their own style, Morlaf. But many people (myself included) think that the characters must be useful on their own either inside and outside combat, and not require DM dependency to be on par with the rest of the party.
Knife master is a good archetype, but have the same problems as the basic rogue; low accuracy, low defense, too much dependency on the position of other parties members to land the sneaks attacks and low damage when sneak attack is not possible, wich is very usual.I don't entirely agree.....
we cannot all be equal all the time - in fact ever.
as for the non-GM dependancy that is a bit silly.
He, in co-operation with the players, should address grotesque imbalances in character effectiveness if it becomes an issue.
I don't think he was advocating for an equal experience in every game. I think he was saying that a class should generally be able to hold its own without the GM having to help it out.
There is a difference between a class not holding up in a particular GM's game, and not being able to hold up in a much larger group of GMs' games because it is mechanically inefficient.
At the point we have a class problem, not a GM problem.
|
|
i think your mistake (in my opinion) started with the sentence:
"...let's compare damage at level 6 to a base 2-handed barb:"
I did not read anymore of your post.
The game is more.... SHOULD be more.....
Well your implication was that a knife-master rogue is competitive in damage with other damage-focused builds, so that's what I went with.
Compare it to almost any archer, and it's far behind.
Compare it to a one-handed fighter with weapon training, it's behind.
Compare it to a smiting Paladin, it's behind.
Compare it to a raging Barbarian, it's far behind.
Compare it to a studied + sneak attacking Slayer, it's far behind.
Compare it to a favoured enemy Ranger, and it's behind.
That's the problem -a core rogue is behind on damage to almost any other martial, and their 'advantage' is their skills, but other classes can very easily be better at the skills (Investigators and Bards both have same/more skill ranks per level, and better stats to use them, and magic to enhance them) and still competitive with the damage. Compare to a ranged bard, 18 DEX and 12 STR at level 6:
+4 to hit, +4 BaB, +1 from bow, +2 from bard song, +1 from Alter Self/Cat's Grace/other 2nd level spells = +12, -> +10 for rapid shot.
Get 2x: 1d8+1 (STR) + 1 (Point-blank) + 2 (Arcane strike) + 2 (bard song) + 1 (enhancement) = 23 damage -> 13 average damage against that AC 19 enemy. Compared to 15 for the rogue, which required you to:
1: Have paid double the enchantment cost because of two weapons
2: Have a sneak attack for a full attack somehow (probably flanking)
3: Have worse defences (16 dex vs 18 dex)
4: Have worse saves
5: Pick a style that doesn't scale as well (8th level the Bard gets to 4 hits at BaB-2,BaB-2, BaB-2, BaB -5, the rogue is at 2x BaB-2, 2x BaB -7, which is nowhere near as nice.
6: Has to full attack to get that in, but must be within 5ft at the start of the turn to full attack. The bard has to be within 110ft to full attack, so will be at the 'good' damage much more often.
And then the Bard gets 6th level casting, all knowledges, skills, and everything like that. Seriously, what advantage does the core rogue even have there?
|
|
that phrase you used:
"...and mostly unchanged in combat, but otherwise much worse in non-combat situation"
sure that should be left to char design/GM/setting etc?
I made a barbarian once with an intelligence of 14 because that is the char i wanted to play. Yes the fighter teased me throughout the whole campaign but that is the char i wanted to play. and a lot of fun was had by all.Guess i am just a bit lost and disillusioned by the whole "balance-damage-balance-damage" infatuation that thow whole of Pathfinder is embroiled in.....
Unchained barbarian doesn't gain strength or constitution with rage, they the combat related benefits of those instead. So in combat, the two are largely identical.
In non-combat situations, the added strength or constitution may have other applications. For example, using rage to briefly add to a strength check is not something an Unchained Barbarian can do. Useful while arm wrestling in a bar, for example.
If you are playing a game that mostly does combat things with the barbarian, the unchained version is certainly much more simple and easy to use. If the group is big on role play, you'll probably want the Core version of the barbarian because it's more versatile.
|
|
oh, you know this "Ragues are weak" mantra? Have you dudes seen the Knife Master archetype?? Did you not like it?!
Totally agree that the Rogue can be built to be strong in combat. The unchained version is designed to be better at combat without putting major focus into that.
Though personally, I think the Unchained Rogue is only useful if you intend a high dex build for your rogue. The class can be almost anything, and a high strength Rogue isn't benefiting from the unchained incarnation.
On a side note, have you ever tried getting a large or huge dagger for the knife master? They can technically apply the archetype to daggers that require two hands to wield...
oh, you know this "Ragues are weak" mantra? Have you dudes seen the Knife Master archetype?? Did you not like it?!Totally agree that the Rogue can be built to be strong in combat. The unchained version is designed to be better at combat without putting major focus into that.
Though personally, I think the Unchained Rogue is only useful if you intend a high dex build for your rogue. The class can be almost anything, and a high strength Rogue isn't benefiting from the unchained incarnation.
On a side note, have you ever tried getting a large or huge dagger for the knife master? They can technically apply the archetype to daggers that require two hands to wield...
Str rogues still get the debilitating strike, I find that a really big benefit.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Str rogues still get the debilitating strike, I find that a really big benefit.oh, you know this "Ragues are weak" mantra? Have you dudes seen the Knife Master archetype?? Did you not like it?!Totally agree that the Rogue can be built to be strong in combat. The unchained version is designed to be better at combat without putting major focus into that.
Though personally, I think the Unchained Rogue is only useful if you intend a high dex build for your rogue. The class can be almost anything, and a high strength Rogue isn't benefiting from the unchained incarnation.
On a side note, have you ever tried getting a large or huge dagger for the knife master? They can technically apply the archetype to daggers that require two hands to wield...
Yup. They also don't have to waste a feat on Shadow Strike.
Unchained Rogue really could use some archetype that traded the dexterity part for some other cool thing.