I feel like "this archetype of another class does class x better than class x does" is not a new problem. I mean, the Daring Champion Cavalier and Viruoso Bravo Paladin are way better Swashbucklers than the Swashbuckler, and nobody is nerfing those.
I feel like "this archetype of another class does class x better than class x does" is not a new problem. I mean, the Daring Champion Cavalier and Viruoso Bravo Paladin are way better Swashbucklers than the Swashbuckler, and nobody is nerfing those.
Remember the poor, poor Arcane Deed? That got slapped down HARD.
It's worth noting that playtesters tend to be a lot more toxic when they don't think they'll be heard. Just ask poor Mark Seifter, upon whom I once unloaded all my ill feelings about an Unchaining—only for him to pop in and graciously make me feel like the garbage I was! No excuse, of course. And don't forget, having Paizo staffers get active in Paizo threads costs money and time Paizo doesn't necessarily have.Oh crap, I'm sorry for making you feel bad KC! When was this?
@Playtests and toxicity vs when people think they're being heard (or responded to), I think this is definitely true. For example, during the occult playtest, Jason got a reputation for not listening to his playtesters in the threads (you can see it if you look back through archived posts) because he didn't really have enough time to post more than rarely. But during redesign he read through every comment, multiple times, and cross-referenced everything he'd read to find common themes, leading to his being very responsive to playtest feedback, probably second only to me with the kineticist playtest in that regard (obviously since we had to scrap my original medium for space, I couldn't be as incorporating of feedback on the playtest version though I did use feedback from the people who had wanted a drastic redesign to help with that part). But it was not evident during the playtest because he didn't have time to both really crunch the feedback and be visible, so he chose the former, whereas I had time to do both due to spending way too much time out of work on the boards (like now posting at 11PM I guess X_X).
I realize this is another entire thread topic, but I got started with hardcore Pathfinder design as a playtester on these boards and am now a professional designer, so I'm deeply interested in the idea of playtesting, but it's also very tricky to do that and have people understand that getting no response doesn't mean being ignored. I have a few ideas I've been brewing over time in that...
Mark! Mark! He's our man! If he can't design it, nobody can!
*Waves pompoms, gives a high kick*
They may not all get nerfed, but some simply do not 'get allowed' into PFS play.
And before folks jump on me, I realize that's a small fraction of all Pathfinder play, but it's a relevant one to me?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They've already nerfed the Beastkin Beserker Barbarian in PFS. Apparently they don't get the ability score bonuses from Beast Shape anymore.
That...might actually spell the end of my relationship with Pathfinder if that happened again.So... Who's handling the bets for "How long until they nerf Druids and Feral Hunters to make the Shifter look better"?Shhhh.... pointing this out might make it happen quicker...Yeah, I would probably go back to 3.5 or find old used books of PF if the devs decided to take PF in that direction.
Hell, I might even give 4e a shot or just play more Savage Worlds.
I can't imagine I would switch to a different system....I like what they have done with Pathfinder too much.
I think my group would start ignoring more and more of the errata though....and be a lot more leery of new products.
Fortunately I don't have to concern myself with the whole organized play thing...
That...might actually spell the end of my relationship with Pathfinder if that happened again.So... Who's handling the bets for "How long until they nerf Druids and Feral Hunters to make the Shifter look better"?Shhhh.... pointing this out might make it happen quicker...
I would just fall back into using 3rd party rulesets that modify Pathfinder. It would probably be Spheres of Power and Spheres of Might together. Since those completely change how Pathfinder works I don't think very many new rules or errata would affect me.
Heck, I can already make any character a better shapechanger than the shifter class can by using the Transformation feat line from Spheres. Well, the shifter would have more forms in the end, but the Transformation feats are unlimited use like a Kitsune's Change Shape.
|
That...might actually spell the end of my relationship with Pathfinder if that happened again.So... Who's handling the bets for "How long until they nerf Druids and Feral Hunters to make the Shifter look better"?Shhhh.... pointing this out might make it happen quicker...
I'm not seeing that happening. With the exception of summoners, the only major class changes have either been optional alternate versions or straight up superior models. Besides, Feral Hunters aren't all that disruptive on their own. They're not even as strong as their base class.
I do hope that future options and archetypes can help improved the shifter, but Paizo has been pretty good about releasing archetypes that don't outright supersede the base class. Mostly. My fear is that the shifter's disadvantages may serve to anchor it down. Hopefully once it has time to breathe we'll get some improvements.
There's definitely a lot of past precedent already. They changed the way magic worked to better accommodate their new psychic class line?
Greater teleport suddenly got weaker when planetary teleport was invented too.
Examples abound.
I feel like "this archetype of another class does class x better than class x does" is not a new problem. I mean, the Daring Champion Cavalier and Viruoso Bravo Paladin are way better Swashbucklers than the Swashbuckler, and nobody is nerfing those.
Doesn't change the fact that it's a problem....old....new.....who cares really :P
I wish they would do something like add +Wis mod additional times per day to wild shape uses. That would at least make “utility forms” less punishing without requiring a drastic re-write.
At the least, they could add that as a feat maybe.
That would be an "at the least" for me.....
Based on the direction they chose to go...
I would want to see Wildshape at level one...equivalent to Beast Shape 1 is fine....at level 4, it becomes equivalent to Beat Shape 2, and scales from there up.
I also think they should add a mechanic like the Menhir Guardians "Wild flurry"....otherwise the full BA is useless.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like "this archetype of another class does class x better than class x does" is not a new problem. I mean, the Daring Champion Cavalier and Viruoso Bravo Paladin are way better Swashbucklers than the Swashbuckler, and nobody is nerfing those.
First ACG update took riposte away from daring champion tho.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like "this archetype of another class does class x better than class x does" is not a new problem. I mean, the Daring Champion Cavalier and Viruoso Bravo Paladin are way better Swashbucklers than the Swashbuckler, and nobody is nerfing those.
Daring champion DID get nerf hammered out of parry/riposte.
|
|
I feel like "this archetype of another class does class x better than class x does" is not a new problem. I mean, the Daring Champion Cavalier and Viruoso Bravo Paladin are way better Swashbucklers than the Swashbuckler, and nobody is nerfing those.Daring champion DID get nerf hammered out of parry/riposte.
Is Daring Champion still the go-to method if you dip Swashbuckler for Parry/Riposte?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It appears we got the Red Dragon himself to give an answer to us on his time off for the holidays in a slightly related thread, which sheds some important light on this discussion that I believe participants of this thread should be aware of.
For those who don't want to wade through different page tabs (I get it, mobile phones are still a drag to use for the internet and multitasking):
Hey there folks,
Just an fyi, most of us are out of the office on break right now. I am in fact, typing this from home while sipping some eggnog.
Anyway... couple of things.
1. We didn't do a playtest for the shifter due to the its timing. It was going through its paces right during the ramp for Starfinder and we didn't want to pull focus. That said, it got a fair bit of internal work. In retrospect, this may not have been best for the class.
2. We will have more to talk about on the Shifter in the coming weeks once we are all back in the office.
3. Its been pointed out that I have been pretty quiet here on the boards, which is true. Much of my work these days is on stuff far flung into the future, and by the time any of my work hits your hands, its over a year past my desk. Makes it kind of tricky to stay informed. I still read the boards frequently, but I try not to get drawn into too many discussions, leaving that instead to those who are closer to the work. That said.. it is something I am hoping to change in the coming year.
Just thought I would offer up some thoughts. We are still listening. We still care about your thoughts and ideas. We want your criticisms, your suggestions, and your rambles. We may not have the time needed to comment everywhere, but we do hear you.
Have a happy holidays everybody.
Well, at least they are now addressing the problem.