So we've got less than a week to go before the playtest drops, so I've been thinking about just what I plan on testing. I think my group is going to go through Doomsday Dawn, so what characters am I going to test at the various levels?
My understanding is that in Doomsday Dawn you'll make five different characters. Four are played for one adventure at a set level and the first one will be played in three different adventures at first level, some intermediate level and a high level. So what to play?
I'm not really a big player of casters (I've never actually played a full caster, although I plan on doing one soon to try to get out of my comfort zone, but I think the playtest isn't the right time for that. I think it's better to test what I know, so I have a better frame of reference to judge by.), so it's probably best to leave those to members of my group who are. One guy tends to play wizards almost all the time, so that's covered. Another loves clerics and paladins, so I think those are covered. I think my repeated character might be an Alchemist, because I'm the only one in the group who's played a PF1 alchemist, and trying it at three different levels makes sense because it's the most unique and changed class. Ancestry-wise, I was kind of tempted to make him a goblin, but currently I think I'll probably do a half-elf or half-orc, because of the recent info drop about how those are being handled in PF2 and the resulting controversy.
I'm not quite so sure as to the other 4 characters, and which one to use at which level. A rouge in there somewhere is a given for me and a ranger is also highly likely. I'm thinking maybe a goblin barbarian, both because that sounds fun and to see how a small strength-penalized barbarian fares. Might even go with a dex build as opposed to working to get him to 16 str. Might do that as the highest level character other than the repeating one to see how it goes on in the late-game. As for the final character, probably fighter. Which adventure/level for the fighter, rogue and ranger is probably going to be mostly random. Also not sure on ancestries. I'm not a big elf fan (paladin/cleric player is, so again probably covered). Maybe gnome for the rogue, straight human for another and for the third maybe dwarf.
So there's my reasoning. What classes/ancestries are you planning on playingtesting in Doomsday Dawn and why? Or are you not going to be doing Doomsday Dawn, if so what do you plan on doing for the playtest? Homebrew? Conversion of a PF1 AP?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm running the game, so none.
I'll probably fiddle around building all sorts of characters, mind you, but I won't be playing any of them through the adventure.
Exactly what I'm gonna do
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm running the game, so none.
I'll probably fiddle around building all sorts of characters, mind you, but I won't be playing any of them through the adventure.
Hrm, it's possible that there is a higher GM to player ratio on the forums compared to elsewhere. Being the GM can be a sacrifice at times. Those about to play, salute you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Doomsday Dawn, I will be running the lower level chapters between two (maybe 3) groups who are both new to roleplaying in general.
For playing, I want to play the level 10 and 17 chapters, converting level 12+ characters I have and seeing how they play now. So
- 2H fighter
- Monk
I'll be mostly converting PFS scenarios however. So in a way, it's mostly about about testing Resonance and Medicine. Will it be plausible to play the same, will PFS scenarios (or the core assumption of being able to play nearly anything) need to change, or will every party now need a healer?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I will be play testing every NPC and monster in the Doomsday Dawn adventure, and maybe a few more if there is time which seems unlikely. Two of my players said that they will probably do a goblin fey sorcerer focusing on unssslie magics and a human rogue/fighter ninja type character. Of course nothing is set in stone till they see the actual book and they each will be making four (five?) PCs so there should be plenty of characters to check out.
I will be play testing every NPC and monster in the Doomsday Dawn adventure, and maybe a few more if there is time which seems unlikely. Two of my players said that they will probably do a goblin fey sorcerer focusing on unssslie magics and a human rogue/fighter ninja type character. Of course nothing is set in stone till they see the actual book and they each will be making four (five?) PCs so there should be plenty of characters to check out.
Oh yeah, multi-classing! That slipped my mind completely. That's another thing that maybe I should add to my list to test. Maybe mix a monk in with one of the characters. I almost never did multi-classing in PF1, but it is a part of the system that is good to test.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I will be play testing every NPC and monster in the Doomsday Dawn adventure, and maybe a few more if there is time which seems unlikely. Two of my players said that they will probably do a goblin fey sorcerer focusing on unssslie magics and a human rogue/fighter ninja type character. Of course nothing is set in stone till they see the actual book and they each will be making four (five?) PCs so there should be plenty of characters to check out.Oh yeah, multi-classing! That slipped my mind completely. That's another thing that maybe I should add to my list to test. Maybe mix a monk in with one of the characters. I almost never did multi-classing in PF1, but it is a part of the system that is good to test.
This particular player wants to essentially remake their slayer character from a previous campaign. I'm not totally sure how to do that without the book but I suggested a rogue/fighter (or maybe a fighter/rogue would be better). I don't think ranger is right because tracking and wilderness stuff was never really the point of the character looming in the darkness with two katanas and jumping on enemies from high places was the point of the character.
This particular player wants to essentially remake their slayer character from a previous campaign. I'm not totally sure how to do that without the book but I suggested a rogue/fighter (or maybe a fighter/rogue would be better). I don't think ranger is right because tracking and wilderness stuff was never really the point of the character looming in the darkness with two katanas and jumping on enemies from high places was the point of the character.
Very cool. And that's yet another idea for things to test, the ability to recreate the feel of some of the non-core classes. It's been speculated that many might be able to be done with core classes due to the higher customization, so that might be another good thing to test.
And I've been thinking more about working on deliberately sub-optimal builds, like the goblin barbarian idea. A highly optimized character is likely going to do well, but how well does the system handle non-optimal builds is a good question. I was very successful with a gnome fighter in PF1, and the same game had a gnome cavalier (we all played gnomes that time on a lark) who was just a murder machine. So how does PF2 handle small martial characters?
I was expecting more to sit back and listen to people's ideas, but you've been bringing up good points that are helping me shape my approach.
I'll probably come up with a few variations on "hit it very hard in melee" since that's generally the kind of character I like to play. The two main things I want to see if they work are a Cleric that prioritizes STR>CHA>WIS and the Superstition Totem Barbarian.
I will definitely be play testing out the Paladin. Try to get the ins and out of the class.
My wife, kids and I have an in game family so I may play test those specific characters as well to get a good feel for them. (since I will probably be the only one officially play testing) Which might be good as that will pull me out of my comfort zone. But we'll see...
I will be play testing every NPC and monster in the Doomsday Dawn adventure, and maybe a few more if there is time which seems unlikely. Two of my players said that they will probably do a goblin fey sorcerer focusing on unssslie magics and a human rogue/fighter ninja type character. Of course nothing is set in stone till they see the actual book and they each will be making four (five?) PCs so there should be plenty of characters to check out.
Funny, one of mine said they'd be playing a goblin sorcerer as well, though he was planning draconic.
Personally, I'll be running the three linked scenarios, as well as the level 7 one. The other GM will be running the rest.
Character-wise, I plan to rebuild all my past characters I've played (minus the Kineticist, though I might try a Fey sorcerer to see if it can fit a similar play concept). Main ones I expect to be interesting are the ones that'd be effectively Elf Rogue/Wizard, Half-Elf Alchemist/Rogue, and Cleric/Fighter. I'll probably be testing out multiclassing heavily to see how it turns out.
Still haven't thought through which new characters I'll make, though.
If I were a player, my top 4 character ideas until we see the book are as follows:
I think that the hardest decision for me would be the alchemist or goblin pally.
Not that any of it matters. I'm the GM.
And I don't know when my current campaign is wrapping up yet.
...
Goblin paladin (higher dex than str if I could get away with it)
...
Odd. What use is a dex-pally, if they presumably get mostly heavy armor prof?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Odd. What use is a dex-pally, if they presumably get mostly heavy armor prof?...
Goblin paladin (higher dex than str if I could get away with it)
...
It depends on how armour proficiency works and the requirements on shields.
E.g. I'd be happy to have high dex, light armour, and a shield.I'd go strength if it needed to be the case, but if dex pallies are less of a bad idea in PF2 than 5e I'll be happy.
Odd. What use is a dex-pally, if they presumably get mostly heavy armor prof?...
Goblin paladin (higher dex than str if I could get away with it)
...
I've seen a dex-based, bow weilding paladin be quite successful in our PF1 Wrath of the Righteous campaign. The mythic helped I'm sure, but I think even without it, he'd have been doing pretty well. I don't recall what kind of armor he used, but mostly being a ranged character did mean he didn't need as much.
I could also see a finesse, rapier paladin being rather interesting. Not sure how well that'd work in PF2 though, with the focus seemingly on them being tanky. I do like the idea of oddball builds being viable. It keeps things from getting set with one true way to do things. A dex based paladin, barbarian or fighter, or str based rogue, two-handed ranger, wizard who gets into melee etc. If paladins aren't good without using heavy armor, or barbarians need a two-handed weapon to be effective, then I think they missed the target. My understanding is that PF2 is supposed to have more customization, that would imply wider range of viable play-styles with each class.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What characters I’d like to Playtest...
Some of my oldie characters. Bring me back and try them out in P2.
Half Elf (possibly drow?, but maybe only in name?) Bard/Rogue multiclass to emulate the Archaeologist Archetype from P1. Maybe some more gish like abilities somehow.
Human Paladin/Cleric. Unfortunately using WIS and a Mace instead of INT and a book. To be my old Living Grimoire.
Elf (reflavored as Kitsune?) Feyblooded Sorcerer. Mostly Fire spells if possible. Also some trickery type spells if I can. Illusion and Charm. I want the Flame Blade spell intensely. They were a Kineticist with 9 tails. It was... rough.
Human Paladin/Bard multiclass. A Paladin of Shelyn that I never really got to flesh out.
And something new. I want it to be a Barbarian multiclassed with a caster. Possibly Sorcerer. I always wanted to try a Bloodrager. I might go Cleric or Bard though.
But I’m mostly going to be looking for ways to reflavor things for other people without changing it. Or possibly without changing it too much. Might have to to soothe some players. Data is still data, just massively less useful if it’s not what they wanted us to test.
One of my players is set on Tiefling Witch though. I have ideas of ways to do that legitimately in the Playtest, and it might be fine honestly. But I might have to homebrew it if not. But I have ideas.
Human Paladin/Cleric. Unfortunately using WIS and a Mace instead of INT and a book. To be my old Living Grimoire.
Depending on how spell points pools work you might be able to run off int as a pally if you're actually a wizard multiclassed into a paladin. Though this depends on the limits of multiclassing.
You could probably have "favoured weapon: book" depending on the parameters of the playtest, which means your pally powers might bump up your spellbook in damage.
Oh yeah, multi-classing!
Yeah, This is where I'm starting. An alchemist/wizard [caster that uses int for resonance] or a rogue/bard [skill monkey x2]. I'm keen to see how viable multiclassing is.
EDIT: I WOULD have tried out a 1/2 elf or 1/2 orc if they hadn't mucked them up. Maybe a human since halflings are no longer cha.
Custom Campagin, I GM and play - sice I got two players one or two npcs, not sure about the classes though - Probably a Druid and one Martial character (possible one or both with multiclassing)
One of my Players is afaik playing either a cleric or a martial, my other a Dragon Bloodline sorcerer - possible mc Rogue
Oh yeah, multi-classing!Yeah, This is where I'm starting. An alchemist/wizard [caster that uses int for resonance] or a rogue/bard [skill monkey x2]. I'm keen to see how viable multiclassing is.
EDIT: I WOULD have tried out a 1/2 elf or 1/2 orc if they hadn't mucked them up. Maybe a human since halflings are no longer cha.
Don't forget the elf ability to choose a different skill daily!
Don't forget the elf ability to choose a different skill daily!Oh yeah, multi-classing!Yeah, This is where I'm starting. An alchemist/wizard [caster that uses int for resonance] or a rogue/bard [skill monkey x2]. I'm keen to see how viable multiclassing is.
EDIT: I WOULD have tried out a 1/2 elf or 1/2 orc if they hadn't mucked them up. Maybe a human since halflings are no longer cha.
Maybe for the alchemist/wizard. I'm going to have to see heritage feats [and ancestry ones too] before I make my final pick. I just know it's not going to be goblin. ;P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I was playing, I'd probably just make five different alchemist builds. I have a problem...
Not that I won't make the builds anyways, and many more besides. I just won't get a chance to see them in action outside single-player thought exercises.
Of the four games I'll be running, two will be straight-up Doomsday Dawn games playtesting what we're asked to, and two will be fully homebrewed games, using none of the core races, no core monsters, and no core items, (but some core spells since homebrewing enough of those will be impossible). Basically a test of the extensibility of the system.
Definitely something that plays with the new action economy! Maybe a straightforward sword-and-board fighter? I do have to say I'm also tempted by an accordion playing dwarven bard, just for the heck of it.
Some kind of wonky Monk/Occult Sorcerer multiclass might be ïnteresting as well!
I’ll be GMing Doomsday Dawn but if I get a chance to play the PFS adventures as a player then I would like to play a forlorn elf cleric of Desna. I would be interested to see how fast she could go with the elf base speed, the elf feat to boost speed again and whatever we get from the travel domain. Using the elf training to use bows, should be interesting to cast a 2-action spell and fire a bow in a single round.
From what I know of the players, I think my best bet would be to run a mini-campaign with the party that is initially created. With each adventure taking 8-9 hours, that would mean two sessions for each adventure. I think the adventures I would be running would involve the original party at 1st level, mid level, and very high level, so six sessions would cover that.
If we want to play more with the system before it officially comes out, I could then do another campaign with the PFS adventures.
At this point, though, we haven't even decided who the GM will be -- but I think I should be ready to volunteer because the other possible GM is already running D&D 5E and PF1 campaigns and will continue to do so, while I only have a monthly Starfinder game at this point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll be GMing Doomsday Dawn for a mixed group. After that, I'll probably run the PFS scenarios and see how those go. I originally wanted to try running a converted Rise of the Rune Lords but I may hold off on that until the actual version of Pathfinder 2 is out. I got atleast one player who has been wanting to do a goblin alchemist but as for the others, no clue.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm going to try to Port my Barbarian from pf1 into the new game. He was an armored Hulk and a devout worshipper of Gorum. In the new game, I'm going to have him multi-class into cleric, as well as take heavy armor proficiency to replicate his former self.
I consider that a bit of a stress test on the customizability of characters in this game. If I can make that build work, I have to conclude that this New Edition is highly customizable, in that I can deviate from my class in two major ways and have it work.
I'm also going to play a goblin Paladin who was taken as a baby from a goblin tribe and raised by my main Paladin and his Husband, who is a silver dragon. I'm also probably going to make pre generated characters for doomsday Dawn, because my situation for running it is going to be such that I'll need them. I came up with the idea of having a packet of 12 pregens who are all goblins raised in an orphanage for Monsters babies run by the Paladin and Silver Dragon.
So far I planning on the following:
1. half-elf gladiator bard
2. half-orc nomad barbarian
3. human scholar wizard
4. ? ? paladin
5. ? acolyte cleric
? means I have not decided yet.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Alchemist/Wizard.
Break everything. Just pure break it. Resonance is at the top of the list for the build but looking to just break anything and everything. Turn in the survey/questionnaire thing and hope anything I find gets patched out before release.
That done, maybe Rogue. No one will let me actually play a Rogue in PF1. See if they will still be the whipping boy of the community.
Following that if possible, either back to Alchemist to test some things or pick up Monk/Druid. Maybe a crossclass to see if they get Unarmed and Natural Attacks fixed.
I'm thinking of playing a gnome rogue who has the cantrip racial ability and uses that for sneak attack. Ranged SA in PF1 was...rough. Excited to see how it plays out here.
Alchemist/Wizard.
Break everything. Just pure break it. Resonance is at the top of the list for the build but looking to just break anything and everything. Turn in the survey/questionnaire thing and hope anything I find gets patched out before release.
That done, maybe Rogue. No one will let me actually play a Rogue in PF1. See if they will still be the whipping boy of the community.
Following that if possible, either back to Alchemist to test some things or pick up Monk/Druid. Maybe a crossclass to see if they get Unarmed and Natural Attacks fixed.
Early indications are that the Rogue is the martial class least likely to suck. Only one a Bard can't cheerily sing "anything you can do I can do better" at.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hate to be the one to tell you, but that is not an option as it stands. The playtest currently only allows you to multiclass into Fighter, Cleric, Rogue, or Wizard.Alchemist/Wizard.
Break everything. Just pure break it. Resonance is at the top of the list for the build but looking to just break anything and everything. Turn in the survey/questionnaire thing and hope anything I find gets patched out before release.
That done, maybe Rogue. No one will let me actually play a Rogue in PF1. See if they will still be the whipping boy of the community.
Following that if possible, either back to Alchemist to test some things or pick up Monk/Druid. Maybe a crossclass to see if they get Unarmed and Natural Attacks fixed.
Forgot about that.
Oh well. Druid, take feat that gives Unarmed Damage. Pretty sure there's going to be at least a feat that does that.
OR Monk/Wizard. Cast some sort of transforming spell(Because I doubt Druid will have sole claim to that).
Point is to TRY to see what happens if you have both when it comes to rules. I really don't care too much how one has to go about it in the play test to get both, just to have them and swing.
I'm running the game, so none.
I'll probably fiddle around building all sorts of characters, mind you, but I won't be playing any of them through the adventure.
Same. I told my players to bring lots of character ideas, so I'm sure we'll have no shortage of variety.
After seeing the multiclassing rules, I'm interested in building a Fey bloodline Sorcerer that multiclasses into Wizard to get arcane magic, for more specialization in enchantment and so on.
Human Paladin/Cleric. Unfortunately using WIS and a Mace instead of INT and a book. To be my old Living Grimoire.Depending on how spell points pools work you might be able to run off int as a pally if you're actually a wizard multiclassed into a paladin. Though this depends on the limits of multiclassing.
You could probably have "favoured weapon: book" depending on the parameters of the playtest, which means your pally powers might bump up your spellbook in damage.
Update:
Paladin multiclassed into wizard| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll probably come up with a few variations on "hit it very hard in melee" since that's generally the kind of character I like to play. The two main things I want to see if they work are a Cleric that prioritizes STR>CHA>WIS and the Superstition Totem Barbarian.
I may be doing something similar, assuming that I'm not the DM. For the 3-parter, the analytical side of me wants to do a Fighter/Barbarian or Barbarian/Fighter multiclass to see if that ends up being more powerful than either of its components. I normally prefer more Gish-y cross-class characters but I am mostly worried about the new multiclassing creating combinations that do the jobs of single-classes better than the single-class.
I am of course looking at this class combo because they have a lot of overlap in what they do. (hit stuff)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I want to try:
Bard with Rogue feats (only because I can't do the much cooler reverse yet)
Alchemist with Wizard feats (I'm about equal on being able to do the reverse)
Enchanter Wizard (what does it take to be a decent face?)
I'll be running the game, though, so I might have to wait until after that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll probably come up with a few variations on "hit it very hard in melee" since that's generally the kind of character I like to play. The two main things I want to see if they work are a Cleric that prioritizes STR>CHA>WIS and the Superstition Totem Barbarian.I may be doing something similar, assuming that I'm not the DM. For the 3-parter, the analytical side of me wants to do a Fighter/Barbarian or Barbarian/Fighter multiclass to see if that ends up being more powerful than either of its components. I normally prefer more Gish-y cross-class characters but I am mostly worried about the new multiclassing creating combinations that do the jobs of single-classes better than the single-class.
I am of course looking at this class combo because they have a lot of overlap in what they do. (hit stuff)
Good point. I'm thinking I might do something similar. Like ranger/fighter or monk/fighter. See if taking fighter multi-class is a nice option for certain concepts, or basically a must have for martial classes. I think I might multi-class rogue with the dex-based goblin barbarian. Sounds like it could be a real trip. Probably make him sword and board or even maybe dual weapon, instead of the traditional two-hander.
ooh! ranger fighter might be a good one to investigate, especially if there is anything that can be picked up with fighter that can boost ranger's action economy in terms of getting more attacks in a round to squeeze more value out of Hunt Target.
Human Paladin/Cleric. Unfortunately using WIS and a Mace instead of INT and a book. To be my old Living Grimoire.Depending on how spell points pools work you might be able to run off int as a pally if you're actually a wizard multiclassed into a paladin. Though this depends on the limits of multiclassing.
You could probably have "favoured weapon: book" depending on the parameters of the playtest, which means your pally powers might bump up your spellbook in damage.
Update:
Paladin multiclassed into wizard
Well. Maybe. Thinking about it a little more. Big thing though is I have to make sure to keep him close to concept both mechanically and in flavor. Obviously flavor is more important, but the big thing is that he could heal. At least to the party. Maybe Paladin/Heal Skill would be enough for that though. Not sure. He was admittedly VMC Wizard, and picked mostly spells that were on the Wizard AND Inquisitor list. Maybe if the Divine and Arcane lists have enough in common. If anything. I could also do 3 classes, but that might be too much.
Also, standby. Posting this, but about to update my other ideas into this post too.
Edit: I typed it all out, and the internet ate it. So now it’s not coming up on here. At least right now. Maybe tomorrow. Everything mostly worked the same, with some changes due to what Multiclasses are available.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
While I don't think there is a right or wrong way to play test this game, I do think some people are looking at the play test in a way that is going to conflict with their expectations, and might feel like the game design fails because they are focusing on the limits of what material is presented instead of what the system could allow for with future development. The overall flexibility of the system is not going to be determined by what feats are present in the playtest. I think a lot of character concepts available now in PF1 are not going to look exactly the same in the play test, but that doesn't mean they couldn't be. Figuring out what it will take for our favorite builds to be possible, and whether that fits in the over all structure of the game might be a better focus than saying the overall design fails because it didn't lead with this character variation.
I am curious what people who like playing the magus will need beyond a wizard with some kind of Martial MC feat to feel like their character is robust.
I am curious if a monk with a Cleric MC will feel exceptionally devout and mystical.
I am curious if a Dwarven fighter will feel as much like the ultimate defender-style tank build, since the Paladin has been declared the best at Armor character, and what the dwarf will need access to that will make them feel like the toughest tank around without requiring a lawful good alignment and dedication to a god.
I am curious as to wether a barbarian can exist that doesn't maximize STR and how that build would be supported, and the same about a rogue that has a focus on something other than DEX.
This alone is 5 full character concepts, and yet I think the only one I will actually play test is the rogue. Although I am concerned enough about the dwarven fighter that I may try that build out in a theory-crafting sense.
I'll probably be running playtest games, if I can get a four player group running out of my pool of eleven players I do game with. Probably with a varying roster over the run of the playtest.
I'll also be GMing, but I will build a dwarf fighter 1 just to see how the character compares with a PF1e dwarf fighter as I expect it will reveal how much has been removed from PF2e characters.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because it's looking like my group will still be on hiatus through the playtest, I may have to go it alone.
If so, For the first run through I'm going to try to make the MCU Avengers.
Here are my initial thoughts on what I'll build.
Alchemist=Wasp
Barb=Hulk
Bard=Nick Fury (or Maybe Spider-Man)
Cleric=Thor
Druid=Antman
Fighter=Captain America
Monk=Black Panther
Paladin=Vision
Ranger=Hawkeye
Rogue=Black Widow
Sorcerer Scarlet Witch
Wizard=Iron Man
Class Lineup is subject to change based how well classes and characters mesh.
After that, I'll likely tinker out a Conan, maybe try out the Pathfinder Iconics, Probably tinker until the damned covers comes off of the books.
Because it's looking like my group will still be on hiatus through the playtest, I may have to go it alone.
If so, For the first run through I'm going to try to make the MCU Avengers.
Here are my initial thoughts on what I'll build.
Alchemist=Wasp
Barb=Hulk
Bard=Nick Fury (or Maybe Spider-Man)
Cleric=Thor
Druid=Antman
Fighter=Captain America
Monk=Black Panther
Paladin=Vision
Ranger=Hawkeye
Rogue=Black Widow
Sorcerer Scarlet Witch
Wizard=Iron ManClass Lineup is subject to change based how well classes and characters mesh.
After that, I'll likely tinker out a Conan, maybe try out the Pathfinder Iconics, Probably tinker until the damned covers comes off of the books.
Having theorycrafted PF1e 20th Level Superhero Gestalts a number of years ago (while I myself was between groups), I can hardly disagree with your assessments. Only to say that I think Spider-man is probably an Alchemist (had him as Alchemist/Monk, Synthesis Summoner/Monk, and Sorcerer/Monk, all monks being Cha based archetypes, based on respectively Initial Comics appearance, Symbiote suit, and JMS Spider Totem, and given Holland's performance [and he's not monk enough on his own], I'd wager towards the first), but yeah.
Also, I'd maybe consider switching Thor and Vision, but IDK, since Comics Thor (or at least my favorite run of Thor), is probably more Paladin than MCU Thor.