[Pathfinder 2e- 1.6 Errata] Hunter's Edge Clarification

[42nfl19]

Copied and pasted from the Shining Lights and Dark Stars blog. I hope a Dev or anyone else can clarify on this.

This might sound dumb but can anyone clarify the Ranger's new Hunter's Edge? Do you pick one at the start of a build? Do you pick one every time you activate Hunt Target? Or do you have access to all 3? It does not implicitly tell you to pick one. Even it has a line that says "You have trained for countless hours to become a more skilled hunter and tracker, gaining additional benefits when you Hunt a Target.) Benefit(s)...plural. Masterful Hunter,"You also gain an additional benefit depending on your hunter’s edge", implies that there was an individual choice from before.

The Rogue's Rogue's Technique specifically states " You gain one of the following techniques of your choice."

The Paladin's Righteous Form is chosen at the start and again later if you get a feat. "Once you have chosen the ally’s form, it cannot be changed"

Can anyone clarify? It's not like there are any class feats that require a specific build choice for the Ranger unlike The Paladin and Rogue.

[Shinigami02]

Update 1.6 Ranger Section Introduction wrote:

This update introduces hunter’s edge and masterful hunter as expansions to this base version, with the “flurry” option within hunter’s edge representing a build based on the original version of Hunt Target.

Based on this part I think Hunter's Edge is supposed to be like Rogue's Technique and Paladin's Cause, a subclass choice made at level 1. That said, it could definitely be clearer.

[Rysky]

Hmm, it's either you pick 1 at 1st and that's it or you pick one whenever you declare a Hunt, though I can't quite parse which it's supposed to be.

[DM_Blake]

You pick one at 1st level. You do not have access to all three.

They should have been a little more clear, but this answer is supported by:

"For Update 1.6, we’re adjusting Hunt Target for ranger concepts
that aren’t based around making lots of attacks, and to make
the requirements more flexible for when you’re not in combat.
This update introduces hunter’s edge and masterful hunter as
expansions to this base version, with the “flurry” option within
hunter’s edge representing a build based on the original version
of Hunt Target."

So, evidently we now have three builds for rangers. The "Flurry" build is basically what's in the rulebook, the "Precision" build deals precision damage, and the "Stalker" build gets check bonuses.

Also:

"Masterful Hunter (17th)
...
You also gain an additional benefit depending on your
hunter’s edge."

They used the possessive "your" which means Hunter's Edge belongs to you. Which implies that you have made a Hunter's Edge build choice and based on that build choice, Masterful Hunter gives you new benefits for that build.

Had they meant for Hunter's Edge to be chosen each time you use it, they would have needed to say "You also gain an additional benefit depending on which version of Hunter's Edge you're currently using".

So, the intent can be parsed, but we really shouldn't need to parse it. Hopefully the devs will add a bit to the final version that says something about choosing the build at level 1.

[42nfl19]

Shinigami02 wrote:

Update 1.6 Ranger Section Introduction wrote:

This update introduces hunter’s edge and masterful hunter as expansions to this base version, with the “flurry” option within hunter’s edge representing a build based on the original version of Hunt Target.

Based on this part I think Hunter's Edge is supposed to be like Rogue's Technique and Paladin's Cause, a subclass choice made at level 1. That said, it could definitely be clearer.

The clarification of build is more clearer in the Rogue and Paladin. With the new "subclass" there are class feats the require a specific build choice. There are non that I could see for the Ranger. Non call for Flurry and they did not add more for Precision and Stalker.

In terms of power, it would be Flurry, Precision, and Stalker. I mean I find it highly unlikely that someone would go for a Stalker build. What would make more sense to me is that situationaly, you would want to use the additional benefits of Stalker, like in exploration mode. I mean overall Precision sucks scaling wise. As I mentioned before, it says additional benefits, plural. Having it be a single build choice sucks. Pick when ever you use Hunt Target would be good, and having all three is the cherry on top. As I said, as for how builds go, you really can't "build" anything.

[GM OfAnything]

Quote:

Page 114—Add hunter’s edge to the class table at 1st level.

You choose your edge at first level.

As for the Stalker build, that is definitely geared toward a more urban/investigation campaign.

[Colette Brunel]

The extra +1d6 damage should scale automatically. It is useful at 1st level, much less so at 16th level.

Compare this to the attack penalty reduction, which, mathematically, is just as useful at 1st as it is as 16th.

[42nfl19]

GM OfAnything wrote:

Quote:

Page 114—Add hunter’s edge to the class table at 1st level.

You choose your edge at first level.

As for the Stalker build, that is definitely geared toward a more urban/investigation campaign.

Yes it says to add Hunter's Edge. But the wording within Hunter's Edge and in other places can cause confusion. The Paladin had Causes and Reactions added but they specifically call out for you to choose one. The Rogue's Technique was added to the class table but within the class feature it specifically tells you to choose one.

So the question still stands.
1) Do you get all 3?
2) Do you choose which one on Hunt Target you use?
3) Do you choose which one on build start?

That is why a dev response would be so much clear. I hope they change the wording in the final release. For the "sub classes" of druid, rogue, and now paladin, it specifically tells you to pick one. And they even recently changed up the Bard to clarify any confusion among the builds/muses.

[GM OfAnything]

Yes, they should add the language to make it more clear that you only choose one at first level. It is also obvious from the ability descriptions and formatting that a single choice at level 1 is the intent.

Are you still confused or are you trying to prevent confusion in the final product?

[Excaliburproxy]

Colette Brunel wrote:

The extra +1d6 damage should scale automatically. It is useful at 1st level, much less so at 16th level.

Compare this to the attack penalty reduction, which, mathematically, is just as useful at 1st as it is as 16th.

I sort of view the +1d6 damage option as an improvement to crossbow rangers and a mechanic to be ignored by most other builds. It may have some corner utility for rangers built around warden's boon if your allies aren't making a lot of iterative attacks.

That said, maybe the class would be better served on the whole if crossbow ace gave a smaller benefit and the d6 scaled scaling from hunters edge increased faster.

[DM_Blake]

42nfl19 wrote:

So the question still stands.

1) Do you get all 3?
2) Do you choose which one on Hunt Target you use?
3) Do you choose which one on build start?

That is why a dev response would be so much clear.

The question doesn't really still stand. I answered for you, earlier in this thread, backed up by the rules themselves.

The intent is quite clear.

I do agree with you that it is confusing the way it's written. I also agree that the devs need to clarify this. Rulebooks shouldn't require us to parse multiple rules to figure out the intent of on confusing rule. We shouldn't need to be rules lawyers or English professors to divine the hidden intent of a confusing rule.

That said, I have parsed this. I'm clear on the intent.

I still want the devs to clarify it properly in the final version of the rulebook.

[42nfl19]

GM OfAnything wrote:

Yes, they should add the language to make it more clear that you only choose one at first level. It is also obvious from the ability descriptions and formatting that a single choice at level 1 is the intent.

Are you still confused or are you trying to prevent confusion in the final product?

I am trying to prevent confusion in the final product AND the current testing. How can we rightly test the Ranger with these changes if the wording is odd? Disambiguity can cause players and GMs problems in the future. Also I am slightly confused. It would not even seem that overpowered if you were to have all three.

[LuniasM]

Personally I might consider using the Precision version if I was building a ranged character with a companion - Favored Aim is already pretty strong for landing crits, and if I'm spending a third action to command my companion then I'd prefer some bonus damage rather than a MAP reduction that I'd never use. I do agree that it doesn't scale as well as I'd like, though.

Maybe if it added an extra damage die instead of a d6? That way it would be better for weapons with larger dice.

[Lightning Raven]

Precision and Stalker are completely useless compared to Flurry. Why n the world they were delivered in such a terrible state?

Even if you're planning of varying your build, you still get a lot more benefit from sub-using Flurry than getting any optimal usage of those other two. Both are really terrible and OBVIOUSLY underpowered.

[Excaliburproxy]

Lightning Raven wrote:

Precision and Stalker are completely useless compared to Flurry. Why n the world they were delivered in such a terrible state?

Even if you're planning of varying your build, you still get a lot more benefit from sub-using Flurry than getting any optimal usage of those other two. Both are really terrible and OBVIOUSLY underpowered.

As I said earlier, Precision improves the prospects of the crossbow ranger almost unambiguously. It also likely improves the damage of your animal companion since it will be rare that your animal companion will make two attacks (and you now essentially gain the old "companion's bond" feat automatically).

Stalker is good if you want to demoralize your opponents (which is maybe almost broken right now). It also has good synergy with the "monster hunter" feats. You could also try to do a feint build.

[Captain Morgan]

So for comparison, shortbow flurry vs crossbow ace preision. Both can add half a secondary stat modifier to damage, so I'm going to ignore that. (Even though Wisdom is a much stronger stat to boost than Strength.)

Level 1, 1d6+1d6 vs 1d10+1d6, 7 vs 9.

The crossbow does does less damage with the first attack action even if both arrows land. It can fire again, but at a minus 8, which is not great odds of hitting.

Level 17, 4d6+4d6 vs 4d10+2d6, 28 vs 29. The Precision actually still comes out ahead on a single action, even assuming both arrows hit. The advantage Flurry has it is can fire 2 more times at a -6, where the crossbow can only get one more shot off at a -5. However, Running Reload can let the crossbowman Sneak or Stride as part of the reload, which can boost your accuracy 1-3 points easy. (1 for screening, 2 if you hide sneak successfully and are attacking flat-footed.)

I also suspect the precision crossbow can leverage Favored Aim better. A crit from that crossbow HURTS.

So yeah, precision seems pretty viable. I imagine one could build a melee character with similar results.

I really want to try a halfling sniper, utilizing great stat synergy and Distracting Shadows to get Unseen even when drawn into melee. Seems fun.

[DM_Blake]

Lightning Raven wrote:

Precision and Stalker are completely useless compared to Flurry. Why n the world they were delivered in such a terrible state?

I'm afraid the developers are in React-mode. We're giving surveys and posting here, they're reading it, they make a decision to fix it, but then they're under such time pressure that they rush out a decision that sounds good in a conference room but, sometimes, may not work once we get ahold of it.

Seems an ill omen.

On the bright side, every game I've ever seen has trap options. So what if the final version of the ranger has 2 trap options out of three? Won't be any worse than half of the options in, oh, every RPG out there.

Actually, the real bright side is that they got this change to us in time to give them feedback so they can fix it again, so maybe it will get fixed.

[N N 959]

Lightning Raven wrote:

Precision and Stalker are completely useless compared to Flurry. Why n the world they were delivered in such a terrible state?

Even if you're planning of varying your build, you still get a lot more benefit from sub-using Flurry than getting any optimal usage of those other two. Both are really terrible and OBVIOUSLY underpowered.

I don't think that's universally true, but you'd have to run some math to be sure. What I think you'll find is that Precision will out-perform Flurry up until you start getting magical weapons and the bonus damage from critting far outperforms an average 3.5

As Lunias points out, Precision should apply to your Animal Companion as well:

Update 1.6 wrote:

When you Hunt a Target, your animal companion gains the action’s base benefits and the initial benefits of your Hunter’s Edge.”

So at 1st level when you get a Companion and choose Precision, the Ranger gets 1d6 from his/her attack and 1d6 from the animal's attack. You get this every round you attack your Target. If you're using a shorbow an extra 1d6 damage is a 100% increase if you only attack once each round. By contrast, Flurry is adding far less than that and adds nothing if you don't take Twin Takedown and/or Hunted Shot. If you add in your Companion, which may often not get a second attack, then Precision is far superior.

So Precision supports a completely different play style than Flurry and it does sound like something far more suitable for a crossbow build or a single weapon build. Flurry's real benefit is if you combine it with TT/HS and it allows you to make up to 4 attack in a round. That would be useful if you're getting massive bonuses to hit and fighting relatively weak creatures. Also Precision obviously would be worthless against things immune to precision damage.

Stalker on the other hand, is a bit of an oddball. I get what they were trying to do, but the base Ranger's attack is not good enough that the average player will want to go this route. I can imagine those completely knew to the game might see it as interesting. I also don't like that it's Deception and Intimidation as the skills, but I can see how this would support a lot of NPC style evil Rangers.

Personally, I think they should have a Stalker like option as second set of choices. In other words the Ranger gets a combat and non-combat Edge. So add one more combat Edge and two more non-combat Edges.

All of this aside, I still don't like the tunnel-vision feel of the Ranger with Hunt Target, regardless of the Edge.

There's also a huge problem with how Recall Knowledge and Monster Hunter work. As written, the Ranger has to avoid trying to identify any monster that is not his Target or he/she won't get the benefit of Monster Hunter. This further exasperates the perception of the Ranger feeling like its got tunnel-vision on the battlefield.

Fighter Fred: "Hey, Ranger Rick, what's that monster over there?"
Ranger Rick: "Sorry, I can't look at that right now, I'm only interested in talking about my Hunted Target."