It would help if you at least listened to the reply. I was comparing the Bard to Martials in general, not the Fighter specifically, as you asked about a Bard compared to Martials. Fighter is always at +2 accuracy over other Martials, so it's not a good base for comparison of gish vs martial. Also I believe you said martial, not martial multiclassing caster. Entirely different things.
As for buffs, the durations may be short but Heroism easily lasts for multiple fights if you face them back to back, and even 1-fight buffs are insanely useful. They routinely make crucial difference in fights in my Playtest groups. Just writing them off isn't an option.
So, as I said, a Bard gish is -2 or so accuracy behind non-Fighter Martials for most levels, and has ways to make it up. Which is an entirely manageable gap with the new monster math.
It would help if you at least listened to the reply...
The question I asked was :
Red Griffyn wrote:
There seems to be a lot of discussion about when classes can get weapon proficiency bumps. Can you summarize what level different proficiency bumps come online for each class?
Personally I want an archer bard, so likely a dip in fighter for archery feats anyways (since they seem to be class gated), but will I be behind the non-fighter curve having come from a caster class? When do other martial classes get master proficiency?
The response you gave was:
Edge93 wrote:
This, and to answer the other part of the question Martials get Master at 3rd IIRC.
If you don't give complete/correct answers you won't get responses that you find logically consistent. You've now changed your answer to there being two tiers of martials who get weapon proficiency bumps at different levels instead of all 'martials get 'master' at L3.' Now that you've clarified your position we can discuss.
You believe that I am talking about a bard using a bow and in fact I am talking about a bard multi-classing into fighter (per my original post) to get class gated feats only available to the fighter. The closest possible corollary to this is instead a fighter multi-classed as a bard. I would say that I very much intended for a multi-classed PC per my post, but apologize if it wasn't as clear. My question regarding when each class gets proficiency bumps was always designed to identify to myself what class chassis was most appropriate for a weapon focused gish (in this case bard/fighter or fighter/bard, but could apply to a magus, warpriest, etc. remake as desired).
For many gishes, the majority of spells are buffs or attack roll based that exclude save DCs (due to lower DCs, lower caster levels, etc.). As such, the power level, duration, and utility of buffs can make or break a gish and those spells are spent making up for the fact that they are on a caster chassis. All spells got a massive duration nerf AND the world's timescale has been reset to 10 minute intervals (e.g., heroism was 10 min/level in 1e and is now 10 min). What that means is that investigating things can take 10 mins, healing takes 10 minutes, discussing with NPCs takes at least 10 mins, detecting magic/identifying things takes 10 minutes, and so on. Thus a 10 minute spell isn't so useful unless you've got a party entirely capable or willing to just steamroll through a dungeon. One PC who wants to repair his shield or apply the heal skill will wreck your buffing/resource management. In my playtest the desire for the 'short rest' was very high, making many of those buffs 1/combat at best and at worst pre-cast/wasted. This is why I say the playtest did not reward PCs for interacting with the world. I'd rather let PCs investigate/plan around what they know then penalize them with bad durations/time scales. It'll only drive people to be more murder hobos or devalue those buff spells (your pick).
In the specific case of heroism and being a bard, keep in mind that you'd have to burn a spell specialization on it to spontaneously heighten it to a 5th level slot for another +1 bonus vs. just using inspire courage and a 5th level slot for something far more meaningful. Just not worth it honestly, hence why I don't think I'll pursuing a martial gish on a caster chassis.
As to the new math... well that needs to be proven first. The playtest showed really bad PC success rates (i.e., a min maxed PC doing his specialization in combat would receive a 50% success rate - i.e., treadmill). We'll have to wait for the math analyst posts to come out to truly see if they changed the math or simply moved the treadmill. I choose to have faith that they did as the community asked instead of doing the latter.
This, and to answer the other part of the question Martials get Master at 3rd IIRC.
Quite sorry, that was a typo on my part, not sure how that got there. Fighters do get Master at 3rd, but Martials get Expert at 3rd and Master at 13th (this does include Rogues).
I do still stand by my opinion on the usefulness of buffs, as my experiences have borne out in support of them, but clearly your own experiences have been different, as well.
In the end, really, deciding whether to be an x with y Multiclass or a y with x Multiclass is always going to be about which you want to be more of, x or y.
I have seen several Casters multiclassing Martial work out very well and be strong in physical combat as well as great in magical, and I have seen multiple Martials multiclassing Caster be great in physical combat and strong in magical. Both are perfectly viable and useful characters.
So yeah, Fighter MC Bard and Bard MC Fighter are both good characters, but the one you want is based on your preferred focus. Your term of Archer Bard implied to me that you would want to be a Bard that also Arches, rather than an Archer that also Bards, which is why I made a point to emphasize that that absolutely works, but yeah there's a certain emphasis on your Bard-ness since you're taking full Bard progression rather than full Fighter progression. But if the archery is your main concern, of course going Fighter multiclassing Bard makes more sense. And what you get from Bard can very much complement the Fighter's already excellent archery.
As to the math, it actually isnt as much of a we'll have to see as you might think. We've seen numerous examples of monsters from the final Bestiary compared against the accuracy of PCs of the same level that we can extrapolate fully from what we have, and it's definitely more favorable to the PCs than in the Playtest.
That math looks pretty good to me as well, given it's an unbuffed caster attacking (and I know Glabrezu is said to be one of the most armored enemies for its level, and I expect Dragons are the same).
Is that math accounting for a magic weapon? I suppose it probably is.
That math looks pretty good to me as well, given it's an unbuffed caster attacking (and I know Glabrezu is said to be one of the most armored enemies for its level, and I expect Dragons are the same).
Is that math accounting for a magic weapon? I suppose it probably is.
Yes it consider a +1 magic weapon for the Drider and a +2 against Glabrezu and Ancient White Dragon.
And I find hilarious how flanking + inspire courage makes the Fighter hit on 2 (and with that crit on a 12).
Buffs/debuffs in general look like they are *crazy* strong in 2e.
Rogues being able to slam out debuff after debuff with Debilitating Strike - especially once they use the first hit for flat-footed and effectively give themselves unlimited sneak attacks - is going to really make them shine in a support role for people who want to build them that way.
That math looks pretty good to me as well, given it's an unbuffed caster attacking (and I know Glabrezu is said to be one of the most armored enemies for its level, and I expect Dragons are the same).
Is that math accounting for a magic weapon? I suppose it probably is.
Yes it consider a +1 magic weapon for the Drider and a +2 against Glabrezu and Ancient White Dragon.
And I find hilarious how flanking + inspire courage makes the Fighter hit on 2 (and with that crit on a 12).
Yeah, this is why I was such an advocate for how the Playtest math was honestly, it felt like a step too far. But given Fighter is the only Legendary weapons they are the only ones who take it to this degree so I suppose it's fine in the end. I have warmed a fair bit to the new math, though it might make solo bosses harder to utilize effectively than in the Playtest, which is a bummer. But I'll find the best way to make that work.
I think solo bosses are still in. How good a to-hit does a 9th or 10th level Fighter have vs. a Glabrezu, after all?
I come up with 6 worse at level 10 (-2 Proficiency -3 Level -1 Item), 8 worse at level 9 (another -1 level -1 Ability). That puts their to-hit at 8 to 10...with all the buffs that make it a 2 for the 13th level guy. And with a huge pile of HP to get through and ridiculous offense to boot.
Solo on-level foes aren't supposed to be a huge threat, after all.
I take it Dwarves still have 5' less speed than normal while Elves still have 5' more speed, so is it the case Elves are still best mobility in Heavy Armor, assuming they have STR for it? not even accounting for their further movement feats which can further help?
what do higher level Dwarven and other racial feats look like? emphasis on pre-req/chains etc...?
BTW, what happened with Fog/Smoke? I think in Playtest it lacked specific numbers or something.
Retreading 3.x/1E 5' rule (which actually was vague in certain cases), or something else?
Different degrees/distances? Specific interaction with Perception Tiers?
I think solo bosses are still in. How good a to-hit does a 9th or 10th level Fighter have vs. a Glabrezu, after all?
I come up with 6 worse at level 10 (-2 Proficiency -3 Level -1 Item), 8 worse at level 9 (another -1 level -1 Ability). That puts their to-hit at 8 to 10...with all the buffs that make it a 2 for the 13th level guy. And with a huge pile of HP to get through and ridiculous offense to boot.
Solo on-level foes aren't supposed to be a huge threat, after all.
Yeah, I suppose so. I guess my concern was mainly that defense would end up devalued to where a level +3 or 4 foe wouldn't have the evasion they need to last a few rounds, since if they can't keep the PCs from hitting them regularly that big HP pool won't last long.
But of course there are other tactics to hold off PCs, something I learned more than ever the use of in a recent boss I homebrewed, but AC is a key factor as well.
Even so a lot of my worries are probably unfounded in the end, I expect things will turn out fine, and of course not every PC is a Fighter so...
Actually the proficiency increase of weapons for Fighter, Ranger and company is at lvl 5.
For the math, this is considering 18 in the main stat and 16 main stat for the bard and every ability score increase put a point in there...
** spoiler omitted **
Great post! A 50% chance to hit for the caster isn't too bad. I expect some people will be combing through the bestiary and prepping some charts/graphs/tables for average to hit across class per level against the level = CR benchmark.
This makes me way more excited about 2e then what most people have posted to date. Its way easier for a GM to buff up a monster behind the screen (add template X or what have you to make them interesting). But having that be the base level gameplay wasn't super enticing for me or the kinds of players I routinely GM.
I mean, it's not like the Paladin didn't have its problems...
It was super-restrictive, at least by many peoples' interpretations of the code (which itself is an entire snafu), making Paladins unplayable for many groups (which was a shame because the "Paladin" concept is very fun) but it also had some downright BROKEN abilities for anyone who WAS able to play the darn thing.
Now they've done some notable things with code and anathema as well as open up versions of the "Paladin(or rather Champion)" concept for other alignments, and have toned down the busted abilities (while leaving the class quite strong, at least if the Playtest is any indication).
These are all good things.
And the "I considered these abilities iconic and so they should be class features instead of feats" argument is a whole mess that I have plenty of problems with, but suffice to say those abilities weren't iconic to everyone, and making them a choice isn't automatically a bad thing.
Are there any prestige archetypes in the new edition?
Not in the CRB, but the first book of Lost Omens will have 10, including Magic Warrior, Hellknight Armiger, Pathfinder Agent, Red Mantis Assassin and more.
They are not called prestige archetypes anymore though
Any chance to get more than 3 skills to legendary? (for non-rogues, obviously)
Also, I've seen two different statements when it comes to medium/heavy armor and strength. To clear things up:
Can high strength get rid off the complete armor check penalty of those types of armor? And can it get rid of the complete speed penalty on heavy armor?
Any chance to get more than 3 skills to legendary? (for non-rogues, obviously)
Also, I've seen two different statements when it comes to medium/heavy armor and strength. To clear things up:
Can high strength get rid off the complete armor check penalty of those types of armor? And can it get rid of the complete speed penalty on heavy armor?
I don't believe so, but you'd need to look through every class. You can use Skill Increases to bump a Master to Legendary starting at 15th level, and you get two more Skill Increases after.
Yes, and no. Need Mitral for that, which not only reduces the speed penatly but lowers the Strength requirement as well.
1) Are there any feats or focus spells for wizards who wish to be reanimators? Or are clerics still the go to class for that build?
2) When creating undead via the ritual of the same name, are you able to equip them with gear afterwards? Also are you able to craft your chosen undead using the different options and powers found in the Bestiary? Or are there just hardline stats?
3) Last, and most unlikely, are there any options/mechanics for good/neutral aligned undead creation aka White Necromancy?
1) Are there any feats or focus spells for wizards who wish to be reanimators? Or are clerics still the go to class for that build?
2) When creating undead via the ritual of the same name, are you able to equip them with gear afterwards? Also are you able to craft your chosen undead using the different options and powers found in the Bestiary? Or are there just hardline stats?
3) Last, and most unlikely, are there any options/mechanics for good/neutral aligned undead creation aka White Necromancy?
1) Cleric
2) Yes. Yes (there's a different ritual for each type of Undead, but the level is the only requirement).
Do any of the skills make reference to using them to performing other than performance i.e. does juggling / stage magic / circus skills fall under performance or are they under acrobatics / sleight of hand ( which i guess is thievery now) like in PF1?
Got start theorey-crafting my Circus characters early for the next AP.
Do any of the skills make reference to using them to performing other than performance i.e. does juggling / stage magic / circus skills fall under performance or are they under acrobatics / sleight of hand ( which i guess is thievery now) like in PF1?
Got start theorey-crafting my Circus characters early for the next AP.
Yep, General Skill Actions that are used by more than one specific Skill (such as Earn Income).
So while Performance would be the main Skill for that the books writes it in a way that it's not too far out there for the GM to allow Acrobatics or even Theivery to work for something specific like juggling.
Hmm. Is there any provision for waiting or delaying your turn without cost? I often find that 'winning' initiative is a bad thing, especially for certain classes or weapon preferences.
I'd rather wait for the enemies to move forward and then attack them, rather than burning actions on moving and be out of position from the rest of the party.
Hmm. Is there any provision for waiting or delaying your turn without cost? I often find that 'winning' initiative is a bad thing, especially for certain classes or weapon preferences.
I'd rather wait for the enemies to move forward and then attack them, rather than burning actions on moving and be out of position from the rest of the party.
You can delay at the beginning of your turn, and then stop delaying at the end of any creature's turn, inserting yourself back into the initiative order at that location.
By the surprisers using their Stealth check instead of Perception for their initiative.
Basically, there's not surprise rounds anymore
I found this an odd decision in the PT that I hope was going to be changed. Being surprised is a classic in all genres.
I suppose you can give a big initiative bonus but then it just becomes a back and forth between sides (surprised team goes first, then all those who were surprised, and so on).
I guess i miss the verisimilitude. I liked small characters not being able to wield the same giant sword as the half orc. Instead they should get some other bonus (like PF 1e).
I found this an odd decision in the PT that I hope was going to be changed. Being surprised is a classic in all genres.
I suppose you can give a big initiative bonus but then it just becomes a back and forth between sides (surprised team goes first, then all those who were surprised, and so on).
I guess i miss the verisimilitude. I liked small characters not being able to wield the same giant sword as the half orc. Instead they should get some other bonus (like PF 1e).
Winning initiative due to a +4 circ bonus on your ambush is a significant advantage. An entire round is just too big an advantage.
Is it possible for non-humans be adopted by another ancestry from level one character creation, or do you still need to be level 3 to be raised in another culture?
Any chance to get more than 3 skills to legendary? (for non-rogues, obviously)
You can in theory get as many as 7 skills to Legendary, but at a non-trivial cost.
You can spend a Skill feat to get a Skill Increase, and there is a... General feat, I think?... that gives you automatic progression, including up to Legendary, on one Lore skill.
Is it possible for non-humans be adopted by another ancestry from level one character creation, or do you still need to be level 3 to be raised in another culture?
The Adopted Ancestry feat is still a General Feat, and thus you can only get it at 3rd level.
I suppose you can give a big initiative bonus but then it just becomes a back and forth between sides (surprised team goes first, then all those who were surprised, and so on).
That's how it always was, unless you were thinking of a surprise round AND having a higher initiative for two rounds worth of actions, which to me was always kinda jarring.
