Why would anyone take Assurance?


Rules Discussion

51 to 59 of 59 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.

When the playtest came out I made a joke about how the developers got really excited about Fighters being able to climb in Full Plate and forgot that that's the only instance in which Assurance is relevant.

Now Full Plate doesn't have a check penalty for anyone who'd wear it... and Assurance is still basically the same.

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Repairing your shield is generally DC 15. With Trained and Assurance at level 3 I just know it works, no need to roll. By the time my Craft is so good that I'd not get a critfail on a 1 I could just retrain out of Assurance into something else. Also, as a fighter with limited Int, I can take care of my own gear instead of going begging to the wizard.

When using Medicine to Treat Wounds you'd rather not have critfails. Suppose you're an Expert at level 6, so you have an Assurance on Medicine of 20. You can just do the accelerated treatment with no worries. It doesn't even matter that you're the divine list sorcerer who doesn't actually have Wisdom.

Okay, I'm sold, Assurance has valid use cases now.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Arachnofiend wrote:

When the playtest came out I made a joke about how the developers got really excited about Fighters being able to climb in Full Plate and forgot that that's the only instance in which Assurance is relevant.

Now Full Plate doesn't have a check penalty for anyone who'd wear it... and Assurance is still basically the same.

Assurance works similarly, but the numbers are much better. Playtest Assurance for Trained was 10, and stayed there until the sudden spike to expert 15. Now you start at 13, and when you get expert at level 3, 17. It's also a much smoother progression.


I see it as a feat for easy tasks that you want to succeed at and have no chance at failure. A replacement for take10 but without the opportunity to be as problematic as take10 could be.

Learn a Spell is another good option.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
The Gleeful Grognard wrote:

I see it as a feat for easy tasks that you want to succeed at and have no chance at failure. A replacement for take10 but without the opportunity to be as problematic as take10 could be.

Learn a Spell is another good option.

It also ignores your stat, so it is perfect for that one skill you want to be good at with a bad stat. Assurance in Athletics lets a rogue with -1 strength be an excellent cat burglar.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

How well does the Assurance/Athletics/Maneuvers combo work at higher levels?


At level 18:

10 + legendary proficiency = 10 + 8 + 18 = 36

Out of 7 level 18 creatures in the bestiary:

The Reflex DC of the Crimson Worm (sand worm from the Elemental Plane of Fire) is low enough for you to Disarm or Trip, if you're Huge or have the Titan Wrestler feat. Otherwise, you can still Tumble Through their space.

The Perception DC of the Crimson Worm is low enough for you to Feint, leaving them flat-footed against your next attack.

The combo certainly works less often, but it's not completely invalid.

Liberty's Edge

Casts Raise Thread!!

Since Assurance is getting some attention I figured I'd raise this discussion which lays out much of the info and reasoning on why Assurance may or may not be a good idea for your Characters.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Themetricsystem wrote:

Casts Raise Thread!!

Since Assurance is getting some attention I figured I'd raise this discussion which lays out much of the info and reasoning on why Assurance may or may not be a good idea for your Characters.

??? Where is Assurance getting attention? Forum thread? Blog post?

51 to 59 of 59 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Rules Discussion / Why would anyone take Assurance? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.