The feats work perfectly fine for what they are: general feats. They can make interesting builds without sacrificing class feats, which open up much stronger options, while putting less emphasis on dexterity if that is not my focus. I like that as an option.
I guess that is subjective, but the way proficiencies given by classes work in this game makes the investment rather meh sooner or later, which in addition starts rather late unless you are human. I dunno, mechanically they are objectively suboptimal, have been for three previous and one contemporary edition and seem very much like an artifact of "how things are done". Having more options is OK, but then they could have done them differently from previous editions to keep up at higher levels - especially if you only took them to play an interesting build.
Also, maybe it is a matter of style, but I actually like archetypes better for this sort of thing. Running around in armor different from the rest of your class - especially if the difference is vast, like plated wizards -, sounds very much like an archetype to me. But that is subjective, of course.
EDIT: I usually refrain from prophecies, but I am fairly confident that they will become even less appealing the more material gets published.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A huge part of the general feat proficiency issue is that players are getting frustrated by the possibility that a choice made early in game play becomes outdated. It is far more of an optics issue than an actual game play issue, because I don't see a lot of wizards who spent one general feat on a weapon proficiency making that many attacks with it by level 11, when they have 6th level spells and are much better off carrying a staff in their hand than a weapon.
A big thing people have to get used to, I think, is that it's fine if a choice you made 8 levels ago has stopped being useful- since retraining is so cheap and accessible. So it's fine, and indeed probably expected, to try out a feat for a few levels then jettison it when it stops being relevant.
A huge part of the general feat proficiency issue is that players are getting frustrated by the possibility that a choice made early in game play becomes outdated. It is far more of an optics issue than an actual game play issue, because I don't see a lot of wizards who spent one general feat on a weapon proficiency making that many attacks with it by level 11, when they have 6th level spells and are much better off carrying a staff in their hand than a weapon.A big thing people have to get used to, I think, is that it's fine if a choice you made 8 levels ago has stopped being useful- since retraining is so cheap and accessible. So it's fine, and indeed probably expected, to try out a feat for a few levels then jettison it when it stops being relevant.
This seems to be a fallacy of sorts. In case of armor, it depends on your build. Not everyone wants to build a Dex character, and if they don't, they actually benefit from those armor proficiencies. Using the usual extreme example that's flying around. Wizard in Trained fullplate at 13th has the same AC as an Expert Unarmored wizard at +8AC. The only way the Expert will rise above the Trained, is if he pumps 20Dex, which is unavailable till 20th.
Then again, if you didn't build for 18 dex at 13th(in this scenario), then you lose nothing. And for some of us, 3 general feats for not being forced into dex is a fair trade-off, we get access to more specific magic armors and armor special materials.
As Cabbage said: It's fine.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
A huge part of the general feat proficiency issue is that players are getting frustrated by the possibility that a choice made early in game play becomes outdated. It is far more of an optics issue than an actual game play issue, because I don't see a lot of wizards who spent one general feat on a weapon proficiency making that many attacks with it by level 11, when they have 6th level spells and are much better off carrying a staff in their hand than a weapon.A big thing people have to get used to, I think, is that it's fine if a choice you made 8 levels ago has stopped being useful- since retraining is so cheap and accessible. So it's fine, and indeed probably expected, to try out a feat for a few levels then jettison it when it stops being relevant.
It is not only a feat stopping being relevant. It is a whole playstyle with corresponding choices in items, ability boosts (that you cannot retrain BTW) and skill increases.
It is great that things such as retraining and runes-swapping made it to the CRB. It definitely helps people who feel they made a bad choice at some point not be stuck with it forever. It does not mean though that it is now the expected way of evolving your character.
Great points made by DMW as usual. The only thing I would add is a pet peeve of mine : the impossibility of retraining Class.
The fighter who after a few levels discovers magic and abandon the ways of weapon and armor to dedicate his life to spellcasting just cannot be done.
To get the corresponding set of abilities, they need to start Wizard and MC in Fighter. Which entails they were actually casters from the beginning.
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
A big thing people have to get used to, I think, is that it's fine if a choice you made 8 levels ago has stopped being useful- since retraining is so cheap and accessible. So it's fine, and indeed probably expected, to try out a feat for a few levels then jettison it when it stops being relevant.
Not sure if I'll ever get used to my character not only getting better in the use of weapons he never uses (in the example: the staff) but also getting better with it than with the weapon he fought with all the time. Makes no sense at all to me.
But I also never liked retraining too much. It's cool when it comes out of an ingame development, but if it's just done for mechanical reasons, I don't like it at all.
It seems to me that two of these three issues are most likely errata and/or over sites and only one is an actual change (Proficiency).
Are there any mild dislikes of how something has changed from 1e? I mean in a more general way such as (monsters using their own rules, modes of play (more specifically the new one exploration), changes in how BAB / multiple attacks work, determination of initiative, small PCs having minimal penalty's, bulk, etc, etc, etc.
A huge part of the general feat proficiency issue is that players are getting frustrated by the possibility that a choice made early in game play becomes outdated. It is far more of an optics issue than an actual game play issue, because I don't see a lot of wizards who spent one general feat on a weapon proficiency making that many attacks with it by level 11, when they have 6th level spells and are much better off carrying a staff in their hand than a weapon.A big thing people have to get used to, I think, is that it's fine if a choice you made 8 levels ago has stopped being useful- since retraining is so cheap and accessible. So it's fine, and indeed probably expected, to try out a feat for a few levels then jettison it when it stops being relevant.It is not only a feat stopping being relevant. It is a whole playstyle with corresponding choices in items, ability boosts (that you cannot retrain BTW) and skill increases.
It is great that things such as retraining and runes-swapping made it to the CRB. It definitely helps people who feel they made a bad choice at some point not be stuck with it forever. It does not mean though that it is now the expected way of evolving your character.
Great points made by DMW as usual. The only thing I would add is a pet peeve of mine : the impossibility of retraining Class.
The fighter who after a few levels discovers magic and abandon the ways of weapon and armor to dedicate his life to spellcasting just cannot be done.
To get the corresponding set of abilities, they need to start Wizard and MC in Fighter. Which entails they were actually casters from the beginning.
This has been an irk to me because people kept mentioning heavy armor becoming obsolete once unarmored hits Expert while heavy armor stays Trained, ignoring the fact that the character likely didn't build enough dex to make the unarmored expert get over the trained fullplate. It's a bit like a mass hysteria over an unlikely scenario.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's a bit like a mass hysteria over an unlikely scenario.
The first 3E character I ever played started out as a sorcerer and later became a cleric due to ingame events.
The very first PF NPC I tried to rebuild with 2nd ed. rules can't be done as originally envisioned, because she started out as a ranger historywise, but if I don't want to change her skillset too much, I need to rebuild her by startning out as a cleric and add later the ranger later on, thereby messing with the narrative.
No idea how unlikely it is in the big picture, but with my characters it has happened more than once.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
A big thing people have to get used to, I think, is that it's fine if a choice you made 8 levels ago has stopped being useful- since retraining is so cheap and accessible. So it's fine, and indeed probably expected, to try out a feat for a few levels then jettison it when it stops being relevant.Not sure if I'll ever get used to my character not only getting better in the use of weapons he never uses (in the example: the staff) but also getting better with it than with the weapon he fought with all the time. Makes no sense at all to me.
But I also never liked retraining too much. It's cool when it comes out of an ingame development, but if it's just done for mechanical reasons, I don't like it at all.
Agreed.
To me, retraining should be an outlet for a character to reimagine themselves when, say, new opportunities come their way or there's a dramatic shift in character development (goes evil, goes good, joins a faction, etc.)
"I want to retrain because my Feat is now a trap" should not be the expected usage IMO, so using it as justification for Feat Traps existing is not fair.
Plus as someone else mentioned, Classes and Ability Scores are pretty solid where they are.
You can't just swap those out and if a Feat that you can take this early dies at Level X those that built for it are going to be punished since retraining has some limits (someone may not have played the Class at all and started with another and MCD into what they wanted.
Delete em, or fix em. Either is fine, but leaving them in with no changes is only going to hurt new players (vets will just know they are traps).
This has been an irk to me because people kept mentioning heavy armor becoming obsolete once unarmored hits Expert while heavy armor stays Trained, ignoring the fact that the character likely didn't build enough dex to make the unarmored expert get over the trained fullplate. It's a bit like a mass hysteria over an unlikely scenario.
Come on man, we explained you the issues many times:
- You spent 3 feats (and 6 levels being worse) just to get a marginal +1 to AC via an item, which is a low reward
- It is objectively worse until you have Full Plate and then it barely edges a straight Dex investment
- The Dex build does not cost the Wizard anything because you get +2 X 4 ability scores at every 5th level which is plenty (especially if you don't want Str)
- The Str build still sucks in melee, because of the limitations on weapons, so you can't even take advantage of the Str to melee
- The Str build costs WAY more gold than the Dex build, which is effectively free due to the armor
- The Dex build works at level 1, Str does not work for 10 levels
The fact that you keep saying "PERSONAL PREFERENCE" does not change any of the above facts.
It isn't "3 feats vs. 4 ability scores!" it's "3 Feats vs. No investment at all" because you don't spend really anything due the amount of ability scores.
You get 5 total General Feats, you get +2 X 6 Free bonuses at level 1, and X4 +2 Free bonuses every 5 levels. It's not even close to the same comparison of resources.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Free and easy retraining is the way we build "trap protection" into the system.
Like the basic idea of avoiding "traps" in game design is- don't let people make choices that they come to regret and can't take back. There's no way to prevent someone from regretting a feat (a feat can be greatly useful in a context that just never came up), so we fix this by letting people take back their choices whenever they have spare time.
Sure, it's gamey... but so are hit points.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Free and easy retraining is the way we build "trap protection" into the system.
And that's fine.
Like the basic idea of avoiding "traps" in game design is- don't let people make choices that they come to regret and can't take back. There's no way to prevent someone from regretting a feat
"Regretting a feat" and "Regretting to read the fine print of Proficiency" do not amount to the same thing to me.
Retraining is not an excuse to introduce or allow Feat Traps to exist.
That's like saying installing a Fire Extinguisher means setting the place on fire is okay. It's still not okay to set the place on fire, and the Fire Extinguisher isn't going to fix every problem that comes up.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I also think the retraining rules have enough flavor guidelines built into them that you can usually find a pretty good justification in narrative I have one player who wanted to switch to an archery focus when we converted to the new system, so we said his downtime between chapters had been spent training with his old NPC buddy Shalelu Andosana. Felt pretty good in the scope of the story.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
A huge part of the general feat proficiency issue is that players are getting frustrated by the possibility that a choice made early in game play becomes outdated. It is far more of an optics issue than an actual game play issue, because I don't see a lot of wizards who spent one general feat on a weapon proficiency making that many attacks with it by level 11, when they have 6th level spells and are much better off carrying a staff in their hand than a weapon.A big thing people have to get used to, I think, is that it's fine if a choice you made 8 levels ago has stopped being useful- since retraining is so cheap and accessible. So it's fine, and indeed probably expected, to try out a feat for a few levels then jettison it when it stops being relevant.This seems to be a fallacy of sorts. In case of armor, it depends on your build. Not everyone wants to build a Dex character, and if they don't, they actually benefit from those armor proficiencies. Using the usual extreme example that's flying around. Wizard in Trained fullplate at 13th has the same AC as an Expert Unarmored wizard at +8AC. The only way the Expert will rise above the Trained, is if he pumps 20Dex, which is unavailable till 20th.
Then again, if you didn't build for 18 dex at 13th(in this scenario), then you lose nothing. And for some of us, 3 general feats for not being forced into dex is a fair trade-off, we get access to more specific magic armors and armor special materials.
As Cabbage said: It's fine.
Do you realize that your "extreme example" is actually the best example use of those feats? The more armor steps you are going up beyond what your class gives you the more useful it is.
A wizard who take one feat to get light armor proficiency is always better off not having bothered once they hit lvl 13. Regardless of what there dex.
A barbarian who gets heavy armor proficiency gets an equal AC with breastplate at level 13 even with dex of 10. It only gets comparatively worse at level 19.
Feats that are a good idea at low levels but end up making the character objectively worse at high levels are traps for new players who lack system mastery to avoid the issue.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
A big thing people have to get used to, I think, is that it's fine if a choice you made 8 levels ago has stopped being useful- since retraining is so cheap and accessible. So it's fine, and indeed probably expected, to try out a feat for a few levels then jettison it when it stops being relevant.
It's mechanically fine. It's absolutely ass from a roleplaying perspective if you build your character around using a specific type of weapon and 11 levels in you're better off retraining and forgetting it even exists.
Come on man, we explained you the issues many times:
- You spent 3 feats (and 6 levels being worse) just to get a marginal +1 to AC via an item, which is a low reward
- It is objectively worse until you have Full Plate and then it barely edges a straight Dex investment
- The Dex build does not cost the Wizard anything because you get +2 X 4 ability scores at every 5th level which is plenty (especially if you don't want Str)
- The Str build still sucks in melee, because of the limitations on weapons, so you can't even take advantage of the Str to melee
- The Str build costs WAY more gold than the Dex build, which is effectively free due to the armor
- The Dex build works at level 1, Str does not work for 10 levels
i mean...
if you want strength (for bulk and/or melee damage) then you'd be limiting yourself to only increasing 1 mental stat as well, since you're probably always increasing con and int.
you start with maximum 16 dex, 18 at level 5 and 20 at level 15, you'll for almost your entire career get a +2-1 to AC just from light armor, or you could invest the stats elsewhere,(assuming human) and get medium armor getting you +4 at 3rd level and +6 at 7th level.
so you'd actually get your AC up faster than if you stayed unarmored. even if you went non-human you'll still have decent AC and will still end up at +6 at 11th level or +2(prof increase) +4(dex) at 13th level
also assuming you didn't just go champion route and get +8 over trained at 14th.
assuming the general feat route, a dedication to fighter isn't beyond reason making you somewhat decent at melee for a while, as well as letting self buffs probably let you get a bit higher.
as for cost.. how much more expensive is it? most of the cost still comes out of the runes. 500gp for +1 resilient. that's a 30gp increase over explorer's clothing, less than 10%.
actually at least a dex wizard doesn't work at level 1, and the difference between a level 1 human wizard going for heavy armor and a level 1 wizard going for dex is 1AC, and then armor one will have more AC at 3rd level.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wizard in Trained fullplate at 13th has the same AC as an Expert Unarmored wizard at +8AC. The only way the Expert will rise above the Trained, is if he pumps 20Dex, which is unavailable till 20th.
When exactly does this STR-based Wizard kick in? You need three armor proficiency feats, so that would be, what? 5th level for humans, 11th for everybody else? Before that, the wizard with STR instead of DEX will be strictly worse when it comes to defences. Or they invest a bit in DEX, which brings some defences on par with the DEX wizard, but reduces other scores for skills & saves. If you actually want to forgo DEX completely, you also need STR 18 to avoid penalties later on.
The investment is three general feats, plus STR (so you do not even gain more ability boosts or whatever, because both will bring STR or DEX to 18). For that, you start slower, only to become the same later on? Not even that as your reflex save will be lower, even when bulwark actually applies; also you will be 5 feet slower. Not to mention equipment costs.
To summarize, you spend three feats to be a lot worse at the beginning, maybe have a few levels of enjoying a small advantage, then be a bit worse again for the rest of the game. That is without counting the fact that the DEX-based wizard can simply chose three other general feats (for example being faster, quicker or able to take a step into difficult terrain). Not huge, granted, but more and better than the STR wizard.
There might be a case for other builds spending feats to gain armor proficiency (although it seems to be suboptimal in the long run usually with the way classes handle proficiency), but spending three feats to be obviously worse off for the most part of 20 levels is simply not a fair trade-off.
And retraining is not useful, of course, because of the investment in ability scores.
Come on man, we explained you the issues many times:
- You spent 3 feats (and 6 levels being worse) just to get a marginal +1 to AC via an item, which is a low reward
- It is objectively worse until you have Full Plate and then it barely edges a straight Dex investment
- The Dex build does not cost the Wizard anything because you get +2 X 4 ability scores at every 5th level which is plenty (especially if you don't want Str)
- The Str build still sucks in melee, because of the limitations on weapons, so you can't even take advantage of the Str to melee
- The Str build costs WAY more gold than the Dex build, which is effectively free due to the armor
- The Dex build works at level 1, Str does not work for 10 levels
The fact that you keep saying "PERSONAL PREFERENCE" does not change any of the above facts.
It isn't "3 feats vs. 4 ability scores!" it's "3 Feats vs. No investment at all" because you don't spend really anything due the amount of ability scores.
You get 5 total General Feats, you get +2 X 6 Free bonuses at level 1, and X4 +2 Free bonuses every 5 levels. It's not even close to the same comparison of resources.
Come on though, I also explained my side, pretty well I think.
- We get so many feats all the time that 3 general feats aren't that high a resource. The fewer skills you have maxed out at certain levels, the less options you got. And the armored feats with retraining allow downscaling if needed, once you go for dex, you're locked into it AC wise.
- That's objectively not true and varies with choices. A human/half-elf/anyone with adopted ancestry can have armor proficiencies much sooner. Medium armor keeps up with unarmored(18dex) uptil the latter gains expert, which gives it +1AC. A real gamebreaker.
- The Dex build only gets above heavy armor if you get 20Dex, which won't happen on a caster till 15th level. Until then, they're equal. Trained Light/medium armor 1AC behind Expert unarmored(18). Trained Heavy matches Expert Unarmored until you get 20 Dexterity. 15th for caster. Five levels where you're 1-2AC behind someone who sunk 4 ability points into two points of dex.
- Club is 1d6, not the best, but not useless. Staff deals 1d4 or 1d8 if held twohanded. Since we can cast spells holding weapons now, that's not an issue. Casters have plenty of buffs to supplement such a playstyle, such as Enlarge, True Strike, Haste, Mirror Image, etc At seventh level, said wizard could grow Huge , have 15 reach and deal +4 damage on top of his str, which applies both to hit and to damage.
- Grabbing Crafting and smithing armor in downtime isn't the worst idea out there, and easily accessible to everyone now that we don't need to level each crafting trade separately.
- As you said, ability scores are a bit more abundant, it's fairly easy to raise both STR, INT and whatever else you might want. If you go for light or medium armor, you need less Str.
It's 3 general feats vs 4 ability scores if you want the Expert Unarmored to have more AC than trained Heavy armor. Otherwise they're both equal at +8. The unarmored lacks in special materials and specific armors as of now, it might change in the future, but a 12Dex/16str wizard in for example Orichalcum breastplate is 1AC behind his unarmored brethren, but has a fourth property rune.
Not sure what's wrong with personal preference, that's kind of what all posts are about. Numberwise, the only downside to armor is general feats, which are abundant depending on your choices. It really boils down to if you wanna build Dex build or not. They both got their own niche.
Plus if you go the champion road, or another armor archetype that might appear, you can retrain the general feats and instead spend class feats, which you get plenty of.
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
We get so many feats all the time that 3 general feats aren't that high a resource.
3 general feats is literally 60% of all the general feats you get.
ha i ninja'd both of you
When exactly does this STR-based Wizard kick in?
it will be better if human at 3rd(+4 versus +3 to AC), or even(both +4) if non-human at 7th.
I think 3 or so armor choices are "competitive"
complete unarmored, and focus dex, 1 feat into light armor only getting 16 dex and wearing studded leather (+3 to reflex and +5 to AC), and then 3 feats for effectively +1 to AC over the last option. until maybe after 15th level, but then you have to build for it from the start putting every possible chance into Dex even during character creation.
It's mechanically fine. It's absolutely ass from a roleplaying perspective if you build your character around using a specific type of weapon and 11 levels in you're better off retraining and forgetting it even exists.
If feel like the amount of "building your character around a specific weapon" you can do outside of a class which already advances proficiency in that weapon is fairly minimal. Like if you want your sorcerer to use a Halberd, what feats are you taking in the first 10 levels to be good at Halberding, other than one feat for proficiency?
It's a lot harder to pigeonhole your character into "I'm only really good with one weapon" this time around.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
The problem with your entire premise is that you are garbage worse until you get Full Plate and for some reason you think the Dex Wizard has "less Ability Scores" when the Dex Wizard doesn't even need Str.
So literally, you traded your ability score increases from Dex to Str, spent a bunch more gold on Heavy Armor, spent 3 General Feats, and spent several levels (almost half your life span if not Human) being sub-par.
Forgive me for not agreeing that it's "Objectionably better"
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
Like if you want your sorcerer to use a Halberd, what feats are you taking in the first 10 levels to be good at Halberding, other than one feat for proficiency?
What's wrong with proficiency? If someone's character concept is based around the idea of being a sorcerer with a halberd, that's really all you need at least to start.
Until level 11, when suddenly you need two class feats to do what one general feat was doing just fine up until then.
The problem with your entire premise is that you are garbage worse until you get Full Plate and for some reason you think the Dex Wizard has "less Ability Scores" when the Dex Wizard doesn't even need Str.
So literally, you traded your ability score increases from Dex to Str, spent a bunch more gold on Heavy Armor, spent 3 General Feats, and spent several levels (almost half your life span if not Human) being sub-par.
Forgive me for not agreeing that it's "Objectionably better"
garbage worse with higher AC at most levels?
like you can wear light and medium armor on your way to heavy, especially since you can move runes...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
garbage worse with higher AC at most levels?
like you can wear light and medium armor on your way to heavy, especially since you can move runes...
Please demonstrate this Higher AC with a full Str Wizard at level 1 vs. Dex Wizard
Or with 3rd, 7th.
I'll wait.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
garbage worse with higher AC at most levels?
like you can wear light and medium armor on your way to heavy, especially since you can move runes...
Please demonstrate this Higher AC with a full Str Wizard at level 1 vs. Dex Wizard
Or with 3rd, 7th.
I'll wait.
You beat me to it... I'm curious as well.
garbage worse with higher AC at most levels?
like you can wear light and medium armor on your way to heavy, especially since you can move runes...
Please demonstrate this Higher AC with a full Str Wizard at level 1 vs. Dex Wizard
Or with 3rd, 7th.
I'll wait.
human wizard max dex is 16 = (+3)
Human wizard armored spends heritage for armor = (+2)3rd
human wizard max dex is 16 = (+3)
Human wizard armored spends general for armor = (+4)
7th
human wizard max dex is 18 = (+4)
Human wizard armored spends general for armor = (+6)
basically, as far as i can tell, dex is better 1-2 and 15-20 (8 levels total)
armor is better or equal at 3-14 (12 levels)
if you instead go champion, level 2 you probably have +5 to AC from armor or +3 from dex, and level 14 becomes expert and carries you higher than dex. (oh and this works for all races)
Until level 11, when suddenly you need two class feats to do what one general feat was doing just fine up until then.
I think the big disconnect here is that even if they are only trained, a sorcerer is much better off with a martial weapon and armor than they were last go around.
If someone in PF1 wanted to play a sorcerer with a halberd who wears chain mail, what exactly would you tell them? Some things are just going to work better than other things (e.g. a fighter is better off with a great, bastard, or long sword than they are with a clan dagger), but the things which work less well are uniformly better now.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We get so many feats all the time that 3 general feats aren't that high a resource.3 general feats is literally 60% of all the general feats you get.
There's 18 purely General feats, if you use these for Skill feats, you're degrading allegedly valuable resource into a more abundant one(even wizard gets 10 skill feats).
1 General feat is locked behind con 14
1 General feat is locked behind dex 14
1 General feat is locked behind cha 16
1 General feat is locked behind expert in lore
1 general feat is locked behind master perception
2 general feat are locked legendary skills
This leaves us 12 General feats left, 10 if we remove proficiency feats.
More if we're okay with downgrading 5 of a resource into another we get 10 of.
I personally think it's a waste since casters don't get many skills, and you don't qualify for a lot of skill feats until you get expert/master in a skill. A sorcerer for example won't likely have 5 skills at expert or master, so his skill feat choices are rather limited. Rogue on the other hand gets so many skill feats and increases it's not even a worry.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
garbage worse with higher AC at most levels?
like you can wear light and medium armor on your way to heavy, especially since you can move runes...
Please demonstrate this Higher AC with a full Str Wizard at level 1 vs. Dex Wizard
Or with 3rd, 7th.
I'll wait.
human wizard max dex is 16 = (+3)
Human wizard armored spends heritage for armor = (+2)3rd
human wizard max dex is 16 = (+3)
Human wizard armored spends general for armor = (+4)7th
human wizard max dex is 18 = (+4)
Human wizard armored spends general for armor = (+6)
Ah, so HUMAN wizard was the critical thing and NOT wizards in general... So it ties at 7th for every other wizard that doesn't use a heritage feat for armor? That seems a but disingenuous IMO.
I think general feats are supposed to be at a level where you would consider taking an extra skill feat instead of a general, non-skill feat.
Ah, so HUMAN wizard was the critical thing and NOT wizards in general... So it ties at 7th for every other wizard that doesn't use a heritage feat for armor? That seems a but disingenuous IMO.garbage worse with higher AC at most levels?
like you can wear light and medium armor on your way to heavy, especially since you can move runes...
Please demonstrate this Higher AC with a full Str Wizard at level 1 vs. Dex Wizard
Or with 3rd, 7th.
I'll wait.
human wizard max dex is 16 = (+3)
Human wizard armored spends heritage for armor = (+2)3rd
human wizard max dex is 16 = (+3)
Human wizard armored spends general for armor = (+4)7th
human wizard max dex is 18 = (+4)
Human wizard armored spends general for armor = (+6)
sure for non human
first level
dex +3
str +1 buy a breastplate for ultimately 2 less AC or same as a 12 dex wizard, obviously this gets worse as you level,
but then third
dex +3
str studded leather +2
5th
dex +4
studded leather +2
7th
Dex +4
str breastplate +4
11th level
Dex +4
str Fullplate +6
13th
Dex +6
str Fullplate +6
15th
dex +7
str fullplate +6
if you go champion it's
dex +3
buy splintmail +2
2nd level
dex +3
str +5
eventually ~5th at latest
dex +4
str +6
13
dex +6
str +6
14
dex +6
str +8
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think general feats are supposed to be at a level where you would consider taking an extra skill feat instead of a general, non-skill feat.
Are you trying to argue that Armor/Weapon Proficiency that scales with base Class would be a "must" pick over any Skill Feat?
Because I'll contest that all day. Shield Block and those feats would be competing, and not gonna lie that's a tough competition even if it were buffed.
Human wizard armored spends heritage for armor = (+2)
How convenient that you didn't stick to the "3 General Feats" and instead chose an Ancestry Heritage that made it seem less terrible.
If you're not going to have a good faith discussion, why even bother.
It's still not "objectively better" and once again this is from huge investment to the character.
Like if you want your sorcerer to use a Halberd, what feats are you taking in the first 10 levels to be good at Halberding, other than one feat for proficiency?What's wrong with proficiency? If someone's character concept is based around the idea of being a sorcerer with a halberd, that's really all you need at least to start.
Until level 11, when suddenly you need two class feats to do what one general feat was doing just fine up until then.
What is the sorcerer doing with the Halberd? If you are expecting to mix it up with melee and spell casting than it sounds like your character concept is a multi-class character. What roleplaying game lets you effectively use a weapon balanced for all levels of play with only one general feat? Certainly not PF1, a sorcerer with a Halberd is definitely trash with that halberd by level 11, even dropping feats on it like weapon focus.
It seems like the real frustration here is that it feels like the single classed sorcerer is not bad with simple weapons because they have the expert proficiency with them, so why shouldn't they be able to use a martial weapon instead? The answer is they can, but it probably takes multi-classing not a general feat to do so at high levels. The fact that these bumps to expert are built into MC feat trees is a great indication that General feats were never expected to be the level 1 to 20 fix for character concepts that blended class disciplines.
Which leads back to the issue that has so many people calling for fix them or lose them. What is the value of getting trained in something that feels essential to character identity if it can never advance to expert (the minimum value for adequacy at higher levels)? Well in armor, it is literally just about the AC number, and what attributes you invested to get it there, so as long as the numbers are within 2 to 4 of each other, any build is playable, if undesirable. I am strongly expecting archetypes that open armor proficiency up a little more within the next major rule book so the Champions only thing will be an issue of the past.
I still think a third option exists of General feats serving as stepping stones into Archetypes that require trained proficiency, so that the general feats can stay as they are with out being a complete trap, but if the archetypes do grant the proficiency instead of requiring it, then hopefully there are good GM resources to make sure new GMs explain to players the limitations on building a character concept on general feats rather than through class and archetype.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the big disconnect here is that even if they are only trained, a sorcerer is much better off with a martial weapon and armor than they were last go around.
Not sure I agree with that. A level 11 sorcerer going from a longspear to a halberd is trading one general feat for +1 damage and -2 to hit, or two class feats for +1 damage. That +1 scales with runes of course, but that's still a pretty big cost for a fairly small damage increase.
At level 13 the 'just trained' sorcerer is at -2 to hit and -1 to damage before runes (though the runes are still better than the longspear's), so that's even worse.
If someone in PF1 wanted to play a sorcerer with a halberd who wears chain mail, what exactly would you tell them?
That PF1 kinda sucks at doing a lot of weird things like that, but PF2 is supposed to not have to deal with 3.5's baggage so it should make things better and surely no one is going to try to point to PF1's many shortcomings as some weird defense of PF2's issues.
The fact that these bumps to expert are built into MC feat trees is a great indication that General feats were never expected to be the level 1 to 20 fix for character concepts that blended class disciplines.
I get that's Paizo's assertion here, I'm just questioning whether or not it's the right one. What, intrinsically, makes one general feat an acceptable cost at level 9 or 10 or 3 or 5, but at level 12 that same parity is worth more than twice as much?
We keep talking about how much these things are 'worth' as if they're incontrovertible truths, but I'm not sure that things actually play out that way in practice.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think general feats are supposed to be at a level where you would consider taking an extra skill feat instead of a general, non-skill feat.
There are also feats like Ancestral Paragon, Untrained Improvisation, shield block, Incredible Initiative, Fleet, ect that are fine picks well past the level you can first take them.
Now narrative changed to level 1, and not that heavy armor becomes "obsolete" at 13th when Expert kicks in on unarmored as been the typical argument and woes on the forum?
I think it's to show that it's obsolete for lots of levels before 13...
Human wizard armored spends heritage for armor = (+2)How convenient that you didn't stick to the "3 General Feats" and instead chose an Ancestry Heritage that made it seem less terrible.
If you're not going to have a good faith discussion, why even bother.
It's still not "objectively better" and once again this is from huge investment to the character.
wow that's some hyperbole
I mean, the champion one is, also, I have been arguing in good faith, as In every post that i claimed this worked, I did bring up human.
also as you can see i did stat out the non-human path above and it's not that bad, especially if you go champion(and breaking your anathema or whatever doesn't really remove your proficiencies). in fact there's very little reason before 15th level to NOT get at least light armor.
also, I guess for full clarity on my position, most general feats suck, at least compared to +2 to AC.
my conclusion after doing all this, is if you want AC on a wizard, light armor with 16 dex is the best probably, but you can get +1 AC for 2 extra general feats eventually, and this is somewhat worth it since it's the highest your AC can go without using class feats.
if you really want AC go champion dedication, and be a human or half-elf if you want a dedication other than champion.
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
Man, I get seriously squicked out by comments like:
"Why is the wizard even using it?"
"What is the sorcerer even doing with a halberd?"
"Just retrain if you don't like it."
It gives me nauseating flashbacks to when Diablo 3 came out.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Reposting for clarity and since it has been brought up that picking ancestry that helps a build a no-no, because strength is best measured in a vacuum? If not early level AC, Armor proficiency at least wins on Melee and options.
Wizard example:
Unarmored/Dexterity: From 1 to 20th, only armor available as of now is clothing, with no specific armors or materials. No cost.
1-12: 12-18 Dex4(3) +2prof = +6AC(5), clothing only. (Dex capped at 16 until 5th level)
13-14: 12-18 Dex4 +4prof = +8AC, clothing only.
15-20: 12-20 Dex5 +4prof = +9AC, clothing only. Cost 4 ability points for 18-20 dex.
1-15th: Wizard has +4 to hit with crossbows, no finesse weapons proficiencies besides Unarmed.
Wizard with intent of going fullplate:
1-2: 10 dex0 +2prof = +2AC, clothing only
3-6: 10 dex0 +2prof +2Armor = +2AC, access to 7 special materials, 1 specific magic armor
7-10: 10 dex0 +2prof +4Armor = +6AC, access to 6 special materials, 4 specific magic armors
11-20: 10 dex0 +2prof +6Armor = +8AC, access to 6 special materials, 12 specific magic armors
1-15th: Wizard has +4 to hit and to damage with club, dagger and staff as well as unarmed attacks.
Is this better?
Early dex wins. Medium it wins only in AC and not in options. Late it wins by a whole +1AC.
The specific armors in light, medium and heavy will be added at a much higher rate than unarmored armors, that I guarantee.
If General Feats are a valuable resource because you get 5 of them, then Ability boosts are even more so because you get 4 and you can't retrain them. At least the STR has an option to retrain into champion MCD at 2-14 for 2 class feats, with more archetype options coming, and regains 3 general feats. Dex is a choice made for life with less options.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
remember it's only +3 until 5th level for unarmored.
edit:
oh and i've change my opinion that 16 dex on path to full plate is worth it since I think +3 to reflex and +1 ac is worth 2 general feats eventually.
remember it's only +3 until 5th level for unarmored.
Edited that in, thanks. I'm still not used to statting out level 1s. I do love the options though.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is this better?
Early dex wins. Medium it wins only in AC and not in options. Late it wins by a whole +1AC.
Ah so there we have it.
Not objectively better. Period.
The specific armors in light, medium and heavy will be added at a much higher rate than unarmored armors, that I guarantee.
Which changes nothing.
If General Feats are a valuable resource because you get 5 of them, then Ability boosts are even more so because you get 4
No. You get 4 X 4. So 16. Nice effort though.
you can't retrain them.
So a character that went 18 Str just to use Heavy Armor now can't even retrain his Str to Dex when he decides not to use Heavy armor at level 11 due to increases to Expert on Unarmored
Sounds like a counter point to your argument, not a positive.
The Dex wizard is never going to "regret" having better reflex saves, initiatives on stealth, higher rolls on Stealth, Acrobatics, or Thievery and the AC.
The Str wizard will.
At least the STR has an option to retrain into champion MCD at 2-14 for 2 class feats, with more archetype options coming, and regains 3 general feats. Dex is a choice made for life with less options.
Oh right! Now the Wizard has to be "Mr. Knight in Shining faker" just to carry on the concept.
remember it's only +3 until 5th level for unarmored.
edit:
oh and i've change my opinion that 16 dex on path to full plate is worth it since I think +3 to reflex and +1 ac is worth 2 general feats eventually.
It's not "+3 to reflex saves" it's -1 to Reflex compared to Dex.
And remember, one general Feat gives you +2 to a Save of your choice.
So it's quite literally worse.
I guess that's checkmate folks. Full Plate Wizards win the game.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Reposting for clarity and since it has been brought up that picking ancestry that helps a build a no-no
It's not a no-no, but it something that should be said upfront: when you say something about WIZARDS, but in actuality mean HUMAN wizards it looks like bait and switch. SO if making it look good hinges on it being human, say human at the start. You are the one that made it a vacuum: a human wizard 'vacuum'.
champion MCD
You're going to find lots of people that aren't going to want to take this for the requirements or dm that have issues with it if you ignore the requirements. If you're already playing an alignment and outlook of a 'paladin' then you're fine, but if not it's not a very good fit.
No. You get 4 X 4. So 16. Nice effort though.
It's not "+3 to reflex saves" it's -1 to Reflex compared to Dex.
you can only apply 1 ability boost to any given ability score once per time you acquire boosts.
your armor doesn't limit your dex applying to dex saves only AC, so a 16 dex full plate wearer has +6 to reflex from dex and full plate. remember i said i think 16 dex -> full plate is actually decently worth it.
like I think there's basically 3 equatable options currently.
pure dex, which i think is the worst but also most free
light armor which uses 1 general feat and lets you get +5 to ac from 3rd level onward
and human heavy armor which lets you get good armor fairly quickly. if you want, you cna also give him 16 dex for decent dex saves and higher AC.
oh and separately champion which is already the best possible option for a wizard to get AC.
Is this better?
Early dex wins. Medium it wins only in AC and not in options. Late it wins by a whole +1AC.Ah so there we have it.
Not objectively better. Period.
The specific armors in light, medium and heavy will be added at a much higher rate than unarmored armors, that I guarantee.Which changes nothing.
If General Feats are a valuable resource because you get 5 of them, then Ability boosts are even more so because you get 4No. You get 4 X 4. So 16. Nice effort though.
you can't retrain them.So a character that went 18 Str just to use Heavy Armor now can't even retrain his Str to Dex when he decides not to use Heavy armor at level 11 due to increases to Expert on Unarmored
Sounds like a counter point to your argument, not a positive.
The Dex wizard is never going to "regret" having better reflex saves, initiatives on stealth, higher rolls on Stealth, Acrobatics, or Thievery and the AC.
The Str wizard will.
At least the STR has an option to retrain into champion MCD at 2-14 for 2 class feats, with more archetype options coming, and regains 3 general feats. Dex is a choice made for life with less options.Oh right! Now the Wizard has to be "Mr. Knight in Shining faker" just to carry on the concept.
remember it's only +3 until 5th level for unarmored.
edit:
oh and i've change my opinion that 16 dex on path to full plate is worth it since I think +3 to reflex and +1 ac is worth 2 general feats eventually.
It's not "+3 to reflex saves" it's -1 to Reflex compared to Dex.
And remember, one general Feat gives you +2 to a Save of your choice.
So it's quite literally worse.
I guess that's checkmate folks. Full Plate Wizards win the game.
Have what? I have always talked about heavy armor not being useless at after 13th like the hypebole said it was. I didn't argue that heavy plate was better lower level, I in fact said dex wins early. There we have it. It wins early, and only outdoes Fullplate at 15th if you put every point into Dex. 4 boosts, 5 general feats, it's fine if you disagree. I get that it might be weird leaving that ten year meta of dex casters and nothing else but some people might enjoy giving up three general feats which aren't worth that much anymore to some people.
Dex is rigid and has no options from level 1 to 20. There we have it. If you don't want to use GP on options and armor, then dex is really amazing. That +1AC and +2 Reflex at 15th really seals the deal, and those 4 points couldn't serve better by giving you +2 will/perception via Wisdom, +2 fortitude/hp via constitution, +2 to social checks via Charisma. Reflex is what matters. 3 feats isn't worth access to every magic armor and special material you stumble upon at all. Better use them on Toughness/diehard/fast recovery to survive that tight math.
I think it's safe to say agree to disagree.
your armor doesn't limit your dex applying to dex saves only AC, so a 16 dex full plate wearer has +6 to reflex from dex and full plate. remember i said i think 16 dex -> full plate is actually decently worth it.
Sadly the wording on Bulwark is specific about this. "you add a +3 modifier instead of your Dexterity modifier."
Sadly the wording on Bulwark is specific about this. "you add a +3 modifier instead of your Dexterity modifier."
aw, I totally should have check bulwark.
now it's just basically get 16 dex for a less bumpy road. which still MIGHT be worth it, it'll pinge on whether or not i need stats elsewhere I suppose.
Sadly the wording on Bulwark is specific about this. "you add a +3 modifier instead of your Dexterity modifier."aw, I totally should have check bulwark.
now it's just basically get 16 dex for a less bumpy road. which still MIGHT be worth it, it'll pinge on whether or not i need stats elsewhere I suppose.
Personally I went with spending 2 class feats and one ancestry feat to get a half-elf wizard with 4 level 1 wizard feats, and at 14th he'll have expert in all martial weapons, all simple weapons, all armors, and trained in all advanced weapons.
At 14th, his base AC from fullplate+prof can be either +8 or +10 depending on if I want to use 3 general feats or 2 class+1ancestry feats. Options are nice if you ask me. Plus with universalist and hand of the apprentice, he can yeet a Halberd 500ft with no penalties.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think we can all agree that the player who went "Hey I can play a Wizard in Heavy Armor" and invested their stat boosts in STR rather than DEX and their feats in Heavy Armor ends up in more dire straits than the one who went the more usual road of Wizard in robes. And not even retraining or runes-swapping will help them get out of this self-inflicted trap.
Hence Heavy Armor is a trap option for the Wizard.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
But again, I will offer that "Wizard in heavy armor" is better supported by an Arcane Thesis or Archetype than it is by powering up that general feat.
I mean, most notable Wizards have not worn heavy armor throughout the history of Golarion (e.g. Nex, Geb, all the Runelords, the Old Mage Jatembe, etc.) So if there are a number of Wizards who think "being strong and wearing armor is the thing to do" there's probably some tradition there worth exploring.