1st impressions for Investigator (general and specific)


Investigator Playtest


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Overall, I love this Investigator.
While Perception and Recall Knowledge is it's bread and butter in many ways, the real "investigation" stuff that hinges on game style mostly seems optional (e.g. Reconstruct the Scene), so if that's not your type of game you can focus on stuff that will be more useful in standard adventure i.e. mostly hack & slash and not necessarily big mysteries to track down. At a basic level, Studied Strike damage stays close to Rogue Sneak Attack: Actually faster progression by 1d6 and not FF dependant, but countered by not able to max attack stat and normally 1 action to designate target not already investigated... similar to Ranger Hunt Prey but more bonus dice. But if you don't build as much around personal combat, you can still be effective party member, and synergy with Wizard Multiclass seems a pretty clear niche/build as well. I think the general structure and approach is great, it's just a matter of tweaking a few interactions and fleshing out more options.

Anyhow, into the weeds...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------

METHODOLOGIES:

Empiricism's Observe Expeditiously seems like it could extend to allowing Free Action Recall Knowledge, not just Perception/Sense Motive?
Known Weakness(1) grants Recall Knowledge on top of Study, but Empiricism's Observe Expeditiously only once per 10 minutes anyways.

Instead of just Trained Skill, what if it increased Trained skill to Expert AND/OR lowered Skill Feat and Proficiency Level requirement?
So you can also gain Master and Legendary early, and their Feats. That is normally Master=7, Legend=15, but dropping by 3 seems workable...?

Quote:

-> related to that, skipping to some high level Feats which directly relate with that change...

Deductive Improvisation(11) and Master Detective(19) allow skill usages normally requiring +1 higher skill proficiency...
What if they also lowered Skill Feat Proficiency and Level PreReq to allow taking Skill Feats early? (by 3 levels like Empiricism above?)
If Empirism granted early proficiency increase, not phrasing Level PreReq lowering to "stack" would prevent +2 proficiency Feat access.
These Feats would still have value for Empiricism Investigator since Empiricism only increases one skill proficiency (with bonus, unlike these Feats)
Probably would want to clarify these don't stack with Feats which allow higher proficiency usages, such as the Feat Trap Finder(2).

.

Forensic Medicine seems like it could increase Medicine proficiency above normal limit.
Doing that I might specify bonus healing on Battle Medicine isn't multiplied on Crit. (not sure of RAW/intent)

More generally, I feel like each Methodology could use more unique Class Feats exclusive to them.
I expect you already plan more Investigator Feats in APG (to match total # of Core Classes including CRB+APG combined), but having more Methodology specific Feats seems worthy goal IMHO... Not that more general Investigator Feats aren't good TOO.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------

CLASS FEATS:

Flexible Studies(1) should grant ANY skill proficiency increase IMHO (to Trained/Expert/Master/Legendary, using normal limits 7=Master,15=Legendary).
As is, it seems to have very little long term value, considering Keen Recollection(3) gives +Level to Untrained and Deductive Improvisation(11) allows checks requiring +1 proficiency. Keen Recollection only applies to Recall Knowledge not ALL Skill Usages, but I think better long term scaling is good idea, and after all it's not qualifying for taking any Feats either. It has pretty good competition in noncombat skill area at Level 1 (Human) and Level 2 also having Combat Clue so I wouldn't worry too much about a floating skill proficiency increase that is within normal level limits.

On the Scene(1) is great, but one nuance is what is "obvious"? Particularly, plenty of stuff has Perception check to notice it.
So if Investigator FAIL such a check, should they then get a "hunch" that there is something "out of the ordinary"?
That is such a routine scenario that I think the wording should more directly handle it... probably not much of an addition.

Underworld Investigator(1) has similar issue re: "on Thievery checks to investigate the subject (such as checks to Steal a clue from a suspect or Pick a Lock to open a safe with damning documents)". As phrased, that weirdly depends on knowing something is a clue, or knowing the contents of a safe. I guess the player doesn't have to worry about that, as GM can handle giving out the bonus or not (secretly), but may not be worth the bother just to prevent using the bonus for some "non qualifying" usages of Thievery...? After all, maybe you're not even really playing a mystery investigation campaign.

Combat Clue(2) wording and structure is really confusing:
Changing trigger and effects of Clue In, despite not hinging on investigation subject (or Take the Case).
I would say just make it a unique Reaction that just references Study Subject, not bring in Clue In just to change it's mechanics.
This may change how other interacting Feats are phrased, which I address as they come up.

Detective's Will(4) has wierd interaction with Combat Clue in the exact area I suggested to change that Feat, but not sure what intent is:
Currently (RAW) it seems using Combat Clue with non-investigated subject target would grant Will Save bonus to ally, but not yourself.
If granting Will Save from Study Subject VS non-investigated subject is desirable/intended, it seems reasonable to also allow it for yourself. (?)
If desired to work with non-investigated subject for both you and allies, Detective's Will should say allow either Take the Case or Study Subject:
-> "investigated or studied subject"?
If Combat Clue is changed per my suggestion, ally would not gain Will Save vs non-investigated subjects, identically to the Investigator currently.

Accurate Study(6) (...actually implications for Combat Clue(2)...)
I think by RAW the +2 doesn't carry over to ally with Combat Clue, which specifies "the +1 circumstance bonus of Study Subject".
If Study Subject bonus modifications don't apply, it seems clearer for Combat Clue to say "+1 circumstance bonus to attacks", i.e. drop the "of Study Subject".
...But maybe the +2 bonus modification IS intended to carry over???

Clue Them All In(8) (...actually implication of proposed Combat Clue(2) change...)
With suggested changes to Combat Clue, things like this should also specify "or <Combat Clue Reaction>" if intended to work with Combat Clue.

Trickster's Ace(18)
I feel like this should have Requirement of ability to cast spells of a given Tradition, to be something for those who delved into spellcasting rather than a freebie for all. EDIT: I know Rogue already has this, but Rogue also has plenty of magical stuff (or anti-magic or monk-crazy stuff) whether or not they have spellcasting... but Investigator seems inherently unmagical AFAIK, so some restriction seems reasonable. I almost want to say just remove it completely, but if they HAVE developed spellcasting somehow I am OK with them using it appropriately to that tradition. (I also worry about Investigator stepping on Rogue's toes too much)
In same vein, it could be reasonable to require the spell be no more than 1 spell level higher than the spell(s) you can cast, although Heightened up to 1/2 class level like Focus spell (just restricting scope for people with only 1st level Ancestry spell, still leaving solid powerful usages). Restriction to Common spells or Uncommon/Rare spells you have Learned seems reasonable (not needing to currently have in Repertoire/Spellbook/etc, just Learned), although that's reasonable for Rogue also. Not really sure about working with 10 minute casting time spells when real Contingency is just 3 action casting spells, but I feel like I'm already nerfing it hard, so...

Infallible Knowledge(20) ...This is a bit "meta"...
Since you effectively can't CritFail and you recognize the fake info from Dubious Knowledge on "effective" (upgraded) Fails, I'm not really sure what is reason for making the checks no longer Secret. It seems entirely "metagaming" in distinguishing a Dubious Knowledge "effective" Fail from "effective" Success...? Maybe that could be "useful" but doesn't really seem fun addition to game, IMHO, since it's seemingly not "knowing your knowledge is infallible" so much as metagaming about what check DC is, i.e. "hm, interesting tuft of fur I found at the crime scene" -> Recall Knowledge Check -> "wow, boring info but that must be crazy high Level... I THINK WE FOUND OUR BBEG, FELLAZ!!!"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------

SKILL FEATS

Urban Pursuit(2) ...Great, but it raises as many questions as it answers about how it works. Since it is in substance distinct from real Tracking, I think guidelines on how to determine DC are reasonable, with elapsed time since target was there more important. Target Stealth or Disguise could also be potential baselines before Time Elapsed or other conditions (rain, mud, fog), since ultimately you are relying on not only your own Perceptions and conversation, but the "crowds and passerby's" perceptions which are impacted by those factors.

Underground Network(2) ...perhaps should be "doesn’t draw as much PUBLIC attention as Gathering Information in public might" since it would logically draw the same (or more) amount of attention of the members/leaders of the "Underground Network" (not just the specific person you might speak to, otherwise you don't need to use this Feat if you can just contact one specific person without alerting other members of group).

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Advanced Player’s Guide Playtest / Investigator Playtest / 1st impressions for Investigator (general and specific) All Messageboards
Recent threads in Investigator Playtest