| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One of the issues I'm running into is that wisdom means more than one thing. There's the game mechanical notion of "does well on will saves, perception checks, religion, nature, etc." but there's also the common-language notion of "a wise person" as someone who has common sense, makes measured decisions, possesses self-awareness, is calm under pressure, etc.
What I want to play is an investigator who makes rash decisions, has severe gaps in his knowledge but still insists he's right, is a coward, and doesn't really understand a lot of basic things- all of this screams "low wisdom" but I still want this person to still be observant and effective at "investigating".
So if I wanted to play a Pathfinder version of, say, Shawn Spencer (from Psych; who is a low wis investigator if there ever was one), how do I make this character effective?
Is this just a matter of "you put Wis at 14 or 16 because you need to, and just roleplay a less wise person?" Because that doesn't really seem satisfying.
Basically. Wisdom is too important to pass up. It powers your combat features, but it also runs some of the most important checks in the game and is the default ability score for initiative and powers will saves.
The attribute is overloaded as hell in general and even moreso if you're an Investigator (and even moreso than that if you're an Empiricist or Forensic Scientist).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In the original playtest we identified that Dexterity is pretty obligatory to the monk, but "dextrous" was not part-and-parcel to all concepts best represented by the monk class. As a result we got Mountain Stance as a solution to enable low-dex monks.
Should something similar be done to make low-wis investigators viable? It seems like we should never *require* a class to be good in a specific stat which is not their primary stat.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How good is a low CON Barbarian in PF2?
If by low you mean 10-12, then very good. They don't really need it for HP, get solid (if less absurd) Fort without it, and can get it to 14-16 to take minimal advantage of their few Con based features by the time those features matter. It's not quite optimal, but it's close enough to optimal to be very viable.
If Wis was in the same boat for Investigator Con is for the Barbarian, I think most of us would be quite satisfied.
Sadly, that is not the case at the moment, though a single simple change would probably allow that (making Study Suspect not involve Wis). It's strongly arguable that with that particular change, maxed Proficiency in Perception is enough for them to get by with the same degree of Wis Barbarians take in Con (ie: it's something you want, but not something you burningly need).
This is slightly hampered by the fact that Investigators desperately need Dex even with this change, and would still have little need for Int, but it would at least make Wis less absolutely essential.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do you have any actual game data that supports this?
Sure. Lots of people have commented on playing Barbarians with less than maxed Con. Seems to work out fine.
Did you watch the Twitch scenario where the folks at Paizo played characters created by committee? The Con 12 Barbarian in that was extremely effective, and not just compared to the other characters.
But really, just looking at the math would tell you all this. Playtest data is great, but the way the Class works mathematically is also relevant to look at.
Played a short one shot as a 12 wis Investigator at level 3 and it was pretty abysmal. Even against enemies the GM described as weak I was struggling to make my study suspect checks.
I crit once when I rolled a natural 20 against an orc, but I still did the least damage out of anyone that round.
I even rolled a 15 against the miniboss at the end of the session and failed.
I ended up going last nearly every fight too, though that didn't end up feeling as bad as it could have.
My will saves felt, uh, acceptable though! so I guess I had that going for me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A 16 in a stat which is not your primary class stat should not be necessary for playing that class.
It can be *a* way to make the class work, but requiring it is overly limiting in terms of "what concepts does the class support."