Why are we repeating the Rogue's weapons restrictions?


Investigator Playtest


5 people marked this as a favorite.

In P1E, a Rogue started out proficient in certain weapons and not others, but all it took was a weapon proficiency feat to have a primarily "skillsy" character who could branch outside of the stock, expected rogue weapons (spiked chains, maces, warhammers, greatswords, halberds, whatever-your-creative-self-conceives-of). Despite my efforts, the P2E Rogue is the "skillsy" class that somehow and from out of left field also only gets to use his class features with a hyper-specific set of weapons. Even using something like the Fighter dedication feats doesn't fix this because you still have class features you can't trade away that only work with weapons that you have what is somehow the unmitigated gall to not use.

Fine. What's done is done. Onto the Rogue 2.0 (called the Investigator). Maybe we can express "character with lots of skills that isn't hyper limited in his weapon choice just due to being so skillsy".

Except no. Once again, "Oh, you want your character to be skillsy? Obviously, that means you want him to use a dagger or a rapier. You didn't say a word to indicate it; I can just make that prediction, anyway" rears its ugly head. Why? Why does "being skillsy" get conflated with "so of course I don't want to be using a polearm"?

Liberty's Edge

6 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, I'm in general agreement. There should at the very least be a Ruffian equivalent that allows for being Str based and using a longspear.


Yes, but how can you take notes if both hands are holding a weapon? With one hand free, you can nail the notepad to the back of the Fighter, and still write stuff down.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Yeah, I'm in general agreement. There should at the very least be a Ruffian equivalent that allows for being Str based and using a longspear.

Was that sarcasm? Because that's exactly how it works now.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

For better or for worse, Paizo seems really afraid of people coloring outside the lines this edition and has generally made it either prohibitively expensive or impossible to do so as much as possible.

Being limited to agile and finesse weapons feels especially frustrating on an Investigator though, since the Investigator combat mechanic doesn't really synergize at all with the agile property.

Strill wrote:
Was that sarcasm? Because that's exactly how it works now.

No it doesn't. OP is complaining about investigators, who have nothing like the Ruffian. So DMW is saying that they agree and think Investigators should have an option like the Ruffian.

Although personally I'd go a step further than that and just open it up entirely. It's not like an Investigator with a Longsword is going to be anything spectacular anyways.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Strill wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Yeah, I'm in general agreement. There should at the very least be a Ruffian equivalent that allows for being Str based and using a longspear.
Was that sarcasm? Because that's exactly how it works now.

For Investigator? No, it doesn't. You can't use Studied Strike with anything except Agile or Finesse weapons, and getting Medium Armor Proficiency so you can favor Str over Dex is an unavailable option in-Class.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Rogue has a notable damage boost that it can use (potentially) on every Strike, so it makes sense to limit the weapons that can do that.
The closest equivalent, the Precision Ranger, only gets it once/round while the Barbarian is taking a defensive penalty and gets penalized if it uses an Agile weapon (hindering multiple Strikes).
So that all seems like there's balance intrinsic to the system.

Toss in Investigator and it gets messy because their setup requires enough actions to make multiple uses difficult. And there's a failure chance.
So they should do more than a Precision Ranger (or the same, but get the same certainty) or they should match Sneak Attack...making the class superfluous and better as a Racket.

The Investigator's bonus damage should account for having a lesser weapon (like Rogue), limited use per round (like Precision Ranger), and also the risk/reward of having a failure chance (like a Swashbuckler).
Does it? Is the damage significant enough to account for all these drawbacks? It almost sounds like it should be doing comparable bonus damage to a Barbarian! (Who gets a better weapon.)

Liberty's Edge

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Castilliano wrote:
Does it? Is the damage significant enough to account for all these drawbacks? It almost sounds like it should be doing comparable bonus damage to a Barbarian! (Who gets a better weapon.)

It does not. Their damage on their single attack is about on par with a Thief Rogue's (they're using Str rather than Dex for damage on a Dex-based Class, but have a single d6 more of damage at high levels), and that only when they succeed on a check (which isn't even close to automatic).

Their damage at max level is 9d6+10 or thereabouts (for a total of 41.5) if they succeed at the Perception check, while the Rogue's is 8d6+13 (for 41) almost always. A Barbarian, meanwhile, is likely more like 4d12+25 to 4d12+31 (for a total of 51 to 57). All have about equal to-hit...as long as the Investigator makes that Perception check (which, again, is not automatic by any means).

So...yeah, Investigator looks really bad there once you take into account that that's only one attack and only on a success on a Perception check.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

I would be fine if the current weapon proficiencies for this class remained the same but studied strike had different limitations. Like: maybe they could be limited to 1-handed weapons rather than agile/finesse weapons.

I feel like an investigator with a truncheon (club/mace) or even a arming sword ("longsword") tracks for me even more than something like an elven curve sword or--for that matter--a spiked chain.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Castilliano wrote:
Does it? Is the damage significant enough to account for all these drawbacks? It almost sounds like it should be doing comparable bonus damage to a Barbarian! (Who gets a better weapon.)
It does not. Their damage on their single attack is about on par with a Thief Rogue's ...

Is there a reason why the Study Target must be on a SINGLE attack?

Why not give a +2 on a critical success on attacks (assuming things don't change)instead?

Now that I gave a proper thought and analyzed the ability, I think this seems like it's repeating the Envoy (Starfinder) all over again. But worse, which I didn't think it was possible. The Envoys at least need to do their thing over and over and over, but WITHOUT a check.

Honestly, I find the ability of the investigator very flavorful and it should be kept, but it needs to be better, it must be reworked to be GOOD as baseline. Every Class feat afterwards should offer different enhancements to this combat option. My suggestion for improvement choices later down the line would fall into three categories: Offensive capabilities, Defensive and Utility.

Offensive ideas: Inflict minor debuff on-hit, small dmg bonus, a single successful strike doesn't count towards MAP, free combat maneuver check, apply critical specialization without critting, etc.

Defensive: Extra Reaction that can be used solely against target granting either +X bonuses to AC/Reflex or outright allowing DR (similar to Rogue's uncanny dodge in D&D5e), small constant bonus to AC, never trigger reactions (you always read the target).

Utility: Better action economy, more targets, movement, faster checks, more varied bonuses, all allies benefit,etc.

Some of these are already covered, some don't, some are probably overpowered (successful attacks not counting against MAP), but the class should also be interesting in combat. It's the majority of the game. So it should be damn fun and engaging.

Nothing worse than a class stuck solely at roleplaying (which solely depends on the player, not the class) with bad gameplay (the bulk of the system is experienced through combat).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I guess the idea is supposed to be that they use city/urban weapons

But as Excaliburproxy mentioned some of these don’t quite track as you would expect a truncheon over a spiked chain or curved blade

I assume the only reason the list isn’t even more specific it for future proofing

Contributor

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I definitely agree with this. Strength-based investigators built around using mutagens were an iconic PF1 build for the class, and it feels weird to see that taken away from here.

I feel like if studied strike always did minimum damage if you used a weapon that wasn't finesse or agile, it would be fine. Especially considering that unlike the rogue, the investigator has to succeed at a skill check with a skill that isn't associated with their key ability modifier to use the ability.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Advanced Player’s Guide Playtest / Investigator Playtest / Why are we repeating the Rogue's weapons restrictions? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Investigator Playtest