Actually everyone that I’ve seen write positive things about Assurance thus far actually has a player using it at the table (MaxAstro, myself, CM) and I’m willing to bet the ones speaking negatively of it haven’t even seen it used for this purpose because you’re saying things like CL-1/2 are meaningless...
Incorrect. 3/4 of my party took it at 2, because we thought it included ability mods. When we realized it didn't, and it failed at every attempted use, we all retrained out of it at 5.
Outside of combat, it's even worse. Effectively taking a 6 on your roll, or less if you have item bonuses, is not good.
It's fantastic for Medicine and Crafting, and I could see it being useful if you have an 8 in a stat, but none of us have built a character with an 8 in anything yet.
Actually everyone that I’ve seen write positive things about Assurance thus far actually has a player using it at the table (MaxAstro, myself, CM) and I’m willing to bet the ones speaking negatively of it haven’t even seen it used for this purpose because you’re saying things like CL-1/2 are meaningless...Incorrect. 3/4 of my party took it at 2, because we thought it included ability mods. When we realized it didn't, and it failed at every attempted use, we all retrained out of it at 5.
Yeah, I'm not sure how the conspiracy theory started that the only possible way people wouldn't love the feat is that they just haven't tried it out enough. I've even said I didn't find it overly useful in play for maneuvers but I guess I don't count...
Outside of combat, it's even worse. Effectively taking a 6 on your roll, or less if you have item bonuses, is not good.
It's use varies wildly. I've seen it work almost every time with DM's that heavily inflict penalties instead of raise the dc for those things. On the flip side it becomes almost useless with a DM that raises dc's instead.
I could see it being useful if you have an 8 in a stat, but none of us have built a character with an 8 in anything yet.
It can be useful if your dm throws around a lot of easy dc's for those tasks but even then with Follow the Expert adding level + prof + circumstance bonus to the roll you more than overcome the negative stat: even if you have a moderate stat you're doing about as well as someone with a good stat.
Actually everyone that I’ve seen write positive things about Assurance thus far actually has a player using it at the table (MaxAstro, myself, CM) and I’m willing to bet the ones speaking negatively of it haven’t even seen it used for this purpose because you’re saying things like CL-1/2 are meaningless...Incorrect. 3/4 of my party took it at 2, because we thought it included ability mods. When we realized it didn't, and it failed at every attempted use, we all retrained out of it at 5.Yeah, I'm not sure how the conspiracy theory started that the only possible way people wouldn't love the feat is that they just haven't tried it out enough. I've even said I didn't find it overly useful in play for maneuvers but I guess I don't count...
Outside of combat, it's even worse. Effectively taking a 6 on your roll, or less if you have item bonuses, is not good.It's use varies wildly. I've seen it work almost every time with DM's that heavily inflict penalties instead of raise the dc for those things. On the flip side it becomes almost useless with a DM that raises dc's instead.
I could see it being useful if you have an 8 in a stat, but none of us have built a character with an 8 in anything yet.It can be useful if your dm throws around a lot of easy dc's for those tasks but even then with Follow the Expert adding level + prof + circumstance bonus to the roll you more than overcome the negative stat: even if you have a moderate stat you're doing about as well as someone with a good stat.
To be fair I hadn't seen you comment that your crew had it.
Can people describe the experiences they've had with it then, the ones that don't like it?
When were your players trying it on creatures, why didn't it work, are they playing a build that supports it, and stuff like that?
I just haven't had the same experience, I would like to understand that perspective.
I'm not saying my players got it often, maybe they just got lucky the times they decided to use it or maybe the parties just work for it.
Let's get back to the theme of the thread then:
I have a ranged bow user who's struggling with damage and a party rogue thief. The martial players have had a lot of success using Prone to get FF for the archer and for the Rogue when she can't move into positions to flank. The archer's DPR is lower because they only had a certain amount of STR (she wanted to be good with Demoralize so CHA came as a priority), so the extra +2 helps trigger Deadly and more hits (lots of attacks).
Since she has decent Intimidate, enmeies have debuffs from the caster, and Frightened from the archer so it's been easier to trigger and then there's also an animal companion that benefits from the conditions.
I've used a lot of CL equivalent encounters and have only put them against CL+1 about 4 times in their last 10 encounters (40%) but a majority of those were CL with a few CL-1.
They've not used it every time, and they've also found value in the environment (Swim/Climb relevant).
It's all anecdotal, but that's where they've found value.
I also have two NPCs who have it, but I don't find that to be the same thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To be fair I hadn't seen you comment that your crew had it.
I know I've talked about other party members in this or another assurance thread but I positive I've mentioned myself in this one. I think that's valid enough on it's own for 'personal experience'.
Can people describe the experiences they've had with it then, the ones that don't like it?
I didn't work very often? I'm not sure what you want to hear. As I mentioned here in this thread, about a 10% success for maneuvers sounded about right.
When were your players trying it on creatures, why didn't it work, are they playing a build that supports it, and stuff like that?
No "your players": I'm saying what I and other players have experienced in groups I was in. I wasn't going into this thinking it was a DM only debate.
I just haven't had the same experience, I would like to understand that perspective.
As I've tried to point out, it depends how you set up encounters and challenges: the lower the number of under level creatures the game has and it's usefulness goes down. Set dc instead of adding penalties and it becomes less useful.
I'm not saying my players got it often, maybe they just got lucky the times they decided to use it or maybe the parties just work for it.
It could be that you're building a party to complement each other: for instance if you have someone that's specifically set up to debuff before you trip it might seem better than what happens most times with me: players generally build stand alone characters that are just meeting.
It isn't GM only. As a player, how often have you attempted it, what encounters have you faced, what is your party consistency?
It might help to understand what comps Assurance works in and what comps struggle to find value. A ranged attacker benefits a lot from conditions that provide FF without a flank, and debuffs help triggering Assurance thresholds. My teams have fluctuated from 4-5 at a table at a time.
If we're going to talk actual play, let's hear some experiences in actual play.
|
Actually everyone that I’ve seen write positive things about Assurance thus far actually has a player using it at the table (MaxAstro, myself, CM) and I’m willing to bet the ones speaking negatively of it haven’t even seen it used for this purpose because you’re saying things like CL-1/2 are meaningless...
Uh, not all of us. I'm saying that it didn't work for me in practice. Now, maybe I just got unlucky or I chose poorly when to use it but I tried it (PFS) and it just didn't work for 2 levels (I was mostly trying to use it for actual athletics checks but did try and trip a few times).
Please don't assume that your experience is the same as everybody's else
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually everyone that I’ve seen write positive things about Assurance thus far actually has a player using it at the table (MaxAstro, myself, CM) and I’m willing to bet the ones speaking negatively of it haven’t even seen it used for this purpose because you’re saying things like CL-1/2 are meaningless...Uh, not all of us. I'm saying that it didn't work for me in practice. Now, maybe I just got unlucky or I chose poorly when to use it but I tried it (PFS) and it just didn't work for 2 levels (I was mostly trying to use it for actual athletics checks but did try and trip a few times).
Please don't assume that your experience is the same as everybody's else
Can you describe the experiences in which you used them, some things about your group or character?
The problem I've encountered is that the PFS scenarios I've played and the AP encounters I've looked at tend to ignore the CRB's advice about creating challenges
This isn't exactly true: On simple DC's and level based ones, the rules say "Either approach is reasonable!" Level-Based DCs, Core Rulebook pg. 503.
"You can also use the level-based DCs for obstacles instead of assigning a simple DC. For example, you might determine that a wall in a high-level dungeon was constructed of smooth metal and is hard to climb. You could simply say only someone with master proficiency could climb it, and use the simple DC of 30. Or you might decide that the 15th-level villain who created the dungeon crafted the wall, and use the 15th-level DC of 34. Either approach is reasonable!"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If we're going to talk actual play, let's hear some experiences in actual play.
For myself, I think the best example was my rogue w/Lumber Consortium Laborer background. I wanted to try out tripping with assurance vs a sickle to set up the party in a one shot that ran 1st to 3rd level. I tried it with most every target and in 3 levels, I can think of maybe a handful of creatures it actually worked with. Threw in some grapples too but it was equally as frustrating. We didn't see a whole lot of mooks as the game was more sandbox with 1-2 encounters a day. Rounds I instead used normal Demoralize worked MUCH better: even if I took a -4 I'm pretty sure I had more successes than trips. Other players was a Precision ranger with a crossbow, a Giant Instinct barbarian, a cleric and a Storm Druid. The kicker is that every time I used it I rolled a hit with my sickle to compare the results: I'd have tripped more often with the sickle...
I can try to go back and check the games that other's used it but I'm pretty sure it's going to be the same kind of situation: not every game has bucket loads of creatures that fall under the assurance DC's. Or games that concentrate debuffs for assurance. Usually if a creature is low enough that a debuff or 2 would allow assurance, those action most likely could have killed it instead.
If we're going to talk actual play, let's hear some experiences in actual play.For myself, I think the best example was my rogue w/Lumber Consortium Laborer background. I wanted to try out tripping with assurance vs a sickle to set up the party in a one shot that ran 1st to 3rd level. I tried it with most every target and in 3 levels, I can think of maybe a handful of creatures it actually worked with. Threw in some grapples too but it was equally as frustrating. We didn't see a whole lot of mooks as the game was more sandbox with 1-2 encounters a day. Rounds I instead used normal Demoralize worked MUCH better: even if I took a -4 I'm pretty sure I had more successes than trips. Other players was a Precision ranger with a crossbow, a Giant Instinct barbarian, a cleric and a Storm Druid. The kicker is that every time I used it I rolled a hit with my sickle to compare the results: I'd have tripped more often with the sickle...
Graystone, thank you for sharing these kinds of details. You and others who've shared similar details have really helped balance the statistical points (which I'm pretty familiar with) with gameplay observations/experiences.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
At levels 1-3 before you get expert it will underperform in most cases but after you get expert and lvl 4 it hits 18+ which accounts to anything with a +8 or under ref/fort save and there are a good amount of those as long as they are at even or lower lvl to you. Also it allows for climbing most normal walls/cliffs ect with ease. Yes you are never gonna smash a boss with it but ass a 3rd action option or a sure fire jump action it's very useful. At lvl 7 you can hit Master and then you are dinging anything with a +13 ref/fort or less and can just waltz up cliffs/walls. If you ever get one of the feats/ancestries that boost success to crit success for climbing like vine Leshy or the Cliffscail Lizardfolk it can be cool as well.
At levels 1-3 before you get expert it will underperform in most cases but after you get expert and lvl 4 it hits 18+ which accounts to anything with a +8 or under ref/fort save and there are a good amount of those as long as they are at even or lower lvl to you.
I could have gotten expert at 2nd as a rogue but between athletics and intimidate or thievery it wasn't a priority.
Also it allows for climbing most normal walls/cliffs ect with ease.
Trained yes, expert no. For instance a wall with small handholds and footholds [dc20] results in a failure every time. Just following the expert [following an expert] with a str 08 means you climb an untrained dc with a 4 and a trained one with an 9, meaning no crit fails. So you can get the same benefit without spending a feat and the person with expert in athletics can actually roll a regular roll. ;)
Yes you are never gonna smash a boss with it but ass a 3rd action option or a sure fire jump action it's very useful. At lvl 7 you can hit Master
That's starting to put a lot of resources into a skill you don't have the stat for as you have a very limited amount of skills you'e going to raise. I don't think I could justify master just for assurance.