| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another way of increasing the desirability of Int is to reduce the importance of Dex/Int. When I picture an inventor, I don't see the inventor using his own strength/dexterity to hit the enemy, but more a character who uses some kind of piston-based mechanical arm that strikes enemies instead of him. I would really love to see an option where you can use a base accuracy value outside the inventor ability scores that represent the invention attack roll (for example the same progression Animal Companion have). So you could build a Strenght Inventor or a Dexterity Inventor, but you could also dump both of these stats and still have the Inventor expected accuracy because neither Strength nor Dexterity should be required for an inventor to be fully functional.
Doesn't that just sound like int to attack though?
|
Another way of increasing the desirability of Int is to reduce the importance of Dex/Int. When I picture an inventor, I don't see the inventor using his own strength/dexterity to hit the enemy, but more a character who uses some kind of piston-based mechanical arm that strikes enemies instead of him. I would really love to see an option where you can use a base accuracy value outside the inventor ability scores that represent the invention attack roll (for example the same progression Animal Companion have). So you could build a Strenght Inventor or a Dexterity Inventor, but you could also dump both of these stats and still have the Inventor expected accuracy because neither Strength nor Dexterity should be required for an inventor to be fully functional.Doesn't that just sound like int to attack though?
To me it sounds more like pumping up the item bonus to attack.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another way of increasing the desirability of Int is to reduce the importance of Dex/Int. When I picture an inventor, I don't see the inventor using his own strength/dexterity to hit the enemy, but more a character who uses some kind of piston-based mechanical arm that strikes enemies instead of him. I would really love to see an option where you can use a base accuracy value outside the inventor ability scores that represent the invention attack roll (for example the same progression Animal Companion have). So you could build a Strenght Inventor or a Dexterity Inventor, but you could also dump both of these stats and still have the Inventor expected accuracy because neither Strength nor Dexterity should be required for an inventor to be fully functional.Doesn't that just sound like int to attack though?
To paraphrase Rick "Well that just sounds like [INT to attack] with extra steps!"
It's frustrating trying to playtest a class when we know that one of the core systems of the class (unstable), and one tied to its core stat (class DC) is up for change.
Why do you say that 'we know the core stat / class DC is up for change'?
We know Unstable will be working differently because of Mark saying that the most current version of it has it less punitive (though I do feel like if that is accurate, idk why they don't just stat what those current rules are). But I'm not aware of any indications that the inventor's key ability score is actually up for change beyond 'it's a playtest so technically anything can change'.
Ah I took the ', and ' as being the start of a second example of what is up for change.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In my opinion, Inventor's Key Ability Score must be Intelligence, and they should not be able to apply intelligence to attack unless they get some action of similar cost to Devise a Stratagem.
There are countless ways to increase accuracy with weapons if it is indeed a problem, none of which have to replace one of Strength's advantages.
In my opinion, Inventor's Key Ability Score must be Intelligence, and they should not be able to apply intelligence to attack unless they get some action of similar cost to Devise a Stratagem.
There are countless ways to increase accuracy with weapons if it is indeed a problem, none of which have to replace one of Strength's advantages.
I'm okay with them not getting INT to attack if Overdrive provides a Circumstance bonus to hit or something (since they can't ever max their attack stat, it's probably within the realm of reason).
Or just a straight up status bonus when using your Innovation (though that's pretty strong).
As is right now, I have yet to be able to build an Inventor that doesn't have secondary-max in STR.
Tamper tries to deal with this a little bit, but it's not coming through.
|
|
As is right now, I have yet to be able to build an Inventor that doesn't have secondary-max in STR.
Tamper tries to deal with this a little bit, but it's not coming through.
The problem I've run into with Tamper is the limited amount of enemies it works on. In theory, it works on a lot, however in practice I've not seen this.
In most of the sessions I've played over the last year+ of PF2e, a vast majority of enemies don't "wear" armor. Some of those still "hold" a weapon, but many don't. Then of the enemies that are humanoid using wearable armor and weapons, many of those are caster types where Tamper generally isn't needed if you can close the gap with them.
While playtesting so far, only 1 out of 6 battles I've been in actually had a valid and worthy target for Tamper.
As is right now, I have yet to be able to build an Inventor that doesn't have secondary-max in STR.
Tamper tries to deal with this a little bit, but it's not coming through.
The problem I've run into with Tamper is the limited amount of enemies it works on. In theory, it works on a lot, however in practice I've not seen this.
In most of the sessions I've played over the last year+ of PF2e, a vast majority of enemies don't "wear" armor. Some of those still "hold" a weapon, but many don't. Then of the enemies that are humanoid using wearable armor and weapons, many of those are caster types where Tamper generally isn't needed if you can close the gap with them.
While playtesting so far, only 1 out of 6 battles I've been in actually had a valid and worthy target for Tamper.
Oh same, I mentioned this in my level 1 Playtest as well, but I did not present a lot of enemies this would have worked on, so in part, felt somewhat responsible.
My player also felt thematically it made more sense as it was written to work out of combat (kinda like a sabotage situation).
I would personally like to see some kind of "Disable Device but with crafting" thing come into play there as well
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another way of increasing the desirability of Int is to reduce the importance of Dex/Int. When I picture an inventor, I don't see the inventor using his own strength/dexterity to hit the enemy, but more a character who uses some kind of piston-based mechanical arm that strikes enemies instead of him. I would really love to see an option where you can use a base accuracy value outside the inventor ability scores that represent the invention attack roll (for example the same progression Animal Companion have). So you could build a Strenght Inventor or a Dexterity Inventor, but you could also dump both of these stats and still have the Inventor expected accuracy because neither Strength nor Dexterity should be required for an inventor to be fully functional.Doesn't that just sound like int to attack though?
The issue in the current situation is that you either handle attack through Dex/Str and ends up with Intelligence being more of a secondary attribute for an Inventor. Or you put attack rolls under Intelligence and you end up with all Inventors pumping up Intelligence.
But for me, Inventor can cover a few archetypes without genius level intelligence. For example, the mechanics and the "guy who found an alien gizmo and whose whole adventuring progression consists in unlocking more of it". For me, these 2 characters can be handled with current Inventor class pretty nicely because you can make an Inventor with 14 Intelligence and still be perfectly viable.So, not using a key stat for attack would leave room for these builds. It's not unseen as the Summoner is already attacking with fixed numbers (I consider the Eidolon attacks to be central to the class, way more than the spellcasting ability).