Definitely a lower level devil. An on level enemy is balanced around fighting a party of 4. Drop the level of the devil a couple notches
|
One pc vs one +1 level foe would be extreme encounter with xp adjustments. Severe encounter for 1 character would be 30 xp encounter and equal level creature would be 40 xp so uh. Yeah.
-1 level creature vs 1 PC would be severe level encounter of exact xp value and pretty plausibly hard while still possible for pc to beat.
(-2 level creature vs 1 pc would be the moderate encounter for 1 PC though)
Yeah, you would have to drop the level of the devil a bit for sure. I feel like a level -2 devil would be the closest to a fair fight. The XP guidelines are definitely not made for that kind of situation, but they indicate that a -2 level enemy is supposed to be a Moderate encounter for a lone character, while an on-level enemy is an Extreme encounter to a lone character.
Note that an extreme encounter is still beatable, it just requires a lot of skill, advantage, and/or luck. In ordinary circumstances, I think it's supposed to be 50-50 odds. So if you want 50% of those who try to... drop out (die) then it's fine to keep it at level+0.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To be honest, I feel like a more plausible method is to simply define it as a fight against a specific kind of devil.
Why do I say this? Because fighting a devil that depended on your level always seemed rather silly to me.
If I can kill a specific kind of devil (whatever you happen to set the bar at) does it matter if I'm a higher level and can kill it because of that? I can still kill a devil.
To me it simply doesn't make narrative sense.
Personally I think the test should just be "beat this barbazu devil".
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I never really accepted the idea that to join the Hellknights you had to defeat a devil. It always seemed counter to their belief system. Hell represents the ideal of Law and the Hellknights revere that above all things. A devil, especially a ranking one would be almost worshiped by them as the embodiment of their tenets. To destroy a devil makes no sense to me. In fact, unless the devil is acting counter to the laws of Hell, it should be embraced by the hellknights, not challenged. It would make more sense to destroy something counter to Hell, like a powerful demon that is the epitome of chaos. That would show your willingness to risk your life to rid the universe of chaos. YMMV
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Hellknights emulate devils as paragons of law and for intimidation.
But I don't think they fall towards worship, or at least not as a whole organization.
Remember, orders of Hellknights have been founded by Paladins. And many lawful good members fill their ranks.
On average Hellknights are LN, and should eschew both good and evil (though members of the extremes probably are more noted than those in the middle).
I think you have some misunderstanding, which are easy to get because they don't do a great job of drawing the line for an organization which is supposed to LN from the LE side.
It also doesn't help that Axiomites are the true LN outsiders...I guess they just weren't intimidating enough.
|
|
On average Hellknights are LN, and should eschew both good and evil...
I agree, but its no different than the old arguments about worshipers ignoring one aspect of a deific portfolio to focus on another. Its how people have been arguing for years for the worship of evil deities in org play despite the "no evil" rule. If that is true, then certainly Hellknights can ignore the evil aspects of hell and focus just on the obsession with law. In fact, I think they could just as easily revere any "absolute" law creatures and cultures. I think the reason why devils are the default focus stems from the association with Cheliax and House Thrune. More of a historical/cultural issue. Just my opinion, but its how I frame the Hellknights in my own campaigns.
In PF1, the requirement is to beat a devil with more hit dice than the prospective Hellknight. I would recommend looking up the CRs of level appropriate devils for these fights to figure out the appropriate PF2 level difference for these initiation fights. I am pretty sure that generally CR < HD in PF1.
Also, Cheliax has a weird relationship with devils. While their monarch has a deal with Asmodeus and many of its nobles are diabolists, they despise tieflings (as they are a sign that a devil got the better of a deal with their human parent). The main weirdness of fighting any evil creature in the Hellknight test is that paladins would generally have an easier time of it than any other class.
Okay -- From looking up the CRs of a few devils, those Hellknight initiation fights are a deadly serious matter and certainly not something to be handwaved away as they do in PFS. If they don't reduce the effective level of the devilish opponents, there would need to be ways for Hellknight initiates to gain appropriate advantages against devils that would greatly improve their odds.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
On average Hellknights are LN, and should eschew both good and evil...I agree, but its no different than the old arguments about worshipers ignoring one aspect of a deific portfolio to focus on another. Its how people have been arguing for years for the worship of evil deities in org play despite the "no evil" rule. If that is true, then certainly Hellknights can ignore the evil aspects of hell and focus just on the obsession with law. In fact, I think they could just as easily revere any "absolute" law creatures and cultures. I think the reason why devils are the default focus stems from the association with Cheliax and House Thrune. More of a historical/cultural issue. Just my opinion, but its how I frame the Hellknights in my own campaigns.
It should be noted that Hellknights aren't associated with House Thrune, except for the fact that one of their citadels happens to be in Cheliax.
In fact, the Hellknight Order was founded before House Thrune took control of Cheliax and created their current association with devils.
It's also worth noting that the reason the organization was named Hellknights is because the founder rejected Aroden (the main faith in Taldor (which Cheliax had been a part of). It wasn't until later the founder embraced the name.
And originally the founder acted because nobles refused to do anything after his son was murdered, so he went full vigilante. He was imprisoned, broken out of prison, and later gave an impassioned speech which move the King, got him pardoned and was commissioned to form a new order of knights, that would become the Hellknights.
Yeah you could just loan the PC a higher level weapon / magic item. Loaning them a silver weapon anyway seems like a good idea that makes sense for the organisation to do.
I think the point is that it should be a dangerous fight the Armiger needs to prepare for. Silver weapons, oil of alignment, and so forth. Deliberately lowering the caliber of the opponent to make it more survivable undercuts that. Yeah, the Armiger could die, but that's why you spend 3 years training for it.
The Lost Omens character guide says the devil's strength should mirror the Armiger's. The fact that the Hellknight dedication is level 6 means and the most common devil to fight being level 5 is not a coincidence.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Again, I think the devil's strength mirroring the candidates is quite silly.
I think it should simply be a flat barrier to entry.
Why should a level 10 character need to have a higher level opponent to defeat? Levels isn't even an obvious to characters, so it's purely a mechanical construct, because at some point the designers thought "I don't want players to get into this class without a proper challenge".
In my opinion, that's rubbish metathinking that doesn't make sense from a narrative perspective.
Choose one devil type, and let everyone fight that type of devil.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Again, I think the devil's strength mirroring the candidates is quite silly.
I think it should simply be a flat barrier to entry.
Why should a level 10 character need to have a higher level opponent to defeat? Levels isn't even an obvious to characters, so it's purely a mechanical construct, because at some point the designers thought "I don't want players to get into this class without a proper challenge".
In my opinion, that's rubbish metathinking that doesn't make sense from a narrative perspective.
Choose one devil type, and let everyone fight that type of devil.
I agree that it is silly. But so are a lot of traditions, TBH. I also think the Armiger being overqualified is a big distinction between a GM deliberately choosing a weaker devil to make the fight easier.
Also, levels don't exist per se, but relative threat levels do, and your sponsor knight would have spent several years guaging how tough you are and what you can handle.
Oh, one other thing to note. The devil seems like it needs to be a summon, and therefore a minion, so it will only be getting two actions. That's a pretty big disadvantage and probably offsets anything that was lost between editions for pre-buffing.
Oh, one other thing to note. The devil seems like it needs to be a summon, and therefore a minion, so it will only be getting two actions. That's a pretty big disadvantage and probably offsets anything that was lost between editions for pre-buffing.
That is a weird consequence of PF2...and might technically be true in the case of PC summoner...but I'm not sure if that would really be the case here. It would more likely be a special ritual rather than a summoning spell, and leave the creature with all its actions.
Maybe that's why the speech ahead of the trial takes an hour, is because the summoning ritual lasts 1 hr and has special restrictions attached to it.
|
|
It should be noted...
Yes, but one of the key aspects at the outset was the endorsement of the Chelish crown. That went a long way to legitimizing the fledgling organization. And the Chelish crown became increasingly associated with diabolism. The order was less than 50 years old when the civil war occurred so it has spent the majority of its existence under those conditions. I'm just saying over time, clearly there has been a strong relationship between the Hellkights and the Chelish crown.
|
|
We know that Armigers often have appropriate silver weapons
I think that's more an indication of pragmatism. The Hellknights, especially those in Cheliax know there is always a risk of crossing paths with a devil due to their involvement with many powerful factions in the empire. Thus, it makes good sense to keep appropriate weapons around if/when the terms of a contract are broken and said devil goes all Leeroy Jenkins on them.
Oh, one other thing to note. The devil seems like it needs to be a summon, and therefore a minion, so it will only be getting two actions. That's a pretty big disadvantage and probably offsets anything that was lost between editions for pre-buffing.That is a weird consequence of PF2...and might technically be true in the case of PC summoner...but I'm not sure if that would really be the case here. It would more likely be a special ritual rather than a summoning spell, and leave the creature with all its actions.
Maybe that's why the speech ahead of the trial takes an hour, is because the summoning ritual lasts 1 hr and has special restrictions attached to it.
Possibly. The text said the summoning is performed when the ceremony ends but that could translate to "completes." Age of Ashes did have a big pentagram summoning circle used for it, which doea lend credence to the idea.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We know that Armigers often have appropriate silver weaponsI think that's more an indication of pragmatism. The Hellknights, especially those in Cheliax know there is always a risk of crossing paths with a devil due to their involvement with many powerful factions in the empire. Thus, it makes good sense to keep appropriate weapons around if/when the terms of a contract are broken and said devil goes all Leeroy Jenkins on them.Well, I meant for the sake of their test. Since they know when such a test will take place, they prepare by acquiring helpful weapons. I don't disagree that it is anything other than pragmatism, but I think most Hellknight orders want their armigers to succeed and give them appropriate equipment for that purpose.
I'm sure some Hellknights make compacts with devils, but I imagine most of them would not if it required subordinating the Measure and Chain to anything else.
But mostly, I'm just concerned about the actual odds of a fight between a Barbazu and a level 5 armiger in 2e.
That concern feels misplaced if the Armiger is prepared and well equipped. Consider the typical Armiger. They'd be basically a LN fighter. If the fighter brings a striking silver weapon and +1 Hellknight plate, they will be +1 behind on accuracy but +2 ahead on AC. They also have more hit points. The devil's damage looks scary until you realize how much of it is evil damage that only hurts good characters. Suddenly the devil has going for it is bleed damage and it's action economy enhancers, and fighters have plenty of the latter. This without touching on if the fighter can get an alignment oil going.
If you make them as an NPC they wind up about the same. In fact if you apply the elite template to the level 4 Armiger statblock and give them a silver weapon, they look awfully similar.
Mileage may vary based on class and alignment, but there is a reason why LN is typical among the knights. Devils and demons are scary opponents... Unless you actually prepare for their various weaknesses.
That concern feels misplaced if the Armiger is prepared and well equipped.An armiger wouldn't get Hellknight plate, as you only get that once you pass the test, right? But otherwise, I agree that a fighter has a good chance at winning. Even an 8 HP class will have around the same HP as the devil.
The question of the OP was whether or not the test is the same because the different mechanics of PF2 might make it more difficult than it was in the before times. So, misplaced or not, that's my concern. So, I suppose now the question is that if a fighter can pass handedly, who can't pass the test? I mean, a signifier wizard would also have to pass the test.
Hellknight Plate is statistically no different than full plate, so replace that as appropriate.
I'd expect rangers and barbarians to do about as well as a fighter, or close enough to it. Rogues will probably have a harder time but they're not meant to be take on solo threats like this.
Characters that can deal good damage (champions, clerics) should do ok but will take more damage themselves if they are good. A neutral cleric of a good deity should rock out here.
Wizards, sorcerers, and bards could just levitate out of reach of the devil, couldn't they? I'd honestly expect them to be pitted against something less brutish.
|
|
Rogues will probably have a harder time but they're not meant to be take on solo threats like this
How much of a statistical disadvantage is a rogue that specialized in feinting? They seem to keep up fairly well with other solo-martials. From what I can see on an initial scan, the rogue is 2 lower to hit and one AC away from most fighters. I admit this is a specialized rogue being compared to the average fighter who is not likely to be the "best" recruit for the Hellknights anyway. Just wondering. Let's ignore for the moment that said rogue wants nothing to do with Hellknight plate armor.
Hellknight Plate is statistically no different than full plate, so replace that as appropriate.
I'd expect rangers and barbarians to do about as well as a fighter, or close enough to it. Rogues will probably have a harder time but they're not meant to be take on solo threats like this.
Characters that can deal good damage (champions, clerics) should do ok but will take more damage themselves if they are good. A neutral cleric of a good deity should rock out here.
Wizards, sorcerers, and bards could just levitate out of reach of the devil, couldn't they? I'd honestly expect them to be pitted against something less brutish.
Well, that's kind of the point though, isn't it? If you're a level 5 armiger looking to take the test, you're fighting a Barbazu no matter your class.
I suppose with casters, it'll come down to spell selection, where I think a Wizard would have better odds because they can prep a spell list for that day to wreck devil face. The spontaneous casters have to have a spell repertoire that ostensibly is good for the rest of their life too. Retraining notwithstanding. Retraining actually makes most build hypotheticals in 2e moot.
Yeah, and you have years to prep for this. The tests only even happen twice a year. That's plenty of time to retrain yourself into a devik killing machine.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My question is, and sorry if this has been asked before, does The Test work the same in 2E?
[Mechanical aspect]
If your player knows (in character), what kind of a fiend he's fighting against and has time for preparation - it becomes lotta easier.
So, my player was Level 7 Cleric (Warpriest) with Glaive, with Godclaw Deity.
Also with some Hellkhight Armiger archetype feats.
Against him i used Barbazu (CR5 with elite adjustment, so smwt CR6)
And gave them an arena (also for dramatic effect) - round shape with radius of 30 feet (you can experiment with a lower scale, i guess, but be carefull not to make it too tight)
Also, if we go by the "Building Encounters" section (which is not always applicable and depends on ton of factors, but, anyways...), , we're able to do following math:
If devil's CR is similar to player's level and it's one-on-one it balances on "extreme" difficulty. Might be overkill if monster has some abilities, that punish player's class.
If it's one lower - it classifies as "severe". which is likely to go as you planned with a chance for some spectacle.
If it's two lower - it becomes "moderate". And before lvl 10 that might mean "like a knife at 100° through butter".
The best tactic is following: check
1. How devils FAB compares to player's AC (and vice versa). If devil hits player 90% of the time, and v.v. is 10% - something's not good.
2. If devil has a ton of dreadfull spells - that's also likely not the best idea.
3. If the player knows about enemy's specifics - if you think the player will likely loose - give him some time for preparation - knowledge checks, bying silversheen, etc.
4. I wouldn't recommend starting this stuff before level 4 (except, maybe, for full-martial classes) as there could be too much R&G involved.
My player just ripped throug barbazu because they were both a bit of spellcasting/a bit of martial and had chances around 60/40 to the player's benefit and Barbazu critically failed a saving throw on the first round. Also player was specialized in Lore (Hell), so he knew a lot of usefull info upfront.
[Roleplaying aspect]
I'm currently running a campaign (agents of edgewatch, if that matters)
And one of my players wanted to partake the hellknight path, he allready used one feat to become hellknight armiger, but wanted to complete the true test to qualify for hellknight. That was one of the main themes of the character.
If you would like some text example of roleplay script for this stuff - DM me.
|
|
And now that I think about it...
I think that's a GM's decision. You certainly should have to take the dedication feat if you want access to the rest of their archetypal feats, but I guess you could make a case for joining the organization without actually taking the feat.
I don't believe it works that way in org play, however. You would need to take both feats if you wanted to be acknowledged as a hellknight and based on table variation, I wouldn't want to run around wearing the armor unless I was a certified knight.
The military uses civilians all the time for a multitude of tasks. These civilians are considered part of the team even though they are not officially military. I imagine one can apply that same idea when having PCs join the Hellknights without taking any of the feats.