| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So I keep reading up on Assurance, and it just looks worse and worse each time.
Even in the worst circumstances, you can perform basic tasks. Choose a skill you’re trained in. You can forgo rolling a skill check for that skill to instead receive a result of 10 + your proficiency bonus (do not apply any other bonuses, penalties, or modifiers).
This seems nice in certain situations compared to others, but then I looked at what exactly your proficiency bonus entails, and it just falls apart from there:
Proficiency is a system that measures a character’s aptitude at a specific task or quality, and it has five ranks: untrained, trained, expert, master, and legendary. Proficiency gives you a bonus that’s added when determining the following modifiers and statistics: AC, attack rolls, Perception, saving throws, skills, and the effectiveness of spells. If you’re untrained, your proficiency bonus is +0. If you’re trained, expert, master, or legendary, your proficiency bonus equals your level plus 2, 4, 6, or 8, respectively.
So things like your ability modifier, item bonuses, status bonuses, etc. don't get factored in. Neither do penalties, but even in those cases, facing appropriate level tasks makes it impossible, even though the flavor text of Assurance states "Even in the worst circumstances, you can perform basic tasks." It's a false misnomer, because objectively speaking, you can't.
One solid example is utilizing Battle Medicine/Treat Wounds for consistent healing across the board. Let's say we got a 2nd level Cloistered Cleric with the Field Medic background doing this to save on their limited spell slots and fonts for in-combat healing. They are only Trained in Medicine and so will be doing the DC 15 default, having taken Assurance in Medicine as their 2nd level Skill Feat.
So, without Assurance, a DC of 15, and being able to add +4 Wisdom, with maybe an investment of Expanded Healer's Tools for a +1 item bonus, plus a proficiency of 4, giving them a +9 to their skill check. To meet the DC 15 check and succeed, they must roll a 6 or higher, which gives a 25% of failure (including a 5% critical failure chance), with a 50% success rate, and a 25% critical success chance. With a 75% chance to succeed on your rolls, the numbers look quite in your favor here.
With Assurance, however, you do not get to add either the +4 Wisdom or your +1 item bonus, which shifts the math a factor of 25% to your detriment. Since Assurance also fixes the dice result, and has the Fortune effect (meaning effects which improve or allow re-rolls cannot apply), it fixes to the point that it can never succeed until the following level. But, by this point, you'll be improving your Medicine to Expert to get more bang for your buck out of Treat Wounds/Battle Medicine, and be back to being forced to roll to get a success out of it. At best, Assurance has helped to make an already easy check a guarantee, but you still deny yourself the benefits of any critical success effects.
But let's look at another effect in your favor, such as Assurance in Athletics. We're facing an enemy and want to Trip them to make it easier for our allies to run up and beat them in the face, since flanking seems implausible. But, we still want to give our party members that edge. So, we got a 5th level Fighter that is an Expert in Athletics tripping an on-level average enemy. We'll keep things simple and do an average level DC for the Fortitude Save of the creature.
A Fighter who rolls without Assurance will have +4 Strength with a proficiency bonus of +9, making it a +13 check. (It is harder to have Item Bonuses to Athletics via tripping, but at this point, if they have a weapon with the Trip trait, they would get a +1 item bonus to trip with it, but I won't factor that in since it's a little too specialized.) Against a DC 20, they have a 35% chance to fail (including a 5% critical failure chance), a 50% chance to succeed, and a 15% chance to critically succeed. So, it is a 65/35 ratio here (or 70/30 with the +1 Trip trait weapon). This also isn't including MAP, which shifts the math dramatically against the Fighter, making it 40/60 (45/55), and 15/85 (20/80) with the check, the latter of which is what is realistic.
A Fighter using Assurance will have 10 on the Dice with their +9 Proficiency bonus, putting them at a DC of 19, making them fail the check regardless of whether they have MAP or not. This means that, effectively speaking, no matter when this skill is used, against an on-level enemy, that Trip will fail. Whereas without Assurance and rolling, they still have a 15% chance to succeed (even if there is a 35% chance of critically failing). Granted, this would be a guarantee to work against level-1 enemies, it just demonstrates that Assurance isn't meant to work for on-level or higher threats.
Yet another example would be taking Assurance in Lore, Crafting, or Performance for earning gold via downtime activities, which is where it's most prevalent. While Lore may not guarantee on-level activities, Crafting and Performance certainly can, and depending on setting, it might still be available. But, comparing on-level DCs with Assurance values, the disparity between bonuses needed and DCs set become wider and wider. There is the option of doing things at a lower level just to make Assurance work, but then it's becoming more trivial than it is "basic," which is that on-level tasks should be appropriate and basic to them, whereas level+1 or more would be no basic task or feat.
Are there any viable uses for Assurance that I'm overlooking here? Is it just a "Avoid that Nat 1" feat that I presume it is, or is there more to it?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You take it with medicine to remove any variability from post combat healing.
Some people will try and recommend it for athletics against weaker opponents or for downtime money making but this is generally not worth the effort.
| 15 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's best used for stuff that has a fixed DC so you know that you'll succeed.
Treat Wounds, First Aid, Long Jump... stuff like that.
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
Someone has never rolled 6 out of 8 checks of 4 Orr lower when trying to heal
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
If assurance tripping doesn't work you might be able to move to assurance grappling next time and go for fortitude instead of reflex DCs.
Also you can grab Assurance on skills you don't want to pour other resources into and still be able to do things with it. Put it on a skill you won't be increasing the stat for which has actions you still might want to try. I particularly like Athletics for this, you can sometimes trip or grapple people even if you are a dex rogue (or sometimes trip people before retreating on a spellcaster), and it gives you things like Climbing and Swimming without risking falling/drowning.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Someone has never rolled 6 out of 8 checks of 4 Orr lower when trying to heal
This is a feat for people that don't believe in RNGesus. Play and ye shall be saved.
But if you roll bad, then it is for some undisclosed sins that you probably committed. Probably.
Someone has never rolled 6 out of 8 checks of 4 Orr lower when trying to heal
It's amazing how many many times you can roll under a 5 in a row isn't it? I've rolled under 5 x12 in a row... ;)
EDIT: Sometimes the online dice-roller seems to get stuck on rolling high or low. :P
Also useful for characters that are not really increasing the stat of the skill.
Arcane Evolution Sorcerers that are not investing on intelligence being guaranteed to learn a few lvl of spells (you can learn all the lvl 1 spells at lvl 4 when you pick Arcane evolution oer example instead of having to roll a 9 per example in the check).
10 dex heavy armor users for Balance checks or even stealth against lower lvl foes.
| 17 people marked this as a favorite. |
For a cute combo, the dwarf in my party has Assurance Diplomacy and Glad Hand. He starts by ignoring the Glad Hand penalty with his Assurance, then if that still fails, he can try again at normal diplomacy roll with no penalty. Wouldn't call it overpowered but he's been getting the job done more often than not
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Definitely gotta agree with Darksol here. Assurance is definitely one of the more "feels bad" things in the game. You spend a feat for what was "Take 10" previously, except no ability modifier. So a +4 Str mod Barbarian with Expert in Athletics and a +0 Str mod Rogue with Expert in Athletics get the same outcome with Assurance. I.e., the Rogue spends a whole feat on "Take 10", while the Barbarian, spending the same amount (one feat), only gets "Take 6". What is that, besides the Barbarian getting fleeced?
And even the whole "but you also get to ignore penalties" doesn't make it any better. If you have a modifer to a skill you have Assurance for, then you ALWAYS pay the price of not getting that modifier. You will not, however, always be facing a penalty you then get to ignore. And frankly, it feels dishonest that you could, even on a theoretical basis, get slapped with every single penalty in the game and ignore it on what feels like a technicality. Like drown-healing from 3.5; yes, Assurance doing all of that is in the rules, and may even be intentional (unlike drown-healing), but it still feels cheesy as heck.
I'd have much rather they left all the mods and all the penalties in there, and just had Assurance switch a rolled d20 for a static 10.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
As well as all the wonderful examples above of bypassing penalties, I think Assurance is just that, assurance against wild (low) rolls, that 5% chance of crit failure that's difficult to avoid, yet may have severe consequences on the story (like with Medicine as also pointed out above).
Plus, Assurance has the Fortune trait meaning that using it protects you from Misfortune effects (and thereby you roll normally). If your build relies on one skill, i.e. like many Swashbucklers, then the feat will protect you from Ill Omen, etc.
The skill works as intended. If it were stronger, it'd likely become too prevalent. As is, it's a contender for each of one's key skills.
(And I do like having PCs that are somewhat incompetent, yet competent enough, which reminds me that many PF2 abilities aren't about making good PCs great, but about making poor PCs functional/patching up holes in builds.)
| 18 people marked this as a favorite. |
Definitely gotta agree with Darksol here. Assurance is definitely one of the more "feels bad" things in the game. You spend a feat for what was "Take 10" previously, except no ability modifier. So a +4 Str mod Barbarian with Expert in Athletics and a +0 Str mod Rogue with Expert in Athletics get the same outcome with Assurance. I.e., the Rogue spends a whole feat on "Take 10", while the Barbarian, spending the same amount (one feat), only gets "Take 6". What is that, besides the Barbarian getting fleeced?
And even the whole "but you also get to ignore penalties" doesn't make it any better. If you have a modifer to a skill you have Assurance for, then you ALWAYS pay the price of not getting that modifier. You will not, however, always be facing a penalty you then get to ignore. And frankly, it feels dishonest that you could, even on a theoretical basis, get slapped with every single penalty in the game and ignore it on what feels like a technicality. Like drown-healing from 3.5; yes, Assurance doing all of that is in the rules, and may even be intentional (unlike drown-healing), but it still feels cheesy as heck.
I'd have much rather they left all the mods and all the penalties in there, and just had Assurance switch a rolled d20 for a static 10.
Assurance that switched a d20 roll for a static 10, without including limitation on when you could use it, would be grossly overpowered. Guaranteeing success against tasks and enemies that are supposed to be challenging for your level isn't actually a reasonable expectation for the low cost of a skill feat.
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Assurance Medicine on a Forensic Investigator with the Medic archetype. At level 6, I automatically get the sweet DC20 result at Battle Medicine and Treat Wounds without having to invest in WIS or Medicine items.
I once saw a Wizard with Assurance Athletics in PFS. He could easily obtain all the required successes to make good progress in Athletics tasks.
Assurance that switched a d20 roll for a static 10, without including limitation on when you could use it, would be grossly overpowered. Guaranteeing success against tasks and enemies that are supposed to be challenging for your level isn't actually a reasonable expectation for the low cost of a skill feat.Definitely gotta agree with Darksol here. Assurance is definitely one of the more "feels bad" things in the game. You spend a feat for what was "Take 10" previously, except no ability modifier. So a +4 Str mod Barbarian with Expert in Athletics and a +0 Str mod Rogue with Expert in Athletics get the same outcome with Assurance. I.e., the Rogue spends a whole feat on "Take 10", while the Barbarian, spending the same amount (one feat), only gets "Take 6". What is that, besides the Barbarian getting fleeced?
And even the whole "but you also get to ignore penalties" doesn't make it any better. If you have a modifer to a skill you have Assurance for, then you ALWAYS pay the price of not getting that modifier. You will not, however, always be facing a penalty you then get to ignore. And frankly, it feels dishonest that you could, even on a theoretical basis, get slapped with every single penalty in the game and ignore it on what feels like a technicality. Like drown-healing from 3.5; yes, Assurance doing all of that is in the rules, and may even be intentional (unlike drown-healing), but it still feels cheesy as heck.
I'd have much rather they left all the mods and all the penalties in there, and just had Assurance switch a rolled d20 for a static 10.
Yeah, see, I'm not actually married to the whole "10" part of it. It could have been "replace the d20 with an 8, leaving ALL mods and penalties", or even 6. I'm not fussed about the number, but about the dishonest "both of you pay the same thing and one of you reaps more rewards than the other".
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Assurance that switched a d20 roll for a static 10, without including limitation on when you could use it, would be grossly overpowered. Guaranteeing success against tasks and enemies that are supposed to be challenging for your level isn't actually a reasonable expectation for the low cost of a skill feat.
In previous editions this was balanced by making it not work in high stress situations, which allowed it to be very useful for making mundane run of the mill activities (even high skill ones for experts or artisans) not fail 40%+ of the time.
Unlike taking 10 in prior editions, Assurance can be used in combat (and it can be useful for things like tripping low level mounts as your third action, or for a guaranteed battle medicine to get someone conscious), but it fails pretty badly at making sense of the tasks highly skilled people complete routinely outside of life or death situations.
I kind of wish there was another kind of assurance that allowed a Master craftsman to consistently produce Master level crafts while having a small chance to botch it, like give them roll twice (or more) but cap the die at 10 or something (so no crits most likely).
| 14 people marked this as a favorite. |
it fails pretty badly at making sense of the tasks highly skilled people complete routinely outside of life or death situation.
I think the disconnect here is thinking that any on level task should be considered routine in world. On level means that it is at the upper limit of what you are capable of, not that you should be able to do it routinely without risk of failure. I think most characters are not expected to be making checks that push right up against their own level, as those would be considered 50/50 types of challenges.
A Level 15 legendary craftsperson (so 33 check with assurance) is capable of certain success against a level 14 task. That is really impressive. A level 7 craftsperson with master (so a 23 check) is actually capable of success against a level 7 task anyway, making my above claim moot. Assurance is probably tuned a touch higher than it needs to be really, it is specifically designed not to allow you to bypass checks that should be a challenge to your character. That seems more than fair to me.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think part of the problem is not that this is a weird, situational skill. The problem is that it comes up kinda often.
There are a bunch of backgrounds with assurance skills. And I imagine it will continue to be used in the future as 'a weird flavor thing' for various feats, backgrounds, and archetypes.
So we will continue to see discussions like this, because people keep encountering it. Especially at low levels when dice rolls rule more than tertiary stats. I doubt it will be relegated to the logs of 'weird theorycrafter cheese'.
| 15 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the disconnect is in the design intent of the feat vs what people are expecting from the 'take 10' of previous editions.
Even in the worst circumstances, you can perform basic tasks.
So the intent is to allow characters under stress and duress to still be functional at what they are well trained and practiced in. Reminds me of the quote: "In a life or death situation, you won't rise to the occasion, you will fall back to your level of training."
But then the examples of when it doesn't work as expected:
One solid example is utilizing Battle Medicine/Treat Wounds for consistent healing across the board. Let's say we got a 2nd level Cloistered Cleric with the Field Medic background doing this to save on their limited spell slots and fonts for in-combat healing. They are only Trained in Medicine and so will be doing the DC 15 default, having taken Assurance in Medicine as their 2nd level Skill Feat.
So, without Assurance, a DC of 15, and being able to add +4 Wisdom, with maybe an investment of Expanded Healer's Tools for a +1 item bonus, plus a proficiency of 4, giving them a +9 to their skill check. To meet the DC 15 check and succeed, they must roll a 6 or higher, which gives a 25% of failure (including a 5% critical failure chance), with a 50% success rate, and a 25% critical success chance. With a 75% chance to succeed on your rolls, the numbers look quite in your favor here.
With Assurance, however, you do not get to add either the +4 Wisdom or your +1 item bonus, which shifts the math a factor of 25% to your detriment. Since Assurance also fixes the dice result, and has the Fortune effect (meaning effects which improve or allow re-rolls cannot apply), it fixes to the point that it can never succeed until the following level. But, by this point, you'll be improving your Medicine to Expert to get more bang for your buck out of Treat Wounds/Battle Medicine, and be back to being forced to roll to get a success out of it. At best, Assurance has helped to make an already easy check a guarantee, but you still deny yourself the benefits of any critical success effects.
Using the master level proficiency option of Treat Wounds isn't a basic task for that level 3 character. They could indeed succeed at the basic Treat Wounds DC of 15 using Assurance.
Same with the trip example. Tripping an on-level enemy isn't a basic task.
And with the Earn Income. I disagree that an on-level job should be considered basic. A basic job is one that you skate by in. One that is beneath your training and experience. An on-level job or +1 level job shouldn't be called or described as basic.
In general this feels like the disconnect caused by coming from PF1 - where you feel like a +4 encounter/task is a standard challenge and an on-level encounter/task should be trivial. The math was re-balanced for PF2.
Assurance does exactly what it says it does. It allows you to automatically succeed at 'basic' (read as: lower level) tasks.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ninja'd again Unicore. Blast my slow writing speed.
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, see, I'm not actually married to the whole "10" part of it. It could have been "replace the d20 with an 8, leaving ALL mods and penalties", or even 6. I'm not fussed about the number, but about the dishonest "both of you pay the same thing and one of you reaps more rewards than the other".
You keep saying dishonest. I don't see how that word really makes sense in the context of this feat though.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Definitely gotta agree with Darksol here. Assurance is definitely one of the more "feels bad" things in the game. You spend a feat for what was "Take 10" previously, except no ability modifier. So a +4 Str mod Barbarian with Expert in Athletics and a +0 Str mod Rogue with Expert in Athletics get the same outcome with Assurance. I.e., the Rogue spends a whole feat on "Take 10", while the Barbarian, spending the same amount (one feat), only gets "Take 6". What is that, besides the Barbarian getting fleeced?
You can apply similar logic to other feats. The rogue gets 1/8th his class-based hit points every level from Toughness while the barbarian only gets 1/12th. Untrained Improvisation helps with a lot more on the 10 Int Barbarian than the 18 Int Rogue.
But the benefit of the feat remains the same. A guarantee that you can avoid critical failures by forgoing critical successes. 1HP per level and easier dying checks. A bonus on skills you aren't trained in. It's just that some characters don't actually need the help, so should probably avoid picking it up.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is weird but it's best use seems to be for characters with proficiency ranks but not attributes scores.
Example:
A Rogue with little STR but still wants to trip with Athletics
A Wizard with low WIS but still wants to use Battle Medicine
Or anyone who wants an ofenseive athletics skill to use when suffering a multiple attack penalty.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, Trip is still a bad choice for _anyone_ to use with Assurance. Somebody (I don't recall the name) put out a Guide that recommended it and it was heavily discussed in the Guide commentary thread.
Allow me to quote: "...I have just randomly looked under 'G' (in the Bestiary), for all creatures from CR7 to CR11... and if your PC is level 10 & pushed Athletics to Master your Assurance - Athletics fixed total is 10 +10 (level) +6 (master) = 26. The results are that you auto-trip 8 of the 24 creatures. E_____, could you please describe how you came to the conclusion that As/Ath is auto-hit at higher levels? (I picked level 10 because PFS tops out at 11, did you sample at level 15?)"
Note that the 'auto-hit' commentators stopped posting in the thread at this point, rather than actually try to provide any proof.
I agree with the posters above that state Assurance is for basic tasks, and several of the examples. But not Trip!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Assurance that switched a d20 roll for a static 10, without including limitation on when you could use it, would be grossly overpowered. Guaranteeing success against tasks and enemies that are supposed to be challenging for your level isn't actually a reasonable expectation for the low cost of a skill feat.Definitely gotta agree with Darksol here. Assurance is definitely one of the more "feels bad" things in the game. You spend a feat for what was "Take 10" previously, except no ability modifier. So a +4 Str mod Barbarian with Expert in Athletics and a +0 Str mod Rogue with Expert in Athletics get the same outcome with Assurance. I.e., the Rogue spends a whole feat on "Take 10", while the Barbarian, spending the same amount (one feat), only gets "Take 6". What is that, besides the Barbarian getting fleeced?
And even the whole "but you also get to ignore penalties" doesn't make it any better. If you have a modifer to a skill you have Assurance for, then you ALWAYS pay the price of not getting that modifier. You will not, however, always be facing a penalty you then get to ignore. And frankly, it feels dishonest that you could, even on a theoretical basis, get slapped with every single penalty in the game and ignore it on what feels like a technicality. Like drown-healing from 3.5; yes, Assurance doing all of that is in the rules, and may even be intentional (unlike drown-healing), but it still feels cheesy as heck.
I'd have much rather they left all the mods and all the penalties in there, and just had Assurance switch a rolled d20 for a static 10.
But it's not for things like attack rolls, saving throws, or flat checks, which is a whole different animal. Guarantees on those kinds of things are practically unheard of, and affect much more than Skills ever could. Skills are useful, but not the end-all.
You also never critical with them via Assurance either unless it's literally several levels below you, whereas without them, you can. And with enough bonuses/penalties, you have a better chance compared to just failing.
A feat that gives you automatic success against trivial tasks where the success rate is practically guaranteed just seems like a waste compared to other skill feats that expand or improve your options in far better ways.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I never said it was universally useful. But it does have its place.
For sure it is only a chance of working, and only against a portion of monsters as you say around a third.
But you can normally pick those monsters with a bad reflex save - heck you can even do this as a Wizard with 10 STR and a reasonable Recall Knowledge skill.
I'm only talking about it as a potentially good option for your third attack. These sorts of RPG's are a team game. Setting up your allies and wasting your opponents actions is helpful.
If it works though, it is an automatic success which you can keep abusing. Very nice.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I never said it was universally useful. But it does have its place.
For sure it is only a chance of working, and only against a portion of monsters as you say around a third.
But you can normally pick those monsters with a bad reflex save - heck you can even do this as a Wizard with 10 STR and a reasonable Recall Knowledge skill.
I'm only talking about it as a potentially good option for your third attack. These sorts of RPG's are a team game. Setting up your allies and wasting your opponents actions is helpful.
If it works though, it is an automatic success which you can keep abusing. Very nice.
Yeah, I went through the Bestiary too and was surprised by how many monsters can be auto-tripped. Generally it's Giants, Golems, Zombies, and other lumbering creatures at or near level, though tripping minions can also be useful, especially if next to somebody w/ an AoO or Sneak Attack.
So there can be dungeons, i.e. fey-themed or Thieves' Guild, where you'll auto-trip nobody, but then invade that giant enclave and reap.
Again, if it were any more useful it'd be a "must-have". Perhaps somebody oversold it as that, which it isn't, but I've also heard from multiple players (including on this thread) that have said they've found great benefit in the auto-trips.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There there is using assurance with Athletics for Disarm, or targetting Fortitude for Shove or Grapple.
Targetting Fortitude gives you access to a different third of the Bestiary. Though it is probably only specific characters built to Grapple who will want to grab regularly. But still if you can get it as an automatic on your third attack you may want it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would never take Assurance for anything except Medicine since it has static DCs. Assurance is only good for skills that have Static DCs you know you can meet with Assurance to some benefit. You could take Assurance with Crafting for making lower level items if the DM makes you roll or you want a higher roll easily. Maybe there are some other uses, but those are the main two I can think of.
It's never a good idea to remove your ability score and item bonuses from your skill role, especially not as you level where they become quite high. At lvl 20 your ability bonus is +7 with an item bonus of +3, so using Assurance at lvl 20 is giving your a -10 on your skill roll. That doesn't include anything from spells boosting your or getting aid.
Assurance is not good. Not worth taking. It's a massive penalty that just gets worse as your stats get higher and you obtain better magic items.
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe don't take it with a skill that has a super high modifier?
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, Trip is still a bad choice for _anyone_ to use with Assurance. Somebody (I don't recall the name) put out a Guide that recommended it and it was heavily discussed in the Guide commentary thread.
Allow me to quote: "...I have just randomly looked under 'G' (in the Bestiary), for all creatures from CR7 to CR11... and if your PC is level 10 & pushed Athletics to Master your Assurance - Athletics fixed total is 10 +10 (level) +6 (master) = 26. The results are that you auto-trip 8 of the 24 creatures. E_____, could you please describe how you came to the conclusion that As/Ath is auto-hit at higher levels? (I picked level 10 because PFS tops out at 11, did you sample at level 15?)"
Note that the 'auto-hit' commentators stopped posting in the thread at this point, rather than actually try to provide any proof.
I agree with the posters above that state Assurance is for basic tasks, and several of the examples. But not Trip!
Thankfully Assurance(Athletics) allows for targeting both Fort and Ref DCs - so you don't need to try to trip the level 10 tiny-sized Fey that seems to dodge rather well. You can Trip the golem, and Grapple that tiny Fey instead. If we presume the same number of creatures have a bad Fort as they have a Bad ref (likely an unfair assumption to some extent; bigger creatures get more common at higher levels, so I'm probably overestimating a little) then we'd have another 8 of the 24 creatures able to be targeted by Fort DCs. That'd mean your Assurance (a 2nd level feat) is giving you a guaranteed-success option against 16/24 (2/3rds) of creatures that aren't powerful bosses that you'd be facing. That's a lot of versatility in-combat for a single skill feat, gives you a useful third action, and doesn't even require any strength investment.
I agree with those saying on-level challenges shouldn't be basic tasks. Assurance is a low-level skill feat that helps you with tasks a couple of levels below you, normally. If you want to play someone who does something routinely and you don't want to mess anything up in a silly way (athletics to prowl the city, stealth to get past patrols, etc), Assurance is nice. I do think Assurance is more useful the more sandbox your game is - APs tend to be a little more focused and keeping things close to you in levels, especially with PF2 APs having the habit of creating very high-level generic humanoid NPCs at higher levels. You can't Assurance your way past the town guard if the town guard are now level 10 to your level 12.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Static DCs are used for lots of things in PF2. Assurance is great for athletics and acrobatics if your character has feats that let them avoid flat footed conditions when balancing or swimming. It is even pretty great on stealth for low stakes stuff like avoiding the notice of average guards on your approach to the more critical areas of the dungeon, as the failure condition is ok if you are in cover or concealment.
Very few monsters have such feats and being able to exploit terrain can be a big advantage. There are a lot of activities that can force rolls monsters don’t want to have to make all the time.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
My party almost TPKd trying to get up a steep ramp, just because none had Athletics save one, and that one was the one who ate all the attacks from the defenders at the top.
Assurance (Athletics) prevents TPKs!
XD
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Assurance is good for tasks with a low-ish DC, for example some skill challenge where everyone has to roll; those tend to have lower DCs than challenges where only the expert in the party has to roll.
But where it gets even better is cases where you need to beat the same low DC multiple times. Because if you're making multiple rolls then the odds of all of them being successful dwindle pretty quickly. But with Assurance if you can beat one of them you can beat all of them.
Example: suppose that for some roll you have an 0.8 probability of success. If you have to roll five times, you have (0.8^5) = 0.32 probability of success.
Interestingly, that sort of check tends to come up mostly with Athletics (keep swimming/climbing). Also, Athletics actually tends more towards using simple DCs or low DCs for things like "climb this ledge to get to the melee part of the battlefield".
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would never take Assurance for anything except Medicine since it has static DCs. Assurance is only good for skills that have Static DCs you know you can meet with Assurance to some benefit. You could take Assurance with Crafting for making lower level items if the DM makes you roll or you want a higher roll easily. Maybe there are some other uses, but those are the main two I can think of.
It's never a good idea to remove your ability score and item bonuses from your skill role, especially not as you level where they become quite high. At lvl 20 your ability bonus is +7 with an item bonus of +3, so using Assurance at lvl 20 is giving your a -10 on your skill roll. That doesn't include anything from spells boosting your or getting aid.
Assurance is not good. Not worth taking. It's a massive penalty that just gets worse as your stats get higher and you obtain better magic items.
You are missing the point, and arguing from a theoretically ideal position. Yes from level 16 those extra bonuses on your prime attribute rise quickly.
If you have something else you really want to do and the skill is on your main attribute then maybe retrain it eventually or give it a miss. But I'm pretty sure there are a lot of DEX based martial characters out there who won't take their STR past 18 (or even 10) who will gain a lot of benefit from it even at level 20.
Or maybe they don't have a +3 item bonus in all the athletics maneuvers, because they have another effect that they value more.
It is very useful. Just not always, and not always for everybody. Understand it and take it if you want.
PF2 is not a game where you should max one tactic and use it constantly to smash everyone with it. Give yourself some options. This is one.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Trick Magic Item is also an obvious contender for useful things with known DCs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would never take Assurance for anything except Medicine since it has static DCs. Assurance is only good for skills that have Static DCs you know you can meet with Assurance to some benefit. You could take Assurance with Crafting for making lower level items if the DM makes you roll or you want a higher roll easily. Maybe there are some other uses, but those are the main two I can think of.
It's never a good idea to remove your ability score and item bonuses from your skill role, especially not as you level where they become quite high. At lvl 20 your ability bonus is +7 with an item bonus of +3, so using Assurance at lvl 20 is giving your a -10 on your skill roll. That doesn't include anything from spells boosting your or getting aid.
Assurance is not good. Not worth taking. It's a massive penalty that just gets worse as your stats get higher and you obtain better magic items.
As has been mentioned, it can be fine for something like Glad Hand. It can also be useful for High Jump and Long Jump, especially with the Swashbuckler or Barbarian feats to reduce the DCs. Or just climbing and not risking falling.
Medicine isn't the only thing with flat DCs.
Plus there's a level 10 Rogue with Sneak Savant and Assurance: Stealth never failing a Sneak check again.
It's a neat interaction for that, some of the Deception feats, and a couple Thievery feats. But it doesn't break the paradigm of "You can never succeed at an on-level or above task." Is every task going to be on-level or above? No, but there will be plenty enough to make it not a seemingly valued skill feat, especially if the game is meant to throw things that are supposed to be challenging to the PCs on a regular basis. Many of the complaints of low-level combats and AP difficulties are proof of this.
Just as well, Sneak Savant does not interact with Assurance in any way, since Sneak Savant's benefits requires rolling to get its benefits, and Assurance forgoes a roll entirely, meaning feats that provide benefits via rolling a check are worthless, versus having to make a check, which actually work with Assurance.
|
At 2nd level, a rogue with expert in Medicine can automatically succeed at Treat Wounds (and Battle Medicine). I've found that very helpful.
I'm pretty sure that EVERYBODY realizes that Medicine is one skill that can massively benefit from Assurance.
Although even there mathematically (assuming good wisdom and you buy some of the skill items) you are very often better on average to roll the dice looking for criticals or going for a higher target number. Assurance is wonderful at level 2 (Rogue, medic archetype) or 3 (everybody else), its ok at level 6 when you can make that DC 20, but in terms of expected healing it then starts to fall significantly behind rolling the dice (assuming you can live with the occasional failure or critical failure).
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not much reason to "roll hoping for a crit" in a world where Risky Surgery exists. I wouldn't bother with Assurance on a Cleric or Druid, but it's clearly the superior option to hard-investing in wisdom for an Investigator or Rogue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would never take Assurance for anything except Medicine since it has static DCs. Assurance is only good for skills that have Static DCs you know you can meet with Assurance to some benefit. You could take Assurance with Crafting for making lower level items if the DM makes you roll or you want a higher roll easily. Maybe there are some other uses, but those are the main two I can think of.
It's never a good idea to remove your ability score and item bonuses from your skill role, especially not as you level where they become quite high. At lvl 20 your ability bonus is +7 with an item bonus of +3, so using Assurance at lvl 20 is giving your a -10 on your skill roll. That doesn't include anything from spells boosting your or getting aid.
Assurance is not good. Not worth taking. It's a massive penalty that just gets worse as your stats get higher and you obtain better magic items.
You are missing the point, and arguing from a theoretically ideal position. Yes from level 16 those extra bonuses on your prime attribute rise quickly.
If you have something else you really want to do and the skill is on your main attribute then maybe retrain it eventually or give it a miss. But I'm pretty sure there are a lot of DEX based martial characters out there who won't take their STR past 18 (or even 10) who will gain a lot of benefit from it even at level 20.
Or maybe they don't have a +3 item bonus in all the athletics maneuvers, because they have another effect that they value more.
It is very useful. Just not always, and not always for everybody. Understand it and take it if you want.
PF2 is not a game where you should max one tactic and use it constantly to smash everyone with it. Give yourself some options. This is one.
I play a game that often reaches high level with optimizers. So take my perspective for what it is worth and know where it's coming from.
From a high level optimizer viewpoint, Assurance is not worth the skill feat save for something with static DCs. I'm reading a bunch of niche uses for Assurance that to an optimizer don't sound worth it.
1. Why use trip when you can just damage someone? Or the max Athletics strength-based martial with the item bonus can use against lower level weak Fort or Reflex save guys with ease or can use against higher level enemies with a decent chance?
Even with a player that wants to trip stuff dies fast at high level, you don't need to trip it to make it use actions to stand up. It's not worth the bother. But if someone feels like tripping as I have one player who likes to trip on occasion, then they can build for it.
2. If you're in a non-combat climb or swim situation, you're going to let the guy with the athletics move across then drag others across with a rope or some method that can't fail.
3. High level players have lots of mobility options and don't need to worry about climbing or swimming.
4. Stats: The argument that a Dex-based guy wants to use trip or grapple is still not a great argument. Against equal to higher level enemies, your Assurance isn't going to work.
On top of that with +2 to four stats per 5 levels, even a base 10 strength dex-based character should be able to build their strength up to 14 by lvl 10. And to 18 by lvl 20. And pick up a +1 to 3 item bonus fairly quickly.
I have not seen Assurance used in a manner that makes it worth taking for anything but Medicine and Crafting. Medicine because it uses static DCs and it makes the bookkeeping faster than rolling. Crafting because a lot of crafting is for lower level items like scrolls or wands that can easily be done fast with no rolls with Assurance.
Assurance with Athletics and Acrobatics is disappointing to most. It rarely works against many enemies worth using it against. Lower level weak enemies get destroyed by AoE casters or critical hits from martials at higher level. Equal to higher level enemies have saves high enough where your Assurance won't work.
It's not worth taking from an optimizer's perspective. Someone who wants to trip or grapple will build for tripping or grappling wanting the maximum possible bonuses. There aren't enough situations needing an Athletic or Acrobatics check to warrant picking up Assurance.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
2. If you're in a non-combat climb or swim situation, you're going to let the guy with the athletics move across then drag others across with a rope or some method that can't fail.That's not always going to be possible.
Never seen where this was the case. So to me it is always possible.
No one designs modules or adventures where the players can't advance because the low strength stat character didn't take Athletics with Assurance. I have absolutely never seen that happen. Ever.
So if you're taking Assurance with Athletics because your DM is making adventures where your character has to have Athletics with Assurance to advance in the module, then you are in a very, very unique situation that is making Assurance far more valuable than it would be in any normal campaign.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not much reason to "roll hoping for a crit" in a world where Risky Surgery exists. I wouldn't bother with Assurance on a Cleric or Druid, but it's clearly the superior option to hard-investing in wisdom for an Investigator or Rogue.
Battle Medicine is popular enough to address on its own, and Risky Surgery only affects Treat Wounds.
| 24 people marked this as a favorite. |
You can call yourself a high level optimizer all you want but if you're attacking at -10 instead of ignoring your MAP entirely with an assurance maneuver that probably isn't true