One of my players wanted to make a Shadow Bloodline Sorcerer and since Dexterity was not the top score with the build we looked into the Multiclass Archetypes. They were at first thrilled about getting light armor from rogue to help a little in that department, however the enthusiasm quickly deflated when they noticed that, like many other Archetype prophiciences, it does not scale. Unlike the weapon prophiciency of figther not even with a feat.
The campaign starts a few levels higher and the realisation that at level 13 they would be better off just stripping the armor (they probably would've invested some recources in at that point)
So I wonder again, why does the prophiciency with weapons and armor granted by multiclass archetypes not scale?
I mean, it can't be balance reasons, among other things sentinel grants scaling armor prophiciency, archer grants scaling prophiciency with bows and mauler grants scaling prophiciency with all weapons which are two handed or have the two handed trait
I kind of opt just for giving all those archetypes just scaling coupled to their own. The multiclass archetypes are in comparison often subpar either way (the non-caster ones anyway)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So I wonder again, why does the prophiciency with weapons and armor granted by multiclass archetypes not scale?
I mean, it can't be balance reasons, among other things sentinel grants scaling armor prophiciency, archer grants scaling prophiciency with bows and mauler grants scaling prophiciency with all weapons which are two handed or have the two handed trait
Yeah, it is for balance. If you are just wanting the scaling armor proficiency, take the Sentinel archetype instead.
Rogue archetype adds a lot more than just light armor proficiency.
Also, level 13 is a long way away. And even then, you can transfer your investment in your armor into explorer's clothes. You won't end up worse off.
I kind of opt just for giving all those archetypes just scaling coupled to their own. The multiclass archetypes are in comparison often subpar either way (the non-caster ones anyway)
You can houserule it this way in your home games if you like.
Does not change the fact that one does not really need to bother with non-scaling prophiciencies for anything but low-level one-shots
And while Rogue might not be focused on armor, having a different armor class barely makes the character more powerful
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
multiclass dedications are more for the class feats and features than for proficiencies
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Does not change the fact that one does not really need to bother with non-scaling prophiciencies for anything but low-level one-shots
And while Rogue might not be focused on armor, having a different armor class barely makes the character more powerful
Turn it around
And while Rogue might not be focused on armor, not having a different armor class barely makes the character much weaker
...
2nd edition really tries to get away from the idea to take a class for x, another for y and a third for z to have all the nice features and to have them stack as well.
It is a different design philosophy. I like it that way - but I know of players who dislike the system because of it.
So I wonder again, why does the prophiciency with weapons and armor granted by multiclass archetypes not scale?
I mean, it can't be balance reasons, among other things sentinel grants scaling armor prophiciency, archer grants scaling prophiciency with bows and mauler grants scaling prophiciency with all weapons which are two handed or have the two handed traitYeah, it is for balance. If you are just wanting the scaling armor proficiency, take the Sentinel archetype instead.
Rogue archetype adds a lot more than just light armor proficiency.
Also, level 13 is a long way away. And even then, you can transfer your investment in your armor into explorer's clothes. You won't end up worse off.
I kind of opt just for giving all those archetypes just scaling coupled to their own. The multiclass archetypes are in comparison often subpar either way (the non-caster ones anyway)You can houserule it this way in your home games if you like.
Agreed, and I'd like to add to this argument: when you do finally get to level 13, which again, is pretty high up there and probably a long way away, you can just spend a week of downtime to retrain the feat into something more useful. In the meantime it'll get you not only the proficiency, but also extra trained skills.
And, if you can't retrain it in just one week, because you also took other rogue archetype feats, then that just proves that the point of the archetype wasn't only to get the armor proficiency, but rather because they wanted the rogue archetype as a whole, in which case there's the third bonus of taking the dedication: unlocking the other rogue archetype feats.
I know I've taken some not-so-useful dedications before because I wanted the other abilities in that archetype. Nothing wrong with that.
You can also lean into the armor. Invest in Str rather than pumping up Dex and take the Armor Proficiency feat to get Trained in medium armor. You'll be better protected when flat-footed, and you can use Fortification Runes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They why I think simply comes down to a course correction.
It's pretty clear that the devs were very nervous about letting people get proficiency with things. Outside ancestral weapons, it was basically impossible to get true scaling proficiency with anything in the CRB.
Sometime after that they seem to have changed their mind and started publishing a lot of archetypes that make it much easier to grab proficiency, though to some extent the damage is already done because the CRB feats aren't likely changing.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think they just got it wrong in the CRB (and a couple of other places) and mostly got better in later products.
Giving people an ability that you later on nullify is bad design. If someone takes a feat to gain a better armor proficiency but after a while, that "better" armor is actually worse than a lesser armor, that's bad. At the very least you should get an automatic refund, but really, the product you bought should just keep working.
Compare rogue dedication (trained in light armor) to champion (trained, with later option to upgrade) to sentinel (trained, and automatic upgrade if your base armor proficiency would upgrade).
I think they just got this wrong in the CRB and it ought to be changed.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You can also lean into the armor. Invest in Str rather than pumping up Dex and take the Armor Proficiency feat to get Trained in medium armor. You'll be better protected when flat-footed, and you can use Fortification Runes.
Edition confusion?
Flat-footed always gives you a -2 circumstance penalty. It doesn't matter what your DEX is, or what armor you are or are not wearing.
And you can put runes on Explorer's Clothing. I suppose there is a question on whether you can put Armor Property runes on them. It only explicitly says that putting Potency runes on them increases the item bonus to AC. But it also doesn't say you can't put other Armor runes on them. RAI, I am pretty sure that it is intended for all Armor runes to work with Explorer's Clothing.
You can also lean into the armor. Invest in Str rather than pumping up Dex and take the Armor Proficiency feat to get Trained in medium armor. You'll be better protected when flat-footed, and you can use Fortification Runes.Edition confusion?
Flat-footed always gives you a -2 circumstance penalty. It doesn't matter what your DEX is, or what armor you are or are not wearing.
Yeah, definitely edition confusion. I shouldn't post so soon after waking up. :)
And you can put runes on Explorer's Clothing. I suppose there is a question on whether you can put Armor Property runes on them. It only explicitly says that putting Potency runes on them increases the item bonus to AC. But it also doesn't say you can't put other Armor runes on them. RAI, I am pretty sure that it is intended for all Armor runes to work with Explorer's Clothing.
Fortification runes are specifically limited to medium and heavy armor.
Explorer’s clothing can have armor runes etched on it even though it’s not armor, but because it’s not in the light, medium, or heavy armor category, it can’t have runes requiring any of those categories.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just for fun, I whipped up a chart showing the armors that can hold each rune.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is a very big 'depends' on this whole thing. What are the character's non-casting stats? What stats are being focused on? Is it Dex? Does the character plan to use their own spells to keep up with heightened Mage Armor?
Opening options of heavier armor may free up the character to focus on other stats at 5, 10, and 15 if they want to go a different direction.
I think the lack of scaling on many of the things is not a mistake.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is a very big 'depends' on this whole thing. What are the character's non-casting stats? What stats are being focused on? Is it Dex? Does the character plan to use their own spells to keep up with heightened Mage Armor?
Opening options of heavier armor may free up the character to focus on other stats at 5, 10, and 15 if they want to go a different direction.
I think the lack of scaling on many of the things is not a mistake.
For example.
Starting DX of 14, bumped to 16 at fifth, then 18 at tenth, eventually a 20 at twentieth.
Compare to starting DX of 16, bumped to 18 at fifth, eventually a 20 at fifteenth.
Compare to starting DX of 18, bumped to 20 at fifth, eventually 22 at fifteenth.
It looks to me that even if the character's story is "eventually I got so fast I just stopped wearing armor" then the non-scaling armor proficiency they get from Rogue Dedication will keep them relatively at-pace.
Which I believe is working as intended!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Excellent and handy as always.Just for fun, I whipped up a chart showing the armors that can hold each rune.
Thanks! :)
(Not very relevant to this thread, but I just added weapon runes charts to the armor one.)
I appreciate all the answers but I think the only one who really gets me is Ascalaphus.
Getting just baseline better Prophiciency in another type of armor without later progression is a dead feat.
When you get to the point you have paid for something that you won't prophit from later on
Rogue was specifically taken to profit from magical trickster, a small sneak attack and later skill boni
the character can work well enough with light armor (which left him one point below the maximum for that level with the exception from monks and champions)
but getting light armor prophiciency through a dedication and no option to upgrade it at any point just feels bad.
I agree that the rogue dedication gives some nice option, it is one of the better ones (especially with the skill increases if you can sacrifice a feat or two)
But getting non-scaling prophiciency, which can't even be upgraded to scaling one is a really bad investment imo, even if thatinvestment might be part of a besides that good bundle.
I agree but. For the armour it is often level 13 which is long enough for many games. The retraining rules mean that you can go with something more appropriate at that time. When you may have a better Dex.
For weapon restrictions especailly Rogues themseles which get quite a cripped list of weapons improved for Weapon tricks. Its quite annoying to have picked up say Kukri via Catfolk Weapon Familiarity then find it doesn't get expert proficiency. Some of it works and some of it doesn't. Just a bit complex.
...
Its quite annoying to have picked up say Kukri via Catfolk Weapon Familiarity then find it doesn't get expert proficiency.
...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I appreciate all the answers but I think the only one who really gets me is Ascalaphus.
Getting just baseline better Prophiciency in another type of armor without later progression is a dead feat.
When you get to the point you have paid for something that you won't prophit from later on
Rogue was specifically taken to profit from magical trickster, a small sneak attack and later skill boni
the character can work well enough with light armor (which left him one point below the maximum for that level with the exception from monks and champions)
but getting light armor prophiciency through a dedication and no option to upgrade it at any point just feels bad.
I agree that the rogue dedication gives some nice option, it is one of the better ones (especially with the skill increases if you can sacrifice a feat or two)
But getting non-scaling prophiciency, which can't even be upgraded to scaling one is a really bad investment imo, even if thatinvestment might be part of a besides that good bundle.
It just doesn't seem that big a problem to me. The feat is good until 13th level. If you take Sentinel Dedication before 13th level, then you'll get Expert in Light and Medium Armor at 13th. If you take Armor Proficiency before taking Sentinel then you'll also be Expert in Heavy Armor at 13th. So we are only talking about one more feat or two for heavy.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Catfolk Weapon Expertise....
Its quite annoying to have picked up say Kukri via Catfolk Weapon Familiarity then find it doesn't get expert proficiency.
...
Thats not a good answer. That was the point.
A Rogue gets weapon expertise at level 5. Waiting till level 13 doesn't cut it
|
|
Catfolk Weapon Expertise....
Its quite annoying to have picked up say Kukri via Catfolk Weapon Familiarity then find it doesn't get expert proficiency.
...Thats not a good answer. That was the point.
A Rogue gets weapon expertise at level 5. Waiting till level 13 doesn't cut it
Exactly.
"Is spent this feat to do cool stuff rogues do with daggers, also with weird cat claw weapons. But only at levels 1-4 and 13 because at levels 5-12 it's much better to just use daggers."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The thing is, even rogues out grow light armor in PF2, by having a Dex high enough to not need it. It really is only at low levels that a heavily rouge like character needs proficiency in light armor. The MC option offering expert proficiency in light armor at level 13 would kinda make this weird 2 levels of light armor being more useful to a MC rogue than a full class rogue, since most MC rogues can’t hit 20 dex till 15th level. I agree with everyone else who is pointing out that MC rogue isn’t about maintaining best possible armor, that is the sentinel’s role. MC rogue is about skills and sneak attack boosters. Which are pretty useful for shadow sorcerers.
Yep, but for say a Ancient Elf caster with 16 Dex to start. They get out of armour at level 13 so is only level 13 and 14 where they are one point of AC behind. Level 15 they are OK again. It is minor compared the the Rogue weapon expertise problem.
|
|
Looking at all the other dedications - not a single one (apart of the Champion) does offer armour proficiency.
The Champion does offer a level 14 feat.
I do agree that it is wrong not to allow scaling. So something seems off in the CRB. But looking at everything else I would agree with HumbleGamer and my money as a betting person would be that Paizo instead of missing out the scaling rather added the benefit by accident.
Off course - not working for Paizo this is mere speculation.
So three options:
a) be happy as it is and move on
b) ask you GM to have a house rule
c) ask for an errata - but be careful - it could backfire. That might either add scaling or remove the proficiency instead.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't mind it not having scaling, for the classes that benefit from the light armor proficiency (clothy casters) most of the time you'd take the archetype asap at 2nd level (when you need it to help out your defenses). By the time your unarmored proficiency improves at 13th level, you've had two more ability increases to improve dexterity, meaning it should be at 18-19 and you should be starting to consider explorer's clothing anyway. (By 15th you could then have 20dex, meaning you'd have outgrown light armor)
I cant imagine any clothy taking sentinel if rogue gave just as good of a boost, but perhaps that speaks more to the nature of sentinel than the rogue archetype.
Stop it with the sentinel you guys
not everybody is interested in taking up a purely defensive dedicaton just to fix a problem with the first one
also besides the prophiciency there is (for this player) nothing on interst in sentinel, so there is no incitive to pick it up, it would be just a dead feat
|
Champion dedication would be a better option if you want Heavy Armor, assuming you have the Str. It gives all armor proficiency at level 2, and at level 14 you can pick up Expert in all Armor. This is on par with casters only getting Expert in their armors anyway, and the dedication also gives access to abilities like Lay on Hands, a Champion Reaction, and Desperate Prayer.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Stop it with the sentinel you guys
not everybody is interested in taking up a purely defensive dedicaton just to fix a problem with the first one
also besides the prophiciency there is (for this player) nothing on interst in sentinel, so there is no incitive to pick it up, it would be just a dead feat
I don't think people are directing their comments at your original question any more. We have moved on to discussing the scaling proficiency problem in general.
For you and the people you play with it would probably be better to simply remove the Light Armor proficiency from the Rogue dedication entirely. That way it doesn't trigger your natural human loss-aversion tendencies when it stops being better than unarmored.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Stop it with the sentinel you guys
not everybody is interested in taking up a purely defensive dedicaton just to fix a problem with the first one
also besides the prophiciency there is (for this player) nothing on interst in sentinel, so there is no incitive to pick it up, it would be just a dead feat
If the only thing that will make you happy is Paizo changing this feat, then I guess this thread is done.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For you and the people you play with it would probably be better to simply remove the Light Armor proficiency from the Rogue dedication entirely. That way it doesn't trigger your natural human loss-aversion tendencies when it stops being better than unarmored.
Please no. It works well as it is..... and shows up in half my caster builds.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Calling the rogue dedication a "dead feat" is ridiculous. Its a dedication feat. It is supposed to serve as a gateway to all the rogue goodies. The fact that it gives you light armor proficiency at all is a generous extra that singularly helps clothy ac issues assuming you arent choosing to avoid raising dex (deliberately gimping yourself). Compared to most of the other dedication feats that offer significantly less useful perks with their class feat access it is already fantastic.
The main incentive for taking it should be the rogue feats. If the player isnt interested in taking the rogue feats then they shouldn't take the dedication at all. If their main incentive is armor proficiency and non-dexterity defense then they can choose the champion or sentinel dedication. The take away here is that the rogue dedication is supposed to make you more like a rogue, nothing more. Imagine taking the archetype designed to make you more like a rogue then getting upset when it isnt designed to make you tanky and instead encourages you to continue increasing dexterity...
As the GM, rule whatever you like, make up your own rules if you dont like the design choices behind the existing feats. Hell, if you dont like the idea casters are designed to have less ac than martial characters then nothing is stopping you from going so far as to remove ac disparity completely and use flat rolls. Should you? Obviously not, because the ac disparity exists to reinforce class balance and fantasy tropes, but I'm emphasising you can do what you like, so long as your players are having fun.
Also please stop spelling it "prophiciency".
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, just drink a Drakeheart Mutagen. At level 3 it's a +5 Item Bonus to AC, with a +2 Dex Cap. The penalties are negligible when going up against a creature that will be swinging Greatswords at you. It also comes with a single action ability that lets you Stride twice, in case you really need to GTFO.
Just have some on hand, and if the fight starts getting swingy chug it. No armor necessary.
While I can see both sides of the argument it is clearly designed that way for a reason.
However you as the GM have options and have to look no further than the champion dedication to see that it is fair to do this.
Add a feat at 14th level called light armor expertise. Just as the Champion dedication has the Diverse Armor Expert or fighter dedication has Diverse Weapon Expert. They are behind the base class by a level of when they get the next tier but that is fine as a dedication should never grant full proficiency. And capping at expert is perfectly fair as not all martials get Expert armor.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Your proficiencies already scale with your level whenever you are trained in a thing, and you should not be able to access better than expert proficiency in most things without a class feature or an archetype that is dedicated to that specific thing. Master and greater proficiencies are supposed to replace class features like full BAB, weapon training, and the monk's AC Bonus from PF1.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Your proficiencies already scale with your level whenever you are trained in a thing, and you should not be able to access better than expert proficiency in most things without a class feature or an archetype that is dedicated to that specific thing. Master and greater proficiencies are supposed to replace class features like full BAB, weapon training, and the monk's AC Bonus from PF1.
PF1 is probably a bad comparison point, since in that game getting proficient in armor or weapons was worth a single feat. None of this depreciating ability silliness.
Well, I agree, calling the dedication a dead feat is over the top, I got carried away a little bit
but the armor proficiency in it is indeed worthless (longterm, might be okay for shorter campaigns)
And yeah, I would actually like paizo to change the feat in either direction (or add another feat that enables scaling, which imo is sorely needed also as a general follow up feat for most weapon proficiency feats)
I know just stating that wont give the feat
but this is just one of the things that bug me most about the whole rules system: if you want a weapon that is outside of your regular proficiency and it is not a racial weapon it is just not worth it in the long term without an archetype and considering that there is a TON of archetypes missing (which can of course still be filled)
but taking a feat to just train out of it later on feels wrong to me (and I am reasonably sure I dont feel like that alone)
and taking another archetype I (or my players) have no interest in to get proficiency is also rather suboptimal (sentinel and champion dedication are for armor the only options and they are for some builds and characters just not interesting/fitting)
with fitting I don't mean statwise also fluff wise
And yeah, I would actually like paizo to change the feat in either direction
I really don't understand this viewpoint. If it's not an issue without the proficiency, and it's not an issue with a scaling proficiency, then how is it an issue to have something in between: a non-scaling proficiency?
Just think of it this way. For levels 1-12 - which is in no way a short timeframe - it has the proficiency, and then the rules change and it no longer does. Since both of those are valid options that aren't an issue, then the combination should also be fine.but taking a feat to just train out of it later on feels wrong to me (and I am reasonably sure I dont feel like that alone)
Perhaps. I've never felt that way, but I have to admit it does seem like a non-negligible part of the playerbase is generally predisposed to disliking retraining. I don't really see why it's any different from a wizard preparing different spells each day, but hey, you do you. And yeah, this is one of many cases where these people will be at a very slight disadvantage to those who don't have an issue with it. But ultimately that can just factor into your choice. Is it worth it to get the rogue archetype without the armor proficiency? If the answer is yes, then get it. If it's no, then you'll have to weigh how important it is in the short term, and therefore if it's worth it to get it even though that goes away in the long term. These kinds of choices are made all the time in campaigns. Every coin spent on something that's not going to be with you at level 20 (be it from a consumable, or a permanent item you're going to grow out of) can be thought of in the exact same way.