| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Inventor is starting to sound pretty cool!
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think we really need a third category of character in our discussions rather than the martial vs spellcaster binary.
Alchemists and Inventors aren't spellcasters, but while they can be played as a martial, they aren't always focused on filling the kind of direct combat role that martials normally fill.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think we really need a third category of character in our discussions rather than the martial vs spellcaster binary.
Alchemists and Inventors aren't spellcasters, but while they can be played as a martial, they aren't always focused on filling the kind of direct combat role that martials normally fill.
I'm not sure I entirely agree here. The Inventor isn't as strong at hitting things as a Fighter or Barbarian, but it's still pretty much a martial. It's got martial proficiencies and a damage boosting mechanic and most of its core features revolve around getting better at fighting things directly.
The inventor has more stuff outside the realm of hitting something than a Barbarian, but it's very much not in the same ballpark as the Alchemist, imo (which has spellcasting weapons and a lot more tools it can deploy in any given day, though ymmv on how good those tools are).
Honestly its closest analogues are things like the Investigator or the current playtest's Thaumaturge in terms of design space. Definitely still a martial, but with a wider toolkit.
Out of curiosity, do the guns work underwater?
Air guns should. I'm just getting into the equipment so I'll look.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
The inventor has more stuff outside the realm of hitting something than a Barbarian, but it's very much not in the same ballpark as the Alchemist, imo (which has spellcasting weapons and a lot more tools it can deploy in any given day, though ymmv on how good those tools are).
Alchemist is a caster base that tries to be a martial and inventor is a martial base that dabbles as a caster: both have utility options to fill the nebulous space between these aspects. [IMO, inventor does a better job of this]
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is a very clear divide between Full casters and others (whom I call Martials for ease of use) in the starting Saves proficiencies.
All full casters, and only them, start with 2 saves at Trained (and Expert in Will).
All other classes start with 2 saves at Expert, except for the Monk who starts with 3 saves at Expert.
. . . Then, they will need stuff like Haphazard Repair and Unstable Redundancies to get more out of their Unstable abilities, either Clockwork Celerity or Megavolt (depending on if you want strong ranged attack or more actions), and Electrify Armor. ...
Why would you take Haphazard Repair? I don't quite understand the purpose of the feat, especially in the final version. It has the Unstable trait which means if you had already failed the flat DC 17 check for Unstable you can't use the feat at all, and even if you somehow could you would have to immediately make a DC 17 flat check anyway to then use an Unstable ability.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Haphazard Repair is just for what it says on the tin, quickly repairing something. Stuff that breaks a weapon/armor in combat seems too niche for it to be a good feat for those kinds of Inventors, but a construct inventor might not mind access to a one-action heal for their pet.
I'm not sure why it's being referred to as something that improves Unstable actions though, it doesn't really interact with the Unstable trait outside having it itself.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think we really need a third category of character in our discussions rather than the martial vs spellcaster binary.
Alchemists and Inventors aren't spellcasters, but while they can be played as a martial, they aren't always focused on filling the kind of direct combat role that martials normally fill.
I'm not sure I entirely agree here. The Inventor isn't as strong at hitting things as a Fighter or Barbarian, but it's still pretty much a martial. It's got martial proficiencies and a damage boosting mechanic and most of its core features revolve around getting better at fighting things directly.
The inventor has more stuff outside the realm of hitting something than a Barbarian, but it's very much not in the same ballpark as the Alchemist, imo (which has spellcasting weapons and a lot more tools it can deploy in any given day, though ymmv on how good those tools are).
Honestly its closest analogues are things like the Investigator or the current playtest's Thaumaturge in terms of design space. Definitely still a martial, but with a wider toolkit.
Its closest analogue seems to be the Starfinder Mechanic, which has similar choices between a drone, experimental armor, experimental weapon, etc.
In fact everything in Guns and Gears suggests some unified planning between the two lines - a lot of the vehicle stuff in G&G sounds like the new vehicle stuff in Starfinder's recent Tech Revolution book, just with less lasers and more clockwork.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think we really need a third category of character in our discussions rather than the martial vs spellcaster binary.
Alchemists and Inventors aren't spellcasters, but while they can be played as a martial, they aren't always focused on filling the kind of direct combat role that martials normally fill.
Alchemist might not sling spells, but it's a caster by another name. The most success I've had playing an alchemist is treating it like a support caster that trades out offense and spell potency with instant access to your full spellbook and being able to "bottle" my spells and let other people use them.
Inventor is in inverse, where they are certainly a martial that trades power for utility
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The art in G&G is wild. More of this, please.
Im in love with the Unexpected Sharpshooter. I do find the last two feats a little confusing on how to rule Regarding MAP. Firstly i assume you don't add MAP to the deception check for "I MEANT TO DO THAT" as it is its own action. "CHAIN REACTION" is the one i have most trouble with however as I'm not sure if every strike includes MAP which i assume it does. One thing i will state is we need more goofy out of the box thinking archetypes like this in the future!
I'm really excited about it too, especially since it seems to be gun agnostic (though the last two feats are a little odd in their wording).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I didn't notice this before because the one I made took an archetype but...
Weapon Inventors only have a single second level feat they qualify for. I wonder if that's intentional?
I mean obviously they can take another first level feat but I can't think of any other example where a class is that limited by their subclass choice. So it feels weird.