|
Not really sure this would qualify as an errata but....
So, the Fighter Dedication pretty much just gives proficiency in all but advanced weapons. The Champion Dedication gives proficiency in all armor types and all the cause/anathema baggage that comes with being a Champion. Other than that, these dedications only give training in a single skill and the class DC.
My issue is. if I already have a class like the Ranger which automatically has proficiency in all but advanced weapons, taking the initial Fighter Dedication feels like a complete waste of a class feat. If I am a Fighter and take the Champion Dedication, again, I am getting nothing worth a class feat. (Just about nobody is going to be happy with trading a class feat for training in one skill).
Does anyone else find this to be a problem for which Paizo should compensate some classes for already having the appropriate proficiencies or is it something that's not worth the attention in future revisions? Are Fighter and Champion feats good enough to justify the dedication as is and it's not even a problem and I'm just dumb?
Edit: Ok, so Champion Dedication gives a whopping 2 trained skills!....Still, not worth the class feat IMO.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Getting access to eventual Lay on Hands or the Champions Reaction both feel strong enough to me that I'm not worried if the dedication is a little redundant on some martials.
Fighter on the other hand, I think I'd look more closely at a lot of the combat style archetypes from APG instead of taking it on another martial in most cases. Two-weapon Warrior, Archer, Mauler,etc tend to all offer more value in the dedication and access to the feats you likely want + some bonus options.
But I don't think every dedication needs to be equally good on all classes, so I don't think they need to update them.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Some multiclass dedications are more powerful to some characters and others are not.
If you already have light armor proficiency and don't use stealth for initiative, Rogue Dedication only gives you 2 skills.
If you are already a spellcaster, getting two extra cantrips and a skill from a different spellcasting multiclass dedication isn't all that great either.
And ultimately I agree with NielsenE, the power of the dedication isn't just the dedication's abilities - it is access to all of the other feats available to the archetype.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's hard if not impossible to balance an archetype to work similarly well to all. And being honest that's also the fun part.
In fact Champion Dedication armor benefits are useless for a Fighter but champion dedication feats are considered one of the best archetype feat colletion. They easily allow a fight to adquire a full champion reaction and/or weapon/shield/horse ally. That isn't irrelevant no matter how you look.
At same time the champion dedication gives heavy armor to casters easily, allowing theses character to have a improved AC hard to adquire in other way.
Other example is spellcaster dedications (wizard, sorcerer, cleric, oracle, druid, witch). Take such dedication with a martial requires a MAD many time, also if you take one of them with a martial you will face that you never be legendary with your spells but it's still useful if you just want some buff/heal spells. But when used for a caster class like wizard, many of these archetypes will be improved synergistically. A Wizard with arcane witch dedication will receive a familiar and at same time will receive that access to improve the number os spells and spellslot you can use and you will use your best DC from wizard becoming legendary.
So I don't see any problem in how the multiclass archetype works. It's just normal and expected that they benefit different class in different ways or even don't give a real benefit at all depending from your build choice.
The solution I had in mind when the core book first dropped would be to have multiple entry points for the dedications, one feat which requires Str 14, Dex 14 which gives trained in martial weapons, trained in athletics/acrobatics and one which requires Str 14, Dex 14, trained proficiency with all martial weapons that gives something else.
Champion archetype is probably the strongest in the game. Just because getting the champion reaction is so good.
Fighter archetype I don't see used much, largely because the 14 str and 14 dex requirement makes it hard for heavy armor users relying on Bulwark to use, plus it doesn't have anything as powerful as champ reaction and LoH to compensate for the dead dedication.
I think Fighter is worth considering on the barbarian even with the dead dedication.
-Barbarians don't get a lot of special actions for strikes like rangers or monks, so picking up some fighter actions is pure gains.
-Acces to AoO at 4 instead of 6. Not only does this give you the single biggest DPR boost earlier, it frees up your 6th level feat for your instinct feat, which are usually awesome and build defining. Giant in particular can now have both enormous reach and something to actually do with it at level 6, which is amazing.
-Certain Strike rocks on a barbarian. Not sure I'd trade in my 20th level feat for it, but I sure as heck would use a few archetype feat for it.
If you've got an ancestry with an inherent Dex boost you might as well go for it.
Balance wise it ends up being fine for the reasons mentioned above (yes you end up missing out on the benefits of a class feat for those two levels (often lower levels where the impact is lesser)... but you benefit greater in the long run.
Personally I would choose a different feat in the meantime and retrain it before gaining another level that would let me choose the class feat I want from the dedication if I was worried about missing out on power.
On the "feels bad" front I do think it would be better to have a skill feat attached. Even if it was aditional lore.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Balanced or not, I think the current paradigm is not ideal because it goes against one of the core philosophies of PF2: getting read of feat taxes (and I mean feat tax in a literal sense here, something that does absolutely nothing or a completely negligible thing for you, and the only practical effect is unlocking new things in the future).
Alternative dedications or a thing that says "if you already have X, get Y" would be nice. 4e did the first, and PF2 itself has some examples of the second.
Mauler giving critical specialization without requirements is at least sometimes relevant to most martial classes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Balanced or not, I think the current paradigm is not ideal because it goes against one of the core philosophies of PF2: getting read of feat taxes (and I mean feat tax in a literal sense here, something that does absolutely nothing or a completely negligible thing for you, and the only practical effect is unlocking new things in the future).
While it might not be completely ideal, it isn't bad.
Also remember that these dedications don't do nothing for all classes. Rogue Archetype pairs quite nicely with no-armor-proficiency spellcasting classes. Classes with only simple weapons get quite a bit of benefit from Fighter Dedication.
a thing that says "if you already have X, get Y" would be nice.
I see that for skill proficiencies. I don't know of any examples of that pattern for anything else. So maybe list some of those examples.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I see that for skill proficiencies. I don't know of any examples of that pattern for anything else. So maybe list some of those examples.
Familiar Master gives Enhanced Familiar if you already have a familiar. Heavenseeker gives a 1st level Monk feat if you already have the feats it offers. Beastmaster gives you a swappable team of companions if you already have one. Snarecrafter gives you additional uses per day if you already have the feat it immitates.
These are some examples I could find in a quick search.
I don't like telling players to homebrew their games, but if something like this affects all your players equally (the Dedication Feat effectively adds nothing to any character), then I feel the Free Archetype variant might be a good thing to add.
I see that for skill proficiencies. I don't know of any examples of that pattern for anything else. So maybe list some of those examples.Familiar Master gives Enhanced Familiar if you already have a familiar. Heavenseeker gives a 1st level Monk feat if you already have the feats it offers. Beastmaster gives you a swappable team of companions if you already have one. Snarecrafter gives you additional uses per day if you already have the feat it immitates.
These are some examples I could find in a quick search.
Sorry but IMO your are confusing Archetypes with Multiclass Archetypes. They appear to be the same because are all archetype but they are different.
Multiclass archetypes is also accessible via heritage (Ancient Elf), Ancestries feat (Multitalented) or as class ability (Eldritch Trickster) while other archetypes always requires a class feat.
Non-multiclass archetypes also allow the access to stronger feats. For example an Archer archetype allows a player to select many fighters feats "just" 2 levels bellow than current char level while a multiclass Fighter archetype limits feats to half of your level making impossible to obtain a feat above level 10.
So in general multiclass archetypes are more generalist but "weaker" while non-multiclass archetypes are more specific but it's stronger so is more natural that dedications of non-multiclass archetypes give more flexibily in their benefits.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I find Intimidating Glare/Intimidating Prowess more "must take" feats than Bon Mot: As a Cha character, I most likely don't have than many languages [Int's not a priority stat] and with Demoralize taking a -4 without a matching language and Bon Mot not working at all, I personally lean into getting rid of the penalty to Demoralize before Bon Mot.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That dosent seem like a good argument for said choice providing zero benefit
It gives a great benefit: access to that classes feats. Just because it doesn't give you instant gratification and you have to wait a bit doesn't mean it doesn't do anything for you.
If I had a complaint about marital multiclass feats is them requiring 2 stats at 14: I can't understand why those need 2 while the rest are fine with 1.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since taking Dedication is a choice for any character (except in Strength of Thousands), I see no problem with any of them.
I mean there's no 'problem' per se, but feat taxes kinda suck and PF2 was supposed to do away with that kinda content. So some people are frustrated seeing stuff that feels like that in the game.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since taking Dedication is a choice for any character (except in Strength of Thousands), I see no problem with any of them.I mean there's no 'problem' per se, but feat taxes kinda suck and PF2 was supposed to do away with that kinda content. So some people are frustrated seeing stuff that feels like that in the game.
I too have seen posts lamenting the fact that the Sentinel dedication feat does not give the Champion, who is already the best Class for Heavy Armor, even more benefits.
To each their own I guess.
I personally think that the fighter dedication should give your character proficiency in all advanced weapons if your character is already proficient in simple and martial weapons. Basically make it weapon proficiency + like how the champion dedication is armor proficiency +.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well sure, in a vacuum it can litteraly do nothing. Dual weapon warrior also grants acces to a bunch of cool feats. It however also grants a tangible benefit from the get go.
Acces to future feats also varies in value. If I'm playing a very slow progression campaign, having "dead" feats, with a promise of future power, feels really bad.
It's pretty simple then: if you don't think it's worth it, then don't take it. If you think you get better benefits from some other dedication, then take that. You just have to balance out what each gets and when: for instance, Dual-Weapon Warrior is great but if you want Attack of Opportunity then you aren't getting it there where fighter multiclass gets you there.
Mind you I don't think this is a major issue. Having a built in fail-safe against getting the same non stacking benefit from multiple sources, would be nice.
While I can see it for things like skills and bonus feats, things like actual feat benefits seems pretty broad: I'd rather a fix for adding a scaling weapon proficiency to a character than track down every possible overlap and build in a fail-safe. I mean Intimidating Prowess and Intimidating Glare overlap too but I don't see a need to 'fix' it either.
The reason I'm harping on mauler is that it's a bit strange design wise;
More often than not the feats it grants acces to are best suited for martials (which already have everything the dedication gives).
While the dedications benefit might be pretty nice for a caster, the feats less so, as they often rely on athletics, a decent strength score and a action economy not already bogged down by spells and buffs
You can look to something like the ruffian rogue with mauler once: you can go main str, slap on some med armor and this archetype gets you Elven curve blade or a Elven branched spear. They get plenty of use out of every feat the Mauler has.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm just pointing out that it's a odd designed feat.
IMO, it's a perfectly well designed feat: it's a weapon focused archetype with a feat that gets you something rare in the game, a scaling weapon proficiency. It's great for that Mutagenist alchemist, str bard or that rogue I talked about that are looking for a 2 handed martial weapon. The rest of the feats are like you said, geared towards athletics based attacks which has broader appeal but I don't see it as much of an issue: You can just go barbarian multiclass if you're just looking for athletics attacks if you NEED to have each and every feat do something for you.
I always disliked that framing. 'if you don't like it don't use it' when it's a perceived balance issue.
I do when it's about something that's unworkable or unusable. That's not the case here though: it's just doesn't do a lot for some combinations but that IMO is expected and most likely intended. Weapon based archetypes is about adding a particular weapon to a class and opening up attacks with that weapon in later feats: if you're already good with that weapon, it's pretty obvious you aren't getting much out of the basic training of the archetype.