|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So I saw a request for this several months ago and I had pumped out a Swashbuckler, Thaumaturge, and Psychic guide in quick order, so I figured I could do one.
That was a mistake.
This guide quickly got away from me as writing it was an entirely different beast altogether and I just had no idea how I wanted to approach it. Man, it was . . . difficult to write and I am sure parts of it are nonsensical. So, if you would like to help me out, I would REALLY appreciate some constructive critisizm here (not just "you are teh suck jump off a bridge") but actual, meaningful comments to try and improve my guide here.
I've tried to make it new player friendly, discuss pros and cons, talk about how some consider magic suboptimal . . . all that is to say, I tried my best, but now I need the community's help to polish it because I quite frankly, am at the end of my rope as for what I can do by myself.
Anyway, I hope this helps at least someone choose their character class.
it seems almost bizarre to suggest monk as the default tank rather than champion. The champ is going to do the job a lot better with out-of-the-box obvious default choices.
|
|
it seems almost bizarre to suggest monk as the default tank rather than champion. The champ is going to do the job a lot better with out-of-the-box obvious default choices.
Remember, that section is not for 'best' but 'simplest' I was surprised when I came to the conclusion of Monk also, but with the alignment restrictions, reactions you have to keep track of, and Anathema/Edicts, champions are a lot more difficult for first-time players than a monk who doesn't have to muddle through any of that.
Small formatting suggestion: Love the smaller horizontal margins, just worth decreasing the vertical margins too.
I really like the focus on character concept here. Good stuff. I also appreciate the simple build suggestions. I would replace the monk with a flurry rangers as the most simple tank build though. Playing a monk well means understanding MAP and strategizing around it. Most builds benefit from finding a good third action instead of attacking 3 times, or 4 times for the monk. But the flurry rangers just needs to hunt prey and mash strike all day.
The other thing that bothered me was the pic of Valeros and Mersiel being hypnotized to make out in front of Kyra. I'm a little surprised Paizo published that drawing, and I don't especially see it's relevance to your guide, so maybe replace it with something less rape-y?
|
Kinda agree with @capstain Morgan about Meri and Val's pic
Very informative as always, I'm a huge fan of your guides.
It also clears a doubt I had, spell casters being Nerfed, while trying to play my 1e wizard in 2e I noticed her save or suck and debuffs fails a lot, and because of incapacitation there aren't save or suck anymore... Enemies' saves are too high x.x
Oddly enough the classes I like the most are the most complex such as Magus, thaumaturge and Oracle.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Have to disagree about Flurry Rangers being simple tanks. Sure, that Hunter's Edge gains the most benefits by remaining still like a tank, but Rangers aren't built to tank (and arguably Precision's the best Hunter's Edge for beginners). Rangers are perhaps the least tanky CRB martial next to Rogues. Of course an Archetype could patch that up, but then it's not such a simple build anymore, and it'd open up the competition to many combos that still would be simpler or better.
Dex Monk is the better choice, especially when the new player realizes how important mobility is when they find themselves out of position (being new and all) or simply overwhelmed and needing to retreat. And mobility's something the other basic tanks don't provide.
|
|
I really like the focus on character concept here. Good stuff. I also appreciate the simple build suggestions. I would replace the monk with a flurry rangers as the most simple tank build though. Playing a monk well means understanding MAP and strategizing around it. Most builds benefit from finding a good third action instead of attacking 3 times, or 4 times for the monk. But the flurry rangers just needs to hunt prey and mash strike all day.
The other thing that bothered me was the pic of Valeros and Mersiel being hypnotized to make out in front of Kyra. I'm a little surprised Paizo published that drawing, and I don't especially see it's relevance to your guide, so maybe replace it with something less rape-y?
Thanks for the compliments. While Flurry Rangers are good (and I disagree with Castilliano, a properly set up ranger could tank) I stand by my pick of monk for one reason only: I've seen new players play rangers and they are constantly confused about hunter's edge and forget who they applied it to and when they have to re-up it. A PC playing a Monk (especially Sajan) can just choose monastic weaponry, pick up a bo staff (or temple sword, or anything else) and go to town on enemies and not need to worry about keeping track of hunter's mark. Also, Bo staff provides a great third option (parry) if they have a more seasoned player to point it out.
As for the pic, yeah, I see that now. It is surprisingly hard to find a pic with four PCs in it, one from each class roll. That was the ONLY one I found with a tank, healer, rogue, and 'control caster.' (that's the connection, that section is about the four basic types of classes) I realized it was pretty icky in the back of my mind, but I filed that away under 'new players won't know what's going on here.' If you find another good pick with the four types of classes I'll happily replace it.
Kinda agree with @capstain Morgan about Meri and Val's pic
Very informative as always, I'm a huge fan of your guides.
It also clears a doubt I had, spell casters being Nerfed, while trying to play my 1e wizard in 2e I noticed her save or suck and debuffs fails a lot, and because of incapacitation there aren't save or suck anymore... Enemies' saves are too high x.x
Oddly enough the classes I like the most are the most complex such as Magus, thaumaturge and Oracle.
Thanks for the compliments, it means a lot. Yeah, I was surprised when I went into the math of casters as well, and I like playing complex classes too!
Have to disagree about Flurry Rangers being simple tanks. Sure, that Hunter's Edge gains the most benefits by remaining still like a tank, but Rangers aren't built to tank (and arguably Precision's the best Hunter's Edge for beginners). Rangers are perhaps the least tanky CRB martial next to Rogues. Of course an Archetype could patch that up, but then it's not such a simple build anymore, and it'd open up the competition to many combos that still would be simpler or better.
Dex Monk is the better choice, especially when the new player realizes how important mobility is when they find themselves out of position (being new and all) or simply overwhelmed and needing to retreat. And mobility's something the other basic tanks don't provide.
I don't think rangers are any worse than tanking than barbarians. They get better saves and no AC penalty, which offsets the smaller hit points pool. All fighters have over them is heavy armor which is but a feat away. And fighter feats are actually kind of hard to understand for newbs.
Precision ranger is straightforward enough... But actually requires tactical understanding to play well. By comparison, the flurry rangers does not, and you don't even really need to understand the rules in play. The player just tells me who they want to attack, and I tell them how many times they get to do so.
Have to disagree about Flurry Rangers being simple tanks. Sure, that Hunter's Edge gains the most benefits by remaining still like a tank, but Rangers aren't built to tank (and arguably Precision's the best Hunter's Edge for beginners). Rangers are perhaps the least tanky CRB martial next to Rogues. Of course an Archetype could patch that up, but then it's not such a simple build anymore, and it'd open up the competition to many combos that still would be simpler or better.
Dex Monk is the better choice, especially when the new player realizes how important mobility is when they find themselves out of position (being new and all) or simply overwhelmed and needing to retreat. And mobility's something the other basic tanks don't provide.I don't think rangers are any worse than tanking than barbarians. They get better saves and no AC penalty, which offsets the smaller hit points pool. All fighters have over them is heavy armor which is but a feat away. And fighter feats are actually kind of hard to understand for newbs.
Precision ranger is straightforward enough... But actually requires tactical understanding to play well. By comparison, the flurry rangers does not, and you don't even really need to understand the rules in play. The player just tells me who they want to attack, and I tell them how many times they get to do so.
Lots of disagreement (which is odd, since we're usually in sync).
LOL, Barbs make mediocre tanks too, and I prefer their saves. When people complain on the boards about repeated TPK/PPK issues with their party it was (before more classes became available) nearly always due to having Rangers & Barbarians in the front to tank...and fail at it.
Heavy Armor via a feat is subpar, and I suspect you know that. The flaws won't show until later if focused on the early game, but it also kind of forces into a human role to get before 3rd. And that 1 AC is significant IMO, especially when the Heavy Armor guys get Shield Block too.
(Unless you mean via Sentinel, which is a solid choice, but for simplicity I was avoiding Archetypes, especially outside the CRB.)
Also feel Precision Ranger needs less tactical understanding; as long as you hit your Prey once/round, you're doing fine. Meanwhile a Flurry Ranger kind of has to predict which Prey they'll begin the round adjacent to in order to do better than w/ Precision. In both cases they can "just tell you who they want to attack, and you tell them how many times they get to do so." but w/ Precision there's less loss when designating a fresh target.
And Precision meshes better w/ shield use (as we are talking about tanks here) and a pet which it seems many rookies want when they choose Ranger (not that I encourage the latter w/ its complexity).
|
|
I mean, Barbs can do okay at Tanking so long as they don't rage EVERY fight. Like if you see an enemy and know that you are going to be in it for the long haul, maybe don't rage and maybe pick up a shield. Are you raging? No, but sometimes that extra bit of defense is good enough to offset the extra 4 damage you might deal.
And Rangers will basically have the same AC as swashbucklers if they grab a shield, which they should do if they are the party tank.
Also both barbarians and rangers get scaling heavy armor proficiency if they pick up Sentinel dedication, making their AC just as good as fighters if that's what you are worried about.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, but as a Barbarian you generally want to be raging.
Rangers are serviceable tanks. They're not going to be the best, but you can go sword and board with your d10 hp as much as anyone else.
Though I also admittedly can't get my head around monks and rogues being called the simple options compared to champions, fighters, and barbarians, all of which are incredibly straight forward and not super focused on specific positioning and action economy.
Good to has a free class choosing guide stuff out there for PF2e, VampByDay. ;)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks, the guide looks great. But I couldn't disagree more with the difficulty ratings, especially the psychic. IMO it's one of the most newbie friendly caster classes and a million times more straightforward to play than an alchemist or investigator. I would rate magus, psychic and some oracle subclasses lower and alchemist plus all prepared casters higher.
I dunno, when I first read the psychic even I had trouble figuring out how it worked. Keeping track of your psyche unleashed, what abilities can and can't be used during psyche unleashed, the stupified afterwords, and then there are the focus points that work unlike any other focus points in the game. And that's not even counting the oscilating wave psychic which needs to keep track if their last spell was fire or cold. Plus the two different subclasses that determine your casting stat? I think it's pretty complicated. You are right though, Magus is as well.
I read the description of Magus only being able to use Spellstrike every short rest and thought I missed something with the Magus. It's a one action recharge of the Spellstrike. Not sure why you put the short rest for a Spellstrike in this guide for the Magus. Only the Magus archetype requires a 1 minute recharge.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I read the description of Magus only being able to use Spellstrike every short rest and thought I missed something with the Magus. It's a one action recharge of the Spellstrike. Not sure why you put the short rest for a Spellstrike in this guide for the Magus. Only the Magus archetype requires a 1 minute recharge.
Updated the magus entry to make more sense while still communicating what I wanted to communicate.
Just a nit-pick, but you several instances where you write 'roll' instead of 'role', like so:
"Now every party doesn’t need to have each roll, but if everyone in the party wants to play a wizard,..."
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just a nit-pick, but you several instances where you write 'roll' instead of 'role', like so:
"Now every party doesn’t need to have each roll, but if everyone in the party wants to play a wizard,..."
Thanks for pointing that out. Y’know, for having a degree in English, I’ve always been terrible with homonyms. I’ll try to fix that.
