| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is my opinion piece (read: thesis XD) on the investigator class, based mostly on the experiences of myself and people from my table in various one-shots and parts of our campaign (Curse of the Crimson Throne). As such, everything I say is to be taken with an appropriate amount of salt. Maybe not the last part, that one is salty enough
To start, I want to highlight the good parts, because this class does a lot of things right. Most importantly, the core mechanics of Pursue a Lead, Clue In and Devise a Stratagem (DaS) do an awesome job of combining flavour with fitting mechanics. An investigator feels and plays exactly like it should - you are investigating a mystery and are methodical, even in combat. Not just a brute with a sharp stick, but someone who thinks 3 steps ahead of everyone else.
Secondly, the Methodologies do a very good job of adding a special bend to your character, allowing even such a comparatively narrow field to have individual flavours. In addition, a Forensic Medicine Investigator (especially with the medic archetype) really relaxes the healing situation in difficult fights, leading to fewer “heal bot” situations.
Thirdly, there are quite a few feats that encourage and reward teamplay very well. Special mentions go to Shared Stratagem and its awesome upgrade, Didactic Strike.
Fourthly, for the most part, feats that can be very disruptive in play or can break an adventure are properly gated behind the rarity wall. That's Odd is a notable exception.
Sadly, while I really want to like this class, it suffers from many problems, one of which is that it can often be very disruptive to play or at least dictate the pace in an uncomfortable manner. The main source of that is not the gated feats, but rather the internal "cooldowns" of your basic class features Pursue a Lead and Clue In, as well as the minute that Pursue a Lead takes to activate. The "let's wait for the cooldown" or “gimme a minute” situations happened far too often in my experience.
Clue In - We are investigating the study of someone who we suspect to be a baddie. I Clue In someone to help the check, it still fails. We have a bit of time, so we wait to try a different method with the bonus. Eventually, you realise that the whole feature fairly quickly becomes more like “worse Aid” in most situations.
Pursue a Lead – The natural drive of any player will be to use this as often as possible to get DaS for free. But only being able to do so every 10 minutes and having to take 1 minute to investigate after finding something can massively slow things down. This only really matters in situations where you are really in a hurry or after a trivial fight, so mileage may vary. Still, especially in APs the latter happens rather frequently, causing annoyance for everyone involved.
Next, some things necessarily have to be very GM-dependant, but Pursue a Lead’s combat effectiveness can change drastically with the GM. It’s about this part here:
“This subject is typically a single creature, item, or small location (such as a room or corridor), but the GM might allow a different scope for your investigation.“
If you as the GM interpret this conservatively, they’ll only ever get free DaS on a single creature per encounter, if any. If you don’t and say that “small location” also means “the creatures in that small location” or completely rely on the last part of that sentence, that number can go up by a lot.
I’ve seen and heard too much discussion about this for it not to be a concern.
- “Unique” Class Features –
The first topic I want to talk about here is unique class features after level 1. Most classes already get a lot of cool and unique stuff just from their features as they level up. The investigator gets the really good stuff at level 1 and then that’s that. Sure, you get quite a decent haul of proficiency upgrades and skill feats/increases, but that’s really it.
You know who also gets a comparable, less limited set? The rogue. The more limited nature doesn’t really bother me, but you know what does? Looking at Keen Recollection and Deductive Improvisation and then comparing that to Debilitating Strike and Deny Advantage. Keen Recollection is a worse version of Untrained Improvisation, a level 3 general feat (or level 5 human ancestry feat) that is borderline useless for the Investigator. Even at level 1, the average investigator will be trained in at least 11 out of the 16 skills. Even should it come up and for some reason you are the only one in the party who has any chance, your chances aren’t good. They also get really bad as DCs continue to increase. This feature has a shelf life! Deductive Improvisation isn’t much better. If you don’t have the necessary proficiency, chances are very high that you’ll not succeed the check either. Sure, it gives you a chance, but all it really does is slightly mitigate poor party planning, mostly for Thievery. For us, this has literally never come up. Meanwhile, Deny Advantage often seriously saves your bacon and Debilitating Strike is an amazing combat feature. Let’s not even think about Double Debilitations at 15.
At level 19, it gets even worse. The Rogue’s Master Strike isn’t the greatest thing in the world, mostly a very good anti-mook weapon. But it is leagues ahead of “you get your hand held by the GM” aka Master Detective. Not only is it incredibly anti-climactic after the first few times it triggers, but it is also a pain for the GM, because it erodes the main part purpose of any mystery – being mysterious. It can work well, but more often than not the GM just has to work harder to conceal the clue, so that the investigator actually has something to investigate for more than 5 seconds.
So yeah, the investigator really needs some class features that actually make him better over the course of his career.
- Combat Performance and Niche –
The big one people often complain about and I’m no different, as that’s the reason why I stopped enjoying playing my investigator. This part has been discussed to death, so what it boils down to is this: in combat, you are just a worse rogue or (by now) thaumaturge. Outside of combat, you are not useful enough to compensate that fact.
I really like the idea of DaS, but even with the formerly mentioned generous interpretation of Pursue a Lead, almost any other martial who is even halfway competent will pull ahead of you if you do not specifically spec into Eldritch Archer. If you don’t have such a generous GM, even that isn’t an option against most enemies. The fact that the investigator also has very few feats that directly improve combat performance like other martials isn’t helping that fact.
I don’t like feeling like I’m not pulling my weight and that is definitely the case here.
-
All in all, I really want to like and play this class, but I just can’t get over all the problems. That said, I hope there are many people out there that do not share this issue and have fun with their character
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I had a similarly unfun experience with the investigator. My GM definitely played follow a lead to 1 character only. I learned quickly that devise a stratagem suffers from being a fortune effect and being a martial that cannot hero point clutch attacks is incredibly deflating. Also, reload weapons encourage you never to make attacks at all unless you really roll well. It is a class that hinges everything on an often very expensive single d20 roll every round that you can never reroll. That is the core combat mechanic of the class and it super doubles down on it by tying all of the classes bonus damage to that attack.
What I think could save the class (especially in combat, without just pushing investigators to not take investigator feats and just became MC casters) would be be class feat skill activities that are cool, but hyper charge in rounds where you don’t attack or damage an enemy. For example, a feat that combined a demoralize action with a step normally, but if you do it as a last action of the turn, and didn’t do damage this round, it’s tiers of success look more like the fear spell, but without the critical success fleeing. I think even just one of these feats for each methodology at level 2 would really help players feel like they have an investigator-like thing to do when devise is not going to go well for them.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, the thing the investigator needs more than anything else is interesting and effective things to do when your DaS fails, especially early on.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*grabs popcorn*
Hey, check it out. Someone is trash-talking a class other than Witch.
*grabs familiar*
Just leave them alone.
*grabs popcorn*
Hey, check it out. Someone is trash-talking a class other than Witch.
One has to do something different from time to time or things get stale ;)
But in all seriousness, the devs cannot react to feedback you don't give them, so I'm saying my piece ^^
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, more feats really could help fix a lot of the investigator issues.
I think no one would complain about investigators getting feat options for when the devise roll is bad.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One thing that really struck me when GMing for a player with an investigator is how much I could control how powerful it is or isn't. The class never became a dominant power house, but with more liberal readings of Pursue and Devise and with gameplay sections that focused on more singular narratives, these two abilities could work together every fight against almost every opponent.
But with more conservative readings and/or more disjointed storylines, they might be things that only come up rarely, maybe even not at all.
As a GM I can make changes to encounters to make any class feel stronger or weaker, but I still feel like there's generally a baseline degree of functionality you can expect from an 'average' campaign and things only fall apart if you heavily deviate from those norms. The investigator feels a lot more sensitive to arbitrary campaign whims by contrast. You don't need to deviate much to make it feel much better or much worse.
In terms of combat, that instability doesn't feel very rewarding, because the class goes all in on a single strike like a Magus does, but its payoff is just slightly better than every attack a rogue makes, it's certainly not shocking grasp spellstrike.
Out of combat it fares better, but a lot of its features and feats don't feel that significant, or feel redundant with simply good GMing and adventure design, so I'm not sure that really makes up for it (indeed, in some respects it feels like I should be GMing worse with an Investigator so they can take advantage of those feats).
But in all seriousness, the devs cannot react to feedback you don't give them, so I'm saying my piece ^^
Yeah. I don't actually have a problem with it. And for the most part agree with your assessment. Especially the need for more things to do when Devise rolls badly.
I have played an Investigator up to level 4 - but I also went the route of Free Archetype Wizard Multiclass. The class needs something in-class.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, the thing the investigator needs more than anything else is interesting and effective things to do when your DaS fails, especially early on.
I think this is the major issue with the class.
We fought a golem recently, and after a grueling fight we almost had it down. On my turn I devised a Strategum and rolled a 3. The GM actually told me the golum had 6 HP left .
At this point I was basically stuck. I'd used 1 action, I could attack but I knew I'd miss, so in order to deal damage I had to attack twice taking all my actions. The attack that might hit was at a -5 to hit , and since I wouldn't get any bonus damage I wasn't a guaranteed kill even on a hit .
A single bad roll meant I had something like a 20% chance of being able to deal 6 HP to this enemy, and to deal that damage I had to use my entire round. In a multi-target fight it's not quite so bad, I could just target someone else, but for a class who's main schtick is focusing on a single enemy it sure has trouble with single-enemy encounters.
Let's compare Divise a Strategum with the Thaumaturge Tome Implement's Intensify Vulnerability;
Your tome's power not only reads a creature's present but even records its future actions. When you use Intensify Vulnerability, roll a d20 and set the result aside. At any time until the start of your next turn, you can use the d20 result you set aside for an attack roll to Strike the target of your Exploit Vulnerability, instead of rolling a new d20; this is a fortune effect.
There are 2 things that make this easier to use.
The first is that the Thaumaturge can choose to use this roll. If you roll a 3 then you can just ignore it. You spend an action, roll poorly and the only thing you've lost is 1 action, which is not the case for the Investigator . In my opinion letting the Investigator choose whether or not to use the roll from Devise a Strategum is enough to fix the problem, even if ignoring the die-roll also means you lose the bonus damage dice.
The second thing is that the Thaumaturge can choose which attack to use the pre-rolled die on. If you roll a Nat-20 then it's more advantageous to save that 20 for your second attack - You'd get a regular attack at your full attack bonus followed by a guaranteed crit. This is a trick the Investigator can't do, despite this being the Investigator's main schtick.
Now it's worth noting that it isn't all gravy for the Tome-Thaumaturge. This class feature comes online at level 9 so it probably should be better than a level 1 feature. Also the Intensify Vulnerability action can't be used until the round after you've Exploited a creature's vulnerability, so this ability is only useful if a creature survives a round. But this is an optional class feature for the Thaumaturge, and even if they take the Tome they have a 2nd Intensify Vulnerability option to choose if they're not interested in this pre-roll mechanic.
I built my class to have options on a bad DaS roll - Bon Mot, Intimidating Glare, Battle Medicine - but there are times when none of the above are useful and I can't deal damage, like Fighting a lone golem who's immune to mind-affecting effects and who curses all the PCs so that they can't benefit from non-magical healing. This encounter was obviously more difficult than usual for my character specifically, but the problems around rolling poorly against a single enemy is very common, and this isn't a build-specific problem it's a weakness with the core mechanics of the class.
Also to be clear I am enjoying the class, but there are times when the mechanics of the class are underwhelming, and even sometimes feel limiting when they should feel the oposite. It also seems like Paizo agrees since they gave the Thaumaturge basically the same mechanic but with the wrinkles ironed out.
Also sorry this post got so long, I meant to just chime in with a short example =P
... The second thing is that the Thaumaturge can choose which attack to use the pre-rolled die on. If you roll a Nat-20 then it's more advantageous to save that 20 for your second attack - You'd get a regular attack at your full attack bonus followed by a guaranteed crit. This is a trick the Investigator can't do, despite this being the Investigator's main schtick...
That is something an Investigator can do so long as there is another target or if s/he does not have Strategic Maneuver. Target a different creature, or the subject of the Nat 20 DaS with a Shove or Trip, then use the Nat 20 on a qualifying Strike versus the subject.
As for the Single Target conundrum, as long as the Investigator isn't wholly dependent on Int to Strike, simply not using DaS is an option.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
... The second thing is that the Thaumaturge can choose which attack to use the pre-rolled die on. If you roll a Nat-20 then it's more advantageous to save that 20 for your second attack - You'd get a regular attack at your full attack bonus followed by a guaranteed crit. This is a trick the Investigator can't do, despite this being the Investigator's main schtick...That is something an Investigator can do so long as there is another target or if s/he does not have Strategic Maneuver. Target a different creature, or the subject of the Nat 20 DaS with a Shove or Trip, then use the Nat 20 on a qualifying Strike versus the subject.
As for the Single Target conundrum, as long as the Investigator isn't wholly dependent on Int to Strike, simply not using DaS is an option.
While true, the trouble there is against your off-target you completely lose your combat mechanic. No Int, no strategic strike damage. It can feel pretty bad.
And arguably the best mechanical solution to this is to not lean on DaS or SS at all. A strength based investigator with a greatsword or a d10 polearm can just treat free devises as a freebie and otherwise not engage with their core mechanics at all and arguably do better than an investigator who tries to... which also feels kinda bad.
While true, the trouble there is against your off-target you completely lose your combat mechanic. No Int, no strategic strike damage. It can feel pretty bad.
Sure. And it can feel kind of bad for Rogues when the targets are immune to Flat-Footed and/or Precision damage.
Not every fight, nor every target, is going to engage certain classes' combat mechanics optimally.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
While true, the trouble there is against your off-target you completely lose your combat mechanic. No Int, no strategic strike damage. It can feel pretty bad.Sure. And it can feel kind of bad for Rogues when the targets are immune to Flat-Footed and/or Precision damage.
Not every fight, nor every target, is going to engage certain classes' combat mechanics optimally.
A vanishingly few number of niche enemies compared to something that can come up in literally any and every fight. Not really an equitable comparison.
But yeah, oozes are badly designed too.
While true, the trouble there is against your off-target you completely lose your combat mechanic. No Int, no strategic strike damage. It can feel pretty bad.Sure. And it can feel kind of bad for Rogues when the targets are immune to Flat-Footed and/or Precision damage.
Not every fight, nor every target, is going to engage certain classes' combat mechanics optimally.
More relevant, it isn't any one particular enemy or enemy feature that is causing that. It is a feature of the class itself.
So the GM can't do anything like replace the Ooze in the AP with an equivalent enemy so that the Swashbuckler and Precision Ranger don't get neutered.
Rolling low on the Devise roll happens half the time that it is used.
One idea that I am kicking around it my head is to have Devise a Strategem actually be a Fortune effect. The Investigator rolls their Devise roll twice and uses the better result.
It is still counter-balanced by the single attack per round action economy. And second attacks don't get the benefit of Devise such as Strategic Strike and INT replacement. And there is still the chance that both rolls are low.
I haven't actually done any math to see what that does to the expected damage compared to other classes though.
That is something an Investigator can do so long as there is another target or if s/he does not have Strategic Maneuver. Target a different creature, or the subject of the Nat 20 DaS with a Shove or Trip, then use the Nat 20 on a qualifying Strike versus the subject.
As for the Single Target conundrum, as long as the Investigator isn't wholly dependent on Int to Strike, simply not using DaS is an option.
Right. If you're in combat and you flub your DaS roll then you can attack someone else. When you do this you're using a different stat to hit , you don't get any bonus damage and you don't get any other class benefits for attacking the target of your DaS. As Squiggit said, this is essentially encouraging you not to invest into your class features. Having a backup plan when your class features fail is a good idea, having to make it your go-to strategy is a failure of class design in my opinion.
Having said that, what I was talking about was any time where there is only one viable enemy. Not only does this happen any time there is a single-enemy encounter , but also happens at least once at the end of each multiple-enemy encounter. As I said in my example above this has a decent chance of turning my 1 viable attack into 3 actions. Simply the ability to NOT use the pre-rolled number would be enough to fix this. And again, the Thaumaturge has this ability, and also gets their bonus damage regardless of whether they use the preroll or not, so Paizo seems to agree with me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One idea that I am kicking around it my head is to have Devise a Strategem actually be a Fortune effect. The Investigator rolls their Devise roll twice and uses the better result.
It is still counter-balanced by the single attack per round action economy. And second attacks don't get the benefit of Devise such as Strategic Strike and INT replacement. And there is still the chance that both rolls are low.
I haven't actually done any math to see what that does to the expected damage compared to other classes though.
While I like the idea, I think the current basic idea fits better thematically. Roll twice + take the higher always feels more like magic or divine intervention, while DaS feels exactly like the "discombobulate" scene and that is awesome.
What makes no sense however, is that, should you roll low, you then knowingly execute a plan that is guaranteed to fail. Any changes to DaS should absolutely get rid of that particular nonsense.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
In my experience, you always want a back up plan for an investigator.
Plan for when DaS fails.
This could be a cantrip from an ancestry feat or dedication that doesn’t have an attack roll, Intimidation to Demoralize, setting up an Aid reaction, tossing an alchemical bomb (does damage on a failure and you do have martial weapons proficiency unlike the Rogue), providing some Battle Medicine or Assisted Recovery for someone taking persistent damage, or something else.
The best investigators have at least two back up plans.
You should also have a plan for when your DaS goes really well. If you think (or better yet know) that an attack is going to critically hit use some special ammunition like Vine Arrows or a talisman like an Owlbear Claw.
Have a few consumables ready for such occasions.
This can even be relatively cheap if you take something like Talisman Dabbler dedication.
There are other actions in encounter mode than Strike. There are several that don’t require an Attack roll. Learn to use them.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are other actions in encounter mode than Strike. There are several that don’t require an Attack roll. Learn to use them.
You make it sound like most Investigator players don't know that, which is a very bold assumption to make. You are also proving my point - unlike any other class in the game except the Swashbuckler, the Investigator is literally forced to make these considerations for when their one trick fails. That is not a privilege, that is a punishment. Because all other classes can do that too, they just also have the ability the Strike as well.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Investigator is another one of those classes like the witch Paizo made flavorful on paper and very weak in play unfortunately.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
In my experience, you always want a back up plan for an investigator.
Plan for when DaS fails.
This could be a cantrip from an ancestry feat or dedication that doesn’t have an attack roll, Intimidation to Demoralize, setting up an Aid reaction, tossing an alchemical bomb (does damage on a failure and you do have martial weapons proficiency unlike the Rogue), providing some Battle Medicine or Assisted Recovery for someone taking persistent damage, or something else.
The best investigators have at least two back up plans.
You should also have a plan for when your DaS goes really well. If you think (or better yet know) that an attack is going to critically hit use some special ammunition like Vine Arrows or a talisman like an Owlbear Claw.
Have a few consumables ready for such occasions.
This can even be relatively cheap if you take something like Talisman Dabbler dedication.
There are other actions in encounter mode than Strike. There are several that don’t require an Attack roll. Learn to use them.
Yes, and…
Since the class itself creates this dynamic, it would be really cool to get a set of class feats designed around expanding these options, rather than stepping outside the class for answers. Basic skill actions are ok, but on such a skill heavy class there is definitely room to add feats that interact with skills and DaS when the low is roll. This is a good design space to support the class.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, and…Since the class itself creates this dynamic, it would be really cool to get a set of class feats designed around expanding these options, rather than stepping outside the class for answers. Basic skill actions are ok, but on such a skill heavy class there is definitely room to add feats that interact with skills and DaS when the low is roll. This is a good design space to support the class.
Add a few "skill feat + benefit" type class feats to level 1 and 2. Most of the actually good stuff is locked behind skills based on ability scores other than INT (mostly CHA), so adding some usability for that would be highly appreciated. Using Society (Joker flashbacks) to Feint would be funny.
But class feats aren't enough. The Investigator has so more than enough left in the power budget to add some proper class features. Since level 3 seems to be the normal level to add major features, I'd put "Always Prepared" here. It would go something like this:
"When one plan fails, you always have another. When the Strike determined by your Devise a Stratagem fails, you know it would fail, or you have rolled a 7 or lower on your Devise a Stratagem, you can choose to gain a +1 circumstance bonus to the next skill check you make before the end of your turn. This bonus increases to +2 at level 11 and +3 at level 17. If you choose to gain this bonus, you cannot use the roll from Devise a Stratagem this turn. You can also forgo to use Devise a Stratagem this turn to gain the bonus. You cannot use this feature outside of an encounter."
The third sentence is to prevent possible workarounds, such as the 7 you rolled actually succeeding. The bonus is quite significant, so it is fair that you have to make the choice between offence and this.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I was starting to think in a similar direction. How about something like this:
Indirect Strategy (class feature)
Sometimes the direct approach isn't promising. After rolling Devise a Strategy against an opponent but before you make a Strike against that opponent, you may declare that you're using an indirect strategy. If you then take an action with which you may use Indirect Strategy, treat your d20 check for that as if you had rolled a 20 MINUS your Devise a Strategy roll. For example if you rolled a natural 1, 20 -1 = 19.
When you gain this class feature, choose one of the level 1 feats that give you indirect strategy options to gain as a bonus feat. You may spend later class feats to gain more options.
Some ideas for L1 indirect strategies:
- Shove
- Recall Knowledge
- Feint
- Escape
Ideas for later L~4 indirect strategies:
- Trip
- Grab
- Disarm
- Spell Attack
- Strike but only with a non-temporary consumable
It'd take a bit of fine-tuning how many of these you should get for free and at what level. As a general trend, they should be highly compatible with on-theme investigator weapons such as those that leave your hands free for shenanigans, or that allow maneuvers.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are other actions in encounter mode than Strike. There are several that don’t require an Attack roll. Learn to use them.You make it sound like most Investigator players don't know that, which is a very bold assumption to make. You are also proving my point - unlike any other class in the game except the Swashbuckler, the Investigator is literally forced to make these considerations for when their one trick fails. That is not a privilege, that is a punishment. Because all other classes can do that too, they just also have the ability the Strike as well.
You made it sound like you didn’t know that. The class description really doesn’t explicitly point it out and only the Chemist sample does something in the brief description that hints that it is important to always be prepared.
If you don’t want to prepare multiple contingencies, it may be the wrong class for you.
Focus on where the investigator is good rather than where it is bad. Just as you need to play a sorcerer differently than a wizard, you should play the investigator differently than the rogue.
Strategic Strike doesn’t require you to get a target flat footed, making it a lot easier to do than Sneak Attack. It is very easy to do at range, unlike Sneak Attack. The DaS can be free, although as you have pointed out how often that happens will heavily depend on the GM. You know before using the attack if it is likely to hit.
|
I adore the Investigator, and love it enough that I built two separate investigators for PFS. I don't consider it a problem that I cannot reroll the bad Devise a Stratagem because there are usually opportunities to use attack another creature. Bosses rarely act alone, especially in the six person parties that usually happen in PFS.
I do wish though that the investigators got an in-feat option for Electric Arc and other non-attack roll cantrips. Zendel gets his non-attack roll cantrip from being a feychild gnome. This is not an option for my Grippli, Dr. Croaker, and I am seriously considering taking a caster dedication on Dr. Croaker just to get that as an option.
Still, I find that Dr. Croaker has lots that he can do still when DaS is less effective. There's almost always people getting hurt in battles against single bosses, and he's great at keeping the party up.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are other actions in encounter mode than Strike. There are several that don’t require an Attack roll. Learn to use them.You make it sound like most Investigator players don't know that, which is a very bold assumption to make. You are also proving my point - unlike any other class in the game except the Swashbuckler, the Investigator is literally forced to make these considerations for when their one trick fails. That is not a privilege, that is a punishment. Because all other classes can do that too, they just also have the ability the Strike as well.
You made it sound like you didn’t know that. The class description really doesn’t explicitly point it out and only the Chemist sample does something in the brief description that hints that it is important to always be prepared.
If you don’t want to prepare multiple contingencies, it may be the wrong class for you.
Focus on where the investigator is good rather than where it is bad. Just as you need to play a sorcerer differently than a wizard, you should play the investigator differently than the rogue.
Strategic Strike doesn’t require you to get a target flat footed, making it a lot easier to do than Sneak Attack. It is very easy to do at range, unlike Sneak Attack. The DaS can be free, although as you have pointed out how often that happens will heavily depend on the GM. You know before using the attack if it is likely to hit.
My bad, I should have explained that in my original post. I didn't mention it, because it isn't something the Investigator particularly specialises in. Because, as I said, that part of the Investigator isn't a benefit. It's not unique, you don't have a niche in that department, and it's not a high point of the class. Besides Forensic Medicine, as a MAD INT-class the only thing you practically have going for you is Recall Knowledge. That can be good, but rarity and the repeat-penalty heavily limit its usefulness. Not to mention the Thaumaturge is leagues ahead of you in that department, at least in combat. With Diverse Lore and the Tome implement that changes to literally always. Everything else, literally everyone can do as good as you or better. It's just that for them it is a choice. The additional skill increases and feats are nice, but the regular allotment is plenty enough to get everything you need for your abilities to work very well.
In regards to Strategic Strike/DaS, yes, the ease of use at range is a clear advantage, as is the ability to stack things on a roll you know will be good. On the other hand, as a fortune effect it cannot benefit from things like True Strike/Target or Hero points, which really hurts it. It is also really easy to get enemies flat-footed, often not even requiring a check. If you have some good team synergy, it is trivial. Probably about as easy to get for free as DaS in many games. Being endlessly repeatable, it also does it's actual job much, much better - doing damage.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It should probably be noted that, RAW, you can override a bad Devise roll with True Strike, assuming you have a way to cast it and still attack that turn (because they're both Fortune effects you choose which applies).
I've never really found that a compelling argument, Hero Points themselves say:
Spend 1 Hero Point to reroll a check. You must use the second result. This is a fortune effect (which means you can't use more than 1 Hero Point on a check).
If it was possible to add another fortune effect to a fortune effect to choose which one you wanted, it would be possible to use multiple hero points and choose which applies but the rules say that because it is a fortune effect you can't use more than 1 of them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It should probably be noted that, RAW, you can override a bad Devise roll with True Strike, assuming you have a way to cast it and still attack that turn (because they're both Fortune effects you choose which applies).
I've never really found that a compelling argument, Hero Points themselves say:
Spend 1 Hero Point to reroll a check. You must use the second result. This is a fortune effect (which means you can't use more than 1 Hero Point on a check).If it was possible to add another fortune effect to a fortune effect to choose which one you wanted, it would be possible to use multiple hero points and choose which applies but the rules say that because it is a fortune effect you can't use more than 1 of them.
It should work RAW, as both True Strike and DaS are "banked" until you use them, rather than applied immediately and directly to a roll like a hero point. In almost all other combinations (such as trying to use DaS and a Hero Point together), your argument would be absolutely true. It's also really dodgy, so probably not RAI.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Focus on where the investigator is good rather than where it is bad. Just as you need to play a sorcerer differently than a wizard, you should play the investigator differently than the rogue.
I mean that's a great high ideal, but the Investigator struggles a bit because most of the ways it's different are the ways in which it is worse. Having a backup plan is good advice, but it's not a great look for the class when you need a Plan C because of reliability issues, when your Plan A isn't even that strong to begin with.
It's also kind of telling what the advice has been to make the Investigator play better: Use archetypes to pick up new abilities to use instead, choose weapons that minimize the effect of your core mechanics (to the point where builds that outright ignore SS are arguably stronger than ones that rely on it), rely on out of class or class neutral features to bolster your skill set.
Rather than focusing on where it's good, it seems like the prevailing advice here is to be as un-investigatorly as possible. That does not speak to a strong core design.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Focus on where the investigator is good rather than where it is bad. Just as you need to play a sorcerer differently than a wizard, you should play the investigator differently than the rogue.I mean that's a great high ideal, but the Investigator struggles a bit because most of the ways it's different are the ways in which it is worse. Having a backup plan is good advice, but it's not a great look for the class when you need a Plan C because of reliability issues, when your Plan A isn't even that strong to begin with.
It's also kind of telling what the advice has been to make the Investigator play better: Use archetypes to pick up new abilities to use instead, choose weapons that minimize the effect of your core mechanics (to the point where builds that outright ignore SS are arguably stronger than ones that rely on it), rely on out of class or class neutral features to bolster your skill set.
Rather than focusing on where it's good, it seems like the prevailing advice here is to be as un-investigatorly as possible. That does not speak to a strong core design.
Actually, I consider having a backup plan being very appropriate for an investigator. They are supposed to think multiple steps ahead.
So let’s focus on where else they are good at.
Int class with 6 plus Int modifier trained skills. Two of those skills are defined between class and methodology. Still, they can easily be trained in all the monster identification skills.
Feat support for a free RK check against an opponent via Known Weaknesses. I had underestimated how useful that was on my own investigator and will need to pick it up later.
Multiple abilities that help other players. The RK from Known Weakness has a small chance of giving a bonus. Shared Strategem can make an opponent flat footed for an ally. Even without a rogue, that improves the chance of a hit or critical. Clue Them All In is a nice skill boost.
I don’t think they will ever be the highest DPR in combat. They are reasonable in combat, capable of being a switch hitter, and have plenty of ways to help the team with various skill checks and combat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The investigator is one of the classes that fall in these situation we claim about Witch, Fullblaster Casters, Warpriests, Alchemist, Swashbuckler, Inventor?, Non-gunslinger with firearms a so on being subpar.
It's usually is playable but requires a lot of effort and still fells subpar. If you play with these classes/concepts you will be able to play it well but also will notice that it won't work as well as you want or you will fell more inefficient than your allies (curiously if you ask to other player they probably will say that they don't see any problem at all and that you also are helping normally, it's something that usually only the self player and sometimes the gm notices).
That said I still have fun with investigator. I have some love for my elf investigator with alchemist dedication build that the concept of use DaS to check if I will thrown a bomb with precision damage or if you will use only the bow depending from the dice roll. This is fun and useful many times even not being so effective and sometimes take advantage of Strategic Assessment to discover a weakness and begin to throw bombs (if I have bombs for that weakness) to exploit it with the splash.
Once again this build is far from being the best DPR of the party yet is fun to play. But is only fun because I ignore the inefficiency of the number and focus in the fun of try to do the best tactical decision but not everyone will accept this and I cleary understand their point.
Investigator is generally fine, but a couple of new class feats would make the class easier to work with. I say this as someone who has played two investigators and plans to play more, whether or not anything changes for the class.
Investigator is not going to be the biggest damage dealer in a party, nor should they be. In fact, I think they should generally not match the rogue in damage. This is because, simply put, investigators are the best at skills. Rogue comes second because the investigator is +1 on the rogue some of the time with Pursue a Lead, +2 after 9. Then you can add mutagens/elixirs if you are in alchemical sciences for more bonuses, or you can get other skill related benefits from the other methodologies. Yes, half of an investigator's skill feats are required to be on mental skills, but in my experience that isn't a problem. Being the best at skills should cost something, and a little bit of damage is where that cost is being paid.
In combat, your trick is that you know a roll before you try it. You need to have a plan for as many results on that Devise as you can, or else you are leaving value on the table. If it is a 3, maybe you throw a cantrip (spell attacks are fine btw, Devise only cares about Strikes) or skill actions. On an 18, maybe you Strike someone else and then your target. On a 20, maybe you pull out that gun you imported from Alkenstar. Whatever they happen to be, have multiple plans.
I do think it would be good for the investigator to have in-class feats that help with that. Probably skill actions based on their methodology, non-Strike actions that do useful things against singular boss enemies.
That said, my biggest problem with the investigator is Diverse Lore. While I also quite like the look of the thaumaturge (haven't tried it yet, though), I do dearly wish that they didn't get that feat. A general lore that scales better than any other option; I think it is out of line and makes them head and shoulders above other Recall Knowledge options. Of those options, the investigator was previously the best.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, and…
Since the class itself creates this dynamic, it would be really cool to get a set of class feats designed around expanding these options, rather than stepping outside the class for answers. Basic skill actions are ok, but on such a skill heavy class there is definitely room to add feats that interact with skills and DaS when the low is roll. This is a good design space to support the class.
What's funny is that Investigators can accidentally remove Plan B options by taking Athletic Strategist; an Investigator with that feat is now stuck with their bad DaS roll on strikes and grapples. It's to the point where I think I would skip it on a dedicated Athletics build.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Do you want to make DaS way more interesting? Just change the word must to can from:
You assess a foe's weaknesses in combat and use them to formulate a plan of attack against your enemy. Choose a creature you can see and roll a d20. If you Strike the chosen creature later this round, you must use the result of the roll you made to Devise a Stratagem for your Strike's attack roll instead of rolling. You make this substitution only for the first Strike you make against the creature this round, not any subsequent attacks.
to:
You assess a foe's weaknesses in combat and use them to formulate a plan of attack against your enemy. Choose a creature you can see and roll a d20. If you Strike the chosen creature later this round, you can use the result of the roll you made to Devise a Stratagem for your Strike's attack roll instead of rolling. You make this substitution only for the first Strike you make against the creature this round, not any subsequent attacks.
If Paizo make this in a errata many complains will end.
Currently this already works if you switch the target but will only be effective if you are with a ranged weapon and there's still more than 1 enemy around.
Do you want to make DaS way more interesting? Just change the word must to can from:...
Does that make it better? Yes. Does it make it more interesting? No. Just being able to ditch the roll means you don't have to think about planning or anything, and makes the dedication's Devise way too good for the likes of the fighter and magus. I have seen a magus with the current dedication Devise, giving them a free action almost-True Strike is just bonkers.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Investigator is generally fine, but a couple of new class feats would make the class easier to work with. I say this as someone who has played two investigators and plans to play more, whether or not anything changes for the class.
I always love it when people can just play what they want and like. Good luck and have fun :)
Investigator is not going to be the biggest damage dealer in a party, nor should they be. In fact, I think they should generally not match the rogue in damage. This is because, simply put, investigators are the best at skills. Rogue comes second because the investigator is +1 on the rogue some of the time with Pursue a Lead, +2 after 9. Then you can add mutagens/elixirs if you are in alchemical sciences for more bonuses, or you can get other skill related benefits from the other methodologies. Yes, half of an investigator's skill feats are required to be on mental skills, but in my experience that isn't a problem. Being the best at skills should cost something, and a little bit of damage is where that cost is being paid.
[...]
I regularly see people say "the Investigator is the best at skills", but I think there are a few issues with that claim.
The problem is ability scores. The Investigator is extremely MAD. A regular Investigator is practically forced to start with 18 INT and 16 DEX. Even then, they'd need 12 STR to get their full AC before level 10, but ranged investigators have some wiggle room. That leaves one or two AS with a 12, the rest is 10. So, you usually start with at best 12 in WIS and/or CHA. Even when getting one of the corresponding skills to expert at level 2 and getting your Pursue a Lead Bonus, you'll only match someone who cannot do the same and started with an 18 in that score. At level 3, you are inevitably behind, as they can hit expert and from that point you waffle between being behind and pulling even with all your bonuses. That means, while you have a broader base competence than essentially all other classes, you'll only ever be the best in things that are INT related and have something to do with the current line of inquiry. That functionally means Recall Knowledge on 5 of the RK skills plus lores (with the Thaumaturge as a big asterisk on that), Decipher Writing and maybe some Crafting stuff. That is still a lot in most games, but far less than "being the best at skills".
One thing I will say though, is that I've seen some people mistake Pursue a Lead to be more limited than it actually is. AT least as far as the non-combat part of it is concerned. A good GM will be rather open in what skills qualify, as I see no reason why lock-picking or forcing open the door to the office of the bad guy shouldn't be counted as investigating; However, it has to be related to a subject you are investigating, which can sound like you shouldn't get it too regularly when stepping outside the "main plot". That has not been my experience at all. How that typically looks in my games is that you have one of your two investigations set aside for the "main plot" and one open for other stuff, such as combat. That second one gets switched around all the time to your current "subject" or, what I prefer and wish Pursue a Lead would be phrased more like, is that instead of the new room being a new subject to investigate, you instead "push" your investigation forward inside of the bounds of your general location (e.g. a house, cave system or something like that). Like in a detective story, where a clue leads them to a house and inside they discover a range of additional clues, each of which provides an additional piece of the puzzle, including potential henchmen of the mysterious archenemy. As you might have guessed, I am a big fan of interpreting this feature very liberally. That not only solves the problem of doing increasingly weird things and stopping to get DaS for free, it also feels like what the feature is actually intended to feel like.
That said, my biggest problem with the investigator is Diverse Lore. While I also quite like the look of the thaumaturge (haven't tried it yet, though), I do dearly wish that they didn't get that feat. A general lore that scales better than any other option; I think it is out of line and makes them head and shoulders above other Recall Knowledge options. Of those options, the investigator was previously the best.
Absolutely true. Diverse Lore would still be awesome with the "trained, then expert when you hit legendary in X" type deal all other of these "RK Everything" lores have and it would still be better than all of them. It's current iteration is just OP for no good reason. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see it errata'd.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do you want to make DaS way more interesting? Just change the word must to can from:...Does that make it better? Yes. Does it make it more interesting? No. Just being able to ditch the roll means you don't have to think about planning or anything, and makes the dedication's Devise way too good for the likes of the fighter and magus. I have seen a magus with the current dedication Devise, giving them a free action almost-True Strike is just bonkers.
I would very much say that it would make it more interesting. Currently, when you roll low, your smart Investigator will have to execute a plan they know will fail to potentially get a hit in with their second attack. With this change, they can make a new plan from scratch that might result in a hit on the first try. It wouldn't be a very good hit, but still. I think that is much more fitting.
As far as MC things are concerned, you can just leave the old variant for those, no problem.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think getting to re roll DaS just doesn’t feel thematic enough to be cool. It would be way cooler to have feats that do something else based on realizing the attack is a bad idea. Like a feat that let you use the inverse of the roll for aiding an ally’s check could be neat. The worse you realize the attack is going to be, the more you can leverage it into a Aid, so that if the attack would be a critical failure it instead is a critical success as an aid, and if it is a failure than it would just be a success. The narrative would be that you take the attack anyway, but knowing it won’t strike you use it as a distraction for someone else.
I don’t think true strike can work with DaS though. The order of operations means that you have already either cast true strike or devised before any roll is made. So if you had cast it before devising, you’d have to choose not to use one or the other. Meanwhile, if you decide first, that check is already made, so you can’t add a second fortune effect because the one has already resolved. You don’t get to resolve both fortune effects and then decide which one to apply.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think getting to re roll DaS just doesn’t feel thematic enough to be cool. It would be way cooler to have feats that do something else based on realizing the attack is a bad idea. Like a feat that let you use the inverse of the roll for aiding an ally’s check could be neat. The worse you realize the attack is going to be, the more you can leverage it into a Aid, so that if the attack would be a critical failure it instead is a critical success as an aid, and if it is a failure than it would just be a success. The narrative would be that you take the attack anyway, but knowing it won’t strike you use it as a distraction for someone else.
I don’t think true strike can work with DaS though. The order of operations means that you have already either cast true strike or devised before any roll is made. So if you had cast it before devising, you’d have to choose not to use one or the other. Meanwhile, if you decide first, that check is already made, so you can’t add a second fortune effect because the one has already resolved. You don’t get to resolve both fortune effects and then decide which one to apply.
Would it be too strong if Investigators could use a reaction to offload their Devise roll on the target's strike? Might be an interesting "parry" type feat to help make melee Investigators more appealing.