| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've worked for 10 years in the video game industry and I can assure you of one thing: I've never seen a single game designer that was considering power creep positively. For sure, there are some games around there with power creep as a core design component but they are the exceptions not the rule. For most games, power creep is an undesired by-product of game design. Still, it's quite ubiquitous.
So I open this conversation on power creep, using our preferred hobby as gaming material.
I'll start this conversation with an example: the Magus, as I think it's a perfect illustration of the release cycle of new content.
When the Magus has been released, the overall point of view on the class was that it was way underpowered. Fragile, clunky, with an extremely constrained action economy but no real asset. I've been among the first ones (if not the first one on these boards) to raise concerns about what you could do by combining Spellstrike, True Strike and Fire Ray (as it was before the Psychic was a thing). I remember clearly some criticism I experienced at that time: Using Spellstrike with a Focus Spell grabbed through a Dedication is obvious powergamer shenanigans, no one plays their Magus like that. Roughly a year after, the default expectation for the Magus is to grab a Focus Spell through Dedication and the community point of view on the class has strongly shifted, with at least the Starlit Span being considered close to broken and the melee Magus being much closer to the average power level.
The Magus is the perfect embodiment of the release cycle of new content. When new content is released, players start to get used to it. They don't know the builds and tactics so chances are high that they will play it "badly" from a tactical point of view. Soon, powergamers start to release their guides and builds and tactics. These builds and tactics spread across the community and at some point they become the default way of playing. And it's at that point that you can really assess the true power level of the released content.
Before that, it's impossible. Especially in a game like PF2 with so many feats, spells and magic items, determining all the potential combos right off the bat is beyond human reach. So no one can really tell when new content is released if it's balanced or not. In general, the perceived power level of a new class at release is lower than its actual power level (there are so many potential builds, powergamers have a lot of imagination) but it's not set in stone and sometimes no one finds anything fancy to do with a class and the basic builds and tactics are also the most optimized ones.
From APG to Dark Archive, Paizo strategy was to aim low. With APG, they aimed far too low. But after APG and before Thaumaturge, I can say that Paizo was spot on. The new classes are roughly at the same power level than Core Rulebook's, I'd even say that they are more balanced as none is as strong as the best CRB classes and none is as bad as the worst. Still, I don't remember of a single of these classes (before the Thaumaturge) that got positive feedback from the playtest nor at release. Because many of them were then perceived as much worse than they are now, especially the Magus even if I start to see much more love for the Summoner.
Unfortunately, this strategy generates negative feedback. New content always feels weak and being excited about new content is important both for players and game designers. So a lot of game designers follow their players' feedback and release content that feels balanced at release...
With the Thaumaturge, Paizo adopted a brand new class design (and I strongly link that to Mark leaving the design team but I may be wrong). The change has been clearly perceived: Players are now praising Paizo's ability at balancing classes. Do you read between the lines as much as I do?
I must admit I don't like this new class design and I've never been interested in the Thaumaturge nor the Kineticist, so I'm late to the party. But I was curious, and from a conversation I decided to "break" the game with the Thaumaturge. Well, it took me a couple of hours to find a build that significantly outdamages a Greatsword Fighter at level 10+ (yes, I'll give you my build, and yes, once again, there is a small shenanigan).
I already see some people disagreeing. It's fine, it's certainly a bit early to jump to conclusions. Still, I have strong concerns about the future of our hobby. And as a wise man used to say: The signs are there and Groetus is grinning.
To be continued in a couple of years.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Power Creep is like monetary inflation.
You actually need a little to allow enable growth.
When things get out of hand and you spiral off into either hyperinflation or deflationary cycles, then, yeah, it becomes a massive problem.
However, by keeping controls in place, stimulating under performing sectors of your economy, and keeping an eye on the base lines, inflation helps keep modern economies ticking.
Want to keep PF2 running, with new classes, abilities and features? Then a little power creep is needed to keep things going. As long as you keep an eye on what you are allowing, and update the older classes with new standards, everything keeps ticking.
Eh, I'm not seeing it..
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
if you're talking about level 10, then it has to be something about flurry via archetype.
Probably monastic weapon+flurry on a thaumaturge that also gets to benefit from the +2 status to attacks from weapon implement.
---
i'm just pointing this out to remind you that Flurry from multiclass is something from the core rulebook that enables this "spike" and not something "new" that's breaking the expected values.
Breaking the game maths always rely on the same recipes. Yes, I'm using Flurry of Blows, but I don't need Monastic Weaponry as Weapon Implement gives a status bonus to all attacks. But I like what you point out as it removes the need of the only "shenanigan" in my build.
Power Creep is like monetary inflation.
You actually need a little to allow enable growth.
Well, that's a position. I'm not sure I agree. Power creep also destroys games. So I think the important word is "little". If power creep is little enough, then the game shouldn't move. But I feel we are beyond little.
Want to keep PF2 running, with new classes, abilities and features? Then a little power creep is needed to keep things going. As long as you keep an eye on what you are allowing, and update the older classes with new standards, everything keeps ticking.
That's another way of dealing with power creep: buffing old content so power creep is "general" and not limited to new content. It still changes the game significantly, especially its difficulty after some time.
|
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
... you're equating classes you don't know a lot about that just got showcased and are being playtested... with a literal apocalypse.
Okay.
In regards to Thaum, "I piled a bunch of different options together so at a set level I can out-damage another specific build of my choosing" isn't really the condemnation you think it is.
Yes, I'm using Flurry of Blows, but I don't need Monastic Weaponry as Weapon Implement gives a status bonus to all attacks.
I'm pretty sure you can't use Flurry of Blows with any weapon if you don't have Monastic Weaponry.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I think Mark was one of the main designers of the thaumaturge.
I didn't know, my bad.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have never seen a great sword fighter in the game, nor the great sword put forward as the strongest possible fighter.
And what an individual character can do is a metric, but it is absolutely not the ceiling of power in PF2. Tactical advantage making is the difference between a top tier party and a collection of cool builds. Having played a maul fighter in a party with a bard, a wizard, and a champion who all built around enabling my character to hit hard, be nearly untouchable, debuff and control the battlefield, I am highly suspicious of pure damage builds being put forward as signs of power creep because their is a definite range at which doing more damage only maters if it resulting in bringing foes down faster than other builds, and if the difference is by less than an action or even just one additional action, but not by rounds, then damage, debuff and control within close proximity of max damage is a much, much stronger build.
So I hope your build includes a way of easily knocking down foes while still doing lots of damage and the ability to repeatedly exploit reaction based attacks in one round and still surpasses the fighter who gets a heroism status buff and one or more aided attacks a round.
Having played a maul fighter
This build beats a Maul Fighter as much as it beats a Greatsword Fighter. These are more or less the same builds.
Roughly, this Thaumaturge build is equivalent to the Fighter at level 10-14 due to the Strength difference. It beats the Fighter at level 15-18 by roughly 15%. At level 19-20, with Exploit Vulnerability becoming a free action (I've considered one Exploit Vulnerability per round to compare both of them), the Thaumaturge really gets ahead of the Fighter.So I hope your build includes a way of easily knocking down foes while still doing lots of damage and the ability to repeatedly exploit reaction based attacks in one round and still surpasses the fighter who gets a heroism status buff and one or more aided attacks a round.
I hope your Fighter has excellent RK checks?
Obviously they are different builds so they won't react exactly the same to the same situations. But the Thaumaturge also has AoOs and Critical Weapon Specialization, the result in terms of combat utility will be similar to that regard. And the Thaumaturge is overall a much more versatile class than the Fighter. Also, the Fighter is supposed to be the king at single target damage, a versatile class who beats the Fighter at its own game is in my opinion a very problematic one.| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My fighter had additional lore two times on dinosaurs and xulgath in an extinction curse game alongside an INT of 18 by level 10, so, yes? He also had blind fight and a movement speed of 35 in a party that used a lot of solid fog and wall spells to control enemies. He was a he also had improved knock down, swipe, and his runes were absolutely not damage focused with ghost touch and greater fearsome by level 12.
I was almost always getting 2 attacks of opportunity against a boss creature with a massively debuffed AC (flanked and knocked down) or the boss was attacking with a -4 from being afraid and prone , usually also with a 20% miss chance that didn’t affect me and paladin to give me damage resistance and take advantage off all the accuracy my debuffing gave out.
Maul crit specialization was too good and worthy of nerfing (swipe was ridiculous against mounted foes), but that is only going to make Improved Knockdown strike better.
But my main point is that your build at level 12 could do 10 to 15 more points of damage with an attack (something I doubt) and I still wouldn’t say your character was more powerful than mine in a way that would have ended encounters faster or with my party taking less damage. So I don’t see any version of power creep that would affect actual game play and not just white room math.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think this changes your overall argument, but being flanked and knocked down doesn't stack for debuffing AC. Both of them makes the creature flat-footedMy fighter had additional lore two times on dinosaurs and xulgath in an extinction curse game alongside an INT of 18 by level 10, so, yes? He also had blind fight and a movement speed of 35 in a party that used a lot of solid fog and wall spells to control enemies. He was a he also had improved knock down, swipe, and his runes were absolutely not damage focused with ghost touch and greater fearsome by level 12.
I was almost always getting 2 attacks of opportunity against a boss creature with a massively debuffed AC (flanked and knocked down) or the boss was attacking with a -4 from being afraid and prone , usually also with a 20% miss chance that didn’t affect me and paladin to give me damage resistance and take advantage off all the accuracy my debuffing gave out.
Maul crit specialization was too good and worthy of nerfing (swipe was ridiculous against mounted foes), but that is only going to make Improved Knockdown strike better.
But my main point is that your build at level 12 could do 10 to 15 more points of damage with an attack (something I doubt) and I still wouldn’t say your character was more powerful than mine in a way that would have ended encounters faster or with my party taking less damage. So I don’t see any version of power creep that would affect actual game play and not just white room math.
When someone stands up after being knocked prone, they are not off-guard to the Attack of Opportunity strike unless they are also flanked. The -4 to AC is from Off-guard and frightened 2.
But my main point is that your build at level 12 could do 10 to 15 more points of damage with an attack (something I doubt) and I still wouldn’t say your character was more powerful than mine in a way that would have ended encounters faster or with my party taking less damage. So I don’t see any version of power creep that would affect actual game play and not just white room math.
Luckily, it's less than 10 to 15 more points of damage. That would end encounters far quicker.
Also, actual game play is affected by math. If a party deals 10% more damage then it has 10% chance to end the encounter one round earlier.What you are telling me is that you don't trust me. Fine, no issue. I obviously can't compete with your Fighter who's in the middle of a party built for it. But not every party will have the same setup and having a different character as main damage dealer definitely changes the party setup.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Having played a maul fighterThis build beats a Maul Fighter as much as it beats a Greatsword Fighter. These are more or less the same builds.
Roughly, this Thaumaturge build is equivalent to the Fighter at level 10-14 due to the Strength difference. It beats the Fighter at level 15-18 by roughly 15%. At level 19-20, with Exploit Vulnerability becoming a free action (I've considered one Exploit Vulnerability per round to compare both of them), the Thaumaturge really gets ahead of the Fighter.So I hope your build includes a way of easily knocking down foes while still doing lots of damage and the ability to repeatedly exploit reaction based attacks in one round and still surpasses the fighter who gets a heroism status buff and one or more aided attacks a round.I hope your Fighter has excellent RK checks?
Obviously they are different builds so they won't react exactly the same to the same situations. But the Thaumaturge also has AoOs and Critical Weapon Specialization, the result in terms of combat utility will be similar to that regard. And the Thaumaturge is overall a much more versatile class than the Fighter. Also, the Fighter is supposed to be the king at single target damage, a versatile class who beats the Fighter at its own game is in my opinion a very problematic one.
I would have to see this build consistently beat a Maul fighter in all that it brings to the table. I've seen Maul fighters in action and played a few, they are absolutely brutal not just for the damage which is generally high, but also the level of control and the way they work in conjunction with a group.
Then I would have to see it beat a dedicated caster at shifting battles.
It sounds like a good single target damage build. Having a build that matches a fighter is not such a bad thing.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
I firmly disagree with the premise here. For ages, CRB classes were clearly the strongest, and post-CRB classes had to jump through more hoops, invest more character resources, and succeed at more rolls just to compete with their peers at their baseline.
Thaumaturge is simply at the same power level as CRB classes, not above. They pay for all their versatility and relatively good damage with tight action economy, being considerably MAD and having only okay defenses.
You're talking about these classes' cheese builds breaking the game, but you're comparing them to Core classes at their baseline. Compare whatever you did with Thaum to a Polearm Fighter abusing Combat Reflexes, or a Rogue with Preparation + Opportune Backstab, and you'll see that the ceiling is far from being broken.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But my main point is that your build at level 12 could do 10 to 15 more points of damage with an attack (something I doubt) and I still wouldn’t say your character was more powerful than mine in a way that would have ended encounters faster or with my party taking less damage. So I don’t see any version of power creep that would affect actual game play and not just white room math.Luckily, it's less than 10 to 15 more points of damage. That would end encounters far quicker.
Also, actual game play is affected by math. If a party deals 10% more damage then it has 10% chance to end the encounter one round earlier.What you are telling me is that you don't trust me. Fine, no issue. I obviously can't compete with your Fighter who's in the middle of a party built for it. But not every party will have the same setup and having a different character as main damage dealer definitely changes the party setup.
I like math! Even white room math! I don’t think we need to resort to saying I don’t trust that you feel like you have found a strong build, I’d love to see it and hear about your experiences playing it.
I am saying that the “power creep” meta that I am on the look out for are options that really challenge the game play experience of an optimized party, of which builds that are action intensive and not setting up their allies end up not really changing the ceiling unless the spike so high that they make anyone else doing any tactical support actions feel like they are just wasting their time.
Lots of answers in the time to make a single graph.
So, here's the comparison.
I've considered 2 actions, as this is the most common situation in actual play.
I've finally chosen the Tome Implement. First, because the Intensification is better. Also because it's no Status bonus so it kills the discussion about buffs.
I've used either Exploit or Intensify Vulnerability every round, with 50% one and 50% the other (@shroudb: which I think is close to what you should get with this Thaumaturge considering you need only one action to attack every round).
I haven't been able to properly map Exploit Vulnerability, so I've considered Personal Antithesis damage bonus only (which should be the most common situation anyway).
I haven't taken into account the +1 circumstance bonus to your first attack from Tome Adept as it depends on a RK check. That's a significant bonus but I really don't see how I could map it.
At level 17, the Tome gives a +2 circumstance bonus to all your attacks. At that stage your damage should be crazy.
At level 19, you get Exploit/Intensify Vulnerability as a free action. I've tried to map it, but poorly considering that it affects the benefit of Intensify Vulnerability. The level 19-20 graphs are far lower than they should, when you succeed at your RK check and with Ki Strike you should outdamage the Fighter 2 to 1.
This build uses a d8 Unarmed Attack like Goblin Jaws or Kashrishi Horn. It needs Monk Dedication, Ki Strike and Flurry of Blows. I consider Diverse Lore and Sympathetic Vulnerabilities as basic additions, the first one because it's broken and synergizes with the Tome, the second one because it makes it easier to handle Intensify Vulnerability. Grabbing extra Focus Points is also something to consider as it fuels Ki Strike.
About reactions, the Thaumaturge can get nice ones and an extra reaction at level 14. The Weapon one is close to AoO but is limited to the target of your Exploit Vulnerability, so I think grabbing Stand Still on the side should be a good idea. Overall, when it comes to reactions, the Thaumaturge is far from weak (at least equivalent to the Preparation Rogue, not to the Reach Fighter but the Reach Fighter loses on damage dice to compensate).
Overall, this build is far better than a Rogue at skills during its whole career and largely competes with a Fighter in damage at level 10+ (before that, it has action economy issues). There's space to improve it, a few feats (many feats if you play with FA) and 2 Implements. I'm still not a Thaumaturge specialist, so I may have missed some obvious bonuses, especially with high level feats.
As a side note, as the Thaumaturge defense is not very high, I'd personally consider the Amulet. With the Adept Benefit, you should also be a nasty tank.
Also, with the release of the Collar of the Shifting Spider, using Mutagens becomes much easier. And this Thaumaturge doesn't use high damaging Unarmed Attacks so a Bestial Mutagen would increase both its chances to hit and its damage. In my opinion, it's a self buff to consider seriously, especially against bosses who will hit you whatever your AC.
I've built many characters, and I've extremely rarely found builds that were competing with a Greatsword Fighter, especially at the highest levels. When we are speaking of a build who's also a massive skill monkey and who can grab some nice additions with other Implements, I think I can safely say this build is broken. It's true that it's more of a high level thing, even if the Thaumaturge is not really weak at low level. Level 10 is really the moment where it leaves Fighters and Rogues in the dust.
Does your Thaumaturge exploiting Flurry of blows outpace a fighter doing the same thing though?
Be sure the Fighter has Agile Grace, has the better damage bonus from Weapon Specialization and one extra action to attack each round since the Thaumaturge will always be spending one action doing something else. The fighter too will have the D8 agile attack with only a -3 from map and an extra attack. You could also assume that the fighter picks up ki strike if you are not giving any of them outside status bonuses to attack.
The point being, I am not sure that the Thaumaturge is doing anything in this scenario that wasn't already a game exploit to begin with.
The bigger power creep the thaumaturge offers is the Share Weakness feat, giving their bonuses to the party Fighter.
What's your stat spread look like? There's no getting around the MADness of needing everything but int in this build without free archetype to force through sentinel or champion early.
Do the graphs consider that thaumaturge weakness isn't multiplied on crit? Also, if they're using the bestial mutagen, are they considering an equivalent energy mutagen for the fighter?
I'm pretty sure you can actually map tome's intensify, but it's a little tedious process involving hard coding every outcome. Something like:
roll attack 1
->on failure or worse roll an identical attack 1
-->roll attack 2
->On success or better, attack 2
-->on failure or worse roll an identical attack 2
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
So does anyone want to point out to the op that damage is a horribly bad metric at measuring a classes effectiveness?
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Uh, shouldn't the OP post the character, instead of just saying that it is super kewl and definitely powercreeped the Fighter? Or is it Schroedingers Thaumaturge?
The natural limiter on the Thaumaturge has always been that any character can exploit a creature’s weakness for extra damage, it is just more resource intensive to do it. Even if the MC fighter just picks up Ki strike and elemental Ki, it has a decent chance of hiring a weakness and any time it does the Thaumaturge falls way behind.
I would strongly argue that the Thaumaturge was designed only to make existing tactical exploits easier for one class to use reliably. That isn’t really adding power creep to the game.
Flurry of blows at level 10 has been there from the beginning and might be something that changes in the remaster, but it can’t really be called power creep unless some class does something significantly different with it.
So does anyone want to point out to the op that damage is a horribly bad metric at measuring a classes effectiveness?
It really isn't. And it's still a tome thaumaturge. That means 3 legendary skills, 2 variable legendary skills and legendary (diverse) esoteric lore which is nothing to scoff at.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
@SuperBidi Flurry of Blows combines both Strikes for resistances and weaknesses, which means it only adds your Exploit damage once, even if you hit with both attacks. Not sure if you've taken that into account?
In either case, my point still stands that it will not beat a Fighter or Rogue using their multiple, easily-triggering reaction Strikes to their advantage, having better action economy and better synergy with special Strikes and archetypes.
It really isn't. And it's still a tome thaumaturge. That means 3 legendary skills, 2 variable legendary skills and legendary (diverse) esoteric lore which is nothing to scoff at.So does anyone want to point out to the op that damage is a horribly bad metric at measuring a classes effectiveness?
No because you can turn a fighter into a disturbingly effective battlefield controller which drops its DPS drastically but is no less effective at resolving combat than a thaumaturge based off of damage.
Like don't get me wrong the thaumaturge is a fine class but its got a whole host of issues that balance it out. Namely you don't necessairly have a free hand most of the time, you always provoke attacks of opportunities, your action economy is a bit wonky, and if you drop to 0 hit points you have to pick up your stuff up.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The thread has really gone into the discussion of "specific build vs specific build", when, to me, the general topic posed in the original post is by far more interesting.
It does somewhat concern me how strong newer classes look on paper, for the reasons you suggested. There is some degree of possibility that the new CORE versions of the CRB classes will be raised in more a bit since the design team clearly views that higher powered options are viable in the game going forward.
That's my hope, at least.
Yeah, as Ectar I also hope that some core options get raised a little bit.
I don't think I'm qualified to be talking about balance and the ongoing playtest because I only very briefly glanced over the animist to see both the healing focus spell and the fire damage focus spell and I then went to compare it against goodberry/song of healing and wildfire, and that was the extent of my research. I do think the difference between the two is too big though.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've worked for 10 years in the video game industry and I can assure you of one thing: I've never seen a single game designer that was considering power creep positively.
Competitive TCG games with rotation say hi.
Regardless, don't see it. Seen several Thaum in play. They are strong-ish, but nothing outlandish and playtest classes are just that, playtest material. It seems they just stopped going for the "let's make it extremely week and buff later" approach that they used for the other classes.
It really isn't. And it's still a tome thaumaturge. That means 3 legendary skills, 2 variable legendary skills and legendary (diverse) esoteric lore which is nothing to scoff at.So does anyone want to point out to the op that damage is a horribly bad metric at measuring a classes effectiveness?
No because you can turn a fighter into a disturbingly effective battlefield controller which drops its DPS drastically but is no less effective at resolving combat than a thaumaturge based off of damage.
Like don't get me wrong the thaumaturge is a fine class but its got a whole host of issues that balance it out. Namely you don't necessairly have a free hand most of the time, you always provoke attacks of opportunities, your action economy is a bit wonky, and if you drop to 0 hit points you have to pick up your stuff up.
Except fighter doesn't give up any damage to be a battlefield controller except for the step from d12 to d10 or d8 reach weapon. The added reach also better enables reaction attacks which more than make up for the loss from damage dice and results in higher damage anyway.
The better comparison here is the thief with 6 legendary skills and dpr x vs whatever this thaumaturge looks like after we actually see what the character looks like and if the calculations were done right. If it can outdamage preparation thief, great, if it can't then there's really not much more to discuss. Just keep playing thief.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the idea that new classes are dubbed weak because they lack the mature meta is a good insight that it would be good to keep in mind going forward. It's easy for people to draw conclusions about something based on white room math that isn't borne out in actual play.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the idea that new classes are dubbed weak because they lack the mature meta is a good insight that it would be good to keep in mind going forward. It's easy for people to draw conclusions about something based on white room math that isn't borne out in actual play.
Absolutely, but what most people are opposed here is the idea that Thaumaturge and Kineticist are a sign of bad things to come.
I agree that we as a community need some time before being able to correctly grasp if something is "weak" or "strong", but we have also gotten quite better at figuring what works well and what does not. Thaum has been optimized to death ages ago and it is fine.
Oh, and unlike the thaumaturge the rogue can actually trigger sneak attack multiple times with flurry of blows and has fun things like Opportune Backstabber and Preparation
Preparation and Flurry of Blows have both Flourish, so they don't work together. Outside the Spellstrike + Magical Trickster combo, which is a highly controversial topic, Rogue caps at 3 sneak attacks with no MAP.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the idea that new classes are dubbed weak because they lack the mature meta is a good insight that it would be good to keep in mind going forward. It's easy for people to draw conclusions about something based on white room math that isn't borne out in actual play.Absolutely, but what most people are opposed here is the idea that Thaumaturge and Kineticist are a sign of bad things to come.
I agree that we as a community need some time before being able to correctly grasp if something is "weak" or "strong", but we have also gotten quite better at figuring what works well and what does not. Thaum has been optimized to death ages ago and it is fine.
Yes, I meant it as a little tongue-in-cheek jab at SuperBidi's original post because he uses white room math to draw an (in my opinion) incorrect conclusion, though his thoughts are valid. White room math can overshoot as often as it undershoots performance!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the idea that new classes are dubbed weak because they lack the mature meta is a good insight that it would be good to keep in mind going forward. It's easy for people to draw conclusions about something based on white room math that isn't borne out in actual play.
This is one of those things where patches and good data collection really make a difference in perception. Riot often releases new champions just a little too good and then slowly nerfs them as their win rates rise with mastery. They do this because nobody will invest time in a champion that releases and causes them to lose games for playing it.
Paizo probably can't do this because they don't have the data collection required and are already very tight on how many resources can be devoted to errata. However, that means if they miss low that class is probably going to stay weak for a very long time and may well never get needed adjustments to reach par.