| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since a few of the other classes have gotten their remastered wishlist thread already, I thought to add one for the Champion.
All in all, I find the Champion to be a solid class, but the one thing which bothered me so far is that the Champion's Reaction doesn't upgrade its range from 15 feet, outside of a class feat at level 16, which also imposes an action tax per round, which is, uh <check's notes>, not good. Meanwhile opponents tend to get bigger and bigger at high levels, with increased reach, which makes the standard 15 feet range of the Champion's Reaction feel less and less useful.
So, my one wish for the Champion in his remastered form is that they get automatic range increases to their Champion's Reaction without a feat tax (or at least get a class feat much earlier and make it a stance, instead of a once-per-round thing), so that they can reliably use their Champion's Reaction even at high levels against rune giants and the like.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like to see some more shield feats. Some more action efficiency options would be nice. Don't mind if it is high level.
Clarification about the exact relationship of hardness and resistance.
Rebalancing of the level of the celestial mount feats.
A reason to use a lance.
More broadly my concerns with the Champion is centred around that they have a lot of highly specific feats the Oaths, Litanies and Auras. They are largely not worth it. But a fair bit of that is tied up with alignment damage so I figure it is all being reworked anyway.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've already got my wish, as it can't be "the Alignment class" anymore, so everything else is just gravy. Odds feel pretty good that I'll finally have Redeemers of Casandalee available RAW - a useful example of why the launch PF2 Champion frustrated me so much.
I'm holding out hope for some love for the subclasses like the new Wizard Schools got, because the absence of LN and CN options has always been an annoying hole; Tyrant being a little less puppy-kicking and a little more pitiless judge would be very appreciated, that sort of thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've already got my wish, as it can't be "the Alignment class" anymore, so everything else is just gravy. Odds feel pretty good that I'll finally have Redeemers of Casandalee available RAW - a useful example of why the launch PF2 Champion frustrated me so much.
I'm holding out hope for some love for the subclasses like the new Wizard Schools got, because the absence of LN and CN options has always been an annoying hole; Tyrant being a little less puppy-kicking and a little more pitiless judge would be very appreciated, that sort of thing.
Redeemers of Casandalee are already viable i think, but having seen your thread on the topic before, I'm quite sure you mean Liberators and you are right. Casandalee definitely feels like a goddess for whom the neutral 'cross' alignments always felt particularly arbitrary when freeing her fellow androids is such a natural story for her followers.
Can't a Liberator be your CN option now? All you have to do is find a CN god that allows sanctified like Gorum. Or is that still too nice for you?
I do want a cold hearted order cause, a balance cause, and a generic cause.
What I would like to see in the Champion's Remaster? Well I'd like most of the feats to be removed from Good/Evil causes other then those special type specific like Iron Command or Ranged Reprisal.
Stuff like Blade of Justice or Shield of Reckoning should be allowed to be taken by both Causes of Good & Causes of Evil Champions. Aura of Fear is amazing but should also be allowed to be taken by holy warriors who is marking a rusade against you.
Interesting second level feats. It's such a let down if you're not sure if you want an archetype.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I also want work on the oaths, litanies, and auras; they could be reworked to be less restrictive and/or more attractive. The alignment damage to spirit damage change should alleviate my damage concerns for champion.....also id like a censer flail in war of immortals (not strictly relevant but seems like a good enough place to ask)
One thing I dont like is that picking up mercy options does not increase your focus points. And this is true for any class with similar class feat choices to augment an existing focus spell. I always feel like I can't choose the augment feat because having more uses per battle of the one I already have and getting a new focus spell is 100% better than.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here's hoping they get access to paragon's guard so that a fighter isn't a better shield-user than a shield spec champion.
Biggest ask for me is opening up the ability to select reactions. Sneaking suspicion that causes are going to remain as they are with reactions tied to them but I would really like that to not be the case.
Existing cause-reaction dynamic pigeonholes flavor too much and makes certain alignment/cause combinations just... bad.
With alignment going away it would be a great time to open up the ability to choose.
And also maybe rethink the selfish(previously evil) reactions in general because they don't work very well on the whole.
I don't even play Champion (so maybe this is a bad take) but I think they should start out with expert in armors. I honestly thought they already did but finding they didn't explains why the Champion on my team has been getting hit and crit so often.
Champion armor progression is really janky. Ostensibly one of their unique advantages is enhanced armor proficiency but it's... only sometimes? Being consistently one step ahead like Fighters are would make a lot more sense and define their niche better.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Redeemers of Casandalee are already viable i think, but having seen your thread on the topic before, I'm quite sure you mean Liberators and you are right. Casandalee definitely feels like a goddess for whom the neutral 'cross' alignments always felt particularly arbitrary when freeing her fellow androids is such a natural story for her followers.I've already got my wish, as it can't be "the Alignment class" anymore, so everything else is just gravy. Odds feel pretty good that I'll finally have Redeemers of Casandalee available RAW - a useful example of why the launch PF2 Champion frustrated me so much.
I'm holding out hope for some love for the subclasses like the new Wizard Schools got, because the absence of LN and CN options has always been an annoying hole; Tyrant being a little less puppy-kicking and a little more pitiless judge would be very appreciated, that sort of thing.
I did indeed mean Liberators - thank you! Don't post right after traveling, folks.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have to agree with magnuskn on the range. I am fairly kind about this as a DM as I don't feel like fighting a dragon, giant, or some other huge creature in flank position should prevent the champion from using their core ability.
I have many times had the Champion's reaction out of range fighting large creatures or spread out in mook fights. It really lessens the advantage of the champion as 15 feet is far too short a range given how battlefields set up and flanking works. Are players supposed to given up flanking to stand in position next to the champion to gain the benefit? Is that really designer expectation?
The champion reaction should be bumped to 30 feet or only the enemy be in range and the ally within reach of the enemy. I may bump this up as a house rule if they don't fix it in the remaster. Flanking is extremely common and a champion should not have their core ability punished against powerful huge or bigger creatures if their allies are flanking.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The main thing I'm looking forward to is how the removal of alignment will affect causes. I love the Champion's kit, as well as the general flavor of abiding by a rigid moral code, but alignment makes the class a little too rigid in my opinion. Edicts and anathema as promoted in the remaster should allow for much more subclass flexibility, and hopefully let traditionally evil causes receive more support.
I mostly hope they remove or at least reduce the armor proficiency from the Champion archetype. It would be fine if it just gave you proficiency in the next "tier" of armor and maybe shieldblock or something like that. But going from no armor to heavy is too much. Not to mention that having this option it's yet another huge advantage for other charisma-based classes.
It isn't that bad simply because you need 14 strength. Which is almost useless unless you're doing certain caster builds. The only classes that could really benefit from it is Swashbuckler, Rogue and investigator. Bar Examplar unless they do not give them medium armor then hell yeah.
I mostly hope they remove or at least reduce the armor proficiency from the Champion archetype. It would be fine if it just gave you proficiency in the next "tier" of armor and maybe shieldblock or something like that. But going from no armor to heavy is too much. Not to mention that having this option it's yet another huge advantage for other charisma-based classes.
The Champion dedication itself is already one of the worst in the game. Literally not a single no-armor class has a reason to take the dedication for the armor. Not when you can get Armor Proficiency and just stack DEX instead. Not only does the dedication take +2 in STR, the armor itself needs +3 minimum. And any build that still goes that route is hardly problematic.
If anything, the dedication needs a major buff not a nerf. Currently, the only real reason to take it is the feats that you can get from it.
The dedication could need some help. But seeing how the same is true for Fighter, which hasn't been changed at all, I doubt we'll get a buff.
But I still think going from unarmored to heavy armor is too much. YMMV, of course.
The main thing I'm looking forward to is how the removal of alignment will affect causes. I love the Champion's kit, as well as the general flavor of abiding by a rigid moral code, but alignment makes the class a little too rigid in my opinion. Edicts and anathema as promoted in the remaster should allow for much more subclass flexibility, and hopefully let traditionally evil causes receive more support.
This.
My champion of Abadar would always be weaker than those of either good or evil gods.
The dedication could need some help. But seeing how the same is true for Fighter, which hasn't been changed at all, I doubt we'll get a buff.
But I still think going from unarmored to heavy armor is too much. YMMV, of course.
The dedication advantage is not so strong now that the Armor Proficency general feat auto improves to expert. Making many players to consider to get the general feat instead once that light armor is already a considerable improvement in your AC (when you don't use any) without use a class feat.
Get champion dedication is good for casters but adds some anathemas and requires a level 14 feat to get expert with your armor proficiency and even allow to get the reactions with archetype feats with casters could be interesting but may attract some unwanted attention to a char with low HP and defenses so the main benefit of archetype for casters is to get armor and allow to get Lay on Hands.But yes the fighter dedication benefits are just meh for anyone! Only Gunslinger Dedication manages to be worse.
No cloth caster with a serious build has the +3 STR to spare for the heavy armor in the first place. Or realistically the +4, as bulwark is essential to your survivability. In my experience, a caster is much more worried about their reflex save, rather than pumping their AC up as high as possible, as the former is a much more common issue to them.
So going from unarmored straight to heavy armor is an entirely academic issue. I can pretty much guarantee you that 99% of people who take this dedication with an unarmored class in practice go from none to light and that's it. Something that can be accomplished with several other dedications or even better with a general feat.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
You take Champion Dedication for the reaction. Champion's reaction is definitely worth two feats.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I still want the ability to play a Champion whose cause is unrelated to any deity. I will happily take even more restrictive anathema if my cause can be "goodness itself" rather than "do what Iomedae says" or w/e.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I still want the ability to play a Champion whose cause is unrelated to any deity.
They are a deity class. Lean into the deity and have fun with it instead. I always insist that a Champion has to be able to bring their characters religion into their role playing.
Yet many people miss the concept of paladins that follows their own oaths (especially those came from 5e) without necessary having to be a martial defensive focused warpriest.
Yet this is not a discussion for remaster. The remaster can fully rebalance a class but won't change its roles at all.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I realize this may be a little out of scope for the Remaster, but I myself would love to see proper support for a ranged champion, ideally as a class archetype because imo its chassis need a few key changes for it to work well.
I mean yes, you can more or less get by with a throwing build, but if I want to play as a Champion of Erastil and wants to use his divine weapon, then I:
- Will have to incur the volley trait penalty if I want to use my reaction.
- Will have to stay too close to the enemy if I want to use my reaction.
- Will probably have to focus on my Dexterity, which won’t offer any synergy with heavy armor. In fact, I probably won’t wear one because I won’t have the strength requirements for one.
- If I want to play as an actual ranged character; that is, trying to be as far away from the enemy as possible, then I won’t be able to use my reaction… And at this point, why even play a Champion?
And yeah, I realize that the volley trait is a specific problem in itself, but it is compounded by the need of proximity to the enemy and allies of the champion.
I think that an ideal ranged champion option should:
- Have a reaction or similar key ability that works within a pretty generous range. Ideally have it run off your own weapon.
- Preserve the tank identity in some way, maybe muddling it more into a tank-debuffer or something.
- Decide if the ranged version of the class should wear heavy armor and then implement it in a worthwhile way (i.e use dex instead of str for the armor requirement values), or if it should have typical light to no armor and less AC (so maybe with this you could move more of the budget around?).
And that’s pretty much it!
I realize this may be a little out of scope for the Remaster, but I myself would love to see proper support for a ranged champion, ideally as a class archetype because imo its chassis need a few key changes for it to work well.
I mean yes, you can more or less get by with a throwing build, but if I want to play as a Champion of Erastil and wants to use his divine weapon, then I:
- Will have to incur the volley trait penalty if I want to use my reaction.
- Will have to stay too close to the enemy if I want to use my reaction.
- Will probably have to focus on my Dexterity, which won’t offer any synergy with heavy armor. In fact, I probably won’t wear one because I won’t have the strength requirements for one.
- If I want to play as an actual ranged character; that is, trying to be as far away from the enemy as possible, then I won’t be able to use my reaction… And at this point, why even play a Champion?And yeah, I realize that the volley trait is a specific problem in itself, but it is compounded by the need of proximity to the enemy and allies of the champion.
I think that an ideal ranged champion option should:
- Have a reaction or similar key ability that works within a pretty generous range. Ideally have it run off your own weapon.
- Preserve the tank identity in some way, maybe muddling it more into a tank-debuffer or something.
- Decide if the ranged version of the class should wear heavy armor and then implement it in a worthwhile way (i.e use dex instead of str for the armor requirement values), or if it should have typical light to no armor and less AC (so maybe with this you could move more of the budget around?).And that’s pretty much it!
Yet insight the concept of remaster we may get a improved Champion's Reaction range. Once that the currently range is short and probably will be well received by the community and if the designers improved Bless range probably there's no reason to not improve the Champion's Reaction range too.
IMO the ideal would be 30ft once this is maximum range of most weapons is greater than maxium range of very big creatures ranged weapons (25ft) and its the range of longbows volley trait.My thrown paladin player would love such range.
|
I still want the ability to play a Champion whose cause is unrelated to any deity. I will happily take even more restrictive anathema if my cause can be "goodness itself" rather than "do what Iomedae says" or w/e.
Take a closer look at the pantheons. You can pretty much do that already by picking one with an appropriate theme.
ETA: For "Goodness" I would suggest "The Offering Plate", for instance.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So i feel differently about the champion 15 ft reaction range.
I don't like the idea of that ability being used to provide more security for an offensive tactic like flanking a huge dragon by increasing its range.
I would rather see champion abilities enable and empower defensive tactics that right now cannot compete with flaking. Or at least good champions.
Looking at champion skills as they are when you having allies adjacent to you can provide some benefits like AC or being in reprisal range. But that doest compare to making an enemy off-guard. There is a point where defensive benefits can be competitive with offensive ones but its not there yet. In fact this may be due to a lack of positive conditions in the game that a defensive tactic could potentially bestow allies. There is quickened and concealed, that's it. we need more positive conditions and give paladin abilities to bestow them to allows that stay close to them.
|
I still want the ability to play a Champion whose cause is unrelated to any deity. I will happily take even more restrictive anathema if my cause can be "goodness itself" rather than "do what Iomedae says" or w/e.Take a closer look at the pantheons. You can pretty much do that already by picking one with an appropriate theme.
ETA: For "Goodness" I would suggest "The Offering Plate", for instance.
I think the point that you can't make a functional champion for a philosophy, or other non-deity-based religion still remains.
I'm afraid, that personally, I'm having an increasing problem with both Champion and Cleric with regards to this. At issue is, it hasn't escaped me that most of the religions that are affected by this rule are ones that resemble religions in our world that have Asian origins. This seems problematic...
The Animist is specifically designed to be the Cleric-equivalent for non-deity religions.
I feel the Exemplar could be recycled as the equivalent for the Champion.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think that's because their armour progression is pegged to the monk - because unarmoured cannot hit max dex until 10th level, the champion has to slow-roll their expert armour or else they'd be awkwardly far ahead (they still are at levels 7-9, except against Mountain Stance monks who hit the full +5 at 6th)Champion armor progression is really janky. Ostensibly one of their unique advantages is enhanced armor proficiency but it's... only sometimes? Being consistently one step ahead like Fighters are would make a lot more sense and define their niche better.
Yeah, but on the other hand if you put them next to the fighter, the "armor specialist" spends nearly half the game with the same armor proficiency. That feels kind of weird and arbitrary, because it's unclear why champions should have better/worse AC at specific level brackets.
I don't like the idea of that ability being used to provide more security for an offensive tactic like flanking a huge dragon by increasing its range.
The thing is, that's already what the reaction does... provided you're fighting enemies of the right size.
Asking for a range increase is less about providing security for offensive tactics and more about addressing the ways champions get worse at their job the bigger an enemy is, which is just kind of weird.
The assumption is that every battle should be some variation of flank trip kill and if nothing else competes with doing that then of course the response to a defensive ability that calls for characters to stay together would be hey this skill doesnt play well with flank trip kill so it needs more range so it can be used with that offensive tactic.
What I would like to see is defensive options that rival flank trip kill.
What I would like to see is defensive options that rival flank trip kill.
Rise a shield?
Am I wrong on this? Are there good reasons for a party to keep a tight formation in the mechanics over having some members go out of the champs 15ft to set up flanks?
Am I wrong on this? Are there good reasons for a party to keep a tight formation in the mechanics over having some members go out of the champs 15ft to set up flanks?
Rogue takes gang up and laughs at your need for special positiong. Archetype rogues at level 12+ also laugh.
Cant argue with that.
I mean are there bonuses out there that are not flanking lol that you want to stay close to gain and are willing to not attempt flanking to keep (unless you have gang up of course, thank you gestalt)?
There's also plenty of other means to make enemies Off-Guard. If you have someone who focuses on Grab and/or Trip, you can often make do without flanking, for example.
|
|
I'm not sure the optics are better...I think the point that you can't make a functional champion for a philosophy, or other non-deity-based religion still remains.
I'm afraid, that personally, I'm having an increasing problem with both Champion and Cleric with regards to this. At issue is, it hasn't escaped me that most of the religions that are affected by this rule are ones that resemble religions in our world that have Asian origins. This seems problematic...
The Animist is specifically designed to be the Cleric-equivalent for non-deity religions.
Sorry, I do not get your meaning (not a native speaker) but I do realize that what I wrote is not quite right : Animist is the class for getting Divine power from worshipping spirits where Cleric is the class for getting Divine power from worshipping a deity.
But then in Golarion lore, from the very beginning, priests of a religion are not necessarily of the Cleric class.
Oracles are a good example of non-Cleric Divine casters that can perfectly be priests of a religion.