Any ideas on the Guardian?
What would make it different from a Champions?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the appeal is to make an anathema-less defender that doesn't have to bother with faith or a church and is more self made. The problem with that is that I feel that premise could be made with a class archetype for champions, but I'll wait to see the playtest before I judge the class a whole.
I also think somewhere (either on the stream or in the product page) it says or hints that guardians will be able to taunt enemies. Well, some champions kinda do that already to some extent, but I feel the idea here is that you mark someone and that target is forced to attack you or would instead receive penalties of some kind. Probably something like "you receive a +1 to AC against your mark, and if your mark attacks someone that isn't you they receive a -2 to the attack roll".
They also probably could beging being experts in all armor? Probably an earlier armor specialization too? That or their armor specialization bonuses are higher than other classes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I expect the guardian to be CON based and to be especially good at controlling positioning on the battlefield. For instance they could have a Feat where allies who Step into a square adjacent to the guardian can immediately Step again. Or they could have a Reaction that interrupts an enemy in the middle of their movement so the guardian can move to block their path.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the appeal is to make an anathema-less defender that doesn't have to bother with faith or a church and is more self made.
agreed. There is story room for the Guardian.
They also probably could beging being experts in all armor?
I expect the same armor as the Champion. As well as a lot of the same shield feats.
But without the divine connection, they will need something to replace Champion Reaction and Lay on Hands.
I also think somewhere (either on the stream or in the product page) it says or hints that guardians will be able to taunt enemies...
Probably something like "you receive a +1 to AC against your mark, and if your mark attacks someone that isn't you they receive a -2 to the attack roll".
That could work.
Especially if you could taunt multiple enemies. Champion reaction works on one attack. If Guardian could do a smaller effect but against more attacks that would make them feel different.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think that trying to use a class archetype to carve the divine out of a Champion would have been a mistake. Like, you'd have to get rid of something like half the feats and multiple class features, on top of the anathema. That's not exactly something that a Class Archetype is well suited fro.
I expect the guardian to be CON based and to be especially good at controlling positioning on the battlefield. For instance they could have a Feat where allies who Step into a square adjacent to the guardian can immediately Step again. Or they could have a Reaction that interrupts an enemy in the middle of their movement so the guardian can move to block their path.
I do like the idea of a short-range battlefield control focus. I'd see a Guardian as being relatively low-damage, and letting them have a fair bit of ability at playing as tarpit/barrier, plus handing out debuffs on those enemies that are stuck near them, would help keep them relevant.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I can see the Guardian having 12 hp per level. If they're going to soak up damage (and attract it) they will need the extra hp.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Con could make sense and I would be for it, but the Guardian as described makes me feel like it might want to be in heavy armor so I could also see it being exclusively strength to(help make sure you can easily get the boosts you need to wear heavy armor as soon as possible)
I certainly wouldn't mind the guardian being a Con-based class that can choose to ignore Strength if they want. Since Michael Sayre said in other thread the commander was going to be full support martial, a full tank martial that can choose to not make any strikes at all would be nice too (if they have a way to deal damage that way at least). I imagine something like a retaliation attack that you have when your enemies don't target you in which you use your Constitution modifier for the attack roll, that plus something that when someone attacks you they receive a little damage too.
Con could make sense and I would be for it, but the Guardian as described makes me feel like it might want to be in heavy armor so I could also see it being exclusively strength to(help make sure you can easily get the boosts you need to wear heavy armor as soon as possible)That, or it gains a feature allowing them to use Con in place of Str for carrying heavy armor purposes and bulk, though I think that's a bit less likely.
Doesn't the Soldier have something like that? Not that I expect the classes to be all too similar, but I could see a feature like that still being shared if Guardian is also a heavy armor con-based class.
Design Manager
|
| 15 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think that trying to use a class archetype to carve the divine out of a Champion would have been a mistake. Like, you'd have to get rid of something like half the feats and multiple class features, on top of the anathema. That's not exactly something that a Class Archetype is well suited fro.
Very much this, yeah. A class archetype is for something where the core identity of two ideas is like 90% the same but there's one or two notable differences at a fundamental level that you need to adjust for. Just flipping open the CRB, there's literally not a single feat a non-magical, non-god-worshipping champion could take until 8th level, and then there's exactly one.
And that assumes that feats are the only things distinguishing a champion and guardian, which isn't exactly an occurrence I'd bet any money on having happen...
I think that trying to use a class archetype to carve the divine out of a Champion would have been a mistake. Like, you'd have to get rid of something like half the feats and multiple class features, on top of the anathema. That's not exactly something that a Class Archetype is well suited fro.
Very much this, yeah. A class archetype is for something where the core identity of two ideas is like 90% the same but there's one or two notable differences at a fundamental level that you need to adjust for. Just flipping open the CRB, there's literally not a single feat a non-magical, non-god-worshipping champion could take until 8th level, and then there's exactly one.
And that assumes that feats are the only things distinguishing a champion and guardian, which isn't exactly an occurrence I'd bet any money on having happen...
Forgive me Michael, but isn’t the level 6 Attack of Opportunity a non-magical, non-god-worshiping feat as well?
Your point is still well made, regardless…|
Design Manager
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Forgive me Michael, but isn’t the level 6 Attack of Opportunity a non-magical, non-god-worshiping feat as well?
Your point is still well made, regardless…
Fair enough, I probably skimmed right past it. Not that two feats across 8 levels of play is much of an improvement, as you note.
And the broader point is, of course, that class archetypes are things you deploy for concepts where changing 2 or 3 class features and adding 4-8 feats will give you the entirety of what you need to embody the variant concept.
If the concept can support dozens of unique feats across all 20 levels alongside multiple unique class features and new abilities, you're pretty far afield from what a class archetype can support.
Only a few more days now until you all get to see for yourselves what we've cooked up...
I think speciation is more of an Evolutionist thing.
I'm not really expecting "Guardian" to get something like bonus AC against a taunt target, since that only increases the amount of disincentive they need to apply against targeting allies. They've already probably got heavy armor anyway.
Wild speculation time!
- Being able to shield block for allies.
- A bit of movement built into whatever their main reaction is, since they don't have supernatural abilities to explain ranged protection.
- Something to take the brunt of AoEs they're in alongside allies.
- Temporary hitpoints from something.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The difference is that the Guardian does not get power (or needs to care about) any specific deity. It's currently impossible to make a Champion who is like a Rahadoum patriot.
But my absolutely favorite 4e class was the Warden, who was a good mix of *really* sticky and hard to hurt in a way that mattered, so I hope the Guardian plays something like that.
Forgive me Michael, but isn’t the level 6 Attack of Opportunity a non-magical, non-god-worshiping feat as well?
Your point is still well made, regardless…Fair enough, I probably skimmed right past it. Not that two feats across 8 levels of play is much of an improvement, as you note.
And the broader point is, of course, that class archetypes are things you deploy for concepts where changing 2 or 3 class features and adding 4-8 feats will give you the entirety of what you need to embody the variant concept.
If the concept can support dozens of unique feats across all 20 levels alongside multiple unique class features and new abilities, you're pretty far afield from what a class archetype can support.
Only a few more days now until you all get to see for yourselves what we've cooked up...
In the CRB I count three in total (Attack of Opportunity, Quick Block, and {oddly enough} Divine Wall) from 1-20. Not the chassis to make a non-magical, non-god-worshiping Champion by far. I’m excited to see what you guys came up with in the Guardian class. Still pretty jealous over the Champion and hoping it doesn’t get outshined by the Guardian, tbh. But I trust you guys.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think speciation is more of an Evolutionist thing.
That was my first thought too.
Anyway...
I'm just glad to see a defender type class that is decoupled from the divine.
I'm also just hoping that the taunt mechanics aren't too overbearing. There was an entire thread on that not too long ago. Some people really liked the 4e taunt. Many others, such as myself, really don't.
Wild speculation time!
- Being able to shield block for allies.
- A bit of movement built into whatever their main reaction is, since they don't have supernatural abilities to explain ranged protection.
- Something to take the brunt of AoEs they're in alongside allies.
- Temporary hitpoints from something.
Maybe lean into shields more?
Guardian Block
Increase your hardness of your shields by half your level (minimum 1) and double the HP and BP. In addition, you can use Shield Block against any non-psychic damage instead of just physical.
Guardians Intercept
When an ally within 5' is hit by an attack, you can swap places eith it, becoming the target and using your defense instead, potentially changing the outcome.
If your shield is raises you can also use Shield Block as part of this reaction.
Guardian Protection
When an ally within 5' would make a saving throw, you can swap places with then, making the savings throw in their place. If you and your ally are both subject to the same effect, such as both being in an area effect, roll twice and take the lower result.
If your shield is raises you can also use Shield Block as part of this reaction.
I think speciation is more of an Evolutionist thing.That was my first thought too.
Anyway...
I'm just glad to see a defender type class that is decoupled from the divine.
I'm also just hoping that the taunt mechanics aren't too overbearing. There was an entire thread on that not too long ago. Some people really liked the 4e taunt. Many others, such as myself, really don't.
which version of the 4e taunt did you not like?
Enemies with 5' of you take -2 to their attack rolls against creatures other than you.
Or
When you attack an enemy they take -2 to their attack rolls against creatures other than you, until the start of your next turn.
Or
Select a creature within 60'. They take -2 to their attack rolls against creatures other than you. This last until you use this feature again.
I mean, if -2 is too much than it could be -1 instead.
The difference is that the Guardian does not get power (or needs to care about) any specific deity. It's currently impossible to make a Champion who is like a Rahadoum patriot.
But my absolutely favorite 4e class was the Warden, who was a good mix of *really* sticky and hard to hurt in a way that mattered, so I hope the Guardian plays something like that.
Warden was my favorite class in 4E as well. I'd love to see Guardian turn out like that. Maybe without the elemental theme that Wardens had, since Kineticist already has the elemental tank thing going on.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If this taunting mechanic forces us to invest in Charisma and roll to beat a target number then that's a hard pass for me. I hate Charisma-based characters, just a matter of personal taste. Rather I'm hoping that it works more like Marking did in 4E; no roll required.
I feel that shield stuff will likely be optional, as it feels weird to tie a class to closely to one piece of gear.Wild speculation time!
- Being able to shield block for allies.
- A bit of movement built into whatever their main reaction is, since they don't have supernatural abilities to explain ranged protection.
- Something to take the brunt of AoEs they're in alongside allies.
- Temporary hitpoints from something.Maybe lean into shields more?
Guardian Block
Increase your hardness of your shields by half your level (minimum 1) and double the HP and BP. In addition, you can use Shield Block against any non-psychic damage instead of just physical.Guardians Intercept
When an ally within 5' is hit by an attack, you can swap places eith it, becoming the target and using your defense instead, potentially changing the outcome.
If your shield is raises you can also use Shield Block as part of this reaction.Guardian Protection
When an ally within 5' would make a saving throw, you can swap places with then, making the savings throw in their place. If you and your ally are both subject to the same effect, such as both being in an area effect, roll twice and take the lower result.
If your shield is raises you can also use Shield Block as part of this reaction.
Kineticist are tied to gate attenuators. Gunslinger's are tied to guns/crossbows. Rogues have their limited weapons as well.
Being tied to shields wouldn't be out of line IMO.You could even still do the "swap places and take the hit" without a shield. Even if you just have +2 AC over your allies, it would be pretty solid reaction.
But sure. Shield Master could be a subclass.
Perhaps Polarm Master could be another, doing more to hamper enemy movements with reach.
And then maybe another one that just a simple one that gives you a little damage resistance to everything.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel that shield stuff will likely be optional, as it feels weird to tie a class to closely to one piece of gear.
What, you mean like the Gunslinger… or is it the Inventor you mean? No, wait! You’re talking about the Thaumaturge, right? ;)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think there's any need for a dual-wielding Guardian, but if shields are mandatory, that means that we can't get polearm guardians, and that seems a little sad. I'd like to see some of that "better defense" vs "larger zone of control" tradeoff... probably supported on both sides by class paths so you don't just get the Paladin thing of immediately grabbing for the flickmace or flickmace-equivalent.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think there's any need for a dual-wielding Guardian, but if shields are mandatory, that means that we can't get polearm guardians, and that seems a little sad. I'd like to see some of that "better defense" vs "larger zone of control" tradeoff... probably supported on both sides by class paths so you don't just get the Paladin thing of immediately grabbing for the flickmace or flickmace-equivalent.
Need, no. But I'd love to see a duel welding tank. Death Knights in their original implementation (where you could choose to dual wield or use a 2 hander in any spec) were quite fun for me to play, even if dw was suboptimal.
And yes, polearms, staves, and big 2 handed weapons are all good flavors that I'd want to see included, as well as shields.
I don't think there's any need for a dual-wielding Guardian, but if shields are mandatory, that means that we can't get polearm guardians, and that seems a little sad. I'd like to see some of that "better defense" vs "larger zone of control" tradeoff...
fair, but also Grapple Guardian seems like it should be a thing.
Guardian Intercept
You swap places and take the attack
Subclass
Shield Master, you can use Shield Block as part of the same reaction.
Polarm Master, can Intercept with your weapon at reach.
Grapple Master,can use Reposition as part of the same reaction.
Bodyblock, Level 10: can shove a grabbed creature in the way, redirecting the attack to them.
Feat
Lock Step: 1 action
Select an adjacent creature. When they move, you can Stride as a free action. You movement keeps you adjacent to the selected creature, moving along with them.
Two Handed Grapple
You can Grapple with 2 hands, if you do, you can grab one size larger than normal
I admit, I do love me some grappling, and I certainly wouldn't mind seeing some of it one the Guardian. Given what we have in monk, barbarian, wrestler, and swashbuckler, though, I'm not sure how much further they'd be willing to push it... especially since the guardian is (to my understanding) explicitly nonmagical, which limits the design space for such things to a degree. If all we're getting is somewhat more level-efficient access to wrestler feats... that's just not all that exciting, you know?
I feel that shield stuff will likely be optional, as it feels weird to tie a class to closely to one piece of gear.What, you mean like the Gunslinger… or is it the Inventor you mean? No, wait! You’re talking about the Thaumaturge, right? ;)Well Thaumaturge is a special item, there is more than one, you get to choose, and you get more as you level.
Inventors once again is a special item, they get to choose and they get to customize and they aren’t stuck with their choices as they level.
And Gunslinger? Well I dislike the class specifically because it is designed to make Reloading not suck so it can justify it’s own existence, while essentially locking off guns to almost every other class.
A Guardian shouldn’t be required to have a shield. Two-hand, free-hand, also be available. And since Twin Parry exists they could potentially find a way to get dual wielding in, not unlike the 4e Fighter. Though that fantasy is probably of lower priority.
I’m not making any kind of argument for or against shields. Just pointing something out. Your points are missing the point. Gear is gear, no matter special significance a class assigns it. Those classes are still primarily focused on using a particular type of gear. And gear can still be disarmed and/or broken.
I am in agreement with AnimatedPaper. Personally, I would hope that the class is just versatile enough to allow for any type of equipment-based build players can conceive of that is tanky; sword and board, two-handler, dual wielded, whatever.
I’m also hoping guardian has feats to be better at disarming and sundering gear and creating difficult terrain. I think a reaction that lets them move to and immediately block an attack on an ally would be pretty cool, too.
I imagine guardian as a love child of bastion and wrestler archetypes with some bespoke tanking/punishing mechanic. I see Braum from LoL in my minds eye...."STAND BEHIND BRAUM!!" "THE HEART IS THE STRONGEST MUSCLE!!!"...Honestly I couldn't think of making any guardians until I remembered that character.
I admit, I do love me some grappling, and I certainly wouldn't mind seeing some of it one the Guardian. Given what we have in monk, barbarian, wrestler, and swashbuckler, though, I'm not sure how much further they'd be willing to push it... especially since the guardian is (to my understanding) explicitly nonmagical, which limits the design space for such things to a degree. If all we're getting is somewhat more level-efficient access to wrestler feats... that's just not all that exciting, you know?
Is there any grapple feats that let you redirect attacks?
Or give a penalty to Stikes?Halt Movement, reaction
Requirement: a free hand
Trigger: a creature within reach moves past you, including forced movement and falling.
Attempt a Grab. If the target is willingly, you gain a +3 circumstance bonus.
Critical Success: you halt the movement and Relocation the creature
Success: you halt the movement
Failure: you reduce the movement by half.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I really want to be able to play reach tricks with a guardian with a polearm so I certainly don't think that a shield should be *necessary*.
I don't see Paizo forcing people to use a shield, because if anything, I could see people not wanting to play it since that adds more math to the game and there's people that don't like that. Also, the concept of taking isn't necesarily tied to shields. The basic concept of a tank is a dude that withstands damage and forces enemies to target them. The only thing that I imagine a tank-based class having is heavy armor and Shield Block since that's kinda a martial staple of sorts, but not features that force all guardians to use shields.
There are 45 guns and crossbows, each with a unique combination of hands, traits, and damage giving you a wide variety of options in both equipment and playstyle.
I don't consider that to be a good thing with how small the difference are.
Like is there really a need for both deadly and fatal?
Is the +1 damage from backstabber even worth the effort of remembering you have it?
You could easily reduce it to 10 or so weapons with meaning differences.
Now wanting polearma and grappling is a good reason not to make shields a core feature
|
Design Manager
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Like is there really a need for both deadly and fatal?
Slight tangent to the topic, but...
Fatal adds a larger and more reliable damage increase than deadly, so the traits being different allows for a much wider array of weapon variation.
A shortbow that gets a crit sees its damage increase by 5.5 points, on average; that means that a crit in the early levels adds damage roughly equivalent to a primary attack and a follow-up attack at -5 MAP.
A dueling pistol that gets a crit sees an average damage increase of 9.5 points; that's roughly the damage of two attacks with no MAP and a third attack at -5 MAP in the same level range.
The base adjustment in weapon design is that fatal and deadly both cost one die size in the weapon's trait budget; deadly's comparative value is much more mutable based on the weapon profile, though, while fatal mathematically retains its comparative value until you can no longer have the fatal die be two die steps above the base die (basically once the base die hits a d10, since the game doesn't use a d14). You can also squeeze deadly down to be worth less than a full die trait by reducing the size of the deadly die; you can't do that with fatal because fatal adjusts the size of the original damage die.
While they may look very similar on the surface, their math profiles are actually very distinct in a way that creates a lot of situations where one is appropriate and the other just isn't.
Bringing that back around to the topic at hand, though, I'd anticipate the guardian and the champion being even more and more obviously distinct than deadly and fatal ;)
There are 3 basic shields, and while treasure vault added some more, they are still more or less the same with minor additions. There are 45 guns and crossbows, each with a unique combination of hands, traits, and damage giving you a wide variety of options in both equipment and playstyle. The inventor can literally use any weapon or armor they want. The Thaumaturge likewise can use any gear they want, but effectively have one less hand, making 2 handed weapons hard to use. So yea, a shield based class would be uniquely narrow in its equipment choicesI feel that shield stuff will likely be optional, as it feels weird to tie a class to closely to one piece of gear.What, you mean like the Gunslinger… or is it the Inventor you mean? No, wait! You’re talking about the Thaumaturge, right? ;)
You are missing the point, which isn't worth arguing over anyway. It is all a particular category of gear, regardless of how many of a variations there are to choose from. I am not arguing against your point that shield use is likely to be optional. See my follow up post - that you conveniently skipped over - for my clarification on that statement. There is no disagreement of any substance here.
Do I literally have to explain a joke post?! I even used the winky smiley face.
I merely pointed out - in what I find to be a humorous manner - classes that are more reliant on "gear" than other classes. I do not want, nor am I arguing for, the Guardian class to be solely focused on Shield use.
Please move on. I am.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To celebrate the release of the Guardian class we are releasing a brand new AP where you are encouraged to make a full party of Guardians.
The Archipelago of Galxy is a wild place where anything can happen, which only avoids cataclysm due to its plucky Guardians, a unit of misfits with a heart of gold.
Select from premade guardians such as a deadly orc lady, a leshy of few words, or an awakened racoon (just don't call him that).
A wild adventure is sure to await you in Guardians of Galxy™!
Fatal adds a larger and more reliable damage increase than deadly, so the traits being different allows for a much wider array of weapon variation.
Depends on the runes, they don't scale the same way.
Deadly d8 with major striking adds 4.5 * 3 = 13.5Fatal d12 on a d8 weapon, with major striking adds 6.5+2*3= 12.5
But both are still overlapping "add more to crits" options.
Closer to on topic, a class that focuses on shields isn't bad because of a lack of shields variety.
And it's not like you could just make more shields. A glass shield, with higher Hardness, but 1 HP and BP, and some kind of shatter effect.
But yea, back on topic.
I'd anticipate the guardian and the champion being even more and more obviously distinct than deadly and fatal ;)
I can imagine several ways to do that.
Just can't figure out which one you did.|
Design Manager
|
Depends on the runes, they don't scale the same way.
Deadly d8 with major striking adds 4.5 * 3 = 13.5
Fatal d12 on a d8 weapon, with major striking adds 6.5+2*3= 12.5
Your math is wrong. Fatal d12 on major striking is an average gain of 6.5 + 2*4 for 14.5. Deadly and fatal are designed to converge more as you reach higher levels and crit damage becomes a smaller but also more reliable portion of your anticipated damage output.
At low levels fatal can reliably be expected to be a significantly larger portion of your overall damage than deadly, and as class feats and features take over more of your total DPR output (even feats like Running Reload that don't directly increase DPR do improve your TAE, which increases your effective DPR in live combat situations) the span narrows. Fatal and deadly slowly draw in closer to each other over the course of 20 levels because the offsets are less necessary as more character-specific factors come into play.
This is oddly hostile for just one reply
There was no hostility. None was intended. I just wanted to see the conversation move on to more productive, and possibly humorous, avenues.
Your math is wrong. Fatal d12 on major striking is an average gain of 6.5 + 2*4 for 14.5.Depends on the runes, they don't scale the same way.
Deadly d8 with major striking adds 4.5 * 3 = 13.5
Fatal d12 on a d8 weapon, with major striking adds 6.5+2*3= 12.5
I see my mistake.
Deadly and fatal are designed to converge more as you reach higher levels and crit damage becomes a smaller but also more reliable portion of your anticipated damage output.
I don't think designing things to be the same as a good use of the space.
I mean, sure. From a developer perspective, it gives you the ability for finely tuned balance.
But from a player perspective, I'd rather have the page count go to something with greater difference than two flavors of "more damage on a crit". (I like concussive for instance)
IMO.
Anyways. Back to guessing about the Guardian.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Perhaps they lean into the "parent or" meaning of guardian? We get a feat that gives us a minion small child?
Perhaps they lean into the "parent or" meaning of guardian? We get a feat that gives us a minion small child?
Brilliant insight! I think you've cracked the code. The guardian is the reverse Summoner class we've been pining for. Instead of a caster with a powerful combat pet, it's a warrior with a vulnerable ally that it has to use its superior defensive abilities to protect. The minion is the source of its nigh-supernatural protective leaps, and otherwise buffs the guardian and their allies' morale. The guardian's Ward doesn't have to be a literal child but may be any endearingly cute and harmless creature.