As said, Marshal's ability to prompt a Reactive Strike is not the same thing.How is "If you spend 2 actions, that ally can use their reaction to immediately Strike."
Different from
2 actions: "That ally immediately attempts a Strike as a reaction."
Or
"The target of the message can immediately spend its reaction to Step or Stride.
Amp Heightened (4th) The target of the message can choose to Shove, Strike, or Trip with its reaction instead."Other than the Commander getting it earlier and having a bit more range?
Please, read the actual thread.
Reactive Strike is put into the balance consideration for every class, as it can be obtained by any PC for 2 Feats.
Those options that still burn Reactions are therefore within the system tolerance for what a PC can do.
The Commander allows an extra Strike beyond and independent of that. Every turn, the Commander gets 1 tactic that does NOT burn a Reaction. Meaning, that Giant Barb can do their own MAP 0 Strike, a MAP 0 AoO, and another MAP 0 Strike via Commander. Every single turn, no spell slots, no focus points.
Our Commander #1 even did go Psychic for that amp, thinking it could double up to get around the 1 tactic limit. But the Barb would generally already use Attack of Opportunity, as the Guardian was a Trip machine.
I think he used it once on the Guardian instead, but then realized he would rather use his own MAP 0 for Guiding Shot (and the Guardian needed their Reaction), making the amp worthless.
Again, that's how absurdly good Strike Hard is. It's good enough to make what is widely considered a very good focus spell/amp worthless in context.
Because the Commander's 0 MAP was better spent on his 1A Strike, and the given Strike Reaction was more than worth the 2A vs 1A difference.
The Commander allows an extra Strike beyond and independent of that. Every turn, the Commander gets 1 tactic that does NOT burn a Reaction. Meaning, that Giant Barb can do their own MAP 0 Strike, a MAP 0 AoO, and another MAP 0 Strike via Commander. Every single turn, no spell slots, no focus points.
3 Stikes is less than 2 giant barbs doing 2 MAP 0 Stikes + 2 AoO.
You need to compare 2 characters to 2 characters.
Our Commander #1 even did go Psychic for that amp, thinking it could double up to get around the 1 tactic limit. But the Barb would generally already use Attack of Opportunity, as the Guardian was a Trip machine
right. The Commander needs the extra reaction or it could easily end up useless given all the other ways to grant attack already in the game.
Again, that's how absurdly good Strike Hard is. It's good enough to make what is widely considered a very good focus spell/amp worthless in context.
no. It just means they don't stack with the Trip.
Allegro and Haste don't stack either. It doesn't make one absurdly good.
Because the Commander's 0 MAP was better spent on his 1A Strike, and the given Strike Reaction was more than worth the 2A vs 1A difference.
and the Guardian was spending 1 action+1 Reaction to grant attacks, possibly to multiple allies, while having better armor and hit points.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@ Trip: I have a question. Why didn't the GM in your playest have the monsters move? If every round for the Commander was Strike then Strike Hard! on the barb, having monsters move shuts that down. The barb can't Strike if things are out of reach.
Was it init stacking by the party? Was it not thought about by the GM? Does your party play static combat?
I'm just curious.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, how did the commander never have to move? If the commander is using a ranged weapon, cover and never having an enemy off-guard would very quickly evaporate the efficacy of the commander’s 0 map attack. And that is without ever losing the ability to use strike hard because no one is in a position to use it. If the commander delays and the barbarian has to move outside of the commanders aura, then the whole strategy is shut down too.
I do think RAF could be OP in the right party. That's a lot of action.
Maybe limit it to 3 allies to cap the high end, but not affecting your normal party.
4 PCs were L8, no F Archetype, basically PFS rules for both sessions.
Fight 1 was vs 2 rock throwing gaint-types, and 1 rocky giant that had a hazard spike terrain aura around it. 1 Rock thrower ran in to flank the Barb that engaged the melee spiky one, the other thrower stayed at range for a round or 2 more.
Once the Barb got flanked, I don't think they moved until foes started dying and the 3rd giant ran in, but the main thing is that he only needed to be in Strike range by the end of his turn, which is what the Barb already wants to do.
In a scenario where the Barb spends all 3 actions getting into melee, that still enables S-H!. The chances of a melee PC *not* being in range to Strike by the end of their turn is very low.
The Commander delayed once to go after the Barb, and there was not much the GM could possibly do. I honestly do not think there was a single turn where the Barb ended theirs outside of melee range once the swings started.
From the Commander's PoV, the Barb Strike was better than his, so if he needed to move, S-H! was prioritized. I think he needed to reposition his aura once to follow the Barb in, then was free to throw a returning weapon. They used Guiding Shot for the thrown Strikes.
It was about turn 3 or 4 after he had used some of his other tactics, and then realized how much better the S + S-H! routine was.
Fight 2 of that playtest was vs 2 melee humanoids and 2 casters, indoors. Commander moved in to a spot at the S of the room, and was pretty much set to literally stand still the whole fight. It took the Guardian dropping dying a 2nd time, for him to Battle Medicine the Barb, then did a Defensive Swap the next turn to make sure our heavy hitter did not drop.
===========================
Playtest 2 had a (different pilot) Commander w/ a Reach weapon. It went very much the same, but with a lot more wasted actions to get in Reach, and the Commander took a lot more AoE damage from an Avalanche Troop throwing at us. This Commander figured out that S-H! was the #1 priority almost instantly, and did not do a lot else because they did not have a throwing weapon, and none of the other tactics were really usable once the PCs were slugging it out. They only got a few Strikes of their own off.
That heavy hitter was a Thief with Wolf Stance from Monk (piloted by Commander #1) This Guardian was even more ready to Trip with a Shield + Whip and Bolas on his belt.
The fight 1 was vs 1 high caster + Avalanche Legion. The Thief melted the foes even faster than the Barb had done. My Witch rolled last for initiative, and I don't think my 3 turn happened before they were all dead. And troops have that whole HP threshold mechanic.
Fight 2 was more dynamic due to the GM really trying to optimize his dragon, and the single foe could try to force wasted move actions (but got tripped a few times and Hampering Swept).
The Commander beat the dragon's initiative and had a cool turn 1 where he used a tactic to let us spread out and scatter before the breath attack. While it seemed cool, in hindsight it did nothing to help.
The reality is that such things that don't affect HP numbers really struggle to make a difference. My Witch was already behind a boulder, and because the others still had to end movement inside the aura, the dragon just flew above the middle and did a downward cone to hit the other 3 PCs.
===========================
And I'll say again, the Commander introduces an entirely new MAP 0 into a ruleset that is balanced on each PC having their class-internal MAP stuff during their turn, and 1 chance for a Reaction Strike at 0.
When a PC spends 2 Actions to prep a Strike, they must carry their MAP into that Reaction, that's how strict/careful the rule set is.
There is no avoiding that Commander's S-H! is a new an unique thing. Literally every other feature I know of does not break this rule. Only the Commander. IMO, this is NOT a good idea to put into pf2e when it does not need to be there.
Strike Hard! is an infinite, every turn, no resource, single prep slot budget, MAP 0 Strike for a super-glass-cannon PC that's spent 0 budget on such a serious ability.
If Strike Hard! makes it into the game unchanged, it will absolutely be the core thing every Commander will be stuck spamming every session. There will be threads of Commanders trying to invent hyper-specific contexts where it's justified to prioritize another tactic over S-H! (before R,A,F! happens).
S-H! will be a huge dagger, lodged right in the heart of the class, that players will have to gingerly navigate in order to maximize their fun.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
So strike hard works well when you have 1 commander, 1 brutal melee attacker and a tank who can throw their entire life into keeping the striker on their feat.
Do you really think this is obviously superior to just 3 barbarians as far as damage output?
And woe be that party against any fliers/kiters that prevent you from standing together.
Not to mention you have a whole group with pretty bad reflex saves bunching up, also known as dragon soup.
Every Strike-prioritizing class multiplies too much w/ S-H! for it to be a healthy thing for the gamesystem.
And yes, the Commander + Big Hitter pairing is 100% better than 2 Big Hitters.
Commander still has all their other Feats and Features. From Plant Banner, Shields Up!, Guiding Shot, Combat Assessment, Defiant Banner, Rallying Banner, and others (including Battle Medicine) are all ONE action abilities (L8 and under).
The value of Commander is amazing, even when S-H! is such a priority.
Half the reason that the ability to use/invoke the Strike of the Big Hitter ally is problematic design is because it allows the Commander to invest in other things while still doing the other PC's attacks.
It is just a fundamentally bad idea.
===========================================
Even a small change, like removing the "free Reaction," but letting the tactic-shouted ally wait until just before their turn to act on the order, would remove the issue.
That change would mean that any time a Big Hitter would not be able to trigger their RS, they could use the Commander's order to make a single MAP 0 Strike, but they would never get an extra Strike beyond that.
The Commander would have to be genuinely thoughtful about foreseeing chances where allies would be unable to RS on their own. It would also be a big buff to other tactics; it would allow allies to save their Reactions they may not want to spend, such as only raising after Shields Up! when an attack is actually coming their way, instead of needing to spend the Reaction right when the order is shouted.
If the removal of the "free Reaction" seems like too much of a deal-breaking nerf, then holy cow, I don't know how better to exemplify why S-H! is so absurdly potent.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
it wasnt 2 characters it was 3. without that guardian, the barbarian is floored the first time he ends a a turn next to 2 enemies (unless he can definitely drop one with the strike hard.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Meh, SH looks fine to me
it wasnt 2 characters it was 3. without that guardian, the barbarian is floored the first time he ends a a turn next to 2 enemies (unless he can definitely drop one with the strike hard.
Lol, no. Please, do not state some b!%#@~@* assumption about a playtest you did not participate in like it is fact. That is outright bad-faith discussion.
The Guardian is/was a very obvious minus to the party's effectiveness. The idea that a 12 HP/level Barb "needed a tank" is a joke. I used Life Boost, and both Commanders had Battle Medicine on deck, but left it unused in both fight 1s.
The foes died far too fast for the Barb to be in danger, and the GM's plan for playtest 2 to use more AoEs backfired when the Barb was swapped for a Rogue. In playtest 2, I used Life Boost on the Reach Commander because they got more bloodied than the Rogue for just trying stay in melee.
The foes would have dropped even faster if the Guardian had been replaced with another damage dealer.
The ability to redirect damage ONCE (twice w/ a Feat) per turn and reduce it by only 10 via resist is a capital J Joke compared with any martial and Reactive Strike.
The Guardian was as close to dead weight as it gets, being adjacent to their ally only ensured that we would take 2x damage from AoEs. And having 0 Strike enhancements left them worse at offense than an Alchemist. Guardian cannot even offer flanking while protecting FFS.
Playtest 2 went so much smoother in part because the Guardian had abandoned their class to optimize Master Athletics Tripping.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Commander + Big Hitter pairing is 100% better than 2 Big Hitters.
level 8 Giant Barb
2d12+4+2+10 = 2960% base hit chance, 10% crit.
2 barbarians, 1 action flank, 2 attacks
(29 * .5) + (29 * 2 * .2) = 26.1
(29 * .45) + (29 * 2 * .05) = 15.95
= 42.05
Level 8 commander
2d6+4+2 = 13
60% base hit chance, 10% crit.
guiding shot
(13 * .5) + (13 * 2 * .1) = 9.1
Stike hard
+10% chance of 26.1
+ 50% chance of (29 * .5) + (29 * 2 * .15) = 23.2
+ 40% chance of (29 * .5) + (29 * 2 * .10) = 22.33
= 31.43
So
2 barbarians flanking does 84.1
1 commander and 1 barb do 69.71
And it's likely the barbarians will have an extra action here or there while the Commander is short an action here and there.
Feel free to double check the math. But I even picked level 8 so the commander wouldn't be behind in Str.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is no reason that the class *needs* to have Strike Hard
I mean the reason is that some people seem to want that option and mechanic to exist, which at the very least is no less compelling than you saying you personally dislike it (and arguably moreso, since tactics are by definition opt-in).
If the whiteroom math looks that close in a DPS race, then I'm absolutely happy to say Commander + Big Hitter is a better idea.
The more a PC is invested into their Strikes, the larger the cost of doing anything else. Having a lower hitting PC means that it's less of a minus for them to do other very helpful actions, such as Trip.
Single-target offensive buffs is another forgotten swing of that equation. Runic Weapon will get more value per casting action, ect.
I do not like having to repeat myself, but once again, the reason the dissimilar pairing is better is because it offers a whole lot more than just Strikes. No s$!@ two unga bungas can do more Strike damage.
Being an Int class while a full martial is very good for multiple forms of utility, from skills to spells of any list. Going all-in on dps is not a good plan.
Commander uniquely enables such utility to not come at as much of a cost as it should, due to using another PC's Strike. And that ability to Strike via an ally is fine. What is a big problem is the ability to add an extra attack beyond the normal 1 Reaction limit.
That's a new rulebreak that tips the scales too much toward spamming S-H!, and over-encourages investing into a Big Hitter PC.
I'm pretty sure the observation of Strike Hard! being way overused is the norm for the playtest, and it's wild that people refuse to let that translate into "maybe this would be improved if it was changed."
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
If the whiteroom math looks that close in a DPS race, then I'm absolutely happy to say Commander + Big Hitter is a better idea.
how much more damage should 2 barbarians do compared to 1 commander and 1 barb, in your opinion.
It's at 20% now.
Single-target offensive buffs is another forgotten swing of that equation. Runic Weapon will get more value per casting action, ect.
so do debuffs, including focus fire. You needed a Guardian to keep the Barb up.
Not that I have any issues with a party with their own niche working together doing more than a party of well rounded characters doing their own thing.
Being an Int class while a full martial is very good for multiple forms of utility, from skills to spells of any list. Going all-in on dps is not a good plan.
then MAP doesn't matter if your not using your 3rd action to attack.
That leaves the commander with a 2 action "power attack" that will be less than 2 Stikes from whatever their ally is. And less than most 2 action spells.
You lose damage, and gain utility. That's the trade. But if you don't think 20% is enough damage loss, how much?
Commander [b]uniquely enables such utility
That's a good thing.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The cap with (melee) Magus & Summoner is one slightly enhanced Strike + one Cantrip (w/ some nova spell slots) vs. a Commander's not enhanced Strike + one ally's Strike (and no nova abilities). A heavy hitter will routinely outperform a Cantrip, but given the positioning needs and teamwork required, I think SH! is in a fine place (though I could accept an added drawback too).
If the party funnels its resources into that heavy hitter by giving it the best Runes & buffs, the Commander will itself become a heavy hitter by proxy. Yet having a Commander only competes with having a second heavy hitter when funds & Runes would deprive the second heavy hitter from matching the first. So maybe there doesn't need to be a drawback, eh?
Or maybe there already is one, a risky one. I DMed/GMed several 3.X/PF1 parties where one PC served as the locus for the party's resources. That single PC became nearly unstoppable, yet when stopped in that rare instance or dropped in a pit, outmaneuvered*, etc., whoa to the rest of the party! Seems similar here, such that if the Commander becomes overly reliant on using another PC as proxy, what happens when there's no heavy hitter around?
*Not to mention the instant TPK threat if confused or controlled! Saw that in PFS1 a bit too much.
Hmm, this reminds me of how the Guardian's also so reliant on others for offense. I find it funny/awkward that the two war-themed classes rely on the aggression of others.
[...]
I'd like to ask what PC you used Strike Hard! on, as that's a pretty big variable.
Do you think Commander would be under-powered or unfun if that specific tactic were just removed/replaced?
Do you think the class would be more fun to play if changes were made to make Strike Hard! less of an automatic pick (comparative nerf)?
Some change like, instead of getting 1 free tactic per turn that does not use a Reaction, the tactic either uses their Reaction (does not stack w/ a Reactive Striking PC), or you have the choice to donate your own Reaction as you see fit. Putting more cost-benefit contextuality into the choice to use S-H!.
Another spitball idea would be to have S-H! state that it's attack will impose/suffer from MAP with other out of turn Reactive Strikes.
I'd also like to poke you for a chance to suggest your own change that would help encourage other tactics, and discourage/nerf S-H! a bit.
Even buffs, like "remove the must end movement inside aura" clauses from other tactics, ect.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Finally after testing the class for 16 levels especially against severe encounters (basically just boss fights) I will post my Guardian feedback here.
Firstly, I will apologize to everyone who reads it because English is not my native language and I have additional difficulties writing in it. That's why I'm writing this text using Google Translate, which may contain incorrect terms that I'll try to review, but I hope people here will understand the general context.
As it was the longest playtest I've ever done, with the largest number of different players (although the party was fixed for practicality, the people who played with the characters or were GMs alternated), I won't go into details of each battle.
The party chosen was:
Choosing the commander's ancestry was a little complicated. I originally made her as a human, because I dumped intelligence (+1 in intelligence is enough to use tactics on up to 3 characters, in this case they were the guardian, the eidolon and psichic). But when I reached level 8 and decided to get the Defiant Banner feat, I redid the sheet, this time making an android, investing in Int, Dex and Str and ended up playing like that for the rest of the game. The interesting thing is that that's why I spent half the playtest using a guisarme and the other half using it, so I had the experience of playing with both modes, "warlord" and "lazylord".
First of all, my compliments are that this class is already very well done and fun in the playtest. The experience of using it is as if you were playing a martial bard mixed with an improved marshal archetype. The gameplay of using tactics while fighting, having access to heavy armor and standard martial proficiency was very interesting and fun.
That's why I started the class using a guisarme as my banner, to be able to attack while using the class's support tactics and feats. And in general, my experience was good, but with it comes my main complaint about the class, the key attribute.
It makes thematic sense for the class to have Int as a key attribute, however it is very underused by the class. To the point that in most builds you can dump it without regret! And that's what I did until level 7! Simply the best tactics I found to use didn't need Int. So it was much more useful to invest in Str, Con, Wiz and Dex than to keep putting points in Int like any martial class would do.
It was only at level 8, because of Defiant Banner that I decided to invest in Int, and it was only because of that. Which in my opinion is too little to justify using Int as a key attribute.
And with that goes my first review. The designer needs to make much greater and more general use of the class's Int, having only a few optional abilities requiring it makes it difficult to justify the investment. Or, put Str or Dex as a key attribute like most martial classes are.
Continuing on the class problems, the other problematic thing in my opinion is also the folio and prepared tactics. In practice, this is like a worse wizard. Because you have the mix of a repertoire + flexible preparation and both are very small. This leads to a classic problem that prepared spellcasting classes, especially the wizard and witch have, which is the fact that the player tends to ignore all situational tactics focusing only on those that will be useful in most possible situations. Honestly, I don't even see a reason for folio to exist, because throughout the playtest I never changed any prepared tactics.
That's why I believe the class needs a good improvement here. Firstly, finishing off the folio. There is already a limit of prepared tactics, the folio is not only redundant but it eliminates any possibility of considering changing tactics throughout the day.
The other problem is the very small number of tactics prepared. As I said above, this makes the player opt for the tactics that he believes to be useful in most situations, ignoring the more situational ones due to the risk of being left with useless tactics throughout the day, leaving in the end with fewer useful options instead to have greater versatility.
If there wasn't the folio and a much greater number of prepared tactics (something like 4x more than we have today) the players would take several more situational tactics and use them when possible and favorable, but as things stand today basically pushes the player to pick up Striker Hard!, Pincer Attack, or Form Up! because they are tactics that work in practically any battle.
While you're at it, here's the list of tactics I chose to always stay prepared (forget the folio, I didn't even care about its existence).
Prepared tactics:
And here comes an interesting detail. I saw a lot of people here talking about how OP Strike Hard! was or could be, but in practice, neither I nor my friends actually used it as extensively as many people imagined.
Don't get it wrong, Strike Hard is a great tactic, especially because you use the additional reaction for it which means that no ally can deny using the reaction. But in practice it's only really worth it if you attack too. If this is not the case, it is much more efficient for you to Strike 2x with your own weapon, even if it does not have the key attribute in it, even if it does not have the bonuses of a barbarian or fighter. Giving two blows even if one suffers MAP -5/-4 is still very efficient for any martial artist, even if he eventually has a -1 hit.
Instead, the main tactic that my friends and I used the most by far was the Pincer Attack.
The Pincer Attack was extremely efficient and useful, it often left all enemies off guard against all the allies that mattered, in addition to using Step it also helped to reposition the allies that needed it, whether melee or ranged, it was also essential because the guardian normally didn't want to flank (because he needed to be adjacent to his allies to use reactions) and it was a tactic that used free action, that is, different from Form Up! I could use it even in the first round without needing to delay because my allies still didn't have enough reactions, nor was there a risk of them refusing to save reactions. Honestly, Pincer Attack was almost always much better than Strike Hard! the exception was when the targets were already off-guard by another source, then Strike Hard was preferred, if there were enough actions to attack as well (if not just Strike 2x).
Form Up! It was also a very interesting tactic on paper, but much less so in practice. It basically had 2 big problems, the initiative in the first round and the consequent need for reactions if more than one player needs to respond to it. This sometimes forced us to choose to delay with the commander, so that everyone could have reactions to be able to use Form Up! But at the same time, acting after everyone else sometimes ended up eliminating the need to use it, after all, everyone has already played and taken a stand! In the end, we often ended up not using it and instead opting to use Pincer Attack, which also moved allies that were at risk without the chance of activating a movement reaction, left enemies in range off guard and could be used even if you were the first of the round, since it was a free action.
And here’s my review of Form Up! It should be free action just like the Pincer Attack. In fact, Pincer Attack turned out to be so good that I would even suggest that it would need to use reactions, reversing the situation.
Piranha Assult was another tactic that on paper was more interesting than in practice. But in practice I think it was more due to the selected enemies than her actual inability. Most of the enemies didn't have resistances that the PCs couldn't already bypass, and when enemies like that appeared (elementals and fire dragons), they were immune making the tactic useless. Perhaps if the tactic could also transform immunity into resistance like Extract Element does, it would be more useful.
And finally Ready, Aim, Fire! which honestly, was very OP. And the worst thing is that we adjusted the party to take advantage of it, the psyche gained extra damage from Unleash the Psyche, the summoner used EA and even the guardian agent gave him a Jezail so he could participate too, and even though he only got a few hits, when he got them right it was still welcome damage to the entire party. This section needs to be limited, even if only in the number of allies. The general feeling was as if everyone, especially spellcasters, had been given an extra round to attack. The moment this tactic came into play the party simply became very brutal! It will even appear in my criticism about the class progression later on.
About the class feats
I won't talk about them all, but I will highlight some that caught my attention during the playtest.
Once the feats are shown, here is my criticism of the commander's progression. The commander is good since level 1, but for some reason at levels 14 and 15 he receives a brutal boost due to the Defiant Banner and the Plant Banner suddenly adding half the level and the full level respectively, in addition to the entry of the Ready, Aim, Fire!
During the playtests the party suddenly became much more powerful because of this. I didn't get to use the Plant Banner because it competes with the Defiant Banner, but the Defiant Banner alone made everyone much more resistant at a simple cost of 1 action and suddenly the resistance that was 5 jumped to 12! Something similar happens in Plant Banner when suddenly the temporary HP increases from 5 to 20! And finally at this level comes Ready, Aim, Fire! causing at least the casters to use an extra cantrip each round, and if there are 3 spellcasters in the party or even a martial class with innate magic, things are very violent, 3 easy EAs come out of this or more if the party is larger .
Another interesting detail is that as the Defiant Banner easily causes AoO/RS due to the manipulate trait, from the moment I got this feat (but it applies to any feat or banner tactic with manipulate) I switched to using bows and started fighting as "lazylord" and thus protect myself from these reactions. In practice, I ended up enjoying playing "lazylord" more than playing on the front line, as I ended up getting a more suitable action economy for the commander if I didn't have to move to the front line, even though I had a lot of AC.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is! One thing I forgot in my review was the Warfare Expertise part.
For me, it's another mechanic that tries to justify Int as a key attribute. But he fails doubly.
Firstly because it is defined in a very limited and very open way at the same time. The point is that the commander can use it to RK all creatures, but only for "their most notable offensive abilities, and whether one of their saving throws is particularly weak" which is very little, especially since it excludes the thing The most frequently asked question by PCs is weaknesses, immunities and resistances, which in my opinion are issues that should not be contextually excluded from a specific lore for battle (after all, knowing your enemy's weaknesses is as important, if not more, than knowing their capabilities, offensives and saves), however on the other hand it authorizes the GM to release other questions that are "appropriate to the situation", hence my question about what information about the creature, with the exception of its lore, is not appropriate in a battle?
Anyway, as it's a Lore similar to Bardic Lore/Exoteric Lore I don't see why adding such strange limitations.
The other point of this ability is being able to use it in the initiative, basically trying once again to justify Int as a key attribute, however here you have a curious situation in practice which is the fact that the commander benefits very little from acting before the allies ! After all, the issue is quite simple, if you are the first or one of the first to act in the 1st round, you often have limited tactics, so it is not uncommon for a commander to use Delay to delay his turn until his allies act, receive their reactions and position theirselves. Which ends up making the functionality not very useful in practice.
And here's another suggestion of something that can be done to improve the commander that I mentioned slightly above. But to make this ability more useful, the commander could also gain the ability to give reactions at the beginning of his turn to allies, thus allowing a better use of tactics and a better use for Warfare Expertise on the initiative, in addition to helping to justify a little plus Int as the key attribute.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
After it was pointed out that the Shield cantrip enables itself to be substituted for Raise a Shield, I have been hoping for some Commander to try that tactic out.
It seems that the restrictive nature of the folio + prepared tactics being so damn small really is limiting even for the testing of the class.
It is good to hear how less dominating S-H! felt for groups without a PC built to capitalize on it, and TBH even the Fighter lacks a significant amount of bonuses on-hit that classes like Thaum or Rogue have, which lowers the incentive a bit when present.
The mention of Summoner really had me wince, as yeah, the Eidolon counting as a squadmate is a possible hairball of problems/edge cases.
With one Feat, Eidolons can cast cantrips for R,A,F! and even though the Summoner PC is limited to 1 Reaction, the other half of R,A,F! is the free action Swap + Reload, which the summoner can still perform alongside the cantrip-slinging Eidolon. And that's assuming the Commander's one free Reaction is already taken.
Re-reading R,A,F! the tactic also needs to specify if the free action Reload is only for a single action, or if weapons with Reload 2 are also fully reloaded by the tactic.
Heavy Crossbows are simple weapons, and the Summoner being able to Act Together shoot the Xbow for the bonus action, while still having the 3 other actions for their turn (Cast a 2A spell)... Only to then sling another cantrip as a Reaction, while reloading for free...
Yeah, Commander is a weird class that's going to be hard to balance.