| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Between Form Up! and Coordinating Maneuvers a commander can set up a caster for AOE blasting and control better than any class in the game thus far. I can understand why most parties won't touch Coordinating Maneuvers because they have a 2 hander martial that they want to give an extra attack to every round, if your party doesn't have that, and instead has 2 casters (or AoE Kineticists) and a more defensive martial in the mix, the casters can absolutely feast on cones, lines and blasts in ways that other parties really struggle to exploit.
The key is that you will want your casters going pretty much right after the Commander and before the enemies, so it takes coordination that some parties struggle to accomplish, but the extent this class can reorganize the battlefield by the end of their turn is down right remarkable.
I think some folks want more active debuffing of saves and ability, but we already have that in the minimal expert and master tactics available to us. I am failing to see how much better the commander can be at helping casters without getting too bonkers. It feels like trying to make a version of Strike Hard! that does what Ready, Aim, Fire! does would actually be a set back from rearranging the battle field because it forces the use of cantrips which are rarely going to be more effective than repositioning the battlefield and just using a bomb to exploit whatever weakness you thought you were going to hit with your cantrip...then letting your casters AoE more effectively.
If I was going to make any suggestion for helping commanders with parties of casters, it would be to include a feat that lets allies that are going to be attempting reposition actions as a part of a tactic use the commander's warfare lore skill in place of their athletics skill to do the reposition, as both the repositioning tactics suffer greatly if there is no one in the party that is good at combat maneuvers. I might also consider, as a part of that feat, letting the character reposition without a free hand, as that is the other restriction that makes those tactics very difficult to use.
Agree, plenty of entry level tactics help casters.
Defensive Retreat (three steps away from enemies) to kite regular enemies to eat a move action and avoid reactions from those who have them, Form Up (full stride as a reaction to allow them to bounce around in your banner aura to maximally kite enemies if no enemy reactions are on the table), Pincer Attack (in a mixed party, they can get away from a reaction and do a small amount of kiting as the martials move to block and inflict off guard), Reload! (the low level crossbow plus cantrip wizard lives!), Shields Up! (low level casters don't need the hand or the reaction, better than the Shield cantrip for many purposes).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If that's how players are expected to support casters offensively, then something in the class has to explain or teach it.
Otherwise the class will have a reputation for being bad with casters even if more experienced players know it isn't true.
I think folks underestimate the value of movement generally, focused instead on damage.
Cool insight!
Sorry but I have the opposite impression.
I'm no saying that reactions that helps movements are bad. Specially in the first turn, use a reaction to take position (something that was very useful when I played as Exemplar in last playtest). But once that everyone is already positioned, with exception of 5ft martial that needs to move to get closer to next target, usually the players and enemies doesn't move that much. The reason behind this is simply that the same action you use to move you also use fore everything else. That's main reason why most players and GMs avoid to use actions and reactions to move. Instead they usually prefer to use them to attack or use some special ability.
Once again I'm not saying that many of these reactions that Commander gives to casters are meh. It's the oposite but in theory I see many people overvalue movement more than I saw in practice.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think folks underestimate the value of movement generally, focused instead on damage.
Cool insight!
Sorry but I have the opposite impression.
I'm no saying that reactions that helps movements are bad. Specially in the first turn, use a reaction to take position (something that was very useful when I played as Exemplar in last playtest). But once that everyone is already positioned, with exception of 5ft martial that needs to move to get closer to next target, usually the players and enemies doesn't move that much. The reason behind this is simply that the same action you use to move you also use fore everything else. That's main reason why most players and GMs avoid to use actions and reactions to move. Instead they usually prefer to use them to attack or use some special ability.
Once again I'm not saying that many of these reactions that Commander gives to casters are meh. It's the oposite but in theory I see many people overvalue movement more than I saw in practice.
I don’t disagree that combats can get bogged down and static, but they don’t have to, and tactics like Form Up! Used at the right time can very easily leave a bunch of enemies ready to be mauled by AoEs without the enemy realizing that they were setting themselves up that way.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Playing a lot of casters with blast spells, I rarely need my allies to move to land them. In general, I have issues landing my blasts because the enemies are too spread to get all of them inside or because the martials need to cover multiple fronts (and as such they will straight up refuse to move as that would open attacks on the squishies). So I don't see movement abilities as any way to help casters (without speaking about initiative issues as you need the Commander to play just before the casters).
But I agree with Dubious Scholar remark: Form Up! on the caster themselves can be a nice way to reposition allies just before a blast. Well, honestly, Form Up! on anything is straight up broken... Especially if this character has a mount so they also benefit from Form Up!
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think folks underestimate the value of movement generally, focused instead on damage.
Cool insight!
Sorry but I have the opposite impression.
I'm no saying that reactions that helps movements are bad. Specially in the first turn, use a reaction to take position (something that was very useful when I played as Exemplar in last playtest). But once that everyone is already positioned, with exception of 5ft martial that needs to move to get closer to next target, usually the players and enemies doesn't move that much. The reason behind this is simply that the same action you use to move you also use fore everything else. That's main reason why most players and GMs avoid to use actions and reactions to move. Instead they usually prefer to use them to attack or use some special ability.
Once again I'm not saying that many of these reactions that Commander gives to casters are meh. It's the oposite but in theory I see many people overvalue movement more than I saw in practice.
If you think maneuvering has too high of an action cost, then doesn't that make free movement more valuable?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Playing a lot of casters with blast spells, I rarely need my allies to move to land them. In general, I have issues landing my blasts because the enemies are too spread to get all of them inside or because the martials need to cover multiple fronts (and as such they will straight up refuse to move as that would open attacks on the squishies). So I don't see movement abilities as any way to help casters (without speaking about initiative issues as you need the Commander to play just before the casters).
But I agree with Dubious Scholar remark: Form Up! on the caster themselves can be a nice way to reposition allies just before a blast. Well, honestly, Form Up! on anything is straight up broken... Especially if this character has a mount so they also benefit from Form Up!
The parties I play with tend to stay pretty close together. It is usually not hard to get most every enemy in a 20 ft blast, but allies are usually the problem that makes it difficult to get them all, especially as enemies tend to try to flank to get off guard.
Edit: and Form up! lets everyone move, so the martials can still set up a new line between themselves and the casters.
If you think maneuvering has too high of an action cost, then doesn't that make free movement more valuable?I think folks underestimate the value of movement generally, focused instead on damage.
Cool insight!
Sorry but I have the opposite impression.
I'm no saying that reactions that helps movements are bad. Specially in the first turn, use a reaction to take position (something that was very useful when I played as Exemplar in last playtest). But once that everyone is already positioned, with exception of 5ft martial that needs to move to get closer to next target, usually the players and enemies doesn't move that much. The reason behind this is simply that the same action you use to move you also use fore everything else. That's main reason why most players and GMs avoid to use actions and reactions to move. Instead they usually prefer to use them to attack or use some special ability.
Once again I'm not saying that many of these reactions that Commander gives to casters are meh. It's the oposite but in theory I see many people overvalue movement more than I saw in practice.
Even free movement many times have no use. I have players that casts rank 7 Haste pretty frequently to help the martials to do some extra Strike and sometimes Stride a little but the casters many times just don't use their extra action because they simply doesn't have a real use for them. They use 1 time to get their best positioning and then begin to use their actions to do other things and many times in many turns the just discard the extra Strike or Stride action because they are already positioned.
As I said get some "free" movement isn't bad specially in the round 1 where the encounter begins and not everyone is already well positioned but once they goes to where they want the melee martials simply focus into the attack until the their target is down and them move to next one while archers usually use their extra Strike to shot some extra arrows and casters many just ignore it.
Extra move action is also welcome when something unexpected happens but in practice unless you GM likes a lot to mess the encounter typically most players enter in their pre-planed position to do most of their pre-planed strategies most as possible.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Squad: Darn! Looks like all the animated scarecrows, save one, are in place for the squad caster's burning hands spell.
Commander: Shoots one of the scarecrows, then uses Coordinating Maneuvers in conjunction with Drilled Reactions.
Squad Martial: Steps up to the outlier, and repositions it into an inlier.
Commander: Uses Form Up!
Squad: Moves out of the area, and/or moves to defensive positions around the squad's backline, and/or moves to the edges of the area in expectation of picking off any survivors.
Squad Caster: Casts burning hands on all enemies.
Checks out.
Now, will my IRL friends ever be that coordinated? Nope. Probably not.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think people are sleeping on the free recall knowledge at the start of battle.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
While there is probably room for Strike Hard! to enable a greater range of hostile actions besides Strikes (you could also enable single-action impulse attacks such as Elemental Blasts, or spend an additional action to enable two-action Elemental Blasts and hostile cantrips), I very much agree that the range of mobility offered by the Commander is particularly valuable on casters, whose action-costly spells mean they'd greatly appreciate being able to move more freely without that eating into their own turn. Defensive Retreat in particular looks like the button you'd press if your caster got caught in melee range of an enemy with Reactive Strike, and the triple Step means that they can even get out of range of an enemy whose reach is 15 feet, which would normally be atrociously costly.
Because of this, I still feel there's merit to the criticism that the Commander could support casters a bit better, but specifically if we narrow it down to supporting offensive actions. It's great that Ready, Aim, Fire! supports cantrips, but that only comes online at 15th level, and until then there's no option for the Commander to let a caster fire even a cantrip (or a kineticist fire an Elemental Blast). I'd even go as far as to support expanding Strike Hard! to let one ally use a reaction to take any action that takes one action less than the number of actions you spent on the tactic and lacks the flourish trait, though generalizing the tactic that much I imagine would create some unforeseen abuse cases. Overall, though, the commander will have tactics that will benefit casters from level 1, though having only 2 tactics prepared to start with might limit their ability to cater to casters every encounter as much as other party members.
I think people are sleeping on the free recall knowledge at the start of battle.
An early Recall is absolutely a boon to spellcasters, as well. My spellcasters would absolutely appreciate a Commander in the party.
I think people are sleeping on the free recall knowledge at the start of battle.An early Recall is absolutely a boon to spellcasters, as well. My spellcasters would absolutely appreciate a Commander in the party.
What other classes get, or can get, something similar?
I fear a couple of Recall Knowledge builds, like the Outwit Ranger, won't survive the Commander.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think people are sleeping on the free recall knowledge at the start of battle.An early Recall is absolutely a boon to spellcasters, as well. My spellcasters would absolutely appreciate a Commander in the party.What other classes get, or can get, something similar?
I fear a couple of Recall Knowledge builds, like the Outwit Ranger, won't survive the Commander.
When a Commander uses Warfare Lore to Recall Knowledge, they are only able to ask "whether they can be reasoned with, their most notable offensive abilities, and whether one of their saving throws is particularly weak"
This should leave plenty of room for other classes to Recall Knowledge too.
But those are the only questions players ever bother asking, in my experience.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
But those are the only questions players ever bother asking, in my experience.
Defensive abilities, weaknesses, and resistances are pretty relevant too and you can't ask that.
whether they can be reasoned with, their most notable offensive abilities, and whether one of their saving throws is particularly weak
Suddenly reminded of that thread last week where some people were talking about how they like to run recall knowledge very restrictively, imagining a commander asking "whether one of their saving throws is particularly weak" and the GM glances down at the stat block, then looks back up and says "yes"
But those are the only questions players ever bother asking, in my experience.In my experience, weaknesses, resistances and immunities are the vast majority of questions.
Apologies. I misread your post. I thought Weaknesses was on the list.
I stand corrected. Without that, my statement is untrue, even for my players.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Its more commanders have tactics which are good for everybody and the a bunch which are only good for martials. There are no tactics which are themed for spellcasters.
Its more commanders have tactics which are good for everybody and the a bunch which are only good for martials. There are no tactics which are themed for spellcasters.
Themed, no, but practically? Lots of these movement abilities are better for casters than martials. (At least melee martials.)
Its more commanders have tactics which are good for everybody and the a bunch which are only good for martials. There are no tactics which are themed for spellcasters.
Themed for spell casters is pretty loose language. Does stupefying raid not count? Or Ready Aim Fire?
Defensive Retreat in particular, but Form Up and passage of lines help casters so much it is hard to say they are not written with casters in mind.
What is missing, that I think is what people are talking about, is a Strike Hard! For casters. I think such a tactic would be a mistake. It would very likely take 3 actions, and it would be too weak if restricted to single target cantrips (the closest thing to a strike), but it would be bonkers broken with “cast any spell.”
In my opinion, the combat support casters need the most help with is learning information about their enemies, and creating the space to target the most possible enemies with their spells. These are exactly what is on offer with the commander. Incentivizing casters to cast more cantrips doesn’t qualify to me as really helping casters play at their highest level.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Its more commanders have tactics which are good for everybody and the a bunch which are only good for martials. There are no tactics which are themed for spellcasters.Themed, no, but practically? Lots of these movement abilities are better for casters than martials. (At least melee martials.)
Sometimes. Depending on a number of circumstances, which imo is part of the problem. The movement options are best if your action economy is tight or if you need allies to reposition, which is sometimes casters but also includes a number of martial-adjacent characters with poor action economy.
I think the core frustration though is that in this thread we basically have "look it's fine, if your party has a certain type of caster and if they're standing in a certain place and if your allies are positioned in a certain way and if they have the right spell on hand these tactics might be really good."
Which is fine, situationally useful tactics are good, but it's really not in the same category as just giving people extra strikes. It just isn't, and when I see people griping about the Commander not doing as much for casters they're looking for more specifically targeted support, not generically useful options that just happen to be very useful for casters in certain circumstances.
But those are the only questions players ever bother asking, in my experience.In my experience, weaknesses, resistances and immunities are the vast majority of questions.
That's kind of the Thaumaturge thing though.
So maybe it's intentional that it's not on the list.
Weakest save is still pretty good knowledge.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pretty much what Squiggit said. Casters in the games I run are rarely out of place so movement abilities are rarely useful. If they are in the wrong place they either have ways of getting out of it easily enough there are no right spaces to stand so movement abilities aren't going to help.
Abilities to let casters cast 1 action spell/cantrip (shield) or dodge with something like nimble dodge might be better. Reactions to let them cast or prep a spellshape as has been said above all would be good. Even ones that allowed them to cast without provoking reactive strikes while niche would be good.
Martials get free strikes, things to help them get closer, things to help get them off-guard abilities allowing them to move and strike (2 actions) casters only get a 2 action help for attaching at level 15...
Paizo doesn't seem to know how to create abilities that support casters that universally good for everyone.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The developers at Paizo are creative, and I have no doubt they have some interesting ideas for additional tactics and that we are only playtesting a handful of ideas they are trialing to get some general feedback. Who knows what could be in store?
At the same time, I personally don’t want to see to much hyper specialization with tactics because they are extremely limited resources. For example, a tactic that allows one caster to prepare a one action spellshape feat in advanced sounds like it might not be an issue power balance wise, but realistically, how many party members are ever going to utilize that tactic? Maybe 2? And what spell shape feats are being used more than once or twice an encounter anyway? Tactics that don’t have a lot of flexibility in how they can be used are very difficult to fit into a commander’s budget.
There probably will be some potential debuff options available through tactics or feats that could benefit casters more, but getting access to 20 highly specialized tactics that will only work well with 3 or 4 classes has a lot of potential to leave commanders stranded with tactics they can’t really use.
The developers at Paizo are creative, and I have no doubt they have some interesting ideas for additional tactics and that we are only playtesting a handful of ideas they are trialing to get some general feedback. Who knows what could be in store?
At the same time, I personally don’t want to see to much hyper specialization with tactics because they are extremely limited resources. For example, a tactic that allows one caster to prepare a one action spellshape feat in advanced sounds like it might not be an issue power balance wise, but realistically, how many party members are ever going to utilize that tactic? Maybe 2? And what spell shape feats are being used more than once or twice an encounter anyway? Tactics that don’t have a lot of flexibility in how they can be used are very difficult to fit into a commander’s budget.
There probably will be some potential debuff options available through tactics or feats that could benefit casters more, but getting access to 20 highly specialized tactics that will only work well with 3 or 4 classes has a lot of potential to leave commanders stranded with tactics they can’t really use.
This is why I don't really like the current tactics system. When you only have to prepare 2-3 tactics for most of your career, even if you can prepare them again the next day, based on which tactics you decided to learn it is entirely possible for someone to trap themselves with options that aren't going to be always useful. For example, a 1st-level wizard can prepare 7 spells (5 cantrips, 2 leveled spells) which gives them plenty of room to have backup options in case they need them.
A 1st-level commander has only two tactics, which means that its not only easier to prepare stuff that probably wouldn't be optimal but also that you can't even prepare backup options because you simply don't have enough room. I think basic tactics such as Strike Hard! and a single target version of Form Up! should be default options that you have always prepared, and then have two free slots to prepare whatever you want.
I don’t like strike hard. I don’t think I’ll take it with any commander unless I am in a party with a barbarian or maybe a two hander fighter.
I think the feat that let you change a tactic at the start of an encounter should be baked into the class, and then you are less likely to sit on the same two all the time. Otherwise the class is feeling pretty solid at low levels to me. I am hoping to get some playtest time at the start of next week and the week after with some different levels in.
The party I am playing with is a Magus, a Psychic, and a Wizard, so all very different kinds of casters/caster hybrids. It is hard to settle on 4 tactics even though we have so few of them in this playtest. I am leaning towards Form Up, defensive retreat, pincer attack and coordinating maneuver. Passage of lines and the mountaineering one feel tough to pass on.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is some cool stuff stashed in the commander feats, especially at some of the higher levels. It definitely feels like something new to me and not just a rehash of the 4e warlord.
This is why I don't really like the current tactics system. When you only have to prepare 2-3 tactics for most of your career, even if you can prepare them again the next day, based on which tactics you decided to learn it is entirely possible for someone to trap themselves with options that aren't going to be always useful. For example, a 1st-level wizard can prepare 7 spells (5 cantrips, 2 leveled spells) which gives them plenty of room to have backup options in case they need them.
A 1st-level commander has only two tactics, which means that its not only easier to prepare stuff that probably wouldn't be optimal but also that you can't even prepare backup options because you simply don't have enough room. I think basic tactics such as Strike Hard! and a single target version of Form Up! should be default options that you have always prepared, and then have two free slots to prepare whatever you want.
Would it be a good idea to have subclasses that give a "free" tactic to be used? Maybe divided into movement/offensive/defensive or something like that? Or maybe like a Wizard's school (which is essentially the same)?
I was thinking of maybe allowing a "one of each" approach, but that seems needlessly restrictive. Also, sometimes you want offensive tactic A and sometimes offensive tactic B, so forcing people into choosing only one seems bad.
I haven't played a Warlord yet (I will on Wednesday), but I do think the current number of 2 "active" tactics seems too limited. If you had one or two always available tactics that means you can choose more niche options so you're not locked out of options when your niche isn't available.
(I mean, similar to how I view Wizard schools: the schools aren't meant as your bread and butter, but to give you a "core," and the rest of your spells are your experimental options. But that's not how many people seem to see things, and it's besides the point anyways.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At the same time, I personally don’t want to see to much hyper specialization with tactics because they are extremely limited resources. For example, a tactic that allows one caster to prepare a one action spellshape feat in advanced sounds like it might not be an issue power balance wise, but realistically, how many party members are ever going to utilize that tactic? Maybe 2? And what spell shape feats are being used more than once or twice an encounter anyway? Tactics that don’t have a lot of flexibility in how they can be used are very difficult to fit into a commander’s budget.
But we have tactics that specifically help martials, Strike hard is probably never going to help a caster. Its not asking for anything more specialised than what already exists for martials or ranged martials.
How about a reaction to sustain a spell or to at least move and sustain a spell for 1 action? That could be used by a lot of casters.
Its true we don't know what other tactics they have but I feel when it comes to options that specifically help casters as opposed to support options that favour martials (Bless, Courageous Anthem, Heroism) all favour martials, even generic universal debuffs all help martials (Fear, sicken etc). Martials and Martial muse bards all have a lot of things that help Martials with move and then later move and strike if they end up next to an enemy. Commanders offering more of the same without real caster support is just... on point for Paizo so far.
It is relatively easy for martials to inflict off guard, harder for casters to get it (for attack spells) and no equivalent for save DCs.
I really do understand the impetus, and think some creative options may be available, but the thing is buffs that help everyone are much better for the commander than buffs that can only affect 50% or less of the characters.
Strike hard! Is much worse than pincer attack on Monks, Rogues, Rangers, Magi, casters, really everyone except a couple of builds of Fighter and the Barbarians. So even though casters can get pretty decent strikes themselves (especially with battle form spells) you will get less efficacy out of using Strike Hard on most of your party, and it really isn’t a tactic that works well for most martials. Tactics like that that work only for some kinds of casters are even more restrictive because a tactic that allows a character to sustain a spell as a free action (for example) only works when a the party has casters and those casters have sustain spells (which isn’t even going to be every encounter unless they have sustain focus spells). At least Strike hard is still usable on anyone in any encounter, even if there are characters that you get less value for doing so.
At level 1 at least, melee spell attack roll spells that you can use after a pincer attack positioning into range, and then spend your own action falling back has been very effective. It makes Magi in particular look like fighters accuracy wise without overly exposing themselves to retaliation.
The lack of reactive strikes is tough with mostly casters but the damage output is excellent.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Strike hard! Is much worse than pincer attack
Where do you get that?
Pincer Attack is useless in a lot of situations (when you don't need mobility and the party is already flanking enemies). Strike Hard! is a very good default option because it will nearly always be useful (and when it's not it's because your party needs mobility and that's where you shine). And if you have a party with a heavy hitter (2-handed Str-based character) it's very much optimized.The choice between Pincer Attack and Strike Hard! will often come from the size of the party. In a 4-man party, Strike Hard! will outdamage Pincer Attack easily. On the other hand, in a 6-man party, especially if you are heavy on martials, Pincer Attack becomes an excellent choice.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The level 1 playtest I was part of yesterday (and hopefully we finish today) had a psychic, a wizard and a twisting tree magus. At least at level 1, the ability not to spread out around an enemy/enemies and to set up strong AoE spells with one action has been very powerful.
Some goblin warriors and a commando have given us some trouble with their ranged attacks and kiting, but we have pretty much smashed all the enemies that try to close into melee with us. Even the goblins are mostly just doing plink damage (it turned into a rolling encounter with the commando moving around, opening doors in a large hall to release different packs of monsters on us, so we had to stop at the end of 6 rounds), but a door is about to be open that has the goblin commando smiling.
Two packs of zombie (4 and then 3) got pretty well torched by 2 breathe fire spells by the wizard that got at least 3 of them) and even the magus has paired timber with a spinning staff to take advantage of the pincer attack and the grouped positioning of some zombies. Only the psych has been under performing because things keep dying before they can get off an amped imaginary weapon on 2 foes, and their only offensive spell slot spell is dizzying colors, which hasn’t been used yet.
Basically, off guard without using actions to stride into position has resulted in a lot of grouped together vulnerable enemies that have died very quickly ( 7 zombies, 2 goblin warriors, a goblin dog and a goblin pyro who never got to go). The zombies only getting one attack at most each round has prevented a lot of damage that has mostly been absorbed by shields. It is not a traditional party and it is caster heavy, but even so pincer strike pulls a ton of offensive and defensive weight saving actions, denying them from enemies and debuffing the target/s that are getting focus fired upon. An extra d8+5 reach strike a round wouldn’t have been bad, but it pales compared to getting extra enemies in AoE spells and setting up off guard on enemies set up to get smashed quickly without anyone moving around to flank.
|
|
Strike hard! Is much worse than pincer attackWhere do you get that?
Pincer Attack is useless in a lot of situations (when you don't need mobility and the party is already flanking enemies). Strike Hard! is a very good default option because it will nearly always be useful (and when it's not it's because your party needs mobility and that's where you shine). And if you have a party with a heavy hitter (2-handed Str-based character) it's very much optimized.The choice between Pincer Attack and Strike Hard! will often come from the size of the party. In a 4-man party, Strike Hard! will outdamage Pincer Attack easily. On the other hand, in a 6-man party, especially if you are heavy on martials, Pincer Attack becomes an excellent choice.
I think it will come down more to party composition than situation. I watched an archer Rogue slice up the opposition in a game I GMed due to Pincer Attack making everyone Off Guard to them, regardless of position.
Well, Pincer attack does only make off guard for melee, but it does do great things for Rogues too.
Our party ended up TPKing after the commando opened the door and there were 3 ravenously angry Foxes behind the door. They got to go right after the commando ran away (apparently they and the zombies were set to attack the nearest creatures to them, so the goblins were staying away from the opened doors). They dropped the psychic, who's missed imaginary weapon would have dropped the commando before he could have opened the door, and then also dropped the wizard before the party got to go again. 2 against 7, including the commando proved to be too much. Commanders get much, much worse once party members start dropping, especially if they are the only healer left standing and they have their hands full with shield and weapon. Dropping the weapon to start battle medicining was the end of the end. The high AC of the Commander did hold out for a surprisingly long time. She managed to heal herself, the magus up from unconscious and the wizard up from unconscious, but the high number of enemies at that point meant no one healed got to take an action. Still, that rolling encounter was 400xp and we got through 260 of it before the end...and if only we could have prevented the commando from opening that door, I think we would have won.
Lesson: A commander built to support casters starts having a rough time if the casters start getting KO'd. Who would have guessed?
We are hoping to play test with the same characters next week at level 6. I was planning on taking Adaptive Stratagem (because that ability sounds so cool), but with a party of casters, I think defensive swap is going to see a lot of regular use. I also really wanted to take observational analysis, but Shielded Recovery is feeling like it would have been a life saver in this TPK scenario and is also a pretty cool ability to build on Combat Medic. Again at level 6 I was really wanting to take Efficient Preparation, but Pincer Attack was so overwhelmingly good, I am not as convinced I need it now, and I think the whole stay up front, Pincer attack to set up big hits from my allies, and then raise shield and combat assess are pretty good actions to take regularly when supporting a party of casters and hybrid casters.
Its a playtest. It is hard to close read all the little rules and remember them all. If pincer attack did make foes off guard to ranged attacks as well, it would be completely busted, especially if paired with a bunch of animal companions. Spells like Scorching Ray would absolutely wreck.