| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Over the weekend I ran 3 mock battles with my group each at a different level and party comp.
Encounter 1, party level 4
Party: guardian, commander(melee), barbarian, ranger(bow)
Enemys:4 durauger 2 flaming skulls
Encounter 2, party level 8
Party: guardian, commander(ranged), barbarian, thaumaturge
Enemys:zombie dragon (elite) 2 sulpher zombies
Encounter 3, party level 15
Party: guardian, commander(melee), commander(ranged), gunslinger
Enemies: 2 beneficial worms.
Our findings: both classes feel incredibly solid, our guardian player did find that intercept attack was a much more engaging and reliable mechanic compared to taunt. Especially in the high level build where he had three reactions to intercept and had 10 feet of movement on each. Also tough cookie is a very silly feat.
Onto commander more good news both our commander testers got a lot of active use out of their abilities, stand outs being form up, plant banner, quickening banner, and fortunate blow. In our last test we had two commanders to see how they play in multiples and surprisingly they very rarely where stepping on each other's toes and managed to work around each other very cleanly.
Criticisms: our guardian found that it was actually not super common for the situation to line up where taunting actually made sense, and as such his threat methods where basically never online. Also there for the commander tactics, there are enough "generally useful" commands like strike hard or form up that preparing the more niche options like pincer attack doesn't make a lot of sense.
On the upside my guardian player and both commander players where very satisfied with gamefeeland feel both classes as they stand are very effective at filling their rolls.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Looks like you were playing with pretty atypical parties!
It's not surprising the commander(s) had a great time with three other martial characters (and, in the first two parties, two damage dealers) to give strikes to, or that the guardian felt powerful in a party where everyone had good armor proficiency and at least 8 base hit points per level
So, three questions.
First, how do you think they would fare in a more typical party, where one or both of the other martials are replaced with casters?
Second, do you think the party as a whole would have been more effective if (a) the commander had been replaced by a fighter or bard, or (b) the guardian had been replaced by a retributive strike champion, or just a fighter with the champion archetype?
Third (to combine the previous two), let's say you're not stacking martial characters specialzied in single-target damage, but instead are adding to (again) a more typical party--you have:
(a) one Core Rulebook martial (leaving it open which),
(b) one squishy caster (i.e., anyone with a base 6 hp/level), and
(c) another character who's either a somewhat less squishy caster or a non-caster more focused on support than dealing or receiving damage (i.e. an investigator or alchemist).
So, final queestion: the fourth character is played by an experienced gamer who's comfortable with abstraction and tactical challenges, but who hasn't played with you before: because of this, it's especially important to you to make sure they have a good time, and feel effective both individually and as part of a well-functioning team. Given the importance of this aim, do you think it's really likely that you would advise them to play one of these new classes, rather than a champion, fighter, ranger, or rogue?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
stuff
1)So from what i have seen, the commander only really needs one ally who has a high value strike to get solid value, more gives them more flexibility sure, but so long as they have at least one full martial to give options to they should be fine.
2)For the commander, probobly not, the action economy fraud that commander allows is a pretty huge force multiplier, and each of these characters where built in isolation in an actual party the commanders would be leaning more towards options that activly aid the group and prove even more efficiant. for the guardian, eh, it varies on a fight by fight basis, although i will say the earlier encounter looked a lot more replacable than the later encounters
3) so in a party of (pulling out of my hat here) Commander, fighter, primal sorc, and investigator, i think the commander would still do well, many of its options like form up, quickin banner, or the temp hp cushion of plant banner are exeptionally useful to every class, and so long as they have one or two allies with fully runed weapons whos attacks they can cheat out they should be fine, as stated above they obviously gain more flexibility the more targets they have but even just one or two is good, (for instance in our last combat, almost all of the tactects where focused on aiding the gunslinger)
4) Commander, from what my players have told me feels pretty great right out of the box, for a completely new player i would probobly advize them toward a simpler class like fighter, barb or rogue, but i would put commander in the mid complexity teir, with things like magus or a prepared caster, but it certanly would not be something i would activly advize a new player avoid when cutting their teeth on the game like alchemist or orical.
4) Commander, from what my players have told me feels pretty great right out of the box, for a completely new player i would probobly advize them toward a simpler class like fighter, barb or rogue, but i would put commander in the mid complexity teir, with things like magus or a prepared caster, but it certanly would not be something i would activly advize a new player avoid when cutting their teeth on the game like alchemist or orical.
Thanks for the detailed & helpful reply! I wasn't clear enough about this last question: I wanted to bring to mind the kind of player who didn't need anything simple--indeed, who welcomed mechanical complexity! Rather, the point of having them be new to the group is that (in order to ensure they feel welcome, and make it easier for them to vibe with the group) you want to make sure they're playing something that feels awesome, and that felt awesome for everyone else to play with.
I'm skeptical that, without really significant and creative redesign, the new classes will inspire nearly as much as trust in this regard as the comparatively well-designed PH classes.
I'm skeptical that, without really significant and creative redesign, the new classes will inspire nearly as much as trust in this regard as the comparatively well-designed PH classes.
Ah well that really depends on the player, the commander is solidly a support class so if your player is the kind that wants to feel awesome on their own actions than commander will probobly not be for them. If however they enjoy the idea of being a power multiplier for the group or setting up combos with their teammates then there is a lot that can feel great.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Taunt being kind of meh is something I'm seeing in a lot of places.
When I playtest these classes myself, I'll be sure to include more caster-heavy party comps. One thing I'm worried about is that guardians and commanders might not fit together very well in the same party, as both are martials who need other characters to do damage for them. So, running these guys with some "bad" party comps--or at least random ones--might help reveal some possible issues.
