|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Hi, the past few days I had to think about about the Guardian, some of the issues the class has as it is right now, and how I would go about fixing them. I had a lot of (What I think to be) cool ideas and now want to share them across a few posts on this sub. This post is one of those. I will first write down the ideas I had as rules, and then later add some comments explaining my thoughts and reasoning behind those ideas.
Disclaimer: This is not me saying that this is what the Guardian SHOULD BE. I also don't claim that these changes would even necessarily be for the better. My goals with these posts is not to dictate how to make the Guardian properly. My goals with these posts is discussing potential issues with the Class (many of which have already been pointed out, some of which I haven't seen discussed much), talking about potential ways of fixing them and discussing game design in general, but primarily, my goal with this is just to share and discuss some cool ideas I had because I love homebrewing :). And how knows, maybe a Paizo designer stumbles across one of these and takes some inspiration, but that would already be far more than I would hope to accomplish.
Here is a list of all parts:
Reworking The Guardian Part 1: The Taunt Mechanic
Reworking The Guardian Part 2: Class Options
Reworking The Guardian Part 3: Class Mechanics & Subclasses
This will probably the longest post. Here I go into the primary class options my homebrew Guardians would be able to choose from. At the end I discuss some feat ideas I had, some of which should replace feats I turned into class features.
___________________________________________________________________________ ____________
Keyword Intercept:
Some abilities refer to this. These are the rules for intercepting
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------
Intercept
You attempt to redirect an effect away from an ally to yourself. Generally, only targeted effects can be intercepted. Attempt a check using your Class DC - 10 + your armors item bonus against the enemies relevant DC or 10 + the enemies relevant modifier.
-Critical Success: As success, but you gain a +2 circumstance bonus to the relevant defense.
-Success: You are in time. The effect targets you instead of your ally. You can still choose to split the damage like with the failure condition.
-Failure: You are barley too late. If the effect causes damage, your ally takes half and you can take the other half. You an your ally only apply half your usual resistances against that damage.
-Critical Failure: You fail to Intercept
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------
Level 1 Class Feature: Defensive Strategy
While all Guardians are specialists of protecting their allies, the way they go about doing so differs from Guardian to Guardian. Choose 2 of the following abilities. You Subclass will grant you a third one.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------
Tackle Ally ⟳
Trigger: An willing ally you are adjacent is about to be subject to a hostile effect.
Effect: Before the effect resolves, you push the ally 5 feet away from you and enter their space yourself. This is forced movement. If their is not enough space for either, this ability fails. If the triggering effect was targeted, you also try to Intercept it. If the triggering effect was an area effect and the ally is now outside the area, they aren't affected.
Command Attention ◆ or ◆◆ (mental)
Duration: Until the end of your next turn.
Area: 15-foot or 30-foot emanation.
Effect: All enemies in the area are taunted 1. The area depends on the actions spend.
Danger Sense
Whenever you are in the presence of a hidden threat (Such as a potential ambush, traps, hidden weapons ect.) the GM secretly rolls a Perception check against a relevant DC (Usually the Stealth DC of the creature/object). On a success you spot the danger, on a critical success you or an ally of yours gains a +1 circumstance bonus on the relevant defensive stat for the purpose of the first check made to resist the spotted threat.
Hampering Sweeps ◆
Like the feat, but enemies can attempt a Reflex save against your class DC.
-Success: They get away
-Failure: They can't get away
-Critical Failure: They can't get away and can't take move actions for the rest of their turn.
Taunting Strike ◆ (flourish)
You Strike an enemy. If you hit they are taunted 1 (Taunted 2 on a critical).
Challenge ◆ (mental)
Range: 60 feet
Duration: 1 round.
Effect: The enemy has to attempt a Will save against your Class DC.
-Critical Success: They are unaffected.
-Success: They are taunted 1.
-Failure: They are up to taunted 2 (Your choice).
-Critical Failure: They are up to taunted 2 for up to 2 rounds (Your choice).
Blanket Defense ◆◆
Like the feat.
Body Block ◆◆
Area: 5-foot emanation.
Duration: Sustained up to 3 rounds.
Effect: Whenever the line-of-effect of a ranged, targeted strike/ability/spell intersect the area, you can attempt to Intercept it. If the effect is a burst, line or cone and you are between an affected ally and the areas origin, you can attempt the same check as the one when you would Intercept, but it has the following effects:
-Critical Success: As success but you get a +1 circumstance bonus to the relevant defense instead.
-Success: Only you are affected and you take a -1 circumstance penalty to the relevant defense.
-Failure: Both you and the ally are affected as normal.
Covering Statue
You always provide Standard Cover instead of Lesser Cover to allies and allies can Take Cover behind you to upgrade this to Greater Cover.
Guard Ally ◆
Targets: An ally adjacent to you.
Duration: Until the end of your next turn.
Effect: As long as you are still adjacent to the target, you can Intercept all targeted effects the ally is subject to. If the ally moves, you can Stride up to your speed as a reaction, but you have to Stride towards the allies current position.
Guardian Lore
You gain "Guardian Lore". You can use "Guardian Lore" to Recall Knowledge about offensive statistics and abilities and about ways of mitigating them. Your proficiency in Guardian Lore increases to expert at 3rd level, to master at 7th level and to legendary at 15th level.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------
Feat Ideas
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------
Taunting Strength --- Feat 2
When you succeed at an Athletics check against an enemy, they have to make a Will save against your class DC. On a failure they are taunted 1 for 1 round (Taunted 2 on a critical failure). If you Athletics check was a critical success, they decrease their degree of success by one step.
Slowing Strike ◆ (flourish) --- Feat 6
Make a Strike against an enemy. If you hit, they need to make a Fortitude save against your Class DC. If your hit was a critical hit, they decrease their degree of success by 1 step.
-Critical Success: They are unaffected.
-Success: They take a -5 foot status penalty to their speed for 1 round.
-Failure: They take a -15 foot status penalty to their speed for 1 round.
-Critical Failure: They are Immobilized for 1 round.
Ground Stomp ◆◆ --- Feat 8
You stomp the ground so hard that it becomes uneven and difficult to walk through. The ground in a 10 foot emanation becomes difficult terrain. All creatures in the area must attempt a Reflex save against your Class DC. On a failure they loose 10 feet of their next Stride action. On a critical failure they also fall prone.
Don't Run! --- Feat 10
When an enemy is taunted by you, moving away from you is difficult terrain.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------
___________________________________________________________________________ ____________
Comments
I want to start by saying, that while there was a lot of though behind some of these, other more just proof of concepts, and I realize that these options are probably not balanced yet.
There are a few things I tried to accomplish with these changes
I think that the Guardian is thematically closer to an Archetype than a Class. Its about protection in two very specific and niche ways. I think, that while for archetypes to have a very specific/limited scope/theme, classes need to be more open ended, or if they are specific in theme (Like the Thaumaturge) they need to have a very strong theme. And even those very specific classes (Thaumaturge, Psychic, Gunslinger) usually have a lot of choices and different ways of being played/build. I think this is something the Guardian still lacks. I come back to this in my post about Class Mechanics & Subclasses, but I tried to expand the theme from "Very specific video game-esk semi-tank" to being about "Protection in various different ways".
I wanted to provide players with interesting choices and make it so that different Guardians can actually be very different.
I tried to balance some broken options.
I turned some Feats that I think are very fitting for the class into general class options that you can take at level 1.
I wanted these abilities to fulfill the "tank" fantasy better. Gameplay of tanks generally centers around positioning and space-control. So I added some abilities that allow you to engage with that aspect of strategy.
Now lets discuss specific options:
Intercept
I find it weird how, in the original guardian, this has a very impactful ability and "absolute" ability had no check associated with it, while the ability that is just a debuff has. I feel like it should be the other way around. So I added a check. In return, I made it more applicable. Now you can not only use it to block damage, but you can even use it to "tank" debuffing effects for your allies, widening the scope of what you can protect your allies from.
Tackle Ally
This is basically the "replacement" for the original "Intercept" class feature, so what I wrote for "Intercept" also applies here. Additionally, I think the ability to control your allies' positioning and, for example, push them outside of the range of an attack to protect them from follow-ups or out of a spell's area opens a new dimension of strategy.
Command Attention
I feel like a Tank class needs an option that allows it to take aggro from multiple smaller creatures around it at once. This ability also plays a lot with your positioning. I also think that it makes sense for this to be automatic. This avoids a lot of weirdness in regards to who you want to fail and who you don't want to fail and makes the ability both more consistently useful and simple.
Danger Sense / Guardian Lore
I want to start by saying that I got the idea for these options from the Rules Lawyer Playtest stream, where they discussed the Guardian at the end. One of his players said how he wants the Guardian to also have protection-themed exploration abilities, and I couldn't agree more. I think a "Protection" class should also have options for indirect protection. Both in reality and in fantasy, "protecting" not only includes physically putting yourself between the attacker and your protectee (Usually you needing to do that means that something went wrong), proper protection primarily means seeing potential dangers coming and knowing how to avoid or deal with them. These two options play into that aspect of protection.
Hampering Sweeps/Blanket Defense
I think these feats are just so thematic, cool, and fitting for the class that they should be primary class features. Hampering Sweeps also needs a small nerf, of course, because, no, I don't think a level 1 Guardian should be able to literally bind a god if that god had no teleportation spells prepared xd. In regard to Blanket Defense, spending a whole turn on this, I think, feels bad, and I think that the ability is also balanced if it only causes two actions.
Body Block
This is meant to be the classic Reinhard/Braum shield-esque ability, where you can literally use a shield, or in this case your body, to intercept ranged attacks against your allies. This also makes positioning really important.
Taunting Strike
This is supposed to be a cool option if you want to mix some offense into your Guardian.
Covering Statue
Together with Taunting Strike this allows you to have an extremely action-efficient Guardian, if you wanted to. You could then use those actions for something more action-intensive. This could open up a lot of cool build ideas.
Slowing Strike
This is meant to provide the Guardian with another option to control the battlefield and indirectly protect their allies. This also particularly adds some cool ranged Guardian support I'd imagine.
Ground Stomp
I am honestly not sure right now since it has been some time since I read through every single feat, but I feel like the Guardian currently lacks some sort of soft AoE CC. This should provide this.
Don't Run!
I feel like this is just a typical tank-space control ability that synergizes well with other class options. I think this opens up a lot of tactical possibilities for the class.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
emptyptr_97 wrote: I find it weird how, in the original guardian, this has a very impactful ability and "absolute" ability had no check associated with it, while the ability that is just a debuff has. I feel like it should be the other way around. So I added a check. can't say I like interrupting a roll to make a roll to see what penalty you need to subtract from a roll.
I do agree Tackel Ally should be the default Intercept. But not with that name.
Otherwise I like the suggestions and agree with the overall direction.
Appreciate the Feedback :)
Mellored wrote: can't say I like interrupting a roll to make a roll to see what penalty you need to subtract from a roll. So you think its too complex/disruptive how I set it up right now? Basically, its just you take half of the damage for an ally on failure, you are the new target on success and in the rare case of a critical success you get a +2 to defend. I hoped that this would be quite intuitive once you have used the ability a few times.
Mellored wrote: I do agree Tackel Ally should be the default Intercept. But not with that name. Yeah, 100% xD. I focused on the mechanics first and couldn't think of a better name while writing.
I'd be OK if Intercept repositioned the ally much like Defensive Swap. In fact Defensive Swap could probably just work OK as the core class feature. With some sort of improved feature not just swapping but moving both.
Command Attention and Challenge are interesting. Maybe a Guard action and no Taunted condition might be better. A condition seems an odd choice as you need to still know who taunted you.
Thank you too for your feedback :)
Gortle wrote: I'd be OK if Intercept repositioned the ally much like Defensive Swap. In fact Defensive Swap could probably just work OK as the core class feature. With some sort of improved feature not just swapping but moving both. I think his criticism was regarding "Intercept" requiring a check. If I understood his point correctly, his concern is that having to make one check before resolving the other check might slow down or disrupt combat. Personally I don't really think that it would once you get used to the ability, but I could just be wrong of course. I will need to playtest it.
Gortle wrote: Maybe a Guard action and no Taunted condition might be better. So you mean something like a Taunt (Where you are easier to hit but your allies are harder to hit), just handled as a protection ability instead? Mmm, could work for sure, but it would behave differently since that implies that you need to be close to the ally imo. And the Guardian already has a lot of "If I am close to you I protect you" abilities. I also really like the risk/reward and flavor of Taunt mechanics, and while I find it weird that you can't really opt out of playing a Taunt based protector, I definitely think that there should be the option of taking such a mechanic. Taunting is also a much more proactive form of protection, which is also a reason why I like it. (Also its just really flavorful I think).
Long story short, I think Taunting enemies should remain a part of the class. Although it should be one that you can choose not to engage with.
Gortle wrote: A condition seems an odd choice as you need to still know who taunted you. Are you sure that would be an issue? There are already conditions in the game that are relative/where you need to remember what you rolled against whom (Hidden for example). At least the player who taunted the creature would still know, right? Especially since the fact that players need to remember who they taunted is also true for the taunt as it is right now.
To clarify: Do you take issue with it being called a condition and would have no problem with it if it was handled a little differently (Like it is in the actual Guardian for example), or is a Taunt mechanic similar to the one I suggested something you see as an issue in general? If the former is the case, would just treating it is a Class-Keyword solve the problem for you?
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
emptyptr_97 wrote: I think his criticism was regarding "Intercept" requiring a check. If I understood his point correctly, his concern is that having to make one check before resolving the other check might slow down or disrupt combat. That is my main complaint.
But i also don't see how it adds to the game.
Champions don't need to roll for their reaction. No one is sad about that.
I mean, if there was a feat
Roll for Bonus, 1 action
Make an roll and gain a bonus on your next basic Strike you make this turn.
Critical Success: +3
Success: +2
Failure: +1
Critical Failure: no effect
Vs
Sniper's Aim, 2 actions
Make a Stike with a +2 bonus
Mellored wrote: I mean, if there was a feat
Roll for Bonus, 1 action
Make an roll and gain a bonus on your next basic Strike you make this turn.
Critical Success: +3
Success: +2
Failure: +1
Critical Failure: no effect
Vs
Sniper's Aim, 2 actions
Make a Stike with a +2 bonus
Have to note that other classes would poach a feat, so direct bonuses to attacks kinda have to be tied into the chassis or high enough level that they come online (IMO) too late. That said, "Roll for Bonus" seems most similar to an Investigator's Devise a Stratagem. Maybe it could be tied to having Intercepted to the target before (though there's already a lot of fruitful ideas for beefing up Intercept which might already be overkill).
Tying intercept to a roll might be bothersome, but letting it target your own defenses is a good and necessary first step.
Anyway, there is one thing about the intercept feature which we noticed in our playtests which I have not seen mentioned a lot:
In a standard party with 4 PC's it's common to have only 2 melee characters, and the Guardian will be one of them. If you want to intercept you give up on flanking. Guardian already does little damage, no need to make it more difficult for the rest of the party to do damage.
So, how about adding making an opponent off-guard when intercepting? After all, you give up flanking and the Guardian bulldozes itself between their ally so that would make sense narratively.
Mellored wrote: emptyptr_97 wrote: I think his criticism was regarding "Intercept" requiring a check. If I understood his point correctly, his concern is that having to make one check before resolving the other check might slow down or disrupt combat. That is my main complaint.
But i also don't see how it adds to the game.
Champions don't need to roll for their reaction. No one is sad about that. The reason why I feel like it should be a roll is for one thematically (Intercepting a Strike seems very difficult and uncertain, so its the exact kind if thing that I should should have a roll associated with it).
In addition, it seems very un-pathfinder-y for me. As I said, next to every effect in the game requires rolls/very little is automatic. If effects that affect other rolls usually are rolls.
I also think that the ability to redirect damage is a potentially extremely powerful effect, strategically speaking. Its not that powerful in all situations, but target prioritization can be VERY important, so an ability that just nullifies your ability to prioritize targets seems potentially too powerful. Granted, this is probably not true for a large quantity of situations, since many GMs probably don't really worry about playing strategically optimally against their players, but for those that do (If you want to challenge a very experienced party for example) this effect might feel very annoying to play against.
And that is my last point. It might just be very annoying to play against. This also matters less because its the players who use it, but while you shouldn't try to kill your players as a GM, there is still fun in trying to challenge them and make them a little scared every now and then. So while it matters less, how an ability feels to play against as a GM should still matter a little.
But my main complain is still probably the thematic aspect of it. And you are right, if I am really in the clear minority here (And to be fair, I also haven't seen many players complain about this) it can probably be kept automatic. Even though on a personal level I don't really like that xD.
Mellored wrote: I mean, if there was a feat
Roll for Bonus, 1 action
Make an roll and gain a bonus on your next basic Strike you make this turn.
Critical Success: +3
Success: +2
Failure: +1
Critical Failure: no effect
Vs
Sniper's Aim, 2 actions
Make a Stike with a +2 bonus
Thats kind of what I mean though. Snipers Aim is just a buff to another roll. While many buffs also do require rolls, they don't necessarily need them, because they just affect other rolls, there is still an actual roll afterwards. Intercepting however is not modifying a roll, it is in itself an effect, and a potentially quite powerful one at that. This is why I feel a roll is in order.
Angwa wrote: So, how about adding making an opponent off-guard when intercepting? After all, you give up flanking and the Guardian bulldozes itself between their ally so that would make sense narratively. Very interesting idea, might be a little powerful though, and a very big change to how the feature would be used. This sounds a lot like it could be a feat to me.
Otherwise, this issue might be solved fairly well by my Dex-Based subclass form part 3, whose subclass feature is that they get to Stride towards enemies when they are attacked. That way you could enter a flanking position for your ally, and later, after they attacked for example, Stride towards them when they are attacked.
Also, the Guardian has a lot of feats surrounding Athletic maneuvers and other ways of inflicting off-guard. Maybe we should go even further into that direction to compensate for the fact that they have to sacrifice offensive positioning for defensive positioning.
Angwa wrote: In a standard party with 4 PC's it's common to have only 2 melee characters, and the Guardian will be one of them. If you want to intercept you give up on flanking. Guardian already does little damage, no need to make it more difficult for the rest of the party to do damage.
So, how about adding making an opponent off-guard when intercepting? After all, you give up flanking and the Guardian bulldozes itself between their ally so that would make sense narratively.
IMO, have a reaction that triggers of an adjacent enemy not attacking you. Maybe Reposition them.
But there is still room for a reverse Gang Up feat.
pU ganG
You and your allies harry an opponent in concert. Any enemy is flat-footed against your allies melee attacks due to flanking as long as the enemy is within both your reach and your ally’s. You must still flank an enemy for it to be flat-footed to you.
emptyptr_97 wrote: It might just be very annoying to play against. This also matters less because its the players who use it, but while you shouldn't try to kill your players as a GM, there is still fun in trying to challenge them and make them a little scared every now and then. So while it matters less, how an ability feels to play against as a GM should still matter a little. the guardian should add as much survivability as a cleric.
I.e.
Hit the enemy and the Cleric heals for 50
Vs
Hit the enemy and tbe Guardian Intercepts for 50
Both reduce the effectiveness of focus fire. And healing doesn't have a save.
Neither does Protector Tree for that matter.
Mellored wrote:
I.e.
Hit the enemy and the Cleric heals for 50
Vs
Hit the enemy and tbe Guardian Intercepts for 50
Both reduce the effectiveness of focus fire. And healing doesn't have a save.
Neither does Protector Tree for that matter.
Those aren't directly comparable tho imo. Both mechanically and in theme.
Theme-wise one is a buff for an ally, the other is disruption of the enemy. And while this is, as stated, probably more of a personal thing on my end, I feel like disruption of the enemy should generally require a check.
Mechanically, one costs two actions, a quite limited resources and heals for a fixed amount, while the other costs a reaction, come be used indefinitely and redirects potentially unlimited amounts of damage. Of course, it also requires you to be adjacent to an ally and only redirects damage instead of "nullifying" it, so I am not saying that it being automatic would be broken, but what I am saying is that this does not really address the issues I have with it.
Protector Tree is a lot more similar though, but it also requires a big resource investment, a higher action investment and has a fixed amount it can block. Protector tree is mechanically more similar to temp-hp than to a true Intercept, I'd say. Although it is still a pretty good point.
Personally I feel like making it a roll would make using the ability more exciting though. That is, IF it works smoothly in practice and isn't disruptive. Whether it is, is something I will playtest.
With that being said, I do admit that you are at the end of the day probably right about it being fine the way it is. I am still probably gonna playtest it WITH the roll, to see how well it works, but I am definitely open to making it automatic.
emptyptr_97 wrote: Mellored wrote:
I.e.
Hit the enemy and the Cleric heals for 50
Vs
Hit the enemy and tbe Guardian Intercepts for 50
Both reduce the effectiveness of focus fire. And healing doesn't have a save.
Neither does Protector Tree for that matter.
Those aren't directly comparable tho imo. Both mechanically and in theme. They shouldn't be the same mechanics or theme.
But at the end of the day, they should add up to about the same amount. (Obviously with some variety depending on the enemies and rolls).
Quote: Personally I feel like making it a roll would make using the ability more exciting though Maybe if the difference between Success and Failure where larger.
I.e.
Critical Success: The Stike fails to hit anyone.
Success: the Stike targets you and you gain resistance to it.
Failure: the Stike still targets your ally, but you split the damage.
Critical Failure: you fall prone.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Mellored wrote: emptyptr_97 wrote: It might just be very annoying to play against. This also matters less because its the players who use it, but while you shouldn't try to kill your players as a GM, there is still fun in trying to challenge them and make them a little scared every now and then. So while it matters less, how an ability feels to play against as a GM should still matter a little. the guardian should add as much survivability as a cleric.
I.e.
Hit the enemy and the Cleric heals for 50
Vs
Hit the enemy and tbe Guardian Intercepts for 50
Both reduce the effectiveness of focus fire. And healing doesn't have a save.
Neither does Protector Tree for that matter. I agree results should be more comparable, especially if the Guardian's attack progression continues to resemble a Warpriest's, yet keeping in mind Heal is a limited resource (though plentiful). At minimum one needs to prevent as much as a Shield Cantrip or Lay On Hands which are renewable. Temp hit points are likely a necessary bonus since too much Resistance (or too many) can get wonky or simply unfun.
IMO, one should imagine PCs facing a Guardian too and how players would respond.
Also, I think the name "Guardian" has misled people (including myself) to think of archetypical bodyguards which come in many flavors, when really the class only wants to be "the utmost armor guy (w/ shields)" to balance the Fighter's "the utmost weapons guy (w/ shields)". So as much as I'd like (maybe even prefer!) a Wis-based martial, I think it's gonna remain about Str.
Mellored wrote:
I.e.
Critical Success: The Stike fails to hit anyone.
Success: the Stike targets you and you gain resistance to it.
Failure: the Stike still targets your ally, but you split the damage.
Critical Failure: you fall prone.
Yeah, could absolutely see doing something like that too.
Although I would like to keep the Critical failure condition neutral. I wouldn't go as far as to actually punish the Guardian for trying to protect their ally.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
What this version of intercept roll against and what bonuses are used for it?
Bluemagetim wrote: What this version of intercept roll against and what bonuses are used for it? I would make your roll against the relevant offensive modifier, so for example vs 10 + attack modifier for attacks, or vs Spell DC for spells.
You would use your Class DC but as a modifier (So your Class DC - 10) and would let you add your armors item bonus (Because Class DCs usually don't get item bonuses). So in short:
Class DC - 10 + armor potency bonus.
I know its cumbersome to define this in the effect itself, which is why I would define this in the keyword section. I would also use this "Class Modifier" for other effects too (I am surprised that no other classes use something like this yet, seems like a missed opportunity).
Mellored wrote:
I.e.
Critical Success: The Stike fails to hit anyone.
Success: the Stike targets you and you gain resistance to it.
Failure: the Stike still targets your ally, but you split the damage.
Critical Failure: you fall prone.
What do you think of this?
------------------------
Intercept
You attempt to redirect an effect away from an ally to yourself. Generally, only targeted effects can be intercepted. Attempt a check using your Class DC - 10 + your armors item bonus against the enemies relevant DC or 10 + the enemies relevant modifier.
Critical Success As success, but instead of the bonus you improve your degree of success by 1 step.
Success You are in time. The effect targets you instead of your ally and you gain a +2 circumstance bonus to the relevant defense. You can still choose to split the damage like with the failure condition.
Failure You are barley too late. The ally gains a +1 circumstance bonus on the relevant defense. If the effect causes damage, your ally takes half and you take the other half. You an your ally only apply half your usual resistances against that damage.
Critical Failure You fail to Intercept.
------------------------
I didn't want to make it part of the failure condition that you are targeted instead of your ally, because as it is in my homebrew, Intercept allows you to tank EVERYTHING as long as it is targeted, including debuffs or stuff like the Maze spell. Being able to redirect that should in my opinion be locked behind a check.
That is actually a more logical reason to have it be a check than the more subjective ones I listed earlier. One that I forgot to mention. Because I think this in particular is a lot more powerful than any of the automatic options listed earlier, but it is something that I think would be cool if the Guardian was able to do it.
I changed the ability so that it provides you with an actual numerical bonus too, in return for not being guaranteed.
You could probably also make the critical success condition what you suggested earlier, I just though that if the boss later managed to roll a nat 20 on their attack, there should at least be a normal hit.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Conceptually I dont see an intercept working on daze for example.
Bluemagetim wrote: Conceptually I dont see an intercept working on daze for example. Fair, but generally I'd argue that we should fist focus on making cool mechanics (And having such a wide range of applications is mechanically very fitting for a core class feature imo) and flavor second.
Although I though about how I would flavor this, and I think you can either flavor it as the Guardian blocking the line of effect while the caster is casting it, forcing the caster to target the Guardian instead (instead if loosing the spell), or you could just say that your Guardian had some sort of magical ability for some reason, that allows him to "absorb" magical effects.
I feel like depending on ones creativity you can come up with fitting, flavorful explanations for most mechanics, which is why this is a secondary concern for me when trying to design abilities.
emptyptr_97 wrote: Bluemagetim wrote: What this version of intercept roll against and what bonuses are used for it? I would make your roll against the relevant offensive modifier, so for example vs 10 + attack modifier for attacks, or vs Spell DC for spells.
You would use your Class DC but as a modifier (So your Class DC - 10) and would let you add your armors item bonus (Because Class DCs usually don't get item bonuses). So in short:
Class DC - 10 + armor potency bonus.
I know its cumbersome to define this in the effect itself, which is why I would define this in the keyword section. I would also use this "Class Modifier" for other effects too (I am surprised that no other classes use something like this yet, seems like a missed opportunity). what if the DC was the attack roll?
Still not much in favor of double rolling, but at least this way your not redoing a previous roll.
Perhaps also use your AC as the bonus.
AC-10+d20 vs Attack Roll or effect DC.
Mellored wrote:
Still not much in favor of double rolling, but at least this way your not redoing a previous roll.
Maybe I didn't make this clear enough, but you would declare an "Intercept" BEFORE the GM rolls the attack roll (Or at least before the GM announces the result). It would work similar to a targeting roll when you are hidden or obscured.
The issue with rolling against another rolls result is that than weird things happen with the probability distribution behind the roll. Namely, instead of an even distribution you would then have something close to a binomial distribution. This would make succeeding that roll against higher level creatures disproportionately harder and do the opposite for lower level creatures.
Mellored wrote:
Perhaps also use your AC as the bonus.
AC-10+d20 vs Attack Roll or effect DC.
The would definitely simplify it, so its for sure an option we can look at, but provided it is intuitive enough for players, I would prefer using the Class DC. The reason being is that at, firstly, I don't want to punish Guardians who invest into non-heavy armor for extra move speed, I think having a lower AC alone is enough of a drawback. Secondly, currently there is a (In my opinion cool) dynamic with your key ability and the Class DC. Your to-hit bonus and (to a lesser extend) AC rely on your Dexterity or Strength, while the CLass DC relies on one of the other modifiers. Meaning that when building the Guardian there is an interesting choice that you have to make of where to put your key ability score. You can effectively choose between being a little better at attacking or being a little better at defending your allies. In order for this trade-off to work, the Class DC needs to be relevant for most Class Ability related checks and DCs.
emptyptr_97 wrote: This would make succeeding that roll against higher level creatures disproportionately harder and do the opposite for lower level creatures. that's true for any roll. Simply having it retarget you will work on any level.
I suppose if you want it to be like concealment, you could use a flat check.
Quote: firstly, I don't want to punish Guardians who invest into non-heavy armor for extra move speed Armored Mobility, level 1 feat.
The speed penalty for armor you are wearing is reduced by 5'.
Armored Concealment 1 Action, Stance
Allies adjacent to you are Concealed.
Mellored wrote: that's true for any roll. Simply having it retarget you will work on any level. Not really. Not in the same way at least. Usually in pathfinder every number has exactly a 5% chance of coming up. Rolling twice changes the distribution so that now not every result is as likely as every other result. If you roll this: 1d20 - 1d20 (Or alternatively 1d20 + 1d20, makes no mathematical difference for the resulting distribution) the result of "0" (alternatively 21) will have a 5% chance. A result of 10 (alternatively 31) would have a chance of of 2.5% and a result of 19 (Alternatively 40) would only have a 0.25% chance.
I was wrong however about one thing: Because the potential range of results is twice as big (Making your modifiers half as relevant) your success chances themselves (in the specific cases I tested) stay somewhat similar. But I have not done extensive testing and I'd say its very likely that, especially when looking at crit successes/fails, the involved probabilities are now wildly different. After all, if you are only 1 level above your enemy you could beat their standard DC by 20 if you roll 2 dice. Its just not good to mess with the probabilities like that.
Mellored wrote:
I suppose if you want it to be like concealment, you could use a flat check.
What issue would you try to solve with that? In other words: What would be the benefit of that over a normal check, would you say?
Mellored wrote: The speed penalty for armor you are wearing is reduced by 5'. Mmm, personally I am not the biggest fan of that tbh. The speed reduction of heavy armor is one of its main trade-offs. And I generally like having trade-offs in my games. It leads to more unique characters and more interesting gameplay choices.
Edit: This feat would also become a must-take for the Dex-based subclass I'd imagine.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
It might be good then to have some kind of distinguishing options for medium and heavy armor guardians to make each choice meaningful and supported.
Bluemagetim wrote: It might be good then to have some kind of distinguishing options for medium and heavy armor guardians to make each choice meaningful and supported. Is the "Speed vs AC" trade-off no already such a trade-off? However, further distinguishing the two sounds interesting. What do you have in mind?
emptyptr_97 wrote: Mellored wrote: I suppose if you want it to be like concealment, you could use a flat check. What issue would you try to solve with that? In other words: What would be the benefit of that over a normal check, would you say?
it works the same no matter what level the opponent is.
Quote: Mellored wrote: The speed penalty for armor you are wearing is reduced by 5'. Mmm, personally I am not the biggest fan of that tbh. The speed reduction of heavy armor is one of its main trade-offs. And I generally like having trade-offs in my games. It leads to more unique characters and more interesting gameplay choices.
The trade-off is spending a feat.
Quote: Edit: This feat would also become a must-take for the Dex-based subclass I'd imagine. Do you find Fleet to be a must-take feat? Because it's a lot more accessible.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
emptyptr_97 wrote: Bluemagetim wrote: It might be good then to have some kind of distinguishing options for medium and heavy armor guardians to make each choice meaningful and supported. Is the "Speed vs AC" trade-off no already such a trade-off? However, further distinguishing the two sounds interesting. What do you have in mind? Originally I thought of the heavy armored guardian as the one with the big armor and shield standing in the front line intercepting strikes for the front line martials.
Pretty much all the class supports this playstyle and is the reason some see it currently as more of an archtype than a whole class.
Taunt though felt like an outlier ability because the incentive was to use it from a distance otherwise your not presenting the choice of waste movement to get to the guardian or attack your other target at a minus.
That guardian felt more like a harrier of the front lines, with a weapon capable of melee and thrown like a trident, able to move better in medium armor and harass the enemy front line from a steps away. Other than taunt itself there was no support in class to build on the idea though. But it did feel like a place and a reason to put a guardian in medium armor.
Mellored wrote: It works the same no matter what level the opponent is. Is it a bad thing if it did work better against lower level creatures and better against higher level creatures though? After all, the ability (disregarding the check) is better against single powerful enemies than against multiple weak enemies because you only have one reaction. At least in the case of the "Tackle Ally" ability I think that it balances out. Its definitely something to think about for the other abilities that use it, so in that sense you are not wrong.
Mellored wrote: The trade-off is spending a feat. I feel like that is not a good trade-off though. Firstly, it'd probably feel bad to take that feat because its simply a must take for certain builds/subclasses. Secondly, while you do pay in the form of opportunity cost, what I meant by "Trade-off" was gameplay/play style trade-offs and trade-offs in game feel. I like transformative trade-offs, that give you distinct strengths and weaknesses that you can feel while playing the game. I want the heavily Armored high AC Guardian to feel slow but powerful, and I want the fast "All around the battlefield" Guardian to feel a little squishier by comparison.
Mellored wrote: Do you find Fleet to be a must-take feat? Because it's a lot more accessible. Yes, I do actually. Its not a literal must-take, but general feats are poorly balanced in general and "Fleet" is one of, if not the best general feat. There are few feats that compare in terms of action economy and increased flexibility.
Situationally other feats can be as good and, depending on the build, arguably even better, but there are few feats that compare to the general across-the-board usefulness of that feat. Its a feat that next to every build should pick up at some point imo.
Bluemagetim wrote: Originally I thought of the heavy armored guardian as the one with the big armor and shield standing in the front line intercepting strikes for the front line martials.
Pretty much all the class supports this playstyle and is the reason some see it currently as more of an archtype than a whole class.
Taunt though felt like an outlier ability because the incentive was to use it from a distance otherwise your not presenting the choice of waste movement to get to the guardian or attack your other target at a minus.
That guardian felt more like a harrier of the front lines, with a weapon capable of melee and thrown like a trident, able to move better in medium armor and harass the enemy front line from a steps away. Other than taunt itself there was no support in class to build on the idea though. But it did feel like a place and a reason to put a guardian in medium armor.
Jup. The fact that it seems to be more like an archetype is one of the main issues I tried to address with my homebrew. And its interesting that you should mention a thrown weapon Guardian. I actually think that the Dex-based subclass would be exactly that. You would run circles across the battlefield using your subclass ability, sometimes ending up adjacent to an enemy, sometimes not, and thus sometimes use your weapon in melee, and sometimes as a thrown weapon. You could also simultaneously kite Taunted enemies, for sure. That would also be a way to offset the lower AC.
In general though I think that the Guardian should be designed as a short to mid range character and should have good support for both. Taunting enemies from a distance where they have no way of getting to you seems cheesy and goes against what the Class is supposed to be, so I am glad that it seems to not be viable. I think its fine though if they would need to spend one or sometimes two Strides to get to you, if you are a mid-range Guardian.
emptyptr_97 wrote: I want the heavily Armored high AC Guardian to feel slow but powerful, and I want the fast "All around the battlefield" Guardian to feel a little squishier by comparison Not sure why you can't get that though feat choices.
Quote: "Fleet" is one of, if not the best general feat. Not sure I agree, but I can nerf it a bit.
Examples
Ready Movement, 1 action
Step or Escape, and then increase your Speed by 10' until the start of your next turn.
And
Timber Sentinel, 1, 2 or 3 actions.
You gain temporary hit points equal to 2, 4, or 6 times your level depending on the actions spent. These last until you move. If an adjacent ally takes physical damage, apply it to these temporary hit points first.
Mellored wrote: Not sure why you can't get that though feat choices. Its not that you can't, it wouldn't break anything to do this, its just not a good idea to implement this if you want to make the gameplay and feel of different build more distinct and choices more difficult (Because this feat allows you to compensate for a weakness your build would otherwise have had). And I just fear that it would feel like a must-take feat for certain builds.
Mellored wrote: Not sure I agree, but I can nerf it a bit. The main reason why I think its so powerful is (mainly) because, if you are faster than an enemy by even 5 feet and run away from him, he has to spend 2 actions to get to you, while you only need to spend one. In that case its just a straight up action economy win.
Additionally, most speeds start at 25, and getting to even speed breakpoints is very powerful because half of 25 is 10, while half of 30 is 15. This is a huge 50% increase in speed when sneaking/in difficult terrain ect.
Melee creatures want to kite but not be kited, ranged creatures often want to sneak. And also want to kite... Casters also want to kite. Its useful for everyone.
Of course those two situations that don't always come up, but in addition to better action economy when you use it and far more flexibility when having halved speed, there will just be cases where you barely can't get to a field that you need to get to to do something else (using a single Stride). VERY roughly speaking there is a 20% increased chance of not having to spend a second action (This is a massive oversimplification of course).
Its a huge win of action economy on so many levels. I don't really see what other General Feat compares.
Sorry for the long rant on this xd
Mellored wrote:
Examples
Ready Movement, 1 action
Step or Escape, and then increase your Speed by 10' until the start of your next turn.
And
Timber Sentinel, 1, 2 or 3 actions.
You gain temporary hit points equal to 2, 4, or 6 times your level depending on the actions spent. These last until you move. If an adjacent ally takes physical damage, apply it to these temporary hit points first.
I mean, I really like those ideas (The second one especially, although the numbers seem a little high), but I am not sure what this has to do with the topic xd. This is about whether its a good idea to have a "You dont take the speed penalty of heavy armor" feat and how much a flat +5 on your speed is worth, no?
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
emptyptr_97 wrote: The main reason why I think its so powerful is (mainly) because, if you are faster than an enemy by even 5 feet and run away from him, he has to spend 2 actions to get to you,
while you only need to spend one. In that case its just a straight up action economy win.
IMO, if the guardian is running away, there are other issues with the class.
Quote: Mellored wrote: Examples
Ready Movement, 1 action
Step or Escape, and then increase your Speed by 10' until the start of your next turn.
And
Timber Sentinel, 1, 2 or 3 actions.
You gain temporary hit points equal to 2, 4, or 6
This is about whether its a good idea to have a "You dont take the speed penalty of heavy armor" feat and how much a flat +5 on your speed is worth, no?
It let's you overcome the armor penalty and expand your intercept range, but not really be useful for running away.
And it keeps the trade-off with one that makes you tankier but immobilize.
The THP amount and name is take from the kinetisist Timber Sentinel.
https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=4284
Mellored wrote: MO, if the guardian is running away, there are other issues with the class. The point is not that you run away in order to not engage with the enemy, the idea is just to get a positive trade in action economy. You run away under the presumption that the enemy has to follow you, and if you spend on Stride in order to force the enemy to also do the same its usually a positive trade against boss monsters, because single bosses only have 3 actions, while your team usually has around 12. If you then are even just 5 feet faster than the enemy that calculation is even more in your favor because then you quite literally trade 1 action for 2. Its a more or less basic strategy for pretty much any martial (I mean, its basic for someone who likes pf2es tactical theory, definitely not something every player needs to know).
Mellored wrote: .
It let's you overcome the armor penalty and expand your intercept range, but not really be useful for running away.
And it keeps the trade-off with one that makes you tankier but immobilize.
The THP amount and name is take from the kinetisist Timber Sentinel.
https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=4284
I feel like this would be perfect for running away. 1 Action to get 2 actions worth of "movement" and a speed boost, giving any subsequent Stride action far more value. Although a Guardian also being good at running away is not necessarily a bad thing (Since he is expected to take a lot of damage and might need the tools to get away from danger when push comes to shove). We just have to be careful when other classes wanted to archetype into Guardian. An ability like that makes sense to have as a "get out of jail - free" card on a martial, who generally want to be in the face of danger, but might be OP if suddenly the Wizzard or Gunslinger (Who has the most value from range) archetypes into it.
Overall I like the ideas though, as I said. Just maybe need a little tweaking here and there.
Another idea for a feat I had would be a combination of the two. An ability that lets you Stride towards an ally, and if you end your movement adjacent to that ally you grant them and yourself temp hp. I think that would be quite a cool and satisfying support ability to use.
I would also give you a speed boost for that Stride, but limit the ability to once per hour or something like that.
emptyptr_97 wrote: Mellored wrote: It let's you overcome the armor penalty and expand your intercept range, but not really be useful for running away.
And it keeps the trade-off with one that makes you tankier but immobilize.
The THP amount and name is take from the kinetisist Timber Sentinel.
https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=4284
I feel like this would be perfect for running away. 1 Action to get 2 actions worth of "movement" and a speed boost, giving any subsequent Stride action far more value.
It's the same distance as taking 3 stride actions.
But I'm sure it thing could be tweaked. Main point is that you can have mobile and stationary options while still having Str and heavy armor.
Quote: An ability that lets you Stride towards an ally, and if you end your movement adjacent to that ally you grant them and yourself temp hp. sure.
I guess Step + 3x Stide distance would be good at running away.
Tweaked.
Ready Movement, 1 action
Step or Escape, and then increase your next movement towards an ally before the start of your next turn by by 10'.
Mellored wrote:
Ready Movement, 1 action
Step or Escape, and then increase your next movement towards an ally before the start of your next turn by by 10'.
Yes, I really like that.
The only thing I would add is some kind of restriction that makes it effectively impossible to take this up through archetypes (At least without a heavy investment). The best way of doing that is probably to add some class feature that you don't get through the archetype (At least not until very late) to the prerequisites.
Recent threads in Guardian Class Discussion
|
