Battlecry! Guardian

[Secret Wizard]

Just wanted to say I'm very, very happy Paizo abstained from features that have reduced effect if wearing Medium armor.

I'd love for more excuses to use Medium armor as a Guardian too! Hopefully fun archetypes in the future?

[ElementalofCuteness]

Medium armor was always a slight problem if you want to be honest. It promotes you to either grab Sentinel for heavy armor, Guardian for taunt and heavy armor or you build DEX. Which in it's self is a minor problem, the game defensive stats I think over shadow the none defensive stats personally. Why I doubt we will see many ranged Guardians since the kit screams MELEE FRONT LINER.

[exequiel759]

Blue_frog wrote:

exequiel759 wrote:

The problem here is that, well, I can't use a greatsword because it isn't Desna's favored weapon

Actually, you very much can, starting at lvl 3 (and dropping off at lvl 19-20).

You will lose:
- a +1 status bonus on restorative strike (that is basically useless since you should have bless, heroism or a bard song running).
- Divine rebuttal (nobody ever takes this feat)
- Replenishment of war (this one actually really hurts)

And well, that's about it.

So yeah, from level 10+, you lose replenishment of war which is an amazing feat for a warpriest, but that might be an acceptable price to pay in order to fulfill your fantasy and deal d12 damage.

Except I won't ever reach master proficiency with it. Yeah, its at 19th level so it doesn't matter for most of the campaigns or most campaigns at all, but the idea that I would potentially need to switch my weapon at the end of my career for something as arbritary as favored weapons feels bad and is bad design.

I'm also gonna be totally honest and say that I'm the type of person that's likely to magnify the problems of religious classes because IRL I'm not religious and most types of devotion, either to a god or to a person, are contradictory to my views of the world. However, I'm still interested in religion from a sociological perspective, so when it so happens that I want to play a religious character I hate that there's always going to be some kind of problem along the way to make the whole experience worse. And I don't say this because I don't want to the character to be challenged about their beliefs (I think that's kind of the appeal of religious characters in fiction actually, either if its to debunk their beliefs because they are wrong or because your faith is big enough for the character to overcome the worst) but I think the mechanics implemented to "game-fy" that experience are more to the detriment of the whole concept rather than something that adds to it.

[exequiel759]

Also, in regards to clerics in particular, I really don't understand why the base class doesn't have armor proficiencies and the warpriest only goes up to medium armor without a (horrible) feat. The cleric was the armored caster of D&D 3.5 and PF1e so I find really strange that now it doesn't begin with at least light armor, with the warpriest going up to heavy armor. I also won't ever be convinced that Warpriest's Armor isn't a bad feat. It's literally a general feat for the price a class feat. The animist, bard, druid, and oracle have at least light armor proficiency, so why doesn't the cleric?

[Ryangwy]

exequiel759 wrote:

Also, in regards to clerics in particular, I really don't understand why the base class doesn't have armor proficiencies and the warpriest only goes up to medium armor without a (horrible) feat. The cleric was the armored caster of D&D 3.5 and PF1e so I find really strange that now it doesn't begin with at least light armor, with the warpriest going up to heavy armor. I also won't ever be convinced that Warpriest's Armor isn't a bad feat. It's literally a general feat for the price a class feat. The animist, bard, druid, and oracle have at least light armor proficiency, so why doesn't the cleric?

Beyond the fact that this is still the Guardian thread, the PF1e cleric is, in fact, the warpriest doctrine, not the cloistered cleric, and they got medium armor in PF1e as well, so everything works out. The Oracle actually lost medium armour, too.

[Khefer]

Ryangwy wrote:

exequiel759 wrote:

Also, in regards to clerics in particular, I really don't understand why the base class doesn't have armor proficiencies and the warpriest only goes up to medium armor without a (horrible) feat. The cleric was the armored caster of D&D 3.5 and PF1e so I find really strange that now it doesn't begin with at least light armor, with the warpriest going up to heavy armor. I also won't ever be convinced that Warpriest's Armor isn't a bad feat. It's literally a general feat for the price a class feat. The animist, bard, druid, and oracle have at least light armor proficiency, so why doesn't the cleric?

Beyond the fact that this is still the Guardian thread, the PF1e cleric is, in fact, the warpriest doctrine, not the cloistered cleric, and they got medium armor in PF1e as well, so everything works out. The Oracle actually lost medium armour, too.

Oracle never had Medium Armor. Only Battle did, but they also had Heavy because using its Curse benefits left you -2/-1 to your AC, effectively making you the same as Light/Medium armor wearers on first contact in an encounter.

[Ryangwy]

Khefer wrote:

Ryangwy wrote:

Beyond the fact that this is still the Guardian thread, the PF1e cleric is, in fact, the warpriest doctrine, not the cloistered cleric, and they got medium armor in PF1e as well, so everything works out. The Oracle actually lost medium armour, too.

Oracle never had Medium Armor. Only Battle did, but they also had Heavy because using its Curse benefits left you -2/-1 to your AC, effectively making you the same as Light/Medium armor wearers on first contact in an encounter.

They had it in PF1e, unless I'm reading AoN wrong. Which was my point, even if you were (somehow) comparing cloistered cleric to PF1e cleric, it's not the only class that would have lost armour proficiency between editions. And that the cleric couldn't be the armoured caster of PF1e if it had the same proficiencies as the druid and oracle and shaman and... actually, medium armour was everywhere in PF1e huh. No wonder CoDzilla was real.

[Khefer]

Ah, gotcha.

Didn’t catch you were referring to the PF1e->PF2e comparison.

Going back to Guardian, I guess it’s a good they kept the Medium/Heavy armor focus and changed Taunt’s operation.

I remember during the Playtest discussions folks were finding Taunt was more effective on a Bow Guardian…which wasn’t very “guardian-y”, lol.

I did suggest that there could’ve been a “Parade Armor” feat that let you tweak any Unarmored/Light armor equipment into Medium armor (with stat adjustment, similar to how Armored Skirt works). And while wearing your Parade Armor, you should get a bonus to Intimidation and Society checks.

Coz I think the part I wanted the Guardian to do more was rely on armor traits and selections, but honestly, the armor system is one of the least interesting parts of the game and hopefully can be spruced up in PF3e.

[WWHsmackdown]

From the class descriptions I've seen, it seems like guardian has shaped up to be a nice bruiser tank. I'm excited for a character that can actually ride large, strength-based animal companions and not have their teeny AC values be a liability (bc they can tank the hits for them)! My caveman and trex PC idea based on Fang and Spear from Primal can finally be realized!!!

[The Raven Black]

I hope we can make a lightly armored (or even unarmored) PC who Taunts and then deftly avoids attacks, a la Spiderman.

Maybe with the Guardian archetype.

[Blue_frog]

The Raven Black wrote:

I hope we can make a lightly armored (or even unarmored) PC who Taunts and then deftly avoids attacks, a la Spiderman.

Maybe with the Guardian archetype.

Swashbuckler with antagonize/enjoy the show and guardian archetype ?

[shroudb]

The Raven Black wrote:

I hope we can make a lightly armored (or even unarmored) PC who Taunts and then deftly avoids attacks, a la Spiderman.

Maybe with the Guardian archetype.

Yeah, that sounds more like a swashbuckler. Either Wit or Intimidate can taunt and/or ridicule enemies and nimbly avoid attacks/counterattack.

[Castilliano]

Swashbuckler already can function in a Guardian's role. Defensive 1st level feat, Antagonize, Guardian's Deflection (w/ whip perhaps), and you have a strong base by 4th with a similar playstyle which any build that can afford +2 Charisma can pick up by 8th. The ability to build a better Guardian w/ other classes/MCDs was obvious in the playtest and will be the final version's litmus test IMO.

[Perpdepog]

Castilliano wrote:

Swashbuckler already can function in a Guardian's role. Defensive 1st level feat, Antagonize, Guardian's Deflection (w/ whip perhaps), and you have a strong base by 4th with a similar playstyle which any build that can afford +2 Charisma can pick up by 8th. The ability to build a better Guardian w/ other classes/MCDs was obvious in the playtest and will be the final version's litmus test IMO.

From what I gather from snippets I've been gathering, it sounds like guardians have got more toys to themselves now. Their physical resistance, high HP, and real good armor progression are locked to them, and IIRC their reaction is basically limited to once per encounter for their archetype.

It sounds like you can make good guardians with other classes dipping into guardian, but guardian is now the most guardian-y.

[exequiel759]

Yeah, the only class that rivals the guardian for taunting and tanking is the champion. The swashbuckler isn't even close.

[ElementalofCuteness]

I just wish they kept the 2+Level DR alone for their Reaction.

[Squark]

ElementalofCuteness wrote:

I just wish they kept the 2+Level DR alone for their Reaction.

The sheer number of resistances a 1st level guardian could have confused the hell out of people. I'm not surprised they unified things.

[Perpdepog]

Squark wrote:

ElementalofCuteness wrote:

I just wish they kept the 2+Level DR alone for their Reaction.

The sheer number of resistances a 1st level guardian could have confused the hell out of people. I'm not surprised they unified things.

I also think it was done to help even out the damage the guardian takes. The playtest guardian was either getting champion resistance while using their special ability, or real small, situational resistance from their armor specialization the rest of the time. The former was real good, and made them want to use their reaction all the time, while the other situation could equate to a point or two of resistance, or nothing if they were taking damage from a physical type their armor didn't resist.

Now they have decent damage mitigation all the time, whether they're defending or not, which I imagine is easier to track.

[Powers128]

I feel with the passive resistance you get all the time, you'll be able to tank more damage over time regardless of that particular nerf to intercept but it does leave it feeling a bit weak in a vacuum

It's more of a situational tool which I think is reasonably balanced with the rest of the kit. It becomes a lot more reliable at lvl 7 when you can shield block the damage from intercept

[Khefer]

Agreed.

Playtest was kind of fiddly because you had to choose between which damage type you WEREN’T resistant to (and didn’t stack with other resistances), pick something funny like Wooden armor (that only works if you get crit…which you’re not great at), or a combo like Mitigate Harm + Chain spec armor…which meant you were actually safer getting crit by someone…which wasn’t easy because you had better defenses. And Mitigate Harm + Chain spec being stackable meant it was really the only viable option.

Additionally, there’s the Malleable rune that an change an armor’s specialization type with 1-action…at lvl. 9. That’s way too late in the game. Additionally, Armors are heavily LACKING in terms of diversity and even depth.

I tried a Shield+Mitigate Harm Guardian and a 2H+Ferocious Vengeance Guardian, and weirdly, the weapons would’ve been better on the opposite version. 2H Guardian would’ve done better with Mitigate Harm while Shield Gurdian would’ve done better with Ferocious Vengeance.

Overall, Guardian was just not intuitive, did not provide the tools to do the fantasy, and the fantasy was mechanically undercooked because PF2e lacks an interesting/interactive structure for the PT Guardian to actually operate.

Flat resistance tied to the class (when in Medium/Heavy) and dropping the subclasses into feats was probably the more elegant way to get it done.