| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My brain is telling me something the more I read about these classes.
Daredevil is not great, it really is a limiting 8 hit point none caster. It's on the same level as Gunslinger for me. Something even with the remastered, I'd consider nearly useless to play since in my mind Classes in PF-2E have Archetypes, Niches or Play-styles? That is something that you expect when you play them and it feels like soem classes avoid this like the plague.
Examples of what I am talking about.
- There are, as of the Playtest 7 classes which have 8 hit points a level.
- 3 of them are skill related, Investigator, Rogue & Thaumaturge
- 4 of them are not skill related, Alchemist, Daredevil, Gunslinger & Inventor.
(Honestly a bit of an interruption, Gunslinger & Inventor could be a 10 hit point class since Swashbuckler gets auto-scaling Acrobatics/Other Skill.)
This is where I'd like to ask for the Daredevil to get the Swashbuckler treatment. Where Swashbucklers get 10 hit points a level and auto-scaling on Acrobatics, which sadly but to shame Alchemist, Daredevbil and Inventor.
For Daredevil to be good it needs more hit points because right now it is a rather squishy and has no reward out side of wanting to build battle medicine and go into the Medic Archetype. Their level 1 Class Feature basically all but confirms they want to try to hit Medic Dedication ad build for Wisdom.
Slayer Next isn't it?
It's just diet Ranger with a single Thaumaturge Implement. There is not much to honestly say on the matter of Slayer other then it has no base way to increase base damage unless you choice the Blade as your Special Gear, Which is kinda bad since unlike Exemplar you start with 3 Ikons... You know let's just be honest here. Without any way to increase damage, Slayers are going to feel less complete and I do know some of you are going to be pointing out "What about flurry ranger?" and that is a good point but unlike Slayer, they get more damage the same way monks do, they have feats and/or class features which allow them to either reduce MAP or make 2 Attacks for 1 Action.
Sure Ranger and Monk do not have a way to increase their base damage, Flurry Ranger eventually just hit more with multiple attacks allowing them to crit fish and Monk, well Monk kinda just wants to Flurry of Blows every turn whenever possible. Slayer doesn't seem to do either of these two things unless you choose to do this with your unique class feature.
Am I missing something about Slayer? I really do not have a clue if I am or not.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree the Daredevil right now is too squishy for their own good. Whereas most other 8 HP/level martials can engage in hit-and-run playstyles, protect themselves, or have strong enough features to justify their low survivability, the Daredevil has to get into really messy melee combat, and is built to trigger lots of Reactive Strikes as well. I'd want to avoid increasing their HP if possible, but I certainly think they'd benefit from a feature that'd let them avoid getting downed, like a version of Orc Ferocity without a daily frequency limit.
As for the Slayer, the class is a bit of a misnomer in my opinion, because they're largely terrible at actually slaying creatures at most levels and shine mostly through utility. I think their signature tools are terribly-designed and definitely believe they should have some measure of killing power built into their kit as a baseline, ideally some kind of execution ability against their quarry. I actually quite like their tool feats, though, and feel that the class could actually be really interesting if they got their core features sorted out. Decoupling their quarry from trophies and making quarry easier to mark I think would go a long way towards making their gameplay loop smoother, as would actually letting them use their special Lore skill to find and mark quarry before a combat encounter.
In general, the impression I have of both classes is that they're an experiment in high-risk, high-reward gameplay, the idea being that they can have more low moments than other classes but more high moments to compensate. In my humble opinion, that experiment has failed. Not because the classes are too risky, though their propensity to become unable to use their core mechanics is certainly a problem, but because I don't think either delivers on the "high-reward" component: even when the stars align and you find yourself in a situation tailor-made for a Daredevil or a Slayer, neither class finds themselves shining that bright. For all the risks involved, both classes are timidly-balanced in a way that highlights Paizo's reluctance to let characters punch significantly above their weight in this edition, and the end result is a couple of classes that spend a lot of time barely working at all just on the off-chance that they perform about as well as any other in a small subset of ideal circumstances. The two biggest points of feedback I have to give on this playtest are to make sure neither class stops functioning in encounters, which ought to mean lessening or removing the many arbitrary restrictions on their mechanics, and to amp up the rewards to playing these classes as intended, whether it's by giving the Daredevil lots of great action compression or making the Slayer much more lethal against their quarry.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
A bit of a side tangent, but how aren't the inventor or daredevil skill classes when both revolve entirely around skills (Crafting in the case of inventor, Athletics or Acrobatics in the case of daredevil)? Gunslinger is in a weird spot, because all ways revolve around skills, though I wouldn't consider it a skill class personally. However, I do agree with most of points you make here. Daredevil is weak yet really interesting, while the slayer feels like class bloat.
A bit of a side tangent, but how aren't the inventor or daredevil skill classes when both revolve entirely around skills (Crafting in the case of inventor, Athletics or Acrobatics in the case of daredevil)? Gunslinger is in a weird spot, because all ways revolve around skills, though I wouldn't consider it a skill class personally. However, I do agree with most of points you make here. Daredevil is weak yet really interesting, while the slayer feels like class bloat.
I translated it more as skill->broad utility, though I wouldn't place a non-Tome Thaumaturge in that group, but it does have lots of utility. Despite awkward premises, I think the point stands; 8 hit point classes come with a lot of utility, either through skills or spells, with the possible exceptions of Gunslinger and Inventor. While I'm skeptical, players often praise the Gunslinger as a dominant force in their parties, for non-combat too. And I think an Inventor, with its Int & feats choices, can provide more utility than many martials.
In other words, Daredevil has to up its game, and broaden it too. Many classes contend with it re: maneuvers & skirmishing, and DD doesn't provide the skills/spells/utility/durability to warrant inclusion in a party like those classes do.
A bit of a side tangent, but how aren't the inventor or daredevil skill classes when both revolve entirely around skills (Crafting in the case of inventor, Athletics or Acrobatics in the case of daredevil)? Gunslinger is in a weird spot, because all ways revolve around skills, though I wouldn't consider it a skill class personally. However, I do agree with most of points you make here. Daredevil is weak yet really interesting, while the slayer feels like class bloat.
I'll try my best to explain what I mean.
- Alchemist has versatility which makes them a Pseudo-Spellcaster, they get a pass.
- Inventor gets 8 hit points, auto-scaling crafting, no bonus skills, crafting is not useful in a lot of places. They should be a 10 hit poitn class like Swashbuckler...
- Thaumaturge gets Devise Lore, Which turns you Niche lore into Lore-Everything using Charisma at a -2, making it still +2 Better then any other Int based Lore-Anything unless you are a Wizard with Loremaster Lore and even then it caps at Expert vs Legendary -2 (So Master). The Tome makes it Legendary -1 (The Tome is a SUPER good Implement)
- Gunslinger class kit makes it once again like Swashbuckler. It should get either Auto-scaling in the Skills the Gunslinger's way give and/or give it 10 hit points, it shouldn't be a 10 hit point class.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One problem with the gunslinger having the different ways is that some, like the sniper, really do not need more hp, but others do. One lesson that I hope we can all learn from PF2 and for new classes, is that it might be better to dial in a class around a very small number of subclasses/no subclasses, and then expand those classes with class archetypes and feats to support those archetypes in later books when they can be fully developed.
One problem with the gunslinger having the different ways is that some, like the sniper, really do not need more hp, but others do. One lesson that I hope we can all learn from PF2 and for new classes, is that it might be better to dial in a class around a very small number of subclasses/no subclasses, and then expand those classes with class archetypes and feats to support those archetypes in later books when they can be fully developed.
Have to agree but Sniper is only useful on the first round generally. However as someone who is in a campaign with a Ranger sniping with a Sukgong Crossbow...Snipers are dangerous especially if you give them Farshot and Hunt Prey class feature/feat.
However I believe a dedicated Combination Weapon Class woudl been much better then Gunsligner trying to work it in. This prov3es my point of you should really focus on a Gimmick and do it well, have class identity and don't try to cross paths when the class doe snot support such a thing.
8 Hit points makes any melee class risky to play. Rogue really only get a pass because you generally are supporting a more beefy martial and have reactions to have bring targets down faster then if you just fought solo.
The daredevil doesn’t come by it naturally, but with a weapon in the club family the daredevil can get stunt damage on top of pretty nasty critical hits. Combined with a caster laying out clumsy (like with synesthesia) and the ability to triple the clumsy value in extra damage, a high level daredevil is pretty competent as a skirmishing striker especially against a lot of lower level targets. Scrambling retreat with a lot of speed can make the risk of getting cut down afterwards much less serious, but it takes a pretty intense knowledge of the class to balance defensive feats, striking feats and maneuvers.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
However I believe a dedicated Combination Weapon Class woudl been much better then Gunsligner trying to work it in. This prov3es my point of you should really focus on a Gimmick and do it well, have class identity and don't try to cross paths when the class doe snot support such a thing.
What do you want of a combination weapon class? After the G&G remaster, there's nothing I can think you'll ever need to use them. If we can agree the slayer is already bloating the system a bit, I think we should also agree a class that focus on using exactly 18 weapons would be much worse.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
… The two biggest points of feedback I have to give on this playtest are to make sure neither class stops functioning in encounters, which ought to mean lessening or removing the many arbitrary restrictions on their mechanics, and to amp up the rewards to playing these classes as intended, whether it's by giving the Daredevil lots of great action compression or making the Slayer much more lethal against their quarry.
Interestingly enough, todays Risk and Rewards blog on the landing page mentions that:
First, we are going to reconsider some of the restrictions on the daredevil, granting them a bit more freedom in combat to do the things they love to do. Second, we are going to keep a close eye on the slayer’s consistency across game styles to ensure one doesn’t become the strongest choice…
Yeah, that doesn't surprise me one bit. Those points of criticism come up pretty much every time I've seen someone give feedback on those classes, and it's good to see that Paizo's already been taking the pulse on this playtest. Only time will tell, but I do think that the developers will be able to give both the glow-up they sorely need for their final release, as happened before with the Guardian.
EDIT: I forgot non reload combination weapons don't have critical fusion so nix that. Both combination bows have the monk trait so that signals pretty clearly who uses the mikazuki/bow staff (notably, both have parry in their melee form) and the Wrecker... has ranged trip?
I'd say a bow staff is a slightly better choice for a monk, even though it lacks the Propulsive trait in bow form, because it has the Finesse trait in staff form.
*- Monastic Archer Stance and Monastic Weaponry explicitly allow you to "use your other monk feats or monk abilities that normally require unarmed attacks with these bows" and "use melee monk weapons with any of your monk feats or monk abilities that normally require unarmed attacks, though not if the feat or ability requires you to use a single specific type of attack, such as Crane Stance"
Mikazuki is probably better for a more melee-focused or melee/switch-hitter monk.