ALL CLASSES RANKED - Pathfinder 2e: The Mid Levels (8 to 14) ! - Livestream #30
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 сен 2022
- Our journey continues!
We look now to the mid levels, where spellcasters start coming into their own and class features and feat "builds" start to really come online. New challenges await the PC class - which ones will rise to the top? (or sink into mediocrity)
Tips Appreciated!!!
streamelements.com/knightsofl...
Join our Patreon! / knightsoflastcall
------------------------ Tips and Donations -----------------------------------
If you would like to show your appreciation please consider a tip or donation! Superchats are great, but if you use the link below to our Stream Elements tipping page we receive almost 100% of your tip directly, your generous donation goes a lot further through Stream Elements!
streamelements.com/knightsofl...
------------------------ Knights of Last Call -----------------------------------
If you would like to support the Knights directly or want to join are our ever growing discord, please consider joining our Patreon: / knightsoflastcall
Check out our Podcast! Available on Apple, Google, Spotify, and Anchor! anchor.fm/kolc
-----------------------------Social Media---------------------------------------------
Follow us on Twitter and Instagram for behind-the-scenes photos and videos, along with information about upcoming episodes and giveaways!
/ knightslastcall
/ knightsoflastcall
-----------------------CREDITS/DISCLAIMERS---------------------------------
Knights of Last Call uses trademarks and/or copyrights owned by Paizo Inc., used under Paizo's Community Use Policy (paizo.com/communityuse). We are expressly prohibited from charging you to use or access this content. Knights of Last Call is not published, endorsed, or specifically approved by Paizo. For more information about Paizo Inc. and Paizo products, visit paizo.com. 
Игры
10:46 intro
15:00 reminder of how tiers work and the last video
32:00 fighter
48:35 bard
55:05 cleric
56:15 warpriest (cleric)
1:01::46 cloistered (cleric)
1:09:14 alchemist
1:17:18 barbarian
1:30:01 champion
1:50:36 druid
1:58:23 gunslinger
2:02:38 inventor
2:05:52 investigator
2:08:51 magus
2:13:38 monk
2:16:44 oracle
2:21:35 psychic
2:23:25 ranger
2:31:34 rogue
2:36:56 sorcerer
2:43:47 summoner
2:59:43 thaumaturge
3:00:16 wizard
3:01:37 witch
3:05:05 swashbuckler
LEGENDARY!! Thank you!!
Not all heroes wear capes.
Beat me to it!
@@CeaneCilias Go do it for the spell tier videos ;)
At about 1:24:00 when discussing the Barbarian benefiting from Aid, I think this highlights one of the features of Pathfinder 2E. Through team composition, tactics, and strategy, a party of B and C classes can feel like A and S tiers (and S tiers can feel like a snooze fest, but that might be a feature, not a bug). PF2 rewards the sabremetricians and optimizers who can find their niches and create really fun, funky builds that function as a team versus something like 5th edition where you could build characters who can solo boss battles.
It’s definitely the case that many classes only really shine when you use team tactics. Gaining status and circumstance bonuses from your allies (and having them put status and circumstance penalties on your foes) can make an absolutely massive mathematical difference in your effectiveness. Massive
U right. My party comp is Champion-w/cleric archetype (c tier)
Spirit instinct barbarian (c tier)
Investigator- w/ witch archetype (d tier) and
Swashbuckler (c-ish tier)
And the way we play makes the game exactly as challenging as you would hope for (for peak role play/entertainment). I love that the way you play has more impact on what you play.
A quibbling with D tier Investigator between levels 8-14: yes, by this level they really should be consistently getting Devise for free. Not just out of the GM's benevolence granting Investigators ways to Pursue a Lead prior to combat, but actually because of their own class features! Level 10 is where they can now switch targets of their Pursue a Lead during each combat as a reaction, which you better believe is what Investigators will be doing!
Devise was always actually pretty good; it's easy to fixate on the action tax without thinking about how, in practice, *knowing* an attack will hit or miss, or crit, informs and changes player choices for the rest of the turn. In other words, Devise always adds value to the Investigator's action economy, but the trouble is that the added value is usually not equal to or greater than the action cost to Devise in the first place. But being able to Devise for free consistently by level 10 is both mechanically powerful and a lot of fun to do. There's definitely other problems with mid-level Investigator (Empiricism and Interrogation are always very weak, and Alchemical Sciences has lacked any room for out-of-combat utility until right about now at 10th level), but if it's Devise that's holding Investigator back from C tier, I don't think this was considering just how consistently Devise will be free at this point in the game.
I'm at the middle of the video and I really feel like there is not enough discussion about the feats and when there is it's to say that they suck. Barbarian is a great example of that. Yeah sure the -1 mean you'll take hits but have you seen the level 8, 10 and 12 feats ? They're almost all amazing and a few directly address the tankyness problem.
I like the show and love the Knights, but I always feel like C is not average, it's slightly below average (otherwise why have S ?). We really focus too much on what is weak in the class and not enough what is strong. Conversely when we talk about the Fighter we see only the good stuff, the freakin +2. Fighter do one thing and one thing only. They're slow, will have one fighting technique and that's it. Not great saves compared to other martials and almost no skills. I'm not saying the class is bad, I'm just saying it's not 3 tiers above Champion.
To be clear S is not a good thing
it's problematic... it's TOO powerful
For the summoner, act together 2 (summoner casts a 2 action spell) Eidolon gets to use 1 action (Strike) the Eidolon can then use a 3rd action to strike again. ( Looks like 4 actions. With the act together ability it really helps the summoner)
ive dived DEEP into the summoner. its a very useful and resourceful class. its not just about damage with the summoner
In act together, the actions can be used in either order. 2 action spell then eidolon strike, OR eidolon strike and then 2 point spell.. either way is perfectly fine.. i seriously love the summoner and i know it almost inside and out. i could talk about it all day lol
@@ObedientMammal Yeah understanding that the base "3 actions" can be broken up throughtout the turn between the summoner and the eidolon as you see fit was something I had missed in the rules and so when that was made apparent to me I thought the class improved for sure.
I still think ultimately it's a class that performs as expected; it's still very limited I feel by the very small number of spell slots... but viewing it more as a melee class is an interexsting perspective
@@KnightsofLastCall id love to join in a campaign and show you 😁😉 im playing a goblin summoner called Gribble with his trusty dragon Eidolon named Gary (Gyraxius)
I'm with you that the summoner is really strong with action economy. Especially with the Tandem Movement Feat you can get up to 5 actions in total per round.
But whenever I need to pick the spells of my occult spell list (phantom eidolon) I get sad. Until I saw Haste in the occult list...6 Actions per round!
My biggest issue with TT RPGs is that they don't give players enough options on their turn, particularly at low levels where most games are played. As an experienced player, most classes don't feel like they start to come online until level 10, and very few games play at this level, AND the games are most difficult at levels 1-3 (where the new players are forced to start).
I took Blade Ally for my Paladin and was concerned about the decision at first.
I ended up picking up Smite Evil for flavor reasons and turns out it's worked relatively well on increasing my damage and also to encourage enemies to attack me instead of my allies.
The constant GM problem when you have a Champion in the group, that. Do you attack their allies, who are protected and can get lay-on-handsed for HP and that sweet AC boost, or do you attack the Champion with their probably higher base AC and HP. Feels like a lose-lose situation in so many cases. The main thing we found to hold the Champion (a Redeemer in this case) back was that abysmal 15ft range on their reaction.
So...fighters towards the end of this range start to suffer from lack of damage vs the other martial classes other than champions and monks who are more defensive. Especially the more optimal ones for damage. Even at legendary greater weapon spec, which is outside this range of levels, you are looking at +13 extra damage per hit. Giant barbarian is +29 damage at that point. A magus using a cantrip is adding 7d6+23 (47.5 damage on average) as a laughing shadow vs flat footed. Yes 2 actions...but really using that vs 2 attacks with one of them having a MAP makes it do more damage on average. And that's not assuming spell buffs that they can cast on themselves. Hell, the eidolon you make so much fun of, at this point has +17 with boost eidolon and the dragon one can make 3 attacks with 2 actions. +21 with huge enlarge on it. At level 7 when your dragon gets frenzy for the first time over what a fighter pushes out when you are looking at 4d8+20+4d6+20 for 3 actions + 1 on caster's part vs the fighter doing 7d12+18 for their entire actions. More if you enlarge your dragon...which can be huge now for an extra 4 damage a hit for 16 more a round potential. If we assume that that anything at max MAP misses, the fighter is looking at 44.5 average. The dragon is at 44 with enlarge. But once again, summoner has spell options if needed.
At low levels, the wrath spirit eidolon can dish out damage on par with a damaged focus barbarian while having spell options when you need it. Hell, a level 1 angry spirit eidolon with a primal spell casting dedication as an ancient elf can use a scroll of magic fangs on their pet to do 5d8+19 damage with it for 3 actions + boost eidolon. Which is an absolute insane thing at level ONE. This becomes less and less of a thing at higher levels of course...and archetyping is kinda cheating maybe in all of this...but the magus and summoner both really benefit from it.
Fighters are good...but they are not the auto broken that people think they are. That legendary proficiency does make things broken however. A free hand fighter so that they can ready an action to aid for that tasty tasty +4, do the 2 action strike to add fear 1 or 2 and than do desperate finisher with combat grab so the critter is flat footed. You just gave the giant barbarian or magus a +7 or 8 to their crit fishing attempt. Sneak attack rogues can go to town as well. If you build the fighter to do damage...you are doing it wrong. They really don't get enough damage bonus past the first few levels for this to work well. They are STUPIDLY powerful as a way to boost the big damage dealing builds up, but with the lack of such damage themselves, I don't believe in them being auto S tier that seems to be popular. They are S tier played a certain way...but so are summoners and magus and rangers and pretty much ALL the classes. I have seen WAY too many damage focused, two handed weapon, power attack, furious focus fighter builds in PFS. And they all perform mediocre. My magus who can spell strike for the damage they push out but can move 70 feet and can haste and fly and enlarge to huge or go invis while attacking as to basically double my HP performs MUCH better...despite the fighter being S and Magus C according to you. My level 1 summoner puts pretty much any level 1 fighter to shame in the damage department...and even the support area as not only can I do that much damage, but I can do 3d8+5 damage with an attack while casting spells to support the party. Yes yes individual build don't mean much...but I can have a plant pet that has 10 ft reach doing 2d8+4 damage while I cast spells. At level 7, that can be as much as 25 feet reach. I can have a magus that spellstrikes from 100 feet away for 1d8+1d6+5 damage while moving 60 feet if anything even remotely attempts to get close. From a HUNDRED feet away. I made a level 1 shield tome magus for shits and giggles that uses a fighting fan while reading a book like in many animes that was doing 1d4+1d6+10 damage at level 1. With a move speed of 40. I could once per day do the shocking grasp for 1d4+2d12+7. Which since I would go into flank with the fighter with my superior movement means I was just as likely to hit as he was. His 2d12+4 power attack did less damage than my once per day shocking grasp spell strike and not much more than my sustained damage. And this is my for shits and giggles magus that is not optimized. The chances of you running into a fighter built and played in a manner to be that S tier broken is so FRAKING rare, they really should just be C tier as everyone builds and plays them to be damage dealers thinking that +2 to hit means everything. Let's put it this way...I have yet to see another fighter in PFS besides me, that uses the aid action on a regular basis because of the higher proficiency means higher bonus on crits. Now to be fair, it is not that great in the 1-6 range that society normally plays in as you have to crit for it to matter...but even in high level AP, I really don't see this outside of my HIGHLY tactical and optimized player group. But in that group, rogues, summoners, magus, alchemists and any full casters are some of the deadliest classes played with fighters still being a solid middle of the pack with the biggest thing they have going is adding an extra +1 to aid crits.
As far as i can tell it doesn't really matter what you tell people, they like to hate fighter so they will.
Having played a lot of mid-level Pathfinder 2E, I find this tier list to be pretty inaccurate. Here'd be my list:
Top Tier:
Druid, Cleric, Champion, Bard, Sorcerer
High Tier:
Wizard, Witch, Psychic
Upper Tier:
Oracle (Cosmos, Ash, Time), Magus, Summoner, Kineticist, Monk, Ranger, Oracle (Tempest, Battle)
Upper:
Ranger, Thaumaturge, Oracle (Bones, Life (level 11+), Flames, Lore)
Mid Tier:
Inventor (construct), Fighter, Barbarian, Rogue, Oracle (Ancestors Oracle), Ranger (No focus spell archetype AND no animal companion), Inventor (non-construct)
Low Tier:
Swashbucker, Gunslinger, Investigator, Alchemist
The big differences:
1) Casters are all VERY powerful. Low level (level 1-4 casters) are not as strong as they are later on. 3rd rank spells are good, but what really starts setting up casters is the sheer number of 3rd, 4th, and 5th level spells they get. On top of that, higher level spells are EXTREMELY powerful - AoE damage spells wreck groups of monsters, you get spells like slow and resilient sphere that severely impede single monsters' actions, you get spells like haste that can fix the action economy of some classes, and then you start getting these powerful AoE zoning spells like Stifling Stillness, Wall of Fire, and Freezing Rain that basically force enemies to move, along with area control spells like Coral Eruption that make damaging difficult terrain - and then you start getting nonsense like Wall of Stone, which can cut encounters in half and make them much, much easier. Casters get more and more spells, and they get stronger and stronger, bigger and bigger in terms of area of effect, and the damage just keeps going up and up much faster than martial damage does.
On top of this, they also get powerful focus spells. Druids in particular have amazing focus spells, and the fact that they have a lot of really good ones means that they can preserve their spell slots for the actually dangerous encounters. But psychics, oracles, sorcerers, and druids all get powerful AoE damage spells that they can use every encounter all day long, as well as various strong single target spells, which let them stretch their resources much further and bring out "big guns" that aren't daily powers.
Druids are probably the strongest class in the game because of animal companions. Animal companions give you an extra front-liner, give you an extra flanker, and solve the third action problem for them very handily. Sure, an animal companion isn't as strong as a martial - but they don't need to be, they're strong enough as-is, and they're a class feature that adds a whole bunch of HP to your party and are generally a nuisance on an already very strong caster class.
2) Champions are nuts. The amount of damage reduction they can provide is insane, and it is largely invisible to a lot of people. Tonight, a champion in our party prevented more than 70 damage in just three rounds of combat in an extreme encounter between Shield Warden and their reaction, and they're only level 8. The enemies ended up being forced to run away from them to fight the rest of the party, because the champion was standing around with 32 AC and they couldn't profitably hit anyone nearby. The champion's single-action healing with Lay on Hands and their healer's gloves let them bolster the druid's animal companion so it could keep helping them block off the street that they were on, and by the end of the combat the animal companion was actually back up to full HP - the 160 xp encounter didn't ultimately end with a single character below half hit points.
Preventing damage means that casters can focus more on doing damage and applying control effects, which makes your party substantially stronger - ironically, despite champion damage being very mediocre, parties with champions in them tend to deal more damage per round because the rest of the party is more able to dish out damage.
3) Fighters are not that great in mid levels. They are a heavily frontloaded class that seems really strong at low levels but they fall off as you go up in level because they don't have sources of bonus damage from their class. As a result, their damage ends up being not so great, and the extra +2 to hit doesn't make up for it. That doesn't mean they're bad - everything in mid tier and above is entirely viable - but they're not really all that strong, as the casters get strong AoE damage abilities, the champion's reactions are better and champions are extremely hard to kill, monks are also very hard to kill and start being able to abuse their full action economy with things like focus spells from archetyping, and you just end up with this situation where the fighter struggles to get really good action compression. They are probably at their worst at levels 6-9, as they kind of don't get anything really that significant in that level span while other classes are getting features like reactive strikes and powerful bespoke abilities that help them catch up to the fighter. The fighter starts getting strong feats again at level 10, but by that point everyone has caught up to them in their own way.
4) The Magus can archetype to psychic and pick up imaginary weapon and do 50+ damage with a spellstrike - a normal HIT, not a crit! - at level 7. Their crits crack 100 damage. Maguses do really heavy damage, and while their action economy is a bit wonky, the fact that they do such heavy single target damage helps them to delete things. Moreover, they get very strong spells like Dive and Breach and Blazing Dive which serve as powerful mobility boosters and AoE damage effects that help them reposition. Multiclass maguses can also abuse scrolls from their other class, like a psychic magus can use Soothe from a scroll if need be. Shining Targe maguses are quite resilient as well. And maguses in general can benefit from things like Reactive Strike, as they almost always have reach weapons because they want to avoid reactive strikes and avoid moving as much as possible. Meanwhile Starlit Span maguses can use stuff like Fireball on their spellstrikes and basically do AoE control on top of damage.
5) Swashbucklers end up wasting tons of actions getting panache way too often, and their finishers are often not really worth using because of the action cost of regaining panache. It varies, of course, but they're pretty mediocre and end up losing out on a lot of actions because of the restrictions on not attacking post-finishers (which you want to use as your first attack in a round) and their overall damage is not very good.
6) Rogues have good damage (and opportune backstab is amazing) but they suffer from the fact that they're pretty squishy melee combatants. Having super great mobility is great and all, but they often are stuck needing to flank (or needing to have an ally flank with them) which can put people in bad positions and makes it hard to build a proper line of battle unless you have a grappler or similar character in the party who can provide off-guard. With off-guard, rogues deal quite respectable damage; without it, they fall way behind. They also don't really have any ability to protect other people the way a lot of other melee martials do, which hurts their ability to contribute to the team.
7) Gunslingers' action economy is terrible and their damage is bad. They do less on their crits than maguses do with normal hits. Having +2 to hit doesn't matter when your damage is worse than everyone else's by a long shot and you have to waste actions on reloading. They are anti-clutch against bosses because of their reliance on critical hits and they're worse than casters against groups of enemies. Most gunslingers also don't contribute to the front line at all, which hurts the party a lot.
1:41:32 , What I did with my champion was going Dhampir with Fangs. I still have a shield, but I can grapple with Fangs and if I crit on the grapple I can gain temporary hit points with taste blood. On RP I did a Redeemed Dhampir that still feel bad for his past and want to rectify.
black dragon gaming has a series "min maxing for fun and profit" and he has a pretty convincing witch build.
Is there a link to the music you use for pre/post stream anywhere?
Even better (theorycrafted only at this point, for my experience) would be Champiom with heavy Strength/Athletics investment to be open-handed, but with a shield with which they can attack.
Grab and bully around the enemies with Shove and Trip (Titan Wrestler ASAP), use reactions and Lay On Hands as needed (even better with high Medicine and Battle Medicine), bop with the shield if no other good options present themselves... but Strikes would probably be uncommon.
I think they would be disruptive enough with maneuvers and healing that they would draw some attacks that would otherwise go to other characters.
I would go for a Champion of Kurgess if playing in Golarion, and refocusing would be calisthenics. Temperament would be that of a sideline sports coach.
Yeah the so called “capt. America” build seems ... well a bit silly.... but very practical
Hey Derek, how about dual class tier list? I'm new to Pathfinder and our group is still learning the game. Although we have played over 20 years. Have you played rolemaster?
30:03 You clearly haven't taken a higher level physics test. We would routinely have tests that would be an A at 50%
Plant summoner is a beast at these levels! You are a crazy person! You get like 20ft reach with access to grab, trip, AOO and the primal tradition. Its a B only because of the limited spells. You have the best action economy in the game which alone makes your rating shortsighted imo.
So many flanking opportunities too! That along with all the grabbing and tripping, your martials will love you.
I'll check it out!
While you might find dragon eidolon and arcane list satisfying, my personal vote is Beast Eidolon. Magic Fang at lvl 1 ofc and later on Envenom Companion and Thundering Dominance. Pick wand of Summonners Precaution ASAP.
Remember that the way summoner works you can cast magic weapon on your own weapon and it will also count as being on your dragon. So magic weapon still works like a magic fang.
I know this is almost a year and a half later, but I'm slowly catching up on all these past streams. I'm curious if you ever got to play the Summoner, and if so, what your thoughts were on it.
I played a short-lived Primal Summoner recently, and it was probably my favorite class of the 4 I've played so far, despite only surviving ~2 months of weekly sessions. Primal meant I could take both blasty spells, and Heal. Combine the Heal with Battle Medicine and Godless Healing, and I could keep my Eidolon in the fight for significantly longer than any other character in the party, making it a great meat shield and flanking partner for our Rogue. The Eidolon counting as a separate creature, as well as the shared hit point pool, meant Battle Medicine could be used on the Summoner who is away from danger to heal, or I could double dip on Battle Medicine in one turn to double up on the healing.
I viewed the Summoner as that generic Melee character with dedicated Bard support. Boost Eidolon (Ghetto Inspire Courage) + Protect Companion (Better Shield for Summoners) could make the Eidolon a force to be reckoned with in the fray, with the added ability to blast in big group encounters or heal in a pinch. The lack of spells didn't feel like *that much* of a detriment, since as someone in the chat said, it felt to me that the class was more of a Gish with extra steps. My spell slots were there for situational support to the Eidolon/party, not a primary function of the class. Beast Eidolon also allowed for AOE Demoralize with Primal Roar (yes, Beast Eidolon lacks in Charisma but it still inherited my Intimidation proficiency) which came in handy a lot more often than I expected it would.
If I were to rank it using the same scale as you, I'd probably put it as a solid B. The character always felt like it had a presence and impact in encounters, which I couldn't say about the Gunslinger I played prior. The only character that I've felt had a larger impact so far would be the Kineticist, which I would solidly rank as an A-tier so far.
Also, as an added fun fact, Summoner was primarily design by Mark Seifter. I believe it was the last class he worked on before leaving Paizo.
1:46:00 I am a bit sad that Champion is in C since my newest character is a Goblin Redeemer-Champion (who will start having his canine companion starting Level 2 since he goes Beastmaster with the free Archetype) but you nail the issues of almost all D20-games quite well. That kind of character is likely the hardest to hit and get down and sadly, this time, the removal of "everyone has AoO's" is a negative. Enemies can simply walk around that obstacle and take care of the squishies... But, it still is a working class, could need a bit of tweaking but it is working. The grappling is an interesting idea though, I'll have to think about that some more. A tin can goblin jumping at every enemy while cursing those who ignore him and sending his half feral dog after them ^^
In all fairness if he is playing ALL monsters as some super intelligent combat monsters, then he is playing it wrong. Let me explain a lot of situation. Champion is up front. He opens the door and walks in first. He triggers whatever monsters want to attack. You honestly think some normal creature is going to go "Oh, I must ignore this Champion and walk around him to get to that caster in the back? Nope. All but the most intelligent and prepared "monsters" will just attack the dude in front. Which will be the Champion. Now after say a round or two of combat, yes they may peel off the Champion if they are getting hit hard by someone else but that is 2 or more rounds in. By that point the damage should have been done AND the Champion can protect with a reaction as well if needed. Now compare that to say the fighter? Does he really hit that much harder? With the new rules is that gnome flick-mace going to work as well? Nope. So would I have the Champion at B tier? I have no idea, but the reasoning isn't valid, unless you have a GM who is abusing the ability of monsters.
I would rate starlit span magus with imaginary weapon B Tier. Damage is good for a range character and mostly the recharge cost of 1 action is way easier to overcome. While I think its strong enough (dmg wise), I think its really boring to play. Just stand in the same spot and spellstrike and last action recharge, is that fun? maybe not....
I wished you would make a just level 20 episode.
Then alchemist can finally get S tier😄
In regards to the paladin; a GM shouldn't be meta-gaming to neuter a character class. A GM should be doing what they can to make players' characters feel powerful in game, not striving to do the opposite; you're not their opponent, you're a facilitator of the their heroes' stories. On another note, providing the Paladin some strong buff auras that make their allies much more powerful would provide incentive for the mobs to take down the paladin(too funny that you got to this a bit further in the video).
Also, Derik is 100% spot on with the open hand shield bash build, the best defender in the game. Take blade ally to buff the strikes and reactions, but otherwise make them suffer next to you. Or, y’know, trip with Gnomish Flickmace reaction crits, cuz no MAP
Basically GM have to homebrew taunt for the character.
I like your content ! Your magic tier level videos were amazing. When it comes to classes I disagree on some of them, but hey, that's the beauty of PF2e, most classes are overall solid and absolutely playable.
I always thought these rankings were very combat focused. But then I heard you say a boilerplate campaign was 50% to 80% combat, which is why our opinions differ so. In 25 years of TTRPGs, I've had maybe one or 2 campaigns that were pure dungeon crawling, with some that could go several sessions without rolling initiative. Most campaigns I've been in had maybe 30-60 mins of combat per 4 hour sessions. I rate the fighter S for combat, sure, but for what it brings on a campaign level, a B. Like most fighter players I've seen, this class bores me out of my mind out of combat. Now, I do love combat, and I rarely put less than 20-30 hours on a character to make sure it is effective without being unidimensional, but if I just wanted to grind, I'd play WoW or Diablo.
As a test.. I just quickly read through Broken Tusk Moon (adventure 1 of 3 for the Quest for Frozen Flame AP that we are running on the channel).
The first adventure has 27 published encounters in it.. 21 of them are combat .. so 77%
And those encounters last a few rounds. The non-number crunching parts of TTRPGs often take most of the sessions. They are the parts you can't fully write about that revolve around the players and their choices, and the very reason we need game masters. We just ran that first book and most of the memorable moments aren't combat related. There is just so much to do outside of rolling to hit. I don't think I've ever had a group that didn't stray several times from the books.
And while role-play and contributions are certainly very player dependent, a flick mace and expert in athletics only get you so far.
@@Myrdraall Agreed but at that point the mechanics don't matter anyways - we spent about an hour and half in our livestream AP during a conversation with Grandfather Eiwa.... but class-elements have no impact there, in fact your mechanical choices dont' matter at all.
So the time it does matter is during the aforementioned combats, which again are the lion's share of the encounters.
21:30 Now I want a see a TPK as a result of a social encounter!
Play Legend of the Five Rings!
I had a game where the party failed a social encounter badly enough that they were executed by the queen after the barbarian accidently juggled the gnome into the king and knocked him out. The barbarian apology was a total of -1 (was a 2...not a nat 1). The gnome apology was a 4. The rogue decided that attempting to hide while everyone was looking was a good idea and so auto failed and made people more suspicious. The gnome attempts to cast charm person at this point...which the court wizard identifies and counters. And once again even MORE suspicious looks come their way. The cleric attempts to salvage all of this with an eloquent speech of contrition and rolls a nat 1. TPK via execution it is. This was in PF1 tho.
I think the reason ranger is better than you ranked, is because twin takedown works to throw in weapons and at level 10 monster hunter becomes a good support skill. I agree that ranged Rangers aren’t that good, but given you have abilities that allow your range increments to increase and to not suffer penalties from throwing in farther range increments, a thrown weapon built with twin takedown allows you to very easily work well in Melee and ranged. Also to your point that hunting prey hurt your action economy is definitely true at low levels, but that is medicated once you get the monster hunter skill pass online at level 10, when you can use nature for all of them, and no longer need a critical success to get the benefits. Giving all of your ally circumstance +1 on their first attack AC and save against your hunted prey, as well as the benefits of recall knowledge makes hunted prey a pretty decent action, that and being able to give your party members the benefits of flurry makes a 2 weapon thrown ranger a very good support and versatile damage dealer.
Well the BRB can make more use of athletics (trip/shove etc) while not limited by armor, dont he?
Am I the only one that has way more roleplay, exploration and downtime than combat?
Most certainly not - but when it comes to those three things (especially Roleplay)... it doesn't really matter much WHAT a class can do, does it?
I like your honest and brutal ratings, ignore reddit
Swashbuckler was a class that I dislike. But it is so fkng awesome that it is A tier
Around 1:38:00 when he talks about changing the litany against wrath, the homebrew only really works if the enemy recognizes the spell, no? And if the enemy doesn't recognize the spell, how do they know to ever attack the champion? You as a DM can of course make the decision to attack the champion but that's entirely a meta game decision, and not roleplaying the monsters.
Edit: fixing typos
The spell is cast ON the enemy, so just like when you cast Slow on an enemy that know that they are Slowed 1 even if they didn't recognize the spell.
So "Litany of Protection" despite it sounding strange was actually cast against a foe, just like normal Litanies... with the target getting a saving throw and such.
It just changed the nature of the trigger of the damage. From "successfully attacking anyone" to "ATTEMPTING to attack anyone BUT the champion who cast the spell"
@@KnightsofLastCall Is that a general rule? I'm new to pathfinder, coming from 5e.
@@norandomnumbers no no no, just a house rule I used during our Rise of the Runelords actual play
@@KnightsofLastCall I meant the first part. "The spell is cast ON the enemy, so just like when you cast Slow on an enemy that know that they are Slowed 1 even if they didn't recognize the spell." We've never played like this in 5e, is this how PF2e is generally played? Effects of spells and abilities are secret to the players until they either recognize them, or they figure them out during play. And the way I've run my games for the NPCs is the same. If the NPC has no knowledge of a spell or ability, it won't know its effect until it sees them first hand.
@@norandomnumbersI'm just curious how you expect a player to run a PC who is Slowed 1 if they don't know they are Slowed 1?
But more generally, I'm very transparent with effects and abilities, ESPECIALLY if they are effecting the PCs... but even then.. if the enemy-spellcaster casts Haste on herself and her allies... I'll usually just tell the PCs they are hasted.
I like for people to have information, especially in any game that revolves around tactical combat (i.e. any game played on a grid).
pf2 barbarians remind me of the pillars of eternity barbarian, a total glass cannon that wants to use a polearm and hide behind a "real" tank. does anyone who picks barbarian have that as their class fantasy?
45:00 tens of thousands of gold... nope, never seen that with my characters so far despite levels above 12. Everything piled together from the whole group we sometimes had 4 digits of gold which was melting away fast for few things. And that was with extra money from our DM on top of loot from the Paizo-AP's.
A level 20 character's wealth is 112k! (per player!)
Loving and completely agreeing with why the fighter being so good makes other martials 'disappointing'. Example: I'm a swashbuckler, cool. I need to do THINGS (and not easy things! things I have a decent chance of failure at!) to be at my full potential! .... full potential which is at best on par with a fighter, and possible still under the potential of a fighter... Do I still play non-fighter martials because I buy into the flavor of the classes? Absolutely! Could I play a fighter and just RP the flavor of a different class and be more mechanically effective? .... Probably, and that's a problem.
Infernal!
At 19:30 talking about PF2 being 1/3 split of exploration, combat and social honestly sounds boring as hell to me. I am in the camp that much prefers frequent combats, motivated by story and investigations. A full third for exploration and social each as a constant would be way too much and super uneventful.
@23:40 : I play a level 15 Fighter in EC and it is so boring... Like when you crit it's nice but on low roll nights you do fuck all cause a 1-6/7 often misses on higher level ennemies. Plus as a fighter if you're not criting you ain't doing shit basically, so it's VERY luck dependent and I kinda lowkey hate it.
Gimme a funky martial like thaumaturge or Inventor or **Gasp** even monk anytime over fighter in the future.
I’m not trying to be sassy here; but if your monk or inventor misses a bunch(or rolls low in general(… wouldn’t that be a boring night as well?
@@KnightsofLastCall agreed but they have more flex options that don't require rolling or can expose various actors to mitigate failure, or don't require high rolls like explode, gigavolt, share overdrive for inventor or ki blast, flurry of maneuvers, etc for monks (you can target different defenses thus increasing chance of success, and it's easier than fighters cause you always have free hands).
Rogues have skill arrays, barbarians hurt more on a regular strike (but Crit less often) and have aoe effects (especially dragon) thaumaturges can switch to scroll casting on a bad roll night and their damage mechanic benefits the party through RK etc etc.
Most classes have no roll options or options that make them potent outside of pure hitting but everything the fighter does is always about striking, as it should, but only striking all the time is boring and when it's not what is optimal (like with high AC opponents with resistances) you feel useless.
@@KnightsofLastCall 100% agree about the S class ranking though, I just find them boring.
Also screaming OVERDRIVEUUUU every fight and imagining the bankai music starting in the background makes me giggle.
For Magus, Summoner, and other 2 slot classes, what about two slots for three levels of spells (so at 5th level they have 2 1st, 2 2nd, and 2 3rd, and at 7th they have 2 4th, 2 3rd, and 2 2nd, ...)? would that fix these classes?
It would certainly help .. I don't know exactly what the right answer is.. I think giving the summoner and magus full spell access (i.e. slots at all levels) would make them far too strong.
It is my believe that the S ranks listed are not a full tier better than the A ranks, although they are better. Framing them like this implies that S rank is 'broken' and will warp the campaign, while the classes at that scale matter less than the specifics of what you have chosen and how it relates to what you encounter. A sorcerer is generally better than a wizard, but its not so categorically better that a party is going to notice a significant difference in strength.
Also I incidentally believe that investigator and innovator are under-rated in this. Investigator gets increasing ways to pursue a lead if the GM is being stingy (and I do feel the GM is stingy if they will not let the PC investigator before a room or count plot enemies for an investigated major plot). This combined with good alternate action choices pushes the investigator up to a low C. Inventor likewise is capable of the highest sustained ranged dps, which is a C is you genuinely use ranged combat and a D admittedly if you are always brawling.
I play a investigator / eldrich archer in from level 8 to (currently) 13. I can tell you: the damage is absolute op. Yes, the damage is not constant enough for a direct comparison to our fighter or barbarian, but on a regular base there's coming the "death bolt" from behind dealing around 100-130 damage taking out a foe at once... so much fun!
Will you make a Remake ..err... remake of this video?! =)
Yup... Just waiting for player core 2 to drop
Oh hey, catching up after my crunch for Security+ test, appreciate the shoutout for underappreciated jokes!
though you didn't actually give me HP for them lol
To put into perspective how strong a constant +2 to attack is, against an AC with modifiers equivalent to your attack bonus, you have a 55% chance to hit and 5% chance to crit. This is at the threshold where increasing attack bonus increases crit chance as well. If a regular martial is just at the threshold, their expected damage is 60% of their listed output, while a fighter gets 80% (65% to hit, 15% to crit). That's a relative increase of a third. And this is just the bare minimum of double damage on a crit.
Now, this is at a breakpoint where the benefit is huge. But even if you average out the outcomes against ACs a few points above or below that, the damage increase is like 25%.
But as said, all the other stuff that the fighter gets is so strong that the attack bonus is not the only thing that makes it good. I would argue that a fighter with regular martial attack progression would still be at least B tier.
Solid analysis
Man iron heroes was the best
It was so awesome :D definitely a big inspo for me in terms of what I would love to do with class game design
I do loath metagaming monsters. Ones that only ever Tumble away from Fighters as if they understand my Ranger or Monk don't yet have reactions on their character sheets. Somehow six Intelligence creatures know which feats have been taken by the PC's.
So if I clad my Wizard in Plate armor and equip a shield, then I can count on the GM to have the monsters avoid attacking me (because I look like a Champion now) in favor of other party members? Would the GM direct just an illusion spell of plate armor to cause animals to avoid prioritizing a 'squishy' PC in combat? Easily done. Does that now buy my caster the first three or four rounds of combat free from attack roll?
Or, at that point, would the tactics of the monsters be suddenly, inexplicably be altered? I do loath metagame monster tactics.
It's all within reason.... are you telling me that you and your fellow players don't look at a combat encounter and go "Okay there's the lady in robes... she's the spellcaster let's take her out first?"
Force of Will was great for the era it was released in. A whole lot of other counter spells. You put those Mishra's Factory into play. There wasn't many anti counter spells back then. You counter eveything and grind down your opponents real slow like. Its a narcissist dream deck.
at these levels, rogue > fighter
Well they are both S :)
Barbarian at mid tier gets so many ways to rage without an action essentially negating that weakness. B.
Also speaking about soft fudging or "larger map" when he specifically said that the rank scale is based on average Paizo adventures WHICH HAVE SMALL MAPS. Derek you´re contradicting yourself and being hypocritical. Large maps are not the norm in PF2 even though they should be.
Champions damage is also in scale with other martials at 2d8+7 at 7th level, which is pretty much the norm. Add in any smite abilities or property runes on weapons and Champions damage is still pretty scary not to ignore. B
So if you feel that Barbarian and Champions are B, you are saying they are better than some other classes martial capabilities.... what classes do you think the Barb/Champ outperform mechanically?
@@KnightsofLastCall I feel that the flat damage potential of the barbarian is downplayed a bit too much. Many instincts added up with weapon expertise increase to the flat damage that is 6-10 depending of the instinct. That is pretty much more than an average damage die of a weapon. Fighters do crit more often and have easier time hitting, but without the crits their weapon damage is very average, and a fighter might have a 10% chance to crit an equal or higher level foe.
Barbarians on the other hand have a higher chance to miss, but their average damage per strike is still very devastating (lets say 7th level fury instinct barbarian which is the worst barbarian instinct with a striking greatsword: 2d12+str+specialization+rage damage specialization = around the ballpark of 2d12+12 damage on a succesful strike with no additional feats or runes. A two-handed fighter of same level would do 2d12+6 with higher chance to hit and crit AND no penalty to AC (this is why fighter is S) however -1 AC while difficult is not unsolveable and Barbarians still have average martial hit chances. The 6 extra damage is average for a 1d12 damage dice so barbarians essentially do power attacks on each hit compared to fighter.
All ways fighter is superior of course for the obvious reasons, but the barbarians do not fall much behind with superior HP and base damage. Rage feats makes rage easier to activate without actions and higher levels and allow some decent ways, combined with some restraint in going in first and setting up situations where the barbarian can reliably hit is the way for them to succeed. PF2 is a teamwork game and a class that asks for teamwork should not be penalized so much from it. (Fighter relies less on teamwork being a bit too busted and maybe so less interesting.)
The champion is the opposite of barbarian. It's damage is on par with the fighter, but without the increased hit and crit it lacks behind. The class however indeed gains lots of defensive benefits. The champion gains damage bonuses on its feats more than class features. Smite evil is good persistent damage on evil foes that starts adding up, also encouraging enemies to target the champion like you want them to. Certain oath feats give not so instignificant fixed damage bonuses though those are more campaign dependant (as champions historically have been better in campaigns with lots of fiends and undead)
What I am meaning that champions get tons of ways to reactively and they still hit basically pretty hard just based on how pf2 damage scales even without crits. Add in some feats to add up several damage bonuses, good focus spells and support and then good defence which stays on pace with the monsters, the champion is not yet lacking behind in the difficulty curve. Based on what I've seen them played levels 8-14 is actually when they are at their best because their feats start getting very powerful.
As for the slowness of the Champion? If the maps are bigger than they usually are in Paizo products? You can choose a divine ally steed to give yourself increased reach to support your allies and increased movement.
@@Nyug3r While it is of course subjective, from the GMs side Champions and Barbarians are fantastic for the party as both can tank in a way the Fighter just can't to the same degree, in that I feel like a group of foes can work around a Fighter while the other two can almost never be ignored. You end up in a situation where if you go for them, they can easily stall you long enough for their allies to finish you off, but if you go for their allies instead they either go 'nope' or rip your creatures to shreds.
To boot debuffing both is pretty hard, and it's often even harder to make it stick. And if you happen to get a status penalty like frightened or sickened on a Giant Barbarian after all, well, now they just effectively lost the penalty from their instinct. (Though this is another one of those things where I think the Fighter is overtuned, with Bravery, Juggernaut, _and_ Evasion. Just turn almost any successful save into a crit...).
Another insightful video, but the end bit crapping on the whole d20 genre was weird and off-putting. I get the call for continued evolution of games, but came across as condescending.
"roleplay" killing social characters sucks
I am sorry but i very much dislike one aspect of the ranking. The monster would not do that (because against this party composition it is not 100% efficient in terms of dmg output).
Here you are doing what DM should never do. You are useing your meta knowladge (of the rules and party composition) against the players.
None of the monsters know the rules (meaning they would not scrutinize each and every action to max their dmg output vs the party) and 95% of the monsters probably know nothing about the party, their classes, their strengths and weaknesses. Most monsters will not see lvl X champion with Y amount of AC and conclude that they probably have only 35% chance to hit him. Most monsters will se a guy in an armour that is the closest, sou they will probably hit him anyway.
I am not saying that that all monsters should be dumb, but most monster groups will be far from 100% well oiled battle machines. You have degrees of inteligence and combat tactics with the monsters. I as a DM imagine st. like this:
1. Mindless or animal inteligence. (ooze, undead without leadership, animals) - usually no tactics
2. Below average (ogres, trolls, etc.) - some smart mooves here and there
3. Average or slightly above average (human guards, orc raiders, ...) - use of tactics starts to be consistent
4. Very good inteligence and/or leadership (undead led by lich, vampire, necromancer, group of well trained mercenaries, ...) - good tactics but no or limited knowladge about the party
5. Like above but + the monster group is briefed about the party and prepared for the party in defensive position or there is a traitor NPC who leads the party into a trap - good tactics and knowladge about the party
As a long time DM this sort of got on my nerves. But I want to say that I mostly enjoy your content. Keep it up.