Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous - Survey

Owlcat Games have launched a new survey to find out about the weakest archetype.

The Weakest Archetype Survey

Let's play The Weakest Archetype game!

Follow the link below and vote for the archetype or a prestige class you found the least useful. All names are in English and Russian:

https://forms.gle/VBKYLfMbhhUAo6wt5

All archetypes are in the form, you can multi-select them, there are no other question except optional comments below. So it's a very quick survey.

More information.

The prestige classes are there too, at the bottom.

I'm not sure what they want to do with it, is that for improvement or to reduce the scope? We'll see that in the preparation for the next DLC perhaps. It's not for Starfinder.

PS: To be honest, I've always wondered how they could extract relevant statistics from those surveys, it's definitely not how I'd present them. But I suppose they get some vague information out of that anyway.

Lol, if I counted correctly (probably didn't) there are 186 main classes & sub classes as well as 13 prestige classes.

I wonder how many responses are neccesary in order to get a reasonable statistical idea about the weakest of that lot.

It's a little funny, in WotR I found myself practically overwhelmed by all the choices available. There were just too many interesting/tempting things to choose from in the game.

In contrast, in the rpgs I have played since, I usually feel rather underwhelmed by the classes/feats/skills/abilities at hand.

Once again, I return to BG & IWD, I think those games had roughly the right amount of stuff to choose from (at least for my tastes). Not too much, not too little.

I'm looking forward to playing this when it's in a less buggy state.

Should be reasonably close to what I consider playable.

Originally Posted by Feist
Lol, if I counted correctly (probably didn't) there are 186 main classes & sub classes as well as 13 prestige classes.

I wonder how many responses are neccesary in order to get a reasonable statistical idea about the weakest of that lot.

Insane isn't it? I'm overwhelmed by the choice every time I create a new character.

They should have organized the choice with a simple 'yes'/'no' for each subclass instead of just a 'yes', to know which answers were relevant and worth including in the stats. I haven't filled anything in, since I only tested one or maybe two archetypes in a few categories, and this would bias the results.

Or they're only interested in the number of checked inputs for each archetype, but it doesn't make any sense (besides, the "they are all fine" would be unnecessary).

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
I'm looking forward to playing this when it's in a less buggy state.

Should be reasonably close to what I consider playable.

It's been stable for a while now, I think you don't need to wait any longer.

I've been playing this since September and am now 80+ hours in. The stability has improved a lot over the course of that time. I actually think the current build is pretty stable as well. I do think some things could be better telegraphed. It took me awhile to realize when my mounts were asleep or when I was got in a spectral web.

Stability wasn't really my issue, it was a TON of bugs related to turn-based combat and downright terrible performance.

Based on the patch notes that are still coming out - as well as comments from many users on Steam forums, there's still a way to go before certain build-related issues and what not are fixed.

I'll hold off for a few months - and that's not a problem, because I'll need a LARGE chunk of free time for this one

I'm curious about the result.

I thought the number of options could be a strength and a weakness to a degree. Having so many choices in character creation was cool, but so many of the prestige classes or other options were so specific that you'd have to design your character starting from scratch with the plan to go that route. Most of the options were not appropriate for any of your companions. I felt like this was an area where adhering too closely to the original rules might have hurt a bit. If I did a different playthrough I could make my main character radically different, which would be very cool. But my companions would mostly be the same.

It also made loot a little annoying. They had make sure treasure dropped to support every random obscure class you could possibly play. They also made sure to give you the option to specialize in any number of exotic weapons with barely meaningful differences between them, and then had to support those with loot drops too. So it meant when I found a new hidden epic magic item somewhere after a quest I was rarely excited about it, because I knew there was a 90% chance that it was specialized for some obscure class or build I wasn't playing.

With all that said, still my GOTY.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
Stability wasn't really my issue, it was a TON of bugs related to turn-based combat and downright terrible performance.

Based on the patch notes that are still coming out - as well as comments from many users on Steam forums, there's still a way to go before certain build-related issues and what not are fixed.

I'll hold off for a few months - and that's not a problem, because I'll need a LARGE chunk of free time for this one

When I said stable, that's what I meant, a release that doesn't need regular updates to fix important issues. There will always be a few minor ones here and there like in any piece of software of that magnitude (do I sound resigned? maybe I do ).

I do have performance issues but there's nothing for it, it's Unity so I have to accept that my RTX 3070 runs at 50% in the main menu. Lowering the graphics settings improves it a little bit and makes it quite acceptable; it's just sad to have to do that with such a GPU.

Turn-based combat has been their weak point since they introduced it (to my knowledge, it's not fixed yet in Kingmaker). Last time I tried in December, I didn't have any problem though.

Originally Posted by Redglyph
When I said stable, that's what I meant, a release that doesn't need regular updates to fix important issues. There will always be a few minor ones here and there like in any piece of software of that magnitude (do I sound resigned? maybe I do ).

I do have performance issues but there's nothing for it, it's Unity so I have to accept that my RTX 3070 runs at 50% in the main menu. Lowering the graphics settings improves it a little bit and makes it quite acceptable; it's just sad to have to do that with such a GPU.

Turn-based combat has been their weak point since they introduced it (to my knowledge, it's not fixed yet in Kingmaker). Last time I tried in December, I didn't have any problem though.

Resigned? No, probably just a guy with different tolerance levels and preferences

As for performance, it's already quite a bit better than it was at launch. I tried a build a month or so ago - and it was significantly faster.

Unity isn't exactly a powerhouse engine, that's true, but - then again - this type of game shouldn't require a powerhouse engine, especially not during turn-based combat.

Ironically, the game runs significantly worse in TB mode - or at least it did at launch. That's a pretty impressive feat

Kingmaker was a lot faster, even at launch. I concede that Wrath is a better looking game - but I honestly don't think it's that significant.

Launch performance was truly, truly terrible.

To me, that's very important - as I have a very low tolerance for sluggish performance.

Now, as for other important things - I actually bought this game based on the word of several critics who all proclaimed that the game only had minor issues - and they essentially didn't experience anything game-breaking or serious.

Even so, it was only a few weeks post-release that it was made quite plain that respeccing characters could very easily lead to entirely broken quest-lines or playthroughs.

I read quite a few stories about that from other players - which is ultimately what told me to hold off for a while yet.

I'm in no real hurry to play it - but I'm glad to hear it's stable and won't need updates.

I'm also curious what they are after - I mean, WotR is a massive game with easily over 100 hours gameplay so I assume most people finished it only once or twice. It would have been better if they had Beneath the Stolen Lands like DLC (where you level up much quicker so you can test out builds more efficiently) out first before doing surveys like this.

It'd be really nice if OwlCat released campaign creation software for the community to create more stories to play through. Hopefully there'll be a few official expansions at least. As above, an in game levelling module would also be welcome to try builds out. To state the obvious, the vast number of character building options and community content keeps NWN alive 20 years after release, I'd like it if these Pathfinder games could see some of that longevity.

Originally Posted by Feist
Lol, if I counted correctly (probably didn't) there are 186 main classes & sub classes as well as 13 prestige classes.

I got more than 186

I counted 25 different classes x (6 archetypes + 1 base) = 175
+ 13 prestige classes
=188 all up

I think I may not be counting the race specific archetypes either, so there may be more

I too was overwhelmed by all of the choices. It wasn't a bad thing, though, as I just chose one which I wanted to play and then went with the flow of what I figured would be good builds for the companions.

And yet there are people who claim the game doesn't have enough archetypes/prestige classes

I didn't have any performance issues and Ive only got a 1070 in a 10 year old PC.

Maybe it just runs better on Windows 7?

I'm guessing what they will do with the results depends on what they find. If the classes found really are weaker, they should buff them up a little or put a note on them saying they are harder classes to win with. It could also be that the classes aren't weaker but are simply harder to figure out - so maybe just a few notes in the skills would fix that, or maybe a "how to be a good whatever-seems-weak" video would do it.

SO many classes! I thought Rolemaster was the ultimate there, but it only has 140.

I went to do it but couldn't. To really know what the weakest is for each you need to try them all within that group. I barely touched any of them and only played a handful well enough to make any decision. So I really don't know if what I chose was weaker than others unless I played each one at least to a decent enough level to really know. So it was "don't know" for all of them so decided not to submit.

Game itself runs fine for me in regards to stability on windows 10.