在PC2情报出来以后，悬着的心终于还是死了，我对武僧这个职业又多了一分敬畏。
这段时间，P子论坛和红迪上有很多关于法师的讨论，主要源于设计师Michael Sayre去年年末关于法师的设计理念，其中讨论度最高的除了倒数第二段和“默认法师全表无限法术位无限准备”类似的言论以外，就是最后一段，“如果你觉得法师不好，那是你应该改变对法师的看法。很多人想玩的法师其实是御能。”
最近，这段发表又被拎了出来，关于画风，关于能力，关于法师的各种，讨论了好几个大帖子，共计千来条回复
当我看完武僧的情报以后，我发现这些问题可以批量替换成武僧，毫无违和——只不过武僧不像法师那样有代表性，没什么遮羞布罢了。
劇透 - 设计师发表 by Michael Sayre:
An interesting anecdote from PF1 that has some bearing on how #Pathfinder2E came to be what it is:
Once upon a time, PF1 introduced a class called the arcanist. The arcanist was regarded by many to be a very strong class. The thing is, it actually wasn't.
For a player with even a modicum of system mastery, the arcanist was strictly worse than either of the classes who informed its design, the wizard and the sorcerer. The sorcerer had significantly more spells to throw around, and the wizard had both a faster spell progression and more versatility in its ability to prepare for a wide array of encounters. Both classes were strictly better than the arcanist if you knew PF1 well enough to play them to their potential.
What the arcanist had going for it was that it was extremely forgiving. It didn't require anywhere near the same level of system mastery to excel. You could make a lot more mistakes, both in building it and while playing, and still feel powerful. You could adjust your plans a lot more easily on the fly if you hadn't done a very good job planning in advance. The class's ability to elevate the player rather than requiring the player to elevate the class made it quite popular and created the general impression that it was very strong.
It was also just more fun to play, with bespoke abilities and little design flourishes that at least filled up the action economy and gave you ways to feel valuable, even if the core chassis was weaker and less able to reach the highest performance levels.
In many TTRPGs and TTRPG communities, the options that are considered "strongest" are often actually the options that are simplest. Even if a spellcaster in a game like PF1 or PF2 is actually capable of handling significantly more types and kinds of challenges more effectively, achieving that can be a difficult feat. A class that simply has the raw power to do a basic function well with a minimal amount of technical skill applied, like the fighter, will generally feel more powerful because a wider array of players can more easily access and exploit that power.
This can be compounded when you have goals that require complicating solutions. PF2 has goals of depth, customization, and balance. Compared to other games, PF1 sacrificed balance in favor of depth and customization, and 5E forgoes depth and limits customization. In attempting to hit all three goals, PF2 sets a very high and difficult bar for itself. This is further complicated by the fact that PF2 attempts to emulate the spellcasters of traditional TTRPG gaming, with tropes of deep possibility within every single character.
It's been many years and editions of multiple games since things that were actually balance points in older editions were true of d20 spellcasters. D20 TTRPG wizards, generally, have a humongous breadth of spells available to every single individual spellcaster, and their only cohesive theme is "magic". They are expected to be able to do almost anything (except heal), and even "specialists" in most fantasy TTRPGs of the last couple decades are really generalists with an extra bit of flavor and flair in the form of an extra spell slot or ability dedicated to a particular theme.
So bringing it back to balance and customization: if a character has the potential to do anything and a goal of your game is balance, it must be assumed that the character will do all those things they're capable of. Since a wizard very much can have a spell for every situation that targets every possible defense, the game has to assume they do, otherwise you cannot meet the goal of balance. Customization, on the other side, demands that the player be allowed to make other choices and not prepare to the degree that the game assumes they must, which creates striations in the player base where classes are interpreted based on a given person's preferences and ability/desire to engage with the meta of the game. It's ultimately not possible to have the same class provide both endless possibilities and a balanced experience without assuming that those possibilities are capitalized on.
So if you want the fantasy of a wizard, and want a balanced game, but also don't want to have the game force you into having to use particular strategies to succeed, how do you square the circle? I suspect the best answer is "change your idea of what the wizard must be." D20 fantasy TTRPG wizards are heavily influenced by the dominating presence of D&D and, to a significantly lesser degree, the works of Jack Vance. But Vance hasn't been a particularly popular fantasy author for several generations now, and many popular fantasy wizards don't have massively diverse bags of tricks and fire and forget spells. They often have a smaller bag of focused abilities that they get increasingly competent with, with maybe some expansions into specific new themes and abilities as they grow in power. The PF2 kineticist is an example of how limiting the theme and degree of customization of a character can lead to a more overall satisfying and accessible play experience. Modernizing the idea of what a wizard is and can do, and rebuilding to that spec, could make the class more satisfying to those who find it inaccessible.
Of course, the other side of that equation is that a notable number of people like the wizard exactly as the current trope presents it, a fact that's further complicated by people's tendency to want a specific name on the tin for their character. A kineticist isn't a satisfying "elemental wizard" to some people simply because it isn't called a wizard, and that speaks to psychology in a way that you often can't design around. You can create the field of options to give everyone what they want, but it does require drawing lines in places where some people will just never want to see the line, and that's difficult to do anything about without revisiting your core assumptions regarding balance, depth, and customization.
毫无疑问，武僧是个菜刀职业，他注定要和战贼帕软并驱争先，但是他古怪的属性值需求和奇特的职业能力又令他首鼠两端。夸耀着徒手能力，可是徒手能力却并不优越——你连传奇熟练都没有，我看你还不如战士兼职武道家会打拳。转而宣扬机动性和防御能力，可是先不说机动性本身在地城环境就非常微妙，而且你也不像魔战那样动作卡到移动都不够；无甲本身就比重甲少AC，少专精，你要跟神卫这种比的话还得拿盾牌才能不被甩开，但是武僧拿盾牌这件事本身就很难接受。
最后，机动性和防御力这两个只能说是加分项，并不能算是职业的主干能力——神卫有着高强的控制和反应惩罚，魔战和游荡者则以高输出见长，但武僧，武僧输出并无特别，用混合战技和饿狼拖拽打击倒算是仅有的优点，却也不是不可或缺，也不是没有替代。
武僧有着大量的架势专长，但从上面和实践我们就不难看出，武僧实际上有优势的架势有且仅有饿狼架势，而饿狼架势是个一级架势。那些高级架势，聚能架势，几乎没有一个可以与之媲美。站在专长表里的意义就是存在意义，或者在你需求什么画风的时候忽然出现，让你挥泪自降强度。此外还有许多诸如八门金锁，游墙功，身如落叶这样武僧系能力，在技能专长和时尚消耗品兴旺发达的当下显得不合时宜。
还有气法术，可堪一用的气法术可能也就斗气击，运气化形和真气波，但是只要你考虑你那落于人后的气法术DC，你就会发现可能到最后还得是斗气击。
但，斗气击，作为一个聚能，它真的厉害吗？至于运气化形，18级给你这点数据，只能说聊胜于无。
那么武僧的定位到底是什么？我觉得有个比喻很适合现在，或者说以前的武僧，就像是秋后的蚊子，时不时叮你一口，你打它是又累又麻烦。但它并不会造成真正的威胁，打死它也并非难事。
二，武僧的画风 在最开头我说了御能和法师之间的事情，加上第一段，我想大概都能开始思考“御能是不是更好的，更符合人们想象的武僧”了吧？
武僧以前可以说能够一下跳到房顶，可以爬墙，可以玩特技，但是这部分能力早就被技能专长代替了，一个战士可能比武僧更能跳，而御能的“风行”玩意儿更是只多不少。
当武道家诞生时，本就已经很幽默的徒手能力也变得更加着急，无论什么职业都能迅速成为格斗大师，八臂拳催心掌铁流云个个好手，还有饿狼架势饿狼拖拽这些精华专长都包含在内，而且你只需要9级成为人类就能在10级获得疾风连击。如果不是后来出了心能，恐怕这也会成为武僧的一大辱点。
我在入坑的时候就有看到段子，一个野蛮人，无武装的熟练是一样的，豁免熟练也差不多是一样的，一点AC有缺，但是输出却是武僧尾灯都看不见的级别——是故野蛮人为更好的武僧。
而后是气法术，聚能法术本来非常契合武僧在DND和PF前朝中“气点”的设计，但是在其他职业喜提各种超级聚能的时候，武僧的聚能却仿佛停留在石器时代。而如果你不拘泥于聚能的设计，只从画风来看——那更是被真施法者和御能完全覆盖。无论是气功波，增益，还是武侠电影中的花哨特效，武僧均是复现困难。在你艰难使用真气波的时候，隔壁术士除了模型更好的龙息以外，还有各种火球和光流，两相对比更觉卑微。
饶是如此，你也可以说术士不擅近战，只要六柱子一天没转正，你就仍然有优越之处——然后御能从天而降。这个职业不仅有着远近兼顾的能力，还有真正的“气功”，可以肆意生成各种夸张特效和华丽AOE，如果你原本理想的武僧就是降世神通的角色，或者是什么练气修士，那似乎更没有了选择武僧的理由。
三，武僧的更新 PC2对武僧的更新，我列出来大概有36条，基本都是改名或者整合。能算得上主要更新的，也就是搏击专攻这个本就该进入主职业的能力成为了职业能力。而修道武器专家也总算是整合了祖传武艺。
天眼通直接被删除了，是不是担心会影响到施法职业的发挥？
之后，他们新增了几个专长，比如进阶修道武器——你可以选择进阶武僧武器，但进阶武僧武器有且仅有一把钩剑，还是个成对武器，武僧需要成对武器吗？
以及战斗开始时可以用F进入架势了，而不用吃一个R，啊，真是太贴心了。
最后是几个已经渲染过的“大招”，20级的神龙裂破，20级的出神入化，20级的真气自如，18级的空灵体重做，理绝众相。
首先是理绝众相，它跟运气化形冲突，效果是2A给自己贴隐形，然后以只能穿透2尺厚事物为代价换来了可以正常攻击的能力，速度变为一半，获得等级相同的物理抗力，然后可以凌空而行。
但见第一部分，我实在想不通在18级还要给菜刀强化“生存”的意义，而且说是无相返虚，效果却只不过是物理抗力和隐形？
而后是真气自如，它能让你2A施展的真气法术变成1A，但你的真气法术本就不多，有意义的更少，能实际应用的也就美杜莎之怒（失能），渗透劲（失能）和上面的理绝众相，仍然参见第一部分，它根本不具备一个“大招”的价值。
接着是出神入化，当你每轮第一次切换架势的时候可以刷新20点临时生命值，为切而切。
最后是重量级，神龙裂破。3A大招，使用时你必须已经擒抱或束缚住一个敌人，所以至少需要两轮打出。你能将他丢往空中20尺然后打一拳，重复两次，也就是最多60尺，打3拳，然后落地，再直接造成一拳的伤害与合计30点的坠落伤害，听起来3A打4拳外带30点固伤似乎也够格了？如果不和隔壁战士游侠对比的话？
啊，这三拳是要吃满MAP的，也就是第一拳-0，第二拳-4，第三拳-8，如果有一拳没中，那么你和对方都会立刻滑稽地坠落，你也一起摔成雅木茶。
四，总结 洋人很喜欢说class identity，我也很同意这个概念。P子非常热衷于切割出“细分画风”，把一些很酷炫的概念单独切出来，比如御能，这最后必然，也的确导致了“被切分”的那个职业反而形象空虚，就如同这帖子一开始时的法师那般。你想要个擅长玩元素魔法的？你想要个擅长控制自然魔力的？擅长轰火球的？擅长随时随地制造出魔法效应解决问题的？玩御能，而不是玩法师。
如果这是你想玩的画风，那当然是好事，你终于可以摆脱原先法师那无聊的法术位机制，不用再选出一些你不想要的法术了，你可以尽情挥洒自己惠惠传人的才能了。但如果被切分的那个职业没有了数值之美，最后就会变得，“无聊”。
换成武僧也是一样的，但武僧本来就不是什么很具备代表性的职业，它的“核心特征”本就脆弱，运动能力，徒手能力，无甲防御，气法——也已经很难满足现在大家对于“武僧”这个概念的需求了。
你也许会想着健次郎，龙珠悟空，空条承太郎，成龙，李小龙，刘康，雷电，隆，肯，豪鬼这些代表形象——但是武僧这种“非常具有机动性，擅长一击脱离”的定位其实很难满足，因为没有数值之美，给人的感觉就是一直在不断地刮痧。而且打法上也并不够“豪迈”，更不要说，成为一个战士或游荡者再兼职武道家，或者成为御能反而更能满足对应角色的“细分画风”。
悲观地说，武僧这个职业现在最大的意义就是其名字，MONK。
TV书出来的时候，我非常热情地去看里头提供了什么可以让我在团里使用的炫酷武器，而当我找到野太刀的时候却感觉非常难受。因为它的模型实在是太烂了，还是个进阶武器——但它叫野太刀。
一个使用野太刀战斗的角色，以前都是套皮巨剑，现在真的来了一把“正版野太刀”，可为了它必须得自降很多强度，因为它是“正版”。
一种，很难说出话的感觉。
另外怎么术士神卫还在加强啊？？真就PF2马太效应？？
