A Quick Recap of Discussion Around Unstable

(You can skip this if you've heard any of it before)

The base functionality of Unstable is now a DC 15 flat check (that is, you succeed 30% of the time). Before errata, it was a DC 17 check (that is, a 20% chance). If you fail the check, you cannot use further Unstable actions until you spend 10 minutes to refocus fix your innovation. If you Critically Fail (a 25% chance, down from 35% pre-errata), you also take Fire damage equal to your level. There is no benefit to rolling a natural 20, the only way to critically succeed.

Many agree that Unstable is, essentially, an Inventor's Focus Points with serial numbers filed off - indeed, Focus Points getting buffed with the Remaster (allowing characters to regain FP to full instead of only 1) is generally cited as a major contributing reason Unstable's DC got lowered. The main difference is that Focus Points are reliable (you always know exactly how many Focus Spells you can cast), limited (you can only have 3 FP maximum), and magical, whereas Unstable actions are luck-based (you can use them infinitely if you're lucky on the flat check), all-or-nothing, and technological. There's also the flavor aspect - Unstable is intended to mimic moments like "Crossing the streams" in Ghostbusters, where you ignore safe limits because it's better than the alternative.

However, Unstable's design tends to at least feel like it has a few notable flaws. First, people are quick to point out that you aren't incentivized to take multiple Unstable actions like you are with Focus Spells, because failing the flat check on any Unstable action locks you out of all further Unstable actions. The DC is also removed from any scaling - a level 1 Inventor who has just cobbled together their innovation and a level 20 Inventor who can supercharge their entire party with Overdrive both have an equal chance to blow themselves up with their Unstable actions. In my opinion, they also tend to not really reach the breakpoint of power where it feels narratively exciting to risk an Unstable action in the context of these downsides.

Of course, with the PF2E community being who we are, it's super common to suggest homebrew alternatives to how Unstable works.

Common Fixes

• Each Unstable action only locks itself out on a failure.

This is an extremely simple fix targeting the complaint that players aren't incentivized to take multiple Unstable actions. I haven't seen this one as much since the DC got lowered, but I'm still curious about experiences with it. Is it too easy to spam Unstable actions with the lower DC? Did it work well with the higher DC?

• Unstable DC changes based on how many actions you have

Probably the other most common fix proposed, usually with a significant statistical analysis of exactly which DC curve is best. Essentially, the DC starts at 15/17, and when you take another Unstable action, it lowers by ~4. Every time you succeed at an Unstable action, the DC raises by the same amount until you perform maintenance. This provides a much closer analogue to Focus Points. Also, I've seen some suggestions where on a Critical Success, the DC doesn't raise, because crits should feel good, but that could theoretically lead to infinite Unstable actions at higher levels - which may be something you want to enable in your game or not!

• Change the flat check to some kind of scaling check, usually Crafting

This one isn't as common as others, but it is one I do like. Requiring a Crafting check of somewhere in the range of level +20~25 means that Inventors can actually get better at Unstable actions as they level up. A DC of level +25 means a level 1 Inventor (+7 Crafting) needs a 19 to hit DC 26, while a level 20 Inventor (+34-38 Crafting depending on Apex and item bonuses) needs a 7-11 to hit DC 45; more experienced Inventors know their innovations better and can use them more safely.

• Make Feats that interact with Unstable so the player can choose to build around it.

You could add a benefit to failing, or add extra safety or risk to Unstable actions, or just making things more consistent. You could make failing or crit failing even more spectacular and power up Unstable that way. You could give disposable gadgets to copy Unstable actions once per day, treating them like leveled spells. You could let someone reject a failure by giving up the action.

The question in the title

If you've used an alternate Unstable rule, how did it work out? Was it something I didn't list? Did it improve the experience of playing an Inventor (a class that I think absolutely oozes flavor while also not being mechanically appetizing enough)?

Frankly, Inventor is PF2E's first foray into original classes, uncoupled from any 1E designs - and really one of only TWO classes that fits that description. A class focused around items you design and empower, using special actions to mimic combat roles usually relegated to casters. I absolutely love the idea of it. I also don't enjoy the feeling of it, and a ton of its design space has been snatched by the second PF2E original class, the Exemplar (though I love the flow of Exemplar!). It's a class that could absolutely use some love, and I was considering putting together homebrew to capture the excitement I felt when I first read the playtest announcement. To that end, I wanted to know gather opinions about possible changes.

Thanks in advance for any feedback!