|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
That's fair. I certainly hope they do. I'd like to see what insight they have from the playtest.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Kineticist and medium post-mortems will go up in their associated threads next week, after the design team has a post-playtest meeting. I could put up my thoughts today, but at the advice of playtesters who voted in the kineticist thread, I will wait in case things change after the meeting.
Can we expect a post mortem post for all of the classes?
Yeah I'm trying REALLY hard to be optimistic about OA, especially since A) I love psionics and B) I love the occult. It just feels like the Kineticist and Medium got the most out of this playtest, while the other classes were afterthoughts. I ended up losing interest in the playtest because I didn't really see a lot of feedback in the other topics like we saw with the Kineticist.
I really hope there are a lot of updates soon on the state of the classes, like we got with the ACG (but sooner). There really should have been a second round. I don't feel comfortable with only one round of playtesting, especially one that was only for a month.
I'm very worried about the classes that aren't the Kineticist or Medium. Those two got a great deal of dev comments compared to the other ones. In particular, I fear the Psychic and Spiritualist will suffer the most. Psychic was very bland and boring and had nothing that made it pop with me. Spiritualist was weak and seemed like they were too worried about making a Summoner 2.0 to give it anything cool and unique. With the lack of dev responses for those two class, I fear they will be left to mediocrity.
There will have to be a lot done to the Occult classes to make them unique and fun. Only the Kineticist, Medium, and Occultist seemed to fit that. The other classes just felt boring and uncompelling. I hope that the playtest data will reflect this and we can give the classes (especially the Psychic and Spiritualist) more of a creative oomph. As it stands, though , without some kind of post-playtest summary for each class, I'm not really holding my breath for good mechanics. The fluff, however, should be awesome and probably the main reason I would get a copy of OA.
Home made kale chips are easy to make, delicious, and good for you.
Like most health foods, kale gets a bad rap because people assume it's only for pretentious hipsters. But honestly, it's delicious and good for you to boot. You can trust me. I'm no hipster, I'm a fat Latino chef-in-training :D
Also, lemme dig through my culinary repertoire and post some stuff I like to make. I've got my Culinary Foundations textbook with some good dip recipes.
Serve this with corn tortillas, blue corn tortillas (my favorite), or other chips. S!+*'s pretty easy and works well. The garnish and lumpiness of the guacamole gives it a rustic look, helps with the looks of the dip (so it looks like a salsa rather than green paste), and the mouth-feel of the crunch is awesome. Enjoy.
Might post a chowder recipe next. Or shrimp and grits, my personal hometown favorite. Although currently I'm enjoying Squid n grits more :)
So I was recently inspired by one of SKR's blogs about replacing Touch attacks in his new RPG. It got me thinking about how I am not really a big fan of Touch Attacks or Touch AC. So I began musing a bit on how to replace it for casters and gunslingers.
So I turned to HERO a bit, which has two options for attacking. A physical attack and a mental (or magical) attack. So I got to thinking, maybe that would be a good way to model that.
I was thinking that a spell version of BAB would be useful, using the caster level plus casting stat and comparing it to the creature's AC. At first glance, it doesn't seem unbalancing, though obviously without some mathematical theorycrafting and playtesting, it is difficult to tell. Another idea I had was perhaps BAB + spell level of spell+ casting stat. I think I prefer the former, but I'd love to see what you guys think of both.
Sounds like what you are describing is less monotheism and more like monolatrism, wherein a worshiper reveres one god exclusively, acknowledges the existence of other gods, but believes that they are not worthy of worship and adoration. Nothing wrong with that, as I have that same concept in my game setting. Like Xenre the Vague, it's perfectly fine for the gods to have portfolios beyond the five that are usually in Pathfinder. In my setting, I have a religion that worships a one-true god, while the other "gods" are merely simulacra created by a Gnostic-like demiurge being. I gave that one true god all non-evil domains and it's worked out fine.
It was less for PR and more in response to the need for psychic magic to be rare, powerful, and unbalanced. And there's really no reason to add PR in the game when, by flavor, psychic magic is magic and has existed in Paizo's setting since the beginning as magic. If you read any of James Jacob's posts about psionics, he has said countless times that they will be a form of magic, like arcane and divine. And I agree with him. I don't need it to be rare and more mystical and better than arcane and divine magic. I don't need my psionics to be superior than the other two. I'm fine with it being common in the world, perhaps moreso in certain settings over other, but more common nonetheless. For me, psionics has always been and always will be magic. And I like the sources they are using for psychic magic, with Seven Rays of God, the Subtle Bodies, and late 19th/early 20th mysticism as its main sources of inspiration.
Answer me this. Why should psychic magic be rare and unbalanced? What makes psionics not magic?
If you want psionics, then you can use DSP's version without the magic transparency. It already exists there, right for the taking. But going out of one's way to make psionics completely different from other magic just for the sake of making it different feels like poor game design and frankly, a waste of development time that could be used on more important aspects of the playtest.
Agreed. This comes a bit too close to the realm of "super special snowflake" territory for my tastes.
Psychic shouldn't be magic according to you, not the rest of us psionics fans. Paizo is going with a different take where psychic powers are magic. They are using a classic approach via mysticism, ki and chakra, and esotericism as the sources, rather than the Psionics. They have already said that the classes in Occult Adventures will be magic and honestly, from a game design point of view, it makes sense to have the three big magics having similar mechanics that are balanced with each other. The idea that psionics should be more powerful, rare, and break SR is something I can't get behind. You may want psychics to be rare, but what about those that want a more balanced quantity of casters to psychics, or simple more psionics than mages and priests? We can't exactly do that because psychics have been made more unbalancing and clearly the better choice. That's why I'm more for psychics being balanced with the other options in Pathfinder. Making it overpowered but rare is poor game design.
Psionics is magic, just a magic of the mind, the several subtle bodies, and other esoteric things (ki, chakra, prana, the ethereal plane). This is made to appeal to a broader audience while allowing a place for DSP's psionics. Your version is too niche, unbalanced, and poor game design honestly. I'd prefer Paizo stick with what they are doing and allow DMs to decide what to do about SR.
Arcane is magic of reality
The former two have spell resistance, despite their different sources. I don't see why Psychic magic has to have a special resistance when Divine magic doesn't. There isn't a Faith Resistance stat, so I don't see the reason why there should be a Psychic Resistance stat. I'm a fan of psionics, but I don't see any need for it to be different than Arcane and Divine magic, nor do I feel it should be superior to Arcane or Divine magic.
I think the disconnect here is you are seeing this Psychic magic as not spells, but the intent that Paizo has for Occult Adventures is that these psychic abilities are spells. At this point, it is a matter of taste and something that isn't going to be changed in the playtest. If you are looking for something different, there is still DSP's Psionics which can certain fit the bill for what you are looking for.
Logan Bonner wrote:
That's a shame to hear. Was hoping for some more unique options to make the psychic feel like its own class rather than a sorcerer archetype.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Yeah, luckily someone else is playing a Psychic. So I'll get to figure out if shaken is bad news bears or not for the occult classes.
I gotta agree with the sorcerer comment. Compared to the other classes presented, the psychic feels like it needs something more. Something that really makes it stand out. Right now, it feels like a sorcerer archetype with a phrenic pool. I'm not sure what it needs exactly, but something to make it interesting. Right now, it's kind of bland.
Also not a lot of dev commenting on this one compared to the other topics. Kind of has me worried about the Psychic here.
That's honestly too big of a change for the playtest and would make the kineticist less unique in their abilities. The psychic classes were stated in the beginning to be Vancian casters and replacing them completely would be way too much work that isn't worth it honestly. The Kineticist is the exception to the vancian rule that makes it unique. That said, every class sans the Psychic all have special abilities like the Hexes that help make them unique.
The Kineticist is the only new class that doesn't have classic spellcasting. Paizo has said many times that the psychic classes they use will be using Vancian spell casting, not Powerpoints. That's why the Psychic, Occultist, and everyone else all have spell casting abilities and will continue to have them. The Kineticist is really the only exception and that's what make it unique and the exception rather than the rule.
I could see joy and kindness, especially if the phantom is a parent, a sibling, or a lover.
For SoS spells, they won't go up as much since there won't be the Headbands, but there are still feats to increase saves. Won't be nearly as bad, at least, so you may not need the save boosting baked into leveling. Or at least, not as much.
I actually think it would be easier to run a no-magic game than a low magic game, since the most you would have to do is watch what you throw at players. Though obviously, most of the bestiary would be useless and you'd probably have to use monsters with class levels and focus the higher levels on leading battles and wars. Also, I'd make Pathfinder Unchained's Manuever Pool available so martial combat would be more fun. And I'd use Ultimate Campaign's Downtime System to give players more rewards and such. I do plan on running a no magic campaign that ends with the players unlocking magic at the end of the no magic run. I think it would be fun to try.
the secret fire wrote:
This reason is why for low-to-no magic games, even with no magic weapons, I still allow magic armor (refluffed as just better armor) and give all character the bonus to saves as they level.
The ability for kineticist to control creatures with same elemental subtype (or just elementals specifically) of there element would be cool. So would Aether kineticist get incorporeal creatures instead or creatures from the ethereal, or astral planes, or something else?
That was my thinking, yes. My only worry is that incorporeal creature aren't exactly a dime a dozen compared to the other elements, so it might be less worth it. I was thinking they could instead have a physical puppeteering ability like dominate monster but a Fort save. Or something similar.
Pretty much. I just think that the ability to turn and even dominate a creature made of your element would make sense and be flavorful. Though I'd imagine for the pyro, it would get weird turning devils. But I think it's an ability that would add utility and help a bit when a kineticist is met with their own element. So you don't have the problems of a pyro fighting devils, or a winter witch being useless in Reign of Winter.
Aether probably would feel a bit shoehorned, so you could give them a puppeteering ability. Common in fiction and would be cool.
This got me thinking that there could be a wild talent that allows the kineticist to attempt to turn or even dominate a create that has the subtype of it's element. So a pyrokinetic could banish a fire elemental or even try and dominate it. And so on. Would be interesting. Aether could be used on incorporeal or ethereal creatures.
Messing up psychic mages is fine, but we just think that in it's current iteration, it's too harsh. Arcane and divine casters don't have this same all-or-nothing issue when it comes to concentration checks. Only things I can think of are golems (which is much more rare than the Shaken condition) and becoming an ex-divine caster (which is still preventable by the PC).
I think it's fine to have forced emotions screw with the psychic mage. But being crippled by one of the most common effects in the game is too much. It's just weird to be shaken and have your only options be "run, drink potion, or use metamagiced spell that's essentially a feat tax". It's only the Shaken condition after all. I could see it forcing a concentration check, or extending the casting time, or something less harsh than "You can't cast the majority of your spells."
Mark Seifter wrote:
@Emotion components, you could carry around a cheap 50 gp potion of remove fear or rely on getaway spells like dimension door to remaneuver. Remember, if it would have a somatic component, it has an emotion component, so you can cast those getaway no-somatic spells to reposition for better tactical position. The good thing that way is that most forms of easy and reliable access to shaken work in a 30 foot range, so if you get farther than that, you're less likely to be in trouble.
I don't really like the idea of being required to have remove fear on you just so you don't get shut down by being shaken.
Like I said, the idea that emotional status effects are detrimental to psychics are fine. But I think shutting down the majority of their spells because they are only shaken is a very harsh punishment. I like giving PCs (and NPCs) a way to try and overcome issues like this and this style of game design really doesn't sit well with me.
I'm not saying you should remove this, but I really honestly think it could be toned down a little bit. If I can playtest this on the weekend, I'll try to.