|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Elghinn Lightbringer wrote:
Thats cool, I like it.
For the most part I agree with your list Elghinn. I would pull superstitious because we already have an exploit that bolsters the bad save and if you were to stack the effects, well you would only have to worry about no save spells.
@force armor: So we are moving this away from spells as a separate feature and adding exploits to further enhance it? I agree that sacrificing spells to power up your armor should last longer. The initial design functioned exactly as mage armor so the exploit lasted as long as the spell in my head. If the adept gets hours of mage armor based on level and gets to split it up into 10 minute increments, then it should work out to the same really.
A starting armor bonus of 2 is pretty low though, do you think this might make for survivability issues early?
Also, the wording is weird, sounds as if you both can and cannot benefit from bracers of armor.
I think that a new spell list would be great, but I also think its a lot of work. :)
Here is another control exploit I was thinking about. I am not sold on the specific numbers, but I think its a cool idea.
Spectral Grasp(su): As a swift action, the adept may consume a spell to pull a creature towards his waiting blade. The adept manifest a ghostly hand with a special size modifier equal to twice the spell level and a strength modifier equal to the adepts intelligence modifier. The hand grasps the creature with a grapple check which, upon success, forces the creature to move adjacent to the adept over the shortest amount of distance.
The above example needs to have the wording fixed to adjust for range, which is probably best at short (25+5 per 2 caster levels?) but the basic idea behind this kind of area control mechanism is pretty clear. The combat exploit wouldn't work a lot of the time on large enemies for a strength or dexterity build, but the intelligence build would enjoy more success without being able to capitalize the way the more damage oriented builds would.
Combat exploit DC's should be (10+spell level+int modifier) where the spell level is determined by the spell sacrificed for the effect.
That way you can have some pretty powerful effects that wouldn't normally work on a martial because you have to dump your focus entirely into intelligence to make them have a good chance of going off consistently.
If you go the strength or dexterity route, you can take combat exploits that are not dependent on DC based effects.
That way you can be a good damage dealer, a good controller, or a good skirmisher(dex) but not all three.
As to the force armor issue.
I feel like the least likely way to break the force armor effect is to make it function as much like the spell as is possible and use verbiage that makes it clear that the effects of spontaneous spell conversion only work with adept spells. This will totally negate any sort of full caster dip from being an option.
Regarding the spell list:
I do not want to make an evoker list. I was initially enamored with a more abjurer focus, but really I'm open to anything that is not evocation, it confuses the combat focus of the class away from its exploits. There is also no means of making evocation spells function in combat outside of using them as normal, which makes evocation counter intuitive.
I think I need to make this explicit because there seems to be some confusion, the insight bonus to hit from a secondary statistic is perfectly balanced as long as you don't add additional bonuses to intelligence on top of that insight bonus from intelligence.
1. You have to invest in one primary hitting stat which will likely take up all, or at least the vast majority of your investment.
2. As a consequence of number one, your secondary hitting stat (be it strength, dexterity, or intelligence) is fundamentally limited by the nature of statistical allocation to grant you, at best, a +7 to hit over twenty levels. This gives the class an effective hit chance of 22 +primary hitting statistic.
3. Because the intelligence bonus never grants damage bonuses, you end up with a chance to hit that gets somewhere in the ballpark of primary martial classes but never get the bonus damage that they enjoy.
4. Bonus damage from exploits is magical in nature and, if it doesn't have a DC to eliminate part of the effect, it is energy based and thus subject to resistance from... well a lot of enemies later on which is an intentional balancing factor on my part.
5. The reliance on energy based effects to bolster lower damage "encourages" investment into knowledge skills to identify weaknesses and mitigates some of the benefits of having such a significant potential for skill diversity if you focus on intelligence as your primary hitting statistic.
The real kicker on the insight bonus to hit based off intelligence was to make the class functionally able to focus on one of the three hitting stats, and as a consequence, you would have the three examples I mention above. One with good hit and damage with great two handed synergy, one with a good to hit and High touch armor and ludicrous reflexes, and one with good to hit and high spell dc's for his combat exploit and magic ability.
That is really the only downside to switching to bab scaling instead of a secondary stat based buff to hit.
Good reflex and will is more appropriate.
You know, it hadn't even occurred to me what else to keep elghinn, uncanny dodge and trap sense do seem appropriate.
Also If you do go the int mod to hit route, I would probably nix the int mod to damage exploit so as to make intelligence prime a real choice for magic potency over raw damage.
Sounds very cool. I had been entertaining similar concepts after hearing about the genius archetype thing on a sort of basic chassis of full half and three quarter bab progression along with basic qualities tied to those concepts.
... I think that is probably the worst explanation I have ever attempted.
I don't think that's entirely accurate. Everyone needs to invest in constitution for the sake of survival, but a wizard has need of really only one ability score but can only go so far with it before it becomes prohibitive to invest further. This leads to wizards who invest in ability scores that shore up weak saves where a fighter would be hard pressed to do the same because he/she is unable to ignore the ability score tied to their strong save progression.
I don't think your assessment is totally off base, there are just some factors that play a role that you may be overlooking. Another example of why wizards are likely in better shape is that more often than not they avoid close range where most of the fort save based abilities are going to occur. Will saves are not as limited and are thus not something the fighter class can avoid.
I think that I would prefer to go with the +10 bonus and then add exploits that allow you to add effective enhancement based on the spell sacrificed. I was inclined to bar enhancement bonuses and simply focus on armor properties, but if the consensus is that the armor is not adequate for a front liner, then perhaps enhancement is a viable option. I would suggest enhancements of this sort last for one minute.
As far as the intelligence fluff, I was inclined to point toward a sort of divinatory element to explain the insight bonus to attack. Magic is the mode if you get my meaning. I'm not certain why a warrior so driven by intellect would be unable to use skills, but if you think this makes sense as a balance point I will certainly acquiesce.
As to the damage comment, I had initially intended that the class be very flexible in form where the character may be built more as a strength based character who deals good damage, or a dexterity based character who leverages his lack of maximum dexterity bonus to be very tough to hit, or as an intelligence primary character who deals far less damage than his counterparts but uses exploits to accomplish crowd control and other DC based effects to make him much closer to an actual wizard/martial gish in what I would call the true sense of the word.
Does that make sense? Flexibility is very much a feature that I would love to preserve.
I think there is enough intelligence synergy already Elghinn.
Do you think that it's wise to increase the power of the rage mechanic in the way that you mention?
I also think that having a negative fort save at level 1 is potentially terrible and kind of forces players to take channeled fortitude with their first combat exploit instead of it being a nice option that becomes more valuable later. I suggest that the stratagem mechanic does not actually offer as much in terms of modifier bonuses and removes the penalty to fort saves.
2. The class already has a fast save progression in will, so bonuses in that arena may make some thematic sense, but the bonus might be too much of a boon for a fairly damning penalty in the fort save.
3. This, of course, all hinges off the fact that the class has a good reflex/will save as opposed to fort/will because it seems more appropriate to the class(wears no armor and functions as a martial through magic rather than innate toughness).
1000 indeed :) just noticed that last night.
Elghinn Lightbringer wrote:
I figured that the armor from the enhanced mage armor would be sufficient. Should the class get a level based dodge bonus to shore it up further? Ideally I would prefer keeping it within the realm of his magic if possible though. If the mage armor proves to be too little we could also change the way the bonus scales from the spell sacrificed.
I would certainly use rage powers that are thematically and mechanically appropriate, I think we just need to be careful what we okay.
Heres another arcane exploit idea
Spectral weapon(su): As a swift action, the adept consumes a spell to create a series of copies of his weapon. These spectral copies carry all of the weapons enhancement bonuses and weapon properties. The adept adds his/her intelligence modifier to damage instead of strength for these ranged attacks. The adept may hurl these weapons (short range 25+5 feet per 2 cl) at a designated foe as an attack action. These spectral weapons last for a number of rounds equal to the spell level sacrificed.
wording is a bit rough, but I think you get the idea.
I prefer it when people do not ascribe ideology to me on my behalf. I never stated any of the things you claim whilst quoting me and I don't appreciate these sorts of fallacies being propagated at my expense.
I have never, in all of the years I have played dungeons and dragons(and related materials), felt the need to play a full caster. I prefer to play bards or other hybrid classes because I get to meddle in most of the adventure hooks without being totally out of my depth. That doesn't mean that I don't recognize the power that arises from having full casting progression.
I think you have too much invested in this and do not appear to be able to maintain any sort of objectivity.
Active exploits will also require a swift action to unravel the base spell universally. I also think that the spell list would be best if it came from the bard and pulled out some of the enchantment and healing related stuff and put in the abjuration school. The reasoning behind this is that I don't want it to be an evoker the way the magus is. I want the martial aspect of the character to issue from combat exploits rather than the spell list. I also formulated the idea from the arcanist originally and thought that it would make sense for their spell list to have a focus on countering magic.
Passive exploit: Channeled fortitude(su): while maintaining arcane combat, the arcane adept gains an insight bonus to fortitude saves equal to his/her intelligence modifier. In addition the adept gains a number of temporary hit points equal to his/her hit die.
Active exploit: Energy blade(su): As a swift action, the arcane adept may unravel one of their prepared spells to add energy damage to their weapon attacks. Upon unraveling the spell, the adept chooses an energy type(cold, fire, or electricity) and adds a number of d6 of that energy type their physical attacks equal to the spells level for rounds equal to their intelligence modifier. In addition, at class level eleven the adept may choose to forgo his/her normal attacks to attack once as a standard action and gain a rider effect based on the energy type originally chosen. (DC=10+spell level of the original spell+ int modifier)
cold effects might include entanglement or a condition. fire effects might add the adepts int modifier as ongoing damage each round up to the adepts intelligence modifier unless the fire is put out. Electricity damage might leap to every target within 15 feet, reflex for half.
That is the basics of the idea, thoughts?
The basic idea behind the arcane adept is one that involves the pursuit of combat capability through the medium of magic rather than the the other way around. I'll start my write up for it after I post this, but I'll throw up the basic swaps now.
Arcane combat(su): Arcane combat will work off of a resource like rage, but instead of giving strength constitution and willpower bonuses at the expense of some armor, the combat form will grant an insight bonus to attack equal to the Arcane adepts intelligence modifier as long as it is maintained. This is basically the same as the magus pool power.
Combat exploits(su): Combat exploits are similar to rage powers in that they effect the adepts abilities while maintaining arcane combat. Some of these abilities will simply modify the baseline effect of arcane combat like rage powers, while others will be fueled by consuming spells to achieve an effect for a given time as long as arcane combat is active.
Mage armor specialist(su): The name is a work in progress, but the basic idea is that this hybrid class does not have access to armor proficiencies like other hybrid casters and never gains access to the ability to cast in armor. Instead, the class can cast mage armor spontaneously and gains additional armor class from the spell equal to the spell level of the spell sacrificed. For example, an arcane adept might sacrifice a third level spell and gain an armor class of 4+3= 7.
I don't know if this will ultimately help you with your friend, but I suggest that you let the player fail.
I realize that this seems to be unhelpful, but I can only conclude that he is unwilling to alter his position and if this is true then no help can be offered with any hope of it being received with the spirit in which it was offered.
If your player loses his character or continues to complain of his characters lack of success you can only point to the knowledge that you already offered him.
Maybe you could add something to make the ability less situational?
What about an ability called blood philtre or something that allows you to take one dose of blood from any enemy and strain out whatever background magical qualities may be there. You could role percentiles to see what distant ancestor that person may have, which grants you blood pool from that source.
The problem I have with these kinds of arguments is largely that you have to tick off a dozen feat boxes to make this happen, which has nothing to do with the weapon property. I can't fathom why things like extra attacks and critical features are being attributed to it.
If you have to invest all of your feats to make a cool weapon based debuff effect, is that not an appropriate return? Not to mention the fact that by the time you are actually pulling this sort of build off you can afford to have two plus 10 weapons, which makes this weapon property accomplish exactly nothing for the efficacy of a two weapon fighting debuffer.
The enhancement bonus would be the same as another fighter with one weapon. A manual of dex adds 2 points to your hit chance and the same manual is available to the guy with money to burn because he has a big sword instead of two little ones.
Whatever the outcome here, this money that the two weapon fighter saves in no way makes the two weapon fighter a better fighter, it just makes it so that the money available to one class for utility isn't diverted into the second weapon. It's the same as having a greatsword fighter in every way, they just don't have two years of a nations capital tied into there weapon choice. I don't know why the feat investment isn't enough of a tax on what amounts to flavor.
I love the idea of having some cash on my two weapon fighters to pursue some utility instead of spending every copper piece trying to keep up (and inevitably failing) with the barb with a greatsword.
Dualistic in no way makes a person deal more damage, it just reduces the cost of a combat style that routinely underperforms.
So, If people who do not use the material are at a huge disadvantage, why does that matter? I mean, if you don't like or don't use a particular book and, as a consequence, your character will be weaker than another character that will literally never interact... why is this even a problem?
I realize that we may differ on what we consider game breaking, but I am not certain why a weapon property that makes fighting with two weapons more economical as beyond the pale and requiring of a dissertation on the follies of post core balancing.
I don't think you can fairly price the property off the number of attacks you get from two weapon fighting because none of those attacks are coming from the weapon property, those are your iteratives from base attack and feat investment.
The only thing this is really giving you in the long run is a relative reduction in the cost of two weapon fighting that increases over time. It does nothing but hurt you before a certain relative enhancement bonus.
I don't know what would make the best price point for this kind of effect, but I think +4 makes it effectively meaningless and even +2 makes this a tough pill because you end up being behind the other front liners by that much more.... Its a tough one.
If you get both archetypes? Hmmm, I could see doing some kind of versatile character like a detective/Dervish of dawn. Good overall skills and interesting versatility in performances for both combat and out of it... I think that would be a reasonable gestalt.
Of course, a troubling outgrowth of this kind of gestalt would be the dreaded synthesist/ standard summoner. If I understand your meaning about blending archetypes, this fellow would have an eidolon suit and an eidolon companion.
I like this idea largely because combat tricks could be used to achieve actual character concepts in one shot instead of piecemeal. I could imagine combat tricks that define how you want your character to act in combat and have it work straight away, allowing character concepts to spring up fully realized(or at least adequately realized).
gustavo iglesias wrote:
Honestly? Because they are martials to an extent, and if they are martials they should benefit from a system that functions off of base attack. Not to mention the fact that combat tricks would likely scale in effect based on base attack bonus, meaning the 4 combat tricks a 3/4 bab class would get are only going to improve at +6 bab and +11 bab.
A fighter or a barbarian would have more combat tricks at a faster rate, and the specific effects of those tricks would improve at +6,+11,+16, and +20 bab. Each trick would be batter on a full bab class and they would 33% more than 3/4 bab classes.
Casters would get 3 combat tricks and they would improve at +6 bab. That is definitely a boon that they didn't have before, but it is a consequence of basing a mechanic off the Base attack bonus.
Also, I think I just ripped this out of Kirth's playbook for feats and called it something else because feats in Pathfinder have been weakened as part of the design concept. Instead of replacing them, which would require a rewrite, I suggest the combat trick as an alternative. Feats would then function as they do currently, which is to say, they do very little and that seems to be the design paradigm.
What about something like one combat trick at bab 1, 4 and every four thereafter? Full bab characters would get six, three quarter classes would get four and slow bab progression would be three.
You could have them do one specific "thing" and it would scale as you level, similar to a spell or something.
Okay, so the first varient didn't get much traction. How about this, instead of making a class have two swifts, we create a feat that converts one specified swift action ability(again, not magic) to be used as a free action once per round.
This is analogous with the feat that improves style feat action economy in some ways.
You could call it speed of thought
The thought of some sort of feat scroll item is pretty neat actually. Not in a literal scroll form, but some form of magic item that gives you a fragment of a warriors knowledge or something to give some of the magic users x factor to martials would be, I think, an interesting back door enhancement to martials. Just make the items effectiveness function off of BAB or something. 1/day @any level, 2/day @ BAB 6+, 3/day @ BAB 11+, etc...
Very similar to the brawler feature really... Anyhow, you get the idea, lets figure out how to give martial characters some lateral capability!
I think I've figured out how to build out the MCA concept I was mulling over earlier. I wouldn't mind being put in the queue.
It's a Barbarian/Wizard MCA that I want to function as a sort of an elite counter to magicians. I imagine something along the lines of a Praetorian guard for a republic whose primary worry is overthrow by magicians. Thus, the Republic(or whatever fits your world) creates a force to counter the manipulation of magi.
I had initially wanted to use the Arcanist as the caster part of this equation, but I think that the end will be the same with some slight changes.
Two things I wanted to incorporate into the class were combat exploits in the place of rage powers that gave similar capability as well as a smattering of exploits that made the class combat viable by consuming spells to martial ends( I'll expand on this when its my turn).
The second thing was to convert rage into a version of arcane accuracy. That will shore up the 3/4 bab nicely and will work nicely in conjunction with combat exploits.
Finally, I want to make the class not work with armor, which I think is something outside the scope of most melee caster hybrids. To that end, I was thinking that they could have a class feature that would allow them to spontaneously convert any spell into mage armor with an additional bonus to armor equal to the spells level.
So... Yeah, I would like to be on "the list" :)
I'm not sure what you mean here Dabbler. How is it too complicated exactly? Is there some way to alter my suggestion to make it less complicated? It does resolve most of your issues with the fluff and it also deals with hit chance without actually altering much in terms of the classes basic mechanics.
Let me know how you would alter things.