|
Your answer to point 3 shows that you are aware that you are asking for a direct boost to the power of the Evangelist prestige class, a prestige class which had previously received recognition on the boards as being a mechanically strong prestige class.
Because of the way aligned class works, there is literally no decent build involving 3/4 BAB or 1/2 BAB classes and the Evangelist prestige classes that is NOT made stronger by granting access to the class earlier. In fact, if your build involves 1/2 BAB classes leading into the Evangelist prestige class, your build is made stronger in virtually every way by the early access.
No, he's doing comparisons to show that getting the boon early doesn't make a character stronger, and usually makes it worse. He's compared 3 or 4 boons that people thought were the strongest, so if you have a strong boon he'll see if it's overpowered.
Also loosing a caster level I feel makes a weaker sorcerer than having a bit more bab.
|
The Evangelist's Aligned Class ability says to count Evangelist as the base class to determine what class features you gain (come to think of it, does that mean that scaling class features in general don't scale?), and furthermore says that BAB (and HD and saves) are an exception to Aligned Class. So one way or the other, it sounds to me like you're stuck with Evangelist BAB.Would he? Flurry of Blows keys off of Monk Level, not BaB, correct?How bad would a Zen Archer Monk be if they went into this class at level 4? As a follower of Erastil at level 12 they would get Wis to damage with the longbow, getting wis to hit from level 3 in there class features.For being an Evangelist at all, he's at -3 to hit at that level due to reduced BAB. That's about the same attack/damage trade ratio as Deadly Aim (which is in turn a worse payoff than two-handed Power Attack). That doesn't seem problematic to me.
I think the assumption until now has been that class feature in your aligned class scale as though you had gained a level in the aligned class. If that's not the case, it's a much less powerful Prestige Class and probably not worth the time being spent on debating whether it's overpowered or not. If class abilities do scale, I see no reason why Flurry of Blows wouldn't grant character level-1 BAB when using flurry for a Zen Archer/Evangelist. When not using Flurry, the character's BAB would, if multi-classing happened at 4th level, take a small hit, since both Monk and Evangelist are 3/4 BAB. With Flurry or without, it should be a -1 effective hit to BAB, unless class abilities don't scale, in which case it's probably a horrible decision for a Monk to go into Evangelist at all.
Jiggy, as you pointed out later, the character wouldn't get WIS to hit twice, since neither Zen Archer nor Erastil's Boon assign a type to the bonus. It would get WIS to damage, but not until 11th level. So it would be like a -1 to hit for a +6 or +7 to damage. More powerful than Deadly Aim, but an extra 7 damage per attack at 11th level isn't unheard of, and a Zen Archer would be doing so much damage at 11 anyway, it probably wouldn't matter.
Personally, I don't see anything overpowered enough in Evangelist to warrant a special rule to limit access to it. Then again, I don't see anything so advantageous about getting access to it a couple of levels earlier to warrant spending so much effort to get the rule removed. It's really a small corner case of legal builds that would even qualify for early entry anymore, let alone actually benefit much from it.
|
I said that any build that already included the evangelist would be made stronger.
A sorcerer 3/evangelist 6 will invariably be stronger than a sorcerer 5/evangelist 4.
And that is okay. Power creep is only bad if the endpoint is too high. If the power crept from "acceptable" to "still acceptable", then the power creep is A-OK. If the power crept from "underpowered" to "acceptable", then the power creep was actively good and kudos to whoever implemented it. If the power crept from "underpowered" to "still underpowered", then we need MORE power creep.
Jiggy is right. It doesn't matter if the new option is stronger. If the old option wasn't good the new option being a little better than not good doesn't mean it is good.
|
|
I said that any build that already included the evangelist would be made stronger.
A sorcerer 3/evangelist 6 will invariably be stronger than a sorcerer 5/evangelist 4.
That's not necessarily true, since in PFS a Sorcerer 3/Evangelist 6 would have to be a standard Aasimar in order to qualify early, and a sorcerer 5/evangelist 4 could be any other race. For a sorcerer, Aasimar might be an ok race choice, but that's not the case for a Magus (or Wizard, Alchemist, Investigator, or any other class that doesn't rely primarily on WIS or CHAR).
|
|
You can't get all 20 because the Obediences to certain evil gods are forbidden because of the requirement to regularly engage in some severely evil actions.
Yes it was established earlier in the thread that Lamashtu is not a legal resource. I really hope not being able to use this one god changes anyone's opinion on Evangelist.
|
I said that any build that already included the evangelist would be made stronger.
A sorcerer 3/evangelist 6 will always be stronger than a sorcerer 5/evangelist 4 (assuming the bloodline, deity and feat choices are constant).
...which STILL appears to be weaker than a straight sorcerer 9. The OP's point was: why do we have to make a special exception to the standard PF rule about prestige classes and early access with JUST this P-class?
In your earlier argument discussing the zen archer, earlier access gains the bonus to damage, sure, plus more skill points (although with the loss of a favored class bonus, is not that much - 1 pt per level). The rest just appears to be minor abilities gained a couple of levels earlier (languages, minor magic, etc.). However, this is at the expense of to hit and saves.
Where is the 'broken' window (or even the major bump in power level) that requires divergence from the standard PF rules, making a special exception for this normally allowed P-class? Currently, within standard Pathfinder rules, you can gain access to Evangelist by 4th level. Why the special exception? Why diverge from (as the term used repeatedly by people supporting the exception) the 'status quo' - which is the normal PF rules? Even early access appears to be weaker than the original core class.
Earlier access being substantially stronger than the original class would make this all much more understandable. However, many of us are not seeing that.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
The Evangelist's Aligned Class ability says to count Evangelist as the base class to determine what class features you gain (come to think of it, does that mean that scaling class features in general don't scale?), and furthermore says that BAB (and HD and saves) are an exception to Aligned Class. So one way or the other, it sounds to me like you're stuck with Evangelist BAB.I think the assumption until now has been that class feature in your aligned class scale as though you had gained a level in the aligned class. If that's not the case, it's a much less powerful Prestige Class and probably not worth the time being spent on debating whether it's overpowered or not. If class abilities do scale, I see no reason why Flurry of Blows wouldn't grant character level-1 BAB when using flurry for a Zen Archer/Evangelist. When not using Flurry, the character's BAB would, if multi-classing happened at 4th level, take a small hit, since both Monk and Evangelist are 3/4 BAB. With Flurry or without, it should be a -1 effective hit to BAB, unless class abilities don't scale, in which case it's probably a horrible decision for a Monk to go into Evangelist at all.
Hm, you're probably right. But still, yeah, it's –1 to hit for +7-ish damage that he would have gotten in a couple levels anyway. That doesn't seem like a deal-breaker to get at 12th instead of 14th level.
|
|
I think for the most part the issues with early entry evangelist have been discussed.
Certainly don't let this post discourage you from bringing up a point regarding this topic but for the most part I don't feel like there is much left of this class to explore.
Hopefully campaign leadership gets the chance to read, discuss, and judge if this change would be beneficial for the game.
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
More later.
Oh? Other folks were chiming in so I was keeping quiet.
I read over the entire evangelist description, and the capstone ability is quite strong. She gets to assume a spiritual form on and off for a number of minutes per day equal to character level--so every encounter basically. While in this form she gets
- Telepathy 100 ft.
- +4 untyped bonus to an ability score
- fly speed of 40 ft. (or something else far worse)
It's that +4 untyped bonus to an ability score that I'm having issue with. So now our spellcasters that have sacrificed a level of spellcasting have a floating +4 INT/CHA/WIS at level 14. That more than makes up for -1 CL in my book. I can take a trait to replace that missing CL. There is nothing else that comes close to that +4 untyped ability bonus.
While level 14 isn't a huge impact in PFS, there is PFS legal content that can take you to 19 and even 20. So giving this ability out two levels early still makes me uneasy. And any change we make with this ruling is going to effect those tables. The only other thing that increases ability scores like this in PFS is a boon that grants you a +2 bonus for 1 year before expiring. And for the post Eyes play I saw those PCs go through, giving similar builds an additional +2 troubles me.
Level 14 casters will be sitting at 33 in their casting stat, without a +n tome. If they saved up, they could be pushing a 38. That's DC 25 first level spells without any Spell Focus type feats factored in. So level 7 spells will have a DC of 31 without any further adjustments. That's pretty insane. Think of any strong caster build and increase the DCs of their spells by 2. Ouch!
Given that straight casters are typically argued to be the strongest builds in PFS, this change would just be giving them more power, which seems unnecessary.
|
|
So if I understand correctly you're saying that at levels that are not really played much by standard PFS play, that spellcasters, who already are "broken" at that point, well receive a boost.
Without the boost spellcasters still have a DC 23 with a first level spell without feats, While another +2 is nice, I feel it's not a game breaking boost. A player who wanted to would have crazy DC's that a +2 would be sought after, but I feel it wouldn't really be adding much more power to a character than he'd already have.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
We cannot discount the impact of this decision on higher levels simply because less play occurs at that point of the game. That's unfair to people that enjoy that aspect of PFS.
The argument of "this just makes something that is already overpowered more powerful, therefore it's fine to allow" is also faulty one. Every other successful game balances power through a series of updates, patches, or nerfs to keep power creep as low as possible. I believe that for PFS to continue being successful, it needs to ensure power creep is kept to a minimum.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
So now our spellcasters that have sacrificed a level of spellcasting have a floating +4 INT/CHA/WIS at level 14. That more than makes up for -1 CL in my book. I can take a trait to replace that missing CL.
Hold on a second. Missing a level of spellcasting isn't just a -1 CL that can be made up for with a trait. It's access to spell levels a level later, as well as delayed progression on spells per day for every spell level they can cast. That's waaaaay bigger than -1 CL.
So at 14th-level (for example), the wizard evangelist has lost one each of his two highest-level spells. At all odd-numbered levels, he doesn't even have what would normally be his highest-level spells.
Oh, and you know what those spells would be? Power word blind, which has no saving throw and therefore doesn't benefit from that stat boost.
Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't trade a second slot of "you're blind, no save, suck it" for a less than 10% increase in the reliability of lesser spells. Same goes for two levels later when it's PW Stun, and later when it's PW Kill.
|
|
Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't trade a second slot of "you're blind, no save, suck it" for a less than 10% increase in the reliability of lesser spells. Same goes for two levels later when it's PW Stun, and later when it's PW Kill.
At level 14, a lot of the creatures I've faced couldn't care less if they were blind.
|
|
Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't trade a second slot of "you're blind, no save, suck it" for a less than 10% increase in the reliability of lesser spells. Same goes for two levels later when it's PW Stun, and later when it's PW Kill.At level 14, a lot of the creatures I've faced couldn't care less if they were blind.
On top of that, I can see an animal companion-focused druid or animal-domain cleric getting alot of mileage out of Erastil's boons.
Monstrous mount, evolved companion x 2, and you have a flying companion with pounce, rake and 6 natural attacks. At level 9, you add your wisdom to bow attacks and damage. Take a designating bow. Each of those attacks from your animal companion gets +4 to hit and +6 damage. On all 6 attacks AND the rake. And THEN double that once per day.And that's without spells.
Add in broken wing and wounded paw gambit, and you can shoot your designating bow as an immediate action, and then use your standard action to cast communal buffs. Your copy companion won't need defensive buffs since it is expendable, and can be the sacrifice for the gambit whilst giving your real companion an extra attack as well. You're rolling 16 attacks at least (12 natural 2 rakes 2 gambit) and your character hasn't even used his standard action yet. If Jiggy gets his way, that's doable at level 9 instead of level 11, pushing it from the fringe of high-level society play to the middle of it. And if the requirement is waived, then at level 12, the designating bow is quite sure to hit, because an optimized cleric or druid will easily have a +10 wisdom bonus at that level. At level 13? That becomes a +12 bonus. On attacks and damage with your bow.
And memorize die for your master, because your temporary extra animal companion is still an animal companion, and a viable target for that spell.
|
|
Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't trade a second slot of "you're blind, no save, suck it" for a less than 10% increase in the reliability of lesser spells. Same goes for two levels later when it's PW Stun, and later when it's PW Kill.At level 14, a lot of the creatures I've faced couldn't care less if they were blind.On top of that, I can see an animal companion-focused druid or animal-domain cleric getting alot of mileage out of Erastil's boons.
Monstrous mount, evolved companion x 2, and you have a flying companion with pounce, rake and 6 natural attacks.
Evolved companion is not PFS-legal.
|
|
Evolved companion is not PFS-legal.Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't trade a second slot of "you're blind, no save, suck it" for a less than 10% increase in the reliability of lesser spells. Same goes for two levels later when it's PW Stun, and later when it's PW Kill.At level 14, a lot of the creatures I've faced couldn't care less if they were blind.On top of that, I can see an animal companion-focused druid or animal-domain cleric getting alot of mileage out of Erastil's boons.
Monstrous mount, evolved companion x 2, and you have a flying companion with pounce, rake and 6 natural attacks.
Ok, swap that for any big cat. 3 primary attacks, 1 secondary from multi-attack, rake and pounce (oh and grab for extra fun). Or a velociraptor with 5 straight primary natural attacks, still with pounce.
And Erastil forbid that you have bardic music or haste from your party members.
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
Evolved companion is not PFS-legal.Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't trade a second slot of "you're blind, no save, suck it" for a less than 10% increase in the reliability of lesser spells. Same goes for two levels later when it's PW Stun, and later when it's PW Kill.At level 14, a lot of the creatures I've faced couldn't care less if they were blind.On top of that, I can see an animal companion-focused druid or animal-domain cleric getting alot of mileage out of Erastil's boons.
Monstrous mount, evolved companion x 2, and you have a flying companion with pounce, rake and 6 natural attacks.Ok, swap that for any big cat. 3 primary attacks, 1 secondary from multi-attack, rake and pounce (oh and grab for extra fun). Or a velociraptor with 5 straight primary natural attacks, still with pounce.
And Erastil forbid that you have bardic music or haste from your party members.
Not seeing the secondary attack for the cat, but in any case, at this level those might be nice natural attacks, but DR and hardness are a serious problem. And some enemies have other defenses, like a fear aura.
Oh and druids can't take monstrous mount.
|
|
Evolved companion is not PFS-legal.Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't trade a second slot of "you're blind, no save, suck it" for a less than 10% increase in the reliability of lesser spells. Same goes for two levels later when it's PW Stun, and later when it's PW Kill.At level 14, a lot of the creatures I've faced couldn't care less if they were blind.On top of that, I can see an animal companion-focused druid or animal-domain cleric getting alot of mileage out of Erastil's boons.
Monstrous mount, evolved companion x 2, and you have a flying companion with pounce, rake and 6 natural attacks.Ok, swap that for any big cat. 3 primary attacks, 1 secondary from multi-attack, rake and pounce (oh and grab for extra fun). Or a velociraptor with 5 straight primary natural attacks, still with pounce.
And Erastil forbid that you have bardic music or haste from your party members.
Not seeing the secondary attack for the cat, but in any case, at this level those might be nice natural attacks, but DR and hardness are a serious problem. And some enemies have other defenses, like a fear aura.
Oh and druids can't take monstrous mount.
Nevermind the monstrous mount, the big cat is enough.
I misread the multi-attack entry for animal companions. Nonetheless, 3 attacks with grab and rake still get you to 4 attacks with a big cat. Or take a -2 str hit and go with the velociraptor deinonychus. If using a big cat, use your companion's feats to give him greater grapple and rapid grappler, and he and his clone can mess up TWO of your enemies whilst keeping them pinned down, instead of just one.
Remember folks, you can customise your animal companion, and his copy gets all the same feats and bonuses. I forget if betrayal feats are PFS legal, but if they are, your copy-companion is even more abusable(literally).
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
Evolved companion is not PFS-legal.Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't trade a second slot of "you're blind, no save, suck it" for a less than 10% increase in the reliability of lesser spells. Same goes for two levels later when it's PW Stun, and later when it's PW Kill.At level 14, a lot of the creatures I've faced couldn't care less if they were blind.On top of that, I can see an animal companion-focused druid or animal-domain cleric getting alot of mileage out of Erastil's boons.
Monstrous mount, evolved companion x 2, and you have a flying companion with pounce, rake and 6 natural attacks.Ok, swap that for any big cat. 3 primary attacks, 1 secondary from multi-attack, rake and pounce (oh and grab for extra fun). Or a velociraptor with 5 straight primary natural attacks, still with pounce.
And Erastil forbid that you have bardic music or haste from your party members.
Not seeing the secondary attack for the cat, but in any case, at this level those might be nice natural attacks, but DR and hardness are a serious problem. And some enemies have other defenses, like a fear aura.
Oh and druids can't take monstrous mount.
Nevermind the monstrous mount, the big cat is enough.
I misread the multi-attack entry for animal companions. Nonetheless, 3 attacks with grab and rake still get you to 4 attacks with a big cat. Or take a -2 str hit and go with the
velociraptordeinonychus. If using a big cat, use your companion's feats to give him greater grapple and rapid grappler, and he and his clone can mess up TWO of your enemies whilst keeping them pinned down, instead of just one.Remember folks, you can customize your animal companion, and his copy gets all the same feats and bonuses. I forget if betrayal feats are PFS legal, but if they are, your copy-companion is even more abusable(literally).
My cat just learned amateuer swashbuckler ... to defend against the next ghost killing it with a touch attack ^^
To use rake, you have to start your turn grappling a creature, so that only enters the calculation in the second round. Even if those grappling feats seem like a sweet idea, considering the requirements it will take some time until an animal companion can get them all (since IIRC even improved unarmed strike requires 3 INT.)
I am not saying that it isn't a very powerful effect (honestly the deific obedience rewards come in a flavors, from rather useless to game changing) but people tend to think animal companions are better than they actually are. Since the ability requires a standard action, you have to weigh it against the alternatives... if my hunter can use it before combat starts ... but that is a huge if...
|
|
A pouncing creature can also rake on the pounce. After that, the target is likely to be grappled or even pinned if you choose the right feats to use with grab.
When a creature with this special attack makes a charge, it can make a full attack (including rake attacks if the creature also has the rake ability).
Format: pounce; Location: Special Attacks.
First round:
You summon a second companion.Copy companion charge-pounces for 4 attacks. Uses wounded paw gambit on first attack, druid/cleric shoots designating bow. Assuming both hit (looking at the third boon), the next 3 attacks get the bonus, and the cat likely also gets a free grapple attempt with the designating bow's bonus.
And then your real companion does the same, but also uses broken wing gambit to give the copy-cat (hur hur hur) an attack of opportunity on the same target.
That's 10 attacks in total. If the designating attack hits, the next 8 attacks are at +4 to hit and +6 damage each. All primary attacks. And 2 free grapple attempts. Your real cat should have a strength of about 28 with a +4 belt, your copy-cat has a strength of 24 if the belt is not copied. If all attacks hit, just counting the damage from strength bonuses and the designating bonus gets you (7+13+13+13+15+15+15+15+13=119). That's not counting bardic music if you have it, enchancement bonuses, buffs or even the rolled damage (3d8+7d6=34.5 average). A relatively moderate estimate is 153 damage and 2 grapple attempts in round 1. IF the target survives, guess what? both cats look for the next target to charge at. Getting this at level 11 is good enough. We don't need to see this at level 9.
And I suspect a hunter can do even better, since I have not even factored in spells.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
A pouncing creature can also rake on the pounce. After that, the target is likely to be grappled or even pinned if you choose the right feats to use with grab.
When a creature with this special attack makes a charge, it can make a full attack (including rake attacks if the creature also has the rake ability).
Format: pounce; Location: Special Attacks.
First round:
You summon a second companion.
Copy companion charge-pounces for 4 attacks. Uses wounded paw gambit on first attack, druid/cleric shoots designating bow. Assuming both hit (looking at the third boon), the next 3 attacks get the bonus, and the cat likely also gets a free grapple attempt with the designating bow's bonus.
And then your real companion does the same, but also uses broken wing gambit to give the copy-cat (hur hur hur) an attack of opportunity on the same target.That's 10 attacks in total. If the designating attack hits, the next 8 attacks are at +4 to hit and +6 damage each. All primary attacks. And 2 free grapple attempts. Your real cat should have a strength of about 28 with a +4 belt, your copy-cat has a strength of 24 if the belt is not copied. If all attacks hit, just counting the damage from strength bonuses and the designating bonus gets you (7+13+13+13+15+15+15+15+13=119). That's not counting bardic music if you have it, enchancement bonuses, buffs or even the rolled damage (3d8+7d6=34.5 average). A relatively moderate estimate is 153 damage and 2 grapple attempts in round 1. IF the target survives, guess what? both cats look for the next target to charge at. Getting this at level 11 is good enough. We don't need to see this at level 9.
And I suspect a hunter can do even better, since I have not even factored in spells.
Thanks I had forgotten that one, yeah I can really understand the pounce hate/despair to get it.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So now our spellcasters that have sacrificed a level of spellcasting have a floating +4 INT/CHA/WIS at level 14. That more than makes up for -1 CL in my book. I can take a trait to replace that missing CL.Hold on a second. Missing a level of spellcasting isn't just a -1 CL that can be made up for with a trait. It's access to spell levels a level later, as well as delayed progression on spells per day for every spell level they can cast. That's waaaaay bigger than -1 CL.
So at 14th-level (for example), the wizard evangelist has lost one each of his two highest-level spells. At all odd-numbered levels, he doesn't even have what would normally be his highest-level spells.
Oh, and you know what those spells would be? Power word blind, which has no saving throw and therefore doesn't benefit from that stat boost.
Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't trade a second slot of "you're blind, no save, suck it" for a less than 10% increase in the reliability of lesser spells. Same goes for two levels later when it's PW Stun, and later when it's PW Kill.
Jiggy, you can't keep bringing up the loss of a spellcasting level with Evangelist. Early entry or not, both theoretical PCs are paying that cost. The only question could be is if that cost is justified. And I think it most certainly is with the correct builds. And I think you agree with that.
So instead of hearing an argument against the missing level of spell progression, I'd like to hear one against an untyped permanent +4 bonus to any ability score. Because I don't think there is one that holds water here.
I think that a permanent untyped +4 bonus to an ability score is certainly worth sacrificing one spellcasting level. And I think that getting that bonus at level 14 is rather unbalancing, since it does the same thing as having 4 wishes cast on the PC, except it's better because it's an untyped bonus, rather than an insight one.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Jiggy, you can't keep bringing up the loss of a spellcasting level with Evangelist. Early entry or not, both theoretical PCs are paying that cost. The only question could be is if that cost is justified.
And you can't determine whether the cost was justified if you stop looking at the cost. Just because another build also paid that cost doesn't negate the cost's relevance to determining power level. It's entirely possible that the cost isn't justified for traditional entry, and that the power boost for early entry is what it takes to justify it. Or maybe not. The only way to make that determination is to look at both the cost and the benefit.
|
|
I'd like to point out real fast that the +4 to an ability score is not permanent as it seems like you're suggesting Walter, it's minutes/day per character level and a standard action to activate. Since it isn't unlimited any situation where overland travel, or even a dungeon where you can't rely on monsters patiently waiting in their rooms, is involved is often going to see the spellcaster without his bonus at the start of the fight.
High level fights are scary, I'm certainly not wasting my action turn 1 gaining a mental stat bonus. And I certainly don't want to trade my spell progression even at early entry for a bonus with an awkward window of activation that doesn't last indefinitely.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
First round:
You summon a second companion.
Copy companion charge-pounces for 4 attacks. Uses wounded paw gambit on first attack, druid/cleric shoots designating bow. Assuming both hit (looking at the third boon), the next 3 attacks get the bonus, and the cat likely also gets a free grapple attempt with the designating bow's bonus.
And then your real companion does the same, but also uses broken wing gambit to give the copy-cat (hur hur hur) an attack of opportunity on the same target.
Your example is illegal. Your setup is predicated on what I bolded above: you've spent feats trying to give you the chance to fire that bow on your first turn as an immediate action. However, you don't get that free attack until the enemy attacks. So your first round of pet-pounce is completely unassisted. You don't get those bonuses from designating (which you failed to point out is a +4 bonus equivalent power that nobody will have at the level you're talking about) until you either spend your own turn (presumably your second) or respond to the enemy attacking. Either way, the baddies have had a chance to wail on you and/or your pets before we get the attack/damage bonuses you're so worried about.
That's 10 attacks in total. If the designating attack hits, the next 8 attacks are at +4 to hit and +6 damage each.
Like I said, not until round 2.
If all attacks hit, just counting the damage from strength bonuses and the designating bonus gets you (7+13+13+13+15+15+15+15+13=119). That's not counting bardic music if you have it, enchancement bonuses, buffs or even the rolled damage (3d8+7d6=34.5 average). A relatively moderate estimate is 153 damage and 2 grapple attempts in round 1.
If all attacks hit, you get ~150 damage. Except not really, because you don't actually have those damage bonuses yet, so more like ~95 damage (taking off 6 x 8). Let's remember that number for a moment.
Getting this at level 11 is good enough. We don't need to see this at level 9.
Hold on a second. We're talking about Twin Fang, a second Divine Boon, right? I just re-checked Evangelist, and that comes online at Evangelist6, so with early entry that's 10th level, not 9th. And the real damage if every attack hits is 95-ish.
So when you use your 1/day ability, if the stars align and not a single one of 10 d20 rolls goes low, then you gain the ability to deal less damage than a charging cavalier or pouncing barbarian of the same level.
Oh, and that bow that you wanted to use? That costs 50,000gp! You know what your expected WBL is at 10th? 62,000gp. (At 9th, where you claimed this was happening, you can't even afford the weapon you used in your example.)
If you want to try to prove something, your example needs to be both legal and realistic, and yours is neither.
|
|
Jiggy, you can't keep bringing up the loss of a spellcasting level with Evangelist. Early entry or not, both theoretical PCs are paying that cost. The only question could be is if that cost is justified.And you can't determine whether the cost was justified if you stop looking at the cost. Just because another build also paid that cost doesn't negate the cost's relevance to determining power level. It's entirely possible that the cost isn't justified for traditional entry, and that the power boost for early entry is what it takes to justify it. Or maybe not. The only way to make that determination is to look at both the cost and the benefit.
This is exactly what I was thinking. Thank you for putting this idea forward Jiggy. Unfortunately I made this long post on why the twin fang, as it was put forward, wasn’t broken even with misconceptions, @GM Aram Zey, your theorycrafting could use some cleaning up. Breaking down what I was putting before without the exact example
1. You have to hit the designating attack, not exactly a sure thing on high armored targets2. Frequently enemy BBEG’s have massive stretches between you and them at high tiers, or traps or things to waylay you, or ways themselves to slow you as you near them.
3. Damage Reduction that isn’t magic based completely destroys you, even DR/5 massively reduces your DPR.
4. Low health pools makes them very glass-cannon like, and if they can hit your Armor class then your animal companion is probably going down.
Instead of fixing the weaknesses that AC’s and this build in general has, it compounds them, making your strong points stronger and your weak points all the more noticeable. That is not an optimal build, it is a gimmick build that works in specific situations, situations that come up often, particularly post season 3. The main problem of this build is that it dumps large amounts of WBL, but even reducing that, induces a feat tax on someone who loves every single feat, and a skill point tax. Reducing two of the most potent resources you have and a lesser resource as well as decreasing your spell casting abilities and BAB and saves generally. Probably not worth it.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
I'd like to point out real fast that the +4 to an ability score is not permanent as it seems like you're suggesting Walter, it's minutes/day per character level and a standard action to activate. Since it isn't unlimited any situation where overland travel, or even a dungeon where you can't rely on monsters patiently waiting in their rooms, is involved is often going to see the spellcaster without his bonus at the start of the fight.
High level fights are scary, I'm certainly not wasting my action turn 1 gaining a mental stat bonus. And I certainly don't want to trade my spell progression even at early entry for a bonus with an awkward window of activation that doesn't last indefinitely.
It is minutes per day per day per character level and those minutes need not be consecutive. Considering that our hypothetical caster is likely a wizard that can act in the surprise round with boots that give him both a move and a standard action in said surprise round, I'm going to equate this +4 to a stat as just an assumed bonus. There is no reason to imagine he will ever be caught off guard with his +15 or more imitative bonus, and his knowledge of divination magic coupled with his base intelligence of 30+ indicates that to me he'll be played by someone that knows what they are doing when it comes to arcane casters.
I imagine that this wizard/evangelist would be fine to give himself telepathy, +4 Int, and a fly speed with a standard action. That seems like a really good spell that doesn't exist and only evangelists get.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
Walter, would the +4 bonus be unbalancing at 16th level? If not, what do you see as the difference? If so, how do you reconcile that unbalance with the developers passing it?
This question was asked before, another way.
I am fine with this class getting it's abilities when it was designed to get them. I am very doubtful that the PRCs designer was aware of the ruling allowing people to "early entry" into PRCs using SLAs. More likely they were not, and the PRC was balanced by having the earliest possible entry being level 6. Given that, I am fine with people getting the capstone ability at level 16. Getting into this PRC two levels early is where I am having trouble excepting it as "not unbalancing."
That claim previously caused a bit of an argument, so for now let's just leave it as my assumption about this PRC, whether or not it is is accurate is a debate for another time.
|
|
Ok, let's re-jig it slightly.
1. Deific obedience requires 3 skill ranks. Earliest entry INTO evangelist is at level 4, tier 2 boon at level 9.
2. Even without designating, the damage is still obscene. Assuming 2 animal companions at 28 STR and 24 STR, BAB 6, each with power attack and 4 attacks each. 2d8+6d6+(4x13)+(4x11)=126 damage average. Just with the 2 of them using power attack.
3. I took a second look at the hunter, and it makes it even better. Animal focus bull gives both companions +4 str each without a need for gold expenditure, for another +8 damage since the copy companion is now as strong as the original. With the standard bearer feat, that's another 8 damage, or +16 with a banner of ancient kings. We're now at average 150 damage. I've spent 18000 gold.
If they have precise strike as a teamwork feat, you can add an average of +14 damage to the attacks of the second attacker. We're now at 164 damage. If you also gave them broken wing gambit, one of the cats attacks again for 1d8+13+2+1d6 for an average of 23 damage. We're now at 187 damage average if all attacks hit. And 2 free grab attempts, and I have the spare feats to give them improved grapple AND greater grapple. And I can do this every round for the fight, except from round 2 onwards, I also get to join the fight with attacks or spells.
I've only spent money on a banner of ancient kings with this. And all of this at level 9 instead of 11 if Jiggy has his way.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
Jiggy, you can't keep bringing up the loss of a spellcasting level with Evangelist. Early entry or not, both theoretical PCs are paying that cost. The only question could be is if that cost is justified.And you can't determine whether the cost was justified if you stop looking at the cost. Just because another build also paid that cost doesn't negate the cost's relevance to determining power level. It's entirely possible that the cost isn't justified for traditional entry, and that the power boost for early entry is what it takes to justify it. Or maybe not. The only way to make that determination is to look at both the cost and the benefit.
Alright, let's look at some comparisons. Which do you agree with?
Example 1: If we compare a wizard 4/evangelist 7 to a wizard 6/evangelist 5, I'd argue the former is stronger, because they have two more levels of evangelist.
Example 2: However, if we compare a wizard 11 to an wizard 4/evangelist 7, I think we'd agree the Wizard is stronger, simply because it has another spellcasting level and is at the level where it gains access to 6th level spells.
This means that a straight wizard is likely more powerful than taking the PRC at level 11. It doesn't mean that our straight wizard is better than the PRC at every level.
Example 3: If we compare a the wizard at level 14 to a wizard 4/evangelist 10, I'd argue the evangelist is stronger, as I have above.
Example 4: On the other hand, if we compared the same wizard at level 14 to a wizard 6/evangelist 8, I'd be less convinced the evangelist is stronger, because the evangelist lacks their capstone ability at this point.
So in example 3, for that level 14 snapshot, I would argue that the early entry evangelist is the strongest build out of the three presented here.
Conclusion: Because of this, an early entry evangelist is unbalancing because it is replacing a class that is at the top of the power spectrum, even for just that one level.
This conclusion is easily refuted by arguing one of the following points
1) a straight wizard build is not at the top of the power spectrum,
2) that at level 14, a wizard 14 is more powerful than a wizard 4/evangelist 10,
3) we cannot determine the power of a character option by looking only at a single level comparison, or
4) just because something is more powerful for one level doesn't mean it is more powerful overall (this is similar to #3)
|
|
Ok, let's re-jig it slightly.
1. Deific obedience requires 3 skill ranks. Earliest entry INTO evangelist is at level 4, tier 2 boon at level 9.
2. Even without designating, the damage is still obscene. Assuming 2 animal companions at 28 STR and 24 STR, BAB 6, each with power attack and 4 attacks each. 2d8+6d6+(4x13)+(4x11)=126 damage average. Just with the 2 of them using power attack.
3. I took a second look at the hunter, and it makes it even better. Animal focus bull gives both companions +4 str each without a need for gold expenditure, for another +8 damage since the copy companion is now as strong as the original. With the standard bearer feat, that's another 8 damage, or +16 with a banner of ancient kings. We're now at average 150 damage. I've spent 18000 gold.If they have precise strike as a teamwork feat, you can add an average of +14 damage to the attacks of the second attacker. We're now at 164 damage. If you also gave them broken wing gambit, one of the cats attacks again for 1d8+13+2+1d6 for an average of 23 damage. We're now at 187 damage average if all attacks hit. And 2 free grab attempts, and I have the spare feats to give them improved grapple AND greater grapple. And I can do this every round for the fight, except from round 2 onwards, I also get to join the fight with attacks or spells.
I've only spent money on a banner of ancient kings with this. And all of this at level 9 instead of 11 if Jiggy has his way.
Spotted a mistake. The animal companions are at 30 strength, not 28. 21 for big cat, +3 str/dex increase, +2 floating ability increase, +4 enhancement from animal focus. So the average damage if all attacks hit is 196. Let's say for argument's sake I gave the real companion an amulet of mighty fists +1, so I can round it up to 200. Unless he took the attack of opportunity from broken wing, in which case it's 201 average.
As a point of reference, they are at a +6-2+10+2=+16 to hit, +2 again for charging. The second animal companion has another +2 for flanking (or more depending on feat selection). At +18/20 (or +18/22 if you have outflank) to hit, that's a pretty decent chance of hitting at level 9. And two grab attempts at +22 and +26 respectively. In later rounds, you're free to cast greater magic fang on the copy-cat, or use the punch-through feat if you're worried about DR.
|
|
2) that at level 14, a wizard 14 is more powerful than a wizard 4/evangelist 10,
I'll take a brief stab at 2) Walter. A Wizard 14 will have an additional 7th level spell, ignoring everything else. 7th-level wizard spells are so powerful that they are better than a stat increase that does not count toward bonus spells (which the Evangelist temporary ability bonus does not), or some random deific powers that increase spell DC. Take Limited Wish, a spell that has been discussed elsewhere on the forums for doing crazy things like Geasing opponents (no save just lose) or standard-action simulacrums of CR 20 creatures. I'll take another one of those, please.
|
|
Also, minor point, but to address:
I imagine that this wizard/evangelist would be fine to give himself telepathy, +4 Int, and a fly speed with a standard action. That seems like a really good spell that doesn't exist and only evangelists get.
It seems like a good spell... but not better than other spells I could've been casting. And while you could argue you can "cast" the Evangelist capstone more times per day, if I'm fighting at high levels I am taking it seriously and am going to use the most effective option available, not necessarily the most available option.
I'll throw out one of my favorite spell lines, Monstrous Physique. I could be casting one of those spells to gain extra senses, flight, multiple arms, boosts to DEX (for AC) and CON (for HP) and/or STR (for in-combat Blood Money, as needed in the Limited Wish example in the previous post), and a host of other odd and powerful abilities.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I imagine that this wizard/evangelist would be fine to give himself telepathy, +4 Int, and a fly speed with a standard action. That seems like a really good spell that doesn't exist and only evangelists get.
Just for the record, that same wizard has been flying all day since like 9th level, so you don't really get to count that in your argument. More responses to follow.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Getting into this PRC two levels early is where I am having trouble excepting it as "not unbalancing."
It sounds like your main sticking point is that you're having trouble accepting that just because something is more powerful than it was originally designed to be doesn't mean it's "unbalanced" or "overpowered" or whatever.
If you suddenly FAQ'd away the INT 13 prereq on Combat Expertise and every other combat feat that uses it, that would be strictly stronger than was originally intended, while simultaneously being at a completely acceptable power level.
It is okay for something to get stronger than originally designed.
It is okay for something to get stronger than originally designed.
The only thing that matters is that the final result is in a good place. It doesn't matter where it used to be.
|
It hasn't changed mine at all. I've been convinced from the start that allowing early entry into PrCs via spell like abiiities from freak races was an extremely bad move on Paizo's part.You can't get all 20 because the Obediences to certain evil gods are forbidden because of the requirement to regularly engage in some severely evil actions.Yes it was established earlier in the thread that Lamashtu is not a legal resource. I really hope not being able to use this one god changes anyone's opinion on Evangelist.
So by your own logic, you are okay with early entry into PRCs via spell-like abilities for an Elf who has taken the Envoy alternate racial trait, which provides spell-like abilities.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Alright, let's look at some comparisons. Which do you agree with?
Example 1: If we compare a wizard 4/evangelist 7 to a wizard 6/evangelist 5, I'd argue the former is stronger, because they have two more levels of evangelist.
Granted. I don't think this was ever under debate.
Example 2: However, if we compare a wizard 11 to an wizard 4/evangelist 7, I think we'd agree the Wizard is stronger, simply because it has another spellcasting level and is at the level where it gains access to 6th level spells.
Okay. And doesn't that seem like not what we want to be true? Shouldn't the option that requires more effort/investment actually be stronger, or at least not be weaker? More on that later.
Example 3: If we compare a the wizard at level 14 to a wizard 4/evangelist 10, I'd argue the evangelist is stronger, as I have above.
I still need to look deeper into that, but for now (for the sake of discussion) we'll call this a given.
Example 4: On the other hand, if we compared the same wizard at level 14 to a wizard 6/evangelist 8, I'd be less convinced the evangelist is stronger, because the evangelist lacks their capstone ability at this point.
Okay.
So in example 3, for that level 14 snapshot, I would argue that the early entry evangelist is the strongest build out of the three presented here.
Okay, going with that for now.
Conclusion: Because of this, an early entry evangelist is unbalancing because it is replacing a class that is at the top of the power spectrum, even for just that one level.
That sounds fantastic. I mean, the option that takes more investment has a one-level sweet spot where you actually get a payoff for your investment, and the rest of the time you're somewhat (but not horribly) overshadowed by easier builds? That sounds like exactly how PrC's should work, don't you think? I mean, why would we ever want for a PrC to be weaker than a Core class at every single level?
This conclusion is easily refuted by arguing one of the following points
1) a straight wizard build is not at the top of the power spectrum,
2) that at level 14, a wizard 14 is more powerful than a wizard 4/evangelist 10,
3) we cannot determine the power of a character option by looking only at a single level comparison, or
4) just because something is more powerful for one level doesn't mean it is more powerful overall (this is similar to #3)
As I've alluded to above, I'll go with a slightly different version of #4: that just because something is more powerful for one level doesn't mean that it's a problem. "Weaker at every level" is not something we should expect PrC builds to be. "Weaker at some levels and stronger at others" is something that makes PrC's worth taking but not "mandatory". "Stronger at most levels" is something we would want to avoid.
So even if we fully accept your assessment of the early entry Evangelist, the result seems to be exactly what we should want: something which has a small payoff for the investment, rather than simply being a downgrade.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
2) that at level 14, a wizard 14 is more powerful than a wizard 4/evangelist 10,I'll take a brief stab at 2) Walter. A Wizard 14 will have an additional 7th level spell, ignoring everything else. 7th-level wizard spells are so powerful that they are better than a stat increase that does not count toward bonus spells (which the Evangelist temporary ability bonus does not), or some random deific powers that increase spell DC. Take Limited Wish, a spell that has been discussed elsewhere on the forums for doing crazy things like Geasing opponents (no save just lose) or standard-action simulacrums of CR 20 creatures. I'll take another one of those, please.
I think #2 can be argued one way or the other. I'm not an expert on high level arcane casters, so I'll leave that specific debate to someone else, I just wanted to raise my concerns with it.
I am 100% sure that I'd rather have +4 to my Wisdom with my caster druid than another level 7 spell at level 14; the ability to add +2 to all my DCs is ridiculous for the cost of one 7th level spell.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
@ Jiggy: I have no problem with getting a sweet payoff for investment as you mentioned, so long as its when intended: level 16. Not at level 14. And here's where everything I've been trying to argue comes together, for better or worse. So I'll lay it all out and let it sit.
Getting access early is not something intended by the PRC author* and is only supported a rather recent rules change that blindsided everyone that plays this game. The SLA entry method for this PRC isn't even backed by the Creative Director of the Pathfinder RPG! How is this not evidence enough for you that we shouldn't allow it in PFS? In my mind its clearly a clerical error, a loophole, a janky legality that shouldn't be allowed.
All that aside, if you agree that at level 14, through early entry, this PRC becomes one of the most powerful character options, then why would we want to allow it in PFS? We should be keeping the power between builds relatively close, not allowing existing strong character builds another venue for further power creep. Nothing is gained except that those already dominant builds are rewarded and, by comparison, other less popular builds are punished.
I'd be far more on board by a change that strengthened straight rogue builds than a change that strengthens wizard and animal companion builds.
----------------------
*I am assuming the intent of the PRC author here. I believe I am justified in doing so because the Inner Sea Gods book is one of predictable patterns. For example, all of the deific options follow a pattern with their boons (SLAs, second ability, third ability). Similarly, all of the PRCs seem to require level 5 before entry. The only one that doesn't is the evangelist, and only when you allow SLA early entry. Given the response from JJ regarding evangelist SLA early entry, I am assuming it was never intended to work with the evangelist PRC.
|
|
The biggest thing about those DCs raising is, what spells are you using that you'd want that extra +2 to your DC? How much does that +2 DC mean for spells? Some spells its a chance to do more damage. Some spells it's a 10% increase in getting the spell to work at full power/ at all.
I personally feel that if you're building a mage that wants to do SoS type spells, that you have at least 1 spell for each save and you'll try to target their lowest save anyways.
I say the extra spell is "better overall". 7th level spells are when you get some really strong options. It's also allowing better metamagic spells going into that slot. Like I can prep another persistent Dominate Person, or Feeblemind or Hold Monster, etc. And I feel persistent's reroll is better than a +2 to the DC. Also your being able to cast another spell if you fail, you could prep 2 and use both if you really needed it. Let's not forget about the 7th lvl spells themselves. If a wizards strength is having options then another spell is stronger than a little bit better spell.
So a +2 DC is a nice and strong option, a good reward for all the work you did in taking that class, but I don't feel it's 100% certain to be better than a lv14 wizard.
|
|
All that aside, if you agree that at level 14, through early entry, this PRC becomes one of the most powerful character options, then why would we want to allow it in PFS? We should be keeping the power between builds relatively close, not allowing existing strong character builds another venue for further power creep. Nothing is gained except that those already dominant builds are rewarded and, by comparison, other less popular builds are punished.
Well, it's the idea that for the last 9 levels you were weaker for sure than your comparison person that didn't go evangelist. So for 1 level to maybe slightly edge out over them with a certain aspect of a class.
|
|
Even then we aren't even debating if you are strictly better. You traded DC for spell progression. It's not like you didn't lose anything and this build is all upside.
As a side note I personally feel like debating character options between 14 and 16 for PFS is near useless. While playing modules for credit is fun I don't feel it matters nearly as much as scenario game play balance. I also wouldn't even be mad if for one brief shining moment the guy who spent 13 levels asking why he even did this build felt validated for 1 module (if he even was really 'better' in the first place).