|
Phase Bolt from Dark Archive has been errata'ed to do 3d4 instead of 1d4 + Ability Mod.
In a similar vein, Astral Rain has been changed from 2d4 + Ability Mod to 4d4.
Those are the only two examples of that type of increase I've been able to find (besides Needle Darts which everyone was already mentioning.)
Astral rain is both a psi cantrip, which are meant to be a step better than regular cantrips, and has a base rank of 3. I wouldn't compare it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm genuinely curious why Force Barrage wasn't 1d6 (average 3.5) instead of 1d4+1 (average 3.5).
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm genuinely curious why Force Barrage wasn't 1d6 (average 3.5) instead of 1d4+1 (average 3.5).
Hey now, you can take the name out of Magic Missile, but changing the 1d4+1? Now that's just crazy talk!
More seriously, I think it's because the spell's niche is finishing off very low HP enemies, so a higher minimum damage gives a higher threshold at which you are 100% guaranteed to finish off an enemy with it.
As someone newish to pf2e, I will say that pre-remaster cantrips honestly seemed too strong in comparison to spell slots.
The free, auto-max nature is seriously dangerous design and in conflict with the idea of static spell slots. For that idea of cantrips to work, they really do need to have the damage numbers set intentionally lower.
I'd like to talk about Needle Darts (& Slashing Gust) VS Electric Arc.
It is rather clear that the new norm for cantrips is that 2d4 at base, and IF your cantrip has some real outside cost or hassle, such as occupying a hand /w metal, or leaving both usable, you can go above the 2d4 base.
Electric Arc was def nerfed on purpose, and it needed to be. I was honestly surprised when I read it and there was no "trick" to getting the 2nd zap, no "10 ft from first target" or "if the first target is wearing/holding metal" ect.
----------
I understand it is painful to have tools like cantrips unarguably nerfed, but when the very first thing the books says about them is that they are weaker, cantrips REALLY must be weaker than proper slot spells.
If one invests in their catrips and finds the contextually better option, like Caustic Blast being a 5ft burst, then they can be at or even above par. That is fine and healthy.
Damage cantrips were always supposed to be the "emergency pistol," yet before the remaster, I had not really seen that idea as the norm.
The idea that many casters were happy to literally not carry a (runed) weapon was just completely bizarre to me, until I saw and realized that Electric Arc was just that close (or sometimes better) than ever considering a Strike.
The designers chose to simply tone down the damage on EA instead of adding a Needle Darts type restriction, which is fine, enough. 2 enemies both being in your range is about as universal as a "contextual power" can be, and it will still be superior to Caustic Blast in many (most) cases for those attached to that spell.
----------
In short, 2d4 + scaling seems the norm for "often contextual" damage cantrips, while 3d4 requires the caster to have some prior cost consideration, like hand stuff.
It is absolutely healthy for the game to nerf damage cantrips back into the designed intent of "backup pistol" while allowing for the right planners/manipulators to get far more out of them. Note that this change was paired with casters getting better access to and use of weapons!
[Please Delay behind and consult your Reposition Martial before casting Caustic Burst]
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
As someone pretty to pf2e I will say that pre-remaster cantrips honestly seemed too strong in comparison to spell slots.
What's your experience with casters in PF2?
Because you are the first one I read who qualifies cantrips as being "too strong".Electric Arc was the bare minimum for what a cantrip should be. It was never strong and never even remotely comparable to a slotted spell. The rest of the cantrips were so bad that one of the most basic advice to Divine and Occult casters was to grab Electric Arc one way or another.
Having played many casters (Sorcerer, Oracle and Summoner who got to at least mid levels), EA was my bread and butter spell at low level. Having to rely on other cantrips now is just uselessly painful. 1d4+4 to 2 targets for 2 actions was making martials laugh, now they are just sad as it's not even funny.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As someone pretty to pf2e I will say that pre-remaster cantrips honestly seemed too strong in comparison to spell slots.What's your experience with casters in PF2?
Because you are the first one I read who qualifies cantrips as being "too strong".Electric Arc was the bare minimum for what a cantrip should be. It was never strong and never even remotely comparable to a slotted spell. The rest of the cantrips were so bad that one of the most basic advice to Divine and Occult casters was to grab Electric Arc one way or another.
Having played many casters (Sorcerer, Oracle and Summoner who got to at least mid levels), EA was my bread and butter spell at low level. Having to rely on other cantrips now is just uselessly painful. 1d4+4 to 2 targets for 2 actions was making martials laugh, now they are just sad as it's not even funny.
At first level, pre-remaster, there was no damage based spell slot spells casters were casting with their rank one spells that were worth anything more than a cantrip, other than magic missile, and only because magic missile couldn’t miss and did force damage, so it has a very effective niche against difficult to hit or damage enemies. Burning hands/fire breath was/is clearly supposed to be some kind of multi-target damage bench mark for PF2, but electric arc used to obliterate it. Was/is it too low a bench mark? That is a different argument that depends a lot on the prevalence of weaknesses (to damage and to area effect) and creatures with those weaknesses. In Outlaws of Alkenstar, electric arc embarrasses martials for big swaths of the game, for example, because a cantrip triggering weakness on 2 creatures, on a successful save even, is brutal. More cantrips will be able to trigger weaknesses on successes post-remaster, but we are still waiting for truly remastered APs and bestiaries to have their effect on the game yet.
Spell slots have definitely gotten a lot more valuable in the remastered game.
As someone pretty to pf2e I will say that pre-remaster cantrips honestly seemed too strong in comparison to spell slots.What's your experience with casters in PF2?
Because you are the first one I read who qualifies cantrips as being "too strong".Electric Arc was the bare minimum for what a cantrip should be. It was never strong and never even remotely comparable to a slotted spell. The rest of the cantrips were so bad that one of the most basic advice to Divine and Occult casters was to grab Electric Arc one way or another.
Having played many casters (Sorcerer, Oracle and Summoner who got to at least mid levels), EA was my bread and butter spell. Having to rely on other cantrips now is just uselessly painful. 1d4+4 to 2 targets for 2 actions was making martials laugh, now they are just sad as it's not even funny.
In game design, there's a relevant concept of first order optimal strategies. The easily visible, "good enough" choice that does provide reward/success.
When trying to make good design, it's always a nightmare to provide and signpost noob-friendly strategies, without players becoming overly reliant upon them.
Because psychologically speaking, if that first strategy seems good enough early on, that particular problem has been "solved," and it is very, very hard to coax someone to reevaluate something and change their "right answer."
If you see a game itself saying out loud " ___ is flexible, but a weaker..." that is a not even a hint, it's a outright statement of intent. The hope for the designers is that as cantrips slowly become less and less potent as the levels go up, that deficiency will spark players to invest the time to invent another strat.
All too often, the slow creep of obsolescence just leads to frustration, "cantrips suck" type sentiments, while they keep using the tool that literally says on its tin that it was always suppose to be weak, but that early game gimme made it powerful before the player had a chance to find/invest in alternatives.
---------
Conversely, the more that first order tool sucks to use even early on, the more likely it is players will figure out ways to graduate beyond it, and the fewer will be stuck in that creeping obsolescence trap.
Limiting this to <L5 for now, cantrips are seriously good. Just the range + ability to not miss and invoke saves makes them already sidegrades to Strikes. The catch is that while Martials get a constant stream of tools to enhance Strikes, cantrips are much harder to enhance. Cantrips are supposed to be worse than Strikes btw. IMO Focus Spells are supposed to be a bit above a Strike.
One of my L2 Alchemists has been throwing out Scatter Scree even more than I had anticipated. Not only are spells like it no-miss, no MAP, but AoE also means no targeting at all. No concealment check, nor relevant Reactions, which is already relevant in Gatewalkers.
The Alchemical Crossbow, which is very much a "sorry Alchs suck, take this to survive the early game" gimme by the devs, is amazing with its 1d8 + 1d6. Yet, even with that in my hands, I've spent a turn or two choosing to throw a single-target Scatter Scree instead.
It already was said, but the assurance of 1/2 damage on save makes them an amazing last-hit tool, when even the Quicksilver-boosted Strikes will so often whiff, and enemies don't become less dangerous on low health.
------------------
Basically, if a caster was completely ignoring MAP actions before the rework, I can only hope players will seriously spend a good 20-30 min with their characters and evaluating how to integrate some into their combat. I hope GMs will allow a free retraining given the circumstance.
A single Feat will enable 1-action Shortbows, which is about as simple and easy to use as it gets. And anyone who's fine w/ something Simple, 30ft, and buying bombs can use the Alch crossbow for 2-action, beefy shots.
--------------------
Staves are 1d8 in 2-Hands for a bloody reason. Casters were always supposed to bonk alongside throwing cantrips for damage. The fact that cantrips like EA were a better idea than Striking most of the time is yet another prime bit of evidence why their numbers were too high.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Burning hands/fire breath was/is clearly supposed to be some kind of multi-target damage bench mark for PF2, but electric arc used to obliterate it.
It has nothing to do with Electric Arc being too strong but with Burning Hands being an absolute pile of trash. Burning Hands needs a severe buff (you can double its damage) to be even considered by experienced players.
There are a couple of useful rank 1 spells per traditions for level 1-2 casters. Why Paizo designed first rank spells to be so weak, I have no clue. But nerfing cantrips won't make them better.
...
I've been there...
Patronizing tone is really not a good idea in this boards. Also, you can have a different point of view but it's hard to get heard. If a significant portion of the player base considers cantrips weak you'd need more than a pseudo argument of authority to convince anyone your point of view is worth a thought.I won't answer your post because I think you are wrong from the first sentence to the last one. I'd sum up my point of view with this question you have eluded: What's your experience with casters in PF2?
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I won't answer your post because I think you are wrong from the first sentence to the last one. I'd sum up my point of view with this question you have eluded: What's your experience with casters in PF2?
I'm not going to fall for and engage with the fallacious idea that time spent within a single game system is at all relevant to the matter being discussed. Nor is the speaker themself relevant to the validity of the ideas they present.
If you fail to provide a coherent or convincing counter argument, people will pick up on that, whatever naked excuse you use to avoid engaging with it.
And if you are going to try to wield your personal game time like a club whenever someone disagrees with you, my angle of approach will change to reflect that. It is especially ironic that you're accusing me of of an authority argument while demanding to check my pf2e caster badge.
It has nothing to do with Electric Arc being too strong but with Burning Hands being an absolute pile of trash. Burning Hands needs a severe buff (you can double its damage) to be even considered by experienced players.
All numerical balance is relative.
If you perhaps think that casters are weak compared to martials, that is a different matter entirely that is messing with your discussion of cantrips within the context of a caster.
---------
If you personally agree that casters in general don't bonk w/ a staff, don't use MAP actions, and instead spam cantrips for damage, that is a very clear indication that you agree.
The only other ingredient is that you would also have to think that said Strikes/MAP actions were supposed to be contextually used by casters.
With those two together, that means that cantrips were too strong in comparison to said Strikes/ect.
If there is some purity/RP reason why you think that a caster swinging their staff is ridiculous, that's a you thing.
Meanwhile, there's a Wiz or two out there happy to experiment with Conductive Weapon + Bespell Weapon onto their Alch Crossbow, with a dash of True Strikes to taste.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
So it's less that cantrips are "too strong" (objectively they aren't, and the remaster hasn't changed much) and more that you just have a specific fantasy about weapon wielding wizards you want to fulfill.
Though even that feels a bit strained because cantrip + strike is a pretty good round.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I strongly suspect a design goal of cantrips was “let’s give casters tools they can effectively use to take advantage of what we want spell casting to be good at.”
Pre-remaster, this was 90% through damage type, but many of the damage types as single target spell attacks were so niche, that it was hard for casters to have a lot of variety, especially when multi-target ref save was available. Electric arc was the D8 simple weapon with reach and agile. Too many great traits on too high of damage
They mostly raise the floor with their changes to cantrips, but they dropped the ceiling on electric arc and ray of frost. Phase bolt on the other hand just got a whole lot better. They also made a lot more saving throw targeting cantrips, so low level casters will be able to do damage on a success more reliably at low level. This will be a big deal if weaknesses are prevalent in the monster core 1, and it won’t be a big deal otherwise. We still have to wait and see.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
What's funny is that, yes, [caster] with shortbow is better than [caster] with cantrips, but in any encounter that actually matters a caster isn't using cantrips or weapon strikes at all. They're casting real spells and using single action abilities like your metamagic/spellshapes, bon mots, one for alls and certain focus spells. Or moving.
What the cantrip nerf does is make casters feel more miserable to play when clearing through filler fights that aren't worth spending resources on. It's going to be beautiful to watch somebody roll snake eyes on a successful save and do 1 damage and, well, normal when they roll high and do exactly what they did before with modifier to damage but with more RNG.
I strongly suspect a design goal of cantrips was “let’s give casters tools they can effectively use to take advantage of what we want spell casting to be good at.”
Pre-remaster, this was 90% through damage type, but many of the damage types as single target spell attacks were so niche, that it was hard for casters to have a lot of variety, especially when multi-target ref save was available. Electric arc was the D8 simple weapon with reach and agile. Too many great traits on too high of damage
They mostly raise the floor with their changes to cantrips, but they dropped the ceiling on electric arc and ray of frost. Phase bolt on the other hand just got a whole lot better. They also made a lot more saving throw targeting cantrips, so low level casters will be able to do damage on a success more reliably at low level. This will be a big deal if weaknesses are prevalent in the monster core 1, and it won’t be a big deal otherwise. We still have to wait and see.
A proliferation of weaknesses would definitely do some good
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
This will be a big deal if weaknesses are prevalent in the monster core 1, and it won’t be a big deal otherwise. We still have to wait and see.
Weakness exploitation is only valid for Arcane and Primal traditions. Divine and Occult traditions target a very limited number of damage types, many of them being physical (so everyone can exploit it and as such it doesn't become an asset anymore).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the point about weakness exploitation is about cantrips as a class of spells, rather than a specific tradition. Divine and Occult, lacking material essence, were never supposed to be the traditions that could access a wide array of damage types. They get other things instead and this hasn't really changed (though divine lance got a *lot* better.)
So it's less that cantrips are "too strong" (objectively they aren't, and the remaster hasn't changed much) and more that you just have a specific fantasy about weapon wielding wizards you want to fulfill.
Though even that feels a bit strained because cantrip + strike is a pretty good round.
Nah, while a Wiz that isn't obsessed w/ throwing fireballs for damage is a totally valid fantasy if someone should choose it, that example was about doing at or above par damage with nothing but R1 spell slots. Conserving resources during a low - moderate fight, responding to those "but I'm useless w/o a top slot" / "what am I supposed to do if not spend a top slot on a low threat encounter?" type comments.
Bespell Weapon is L4, right when you get that Striking Rune.
2d8 Xbow + 1d6 bomb + 1d6 Bespell + 1d6 Conductive is a bit above par, but the Xbow still needs reloading, and after 3 Strikes so does the bomb.
While the Reload does mean you get to save/use those orphan 3rd actions, you usually need to make up for the 2-action cast.
Any non True Strike turn you loose the Bespell damage, leaving you at 2d8 + 2d6 for a 2-action Strike, which is about the naked, no feat, par for martial Strikes per action.
IMO, while it is good enough to prioritize the shots over throwing cantrips, it's not that much better.
While it takes thought to prepare, the concept is that it's just a single R1 spell + L4 Feat to get a caster above cantrip level, even in a general context.
It proves the point that a Wiz can do a bit of thoughtful prep, cast 1 buff, and shoot their way through the fight, no martial bow access needed. I didn't even mention Injury poisons or ammunition stuff.
Moreover, it's still a self-centered routine. Weapon buff spells are seriously underrated even when used by said casters, but they are of course better when applied to martials. That's a big part of why Bespell Weapon is a thing IMO. Need a caster-only enhancement to help justify making Strikes. Just wish it scaled.
------
But yeah, I still stand by the "cantrips were too strong" statement, and will restate that the comparison is internal to the caster's options.
If cantrips were used nigh-exclusively, and MAP actions were nearly never, then by comparison cantrips were too good. Though it is basically an equivalent statement to say that a caster's MAP actions were too bad.
However, as I have seen Electric Arc in low level play, I do unambiguously say that the spell was blatantly too powerful, and I personally avoided using it because it is/was too busted, especially alongside bonk/shooting.
A cantrip is a special type of spell that's weaker than other spells but can be used with greater freedom and flexibility...
I may add ability damage to spells back in as an overall when I fully switch to remaster. I like caster ability mods adding to damage like martials. This change will make it easer to create a house rule to cover every spell with maybe a caveat of no stacking ability mods, just choose the higher of two two for something like spellstrike.
I'm good the change as it makes a house rule mod easier and will give casters a bump in power like I prefer.
Think the same. But as you mention, “like martials”, the fair and what I’d do would be adding it to melee cantrips, but not to ranged ones.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This will be a big deal if weaknesses are prevalent in the monster core 1, and it won’t be a big deal otherwise. We still have to wait and see.Weakness exploitation is only valid for Arcane and Primal traditions. Divine and Occult traditions target a very limited number of damage types, many of them being physical (so everyone can exploit it and as such it doesn't become an asset anymore).
. The core divine class is the cleric, the core occult is bard. Both get at least some martial weapons built in, and they get cantrips that do damage types that fit their theme. Divine casters were never really all day blasters until the PF2 sorcerer. When that class gets remastered we’ll see if accommodations are made. The witch is a multi-tradition caster, but the hex cantrips on divine and occult versions are pretty good.
The one pause I would have for making the normal thing with spells to add your casting mod to damage is that it would make things like AoE or multitarget spells much, much better.
Like a 3 action 5th rank force barrage cast by a 10th level wizard would go from 9*3.5 average to 9*7.5 damage if it were 1d4+Mod instead of 1d4+1. Part of the argument for adding it to cantrips way back in the beginning of PF2 was that those are generally single target.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This will be a big deal if weaknesses are prevalent in the monster core 1, and it won’t be a big deal otherwise. We still have to wait and see.Weakness exploitation is only valid for Arcane and Primal traditions. Divine and Occult traditions target a very limited number of damage types, many of them being physical (so everyone can exploit it and as such it doesn't become an asset anymore).
This is one weakness I've noticed about discussions surrounding casters. A lot of defenses tend to speak in generalities that amorphously shift between all four traditions and always disregard the ways in which specific pieces of 'advice' fail to apply to multiple types of caster.
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
As someone pretty to pf2e I will say that pre-remaster cantrips honestly seemed too strong in comparison to spell slots.What's your experience with casters in PF2?
Because you are the first one I read who qualifies cantrips as being "too strong".Electric Arc was the bare minimum for what a cantrip should be.
I disagree. Electric arc IS overpowered. You only have to look at how many characters (martials and casters) go to significant lengths to get it. I've been in a PFS session where EVERY character had it. NONE of them getting it natively from their class.
It isn't game breakingly overpowered but it IS overpowered.
Strike/Electric Arc vs 2 opponent is a very strong turn for a great many characters (martials and casters). Obviously, you can't do it all the time but it makes a very strong turn when it comes up.
Oh, and I have LOTS of experience with casters in PF2 if you're thinking of trying to play that card.
And I've played and seen quite a few martials who took something like Ray of Frost as their ranged option for those times when they couldn't hit somebody with their pointy stick. Plate mail users with dumped dex and decent casting stat generally.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
You only have to look at how many characters (martials and casters) go to significant lengths to get it.
All that tells you is that it's better than other printed options within its niche. Without additional analysis you can't really draw any other conclusions.
And that additional analysis just doesn't really support the notion that even the best cantrips are 'broken'
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In practice this is just normal and expected that optimizer players will make some metas.
If the EA was removed today many casters/martials just would change it for Scatter Scree or something like that.
The idea of merge a single action attack with 2-action save spell it's just a simple meta easy to reach that many people noticed. If wasn't this probably would be another thing. It's not different from 5e two weapons to use your off-hand as bonus action when you don't have a better thing to do with it.
It kind of feels like we've gone from martials can't have nice things to casters can't have nice things
The things are way better now with the new focus spells rules and after the addition of kineticists.
As I said before the cantrips nerf is a minor nerf in middle of many buffs for many casters except the wizard (that also get some buffs in some feats but its far for sufficient to compensate its nerfs).
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What's funny is that, yes, [caster] with shortbow is better than [caster] with cantrips, but in any encounter that actually matters a caster isn't using cantrips or weapon strikes at all. They're casting real spells and using single action abilities like your metamagic/spellshapes, bon mots, one for alls and certain focus spells. Or moving.
In my experience they are using that single action to maintain an existing spell, to cast a Hex (if a Witch), to cast Shield, or to cast Glimpse Weakness (if you are the right kind of Psychic). Or move.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
I disagree. Electric arc IS overpowered. You only have to look at how many characters (martials and casters) go to significant lengths to get it. I've been in a PFS session where EVERY character had it. NONE of them getting it natively from their class.
Common doesn't mean overpowered. Electric Arc has traditionally been a safety net for weak builds: Low level casters, Investigators, Alchemists, low level archers, ranged option for martials with no Dexterity...
As PFS combat is notoriously easy, you see more of these builds in comparison to the more combat oriented ones and as such Electric Arc is more common than in other formats.But EA has never been anywhere close to overpowered. There are not many top tier builds where it takes a significant role. And it's mostly because other cantrips were uselessly weak that EA took such a role, it was the only competitive attack cantrip in the game.
What's funny is that, yes, [caster] with shortbow is better than [caster] with cantrips, but in any encounter that actually matters a caster isn't using cantrips or weapon strikes at all. They're casting real spells and using single action abilities like your metamagic/spellshapes, bon mots, one for alls and certain focus spells. Or moving.In my experience they are using that single action to maintain an existing spell, to cast a Hex (if a Witch), to cast Shield, or to cast Glimpse Weakness (if you are the right kind of Psychic). Or move.
I used bows to complete the actions of a spellcaster and they are very useful specially in earliest levels when you have a low number of spells and your proficiency is the same of the martials thats wheres when you use cantrips more frequently and its a very good experience to complete with a bow. But it doesn't substitute cantrips its helps to give some more damage from your 3rd action when you don't have to use it to move or to Sustain or an one-action cantrip like hexes or composition spells. They are specially good with spellhearts like Jolt Coil due the additional damage after the cast and to give EA or other useful spell to a non-arcane/primal list.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
But EA has never been anywhere close to overpowered. There are not many top tier builds where it takes a significant role. And it's mostly because other cantrips were uselessly weak that EA took such a role, it was the only competitive attack cantrip in the game.
Mark Seifter, one of PF2e's co-creators, explicitly said Electric Arc was overpowered, and in the link I shared explained why the cantrip was left in that state (there was a switch midway through development to spellcasting mod to damage across all cantrips). I can certainly agree that cantrips don't need to be nerfed from their current average state, and I do think Daze in particular deserved a lot better, but let's not perpetuate the debunked narrative that cantrips all needed to be buffed to EA levels of power all along.
I feel what's causing a lot of balance disagreements in this thread is the fact that the remaster updated a lot of game mechanics, but not all of the mechanics players wanted to see improved. With notable bits like Daze, the Mastermind Rogue, and other overlooked bits of content that could've used some love, the remaster's balance pass feels incomplete, to me at least, and while it is certainly true that Paizo had only limited time to do all of this work (and the net result is still an improvement), that in itself underlines to me a problem of scope confusion. Effectively, there were two goals with the remaster:
If Paizo had just stuck to Goal #1, the remaster would likely have been a lot less exciting (it would probably not even have been marketed as a remaster so much as OGL-related errata), but would likely have gone out within this timeframe with few to no typos and other oversights. However, the fact that Paizo took on both goals in a very short timeframe on top of their existing work is what caused the remaster to be both more ambitious, but also incapable of delivering on Goal #2 as fully as many of us expected.
I can understand why the decision was made to do both, as the OGL controversy was the perfect springboard to attract frustrated tabletop players with an improved product, but I would've still personally preferred it if the two had been kept separate, and the gameplay remaster had been given more time and playtesting to fully deliver. Part of the issue right now as well is that the furor has died down against WotC, and many of the players who were up in arms have gone back to D&D same as before, with just as little interest as before in approaching alternative systems. Thus, while the remaster achieved a lot within a very short period of time, I also feel that it couldn't have realistically achieved its goal of catching players frustrated with the OGL at the ideal moment.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mark Seifter, one of PF2e's co-creators, explicitly said Electric Arc was overpowered
Well, maybe you should watch it again as Mark never said Electric Arc was overpowered, he just said that Electric Arc was stronger than the other cantrips and why.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm happy my range of cantrips choices has expanded instead of defaulting to EA.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mark Seifter, one of PF2e's co-creators, explicitly said Electric Arc was overpoweredWell, maybe you should watch it again as Mark never said Electric Arc was overpowered, he just said that Electric Arc was stronger than the other cantrips and why.
Overpowered is a statement of opinion, and again, all judgements are comparative to the alternatives.
In my opinion, if EA was so valuable that martials would invest character budget to acquire and cast it over their Feat/Class enhanced MAP 2 & 3 Strikes, that's a SEROUIS red flag.
Yes, the ubiquity and overuse of an option, which has equal access cost to any other cantrip, is the prime metric by which I label it as overpowered.
Again, the very first thing the game tells you about cantrips is that they are flexible, but weak.
Cantrips are a min dmg bottom safety net that are almost always useable in a manner not possible to martials.
When a monk that's refused to carry a ranged option can only sit and wait VS a flying enemy, a caster's cantrips allow them to always be chipping away.
I'm still of the opinion that cantrip damage was tuned too high in general, and there is a lot of overuse / over dependence upon them in a manner that inhibits player (not char/XP) growth and that lowering their dmg a bit is healthy for the game as a whole.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, the lore changes were not just name changes and especially not “filing serial numbers off.” Where just names could be changed, it was because underlying lore already had been changed so much that the name already was the only thing that connected something back to D&D lore and not either a deeper underlying, open lore, or IP that Paizo had been developing for decades.
Even when Paizo had spent decades developing lore of their own, if it was just too tied to distinctly D&D lore, they took that element out of the game, they did not just change its name, even as that caused some players outrage. Their dedication to not “just filing off the serial numbers” really deserves better than to have people keep calling the remastery project that.
I don’t mean to sound hostile, and I understand why “filing the serial numbers off” might not sound like a particularly negative thing to many people, American IP law is confusing, convoluted and complicated. I don’t especially like most aspects of it myself. But Paizo is, and always has been incredibly respectful of it in their growth out of D&D lore and language so directly tied to theft is just really not the right way to talk about the remaster project.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Cantrips are a min dmg bottom safety net that are almost always useable in a manner not possible to martials.
So it's a safety net on the floor?
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also the whole: "Martials don't know how to attack at range" is ridiculous. Martials have absolutely no need for Electric Arc, it's actually a rarity in any optimized build (and in general, as Whew is pointing out, it's a side effect of grabbing something more valuable).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is pretty remarkable that the math of PF2 is so tight that some who plays casters all the time and built many characters who spent early levels primarily casting cantrips feels that the change from 1d4+att nod to 2d4 was moving electric arc to the floor. I am not judging that sentiment, just acknowledging how small a change we are talking about in a large picture.
The change to electric arc makes it a better spell for martials to pick up as a back up option, and a worse spell for casters. It still is a reflex save spell, which is better than targeting fortitude and much better than slashing gust in most typical situations, but there will be more rounds where players curse their die rolls than there were previously, and it now is essentially a worse, but more reliably 2 creature targeting, electric burning hands. I think there are some at Paizo who always imagined that was what electric arc was supposed to be, but are maybe unaware of how much vitriol burning hands has earned as a spell from players in PF2. As burning hands somehow turned to fire breath but stayed the same, the only way it Was going to rise above electric arc was for electric arc to get a nerf. I think this was not on a lot of players radar as the way this would play out, even as there have been vocal calls for a nerf to electric arc since PF2’s release. It is still endless repeatable, and can hit 2 targets much, much more easily than burning hands\fire breath, so comparatively it was a very minor nudge down compared to what happened to either daze, or to ray of frost/frost bite.
Daze has to be a mistake. The change to the spell list description is a glaring indication that something else was considered at least, but “will save targeting cantrip” probably spooked a larger change from happening at some point without changing back the short spell description.
Frostbite is just a completely different spell than ray of frost. Half the range is a massive nerf. Fort save vs spell attack is a boost given the more interesting effect frostbite has, and how it adds a teamwork element to its casting that way more cantrips should have…but ray of frost at 120ft range with a speed reducing crit effect was a sniper cantrip that the game now no longer has.
Overall, rage of elements boosted cantrips enough that the slight nerfing of a few of them is not a super big deal, but I think every full caster probably should have gotten 1 more of them, as the biggest effect of the remaster is that every caster now has to have multiple attack cantrips at low levels or they will underperform what they could do previously. Casters now must play the defense and damage type mini game and that takes 3 or 4 cantrips by itself for the first several levels.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Overall, rage of elements boosted cantrips enough that the slight nerfing of a few of them is not a super big deal, but I think every full caster probably should have gotten 1 more of them, as the biggest effect of the remaster is that every caster now has to have multiple attack cantrips at low levels or they will underperform what they could do previously. Casters now must play the defense and damage type mini game and that takes 3 or 4 cantrips by itself for the first several levels.
I think it'll just change the caster's builds. Before, the most basic advice given to any beginner willing to play a caster was to grab Electric Arc one way or another. And it was working ok without much addition.
Now, it's hard to tell. EA starts at 76% of what it was, gets to 83% at level 3 and never rise above 90%. It's a severe nerf.
I would not be surprised to see Kineticist Dedication on casters more often. The Dedication gives you a ranged attack that you can combine with a cantrip and at level 4 you get good "cantrips" in the form of Impulses. And Constitution is an interesting attribute for casters anyway. It's more costly than grabbing Electric Arc but it's stronger.
For example, if I compare Tremor to Electric Arc: Both have the same range and the ability to hit multiple targets even if Electric Arc is easier to land. At level 4, Tremor does 25% more expected damage than the new Electric Arc (similar damage to the old one) and gets to 56% more at level 5 and then stays around +50% damage (that's considering a 16 starting Con and the level 12 feat to get Expert in Kineticist class DC). The comparison is telling.
In my opinion, the problem has just been sidestepped: You won't see more often the bad cantrips you will just see something else in place of Electric Arc (and I feel Tremor will become the new Electric Arc).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also the whole: "Martials don't know how to attack at range" is ridiculous. Martials have absolutely no need for Electric Arc, it's actually a rarity in any optimized build (and in general, as Whew is pointing out, it's a side effect of grabbing something more valuable).
I agree.
I may understand the idea of get a cantrip with a martial when your hands are full (sword+shield or 2-handed weapon or 2-weapons and so on) because the action cost of change to a ranged weapon or when your build is low in dex for some reason.
But this also have its own counter parts. You need to serious invest into an spellcasting atribute (usually cha) select an ancestry that get a cantrip as innate spell or MC with an spellcasting dedication.
So its not for free to get a cantrip with a martial you may have to sacrifice something like get a lower con or wiz due the investiment into cha, or use some feat slot to get a dedication.
Also for many classes simply doesn't worth the investment. Fighter get naturally a +2 from its weapon proficiency so do a second Strike basically is like a MAP-3 for other classes, usually worth more to do a second Strike. Rangers also have a reduced MAP usually making unfeasible the cantrip investment. Barbarian cannot cast while in rage, Rogues usually don't get Sneak Attack bonus from cantrip without a racket that was removed from remaster (maybe back in a form or archetype, maybe not), Swashbuckler usually doesn't have enough action economy to use cantrips, Thaumaturge Mortal Weakness don't work with spells, same for Inventor's Overdrive. Maybe Str Champions may get a good use for cantrips in order to use it as alternative to some ranged attacks due low dex (or not some paladins use throw weapons and invest into dex to get their reactions longer).
Also now after the remaster implemented the Swap action you can easilly change weapons to use a bow. I honestly don't see too much benefit into use cantrips for martials. Use weapons to increment the DPR output makes sense for casters to use in parallels with their cantrip but the oposite usually doesn't worth.
Kineticist was already a great archetype for just about anyone to add support options, but I'm not sure it'll be taken more often because of this.
Now that there aren't any damage cantrips worth casting early on, the next step is probably a short-lived ancestry feat dip for a shortbow to smooth out the early levels before cantrips become obsolete. A fully upgraded bow outperforms cantrips for just about the whole game, as it should since you're paying for it, but it's cheap early on so it's a nice gain for minimal cost during a period where you aren't buying much of anything anyway. A +1 striking bow will let you coast until level 8 at which point I'm not sure you want to spend money on damage runes. I think you shouldn't even need a weapon anymore at that point between cantrips smoothing out to get you through filler fights and having access to spammable options in your lower slots and/or a staff of illusory object.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Despite how good the Kineticist dedication is, the impulse DC scaling is quite bad being frank. It is somewhat useful at really low levels, but that's it. Better used for effects without save, as Gesalt said earlier.
What I think people will do more is Psychic dedication at 2 for Telekinetic Projectile or Phase Bolt to have both better versions of those cantrips and a decent damaging focus spell (well, CHA and INT casters at least).
It is certainly a nerf in a lot of cases, I would love to see daze either go persistent mental damage or at least get every rank scaling (infact I would like every level scaling for damaging cantrips to be the default)
But in my games the casters have been happier rolling more dice with anything that has a 2d6 or 3d4 base even if the averages and minimums are worse. In my experience before and now cantrips are useful regardless of damage output though, they tend to just be super flexible and basic saves are just reliable.
It is dumb, but I wager outside of optimisation paizo's decision was probably the right one overall.
Really sad to see that daze didn't get off guard as an effect, even if it was just "off guard against the next attack"
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Now that there aren't any damage cantrips worth casting early on
Honestly, Shortbow is nowhere close to strong. You need to wait for level 11 for 2 shots with a Shortbow to get beyond a ranged Ignition.
The Bow is nice as a third action but not as a replacement for cantrips.What I think people will do more is Psychic dedication at 2 for Telekinetic Projectile or Phase Bolt to have both better versions of those cantrips and a decent damaging focus spell (well, CHA and INT casters at least).
Amped TKP is not exactly interesting, but Phase Bolt gets really interesting, I agree. Well, that's also a good guess!
Amped TKP is not exactly interesting, but Phase Bolt gets really interesting, I agree. Well, that's also a good guess!
It really depends, it is kinda boring, but it is also a 2d6 per rank focus spell. Not as strong as Fire Ray I guess, but you can get it at 2 with the dedication and 60ft base TKP is quite nice (like, among the nerfed cantrips it is the one that got hit the least).
Even though I personally find amped Phase Bolt more interesting overall (most of the time a +2 to hit in exchange of the lower damage, ignores the ever present lesser cover and lets other ranged allies ignore it as well on a hit, can block TP effects on crit), I would pick TKP in a party with a martial focused on combat maneuvers, for example.