Dark Archive Playtest Analysis

Monday, November 22, 2021

Welcome, Archivists. I’m James Case, here for your debrief on the playtest for Pathfinder Dark Archive! First, thank you all for taking the time to try out the psychic and the thaumaturge and for filling out surveys, talking about the classes on forums and chat servers, making blog posts and videos, and all in all helping us make the classes the best we can be! Now that the playtest has wrapped, we wanted to talk about some of the feedback we saw and the directions we’re starting to take class revisions. While we’re still in the middle of discussions, development, and analysis, we thought we’d check in. Keep in mind that both classes will get a ton of small updates across the board, as well as more feats, class path options, and the like, so we’re just going to focus on the big changes here!

Psychic:

Thaleon, the iconic psychic. Sketch by Wayne Reynolds.
Thaleon, the iconic psychics

Main Takeaways:We tried something a little different from the conventional spellcaster model with the psychic’s lower number of spell slots and strong focus on …focus... cantrips, amps, and other special powers, with conventional slotted spells filling a more supplemental role. The overwhelming majority of you responded that you preferred this approach over a conventional spellcaster approach; however, much of the feedback also indicated that while what the psychic got in exchange for this reduced spell loadout was very interesting, it didn’t feel powerful or useful enough to make up for the difference in lost spell slots. So, a major direction of change for the psychic will be to retain the “fewer spell slots” and “cantrip/amp focus” class role, but adjust the power level of the supplemental pieces so that you can truly feel like you’ve unleashed the awesome power of your mind. I’ll get into some of the approaches we’re taking in each point below.

We also wanted to get a sense in the playtest of what you all thought of the general tone and genre of the class. This was pretty conclusive—over two-thirds of respondents said the more magical cast was working for them, so we’ll be staying the course here as well!

Spells and Spellcasting: A strong majority of respondents stated that they preferred the playtest arrangement of the psychic’s spellcasting and key ability scores, so we’ll be sticking to those and keeping the psychic as a spontaneous occult spellcaster whose subconscious mind gives them a thematic choice of key ability score between Intelligence and Charisma.

I also want to call out that, as with past spellcaster playtests, the specific spells granted on the conscious minds drew only on spells we had already published, so some needed to be chosen for role (“a damaging spell here” or “a scouting spell here”) and easy understandability even if they were a little outside the theme—for instance, magic missile was a stand-in for a more on-theme damaging level 1 spell on the distant grasp psychic. The final Dark Archive book will introduce several new spells with the psychic in mind for thematically tighter granted spells!

Psyche: The ability to unleash your psyche to amp spells for free was originally intended to let psychics really feel like they got to be masters of focus by cheating the Focus Point caps. However, the fact that psychics had almost unlimited Focus Points took up a lot of the power budget for the class, rippling into the psyches needing to come online later and have both benefits and drawbacks, as well as affecting the power of amps (which I'll touch on next). Therefore, one of the biggest changes we’ll be making to psychic is to remove this aspect of Unleash Psyche, and then redistribute that power through the rest of the class for a more consistent play experience.

Consistent feedback also showed that while psyches were interesting when unleashed, most combats didn’t last long enough after the third turn to make getting into the psyche feel worthwhile (meaning that much of the psychic’s power was tied up in a feature they had inconsistent access to). While we don’t want to make Unleash Psyche an “assumed first-turn action” in the vein of Rage, Hunt Prey, or similar, we do want to make it easier to do. Thankfully, with the removal of psyche’s role as a source of unlimited Focus Points, we have a lot of options for making it more accessible, as well as for adding more punch, such as effects that happen when your first Unleash your Psyche, more special abilities that happen automatically when you are unleashed, or the ability to end your psyche earlier for a single big benefit.

Amps: Amps are one of the major parts of the psychic, and most respondents stated that they found these options very interesting—Mark tells me that amps scored among the highest for “interesting” of any class we’ve playtested—but also that they felt weak in comparison to normal focus spells. They were! Since Unleash Psyche meant that you could amp your focus cantrips 5 or more times in a single combat, as opposed to a hard maximum of 3, those amps needed to be a little under the balance point of spells like fire ray. While psychics will retain their focus on amps, they likely won’t have such an outsized number of them, so we have plenty of room to now bring the power scale of amps back up.

New Stuff!: Of course, we always increase the number of options between the playtest and the final class! In addition to the new spells that will be added in Dark Archive, the psychic will of course be gaining new feats and choices of both conscious and subconscious minds. In honor of our new iconic psychic, Thaleon, I’ll share his conscious mind, which is called the tangible dream. This path focuses on materializing and projecting the user’s thoughts into the physical world, allowing you to conjure walls, blades, and other constructs of force (or astral thread, or ectoplasm, as your character concept fits) around the battlefield!

I’m getting a vision… It’s… of Mark, talking about the thaumaturge!


Thaumaturge:

Mios, the iconic thaumaturge. Sketch by Wayne Reynolds.
Mios, the iconic thaumaturge

Hi everyone, Mark Seifter here for a post-playtest report for the thaumaturge class. I first want to thank you all for participating in the playtest by running and playing games, posting your playtest results and analysis, answering surveys, and having good discussions! In particular, the playtest was happening during a pretty challenging period for us at Paizo, and I appreciate how all of you in the playtest stepped up your game compared to earlier playtests with extremely civil discourse, keeping repetitive points to a minimum so I could keep up with all the new ideas, and just really engaging with each other’s ideas and feelings in good faith to talk about different directions.

Overall, people really liked the thaumaturge, with a strong good feeling from the majority of players, but there were definitely some areas where it needed tweaking or rethinking, usually in a way that didn’t detract much for most playtesters but did in a big way for a small number of them. This left the thaumaturge in an interesting situation, with about as many people who were about as many huge fans of the class as the highest-ranking class we’ve ever playtested, but then that small number with especially low rankings. The great news about that is that it left a clear path forward.

Main Takeaways: The one thing I wasn’t sure about was whether playtesters would like our new vision of the thaumaturge or would prefer something more similar to the first edition occultist. What I discovered is that you really like the martial thaumaturge concept, by an overwhelming majority, and want it to remain a magpie picking up from all four traditions. However, there was a desire to make it clearer how the class fantasy works with respect to exerting your force of personality to convince the universe, as well as to add more capacity to the class’s skills so that Charisma-based skills are front and center to match the intro lore about being persuasive. The changes to Esoteric Antithesis and Find Flaws (see below) may help with this as well to allow better advantage of your Charisma key ability score, while freeing up a broader variety of character concepts—this will let players freely choose whether to lean more heavily on magical learning or more on making things up as you go along as best fits the character. We’ll also be making a variety of quality-of-life changes based on other playtester proposals.

New Implements: As the playtest mentioned, we’ll be adding up to nine implements (three each granting active, reactive, and passive abilities). Of the four new implements, one of them will be the tome (or a ledger, notebook, or similar object), a passive implement that mysteriously writes down information about everything around you to assist you. The other implements are one to let you inspire and lead your allies, one to debuff your enemies, and one that misleads your enemies’ attacks, but I’ll leave it up to you to figure out what implements those might be!

Esoteric Antithesis and Find Flaws: One thing I’ve learned from these playtests is that our playtesters tend to be our most dedicated and experienced players (and even if you’re new to Pathfinder, you are very experienced with tabletop RPGs in general). So, whenever even our most experienced playtesters think a mechanic is complicated, I think I should take another look at that. People loved the benefits for these abilities but thought they were complex, and that they sometimes had issues being tied directly to Recall Knowledge. Our plan is to disentangle Esoteric Antithesis from Recall Knowledge (with a feat, like investigators’, to pick up a free Recall Knowledge if you want that), instead just flat-out forcing your will on the universe with a check to establish a connection (I’m thinking a name like “Forge Connection”). One consequence of this is that even on a failure, you can forge a connection, but a success or critical success will give you more. Additionally, while a high majority of players really liked the playtest benefit from Esoteric Antithesis, there were some good ideas about how to open up to allow a variety of benefits to allow for more playstyles. So, we’re looking at offering multiple benefits a thaumaturge can pick from when you successfully forge a connection. This separates out the benefit where you apply a creature’s highest weakness and the benefit where you create a new weakness as two options, to handle the feedback people gave about situations where they were already applying a creature’s highest weakness due to preparation for the encounter. It also allows you to gain new benefits, for instance, when you might prefer a special buff or debuff instead of simply more damage. Right now, we’re toying with the idea of having a different connection for each implement, as some folks also thought implements could use one more unique power, and then have more connections available through feats

Pacts: People loved the story of the pacts—in fact, they wanted them to have stronger effects, and many wanted the option for any character, even non-thaumaturges, to gain them. We had actually planned on including similar pacts in a yet-unannounced part of the book, but based on your feedback, we also expanded the pacts into a full-on pact binder archetype for anyone to take! Opinions were pretty varied about their rarity, perhaps the most mixed we’ve ever gotten in a multiple choice question for paths moving forward, so we’ll take that into account moving forward.


A Glimpse, A Hunch, A Flicker of the Future:

Hey, thanks for sticking around! Here’s something coming up in Dark Archive—while the book is still in development and various things might change a little, I wanted to give a sneak peek into a new type of player option coming up in the cryptids file, one of the eight casefiles of the Dark ArchiveM.

Creature Echo Feats

Creature echoes are a new type of feat that grant you special powers based on exposure to an unusual creature. These are rare and usually only occur after a significant event involving the creature. Imagine a town where people have, one by one, begun to turn to stone. You might spend many months tracking down the cause of the phenomena, only to eventually find it was an ancient creature with a petrifying gaze living deep under the town. However your encounter with the creature goes, the following feat might echo with you if you survive:

Stone Skin — Feat 12
Rare, Transmutation
Prerequisites You have been petrified.

It might have been a medusa, dracolisk, or even a fossil golem; regardless of the source, you were the target of some petrifying effect, and an element of that stony gaze has remained with you, both protecting and slowly consuming you. Your limbs are coated with a layer of stone that rests atop your skin. You gain a stone fist unarmed attack which deals 1d8 bludgeoning damage, has the shove trait, and is in the brawling weapon group; unlike a normal fist, it does not have the agile or finesse traits. As your life force ebbs, this petrification spreads over more of your body to form a stony armor. When you have fewer than half your maximum Hit Points, your stone fist unarmed attack increases its weapon damage die from 1d8 to 1d10 and you gain resistance to physical damage equal to your Constitution modifier.

If you would gain the dying condition, you can choose to instead be permanently petrified to avoid the risk of death. Counteracting this petrification requires a casting of stone to flesh of a spell level equal to at least half your level, as well as a counteract check against the hard DC for your level. Each time you recover from petrification caused in this way, you gain a new scar on your skin in the shape of a long, thin crack.

Scribes of the Archive

Before I go, I want to say thanks to the awesome writers whose work is featured in the book. We’re in the middle of development and I gotta say, they’ve done some strange, spooky, and brilliant work!

Written by Rigby Bendele, Logan Bonner, James Case, Dan Cascone, Jessica Catalan, Banana Chan, Kay Hashimoto, Sen.H.H.S., Patrick Hurley, Avi Kool, Daniel Kwan, Kendra Leigh Speedling, Luis Loza, Ron Lundeen, Liane Merciel, Jacob W. Michaels, Andrew Mullen, Quinn Murphy, K. Tessa Newton, Mikhail Rekun, Patrick Renie, Michael Sayre, Mark Seifter, Shay Snow, Soup, Alex Speidel, Solomon St. John, Geoffrey Suthers, Ruvaid Virk, Jabari Weathers, and Isis Wozniakowska



We’ll have more for you in the future, so stay tuned for further updates over the next year. Again, thank you all so much for taking the time to participate in the playtest and for sending in feedback to make the classes the best they can be!

In darkness lies enlightenment,

James Case
Designer

Mark Seifter
Design Manager

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Pathfinder Playtest Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Pathfinder Second Edition
151 to 198 of 198 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

6 people marked this as a favorite.

You should be allowed to pick between Cha and Wis for Will anyway. And Dex/Int for Reflex.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

The mental stats (a bit more then the physical stats) have always been a bit blurrier imo, and often there are characters in media who in theory would have high charisma and high will but also like low perception. ( a decent enough collection of character traits)

(one of my biggest issues is the conflation of perception and sense motive in 2e. I miss having someone who is good at maybe picking up on someone emotions but oblivious when it comes to finding things or vice versa)


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I am a little concerned given the lack of spell slots the psychic will get a pretty raw deal if they end up with the usual number of focus points.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
siegfriedliner wrote:
I am a little concerned given the lack of spell slots the psychic will get a pretty raw deal if they end up with the usual number of focus points.

They could end up with a feat similar to the champion's Desperate Prayer, so they have an easier time recovering a focus point when they really need it.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

For mental stats, I usually think of Intelligence as the mental equivalent of Dexterity, Wisdom as Constitution, and Charisma as a mental version of Strength.

Wisdom helps you resist mental attacks, whereas Charisma is how you impose mental ability (or sometimes Int a la finesse)


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Golurkcanfly wrote:

Class DCs just scale very awkwardly since they're both slow to progress and don't get item bonuses, so when targeted against the same DCs or statistics as other abilities, they fall behind.

A good comparison for this is just Demoralize/StD vs Spell DC vs Class DC all against a creature's Will save. That range, especially at higher levels, is enormous. At 15th level you can have Legendary + Item bonuses vs Master vs Expert against the same defense, which makes those rather tricky to balance.

So…don’t target it against a will save. Or any other current defense. Honestly I’d dislike using any defenses, as those vary by creatures of the same level. A simple level+number sounds good to me.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Personally I'd rather have it not mess with saves either. A level-based check seems more appropriate.

It's both better math and letting the creature save against it sort of drains some of the 'collection of esoterica' flavor that made the thaumaturge so cool and makes it feel more like you're just putting a curse on the enemy.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I would prefer if it wasn't a check to begin with, because it's not super fun to fail at the core thing your character does.

Especially when it's a 'single target focused' class, since scaling checks means they're likely to the worst in the group at combating single targets rather than the best.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
siegfriedliner wrote:
I am a little concerned given the lack of spell slots the psychic will get a pretty raw deal if they end up with the usual number of focus points.

I think at least for them "spells known" should be decoupled from spell slots (even more then it was). This system "spells known equals spell slots given" completely breaks at 2 slots per level. If they don't have slots they at least should have a choice how to spend them.

So at least 3 freely selected spells known per level.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

I always pictured the Thaumaturge using more of poetic reasoning, even with the werewolf example.

Like I would picture the thought process being 'a wolf is a dog, dogs can't eat chocolate, let's smear some on my hammer before I batter that werewolf'... Or BBQ sauce against a Wereboar


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm not super invested in either class, but I did think the coolest part of the psychic was being able to fire off more focus spells than other casters. Taking that away, even if they're getting to be as strong as other focus spells, means the class goes back to being just another caster, to me. It also doesn't bode well for future classes like kineticist, if things like a focus spell that does 10d6 at 20 (when martials are doing much more damage) is as high as we're going to get without going into 'its too strong' territory.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yea I'm interested to see how limited slots and limited amps gets tuned on the last iteration of this caster. I'd imagine that many limitations would warrant some amount of punch.


13 people marked this as a favorite.

Have to share some of Gaulin's concerns a little bit. A big part of what made the psychic appealing was that it had these powers that it could throw out with a lot more regularity than a traditional spellcaster could, creating this more dynamic, at-will kind of gameplay (that reminds me a little bit of 4e psionics, albeit with a more limited scope).

I'm also a little confused. The opening post says that the feedback was toward keeping the class built around cantrips and amps... but the breakdown mentions taking away the free amps from Unleash and taking away the bonus focus points/regeneration the class got too.
Maybe I'm misreading something, but if these are going down to 1-2/encounter powers like traditional focus spells then it's not really going to be the centerpiece of the class anymore.

I also think there's maybe too much emphasis on "redistributing" power here. The write-up talks a lot about taking away one thing to create more room in the power budget to buff something else, but the playtest's problem wasn't the overall structure of the class so much as just that the mechanics didn't deliver well.

Both Dark Archive classes were very weak in their playtest forms. Rearranging stuff isn't necessarily bad but I hope just actually making things better doesn't get lost here, because they need a lot of that.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

The gist I get is that psychic is losing the ability to cast free amps while unleashing psyche, but the power level of the amps is going up. Which I personally dislike, a lot, and honestly I can see it being harder to balance than making amps slightly weaker (still stronger than they were in the playtest) than other blasty focus spells (but being castable more often). If the 'all day focus blasting' aspect is going away, then focus spells are going to have to be straight up stronger than classes like sorcerer, who already are the best blasters in the game (I think).


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Just recalled, something I don’t see mentioned is the use of consumables on the Thaum. Now, a thought I had about a year ago (and I will GLEEFULLY crib the playtest class feats that will allow it) was a class archetype that turned the alchemist into a general magical consumable class. It was a bit tough, and might in the end require 2 class archetypes as scrolls are simply balanced differently than other consumables, but I was pleased to see the Thaum could be that class instead.

But…there’s no talk about that here, so I’m a bit worried that aspect will get dropped or set aside. To me the bag of tricks was an important narrative extension of EA and FF, and I’d hate to see that pushed aside. Might need to be in order to make room for other concepts, like doubling down on the implements.

Guess we’ll see. Maybe they’ll have the alchemist class archetypes (in addition to normal archetypes so any class can dabble too, or just extensions of the current ones like Talisman Dabbler) I’m hoping for in DA too.


10 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Squiggit wrote:

Have to share some of Gaulin's concerns a little bit. A big part of what made the psychic appealing was that it had these powers that it could throw out with a lot more regularity than a traditional spellcaster could, creating this more dynamic, at-will kind of gameplay (that reminds me a little bit of 4e psionics, albeit with a more limited scope).

I'm also a little confused. The opening post says that the feedback was toward keeping the class built around cantrips and amps... but the breakdown mentions taking away the free amps from Unleash and taking away the bonus focus points/regeneration the class got too.
Maybe I'm misreading something, but if these are going down to 1-2/encounter powers like traditional focus spells then it's not really going to be the centerpiece of the class anymore.

I also think there's maybe too much emphasis on "redistributing" power here. The write-up talks a lot about taking away one thing to create more room in the power budget to buff something else, but the playtest's problem wasn't the overall structure of the class so much as just that the mechanics didn't deliver well.

Both Dark Archive classes were very weak in their playtest forms. Rearranging stuff isn't necessarily bad but I hope just actually making things better doesn't get lost here, because they need a lot of that.

The idea is that the prospect of unlimited amps through unleash psyche is why they made them so weak, because the designers already know full power focus abilities on that basis would be too strong, so removing that actually lets them buff up the amps. I'm going to guess that in terms of power, the unlimited amps was too unwieldy to balance around since it made the abilities endlessly spammable.

There's nothing about them losing additional focus points / regeneration beyond that, so my guess is that we'll end up with enough to use a couple every encounter, it would have to have more going for it than the Oracle at minimum, since it relies on amps even more than the Oracle actually relies on its mysteries and the Oracle has full casting.

Its also a bit tough because power is one of those things the community never actually seems to agree on with these classes, thinking of how I see people talk about the Magus as being weak vs. how strong it is in actual play. I think what the Psychic really needs is 'impact' essentially spending a resource to use an ability and feeling like it had a significant effect, whereas the playtest emphasized 'a bit better than cantrips' spammable abilities.


11 people marked this as a favorite.

I do share similar concerns as well, for most of the newer content but especially for the Psychic. Sometimes it seems like "shifting the power budget around" is treated as the answer to everything, when it... isn't. It's possible that something simply doesn't have enough power as is, in general. We're not state alchemists, not everything needs to follow the law of equivalent exchange.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
The-Magic-Sword wrote:
Its also a bit tough because power is one of those things the community never actually seems to agree on with these classes, thinking of how I see people talk about the Magus as being weak vs. how strong it is in actual play.

Ain’t THAT the truth.

In general, I try to remember the designers know their game better than me, and keep my opinions on power to myself. I can identify the odd gap here or there (and did on the gunslinger and magus),* but I’m just as often seeing things, such as how weak the playtest spellstrike felt versus how much impact it could actually have.

Edit: *I’m also 75% sure those gaps, the level 7 magus ability and gunslinger reaction, were deliberately placed in so they could slot something into the chassis later. Like I said, I assume they know their stuff better than me.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I kinda get why they're making the psychic more typical of a focus spell class. Unlimited focus points are difficult to balance around. The only other class that can pull something like that off is the oracle only at 18th level with blaze of revelation, and it might kill you outright for using it. More powerful amps with what I'm going to assume, oracle focus point progression, might not break the mold, but it should still work fine.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
The-Magic-Sword wrote:


Its also a bit tough because power is one of those things the community never actually seems to agree on with these classes

Well, I mean that's the thing, it sounds like there was generally a lot of agreement here. The feedback writeup itself says as much. Amps are cool but the class is weak.

And it feels hard to reconcile that assertion with the actual meat of the changes, which seem to be pulling back on Amps and leaves it unclear whether or not the overall power and balance issues are being addressed.

AnimatedPaper wrote:


In general, I try to remember the designers know their game better than me, and keep my opinions on power to myself

I sort of feel the opposite. Paizo has never had trouble coming up with great ideas and interesting solutions to how things feel, but power budgets are always one of the most difficult things to measure and handle in tabletops and tend to cause long term problems if a mark is missed.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
aobst128 wrote:
I kinda get why they're making the psychic more typical of a focus spell class. Unlimited focus points are difficult to balance around. The only other class that can pull something like that off is the oracle only at 18th level with blaze of revelation, and it might kill you outright for using it. More powerful amps with what I'm going to assume, oracle focus point progression, might not break the mold, but it should still work fine.

My concerns is that they are always down spell slots compared to other casters so they need to be consistently up in focus points to balance out that loss.

If the psychic caps at 3 like every other class then eventually other classes will end up with the same number of focus points but just more spells and that doesn't really seem fair.

I suppose it could work if they raise the power floor of psychic cantrips without spending focus spells but that's probably just as hard or harder to balance than the semi-unlimited (once per turn within 3 rounds) focus cantrips they had previously.


15 people marked this as a favorite.

The unlimited focus spells was never the appeal of the Psychic to me; being psychic was.

I’m very, very excited for this change, especially because it allows for a flavorful ability with a lot of customization potential (Psyches) to not have a set gameplay loop (waiting for turn 3), and that I can actually use all of my class out of combat or in the first two rounds. I’m over the moon about the news in this blog.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

If amps aren't powerful and repeatable (by that I mean at least twice a combat at lvl 1) I'd kind of rather have 3 spell slots/ spell level. Otherwise, I wouldn't consider the sacrifice worthwhile.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
keftiu wrote:

The unlimited focus spells was never the appeal of the Psychic to me; being psychic was.

I’m very, very excited for this change, especially because it allows for a flavorful ability with a lot of customization potential (Psyches) to not have a set gameplay loop (waiting for turn 3), and that I can actually use all of my class out of combat or in the first two rounds. I’m over the moon about the news in this blog.

My issue with unleash is that it was gamey and hard on the other side of the table. There's already lots of incentive to start a combat and drag it to two or three rounds with the new SoM spells and buffing, so making it every combat a Psychic is trying to cheese things to start on round 3 is both too gamey and kinda painful for gms IMO.

I'd have been fine with a ramp up though (someone suggested each round powering up a smidge) but Amps needed a bump regardless.

If anything I think the idea of making current power the default and then Amp versions upgraded versions would be a really great bump.

Aka telekinetic projectile base damage for any kind of Amp is the current amped damage and the damage boost Amp is a d12 sounds good.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I feel like we might be able to thread the needle for "the psychic should be better at focus than other people" and "amps are getting more powerful" could be to give the psychic an alternative means to activate amps besides "spending focus" (which is just the most efficient way to do it.)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I feel like we might be able to thread the needle for "the psychic should be better at focus than other people" and "amps are getting more powerful" could be to give the psychic an alternative means to activate amps besides "spending focus" (which is just the most efficient way to do it.)

Kinda like how you can use conflux spells to recharge spellstrike, or do the dedicated recharge?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Squiggit wrote:
AnimatedPaper wrote:


In general, I try to remember the designers know their game better than me, and keep my opinions on power to myself
I sort of feel the opposite. Paizo has never had trouble coming up with great ideas and interesting solutions to how things feel, but power budgets are always one of the most difficult things to measure and handle in tabletops and tend to cause long term problems if a mark is missed.

Oh I’m definitely talking about just myself there. A lot of y’all seem to have a decent handle on that part, but I don’t.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Squiggit wrote:

I also think there's maybe too much emphasis on "redistributing" power here. The write-up talks a lot about taking away one thing to create more room in the power budget to buff something else, but the playtest's problem wasn't the overall structure of the class so much as just that the mechanics didn't deliver well.

Both Dark Archive classes were very weak in their playtest forms. Rearranging stuff isn't necessarily bad but I hope just actually making things better doesn't get lost here, because they need a lot of that.

Quote:
I do share similar concerns as well, for most of the newer content but especially for the Psychic. Sometimes it seems like "shifting the power budget around" is treated as the answer to everything, when it... isn't. It's possible that something simply doesn't have enough power as is, in general. We're not state alchemists, not everything needs to follow the law of equivalent exchange.

Yeah this seems to be a common issue in discussion and the feedback process, where they're hesitant to just buff the things that are weak and underperforming but prefer to rejigger things so they're slightly less underperforming in a different way.


8 people marked this as a favorite.

If I recall correctly, the Playtest Swashbuckler, Investigator, Summoner, Gunslinger, Inventor, and Magus were all weaker than the actually released versions of those classes.

So they might deliberately undertune the playtest so as to not distort the "does this mechanic work" stuff.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:

If I recall correctly, the Playtest Swashbuckler, Investigator, Summoner, Gunslinger, Inventor, and Magus were all weaker than the actually released versions of those classes.

So they might deliberately undertune the playtest so as to not distort the "does this mechanic work" stuff.

Except that would make no sense as you are not really getting accurate advice.


10 people marked this as a favorite.
Temperans wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:

If I recall correctly, the Playtest Swashbuckler, Investigator, Summoner, Gunslinger, Inventor, and Magus were all weaker than the actually released versions of those classes.

So they might deliberately undertune the playtest so as to not distort the "does this mechanic work" stuff.

Except that would make no sense as you are not really getting accurate advice.

That depends on what they are measuring. Mark is pretty good at math. They don’t run playtests for the raw numbers balance of a class. Your advice on the class’s power level is not the data they’re looking for.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
AnimatedPaper wrote:

Just recalled, something I don’t see mentioned is the use of consumables on the Thaum. Now, a thought I had about a year ago (and I will GLEEFULLY crib the playtest class feats that will allow it) was a class archetype that turned the alchemist into a general magical consumable class. It was a bit tough, and might in the end require 2 class archetypes as scrolls are simply balanced differently than other consumables, but I was pleased to see the Thaum could be that class instead.

But…there’s no talk about that here, so I’m a bit worried that aspect will get dropped or set aside. To me the bag of tricks was an important narrative extension of EA and FF, and I’d hate to see that pushed aside. Might need to be in order to make room for other concepts, like doubling down on the implements.

Guess we’ll see. Maybe they’ll have the alchemist class archetypes (in addition to normal archetypes so any class can dabble too, or just extensions of the current ones like Talisman Dabbler) I’m hoping for in DA too.

I gotta admit, this is a concern of mine too. The playtest version had a lot of feats for free consumables, but the whole needing a hand for a weapon and a hand for an implement limited the use of consumables severely; especially since the class lacked any quick draw type ability (unless you can free swap to a weapon implement to strike with it). the flavor is there; besides the alchemist, the thaumaturge feel the most "consumable item expert" class in terms of flavor, but that flavor is hard to achieve with the current thaum set up

Liberty's Edge

I think the use of consumables should be fine because of the following sentence : "What I discovered is that you really like the martial thaumaturge concept, by an overwhelming majority, and want it to remain a magpie picking up from all four traditions."

Magpie through consumables is my take on it.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
The Raven Black wrote:

I think the use of consumables should be fine because of the following sentence : "What I discovered is that you really like the martial thaumaturge concept, by an overwhelming majority, and want it to remain a magpie picking up from all four traditions."

Magpie through consumables is my take on it.

I feel like they are more referring to the Thaumaturge being a magpie of the four traditions, gathering a variable collection of esoterica and lore. But I can see consumables being inferred from that.

*clears throat and puts on best Wayne June impression.*

"Trinkets and baubles... paid for in blood."


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Not gonna lie a non-weapon/shield Quickdraw at level 1 akin to Quick Bomber would be a pretty solid class feat if you could negotiate a different contingency than a Strike.

Maybe flourish trait free action? It would basically end up being a mandatory feat though I suppose


5 people marked this as a favorite.

The playtest had a 'quick swap' feature baked into it. Some way to allow that feature to be more friendly to consumables would be great. Even just the ability to 'quick stow' an implement would be amazing for QoL.


Midnightoker wrote:

Not gonna lie a non-weapon/shield Quickdraw at level 1 akin to Quick Bomber would be a pretty solid class feat if you could negotiate a different contingency than a Strike.

Maybe flourish trait free action? It would basically end up being a mandatory feat though I suppose

I'd been about to say it'd end up being mandatory. The Implements are enough to warrant that, much less being a Consumables user (and weapon wielder for those who don't have a weapon Implement yet, if ever).


8 people marked this as a favorite.

No matter how hard you try there will always be tiers of power in an asymmetric game where different people use different mechanics depending on what they're playing.

The Fighting Game community has to deal with character tiers too. In the FGC there's a growing opinion that the kind of game balance that is realistically achievable is something like: No more than three character tiers, no god tier, no trash tier.

It seems to me to be a standard that's fair to class-based TTRPGS too. I'd say Pathfinder 2E is pretty close to meeting it.

Are the Fighter and Bard tier 1? Yeah, probably. Are they god tier? In my opinion not really.

Are the Alchemist and Witch bottom tier? Yeah, probably. Are they trash tier? Some people say yes quite loudly. Personally, I'm not convinced.

Will the Psychic and Thaumaturge be tier 1? Probably not, the majority of existing classes aren't after all. Will they be trash tier? Again, probably not.

Now some people just can't seem to have fun unless they're playing a tier 1 class and there is nothing wrong with that. But expecting every class to be tier 1 without being overpowered is unrealistic and would require superhuman designers.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

It isn't a matter of wanting them to be tier 1. It's a matter of my players being frustrated and disappointed when they can directly see that their character isn't pulling their weight compared to their fellow companions. They get disappointed if one person in the group is being the person who is the only one who actually has an impact in combat, and that they're achievements in the fight mainly come to just 'eating up the action economy by being targetted by some enemies'.

Being tier 1 isn't the desire. Being at least average is the desire.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
GM OfAnything wrote:
Temperans wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:

If I recall correctly, the Playtest Swashbuckler, Investigator, Summoner, Gunslinger, Inventor, and Magus were all weaker than the actually released versions of those classes.

So they might deliberately undertune the playtest so as to not distort the "does this mechanic work" stuff.

Except that would make no sense as you are not really getting accurate advice.
That depends on what they are measuring. Mark is pretty good at math. They don’t run playtests for the raw numbers balance of a class. Your advice on the class’s power level is not the data they’re looking for.

I was not talking about numbers, but everything. If the class feels bad because of bad action economy then the numbers don't matter, the class will still feel bad.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Part of me wonders if Dark Archive might give some toys to the Investigator class along a similar theme as the Thaumaturge, to scratch the itch for a 'smart' occultist/monster-hunter.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The Ranger should get some too and be the WIS-based one.

Or maybe them taking the Thaumaturge MC Dedication will be enough. I sure hope so.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
The Raven Black wrote:

The Ranger should get some too and be the WIS-based one.

Or maybe them taking the Thaumaturge MC Dedication will be enough. I sure hope so.

If CHA is the MCD requirement... probably a bit steep for either of those classes to afford most of the time. Not impossible, but not easy.


Maryam290 wrote:

Please visit

(http://dradodalovetemple.com)

i am here to give testimony on how this powerful spell caster called Dr Adoda helped me to fix my relationship. i was heartbroken when my fiancee told me he is no longer interested in marrying me because he was having an affair with the other woman where he work. I cried and sobbed every day, until it got so bad that I reached out to the Internet for help, that was when i read a review about the great work of Dr Adoda, then i contacted him for help to get my lover back, he helped me cast a powerful (reconciliation love spell) and to my greatest surprise after 48 hours of doing the love spell my Fiancee came back on his knees begging me to forgive him We are now happily married and all thanks goes to Dr Adoda Wonders for helping me save my relationship you can contact Dr Adoda through his email address: adodalovespelltemple440@gmail.com or WHATSAPP him on+2348112825421

Flagged. C'mon. Dumb way to necro a thread.

151 to 198 of 198 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / Paizo Blog: Dark Archive Playtest Analysis All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.