They should, but I haven't seen anything in the rules to actually say they have to. So, it will vary table to table and isn't a base assumption we can make.
It's also easy to dismiss half damage on a fail. That is a pretty big boost to for, even if it isn't flashy or doesn't feel great to only do half damage.
It's easy because the damage on a success isn't enough for a lot of people to consider it worth using, half of that isn't even worth mentioning.
Yes, in corner cases made just so this looks good, where you somehow know the enemy's HP, it will look good. In general play, according to many people's experiences, it's not common or good.
Except the party doesn't know the enemy's HP. That's a level of optimization the system doesn't facilitate. All they see is that one character hurt it and the next character killed it.
And I have to agree with Temperans. The lengths some of you go make poor performance sound like a good thing.
I've had very similar results with my party. My bard even got some wands so he has some AoE spells...but he'd rather Inspire and cast Haste because his smoldering fireball hurts several enemies but the Fighter can more often than not actually kill something - and dead enemies don't hit back. An enemy with 1 HP hits just as hard as one with 100.
I think it might just be a consequence of the system, even the fighter in fullplate with a shield gets hit fairly often, so the best way to mitigate damage is to remove an entire enemy. And if that's not actually the best strategy it's the one that's served them best.
So, I'm thinking this is not a unique experience and is probably why so few people really seem to care about AoE damage. It's just not that valuable to a player who can't see the HP bar.
I think maybe we should stop trying to figure out the class budget for stuff, we don't have that info and since we don't Paizo can be flexible with it to make the class fun. If the sweet spot is slightly over budget but fun, I don't really see that as a problem. We're still going to see other classes get played all the time even if kineticist is an 11/10 because it doesn't fulfill every character fantasy.
That's the only thing that makes sense me, and it doesn't make any sense! This is just one more reason to add to my list of why I don't like any classes since core. Unnecessary limitations and hoops and deceptive options.
hmm, that sounds familiar.
Captain Morgan wrote:
I dunno, over 10 levels the rogue couldn't sneak attack, like, 5 times? it's situational, but it's a pretty easy situation to set up. once they get debilitations it's even easier.
I've been comparing to a rogue with a shorbow, my damage MVP in the AP I've been running.
I legitimately have no idea how people were reaching the conclusion that you got double the class feats.
probably because the impulse abilities look a lot like spells and nobody blinks at a caster getting a feat and multiple spells a level.
is it really meant to be at range? a lot of it seems to want you to go into melee (and then get AoO'd to bits).
Captain Morgan wrote:
and even then, those pale in comparison to a halfling rogue archer - which is about where i'd want a class to be for damage requiring setup.
It's OK if the Kineticist is as strong as a Core class. That's what breaking/bending their tenets on class balance would result in.
Monk/Kineticist seems to be what a lot of people will want to do in some way anyhow, doesn't hurt for it to actually be good too.
frankly I'm surprised that you had a map big enough for that. I've gone through a lot of PFS and a few APs, and they don't seem common enough for the range to make the d4 seem worth it in any way. It just doesn't seem to be the way the game is typically played - and because of that I don't really think it's worth designing around to the extent that we see a d4 for someone's primary damage ability.
it definitely needs another pass. possible and feasible are different, and while possible water blasts aren't feasible underwater.
Air is way too low, because honestly any range value over 60' doesn't matter. I can count on 1 hand the number of times a map that large has ever been used in a game i've been part of. Whether it's a limit of the battle maps used or average table size, we just don't really see anything happen at those ranges due to practical limits.
it's a post-core class, the action economy will always be a struggle. but maybe that feedback will mean something this time around.
as for a blasting niche, it seems to be a pretty popular desire and fits the class fantasy. Lacks the versatility of a real caster and lacks the accuracy of a real martial. good damage doesn't seem that big an ask.
So we have at least 2 instances of Core classes needing fewer stats than other classes. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the Core classes were the strongest. I'd really like a new class to hit that level and Kineticist has the option and theme strengths of the monk it just needs a chassis that's good too.
But targetting multiple opponents with attacks like that is like, pretty bad. Especially past level 8. Every experience I've had tells me that focused fire is superior for single attacks for a system that tends to like sending "boss" encounters at us with single large targets. Being Bumi, Slayer of Fodder isn't worth much when everyone can slay fodder.
And Forceful without baseline martial accuracy isn't really worth much.
It's like being a cyclist at a motorcycle club. It's cool, but you're not exactly playing the same game.
They can ignore them if they only exist in encounter mode, but if they do something other than crack skulls they'll want some Int and Cha, and some Str if they want medium armor and a shield plus the basic adventuring gear.
I think the aura manipulation feat should be baked into the class and the number of aura feats increased. Having blast accuracy tied to con is too “one stat to rule them all”
Is it really that different from a casting stat though? Sure, there's HP on Con but the defensive proficiency isn't very impressive so they're going to take a beating most of the time.
I see what you mean. Probably should have had a keyword since core then.
why not make it closer to a spell and key attack off as well?
on one element, i'd like all of them to be good even if earth is my favourite.
seems to be an issue with blasts in general, they are presented and in our perception as a main attack, but are written as supplementary to the attacks you need to spend a feat on. i don't think i really like it that way.
This is the trade-off for getting martial progression. It would be bad for balance if the class got both martial proficiencies and full caster proficiencies. Part of why I thought the class should be more of a caster than a martial, but here we are
they don't really have martial proficiencies, it's more like warpriest proficiencies.
rayous brightblade wrote:
then say that's what your comparison is, Dex fighters are relatively uncommon.
same here, why change the class fantasy that much and keep the same name?
except it's not longsword damage, you're not adding a stat to it.
I'm not talking charop. I'm specifically saying I think the Elemental Blast is undertuned between weakish damage, non-attack key ability, and delayed proficiency when weighed against the mechanical footprint of the feature and my own personal interest in being a competent all-day magical blaster.
yeah, it's just not good enough. reminds me of the alchemist, which is sad. actually, comparing it to either alchemist or war-priest is no good for me, i've never seen someone play either and be satisfied with it - they always switch to something else.
I think gathering elements is more apt to compare to Stances. There are actions that end it and (some of the time) you're expected to switch between them.
Being partway through the document, I'm thinking that unless CON does something more obvious the Key Ability should be Str or Dex and Flexible Blasts should be built into that (Finesse on Dex, Brutal on Str). A lot of good points have already been made on why CON isn't feeling right, I don't think I need to rehash them.
At one point I thought they had intended to hire someone explicitly to help with the intent to work on communicating with the teams, authors, and segmentations in the company to do a kind of FAQ/Errata liaison work position that had them dedicated to finding all such flaws from the community and getting them into the hands of the team so as to answer them but if memory serves me correct this happened shortly before the pandemic hit and doing this kind of work would likely be complicated by, you know, the whole ZOOM workplace thing so I think the idea was just... scrapped.
It can be done online, I've got people doing similar work at my job and they make it happen. They're worth their weight in gold.
I've been having Invested items use the characters class DC for effects. It works pretty good and makes items do what we wanted them to.
Of course they do, they write like that all the time, especially for games like this. A professional just means you're paid for it, not that you're infallible.