ArenCordial's page

The "Prince" of Qadira - Male Human Rogue/Acrobat/Chronoskimmer

"Most people think time is like a river that flows swift and sure in one direction. But I have seen the face of time, and I can tell you: they are wrong. Time is an ocean in a storm. You may wonder who I am or why I say this. Sit down and I will tell you a tale like none you have ever heard."

So far my group has done double class feats and its worked great. To be honest a lot of us were initially down on second edition because it felt like it was difficult for any build to have any sense of wiggle room.

Once we implemented this change though everyone's enjoyment went up.

Since in P2e not much power is located in feats it hasn't lead to any sense of being overpowered but has done wonders for being able to more quickly realize a character concept.

they should show they queue for shipping when your order is pending and maybe show the approximate time for your order to be approved.

Honestly that probably would be a disaster. You'd most likely end up with a bunch of impatient people continuing to whine but now with information to try and micromanage. I could imagine the warehouse crew have an emergency or a meeting and somebody scream their head off on the forum because their shipment didn't go out when they expected.

I think it might be good to step back from some of the minutia to talk big idea stuff.

1.) Grit. I think that the interplay between Retorts and Grit is good, but there are too many things competiting for Grit as a resource. Its your primary ability resource and now its moving into being a defensive component. The design space is getting cluttered, probably some things could work well enough without requiring Grit.

2.) Something are kinda OP and Grit as a requirement isn't that much of a balancing factor when you can get Grit easily. I've mentioned Flashing Counter as a good example, getting what could be 1-2 extra attacks potentially every turn. It doesn't even require Grit. Whirling Blades is another, its basically Double Slice but you can use a greatsword. That makes something like Killing Strike not as attractive when I'm basically doubling my chances to hit, don't have to worry about flat-footed (which can be really bad with the new crit system), and both use the same resource. These are just example but there are more.

So what if instead of trying to make Grit the catch all resource, Drifter also gets Focus Powers. This would free up the design space a little. Things that are strong like Flashing Counter could remain strong but are balanced out by requiring focus points and thus limiting its use.

Things like Drifter's Gambit could just be a a nice DR bonus that scales with level and without having to constantly worry about failing and could always provide Grit because its use is limited.

I think this could be a way of freeing up the design space, increasing interplay with abilities, and varying up gameplay a little.

I never realized how much I wanted this to happen. Great stuff.

so wait, the wizard is supposed to be the flexible one, and the sorcerer the rigid?

i could have sworn it was supposed to be the other way around, between the wizard needing to choose strict school limits, pre-prepare their spells for the day, and requiring a lengthy process to change that, while the sorcerer can cast what they need as they need it (previously balanced by narrower list and more per day).

i still need to look over the sorcerer changes, but boy, having the other arcane class have equal spells/day, free heightening as they please, a much wider spell base and a fast swapping process, i'm not particularly seeing much incentive to actually choose a sorcerer over a wizard (to say nothing of however it compares to druids/clerics/bards now). it doesn't even seem like a competition.

This has more or less always been the case with the sorcerer regardless of edition. The Sorcerer has always been a test bed for new ideas handicapped from overcaution. Honestly at this point they may as well wrap the arcane sorcerer back into the Wizard and bring back the Mage class. Just have bloodlines be alternatives to Schools. Everything can go Arcanist style casting because unless Paizo sits down and does major work on the Sorcerer its just not worth having. Right now the Sorcerer has to compare against 4 primary spellcasters and its doesn't stack up well against any them.

I have grave concerns if Paizo thinks Quick Prep is balanced, let alone should be for free. I laughed when prior to the playtest releasing it was said some of the designers thought the Sorcerer was more powerful than the Wizard. The Sorcerer's history has been to red-headed step child to the Wizard since it debuted as its own class in 3e. Nothing has changed save the fact the class now gets to be the red-head step child to the Bard, Cleric, and Druid now as well.

I love the class and its always been the type of caster I want to play but its been the test bed for new ideas that have always error on the side of overcaution and left the class as definitively weaker than its peers. The only saving grace as been being a full caster meant you were strong anyway in previous editions.

Frankly I think they should just roll the arcane Sorcerer into the Wizard and have bloodlines as another option instead of schools then change every caster to arcanist style.

After this I have zero confidence that there will be balance among the Wizard and Sorcerer let alone the other 3 primary casters of Occult, Primal, and Divine. Trying to balance 1 class against 4 others are going to require a lot more TLC than I think Paizo has the time/ability to give.

I hate to say this because I love the idea of the Sorcerer, I love how in 2e it can have different spell lists. Still I just don't see how Paizo can pull this off without major work into the class.

Honestly I think Retribution Strike should just go. It's not that its weak, because its potentially quite strong. It's an interesting idea but there is just a whole host of issues around it that make it ill-suited to be the Paladin's defining class feature.

Off the top of my head
-It overwhelmingly favors reach weapons atm.

-It doesn't work with even some Paladin deities favored weapons. Paladin's of Erastil, sorry guys either use Erastil's favored weapon and lose these feature or take a melee weapon even if it isn't ideal for roleplaying. Its understandable though, because ranged weapons + ret strike wouldn't be balanced.

-It forces the Paladin to act as a 4th edition defender. It forces the whole class into a reactionary playstyle which some people will hate. I don't feel this is give me a tool kit and I'll pick how I want to play, instead this makes the class feel very much like 'you will play the Paladin this way.'

-Its use is highly dependent on the positioning and the DM giving you opportunities to use it. If the DM wants to deny you too many opportunities they can.

-Its worth will vary from table to table based on party compositions and DMs. That also means whatever assumptions Mark, Jacob, and crew are using to balance this ability are ultimately wrong, because assumptions are just assumptions and won't be accurate table to table.

-Limits room for abilities like Smite Evil because if you overload the class with offensive powers its likely going to be too strong.

-If you succeed if actually tanking and taking the hits, you effectively lose you class feature for that round + any class feats you invested into it. Somehow this is considered to be ideal?

-If you want to actually use Ret Strike you are hoping for one of your party members to be attacked. That is kind of a disconnect between what a guardian should actually be wanting which seems to be how Paizo wants people to see the Paladin.

-Action Economy. The Paladin potentially has a lot of features competing for a reaction.

IMO I think Paizo would be better served by scraping Ret Strike or making it a feat than the class defining feature. If Paizo does then it opens up a whole lot of room to accommodate different playstyles rather than marrying the class to one idea, supported by a clunky class feature.

I honestly feel like you can add Radiant Blade Master in as well. Both the level 20 capstone feats are pretty underwhelming. Spellcasters are getting level 10 spells, Fighters are getting perma-haste and you can add....keen to your righteous ally choices.

I have to agree with OP. The class feels too reactive.

Paladin's should be about seeking out evil and smiting it. Ret. Strike should either be a feat or a class component but not the defining feature of the class.

Ret Strike simply put
-makes the class very reactive.
-largely favored reach weapons, over more classical weapon types like the longsword.
-Flat out says ranged weapons can't play (sorry Paladins of Erastil).

That's pretty restrictive.

Also as a side note, does anyone else feel like the Paladin's focus on armor is just screaming for there to be a Radiant Spirit tied to armor? It feels like a big obvious hole to me.

Honestly I think the solution to how best to handle Spontaneous Heightening is really easy.

The Sorcerer can replace one of their Spontaneous Heightening spells for the cost of 2 spell points.

This would

1.) Make the ability feel more spontaneous, fitting the Sorcerer's theme.

2.) Not give Sorcerer's the ability to heighten everything reducing balance concerns.

3.) Have an opportunity cost because these is the equivalent of spending 1 to 2 uses of their auto-heightening bloodline abilities.

It would make sense to me on a fluff level as well, since the Sorcerer is expending the energy from their bloodline to open up the potential of one of their spells.

Dragon78 wrote:

Though calling them "bloodline powers" is a joke.

Does that mean Fey Bloodlines get Bloodline flowers? :D

No it means you can resurrect yourself if your party members clap.

Initial thoughts

*Bloodline = spell list. I love this, this is absolutely fantastic.

*Bloodline Powers. Personally I'm a little underwhelmed by the one's previewed. Is it flavorful? Absolutely, but how useful is it? Having a backup weapon would basically do most of what Glutton's Jaws do.

The real question is will Bloodline Powers + Spontaneous Casting be enough to mechanically keep the Sorcerer on par to other full casters like the Cleric or Wizard, with there greater spell versatility and own domain/school powers?

*Spontaneous Heightening. I understand why Paizo is afraid to let Sorcs heighten anything but there absolutely needs to be a way in the Core Rulebook to expand this. I mean some options will be a no brainer like Dispel Magic. Most players will gravitate to whats best in most encounters for day to day usage so I could easily see one or two very good spells reserving those Spontaneous Heightening slots, limiting experimentation and builds.

Secondly as we get expansion products keeping the Sorcerer so limited for their entire career is going to get more and more obvious as other spellcasters can more easily add new spells known to experiment with while Sorcs will still be in the mindset of whats the biggest bang for your buck on each spell level.

Mark Seifter wrote:

Lockewood wrote:

In Mr. Seifter's own words; "There's no longer any need to learn long chains of spells that are incrementally different and each require you to refer back to the previous spell."

The context here of "require you to refer back to the previous spell" I hoped made it clear way back in that blog, but it seems not (you're not the first to mention this), so to clarify: The "you" in this quote who is learning what spells do and referencing other spells is you, the player.

So... Summon Monster is still 9 spells, but the Wizard gets all 9 for the price of 1 and the Sorcerer has to spend their Spontaneous Heighten to get the same effect?

Could Sorcerers just use spell points to Heighten spells instead?

Pretty much.

Since the Sorcerer is so restricted on their number of spells known, they absolutely should be the masters of the spells they do know.

At the VERY least there should a feat that lets them increase the # of spells they can spontaneously heighten or maybe some feature that starts them out at 2 then get +1 for each level of TEML they move up.

I still like the concept of Occult spell list for Sorcerers. Not so sure why, other than it's different than Wizards. Maybe the vibe it gives Sorcerers? Hmm. Not sure exactly.

Ever since Paizo has spelled out that arcane magic is described as logic, rational thought, and categories in the 'All About Spells' blog I can't help but feel arcane feels like a poor fit for Sorcerers.

I fully expect Sorcerers (and perhaps Bards) will remain arcane but when I read that description is made it pretty clear that arcane magic was solely being based on Wizard traditions without much thought to the other traditionally arcane spellcasters. If the spontaneous arcane casters do remain where they are at it will feel like a square peg trying to fit into a round hole. If ever Paizo were going to try and make these classes more now would be the time.

I tend to agree with QuidEst on this. The problem with Bards have been too much emphasis was put on them being a jack-all-trades class that this eventually became the class identity. A bard apparently needs to be a skill monkey (but not as good as Rogue), a caster (but not as good as Wizard) but somehow is Arcane and can heal (not as good as cleric), can fight (but not as good as a Full BAB class), etc all while somehow being able to play music and being loremasters.

I'd love if 2nd edition focused on giving Bard a more firm identity with its own flavor. If making the Bard Occult does that, then I'm good with that. Frankly I think an Occultist like Bard that can store resonance in their instruments to create different spell like effects would be an interesting idea.

Torbyne wrote:

Wolfgang Rolf wrote:

Eldritch Scrapper, as far as I can tell you won't be doing any scrapping with this archetype. Not calling it useless just misleading, and gaining arcane strike through martial flexibility just adds to the absurdity of it all! Are they really expecting to use melee attacks with your joke of a BAB. This should have been a bloodrager or magus archetype as far as I concerned.

I heard someone mention that is a specific archetype to support people going into dragon disciple.

If thats really true, then that is by far the most niche archetype ever.

Yeah that was my impression when I was told. I still don't have the book but from the spoilers I read, here's my knee jerk reaction: Why play a Sorcerer?

Arcanists can spontaneously cast and has a day to day versatility the Sorcerer will never achieve. They also get vastly more tricks than a Sorcerer does with bloodlines. It also seems most of the Sorcerer's stuff can be gained with either the Eldritch Heritage feat line or the new bloodline amulets. Its stuff is out there for anyone to take to a level beyond even the Fighter has endured.

They can't get a decent bloodline or archetype that significantly adds new and powerful options as a spellcaster. Compare that to the Wizard who in this book alone can play with Arcanist's exploits, the Shaman's stuff, or flat out go cast from completely different spell lists. You'd think that they'd get a bloodline/archetype to play with Exploits like the Wizard but no, instead you get a option to hit things....that works well with a 1/2 BAB class. Any archetype requires multiclassing to work should be questionable.

Right now it seems the only reason to play a Sorc is it gets +1 spell slots max over a specialist Wizard. (Other than RPing of course). That's sad.

I'm curious what does the Mutation Warrior have to give up from Fighter?

And are there any new discoveries that look good for that archetype?

Last set of reveals for the night, I really need to crash (so I can read in bed! Yay!).

The Sorcerer gets two new archetypes:

The amazingly named Eldritch Scrapper focuses on mixing the Brawler's talent for mayhem with natural attacks.
The Mongrel Mage (not making this up, I swear) is a sorcerer that has a weaker mix of different bloodlines instead of a single powerful bloodline.

The Wizard gets three new archetypes:

The Exploiter Wizard gets in on the arcanist racket, gaining an arcane reservoir and arcanist exploits. I expect this to be a popular Wizard archetype.
The Spell Sage eschews the traditional focus on schools and instead studies specific spells and the spellcasting techniques of other classes, which allows him to tap into their spell lists (at a hefty action economy cost) a few times a day.
The Spirit Whisperer Wizard mixes witch and shaman elements - he gains a spellbook familiar like a witch, and a spirit link.

So the Wizard can play with the Arcanist's stuff but not the Sorcerer? So lame. There goes the chance to play the type of Sorc I've wanted to play since I first read about the class in 3.0. <sigh>

Being able to use your innate connection to magic to bend the rules of magic? Nope. Exploits would be considered knowledge and the Sorc is the dumb brute of magic. But hey here's an archetype to punch people because that will go great with your 1/2 BAB you dumb brute Sorc.

/rant

Sorry. Thank you for the information Kudaku its great of you.

I just got back from playing with some friends. Man can the Swashbuckler bring the pain at later levels. My Slayer could have not shown up compared to this guy. Even the always hasted Bloodrager felt shown up.

Quick question: Do gloves of dueling work for Swashbuckler Weapon Training?

I like the IDEA of Studied Strike if it needs something to set it apart from the Rogue. The implementation is just (besides being pretty much unusable/broken currently) lackluster at best.

This.

That's not new as they were in the prior playtest and quite frankly 1/day talents define underwhelming.

I feel compelled to say 1/day talents should die a terrible terrible death.

The surveys better measure the broad opinions of the playtesting audience.

The forums better measure the intensity of those opinions.

In other words, you could have outraged threads about, say, the Slayer, but the surveys only show a blip. That would be a vocal minority. Worth listening to, since they care so much, but should be taken in measure to assign emphasis. I'm not sure who wins in a vocal minority vs. a silent majority (in the assigning of revision efforts).

I think part of the problem people are having with the Slayer is that isn't not really Slayer-y. Really the class should be renamed Stalker, it fits the mechanics of the class far better than Slayer does as the class stands currently.

Crazy idea for a Slayer damage feature that sort of works thematically. What if instead of Sneak Attack the Slayer could use Vital Strike feats as part of full attack actions?

Limit the # of attacks you can apply Vital Strike to per round by your Favored Target bonus and hand out the feats at the appropriate levels so the Slayer gets damage bumps at the appropriate levels.

Example:
Slayer's Strike [Class Feature]
The Slayer is skilled at quickly identifying and then exploiting an enemy where they are most vulnerable. A Slayer may use a Vital Strike feat as part of a full-attack or Charge action against their Favored Target in addition to its normal use. The Slayer may make a number of attacks using this ability no greater than their favored target bonus per round.

At 3rd level they Vital Strike as a bonus feat.
At 6th level they gain Devastating Strike.
At 9th level they gain Assured Strike (may reroll 1 Vital Strike die and take greater roll)
At 12th level they gain Improved Vital Strike
At 15th level they gain Greater Vital Strike
At 18th level they gain Improved Devastating Strike.

So at 10th level Slayer would be able to make up to 3 attacks using Vital Strike.

Assuming a longsword that's 1d8+2 extra damage per hit (avg 6.5 per hit).

versus the current Sneak Attack of +3d6 per hit with a condition (avg 10.5 per hit).

Anyway it fits thematically and isn't so flank/feint/etc dependent.

Whose cuisine will reign supreme?

I really don't get why the developers are looking at replacing the Investigator's Sneak Attack with something more appropriate for the class' theme but they haven't indicated something similar to the Slayer.

Bane's been brought up a few times and that would seem perfect to me. Actually the whole Slayer concept would work well as a Ranger/Inquisitor hybrid as well.

I'd be more than willing to give up some of the damage die for something more consistent.