Ashborne's page

Are you familiar with the Ravingdork solution ?

Start with a martial character and shift to a caster when they become more powerful.

The problem with this is that A) multiclassing has been nerfed, and B) for my current character, that doesn’t fit the concept.

You can’t just ‘switch’ in this game. The multiclassing, while it works ‘meh/okay’ if you dedicate to a spell casting multi class, the other way around has lost many benefits that made multiclassing not as full of suck, like the AoO for fighter dedication or the retributive strike/shield thing that paladins(now champions) had.

Looks right. Consider it vs other PC-built characters, which we've said we built the system to support if you want to use them. The reason why the math adds up so similarly for spellcasters vs weaker saves when comparing to non-fighter martials is that spellcasters go to legendary proficiency while non-fighters go to only master in attack rolls, plus characters with under 20 Dex can use armor to still have just as high of AC, whereas characters with under 20 Dex/Con/Wis don't have such a way to compensate for their saves. All this means that a PC with armor and equivalent proficiency between AC and Will save and 18 Wisdom, say, will have 1 lower Will DC than their AC; add in the legendary casting proficiency and you've already made up the 3 points that weapons can gain from item bonus (that plus a weak save might well have lower proficiency than AC to begin with). Strong saves are harder to defeat than AC because characters' strongest save is pretty much always master or legendary, perhaps legendary, whereas very few character classes reach legendary in armor and some only reach expert.

Except that from what I can tell, most of the thematic damage-dealing spells that are single-target spells are spell-attack rolls. When you then add the magic items available by the time characters have access too by the time a spellcaster gets legendary proficiency, that difference once again usually will stack in the non-spellcaster's favor. Also, this comparison does not take into account acouple of other things, such as how a buff/de-buff may or may affect a combat, nor does it account for the AC and HP gap between spell-casters and martial characters. Spell-casters are not even glass cannons, they are more like glass pistol/shotguns with birdshot.

Casters usually create an effect except on a critical success for the save, while martials must hit to do anything at all. Comparing two Strikes against s a spell needs to be done from that perspective.

If that is the case, then every spell needs to create an effect, not just the ones you make saves against. Spells that require a to-hit roll, most of them anyway, do nothing on a miss, and thus is a wasted 'Strike' subject to MAP.

Get back in the locker nerd

This is exactly what this feels like.

Was it considered that martials only hit higher on the first attack of the round? After that they are less likely to hit. Spellcasters are less likely to need to worry about MAP given they will only attack with one spell per round.

So I think priority chance for hitting should be:

Martials 1st attack
Spellcasters 1st spell
Martials 2nd attack
Martials 3rd attack
Spellcasters using melee/bow for a 3rd action

Martials - Use Double-slice, or Twin-Feint. Two attacks for one action. Also, the martials, if they miss their first strike, can try again, and the more you roll, the better your chances for critical hits.

Spellcaster - 1 Attack spell, and unless it is a save spell that still does something on a successfull save, if you miss, that's it. Move and maybe try a dagger or starknife or something with your not so great physical stats. Or just hide, as you are easier to hit than Martials and have less HP.

Also, spellcasters are priority targets anyway, so any edge to keep the enemy off of them is helpful.

I originally thought that moving to a Spell Attack roll using your spellcasting ability modifier was a good thing, but the fact that there is no way to improve your Attack Roll with items is a huge downer. If Touch AC had been kept, that would have balanced nicely, keeping the damage dice higher for the attacks that still targeted regular AC, but as the game progresses, the action economy works even more against spells. Martial characters get 2 to 4 chances to hit, depending on build, have a better AC, and much better Hitpoints. Spellcasters get only one shot with a spell that requires a Spell Attack roll (for the most part), and they will be eclipsed by martial types as soon as they can A:) find a weapon with a +1 Potency rune on it, or B:) spend the 35 GP for a +1 Potency rune. Granted, I do not know what the 'normal' treasure is in a Pathfinder Society game, as my group has a free-form game, but trying to follow the rules as written has left my spellcaster struggling to keep up at 5th with attack progression and ACs. Combining this with the duration nerf for buff spells, the so-called 'Balancing' has rendered playing a spell caster as a sideboard character from low-mid to upper levels.

*** Caution - - - - Rant Ahead ***

All the complaining about spellcasters being too powerful in late-game forget that in order to get to that point, they had to suffer agonizingly to get there. They deserved to be rewarded for not having the same amount of fun as the others for most of the game. Also, when you look at the practicality of it, they should be anyway. Martials are mortal, bound to the physical world. Spellcasters, as they progress, shuffle off mortal constraints and draw closer, metaphysically, to becoming ascended beings, and a fighter or barbarian can't, and shouldn't be able to compete with that. Also, a GM should be able to balance fights to keep a spellcaster from dominating the playing field, or any class really. Either by specific enemies that spellcasters can't deal with spells, or spellcasters on the enemy side. Anyhoo, I prefer playing martial characters in general, but get stuck playing spellcasters due to lack of interest or lack of gaming experience from the other players, so having been struck with the nerf bat back to back like this really sucks.

Playing a wizard who wants to be able to use shortswords or rapiers, Fighter Dedication was the way to go. Now though, what wizard sinks a 14 into Strength? Dexterity makes sense for the AC, but strength? Not so much. My GM is running as it was for the playtest in this regard, seeing as there is no 'official' clarification yet as far as I can see, but as a whole, I feel multiclass dedication as a whole was nerfed to discourage players from doing so. The benefits suffered from playtest to release, and even in the playtest, it felt very restrictive. I am hoping that up coming class archetypes will aleveiate this lack of customization.

So for a specific example... Tonight we pitted 3rd level characters against a bunch of 6 HP goblin warriors. The fighter had no problem one shotting them, but the rogue needed to roll max damage on his shortbow to do so, and the cleric couldn't actually one shot a goblin with her starknife barring a crit. Meanwhile the wizard was fling around 2d4+4 Rays of Frost which killed gobs on minimum damage.

I dunno how consistent that sort of trend stays, but if cantrips are hitting harder than shortbows they probably need to be less accurate. I'm not entirely fond of limited resources like spells being more likely to miss though.

So, the rogue wasn't using the cleric as a source for flanking? Why not? A Rogue should be positioning to use sneak attack in combat, and since the cleric, using a weapon that should be more awesome than it is, can't and probably shouldn't be one shotting anything, the rogue should pair up with her. Also, the shortbow, attack multiple times a round, and being at 3rd level, should have a +1 potency rune for at least one weapon by now, and so has that +1 extra to hit.

Meanwhile the spellcaster yes has cantrips that are 2d4+4 for damage, but has less hitpoints, less times to attack when using said cantrip, and since there is no longer touch AC, the ray has to hit full AC. There should be an option to boost the only chance wizards have to hit something with a spell attack.

Speaking of spellcasting cantrips, why wasn't the cleric using Chill Touch or Divine Lance? Both are cantrips with the same damage as the Ray of Frost?

Sorry if I sound like I am attcking you and your group, but I am slightly vexed by the lack of support for the spell attack roll, and the scenario you described, in my opinion, was not really supporting either viewpoint as the character options were not utilized to their full potential.