BendKing's page

I agree completely with this assessment.

Not sure they improve fun. Depends on the players. Test it with your players and yourself as DM. If you can handle it and want to remember all your house rules as well as all the other rules, then go for it.

I'm trying to minimize house rules in this edition.

The ones that are in play so far are working well (I still hadn't got the chance to test every class change).

Inherent issues with a class are not uncommon.

They are an issue when they can trivially be solved by going ranged and giving up almost nothing to do so (which is true in the case of Inventor, Magus & Inventor), thus all but invalidating a melee playstyle.

I think you are missing one of the design principles of the game. That Attack of Opportunity is supposed to be uncommon so you don't need to take the manipulate trait off everything. If it is too common then the solution is to take it off more monsters.

Removing Natural Ambition seems pointless. Just giving everyone an extra level 1 class feat like you did is enough. Natural ambition is now worth less. Personally I like that human is a strong ancestry pick. I don't want to devalue them.

If I was going to change the proficiency system I would make it smoother not more generic.

At the moment it is untrained is 0, trained gives 2+level, the other all give +2. I'd change it to untrained was level-2 , trained was level +0, and the other proficiency increases add +1. Plus there would be more ranks. But then I really am reworking the game.

But the different places it goes up and down for different characters is part of the charm of the game. The system is not generic by choice, and you are trying to make it so.

To rebalance casters in general I'd just allow a +1 rune to focus items to get +1 to their spell DC or attack. Maybe +1 as a level 5, +2 at level 13. Anyway clearly Paizo have declined to do such a thing. If they thought it was needed they have had plenty of oppourtunity to do it.

Your absolute worst idea is to make Electric Arc universal. I mean, I get your point. But just give the classes some other options. Scatter Scree is close enough. It would be good if they make a good cantrip with a fortitude save. Puff of Poison is not it. I find it amusing as a GM sitting there with a monster that has a Reflex Dc 7 higher than its Fortitude and 5 higher than its Will DC and the casters are using Electric Arc.

Rather than changing the Key Ability score of the Swashbuckler I would suggest a new optional rule: Allow the player to choose the Key Ability score of there class. Its is simple enough that Paizo might even officially adopt to as an optional rule anyway.

I don't feel qualified to...

Thanks for the feedback!

The issue with AoO is that it is both highly GM/Campaign dependent, and that later on 30% of monsters have it. It isn't as uncommon as you might think. In addition, since this document focuses on simple fixes, I prefer removing Manipulate from certain options rather than go monster by monster and remove their Attack of Opportunity.

Regarding Natural Ambition - fair commentary. I will consider it. It's one of the changes I'm least sold on right now, actually, and am looking for a better fix.

On the proficiency changes, like I said, I prefer simpler solutions to complex ones. Also, I actually like making it more generic. I don't think that the current solution of balancing classes using different progression rates and proficiencies, and thus creating level gaps where there are stark differences in proficiency that get resolves a couple of levels later is a good thing. It seems that you like this, so I suppose it's a matter of taste and we'll have to agree to disagree here.

I don't think Casters as a whole need rebalancing, actually, other than making sure they all have a cantrip as good as Electric Arc, because as-is non-Arcane/Primal casters are kind of forced to take an Ancestry which will let them get it (if you're optimizing).

Why give other classes Scatter Scree and not Electric Arc? What is the difference?

I actually agree on the optional rule that lets players choose their KAS. I might do that, but for now decided to steer clear of more extreme changes where possible to avoid.

BendKing wrote:

Greetings!

I've been working on a houserule doc for the last few months which attempts to balance the different classes and options of the game,
...
Feedback is welcome, though I would highly prefer feedback on the changes themselves, and not whether they necessary or not, since the point of this thread is not to argue class balance :)

This seems totally contradictory to me. The goal is to balance the classes but you don't want to argue about class balance?

You're powering up everybody but powering up some classes and archetypes a lot more than others. Which only makes sense if the original classes are significantly unbalanced.

Given that I think the existing classes are fairly well balanced I think your efforts are pretty much all making things worse.

And you need to do more work. For example, warpriest vs cloistered cleric. Warpriests are now very clearly far superior.

I don't see what is contradictory here. I don't want to debate whether the changes are necessary or not, I want feedback on whether they do what they're supposed to do well (buff the classes in both fun and meaningful ways).

If you don't agree the classes that got buffs need those buffs in the first place - that is just not something I'm personally interested in debating about. If, for example, you think the buffs that they got went too far, or that they are uninteresting, that would be a welcome feedback.

Given that you think the classes are fairly well balanced as-is, it seems like this document isn't really aimed at you, which is completely fine :)

And I definitely don't agree that Warpriest is "far superior" to Cloistered, but thanks for the suggestions.

Greetings!

I've been working on a houserule doc for the last few months which attempts to balance the different classes and options of the game, with a high priority on getting the most "bang for your buck" in terms of changes.

This means I mostly did not go into changing various class feats, but tried focusing on the most core aspects of the different classes.

Keep in mind that this document is written from a perspective of an optimizer, but is also meant to make the classes more fun to play.

I've also included my rationale for most of the changes so you could understand where I'm coming from.

Lastly, this document is a work in progress and likely to change and have things added to it.

Feedback is welcome, though I would highly prefer feedback on the changes themselves, and not whether they necessary or not, since the point of this thread is not to argue class balance :)

Without further adieu, the document:
Pathfinder 2.5e

BendKing wrote:

Golurkcanfly wrote:

The Magus just has some questionable downsides for it's strengths which already have reasonable balance decisions. Spellstrike is balanced by needing to recharge. They only get 4-6 spells per day, so their spellcasting isn't that great (especially when they are behind on proficiency). They also have rather poor class feats, with some particularly questionable choices (why is Raise a Tome two feats just to have a token benefit over normal shield usage?). They're inherently MAD, so they will have less defenses since they can't invest in defensive stats as freely. They also have a much tighter action economy, so aren't as flexible in that regard.

But on top of that, they have less HP and provoke AoO for using their primary feature that is supposed to be used in melee (so, not like an Archer who is punished for bad positioning and can just Step out of AoO range).

Now, Starlit Span gets around this, but that's a rather character-defining option and doesn't help the other subclasses. Reach also helps somewhat, but that drastically limits options when Reach is already stronger for other reasons. It's needlessly punishing for the majority of Magi when the benefits it gets are either already balanced by other elements *or* are incredibly token.

Well said. I would be interested in discussing how to buff the Magus with you if that's something you would find interesting.

Honestly, just a little more durability. 10 base HP and Spellstrike not triggering AoO would go a long way.

Alternatively, some more action economy boosters, but that's less of an issue for the Magus compared to some classes (Melee Investigator).

While I completely agree that these changes are necessary I'm not convinced that it would be enough.

The Magus just has some questionable downsides for it's strengths which already have reasonable balance decisions. Spellstrike is balanced by needing to recharge. They only get 4-6 spells per day, so their spellcasting isn't that great (especially when they are behind on proficiency). They also have rather poor class feats, with some particularly questionable choices (why is Raise a Tome two feats just to have a token benefit over normal shield usage?). They're inherently MAD, so they will have less defenses since they can't invest in defensive stats as freely. They also have a much tighter action economy, so aren't as flexible in that regard.

But on top of that, they have less HP and provoke AoO for using their primary feature that is supposed to be used in melee (so, not like an Archer who is punished for bad positioning and can just Step out of AoO range).

Now, Starlit Span gets around this, but that's a rather character-defining option and doesn't help the other subclasses. Reach also helps somewhat, but that drastically limits options when Reach is already stronger for other reasons. It's needlessly punishing for the majority of Magi when the benefits it gets are either already balanced by other elements *or* are incredibly token.

Squiggit wrote:

The complaint, as far as I can read it, isn't that the Magus isn't the best martial in the game. It's the the magus, putting all their resources into one gimmick that they can only pull off a couple times a day, doesn't actually excel very much at doing that thing. The fighter being better than the magus is almost irrespective of that, it's just used as a comparison point because clearly for a lot of people, the Magus sells itself on these peaks and valleys, but apparently its peaks aren't actually really peaks.

Succintly put, thank you.

Squiggit wrote:

Watery Soup wrote:

1E players

None of the people playing a Magus in any of my current games have ever even played PF1, but they nova with their spell slots because they think its cool.

Exactly. The classes flavor is doing the big spellstrike. Which while flashy, is actually bad. Classes should be GOOD at what their flavor is to do, that is why a lot of people play them.

Magus has issues with that, both in the AoO thing, in their spellstrike not being a lot of damage, and their action econ making it hard to pull off.

I LIKE Magus, I just want to improve it. The designer did a great job improving Magus from the playtest. But when you make big changes, it is hard to nail it right away, basic design principles. Magus needs a bit of iterating. Nothing massive or class changing, but remove a few stumbling blocks, kick up the spellstrike damage maybe, etc.

Well said. I would be interested in discussing how to buff the Magus with you both if that's something you would find interesting.

No mention is made about the fact Reload 0 Repeating weapons DON'T need a free hand in-between rounds. Without the mention, you're still expected to have a hand free even when your gun is auto-reloading in-between shots. Either an errata to the Repeating trait needs to be done, or a FAQ entry explaining you don't need a free hand would be appreciated. Otherwise, it'll be hard to have any dual-wielding guns builds.

Capacity weapons' Interact action to switch barrels also doesn't seem to Interact with Dual-Weapon Reload or any of the Gunslinger Reloads, which seems to defeat a lot of their purpose. If they were meant to Interact, making that clear in a FAQ entry would be nice as well.

These are the most obvious issues with the way guns work right now and need to be fixed ASAP.

I'll also add that I think it would make a lot of sense to make Dual Weapon Reload work with your special Slinger's Reload. Otherwise, you are just incentivizing players to pick up Juggler and Focused Juggler to use their Slinger's Reload while dual wielding, which shouldn't be a thing.

The same works for dual Air Repeaters, by the way - you can dodge the whole Reload 0 thing just by juggling one of them in the air, which is just dumb.

The people trying to justify Spellstrike provoking AoO seem to not realize that Magus isn't that strong of a class in the first place.

Making Spellstrike not provoke would barely raise the class' power level and would simply make it less clunky and punishing to use what is his main offensive mechanic.

In addition, it would push the Magus less towards Starlit Span and reach weapons, which he currently is heavily incentivized to do (indeed, the Starlit Span is already the best Hybrid Study due to essentially being able to Spellstrike each turn, no reason to make it even stronger by punishing melee Magi for daring to use their iconic move in melee).

BendKing wrote:

Furthermore, I believe the reaction Implements (Amulet & Weapon) would suffer greatly if they were to only be usable against a single target at a time.

Having an Attack of Opportunity or a semi-Champion's reaction against only one creature at a time does not feel good at all, to me.

Actually they can be good againts a high-level solo opponent. But those are the ones against whom you are most likely to fail (or even critically fail) your RK.

I am aware they can be good against a single-target. My point is that in any fight that isn't a boss fight (which is most of them, probably) they would suffer immensely in utility and thus not be as worth picking up.

But you make a good point, that often boss fights have higher DCs, thus even this use-case is tenuous.

One of the Thaumaturge players from the first playtest here. I had played with a Whip, Paragon Weapon Implement, and initial Amulet and Chalice implements.

My experience has been that I was indeed quite squishy for a class so heavily encouraged to front-line (can't use Bows, only one-handed ranged weapon which at best only work if you take Weapon Implements). I had died quickly in 2 of the 3 fights that were not immediately decided by the Maze and Prismatic Wall.

It certainly did not help that I basically no defensive measures to protect myself, either, like the Rogue's Mobility or Monk's action compression, etc.

Additionally, I had felt like ruling that the reaction Implements worked on all creatures of the same type was paramount.

I believe the reaction Implements (Amulet & Weapon) would suffer greatly if they were to only be usable against a single target at a time.

Having an Attack of Opportunity or a semi-Champion's reaction against only one creature at a time would not have felt good at all due to how limited it would have been. This was especially true with how quickly my Esoteric Antithesis targets often fell in battles with many opponents.

Thus, these are my main insights from the playtest:
1. Increase Thaumaturges HP to 10 per level rather than 8.
2. Let Esoteric Antithesis and its effects (such as the extra damage and Implement reactions) work versus all creatures of the type you targeted with it.

Furthermore, I believe the reaction Implements (Amulet & Weapon) would suffer greatly if they were to only be usable against a single target at a time.

Having an Attack of Opportunity or a semi-Champion's reaction against only one creature at a time does not feel good at all, to me.

Unless I'm missing something, it loos like in this case the skill check will scale with your class DC, which scales a bit slower than a skill would. Otherwise, I do think this fix is definitely in the right direction!

What are you suggesting the reloading be done with? If not a free hand ?

No. I suggest that weapons with Reload 0 should not require a free hand to 'reload' in between shots, because otherwise the classic Van Helsing concept is moot (if you want to hold an implement in your second hand, which of course, you do).

There is a trait called Capacity introduced in G&G which allows reloading without a free hand.

While technically an option, it is a very poor option. Wasting 2 actions to fire once is not a great use of actions unless you have something like a Way reload which sweetens the deal, which the Thaumaturge doesn't have, of course.

- You can use crossbows to strike. They have a strike action. (Even if you disagree there, they definitely at least have a reload action.)

- You can swap your implement in time to strike as a reaction.
Considering the two, it would be more intuitive to allow swapping before shooting as an action (it should be easier than swapping to shoot as a reaction), and it fits a literal reading. It also doesn't seem unreasonable to expect Van Helsing to be using a weapon implement.

Clear wording saying that you can swap to strike with a weapon, cast with a wand, etc. would be nice, but I don't think that concluding you can't is the right call here.

After all, if you couldn't get your weapon implement out after using your amulet, what would be the point of a weapon implement?

Fair enough. I think it is quite obtuse as is and should definitely be clarified if this is the intent.

And like I said in my post, even if this is clarified specifically for the Thaumaturge, I think there are still glaring issues with the way Reload 0 repeating weapons seem to require a free hand.

Can’t the hand crossbow be a weapon implement leaving a hand free ?

And have I missed something that says you can only have on implement out at once ? Can you not be wielding a weapon implement and another ?

Of course you can hold out both a Weapon Implement and another Implement at once, that's not what I'm talking about here. I'm saying that if you hold a Repeating Hand Crossbow / Air Repeater in one hand, and a second Implement in the other, you would not be able to 'reload' the Repeating Hand Crossbow because it seems that even Reload 0 weapons require a free hand.

And like I said, if the Weapon Implement does let you switch back to the weapon to attack with it, this isn't as much of an issue with Thaumaturge specifically, but it remains an issue for things like Bullet Dancer and Dual Wielding Gunslinger which want to use dual Repeating Hand Crossbows or dual Air Repeaters, and I still would not like being forced to take a Weapon Implement just to use a Repeating Hand Crossbow.

also as the previous mentioned. There ren't restrictions I know of on how many you can have at a time. Just how many you can hold. So amulet weapon implement combo should be valid optin no? (that won't help the hand reload issue though).

Granted if you have an autocrossbow and a few you could always drop instead of reload and pull a new one out if you hae drow shootist.

Yes, the hand reload issue is the issue I'm talking about.

And no, pulling out a new Repeating Hand Crossbow every time is most definitely not an option unless you somehow have enough gold to keep a bunch of crossbows runed up, which you should not have according to the official guidelines.

Also, at that point, what is the point of using a Repeating Hand Crosssbow if you just throw it away after one shot? It becomes just as good as a regular Hand Crossbow.

BendKing wrote:

10th-Level Dark Archive Playtest (Link)

This document includes feedback for both the Psychic and the Thaumaturge, so I posted it in both forums.

For the record, I did not write these results myself, but have received them from an anonymous source. However, this analysis resonated so much with me that I am posting it here.

Also note that this doc is a constantly-updated work in progress, and will be updated every Thursday night, close to midnight EDT.

What incredible análisis! Congratulations BendKing your are done an excellent work!

I did not write this myself, but thank you. I'll give your praise to the author :)

10th-Level Dark Archive Playtest (Link)

This document includes feedback for both the Psychic and the Thaumaturge, so I posted it in both forums.

For the record, I did not write these results myself, but have received them from an anonymous source. However, this analysis resonated so much with me that I am posting it here.

Also note that this doc is a constantly-updated work in progress, and will be updated every Thursday night, close to midnight EDT.

10th-Level Dark Archive Playtest

10th-Level Dark Archive Playtest (Link)

This document includes feedback for both the Psychic and the Thaumaturge, so I posted it in both forums.

For the record, I did not write these results myself, but have received them from an anonymous source. However, this analysis resonated so much with me that I am posting it here.

Also note that this doc is a constantly-updated work in progress, and will be updated every Thursday night, close to midnight EDT.

To add to this, I am aware that Implement Adepts reads "While you’re holding an implement in one hand, you can quickly switch it with another implement you’re wearing to use an action of the implement you’re switching to. To do so, you can Interact as free action
immediately before executing the action. This allows you to meet requirements of having an implement in hand to use its action", but it is unclear whether this switching only works for using the Implement's given action, such as Chalice's Sip/Drain, or whether it's usable for any action allowed by the Implement, such as attacking with your Weapon Implement.

If the case is the latter, please clarify so. Though, I would still not be a fan of only being able to use a Hand Crossbow if you choose the Weapon Implement.

Additionally, this would still not fix the glaring issues with Repeating weapons needing a free hand to reload, but that is more of an issue with Guns & Gears than it is with Thaumaturge.

So, I really wanted to make a Van Helsing type Thaumatruge, especially because the description of the Thaumaturge says a Thaumaturge might use a Hand Crossbow.

Unfortunately, this weapon does not work well with the Thaumaturge, because the class forces you to have both hands taken (one for an implement, the other for your weapon), which means you can't reload your hand crossbow after one shot.

Then I thought to myself - hey, at least you could use a Repeater Hand Crossbow! Alas, even weapons with Reload 0 require an open hand, as far as I can tell from Reload's text: "Reloading a ranged weapon and drawing a thrown weapon both require a free hand".

Thus, the only way to use a 1-handed ranged weapon with Thaumaturge is... Wait for it... Juggler. Yes, indeed. If you want to play Van Helsing (or any other ranged Thaumaturge concept), he has to be a Juggler. You would also be pressed to take Focused Juggler so you wouldn't waste an action each turn juggling your gun/hand crossbow in the air.

This seems... Off-theme, to say the least.
The easiest and best solution to this in my estimation is to errata Reload 0 forcing you to have a hand open, and make it be possible to reload even with both hands taken.

This would also fix dual wielding Pistoleros not being able to use their Slinger's reload due to it not working with Dual-Weapon Reload (since they are different specific actions), and allow archetypes such as the Bullet Dancer to actually wield 2 guns as the sketch implies they are imagined to do.

To summarize:
Errata reload 0 to allow repeating guns to be reloaded without a free hand, and you will easily allow 3 fan-favorite concepts (Dual Pistolero Gunslinger, Van Helsing Thaumaturge, Gun Kata Monk) which currently all require 2 archetype feats from Juggler to work properly.

Design
The design of the class itself is great. Amps are cool, original, and distinctive.

Amps
The power of the amps is way too low. All of the amps should be as good as Message and Mental Scan.

Class Feats
Almost all of the feats are terrible. They are worse than the average full caster feats, which is the opposite of what they should be aiming for (better than average) because of your lower versatility compared to other casters.

Nitpick
Paizo, I don't know if you've realized this or not, but... Blasting spells don't scale well in this game due to the rate of HP advancement on monsters. This makes control spells much more effective once you start hitting level 7-8 onwards. Thus, all of these class abilities and feats that focus on blasting seem wrong-headed to me and will almost undoubtedly end up weak the more you level.

I would love this. Especially for scrolls, as they are extremely clunky to use mid-combat for a class that is basically forced to have both of its hands taken.

BendKing wrote:

I'm surprised no one offered Bastion. It's a great way to fill your reactions with Reactive Shield and makes you a lot tankier if that's a role you need to fill for your party, which it seems like you might.

I would not take Mauler. You're still a full caster, which means you pretty much want to cast a spell in every single turn to get the most value out of your class (which is already hard enough as a melee Battle Oracle). The Mauler archetype is chock-full of 2-action attacks, which means you won't be casting spells when using them. Attacking instead of casting spells when you're a full caster with mediocre melee is not a good idea.

Champion is always a great option. Lay On Hands is awesome, especially because you do NOT want to get to Major curse, and the reaction is fantastic.

Lastly, I'm not sure about the "common wisdom" to take Haste with Divine Access. The 3rd level version only pays for itself in round 3, which is the last round of the battle in most cases. It's awesome at 7th, but I would not use it at 3rd.

Battle oracle gets the shield cantrip as part of the package and shields in general just murder your action economy. I've generally found them not worth using without investing in free reactions from champion or level 12 fighter. Bastion also has the detriment of some truly awful 4th and 6th level feats meaning you don't want it early and by 8-10 there are better archetype options available.

Haste 3rd pays for itself as the last spell you pop in any sort of prebuff routine. Nerfed as pre-buffing might be, it's still something you should be doing.

I agree that a shield is heavy action economy wise, which is why I advise taking one with Bastion, which gives you a reaction Raise Shield, which is a great outlet for your reactions that full casters usually lack AND makes you tankier. I would not take a shield as a Battle Oracle unless Bastion Dedication is taken.

I do agree that the level 4 & 6 feats are a drag, which makes Bastion sub-optimal for Free Archetype at first. I would personally take Champion feats at 2, 4, 6 and Bastion feats and 8, 10.

And yes, Haste is great as a pre-buff, if you're able to get one off in the span of half a minute before the battle. That might be a big if, though, depending on the GM.

I'm surprised no one offered Bastion. It's a great way to fill your reactions with Reactive Shield and makes you a lot tankier if that's a role you need to fill for your party, which it seems like you might.

I would not take Mauler. You're still a full caster, which means you pretty much want to cast a spell in every single turn to get the most value out of your class (which is already hard enough as a melee Battle Oracle). The Mauler archetype is chock-full of 2-action attacks, which means you won't be casting spells when using them. Attacking instead of casting spells when you're a full caster with mediocre melee is not a good idea.

Champion is always a great option. Lay On Hands is awesome, especially because you do NOT want to get to Major curse, and the reaction is fantastic.

Lastly, I'm not sure about the "common wisdom" to take Haste with Divine Access. The 3rd level version only pays for itself in round 3, which is the last round of the battle in most cases. It's awesome at 7th, but I would not use it at 3rd.

BendKing wrote:

Also, the numbers on Rejuvenating Flames are really low, I'm not sure why you rate it so highly. 1d4 damage per spell level is terrible, and 1d4 healing isn't that good either.

Its good every time. As long as there are enemies in range. Phoenix is adding plus 2 per die

What do you mean adding 2 per die?

And even so, the damage is still super low, and the additional +1 per spell level from Dangerous Sorcery isn't enough to redeem it, especially considering that it's added to other blast spells as well, and not uniquely to Rejuvenating Flames.

The numbers are just not good enough to justify using 2 actions on it unless you're completely out of spell slots. 5d4 + 5 damage in a 15ft cone at level 10 is just sad, and 5d4 (12.5) healing is is not great at all.

Okay. Got a chance to put the new bloodlines in Mwangi Expanse

Wymblessed is a really good Divine caster. Picks up a great buffing spell in Haste. So good protective and healing options. Nothing really extra offensively except the Breath weapon of course.
The downside is I can't see the Blood magic benefit being of any use as you should always Intimidate before you cast not after, then the benefit disappears at the start of your next turn.

and

Phoenix
which is just an awesome top level primal blaster caster. It picks up some of the best wizard classics like Disintegrate and Contingency. The first focus spell Rejuvenating Flames is a brilliant blast that heals allies and burns enemies. If you like to play arcane blasters in previous editions, give this one a serious look.

I must say, Pheonix seems a little weird with how it encourages you to play in the frontlines with its Bloodline Spells. It might warrant a Champion MC to support the playstyle.

Also, the numbers on Rejuvenating Flames are really low, I'm not sure why you rate it so highly. 1d4 damage per spell level is terrible, and 1d4 healing isn't that good either.

What started as a Reddit comment just wouldn't stop bouncing around in my head.

So, without further ado, I present to you all this shiny new Support Cleric Guide.

Have at it! If anybody notices anything that requires correction, feel free to message me.

I really love the presentation style. This is probably the best presented guide I've read to date. Great job!

Sidenote, I really liked the way you showed skills, their main utilities and key feats. I would enjoy a table like that for all skills in the game. Seems like a great thing to send a new player struggling to pick skills and skill feats.

Another Build

An effective ranged rogue with Napoleon style pretentions of grandeur
** spoiler omitted **...

Seems like you won't be able to get the Marshal Dedication at 2nd, since you only get Weapon Proficiency at 3rd. Is the intent to retrain into it?

When I hear "free archetype isn't broken" all I can think of is the sorcerer player that MC'd into Swashbuckler (of all things) and used One for All in conjunction with Cooperative Soul to automatically grant the rest of the party what essentially amounted to +3 to everything, every round (or cast a spell and gave one person a +3 bonus).

The thing is, you can do that easily without Free Archetype anyway, and absolutely should if you're optimizing hard.

Improvements can still be done though. Add a shield to the free hand, add Bastion and Quick Block from Champion MC. Swap Dueling Dance to Paragon Guard. Now you have 2 more reactions for shield blocks, which means enemies definitely don’t want to attack you, which means more chance for attack op and champ reaction to trigger. You turn off your ability to use regular riposte, but improved riposte can be used without a free hand.

Could even add Sorcerer for Embrace the Pit if you wanted some more, though I haven’t thought on it that much. My basic improved build with free arch would be

1: Double Slice (Retrain to Sudden Charge at 5, retrain back at 19 if you care by then)
2: Dueling Parry
4: Healing Touch
6: Knockdown
8: Dueling Riposte
(9): Blind-Fight
10: Combat Reflexes
12: Paragon Guard
14: Improved Dueling Riposte
(15): Improved Knockdown
16: Determination / Stance Savant
18: Savage Critical
20: Boundless Reprisals

Archetype feats

2: Champion Ded
4: Basic devotion (ranged reprisal)
6: Champion react
8: Bastion ded
10: Quick Shield Block
12: Reflexive Shield / Destructive Block / Disarming Block
14: Sorcerer ded (Diabolic) or some random level 1-2 sorc feat if you have multitalented
16: Quick Block (from Champion)
18: Random level 1-2 sorc feat or Embrace the Pit
20: Embrace the Pit or idk

I never said it couldn't be improved, what I was saying is that it couldn't be "meaningfully stronger", which of course isn't an exact measurement, but to me, this new FA build you wrote is proving that admittedly vague claim.

Yes, you have better defensive abilities, but you already had the core of the build's power and synergies, and FA is just adding some sugar on top.

The main difference for me is that while FA can add ~20-30% more power to already optimized builds, it could add ~50-60% to previously downright bad builds by letting them get their core synergies online earlier and with less of a sacrifice. Overall, this means that concepts that were previously unattainable without sacrificing a good chunk of your utility to the party become less punishing to build.

For me, that is a huge gain. Especially considering how, as other posters have already said, PF2e encounters are extremely easy to balance on the GMs side.

FA gives:

A better stride (focus spell)
Ranged reprisal
An automatic companion
An automatic familiar OR 24 more health
A free weapon rune that stacks

Again, I believe these benefits prove my points as mentioned above.

Now I just have to give an example of a previously mediocre concept build that gains a lot from FA, allowing the concept to be pulled off without sacrificing a huge amount of power. Luckily, I already have that in the form of this Dragon of the West (Iroh) Build by TheGentelmanDM.

Also, I don't agree with the line of thinking that "people could take feat X anyway, you're not adding much more power giving it for free". Now they can take X and Y instead of having to choose. Pretty often there'll be more than one solid choice at a level.

And even about Reactions - yes, if you already have Attack of Opportunity, a Paladin retributive strike isn't quite as strong as when you don't have any reaction yet at all. But it's quite different for a ranger - much of the time your Disrupt Prey isn't working because it's not your Prey who's doing naughty things. And even for the fighter with AoO, having Retributive Strike can allow you to set up a situation where there's simply nothing an enemy can do that you won't punish. Hit me? Shield block. Hit my friend? Retributive Strike. Walk away? AoO. Yes, you can only do one of them, but you're almost guaranteed to actually get to do it because you cover all the situations.

OK, I want to test this claim. Let's take a highly optimized Fighter build - Exocist's Gnomish Flickmace + Spiked Gauntlet Reach Champion Fighter.

1: Double Slice (Retrain to Sudden Charge at 5, retrain back at 19 if you care by then)
2: Dueling Parry
4: Champion Dedication (Paladin)
6: Champion Reaction
8: Dueling Riposte
(9): Knockdown
10: Combat Reflexes
12: Dueling Dance
14: Improved Dueling Riposte
(15): Improved Knockdown
16: Determination / Stance Savant / Blind-Fight
18: Savage Critical
20: Boundless Reprisals

It already has all the reactions in the world, which are his main source of extra DPR, due to the huge amount of MAP-0 attacks he can make in a round with his reach and AoO + Dueling Riposte + Champion's Reactions. This is an example of a build that already has the best possible options for increasing DPR.

I claim that due to this, Free Archetype would not be able to push this build all that much in power level.

I would be curious to see someone show how Free Archetype suddenly makes this build meaningfully stronger.

If I could offer just one feedback it would be to add coloring for ratings on your guides. Star ratings are so bothersome to read when skimming, it frankly makes me not bother :\

2- Power Increase: Free archetypes made it easy for each character to have access to a focus spell, a good reaction, and a good third action. Each character could plug whatever holes in efficiency their build has with ease, which significantly increased their power. The only time I have seen a free archetype party actually threatened was when half the party went ahead and triggered a second encounter while the other half signaled a retreat. Even then, there was only risk to two characters.

Just make the encounters harder..?

In my opinion, free archetype is a crutch. People like it because they like more power. There may be a few who actually use it...

That's quite presumptuous of you to think you know why people like something. Especially considering how many people in this very thread explained why they like it, and it was not because of the power increase.

BendKing wrote:

VestOfHolding wrote:

I'd still like to see people post some optimized builds posted here. Maybe like once per page or something you create a new post that gathers them all. I've seen other threads do something similar.

Good idea, I'll give it a shot :)

What you could do is to edit che link within the opening post you provided ( Exocist's Optimal Builds ) with a generic one ( Optimal Builds ), which might work as a list of links ( build who will be posted within the thread ).

It would also require more effort than simply edit a post though.

Unfortunately, the link I put there is not mine.

However, I do like the idea of keeping an editable document in the original post, so I think I will, in fact, do this with a new thread once I feel this thread slows down a bit, and direct people from here to the new thread.

Can I suggest a tweak to the frame? Don't fixate on proving the best build in a white-room situation. White room optimization tends to fall on its face in actual campaigns.

In fact, don't insist on proving the best build per class. It's much more interesting to show which classes have a lot of different strong, viable builds, and which classes are maybe much more narrow in what you can do with them.

This is pretty much what I meant.

Before I run wild in this thread (in a good way), I would like a clarification on what qualifies as a "top tier optimized build".

I admit that I don't have a strict definition for this, but I'll try:

You're welcome to suggest a different definition, though!

It seems like I'll for sure need to make a new thread sometime in the future that is better formatted and clearer, and these comments are definitely helping shape that.

In fact, if anyone has any other suggestions for the rules and goal of this post, I'm happy to hear them.

I'd still like to see people post some optimized builds posted here. Maybe like once per page or something you create a new post that gathers them all. I've seen other threads do something similar.

Good idea, I'll give it a shot :)

You'll probably find that you can only edit posts that are less than 1 hour old...

Yup. RIP.

Guess this won't be a compendium, and that my ignorance shall forever be seen on this post.

Maybe what we need is a couple of good effective builds for each class/archetype and compare what that can do at a few level points

So, I made a thread specifically for this.

Here it is:
Community Optimized Build Compendium

This post is dedicated to the submission, discussion, and publication of top-tier optimized builds in PF2e.

The intention is to understand the power balance between the classes by posting and discussing the most optimized builds possible for each class.

I will attempt to keep up with the comments and update this original post with new submissions for each class while listing their creator.

As for the rules:
1. All ancestries are allowed (including uncommon/rare).
2. All feats are allowed (including uncommon/rare).
3. All archetypes are allowed (including uncommon/rare).
3. Only common weapons unless accessed via a feat/ancestry.
4. Only common spells unless accessed via a feat/ancestry.

Special cases:
1. If used, Heaven's Thunder is assumed to work according to Paizo's suggested rework.

If your build doesn't follow these rules, just list in a 'Requirements' section which assumptions you're working with and provide alternative options.

To kick this off, here are Exocist's Optimal Builds.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alchemist

To be added.

Barbarian

To be added.

Bard

To be added.

Champion

To be added.

Cleric

To be added.

Druid

To be added.

Fighter

To be added.

Investigator

To be added.

Monk

To be added.

Oracle

To be added.

Ranger

To be added.

Rogue

To be added.

Sorcerer

To be added.

Swashbuckler

To be added.

Witch

To be added.

Wizard

To be added.

Build Collections

Exocist's Optimal Builds

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I look forward to future submissions and discussions!

BendKing wrote:

Gortle wrote:

Deriven Firelion wrote:

But man, the wizard in PF2 feels bad. I've never seen the wizard in such a state...

It could be better.

Maybe what we need is a couple of good effective builds for each class/archetype and compare what that can do at a few level points

That would be interesting. If people could agree on what are the optimal builds.

I started a document on what I believe to be the best build for every class, trying to use only common options.

I read it. Really illuminating. Waiting for more feat choice explanations, and hoping to see some discussion on the picks by more people.

Deriven Firelion wrote:

But man, the wizard in PF2 feels bad. I've never seen the wizard in such a state...

It could be better.

Maybe what we need is a couple of good effective builds for each class/archetype and compare what that can do at a few level points

That would be interesting. If people could agree on what are the optimal builds.

I wanted to enlight that the "new hard choices" you are talking about, though they do exist ( because you could choose to take B instead of C regardless the fact you may have the free archetype or not ) don't invalidate the fact that given the free archetype, regardless the choice you make, you have a neat advantage compared to not having the free archetype.

I mean, having to choose between B,C,D,E,F,G and H doesn't change the fact that you are given A for free ( without the free archetype you will be choosing between, A,B,C,D,E,F,G and H ).

I see, but I never claimed that Free Archetype doesn't net you an advantage compared to not having it. That would be a pretty absurd claim.

BendKing wrote:

Kyrone wrote:

I Just don't like it, removes a lot of what I find fun in character creation that is weighting options and having to making hard choices between abilities that you want.

IF I would play or GM a free archetype game, it would be for themed games, like Skull and Shackles were everyone is a pirate and get that archetype for free.

I don't quite understand this. There are still hard choices, they're just different choices than the ones you used to have to make.

Imo, it is wiser to make a comparison between a lvl1-20 progression with and without an archetype.

For example, let's compare a Champion

without the free archetype

Quote:

1- Ranged Reprisal
2- Bard Dedication
4- Bard Basic Spellcasting
6- Sun Blade
8- Quick Block
10- Devoted Focus
12- Expert Bard Spellcasting
14- Divine Reflex
16- Occult Breadth
18- Master Bard Spellcasting
20- Sacred Defender

with the free archetype

Quote:

1- Ranged Reprisal
2- Desperate Prayer + Bard Dedication
4- Hymn of Healing + Bard Basic Spellcasting
6- Sorcerer Dedication + Basic Sorcerer Spellcasting
8- Quick Block + Occult Breadth
10- Devoted Focus + Sorcerer Breadth
12- Expert Sorcerer Spellcasting + Expert Bard Spellcasting
14- Divine Reflex + Bastion Dedication
16- Instrument of Zeal + Nimble Hand
18- Master Sorcerer Spellcasting + Master Bard Spellcasting
20- Sacred Defender + Quick Shield Block

Obviously you could do better synergies, but this might be enough to show the differences in terms of possibilities.

That said, I'll quote what I previously said

Quote:

But fun is subjective, so if on the one hand somebody might find not appealing playing with a party with characters too versatile, on the other hand another person might find it more entertaining.

I'm not sure if this is a response to my comment about there still being hard choices or not. If it is, could you highlight what about this comparison shows whether there are less or more hard choices?

I Just don't like it, removes a lot of what I find fun in character creation that is weighting options and having to making hard choices between abilities that you want.

IF I would play or GM a free archetype game, it would be for themed games, like Skull and Shackles were everyone is a pirate and get that archetype for free.

I don't quite understand this. There are still hard choices, they're just different choices than the ones you used to have to make.

I'm not sure if this is the correct board to post this question to, but since this seems to be the de-facto optimization board, I figured I'd go ahead and post here instead of general.

Free Archetype to me seems like it makes both the game and the optimization mini-game to be deeper and just plain more fun. I personally intend to allow it in my upcoming game.

However, it seems to me like the optimization meta trends towards making builds without this optional rule, and I was wondering whether this is true, and if so, why.

Well said, the way PF2e handles base progression and makes many abilities situational means that while there's less need to optimize, you also have to tailor...

How does Downtime play such a big role in the game?

And thanks everyone for the great explanations, I'm learning a lot!

Hi there! I'm new to PF2e, coming from a heavy 5E optimization background.

My observation regarding optimization thus far is that while the gap between optimized and non-optimized builds is smaller in PF2E compared to 5E, there is still a gap.

Thus, I'm wondering what are some of the build options that are considered must-haves for any optimized table.

Note, I'm not asking what are THE most optimized builds in each class, just which options are considered a must to be considered optimized for each class if any exist at all.

For example, Attack of Opportunity seems like a no-brainer for Barbarians, considering they don't have much else to do with their reaction.

CHARACTER ALT

It came to my attention that She'er Falen could do even MORE damage as an elemental (fire) bloodline sorcerer due to that bloodline's Blood Magic ability. Since she was always supposed to be about laying down the hurt, here is an alternate version of the character.

She'er Falen, Ifrit planar merchant (CG female ifrit human merchant sorcerer 13) - Fire bloodline alt

The original efreeti bloodline character file still exists within the Emporium, for those who prefer it.

The fire bloodline alt presented here sacrifices utility (cozy cabin, globe of invulnerability, invisibility, prying eye, and Safeguarded Spell, among other spells and abilities) in return for a wider variety of elemental blasting spells and additional damage. She does gain back some utility in her new staff of nature's vengeance and Counterspell abilities however.

This might not fit the character concept, but you would definitely do more damage with a Goblin Ifrit which takes 'Burn It!'.