![]()
![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Yeah, it works, it isn't a metamagic. But my point was more that now we have psychic, which offers a TON from the basic dedication and such, and much better casting. Why is bounded casting MC so bad? Less spells, and lower scaling spells, slightly higher feat cost. I would really like to see it reworked a little. Have it give no more than 4 spells so you don't have more than the base class sure, but at least let it keep the same level scaling. Maybe have it be 1-1-2 (One max level spell, one -1, 2 -2 spells) the whole way with the same level scaling. The base classes get the same spell scaling after all. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Necroing a bit now that the new book has been released. I stand by my position that this needs fixing to make these archetypes better. I mean, if the concern is you don't want to give a fighter magus higher level spells to spellstrike with, well it doesn't matter now! One dip in psychic and you have a spellstrike that outscales shocking grasp (amped produce flame) And that archetype gives full casting, just now breadth. At a bare minimum, you should get the same level progression as regular casting archetypes. Less spells and lower levels is a double hit, too much. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
The Raven Black wrote:
Not the case most of the time actually. There are 150 fire immune enemies, and 64 that are weak to ice. Even if ALL the weak to ice enemies are fire immune, that still means that most fire immune enemies are not. And hitting a weakness isn't as valuable as your main attack hitting. For instance, at lvl 10, common weaknesses are 10 damage. Even an unamped ray of frost is doing 17.5 damage there. An amped one is doing 27.5. Losing that to do a little weakness damage is a bad bad trade. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Xenocrat wrote: The Thermal Statis not interacting at all with Conservation of Energy is indeed very bad. The only thing you have going for you against an immune creature is the hope that it has a corresponding weakness that your Entropic Wheel is triggering, and if you have psi blast and are in psyche (or have any similar mindshift psyche ability available) you can trigger it a second time in one round with that. I am 90% sure that thermal stasis was meant too. Otherwise it is just a very situational cantrip that was given as the unique psi cantrip as level one. Would love if some dev could comment if I am off base here hah. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
They just posted an errata fixing most of the Oscillating Wave Issues "Page 19: The oscillating wave psychic’s unique psi cantrips (thermal stasis, entropic wheel, and redistribute potential) are not intended to interact with their conservation of energy class feature, as they manipulate cold and fire at the same time. Similarly, psi cantrips from other conscious minds (for instance, ones gained through the Parallel Breakthrough feat) shouldn’t interact with conservation of energy. Modify the text in the Conservation of Energy section from “The first time in an encounter that you cast a granted spell from your conscious mind or a psi cantrip” to “The first time in an encounter that you cast a granted spell or standard psi cantrip from your conscious mind.” Pages 34–35: The thaumaturge should increase in proficiency with unarmed attacks as they grow in level. The weapon expertise class feature should read “You’ve learned the secret ways your weapons work most effectively. Your proficiency ranks for unarmed attacks, simple weapons, and martial weapons increase to expert.” The weapon mastery class feature should read “You fully understand your weapons. Your proficiency ranks for unarmed attacks, simple weapons, and martial weapons increase to master.” Page 48: The feats granting spellcasting benefits in the psychic multiclass archetype have some unintended discrepancies from corresponding feats in other multiclass archetypes. First, Master Psychic Spellcasting should be an 18th-level feat, rather than a 12th-level feat.
All that being said, Oscillating Wave has a new issue now. No way to switch elements for one action, which is what Thermal Stasis seemed to be designed for. So if you run across a fire immune enemy, you can hit it with ice once, but then you have to hit it with fire... ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
SuperBidi wrote:
Do you want to win the fight? Then control takes the cake. Even if the battle is longer control spells hasten the inflection point where a battle is actually a threat. Basically Control = Longer fight but less danger Blasting = Shorter fight but you are more likely to lose At least late game when control is insanely good and mooks have tons of HP so blasting isn't really effective. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Karmagator wrote:
Agreed, would like this cleared up. It does seem like it is missing a heighten, like you should get extra motes at higher levels or it becomes rather useless. Also, Order of Operations. Does it add it's damage to the spell that you use to activate it? More unclear. When a later spell causes it to gain a mote, does that extra damage apply to that spell or just later spells? It is happening as you do things so.. who knows. Karmagator wrote:
Apply this to Thermal Stasis too. An ability that gives two resists. Does it just give one thanks to conservation of energy? So it is better if taken by another subclass or on an MC that doesn't have that? Finally, it is REALLY unclear if conservation of energy applies to cantrips taken from other subclasses with parallel breakthrough. I don't think it is intended (a mental cantrip doing fire etc. and yet still with the mental trait) but the wording is ambiguous. I feel like a line or two got cut for copyfit. Also, if you use firey body, is the produce flame/ray of frost you cast a psi cantrip with all the goodies or just the default? (Really only good anyways if you pick cha, as int doesn't help innate cantrips, or do much of anything...) ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Xenocrat wrote:
I suspect it was intended to combine for a couple reasons - 1 - Because they put the 1 damage per spell level in the text of the spell which is very unusual, usually just make it a +1 heighten effect. I suspect it was done to make it combine.2 - The way it is written I can see an argument that damage the amp is replacing is just the first part, the 1, with the +1 per level being on top. 3 - The scaling makes no sense without it. Like you showed, without the amp scaling better it is a dreadful waste of a focus point. Psychic has quite a few weirdly written rules and strange scalings though so who knows. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
I like a lot of stuff about the psychic. But it does have some issues that jump out at me. Late Game Scaling - Many of their cantrips scaling isn’t the best late game, and psychic will have lost their two focus point advantage by then as everyone else has 2 points. Entropic wheel doesn’t scale well either as it takes forever to boost up later. Bad Scaling in General - Someone explain why telekinetic rend still scales horribly? And only every two spell levels so it is unusable half the time? It was a major complaint in playtest and wasn’t touched. Shatter mind was buffed to be a good nuke, was TK rend forgotten? Makes that whole subclass kind of eh. Also amped daze only scales +2 which gives it dead levels, no reason for that, Confusing Rules - Conservation of Energy on Oscillatinf wave is weird. If it triggers odd thermal stasis, does that mean it only does one resist not two? Making thermal stasis better for MC weirdly. But you want it to to switch damage types…. What about entropic wheel? Also how does it work with redistribute potential? Very cool and thematic feature but the mechanics are… odd. Also, entropic wheel order of operations, does it gain motes before or after the triggering spell does damage, both initially and in subsequent rounds? ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
LordeAlvenaharr wrote: The feature that covers ammunition, now makes viable a Thaumaturge armed with a pistol, (or crossbow would be better?), I'm imagining those cowboy-like creature hunters, cigarette in mouth, dark past, and bad face... I'm thinking about weapon as the first implement and also get the parchment feat, I thought the idea of being able to use "any magic" in the game was cool. This feat actually makes MC Thaumaturge quite good for dual wielding gunslinger. Unlike dual weapon reload, it isn't a specific action, it just lets you use the hand holding your implement reload weapons. So, take Thaum MC, pick one of your pistols as your weapon implement. Get that feat (it is lvl 1 so at lvl 4) Now you can dual wield guns and use ANY of your gunslinger reloads freely with both hands full. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Champion archetype is probably the strongest in the game. Just because getting the champion reaction is so good. Fighter archetype I don't see used much, largely because the 14 str and 14 dex requirement makes it hard for heavy armor users relying on Bulwark to use, plus it doesn't have anything as powerful as champ reaction and LoH to compensate for the dead dedication. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Falco271 wrote:
Well, the no armor thing is poorly written, but technically you may be right. However, equally technically, nothing says you can't manifest it when already manifested, so you could drop your sword as a free action and re-manifest it. That is why I meant some clarification would help. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Ly'ualdre wrote:
Yeah, be a cool weapon. Not better than a guisarme but would love it. What if it is 1d8 no reach as a 1h and 2h 1d10 with reach hah. Justify it by saying you need both hands to control it effectively at full extension. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Greatly looking foward to this book, since I love mechanics and items! I know the ever industrious Michael Sayre said he had combed the forums looking for items people want. Here are the things I want and that I think would help the game! 1 - Attachment (or alterate medium armor) that works with medium armor that gives it bulwark. Right now heavy is almost essential in some builds not just for the AC but for the stat sub. Let medium have bulwark (make it 18 str required to balance it, whatever) so it isn't just a holding pattern until you have enough dex to get light armor! Also more stat sub in general. 2 - Blasting Ring - An item that gives dangerous sorcery and more. lvl 9+ blasting just falls behind. Give it some help. It still won't beat wall of stone. If single target damage is a concern make it an incap effect if you go above 1 damage per level. 3 - 2 handed 1d10 sword with reach. Big swords are cool. If you add a reach version of the bastard sword (think Sephiroth's massive thin sword hah) that is 1d6 reach and 2h 1d10 reach, I will buy you many beers at the next con! Lets see, what else. Love to see some higher level versions of spellhearts that don't cap out at 12. Potion injection device to allow you to use a potion (with restrictions) in a less action intensive way so my alchemist isn't as sad. Alternatives to goggles of night that don't make racial darkvision redundant as you level (only real +perception item). All I can think up right now, keep up the good work! ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Ascalaphus wrote:
Maybe. I thought arcane shroud was insanely good when I first saw it, but now, eh. Magus has a lot of routines that take 3 actions it seems which, particularly for a melee class, is painful. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
I think the biggest issue is medium armor. I mean, it doesn't really have a niche. It is useful early, but unless you have bulwark you are going to be putting some points into dex for the saves anyways, so then you might as well be wearing light armor. And if you ignore dex, you get sentinel for heavy armor because of Bulwark. I basically gave medium armor bulwark in my houserules to make it more of an attractive choice, but really not sure what the solution is there. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Alchemic_Genius wrote:
You don't need to spellstrike every turn, but when you aren't your damage is bad. The spikes actually aren't that big either except under very optimal circumstances. The weakness exploit thing, unless your GM throws you a bone it doesn't come up that often. Maybe 10% of enemies have an elemental weakness. Most of those are fire so once you have a flaming rune, it is pretty rare that cascade will be a weakness hitter. (Basically nothing is weak to acid or lightning, about 3% to Ice) ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
graystone wrote:
Not going to lie, the lack of interaction with ranged magus is... weird. That being said, starlit span is the best magus from a pure power perspective already, so I suspect cascade was meant as a way to balance melee, but yeah, the implimentation is strange. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
YuriP wrote: Cascade as free action maybe is too much. But have a cascade as reaction in a feat in a future book sounds reasonable. Try it:) It works really nicely. Frankly starlit span magus is still better, but melee feels more fluid with this change. xAlso had another change, if spellstrike is already charged and you use a conflux spell, you can recharge spellstrike as a free action once for 1 minute. Allows you to lead with a conflux spell without wasting the free spellstrike recharge! Not a power boost but allows more flexibility. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
WatersLethe wrote:
Yeah, but staying out of the fight for a round isn't fun a lot of the time, and tactically giving up your first round is rather huge. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
As I have played a lot of melee magus, I have really come to this conclusion. Melee magus is badly action restricted, I think everyone agrees on this. And arcane cascade not only taking an action, but having to be after a spell is hard to use, not terribly fun, and often not worth the action. Want to move and spellstrike round one? No cascade
Tactically, I usually find myself in situations where cascade just isn’t worth the action given how restricted getting into it is, unlike pretty much any other stance. Would this be a bit of a buff to magus? Yes, mainly melee magus but they need the help, starlit span doesn’t care about cascade much. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Why do people keep saying bulwark had a steep cost? Two classes get it by default. It is also attached to the best armor in the game. Even if you don’t care about Bulwark, heavy armor is great. Not like you are sacrificing to use it. 1ac for 5 speed is a great trade, particularly later on when you can amp your speed up high enough that 5speed is a minimal difference. Heck, I homebrew a medium armor with Bulwark just to keep heavy from being such an absolute must have. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
I absolutely agree. I think some people forget that saves are literally twice as valuable in this system as in 1e. Used to be a point in a save have a 5% chance of a better outcome. Thanks to the +10/-10 system is it now about a 10% chance per point. I am the GM in a game with a martial that never raised wisdom. It got ugly. At lvl 15, they needed a 17 to make a saving throw in one fight hah. Crit fail on a 7. Bulwark is great because it enables build variety. Classes with MAD stats benefit from it hugely, regardless of the heavy armor. Heaven help you if you are a class that wants to boost too non save stats like melee magus, melee inventor, etc. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
AlastarOG wrote: Well its more that if you're striding you'll often stride to a flanking position. True. But in this scenario it is iffy if you have it with first attack with one stride. (Depends if you go first, if someone is close enough for you to circle, etc etc.) Second attack with the dimensional assault you likely have it. Third one with the three action combo, probably not unless the enemy is just standing there.I mean this is all super speculative and can change in every fight so hell, I don't know. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
AlastarOG wrote:
I would say just 1 dummy is fine. I don’t know about the flanking though, I sure don’t get it every attack hah. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
AlastarOG wrote:
Interesting, I will have to go over this in more depth. A couple things jump out, the first is that power attacking is worse than attacking twice I believe. Second, you have melee magus using 2 focus points in a fight, which they can't do until later, or at least can't do more than once. Third, I don't think having the dummy flatfooted every time is reasonable. Maybe half the time? Can we see how they do if you continue a couple rounds? And maybe a 1handed magus with a longsword? Finally, this fight really assumes optimal stuff for melee people in one sense. Melee fighter is ending the fight next to an enemy every round. They never have to move twice, they never take defensive actions. I am not sure how realistic that is in a tough fight, but I realize this is very hard to model and I applaud your modeling. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
aobst128 wrote: Crud. I can't. Could have sworn I saw it somewhere in the forums. Might have been the how it's played YouTube channel. I think it was a general rule that you can't apply effects requiring your last action being something and doing that across 2 rounds. It was how it is played I believe. Half to track down the link. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Vodalian wrote:
I wouldn't rate champ that low given it is still +2 AC at most levels, but I do agree that champ archetype is way too strong. Should probably be a once a fight reaction like spellstrike is once a fight for the archetype version. Vodalian wrote:
That made me laugh out loud. Thank you ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
AlastarOG wrote:
I disagree, if only because damage applied to a single enemy is far more useful than damage applied to multiple. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Lollerabe wrote: Heh, figures. Out of curiosity - where would you rank melee Magus compared to other melee martials ? This wasn't addressed to me hah, and I have a whole tier list I stole amd mostly agree with, but I rank them like this S - Champion
![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Bidi, I appreciate your graph. I do think however you are conflating a specific archetype build (magus/cleric for a TS fire ray) that has a really strong opening shot to the entire class. The fight lasts longer than one round, and after early game, even a crit with that isn't going to instant kill any enemy that isn't a lvl -3 or something. Sustained damage is quite different, and that magus build is an outlier, and one built for that alpha strike. I would agree that compared to other ranged attackers "that deal less than mele options" which is kind of the whole point of this discussion, as magus has very little reason not to be ranged. As others have pointed out, comparing sustained damage over a fight with a high damage melee build (optimized fighter, giant barbarian) magus gets left in the dust, and can't do big spellstrikes more than a coupletimes a day. Back to my earlier point about ranged magus vs melee magus (and this applies more so to investigator and somewhat inventor) I have taken out two lines of your graph. 2 strikes from a greatsword (with cascade which honestly isn't a fair option as that comes online round 2 at the earliest) against basic spellstriking magus. Ranged guy is damn close to the big 2 hander even when that one has the damage boost going. Hence, range is good hah. https://imgur.com/a/f8RK6sa ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
"AlastarOG” wrote: On earlier topics: caffeinated ninja sorry for the dishonest appellation. Accepted, all good! The AoO thing is not the main factor in ranged beating melee but it is one of them. Not every group has a caster capable of killing AoO. And even those that do, they might want to do something else. The magus is not the person that wants to trigger it anyways, off tank at best. It is just one more “why am I in melee range when I could be 60 feet away” thing though. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
aobst128 wrote: The special spellstrikes past 10th level are pretty good. Lunging spellstrike in particular, no need for cascade as well. Oh yeah, that one is absolutely a standout. Meteoric is pretty good too since you can get some free damage out of it if you line up targets. Dispelling is a bit situational. If fighting enemies that buff themselves it is great. Once again though (recurring theme) it is way easier to use as starlit span since it is 3 actions. Overwhelming Spellstrike is pretty bad. If an enemy is resistant but not immune to your energy type you get a little more damage. But if you are striking with cantrips, better to just use a different element hah. And your main spellstrike spell is shocking grasp, almost nothing is resistant to lightning. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
aobst128 wrote: As far as magus vs magus goes, I'm actually more interested in 1 handed laughing shadow vs 2 handed laughing shadow. Unlike the rest of the hybrid studies conflux spells, dimensional assault doesn't have a wielding requirement and works with 2 handed weapons. The extra damage averages out to be about the same as 2 handed weapons against flatfooted targets. Only really missing out on spell parry and distracting spellstrike plus the standard benefits of having a free hand like maneuvers and high fives. I agree! I actually have been tinkering with a bastard sword using laughing shadow. Basically gives you the “flanking” damage all the time. I don’t find the special spell strikes all that useful on magus. Largely because they all require you to be in arcane cascade, so most of the time it is maybe working on your third round if you spellstrike round one. The devastating spellstrike for inexorable iron is really only good for right packed enemies if they are weak to your cascade, which doesn’t happen a whole lot. Distracting is better I think, but magus had zero room for charisma. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
AlastarOG wrote:
Percentages matter because everything is relative. Getting 2 extra damage per hit at lvl 1 is awesome! Getting it at lvl 20 is meh. AlastarOG wrote: You, on the other hand, have failed to address the reaction problem starlit span has, namely that it has jack s%!% to do as a reaction, while melee builds have an abundance of reactions to pick from, in class. Every melee class has those better reactions. They do give added benefit. My point has been more that relative to core classes the magus and investigator don’t lose much if any damage going into melee for raw damage. Do you consider ranger fighter or ranger underpowered compared to the melee versions? If not, where does that put magus and investigator? AlastarOG wrote: There's also archetype options, such as cavalier, that can nullify the mobility problem (just like there's archetype options that nullify the spammable spell problem for starlit span) Cavalier is an interesting archetype for games that don’t go into tight quarters, but it would give a starlit span magus the same edge. And spammable spellstrikes isn’t a problem for starlit span, it is why they are so good. I AlastarOG wrote: would call melee vs ranged magus equivalent through and through, each having its pros and it's cons. To call ranged vastly superior is misleading and I think dishonest. Dishonest? I find that rather insulting to be truthful with you. We can disagree, but because I disagree with you that doesn’t mean I am arguing in bad faith, just as I have not accused you of the same. People can legitimately disagree while being truthful without insulting one another. AlastarOG wrote:
True. But it is a damage enhancer. Starlitspan can spam this enhancer easily, from safety. Melee can not. AlastarOG wrote:
I am not as familiar with inventor so I can’t argue in depth, but the general rule with any buff is that the longer you wait to use it in a fight the less value it has. Part of the problem with arcane cascade. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
The-Magic-Sword wrote: I feel like propulsive is a trap (not an actual one, but i mean from the 'most effectiveness possible' perspective) on Starlit Span, you only attack once per turn, generally, so the /2 strength only applies once per turn, I feel like most players would rather spend that on Wisdom and Con for their will defense and HP-- it might be nice at low level, but it falls off hard once you start getting property runes and striking dice. I agree. Given spellstrike the +1 damage isn’t really worth two str. Instead I would pump up int (which is giving 1 damage per point on cantrip spell strikes anyways which is most of what you are doing) and con/wis. Plus longstrider makes the +5 speed from laughing shadow pointless hah. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
AlastarOG wrote: So far from the few play I've seen at my tables (and its one build because no one wants to play it) the starlit span magus feels like: ''well I've rolled a dice, it missed, and that's my turn!'' How fun it is is kind of irrelevant to this discussion. It also varies greatly on the player. Personally I enjoy mixing it up in melee, but I have one player in the game I run who loves being a “turret” and just standing there shooting. And you haven’t addressed how other classes have far less ranged damage to compensate for being ranged and magus… doesn’t. Even your example of laughing shadow, it can do that move once a fight. And ranged magus can do the same from 60 feet away. Massive advantage all else being equal. There is a reason guns replaced spears in real life, range is a massive advantage in any fight. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
AlastarOG wrote:
Well, not to quibble but I would do the numbers slightly differently. Unless you spend the first round casting a cantrip and buffing or something, you aren’t in arcane cascade at the start of round 2 even. If you are, then ranged magus has already done a spellstrike and is doing another one. Also 2h weapon vs bow isn’t 100% fair since bow has a free hand, but anyways, let’s compare. Spellstrike 2h - 2d12+5+2+4d6+4 = 38
Now lets compare a fighter.
So we have established fighter has a bigger penalty for going ranged.
So as a practical matter, ranged magus gives up very very little damage in a fight, to be 60 feet away. Unlike fighter or ranger that give up a ton. Add that to magus being rather squishy, and extremely vulnerable to disruption, which is far more common in melee, and you see why we say that the balance is shifted to range. Or even look at it this way. Ranged magus lets you make a ranger spellstrike with a touch spell. It even outranges a wizard using reach. Tactically that is insanely valuable.
|