Clinton Love's page

Have you guys checked out the 3rd party Kineticist by Legendary Games? It's a bit verbose but comes with a lot of things some of you guys are asking for:-

- 1 action attack cantrips,
- altering them with metamagic tied to a focus pool,
- circumventing the focus point requirement with burn, which gives the stunned condition instead of taking health or lowering stats,
- con based,
- no spell slots, and
- legendary spellcasting proficiency.

I can't speak to the balance on it as I have never seen one in play but they seem fun for the most part. A link below for the interested:-

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product_reviews_info.php?&reviews_id=46227 2&products_id=321926

True, though the Inventor does bare a family resemblance to Starfinder's Mechanic. So there might be some cross pollination of concepts that could lead to something similar, even if it lacks the Solarian title.

I'm a big fan of Starfinder's Solarian and I think it could make a cool archetype. The niche of a warrior who draws power from massive cosmic bodies is underutilised I feel.

It could also work as a class archetype for the Monk I think.

It could work like an inverted Swashbuckler panache. Starting combat charged, spending that charge on spell strike then using some options to become charged again.

Interesting ways to recharge could be moving X distance away from your starting position, critting with a weapon, or getting crit yourself.

What if overdrive mirrored the barbarian's rage from the core playtest? I.e. lasting three rounds then being on cool down for a round.

People were put off by the playtest rage as it required more planning ahead than a barbarian should probably be doing, but that might work for the inventor.

Maybe include some feats or options that trigger when entering/during overdrive and move the crafting check at the end of the three turns to extend it (if a crafting check is necessary).

How would the ability to punch through a point or two of Physical Damage resistance and hardness per weapon die fair as a way to boost damage?

It makes sense to me as it helps firearms deal with things like shields and heavily armoured enemies in a way that real firearms did.

Don't know how frequently this trait come in to play though, I just like the idea of an armour shredding niche.

Ah I get you, it is certainly a possibility.

Magus spellstrike's current design is difficult to justify using any of the principles I listed. And strict adherence to a power budget could be the culprit for it.

I would argue than fun is another design principle (or balance principle or whatever you want to call it) that can be balanced against others, such as power budget, theme, ease of play, self expression or even tradition.

If this edition has placed greater emphasis on balance for balance's sake then that does not mean other principles are no longer important in balance decisions. If balance for the sake of balance was the design goal, then we would have one class. Then everything would be balanced (see Street Fighter 1, the most balanced fighting game). So balance is likely a tool to be used to achieve other design goals, for example, martials and GMs having fun past level 10.

As an example compare MAP to Dex attacks doing lower damage:
MAP as a balance tool could be seen as being designed to facilitate self expression. Decreasing the power of your 3rd strike means characters are incentivised to find useful 3rd actions that differentiate them from others, raise shield vs demoralise for example. Even though it might be more balanced for all martials to just do 3 attacks every turn.

Where as, the relatively low damage of dex attacks compared to str based ones could be a balance decision largely guided by the power budget of the two stats. As dex has more skills and is a better defense stat than strength.

Both of these balance decisions use different principles to meet their ends.

The Int/Wis/Cha balance disparity could be explained by tradition for example. (Though I do not find this very compelling).

But any principles used, including fun or power budget can still lead to mistakes.

But I do agree with your main point Temparans on the role usefulness of thinking in power budgets, I just think that power budget is not the only balance principle that is or should be used.

PS. A balance decision can be guided by more than one principle, so in your Summoner example, it could be theme, ease of play, and power budgets.

PPS. I am not arguing one thing is balanced or another isn't, I am just trying to describe certain ways you can look at balance.

Cyouni wrote:

No, you're defining AoO (which rogue doesn't even get) and the level 8 feat Opportune Backstab as subjectively better than the numerous ways of getting permanent +2 AC and Opportune Riposte. This is a subjective assessment.

Similarly, you've subjectively judged rogue's ability to get more consistent SA damage as better than swashbuckler's higher damage and speed.

And you've subjectively judged that it's of no value to be able to pick up advanced weapons through ancestry.

These aren't objective. These are you making subjective value judgements and presenting them as objective.

advanced weapons are not better than martial and martial are barely better than simple and easily rememdied by feats

give me something i cannot overcome via feats?

Fun factor?

If something is mechanically hard to justify but is fun, it could be argued it is balanced.

Especially if your balance goal is to facilitate fun.

Not saying rogue is more/less fun than swashbuckler, but they are different kinds of fun.

I think power budget is to help articulate that nothing is gained for free in the eyes of balance. If a class excels at option X, it must be weak in regards to Y.

Though it is a rough outline, as giving objective values to Xs and Ys is impossible as you say.

But a power budget doesn't necessarily mandate that, so it might be better to think of it in general terms. EG: This class feels weak in X, but feels strong in Y so it is ok, rather than this class gains these numbers for Y, but lacks these numbers for X.

And if a class is under performing, the power budget thinking can still matter, as the class is operating under their power budget. So in the process of bringing the class up to par, there is a finite amount of power they can acquire, and applying that power creates an opportunity cost with other areas. So if people want the Magus to have/become better at X, it will be assumed (due to the idea of a power budget's finite resources) that the Magus cannot also be given/become better at Y.

Ryu/Ken/Guile from Street Fighter are good examples of power budgets at work. They each excel at different ranges despite lots of similarities in their moves. If one of the trio was weak, they have left over budget which could be spent on strengthening a weakness, or pushing a strength further, and if both options were selected it would be a smaller bonus to each.

But this isn't a perfect world, so even if decisions are made with power budgets in mind they can still be incorrect. This does not mean power budget thinking is flawed.

Edit: It could be thought of as a balance principle, a somewhat vague statement that can argue for a position but does not necessarily demand it. And can be balanced against other balance principles.

I am with Ressy here, following the Swashbuckler damage bonus from precise striker and finisher can make for a good framework. Spells can operate as finishers and damage scaling similar to precise strike can come from a synthesis (or part of the base scaling).

If imbuing a weapon is 1 action, this can let you adopt a Swashbuckler-like action routine.

Clinton Love wrote:

Trick magic item would be very cool, especially with the Striker's Scroll feat.

I really like the idea of granting unique actions on Spell Striking, and an extended sustain upon a check is pretty neat. I dunno if there are that many spells that a Magus would want to sustain though.

Oh, by sustain I meant either Sustain a Spell or keep the spell in the weapon for an extra round.

Ah gotcha, that would suit it a lot.

Hate to double post but can't edit.

So heere is my full pitch:

Esoteric Disciple -or- Mystic Disciple
You seek perfection of both body and mind, wielding your knowledge to imbue your strikes with Arcane might.
You gain the Arcane Fists Magus Feat. You also gain the Flurry of Spells action.
Flurry of Spells <1 Action>
Flourish Trait; Magus Trait
When you use your Striking Spell, you store the spell in two of your unarmed Strikes. You must use the Flurry of Spells action after you Cast a Spell. This action lets you make two unarmed Strikes, both of which are imbued with the spell you cast. These attacks follow the normal multiple attack penalty. On a successful hit, you cast the imbued spell on each attack. If you miss with one of the attacks, the spell is lost. This spell is calculated at half your Magus level, rounded up (to a minimum of 1.)

I'm no designer. So it is probably very poorly written and executed. But that is the gist of one of my ideas.

I like the idea of double imbuing, but I think it would better serve a dual wielder than a monk type.

But it could function a bit like sorcerer's split shot feat. That targets to enemies with one spell for half the damage.

Personally I would like to see a monk type combining combat maneuvers and spells. Knocking a target prone then pushing them with hydraulic push would be cool imo.

Clinton Love wrote:

manbearscientist wrote:

Additionally, the spell gets the weapon's item bonus, though cantrips are limited to a +1. This is a fortune effect. It no longer bumps the degree of success on a critical hit with weapon as a default.

I really like this, it also allows for some interesting interaction with Magus Potency spell.

Out of the options listed I think the spell book one is pretty interesting, but it might be too strong. If I remember correctly adv/dis works out to +/- 4ish. That's a big boost at level 1. Could work for a later upgrade feat instead?

If the goal is action economy it could enable actions to draw a scroll or something (and use scrolls whilst you have the tome in your hand).

Yeah, the Spellbook benefit was hardest to figure out. The goal basically was for it to be synthesis that focuses hardest on having the spell land. I'm not sure if advantage is the right way to go about that though.

I definitely like the idea of its spare actions work for Interacting to draw a Scroll or Wand, or use Trick Magic Item. With that, maybe the synthesis is an Arcana check to keep the spell sustained past 2 rounds? Similar to Bard's lingering performance. I think that with the versatility of a really flexible spare action, you don't need to also have a big numeric bonus.

Trick magic item would be very cool, especially with the Striker's Scroll feat.

I really like the idea of granting unique actions on Spell Striking, and an extended sustain upon a check is pretty neat. I dunno if there are that many spells that a Magus would want to sustain though.

Additionally, the spell gets the weapon's item bonus, though cantrips are limited to a +1. This is a fortune effect. It no longer bumps the degree of success on a critical hit with weapon as a default.

I really like this, it also allows for some interesting interaction with Magus Potency spell.

Out of the options listed I think the spell book one is pretty interesting, but it might be too strong. If I remember correctly adv/dis works out to +/- 4ish. That's a big boost at level 1. Could work for a later upgrade feat instead?

If the goal is action economy it could enable actions to draw a scroll or something (and use scrolls whilst you have the tome in your hand).

Edit: The shield and 2h are a bit at odds for me. I feel like 2h options should focus on offence, and shield options should focus on defense. But throwing a spell frisby is pretty cool, but for me it's not why I'd want to be a shield Magus. And being more tanky is not why I'd want to be a 2h magus.

I think spell strike should be able to leverage three separate areas, these are accuracy boosting, action economy manipulation, and cool abilities. With my idea it leans on all three without being fully invested in changing one of them, which can allow for a player to change how much spell striking should steer towards one of the three areas.
Spell striking is now split into two actions and a passive:

Spell Combat:
Some magi abilities interact with your spell combat bonus.
Levels 1 – 6: Spell combat = 1
Levels 7 – 15ish: Spell combat = 2
Levels 16+: Spell combat = 3
Overcharge
1 action
Cast a spell, but instead of the effect of the spell going off it is charged into a weapon (or yourself). The spell has the same qualifiers as the current spell strike.
If a spell has variable actions, you must decide whether you have cast the one action version or the two action version when you Overcharge.
Whilst you are wielding a charged weapon (or you are charged), you count as being Charged (or Enspelled or whatever), certain abilities activiate whilst you are Charged.
For the purpose of feats like bespell this action counts as casting the spell.
Additionally whilst being Charged you gain access to the Discharge Action
Discharge
Free Action or 1 Action
Requirement: Your last action was a successful attack
You discharge the spell. Immediately causing the target of the attack to be subject to the spell. If the spell requires an attack roll, it gains a circ bonus equal to spell combat, if a saving throw, the enemy takes a circ penalty to the save. (In my games I use a spell glove for potency runes on attack spells, if that is not a thing then the attack roll could have spell combat x2 instead, this does increase a Magi spell attacks beyond full casters but I think this is a fitting niche for them).
The amount of actions this takes depends on the actions normally used to cast the spell cast during overcharge.
If 1 action, then discharge is a free action
If 2 actions, then 1 action or a free action, if casting a free action here you a slowed 1. (this helps action economy manipulation as you can eat into your next turns actions to pull of stuff this turn).

I would like this to be paired with a variable action focus spell that when cast as one action follows similar scaling to Swashbuckler finisher damage, but can be cast as two actions for a bit more oomf. (I am thinking d6 normally and d10 as two action) Additionally, I would like this focus spell to be customisable based on a spell school you choose at level 1 (when you gain this spell). Something like Necromancy doing negative damage, gaining the necromancy trait and giving temp HP on a crit.
For cool abilities, I would like to see these come from the synthesis and feats.
Some synthesis ideas I have are Sustaining Steel been given to a shield version, that grants shield block feat for free and the ability to discharge if an attack crit misses or you use a shield block. Magic marauder for two handers gaining a damage buff equal to spell combat (or double if you overcharge with a slot/focus spell) and reach whilst Charged. An unarmed version that gains the Arcane fists feat for free, and backswing whilst Charged, and can trigger discharge after a successful athletic checks to trip, disarm, grapple and shove.

Edit: Charged status last until the end of your next turn your you discharge, whichever is first

and attack spells do not suffer from map when discharged, but still contribute to it

I like the idea of giving reach as well, it's super flavourful.

I think sustaining steel is not that bad on its own. So I would rather see changes come in the form of 2nd level feats similar to the champions 1st level reaction feats.

So giving reach as a 2nd level feat would be where I would want it.

Another option for sustaining steel could be an AoO whilst the weapon is charged. This allows for a more tanking playstyle giving enemies a very good reason not to walk away from you whilst your weapon is charged. And in some circumstances would be better than slide
For example if you start your turn next to an enemy, you can charge a weapon, attempts a strike, have an ally trip, attempt another strike when the enemy gets up, and then attempt a 3rd strike when it is your turn again.

Burrowing the wording from Athletic Strategist might be useful as it does a similar thing but with the athletic skill instead of spell attacks.