ElementalofCuteness's page

One problem with the gunslinger having the different ways is that some, like the sniper, really do not need more hp, but others do. One lesson that I hope we can all learn from PF2 and for new classes, is that it might be better to dial in a class around a very small number of subclasses/no subclasses, and then expand those classes with class archetypes and feats to support those archetypes in later books when they can be fully developed.

Have to agree but Sniper is only useful on the first round generally. However as someone who is in a campaign with a Ranger sniping with a Sukgong Crossbow...Snipers are dangerous especially if you give them Farshot and Hunt Prey class feature/feat.

However I believe a dedicated Combination Weapon Class woudl been much better then Gunsligner trying to work it in. This prov3es my point of you should really focus on a Gimmick and do it well, have class identity and don't try to cross paths when the class doe snot support such a thing.

8 Hit points makes any melee class risky to play. Rogue really only get a pass because you generally are supporting a more beefy martial and have reactions to have bring targets down faster then if you just fought solo.

A bit of a side tangent, but how aren't the inventor or daredevil skill classes when both revolve entirely around skills (Crafting in the case of inventor, Athletics or Acrobatics in the case of daredevil)? Gunslinger is in a weird spot, because all ways revolve around skills, though I wouldn't consider it a skill class personally. However, I do agree with most of points you make here. Daredevil is weak yet really interesting, while the slayer feels like class bloat.

I'll try my best to explain what I mean.

- Alchemist has versatility which makes them a Pseudo-Spellcaster, they get a pass.

- Inventor gets 8 hit points, auto-scaling crafting, no bonus skills, crafting is not useful in a lot of places. They should be a 10 hit poitn class like Swashbuckler...

- Thaumaturge gets Devise Lore, Which turns you Niche lore into Lore-Everything using Charisma at a -2, making it still +2 Better then any other Int based Lore-Anything unless you are a Wizard with Loremaster Lore and even then it caps at Expert vs Legendary -2 (So Master). The Tome makes it Legendary -1 (The Tome is a SUPER good Implement)

- Gunslinger class kit makes it once again like Swashbuckler. It should get either Auto-scaling in the Skills the Gunslinger's way give and/or give it 10 hit points, it shouldn't be a 10 hit point class.

My brain is telling me something the more I read about these classes.

Daredevil is not great, it really is a limiting 8 hit point none caster. It's on the same level as Gunslinger for me. Something even with the remastered, I'd consider nearly useless to play since in my mind Classes in PF-2E have Archetypes, Niches or Play-styles? That is something that you expect when you play them and it feels like soem classes avoid this like the plague.

Examples of what I am talking about.

- There are, as of the Playtest 7 classes which have 8 hit points a level.
- 3 of them are skill related, Investigator, Rogue & Thaumaturge
- 4 of them are not skill related, Alchemist, Daredevil, Gunslinger & Inventor.

(Honestly a bit of an interruption, Gunslinger & Inventor could be a 10 hit point class since Swashbuckler gets auto-scaling Acrobatics/Other Skill.)

This is where I'd like to ask for the Daredevil to get the Swashbuckler treatment. Where Swashbucklers get 10 hit points a level and auto-scaling on Acrobatics, which sadly but to shame Alchemist, Daredevbil and Inventor.

For Daredevil to be good it needs more hit points because right now it is a rather squishy and has no reward out side of wanting to build battle medicine and go into the Medic Archetype. Their level 1 Class Feature basically all but confirms they want to try to hit Medic Dedication ad build for Wisdom.

Slayer Next isn't it?

It's just diet Ranger with a single Thaumaturge Implement. There is not much to honestly say on the matter of Slayer other then it has no base way to increase base damage unless you choice the Blade as your Special Gear, Which is kinda bad since unlike Exemplar you start with 3 Ikons... You know let's just be honest here. Without any way to increase damage, Slayers are going to feel less complete and I do know some of you are going to be pointing out "What about flurry ranger?" and that is a good point but unlike Slayer, they get more damage the same way monks do, they have feats and/or class features which allow them to either reduce MAP or make 2 Attacks for 1 Action.

Sure Ranger and Monk do not have a way to increase their base damage, Flurry Ranger eventually just hit more with multiple attacks allowing them to crit fish and Monk, well Monk kinda just wants to Flurry of Blows every turn whenever possible. Slayer doesn't seem to do either of these two things unless you choose to do this with your unique class feature.

Am I missing something about Slayer? I really do not have a clue if I am or not.

So what is the fastest way you can get 3 Focus points as as a Magus with te domain spell Fire Ray. Since they thought Psychic was too good. (Yeah but you had to give it something being a weaker caster) and this is why people sometimes argue...sometimes, always argue that casters have no true identity and the Psychic was the first one who's MC gave it an identity and Paizo killed it.

Anything other then the horn. Nah, I hardly used any potions in PF-2E. I just feel like they aren't a good bang for your buck and that's before we talk about alchemical elixirs and mutagens and their downsides.

I don't understand the Imaginary Weapon nerf. There was no need to do such a thing as well as kill off one of the two best MC Archetypes in the game. That leaves only . . . Exemplar as the only other good MC and that's if your GM allows it.

Seriously just an Ancestry Guide 2.0 Would be killer and something Paizo should make. Updating all Ancestries would be amazing. Since right now you gotta expect any Ancestry Lore gives Additional Lore -Ancestry- Since some do and that can not be right that only some do.

The weapon feats need standardization too.

This does not change how I felt about Resistance ALL. Back in the old days I played a Paladin and had no idea that Resistance ALL would apply to everything. That seems a little bit I dunno. "Too Good To Be True"?. That makes some enemies way to powerful then what they shouldbe for their level. *Cough* Wraths...

I am simply curious what some of the best spell replacements for Imaginary Weapon Spell Strike is. There is so much content that it is sometimes hard to go through all of the options but one of them is Fire Ray from the Fire Domain.

Anything with Reload 1 is bad. If a none Dual Class game I'd never ever recommend anyone to use a Gun ummm Firearm (Since Guns are a SF-2 Thing) outside of an Investigator because of Devise A Stratagem. Fire Once, Reload, Do another action.

Bows however are weirdly more powerful. Reload 0, can use Hunted Shot from Ranger (Which is a killer feat by the way). So by default if you choose your set up right, you can do 3 actions worth of effects for 2 actions as a Ranger or anything with Ranger Dedication then taking Hunted Shot at level 4, which just means if the target is not dead you now get 2 Actions worth of actions for 1 Action, and 2 Actions for anything else.

It's the whole reason Flurry of Blows is REALLY good.

The moment it is released it goes from Melee weapon to Ranged by the Original Pre-Remastered rules...Which is what makes this even more confusing.

Why do things always need to be ended up nerfed? Investigator without bombs, why...That's not even that powerful. Why are bombs always getting the weird nerf stick?

Investigators can't use bombs

Sticky Bomb got nerfed and thus is not a good level 8 feat, infact Sticky bomb is so weak it might be either a level 1 feat (Probably level 2 cause level 2 is weaker then level 1) or a Bomber exclusive feature.

I don't understand any of this, when it comes to the nerfs.

That was a weird design choice even for a Playtest. Like if you want to use this class they must increase their athletics if you want to use anything shove related which is silly, as it removes player choices from what they are able to do by choosing something for them.

Mark Quarry is just watered down Hunt Prey and I don't want to say this but Paizo should hear it. Why does Paizo always seem to make classes with similar mechanics which are never on par with each other? Slayer specialize in hunting one big monster...What's the point of the Out Wit Ranger then? Isn't this what the Ranger was suppose to do....?

Am I missing something from these classes or could they both just be Class-Archetypes of Swashbuckler & Ranger?

I don't see the appeal of this outside of being a improvised weapon class. It has STR or DEX as KAS but no Medium Armor, only 8 Hit Points and a worse version of Ranger's Flurry Edge because it only works on Press actions. Look I get the idea of the class but could this entire class not be a Swashbuckler Style or Class Archetype? It doesn't even get bonus damage because it's form of extra damage is when slamming people into a prop, which is only d6s...Seriously a long-sword can do more at d8s.

What am I missing here with Daredevil here?

What is the difference between Slowed and Stunned now anyways? Did we ever get a clear answer on why we have two statuses which do the same thing?

To know? Pfft, sorry mate but Paizo doesn't talk to us that often anymore. Get use to this new communication pattern where they don't talk to us and we are guessing on everything they are doing...

But Playtest?

If you use flying to terrain to stop a Necromancer player with the Playtest mechanics we know of then you might as well ban it at the table. Since that could easily go into the position of being unfun no matter who you are. Just the idea of all my thralls constantly dying at the end of the round seems rather unfun.

Yet the Necromancer cluttering the map is something I dread. It seems like the fastest way to make every encounter easier no matter what the encounter is. Burning actions to kill a thrall is so huge because it's not a DC5 or DC10 flat-check, there is no check involved. If you hit a Thrall it has 0 AC and just dies BUT that's so huge because it is like you just failed a DC5/DC10 Flat-Check to lose your current action but worse because now you get the -5 MAP penalty on all future ATTACK TRAITS this turn unless a Reaction...Even if you try to go around them, as I pointed out in a different thread you just need to either go around, which costs more movement if you're forced to go diagonal, or Tumble Through which can ONLY be done on 1 target per Tumble Through Action RAW.

Not to mention the Necromancer has 4 Focus Points ever fight with Consume Thrall, something which makes Psychic jealous of. The FOCUS POINT Class with AMP'D CANTRIPS got out Focused by the other Focus Point Class because let's be real Necromancer only having 2 slots of spells per rank makes it on the same level as Psychic, using Focus Points more.

There is literally no way to make Psychic seem interesting when the other class has such a powerful and game changing ability as the Necromancer's Create Thrall. That alone I would consider the Necromancer A-Tier Caster, right next to Bard in power. Not even Kineticist with all of their wall spells act the same as Create Thrall Cantrip does. 1 Actyion 1/2/3/4 Thralls based on Spell-casting proficiency, 1d6 Ever 2 Spell Ranks, remains as a wall until killed or dismissed. Can float in the air, like what? Then you can cause them to explode by using either Final Sacrifice or the level 6 Feat...Which is a Reaction like Reactive Strike!?

Necromance is totally stacked to be a terror as a DM to deal with.

Yes there been changes in quality. Despite what some might be saying there has been a drop in that quality. It is very confusing because you notice it more on the weaker end of classes and the best of classes. Rogues and Barbarians got buffed, while Wizards and Psychic got nerfed. Witch and Oracle got heavily changed for the better and Alchemist is still the weakest martial which makes it's dedication just as good to steal as before.

Why did Psychic & Monk Dedication need nerfs? Then as soon as they nerfed Monk's Flurry fo Blows they reintroduced it with Spirit Warrior's Combination Strike....It may not be as OP as Tiger Stance Agile, D8s but It's close enough where it is a nice pick up. D6 with any Finesse weapon?

Gunslinger's Remaster has a feat which improves their Ammo creation feat to give them quick alchemy but that feat doesn't work when you consider special ammo needs 1 action to activate. You need to make ammo, activate the ammo then reload your gun...Opps we're at 3 Actions, sure it can work with Risky Reload but like every build requires risky reload to make this work.

It's hard to point a finger at but it feels like classes who got buffed needed no buffs and the classes which got changed people wanted that but the OGL stuff got nerfed aka Wizard.

- Did anyone ask for Barbarian to get free rage at start of initiative?
- Did anyone ask for Rogues to get crit success on all 3 saves, add dex to damage on unarmed strikes as a Thief, and a buff to Ruffian racket?
- Did anyone ask for Alchemist Toxicologist to be this cheesy? (I.E, put poison on everyone's weapon

And it ended up being bad changes...Even if they add new support they aren't going to fix the bad changes. The most we will see is a Wisdom Mind maybe. Which be cool and that make the Psychic useful.

A squishy caster should not be using a melee cantrip of any kind. They best be thinking of a way to escape before they deal any amount of damage unless they can confirm a killing blow. Since no armor and 6HP is putting you in a situation which is not fun, sure ever caster can decide to 2 feat dip into Earth Kineticist for Clad in Earth Impulse (Which I sadly have done several times for the AC boost alone....) because it beats being a squishy mage with no armor even if you suffer 15ft of moment instead of the classic 25ft.

But reducing IW to D6s is like saying it doesn't get to be special since Gouging claw is also d6, sure it deals 2xrank past rank 1, which is odd. Funky math sometimes but there we go, it is just a melee option on a non-melee caster and is a huge risk, that's all.

We're going around in circles because despite this being a new book with two enw classes we don't have enough information to determine anythign past the Playteast of Necromancer & Runesmith. The problem is that we just had a new Remastered dropped which ended up killing a build while nerfing other casters, so when that is a thing we are all a but on edge that Magus, the thing they decided to nerf with the AMP Cantrip changes will not get an additional nerf in the new book.

Paizo has a habit of over-reaching their nerfs or not trying to balance the weaker classes enough. Look at Wizard and Alchemist, they didn't get improvements just side-grades and argubly wizard got nerfed with a more limiting 4th slot which Sorcerer laughs at...

Every caster must be balanced towards Sorcerer, if yor not a Bound Caster.

While on the upside, ?Necromancer who has only 2 slots per rank like Psychic is one of the more powerful casters in the game. Create Thrall is easily one of the most overpowered and yet underpowered Focus Cantrip in the Playtest.

How can it be both OP & UP?

Create Thrall Cantrip

Overpowered
- One Action Cantrip
- Creates a wall the enemy has to go through or around
- If the enemy targets it it suffers MAP
- You can only Tumble Through one target at a time per action, staggering them in a hall way can be a huge pain for enemies.
- Can stop your allies from getting flanked
- What is the RK DC for Thralls? Can you waste enemy acts as they RK thralls...
- Can cast this three times in one turn

Underpowered
- It's a weak damage option if enemies ignores it
- It feels bad when the GM doesn't play with your thralls.
- AOEs destroy your thralls so fast.
- Too many thralls gets in everyone's way, turning the above into a disadvantage.
- You need Thralls to use your Focus Points which feels terrible, because they aren't any stronger then normal Focus Spells.

When you remove the focus point from Psychic Dedication you make the weakest caster now obviously the weakest caster Multielcass Archetype. You get 1 AMP'd Cantrip with NO additional Focus Points, so you get 1 if you had 0 but if you had 1 point already? Nah, might as well have had 0 focus spells so you can get 2 points at level 8+...This HAS to be a mistake, right? Order of operations should not determine what levels you should optimally take feats.

Oracle is such a bad class that Paizo won't answer a simple question but AMPS being this way is odd in my opinion. Magus Psychic was scary but this does not change anything but switch Magus doing somethign else or casters grabbing Blessed One Archetype for that juicy Focus Point in my opinion...

I am scared of Magus Remastered getting a Spell-Strike Nerf by limiting it's Focus Spells to be able to be used in Spell-Strike...It just seems on brand at this point. So why would I ever want to do this then, if you remove Focus Spells Magus Investigator Dedication will become the normal and now you remove Magus Psychic for Magus anything with Domains (Fire Ray is good and so are other spells....) but like if they kill Focus Spells, Magus Investigator Dedication will be the normal for Devise a Stratagem so you can make SURE your Spell-Strike hits.

It's not just that but the way that I've seen Toxicologist played is a very hot topic. You generally poison every single weapon your Martials use and depending on how you read Toxicologist the poison immunity gets override with acid damage because it is possibly YOUR poison, which is the way I see Tox being used, an amazing first Strike with poisons on every Martial Weapon in the party...Is it cheesy, very...Is it intended, unsure because Paizo has yet to fix this issue.

It just another one of those things where you look back and question the Balance....

The Wizard anmd Psychic feel like they need and I am going to hate saying this but this is a good chance near the end of PF-2E to basically revist an old concept from PF-1E, "Unchained Classes". This would be an odd way to sell books but if they really wat to fix Wizard and Psychic then what they need to do is Rebuild them from the ground up. Take trhe core concepts then dial them up to an 11 with these classes.

This change just makes casters and none-martials feel bad again. Like my last post earlier, Where's the balance? Wizard got gutted, Psychic had it's core killed in the Remastered rules, Alchemist are like second-rate spellcasters (Even if they are martials). The only Alchemist worth playing in Toxicologist and that's because it is cheesy.

But you know what? Just you watch in "Impossible Magic" where Remastered Magus will have Spell-strike be only performed with Slot-spells or Cantrips, no longer will it work with Focus Spelsl just because Casters need to be nerfed for whatever reason. This is the change i am expecting for Remastered Magus if Remastered Psychic is anything to go off of...

Am I Paranoid? Absolutely, am I expecting the worst, absolutely. There is no reason for us to assume Magus and Summoner as both casters won't get nerfs with this Remastered or the others, so far.

Woot Thaumaturge buffs! Yay for a good class getting more buffs with no nerfs to it's strongest feature Diverse Lore! Wow now let's see what Psychic got....Oh....Oh no.... What do you mean nerf it, nerf it hard? What do you mean remove the free focus point from the Dedication? What do you mean make it not compatible with Spellstrike from Magus? So

So Paizo, let us get this straight. You nerfed Imaginary Weapon from D8s to D6s and from physical to force damage. Okay you nerfed Imaginary Weapo so why make it not compatible with Magus now, it deals less damage which seems like it be balanced now?

You realize all this does is make Casters turn to Blessed One for their free Focus Point with Lay on Hands now and Magus will not try to grab Fire Ray or a similar powerful Focus Point. All this does is change the power budget back to the old Magus before Psychic was a thing or rather just shifts it over to none Psychic spells in general.

If Psychic got only 2 slots per rank or 3 focus point max makes it bad, it should have 3 slots or 4 focus points max instead of a way to increase power with no page space changes. It is odd that Psychic got nerfed, it feels like Wizard 2: Electric Boogaloo - Psychic Edition. Where we nerf one class that wasn't meta on it's own. While we buff Thaumaturge which is an absurdly great class.

Rogue didn't need the buff, Thaumaturge didn't need the buffs, Yet the best classes always get the love while the bad classes get to stay the same unless there was enough support for them, looking at Alchemist, Wizard or Oracle... Oracle got buffed but the flavor is gone, Witch got buffed but still isn't as good as Sorcerer.

Where's the balance, is all we're asking...Where did it all go?

I joined the forums when communication was not a strong suit. I have to agree with Tridus though. Why are they so allergic to answering some basic questions and fixing some clear flaws. What Maya is doing is incredible, she is very helpful but this is not on her, it's on the rest of the staff to follow up on.

Another issue is no explaining why some features get answers. Like the Rogue's feature. We all thought it was a mistake, a simple error that would be fixed in the first Errata but nope it turned out Rogues do crit succeed on all 3 saving throws at level 17 and that WAS intended. However in an Email/Private Message where the guy had to repost it just to prove it wasn't a mistake...Where is the transparency?

We all love Paizo, why we keep buying books, playing their TTRPG systems. Telling others to come play it more. We keep comign back to this system because we love it over other TTRPG content like 5th Edition DnD...So why can we not get the transparency from the devs on questions and concerns? I

Is this too hard to ask for...?

If answering simple questions is a slippery slop then I would like to say we shouldn't get Errata then and save us al the headache of asking for it in the several forum posts dedicated to the idea of Errata. (Spring 2025, Fall 2025 & Spring 2026). Yet we're so passionate we keep adding more to this hypothetical workload...Are we the knows being played as fools, in reality?

How do I feel about this as a whole? Well this is a problem. We can't lie to ourselves and think it isn't a problem even if it is a minor one. It would take them literally a couple of minutes to quickly answer the problems in Oracle's Spell Repertoire. That's my problem with waiting for an answer, it is a very simple to give the answer. Literally it's either "Yes, that's the correct number of spells in their Repertoire" or "No, actually the spells known is the correct number.". Perhaps I am simply over thinking how simple answering this is.

You'd need to adjust Get'Em! to become a Circumstance Bonus to Attacks if you keep it on a single target which makes it go from weak since it is +1 Status to +1 Circumstance, which makes it able to stack with Bard and Rhythm Mystic's Focus Spell. Yeah would a Bard + Envoy be a strong combo? Absolutely but lets not kid ourselves, it is required to make the Class at leas competitive when compared to an objectively stronger full casting classes. Not to mention Mystics also get a secondary class feature which makes them absurdly strong, maybe stronger then heal font clerics.

Envoy is what happens in my opinion when a Bard and a Commander decide to have a child. That child did not inherent magic which is what makes the Bard stronger in all capabilities.

Get'Em! Being their primary Directive is a problem (Because it's so weak). You get +1 Status bonus to Strikes made against that one target, that one "only" target. Unlike Bard's Courageous Anthem which is a 60ft Emanation, effects all allies and gives them +1 Status Bonus to Attack Rolls against any target until the Spell runs out. It's also only 1 action similar to Get'Em!

Some of the other Directives gives Reactions but Starfinder 2E gives every class a decent Reaction by level 6, so that because do I use my ability and make my ally use their reaction or rather will they use my reaction? Since unlike Commander they do not give out a free Reaction till the highest of levels.

Also locking them to CHA was bad, you then get the realization unlike Bard who has +4 CHA you also have +4 CHA but the difference if Bards get to use their +4 CHA to make Spell Attacks or Used as Spell DC. The Envoy needs to spent 1 Action minimal to match the attack bonus of a regular Martial.

This is only really talking about level 1 Enovy. Which makes it crazy that Get'Em is so....weak. Ge'Em! Isn't even considering the Envoy is a 8 hit point class. Let's look at the other classes real fast.

Envoy
Get'Em Directive - 2 Actions - Adds Charisma to damage against that one target.

Inventor
Overdrive - Can just choose to get INT to damage unless you crit fail the craft check. Lasts for a minute.

Investigator
Strategic Strike - If you hit with Devise a Stratagem you get 1 or more D6s bonus damage. (Which with 1 item becomes D8s) Which sometimes can be used for free.

Rogue
Sneak Attack - Must I say more?

Thaumaturge
Implement Empower + Exploit vulnerability - Adds way more damage which lass for an entire minute if I recall.

Throwing my thoughts back into this thread. I have not seen Magus with Psychic dedication but I have heard of all the chaos that happened because of it. Then again it is difficult to not see someone who does Psychic Magus just for the absurd IW spam or Fire Ray because of how freakishly good Fire Ray can be. It's hella difficult to feel useful when the Magus is throwing about IW level's of damage every turn for the first 3 turns of combat.

That is amazing but also why does the Spellstriker's Staff get Shifting on it!? I am so confused by their choices even more now. It is a very incredibly powerful staff. It just confuses me more about the design choice personally.

I stil think Resistance All is still "To Good To Be True" when it comes to applying multiple times no matter how you look at it possibly. It feels like the Weakness/Resistance rules do not work evenly in both directions which I think feels wrong from a balance point of view. Why can my Resistance 5 (Expect Force) apply to my Flaming Thundering Short-sword three times but If the monster had Weakness 10 sonic, Weakness 5 Fire and Weakness 5 Slashing, it only takes the 10 sonic weakness? How is this even or fair?

I still think resistance triggering more then once depending on source is the "Too Good To Be True" because I feel like this should be the same at weaknesses. If you got weakness 10 fire and weakness 5 slashing and you do 1d8 Slashing and 1d6 Fire you should trigger both weaknesses but if the creature has resistance 10 slashing and resistance 5 Fire and you deal 1d8 slashing + 1d6 Fire you have a chance, a very large chance to deal 0 damage which feels wrong to me but eh.

It would make sense if Magic Staves had a bonus effect when used as a melee weapon. Most of the time anyways you would not be attacking with a Stave unless you are a select few Spell-Caster classes which may or may not include Magus.

So why can I put fundamental runes on Staves but not Property runes for anyways? What is with that odd restriction for anyways they are already simple staff weapons. Is there a reason why you cannot do this or am I just over thinking such a thing anyways?

I am still confused by this thread. So, does resistance still apply multiple times somehow?

Wait so resistence is applying multiple times in the image? I am confused because as far as I know weakness 5 unholy with a 2 on the 1d6 spirit damage becomes 2 unholy damage which you add 5 weakness is now 7 but the resistance 5 unholy in the example should be only -2 not -11... That would make resistance grossly overpowered, meaning the 17 should be 15 damage not only 6...Since only the Spirit Damage becomes Unholy, right?

Where is this rule for sanctified Spirit Damage becoming Holy/Unholy?

So Psychic's Spellcasting does nothing right now or something? I am a bit lost.

Could use some clarification on the interaction of Area Fire, Auto-fire, and Punishing Salvo. The internet seems to broadly interpret that this feat works with Auto-Fire, because it also is an Area attack that benefits from Primary Target. Is this accurate?

Also could use clarity on what the intended MAP is for the Punishing Salvo. Is it intended to offer a second attack at the same MAP as the initial Primary Target strike involved in the attached Area Fire? Or does it have the MAP after the Area Fire (because it says your last action was an Area Fire) and Area Fire has the attack trait. Please errata for clarification.

The way I read it is at a -5 MAP, instead of -10 or something. It is not useful for Automatic weapons but it is mainly there for weapons with only Area fire capabilities. If it did anything else then I'd be surprised and point out that it is not as powerful as the Playtest version which had 0 MAP added.

You... do know that wands are priced simply because that's what a infinite source of a consumable is worth, right? There's a rule for making wands of any kind of consumable, called Gardens. It has nothing to do with trick magic items, except inasmuch as people with 2nd rank slots like 3rd rank scrolls more relatively than people with 4th rank slots, but that's not a problem with wands

Hey can someone link me this rule on AON by chance please?

Why does everyone want to suggest not using Focus Points, a system Paizo made to handle stuff like this? Monks use it instead of Ki and so should Psychics use Focus points instead of their own resource. That would make Psychics overpowered if they could freely cast AMPs without a resource though. There be no reason to use spell slots outside of some rare niche cases.

You would need to restrict them to their current 2 slots or reduce them to 1 slot of magic or worse make them a bound-caster.

I find it silly there is no low level Judgement Thurible for Divine Lance while stuff like Jolt Coil is level 3. Nope the minimal level of the Judgement Thurible is 10 fora awesome cantrip but alright effect, who balances these?

Sorcerer is good because of the bonus damage and healing but Oracle has more HP. It is confusing if you ask me personally. I feel like if you can't poach some stuff multiclassing would be a useless in some regards. It is a slippery slope...

It feels odd talking in the SF 1 Forums lol

How interesting. This is both fascinating and a bit silly at the same time. I understand the logic behind it but Kineticist is like the expectation and not the norm because their impulses are not spells but spell-like abilities which use class-dc instead of spell-dc using CON as their Casting stat.

My big thing is yeah it is silly a Kineticist is better at Area Fire then most but as a Dev pointed out. Kineticist specialize is area style attacks so a Area Fire/Auto-Fire weapon is no different then firing a exploding fire impulse which I Think is cool but also seems silly that a Kineticist with a gun can out perform the Fighter class, The KING of Weaponry. This is not including multiclassing into Soldier just for Primary Target at level 10. Which trades off +2 Area/Auto-Fire DC for I believe +4 to Primary Target.

Slightly off topic but nothing is stopping you from Archetyping Soldier as a Fighter which may actually be stronger then the Soldier as a whole... If you make it to level 10 to steal Primary Target. However that is like pointing out Magus is better with Psychic Dedication.

Playing a game with a level 6 Duel-class Solarion. We'd homebrewed that Examplar Ikons work with Solar Weapons while he is also a Barbarian. It has worked out somewhat decently if you take in the fact he is dual wielding with Twin Manifestation or whatever the feat is called and spamming Double Slice which makes him more realiable then a normal Solarion in my honest opinion.

SInce this is PF-2E and not SF-2E we are doing this in we can see in a PF-2E Campaign even if homebrewed the Solarion even without the barbarian with Double Slice is useful once you pair a second martial on the frontline to absorb hits. The Black Hole feat has gotten many uses from so far and has ended up being good against Pathfinder 2 enemies seeing as many of them need to be melee.

Supernova being Indiscriminate it has a list of problems which can't really be over come depending on party composition. Have 2 Martial Melee and using Super Nova drops off quite a bit without proper planning. Having 3 or more then good luck at all. I ran into thia with a Playtest Solarion.

This could be fixed by making a feat that excludes allies from Supernova at higher levels.