HumbleGamer's page

Organized Play Member. 5,195 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 5,195 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Comparing the 3 reactions with or without the exalt perk would probably have different outcomes.

At low levels, I think the Redeemer one would win hands down.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
The Raven Black wrote:

IIRC the RAW states quite openly that Uncommon should usually be made available to PCs as long as the player puts a little effort in it.

Wasn't that towards items access?

Uncommon ones being slightly more difficult to get, but never impossible.

What about focus spells and refocusing progression?
And the weapon proficiency ( a 1-10 spellcaster with a martial proficiency? )?
Same goes with saves.

Isn't it too much?

ps: I always felt the minstrel name as somebody not tied to magic ( just a rogue, for example, with compositions ).

I know I can already do the something similar with the bard dedication, indeed, but it's a long way to get them with a dedication ( and only a very limited part of them ).

In addition to what already posted by Ascalaphus, a doubt about Skald Weapon Expertise.

you gain access to the critical specialization effects of all simple and martial weapons and unarmed attacks while singing or while under the effect of a composition spell.

What does singing mean?

Expending 1 action every round to perform?

JiCi wrote:

Please enlighten a bit: should we wait for Paizo to release a Feat that allow a Barbarian to use Concentrate actions while Raging?

The Bloodrager's main gimmick is to cast spells while raging and it was similar with the Rage Prophet.

Right now, there's no way to achieve this, because Casting a Spell either have the Manipulate trait (Somatic, Material, Focus) or the Concentrate trait (Verbal). Most spells have both somatic and verbal components.

Indeed not being able to rely on spells with the verbal component is a huge nerf ( the majority if not all 2 actions spells are unavailable ).

I did a quick search not knowing the bloodrager class from 1e, and it seems the class was meant to give them up to lvl 4 spells ( with a slow progression ).

I am not sure whether they were offensive spells or defensive ones, but given how this 2e works in terms of spellcasting dedications, I wouldn't expect a martial combatant to make a good use of offensive spells through a dedication ( not talking about gishers that have their own spellcasting, obviously ).

Maybe a bloodrager archetype could have some way to make moment of clarity a free action ( I am not also sure whether with this 2e a barbarian still deserves not to be able to cast spells while raging. Isn't their rage just what makes them equal to other classes? Like the +2 from fighter, the rogue sneak attack, etc... ).

arcady wrote:

I'm playing a Witch in an Abomination Vaults game and I've become increasingly frustrated with how badly put together the class is. We are using FA and yet I still fail to find a archetype to take that expands things out in an interesting way. The class itself lacks synergy with itself - let alone anything else.

So I put together a Wizard and gave the Wizard the Witch archetype - and found I could recreate my Witch character with better internal consistency by not making a Witch into a Witch... but instead just taking the Witch Devotion feat and the 2 required before you can train elsewhere. 3 feats packed onto the side of Wizard makes a character that holds up it's internal logic to play more like Witch describes itself than the actual Witch class does.

A similar result with Sorcerer / Witch except for opening oneself up to multi-stat dependency. Here you just don't don't take basic witch spellcasting. Instead bump one more feat into the familiar. Having Cackle is they key for this one.

Hopefully this example will no longer hold up once the remaster remakes Witch.

Definitely true ( I also appreciate the witch dedication because, unlike the witch class, it's pretty strong ).

I really hope that the remastered would bring some important improvements to the class.

Anyway, we started AV with FA, and once our group hit lvl 2 our DM decided not to use FA anymore ( mostly because the combat encounters were already easier, and because with 5 characters all skills had already been covered ).

The best approach would imo be to list the available archetypes for the campaign, allowing the players to choose between them.

This would limit powercreep ( extra feats are always powercreep, that's why "limit" ), while also giving some interesting alternatives for the characters ( rather than seeing bastion, sentinel, medic, etc... all the time ).

Ascalaphus wrote:
I generally just grit my teeth and treat all "when you enter" effects as "when you enter or if the effect enters your space". The lack of symmetry really irritates me otherwise.

I do the same ( this also includes forced movements ).

I'd really like to have a wooden sword

Ravingdork, I think that the staff is the closer one that can be reskinned ( for flavor purposes ) into a wooden sword ( the damage and two-handed damage makes sense in terms of progression ).

Richard Lowe wrote:
Pretty sure at this point I've seen more players spend fights unconscious due to Sudden Charge than most any other feat. It almost needs a warning sidebar with it "Use responsibly."


- Small rooms in every AP, not requiring the character to rush forward in a similar way ( although a dwarf or a heavy armored combatant that didn't take fleet might find it somehow useful ).
- Metagame involving ( "wait/delay so we can rush together and you won't get stomped" ).
- Forcing the other combatant to waste actions on striding, that could have been used to ready an action or buffing themselves.
- Way better alternatives in terms of feats ( for both fighter and barbarian ).
-Open trait makes it useless if already in melee with a dying enemy ( I kill him and sudden charg... oh wait, I can't because reasons ).

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Given a blaster arcane spellcaster within the group, I found out that it's better to have an occult spellcaster as healer ( even if soothe is not strong as heal ).

This would allow the characters to benefit from synesthesia, as well as some healings.

Currently we have 3 occult spellcasters:

- Sorcerer ( they can get heal by lvl 8, making them excellent ).
- Bard ( They have inspire courage and heroics, along with the occult list. Definitely the best support we have )
- Witch ( 1 less slot and prepared spellcaster... it's not real impressive, but they can get lesson of life by lvl 2, which helps a lot during encounters. Anyway, it's the worst among the three ).

Whatever the occult spellcaster, things are going to be fine ( I prefer spontaneous ones because this 2e is full of useless spells, making easier to just keep the essentials ).

The wizard might easily provide assistance by getting the witch dedication and the basic lesson ( lesson of life ). Even a single cast per fights would allow to save daily resources, making it always an excellent pick ( they also get a familiar that way ).

Anyway, I think the main issue is that players still look for a way to ease combat encounters the most, while they can easily complete any adventure with a healer, a blaster and a couple of combatants.

To make a quick examples, it's not rare to find groups that play this way:

- Several characters with medicine and battle medicine
- Several characters with healing focus spells
- Several characters with hybrid spellcasters ( nature ), providing aoe and healings
- Synesthesia and Inspire courage all day long ( meaning there's always a bard )
- companions

and so on.

On the one hand, it's pretty normal for characters to increase their chance of survival the best they can, but on the other hand it's just the players choice. Would taking synesthesia and 2 hybrid healers/blasters, synesthesia, heroism/inspirecourage,etc... make things easier compared to bring an arcane spellcaster?

I say yes, but APs don't require any of this.

And reading similar threads, it's pretty clear that Paizo did wrong creating a spell like synesthesia ( and I also agree that heroism could easily be on the arcane list too ).

Striding and using athletics is 2 actions.
Leaping and using athletics is the same.

If you are talking about a long jump, you can do the same by taking the feat that lowers the required actions to 1 and remove the 10-foot distance required by the long jump. This would make 1 action to long jump and another one for the athletics check.

The rest is just flavor ( I think there's no need for a feat, since everything is already covered by the rules ).

RobinEaton wrote:

HumbleGamer wrote:

I'd ask the DM to get the soulforger dedication

It definitely a great solution for the desert, but I also have the same problem with it as the Dex build. It's addressing something that is a temporary concern, only until we get out of the desert. I'll look into it to see what the other advantages of the dedication are though, certainly.

Consider that even without any point into dex, it would allow you to keep +3 AC from a hide armor, and an additional +2 from your shield.

This would put you somehow equal to any combatant class not using a shield ( which though not optimal, it would still be not bad either ).

Also, what level are you going to start?

By lvl 3 your kind wizard friend could cast Endure Elements on you, nullifying the effects of the heat for the whole day ( you will be able to get your armor on all the time ).

You can also cast it yourself with trick magic items and a wand ( though you can't craft magic items, I am not sure you won't also be able to buy them from a local shop).

This would allow you not to get the soulforger dedication, to get something else.

There's also the Forge Dwarf Heritage, that would help you dealing with it.

Severe heat 105º F* to 114º F (41º C to 45º C) 4 hours Minor fire every hour

So, you won't suffer fire damage from a severe environement.

If the environement is severe, any other character will suffer from fire damage every hour. If they don't, the environement climate is not severe, and you don't suffer neither fire nor heat effects.

I agree that "the philosopher" feels kinda wrong for a martial artist that jumps and fly.

I think they wouldn't be able to free a paralyzed ally too ( though as mentioned before, the only trait is the champion one ).

Trigger An enemy damages, Grabs, or Grapples your ally, and both are within 15 feet of you.

So, the trigger would be one of the 3 actions, on an already paralized target ( but can't be used as reaction on a critical failed will save against paralyze ).

Mathmuse wrote:

1. Demonstrate the value of the change to the user. This is best done through actions rather than words, because some players will embrace the change of a quest and spread the good news of the change to the other players.

Point 1 is what I always consider to be the best ( demonstrate the value, but not only towards changes, but also towards brand new features ).

Having done this since day one would not only have contributed in sharing paizo pov / intent with 2e mechanics ( getting closer to the community ), but it would also have helped clarifying ambiguous rules, leaving no room for interpretation at least for what concern major issues.

I know it's something that requires time as well as an agreement on how the whole package works ( which might not be always easy ).

Mathmuse wrote:

This unfortunately means avoiding several changes that people are advocating, such as recent threads Errata Suggestion: Make basic rations worth 3.5 sp per week and Make previously uncommon ancestries common in new core rule books, that would override old rules and change the lore....

That might be true to a point.

Being almost/around 4 years since 2019, I think it requires not so much effort to understand what are the priorities for players ( just by lurking reddit, for example ). Obviously, this would probably exclude last minute requests ( back to your examples, it's the first time I read something about splitting the rations price ), but it woudln't be a big deal.

ps: I too agree with what you wrote about point 2 and 3, for this errata.

I'd be fine with just

Alchemist => Alchemical Items Dispenser.

The cloak is really something.
Can that concealment be used to hide?

I can't remember whether it has to be pointed out whether the concealed condition can't be used to hide, making it ok to hide with a default concleament, or it's a big no by default ( and sometimes the description just reminds this to players )?

I was lurking on reddit looking for posts about this argument and I just happend to found one.

At first I was interested in just the first question, but reading the others I realized that there are several possibilities.

I have recently started playing an oscillating wave for AV, and I was wondering whether I might have been able to provide assistance to my whole party without a secondary healer instead ( currently we have a warpriest, that would like to reroll a different character ).

Anyway, what's your take on this subject?

I am not sure it's the lack of spells that make arcane less appealing, but rather the versatility.

Wizard is also INT based ( as we the witch ), ending up being less appealing than a WIS or CHA based spellcaster, but again this would be just an extra.

One of 2e major issues, to me, is that a character just need to have a level 1 spell that they can enhance over and over to deal with healings, while damaging spells tend to be better as well as different the more the game proceeds.

For example, we have

Level 1) Burning hands ( 2d6, heightened +1 2d6, 15-foot cone )
Level 2) Flaming Sphere ( 3d6, heightened +1 1d6, 5-foot square, sustained up to 1 min )
Level 3) fireball ( 6d6, heightened +1 2d6, 20-foot burst )
Level 3) Lightning Bolt ( 4d12, heightened +1 1d12, 120-foot line )
Level 4) Weapon Storm ( up to 4d12, heightened +1 1 extra dice, 30-foot cone or 10-foot emanation )
Level 5) Cone of Cold ( 12d6, heightened +1 2d6, 60-foot cone )

So, even by lvl 2 a spellcaster might consider using flaming sphere instead of a heightened version of burning hands, if the fight seem to last longer or just to make a good use of their 3rd action.

By lvl 3 fireball obliterates burning hands, both for range and area.
Lightning bolt is imo in a bad spot, both for area and damage.

By lvl 4, weapon storm can be an excellent choice, because of the 2 area of effects.

By lvl 5, cone of cold beats any other existing aoe spell in terms of damage, moving from 10d6 to 12d6. The range is also awesome ( being first in initiative, a spellcaster can easily go in a corner and use it hitting the whole room ).

And that's it ( these are just examples ).

Healing works in a different way, which is "I got heal and I rank it at higher levels". which means that a druid won't really care about divine exclusive healing spells, mostly because the important ones are already in the nature tradition spell list, but also because a heightened heal do the job better than anything else.

Same goes for the occult list.
"Rank soothe at high levels if I have to heal"
A sorcerer would get heal by lvl 8 through croosbloded bloodline, while a bard could get soothing ballad at some point.

It's kinda boring being a healbot in this 2e, mostly because of the lack of possibilities ( you have to build towards it by getting lay on hand, battle medicine, and similar ), but while boring it's pretty functional.

Finally, imo, there are spells way too good and a load of useless ( or not so useful ) ones, ending up with a spontaneous spellcaster to be excellent and not that limited when it comes down to "1 signature spell per level" and "a limited number of spells in their spell list".

So that's why I think that even with more spells ( unless you expect those more spells to be all exclusive to the Arcane list ) the wizard won't probably be that appealing as other spellcasters.

Paizo should imo work towards the wizard and witch class making them more appealing with feats.

Wizard must have ( it's a must ) the standard refocus progression as any other spellcaster ( 1-12-18 ) along with additional spells ( eventually, revising the arcane school given, because they are not that good ), and the witch could really use some extra love in terms of familiars... make some feats and revise some old ones making both witch and familiar working as they were a single entity.

Having access to disappearance would also mean have some teleports, like a lvl 4 dimensionsl door, or flying features.

In combat encounters, I hardly doubt high level monsters/characters would travel with bags of flour.

Outside combat encounters, just disappearance and time jump would do it.

To me, it's just a bad spell ( mean I don't allow it when I am the DM) given this 2e is a combat/tactical game, and I agree it could have been written in a better way.

Gaulin wrote:

I do wonder if synesthesia will get nerfed in the remaster. I hope not, honestly, I'd much rather other comparable options. Even if some other spells only gave clumsy 3 for a minute on a fail, synesthesia would likely still be better by virtue of its other effects and being a will save (hello bon mot).

If buffs/debuffs are clear winners in optimizing a party (and to me they are), it shouldn't be limited to a single spell list. Especially when that spell list gets so many other goodies, including heroism

I fear that nerfing heroism won't do any good, especially for the divine tradition.

Occult spellcasters ( bards, mostly ) already have inspire heroics that is way better than heroism ( that enhances the whole group on the synesthesia round ).

As for Synesthesia, we should probably ask ourselves:
- what are the other alternatives that give the enemy the clumsy condition?
- And how many on a success?
- and how many clumsy 3?

The best I remember are the lvl 10 ruffian sneak attack ( clumsy 1 ) which is easy to apply on boss, and a double slice fighter with double hammer ( both enhanced with crushing runes ). but both are not only class but also require a specialization ( rogue > ruffian , Fighter > hammers > crushing instead of extra dmg runes ).

Reason why, if I were to choose, I'd probably say farewell to synesthesia rather than giving it to other traditions ( If I were to, as said before, It would be on the arcane list ).

Arachnofiend wrote:
SuperBidi wrote:
Synesthesia is, in my opinion, too strong. There's no other spell able to swing the balance even on a successful save. It should be a much higher level spell or they should reduce the effect on a success.
I think the spell would be fair if you only got one of the effects on a successful save. If you really wanted to press the thumb down you could make the failure only give two of the effects.

I think it would be exactly the same... clumsy 3... with the enemy surrounded with AoO users to deal with spells.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

IIRC there's a beautiful feat for the alchemist that allows you to shape the form, and also gives a +3 status to your own saves.

Not the question is whether you inhale to shape because of the feat or you always inhale when you open the vial.

Anyway, being an item I think you can always throw it to an empty space with no check at all. Smashing the vial.

The Raven Black wrote:

A species / ancestry with compulsory edicts / anathemas ?

I do not like this at all.

It sounds like the always Evil/Good species.

I think that's not an issue, if used as a general information about the species/ancestry.

There's nothing wrong in stating "usually, these creatures are evil".

Different would be stating " These creatures are evil. It can't exist a non evil one".

The latter would kill the possibility of alternatives, although rare ones ( for example a good dark elf).

Sudden charge mostly depends on the environment and the party composition.

For example, if, the barbarian strides twice and strike, ending up away from the rest of the melee allies, they'd probably be the only target for the enemy.

Plus, striding 50/60 would always require 2 actions, even without sudden charge. This could end up for more actions for the enemies, requiring less distance to get in melee reach with the heroes.

I tend not to get it, unless the other melee character rushes with me at the beginning of the combat ( requiring both to have similar initiative score).

Anyway, I think nothing can match up with a fighter with double slice ( hammer + crushing runes), in terms of ally support ( flat footed + clumsy) and overall damage.

Boring as well as performant.

Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:

(...seriously though, I can understand no elves, but no goblins? /tease)

Maybe they are using 2e system in a homemade setting.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tactical Drongo wrote:

no elves and goblins? well thats a game I wouldnt have joined

but I agree with the notion of most people - going dexterity is the way to go if you have no easy access to armor

and no magic items till level 9?

I seriously hope for yout that excludes runes or that the gm carefully handcrafts your enemies

because this will become a very dangerous slogfest

by level 9 runes provide +1 armor, +1 saves, almost +2 attack and +1 weapon damage dice (closer to the third)

The OP mentioned they are going to use ABP so, for what concerns runes, they are going to be ok.

SuperBidi wrote:

So the concept of a Dex-based Redeemer is not completely out of the question, unlike what Humblegamer posts implies.

Actually, it's not that "the redimer is out of the question", but rather difficult to play a normal STR based champion.

The current situation suggests:

"In this adventure you would like to play a dex based character because you won't be wearing an armor all the time, and given the fact even a +1 bonus means a lot, having -6 AC because of an ambush would kill the game/math"

So yeah, a player might play a total different champion switching from STR to DEX, or even a dex fighter with redeemer dedication, or a wizard, or any other character, but this wouldn't invalidate any of what I have highlighted.

Reason why I suggested the soulforger, as the only solution ( AFAIK, there are no other "instant armor at will" by lvl 2 ) to properly play a STR based champion ( obviously, renoucing to a class feature which are heavy armors, and forcing the player to put 12/14 dex to properly use the given medium armor ).

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Why giving edicts/anathemas, that force creatures to act in a specific way, rather than guidelines, that would be meant to show how, "generally speaking", a specific creature behaves?

IIRC, you should unlock the curse stuff by getting the first revelation feat ( check for the feat description that tells you how the curse work with the oracle dedication).

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Having the build working around moment of clarity would make the class pretty clunky in my opinion.

I think that the bloodrager might be a good archetype, giving rage by default ( as an alternative to the barbarian dedication), and the feats could provide a specific set of spells ( focus spells) that have the rage trait ( allowing them to use the spells while raging).

Gaulin wrote:
HumbleGamer wrote:
Gaulin wrote:

Seems like the heart of the matter is mostly that heroism and synthesia (maybe inspire heroics too) are the main issue in that they are maybe a little too strong. Or at least too unique, if there were more ways get get similar buffs and debuffs I think it would be less of a problem. I dislike feeling forced to take certain spells, or at least knowing if I took that heroism/inspire courage that last fight could've been a cakewalk.

Worth mentioning that no one is forced to take those spells.

Pushing towards powercreep is the way to simplify the content along with lowering the encounter difficulty ( like back in 3.0,3.5 and 1e ).

It is efficient ( as it is getting a fighter over any other martial class) but it's not mandatory. And it would also negatively impact on your experience ( making a boss fight trivial is not a good thing IMO).

I mean of course I was being hyperbolic when I said I felt forced to take those spells, no one's holding a gun to my head or anything. But picking between synesthesia/heroism and almost any other spell is like, do I want to take the good spell that will make boss fights easier and my party stronger, or this other cool spell that's not as powerful?

Also I don't know if it would be powercreep to publish more spells as strong as synesthesia, just add more variety. Its basically the same argument as electric arc being the strongest cantrips and what should be done about it, so I'm not sure I want to beat that dead horse.

And Electric arc is imo in a worst spot, because of the several complaints about spell attack spells.

As for synesthesia, I am no sure either.
The fact that a similar spell does exist allow players to use it.

To do so, they have to go with the occult tradition ( or get that spell from the occult tradition).

The question is IMO whether occult would deserve synesthesia as something unique or not.

I agree with what superbidi said about synesthesia.
It's too strong.
And being in the occult tradition, it makes the bard class even more broken than it currently is.

But if in over 4 years it stayed the same... The best we might probably get is a similar spell to another tradition ( arcane, for example).

I suppose the +7 enemy might even be a +20000, since you won't probably make a check against the enemy DC.

Talking about infiltration, stealth vs perception.

I like to give enough info to players to make themselves aware of the enemy's power, although it might always be interpreted in a different way.

"They say that dragon killed an army"

Might lead to

"We will even be more glorious!"

I think a deadly encounter ( +4 ) might be the perfect match, giving them a slight chance ( or moderate, if min maxing party) of survival, if they decide to go for it.

Or, at least, the characters should have some way to know what are the odds, more or less.

Trixleby wrote:
Well so far we have gotten through 3 fights then decided to surface and long rest and all of that. So it won’t be 7/8 fights per day it doesn’t seem.

Oh well, then I suppose you are going to be fine whatever the build.

I mean, if you can afford to use all your elixirs ( by lvl 6 it would be 6 from lvl, +1 from familiar, +4 from int = 11 batches of infused reagents ) every 3 encounters, you'll be able to cover up for everything:

- Mutagens for the whole party
- Healing elixirs for everybody
- Even some bomb to throw at the enemies

The alchemist limited resources won't be an issue at all.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I am curious how the DM intent to deal with combat encounters, especially when some characters don't have armors during travelling ones.

Talking about the champion, it's pretty common for them to have 10 dex ( and it's unlikable that they decided to put 14+ dex just in case they shipwrecked ).

So, assuming a 10 dex champion and a hide armor ( given the fact there are leather ones, there should also be hide ones ), the character is going to have +3 AC vs +5 ( light/medium) or +6 ( heavy armor ).

Having a shield raised will put you at the same level of a normal character without shield.

During travelling encounters you will have no armor at all, ending up being critted frequently even by -1/-2 enemies.

Forbidding a champion to use their armor would indirectly force them into putting points on DEX, renouncing to other important stats.

I'd go this way:

1) I'd ask the DM to get the soulforger dedication, in order to manifest your armor asap when needed. This would allow the 2e Math to properly work during travelling encounters, and it would end up just being a tax feat ( one less feat for the character ), so the DM shouldn't be able to complain much. Try to let them notice that even a -1 is a huge debuff, and that being with -3/4/5/6 armor ( depends your build ) would mean being annihilated, being a frontliner

2) I'd ask the DM to come midterms and agree on a medium armor that only requires +1 DEX to work ( for example a chainmail ). This would allow you not to sacrifice too much stats ( you'd be able to start 18 str, 14 con/wis and 12 dex ).

Just with this 2 things you'd be able to play in a somehow decent way ( good luck finding a sturdy shield I guess. I'd also try to point that out to your dm. It's not fun to make a shield build and learn after that you can't get a shield to make a proper use of your shieldblock and quick shield block features ).

GM DarkLightHitomi wrote:
Kobold Catgirl wrote:
Party level +4 encounters aren't combat encounters. If the GM presents them like combat encounters, the party dies. So, yeah. We can talk about "realism" all we want, but at the end of the day, we're telling a story. Good narratives pick and choose where they want the stakes to rise and where they want them to fall.
Truthfully, combat encounters that are just combat encounters should be somewhere between rare and nonexistent

Mind to explain a little more?

Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
Squiggit wrote:
Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:

To me which list it draws from would depend on which spirits it feels its connected to.

Ancestral, General ghostie - Divine

spirits of nature/animal guides - Primal

Make it like a pick a list class based on tradition but only picks between divine and Primal.

This would be a big no sell for me. Presuming the class does focus on communing with spirits as a core theme, it should just be able to do that, not have them compartmentalized based on tradition.

Nothing about what I posted says it can’t commune with all spirits, just that where it draws its power from is narrowed down

All shamans commune with all spirits to draw all their powers to me sounds homogenous.

Can commune with all spirits, draws their powers from a specific subset they always connect with allows more variety,

I expect the shaman to be a nature tradition spellcaster, but I also expect some differences depends the spirits they are more used to.

Something like the barbarian instinct.
Every barbarian has the rage ability and several feats tied to it, but depends the instinct they can also access to different feats.

Also, it won't be any different from a wizard specializing in a magic school ( they are going to be arcane spellcasters, but more specialized towards a specific school ).

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Consider you are a martial class, and because so trained in both simple and martial weapons ( you won't need the firearm expert feat ).

Apart from that.... I have the feel this is going to work very well.
The investigator shines with recall knowledge and skills, and begin tied to a static routine which is:

1) Reload
2) DAS
3) Strike

is IMO not good, regardless the character ( unable to move, starving for actions, no good use of skills, etc... ).

A bow would allow you to save one action that could be used to several purposes ( also moving ) and it's free ( it would allow you to get a different dedication ), while using a xbow would allow you to make a proper use of running reload ( useful for get into position, ovoiding lesser covers from creatures, or even to disengage from close enemies ).

Have you considered the archer dedication instead of the gunslinger one?
Or you'd like to use firearms?

DuckSuit wrote:
I am sure this applies to Primal Foci as well, but they really, truly are almost entirely unrepresented among the published items apart from the Primeval Mistletoe.

I agree ( or else it would negatively impact on mechanics for no reasons ).

I mean, the player main concern is to be effective and efficient.

It's no surprise that the difference between being able to access the focus by wearing a clothing or worning a jewelry is more efficient than holding a mistletoe.

Same goes for holding a mistletoe and a weapon, compared to wielding a weapon and a shield ( for armor and shield block ), or even a weapon and a free hand ( for maneuvers, stances, battlemedicine, kits, etc... ).

So, in the end, I think it does feel reasonable for it to be a player choice ( which might be towards flavor or towards meta/powercreep ).

Trixleby wrote:

I’ll look into the Witch dedication but I was trying to avoid being a spell caster. Specifically because I’ve heard Alchemist is a great 5th party member and I’ve been excited to play one for a long time because I like support characters.

I want to add that my concerns are more about trying to play the standard AP map in the way it is meant to be played, which means straight from the start to the end ( without exploiting with daily preparations ).

Assuming a 7/8 fights per map and balanced amount of mutagens, healing elixirs and bombs, it's unlikely that an alchemist might be able to deal with everything ( even with 3x on healing items per batch by lvl 5 ).

You might focus on getting just healing elixirs ( and the reach mutagen ) to just pass rounds after round using them though( stride + draw + activate ).

Perpetual infusion also won't help in any way.

By lvl 7 a character is going to have between 60 and 100 hp, and perpetual infusions would give you a lvl 1 item that could be drinked every 10 minutes.

Imagine during the fight the alchemist wasting 3 actions to stride, quick alchemy ( perpetual infusion ), activate item ( let an ally drink it ), making them recovering 3.5 hp.

If you don't want to be a spellcaster, maybe the medic dedication could come in handy, especially with the alchemist class ( if needed you'd be able to merge the stride with a battle medicine ).

And by lvl 7 you'd be able to use it once per hour on an immune target.

But again, this assuming the party would keep pushing even if the alchemist run out of resources ( you can easily do it with focus spells and scrolls as backup, although not with an alchemist ).

Just remember that both everstand stance and arcane cascade are both stances, so you'll have to choose which one to use.

Healing bomb, along with debilitating bomb, are nice to see, but the suck up too many resources.

Your party is also composed by two handed combatants ( inexorable iron and fighter), that won't be able to drink potions by themselves, and it's still not clear whether the eidolon might drink elixirs on its own or not ( though the summoner could drink the healing ones in their place).

I think you'd probably find easier to rely on the witch archetype, getting life boost to help with healing during every combat, as well as a familiar and a couple of cantrip you could use to deal damage ( to save alchemical items if needed).

You'd also be able to get some spells, and the possibility to use scrolls, staves and wands to heal your team members.

So I'd go this way:

Lvl 2 = witch dedication
Lvl 4 = basic lesson ( life boost)
Lvl 6 = basic witch spellcasting

Gaulin wrote:

Seems like the heart of the matter is mostly that heroism and synthesia (maybe inspire heroics too) are the main issue in that they are maybe a little too strong. Or at least too unique, if there were more ways get get similar buffs and debuffs I think it would be less of a problem. I dislike feeling forced to take certain spells, or at least knowing if I took that heroism/inspire courage that last fight could've been a cakewalk.

Worth mentioning that no one is forced to take those spells.

Pushing towards powercreep is the way to simplify the content along with lowering the encounter difficulty ( like back in 3.0,3.5 and 1e ).

It is efficient ( as it is getting a fighter over any other martial class) but it's not mandatory. And it would also negatively impact on your experience ( making a boss fight trivial is not a good thing IMO).

1 to 50 of 5,195 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>