Inkfist's page

As a quick question does your group play AP's or Homebrews? I'm asking because the recent 'Treasure Vault' book with its expanded alchemical ammunition options makes Gunslingers much stronger.

This can be seen most clearly in how AP encounters are very frequently written with things like enemy resistances, weaknesses, regeneration etc.

The alchemical ammunition essentially give gunslingers the option to be a 'prepared martial' class, with a suite of bane, elemental, rare metal, and persistent damage options. Careful (or informed) selections shoot the gunslingers effective damage well ahead of other ranged options.

As an example from my table we are playing a certain AP and found ourselves facing a fort full of trolls and their minions. Gunslingers being able to target and exploit a damage weakness, inflict persistent damage to trigger that weakness, and negate regeneration all at once are doing the 'effective damage' of a small party with a handful of level 1 items.

This may sound like an explicitly cherrypicked example (it was the last set of encounters my group faced last week) this just shows how common it is for Paizo to put 'twists' on encounters beyond standard white room math tests. Think of how often hardness or resistance has all but shut down a bow weilding fighter or ranger for that specific encounter? Gunslingers get feat (and trait, and item) support to negate nearly all of that now.

You know the feedback threads posted after every playtest? The ones where Paizo talk about internal testing, and external perception and how people play?

Well, I'd love to see that once or twice a year in regards to Pathfinder 2e as a whole.

Things like talking about how Warpriests are perceived vs internal playtests, or how they were expected to be 'selfish' casters using things like 'heroism' to keep up with other martials.

Or how Witches are seen as the weakest of the current casters, but that there is a slew of new lessons (I hope) on the horizon that should bring them into line with everyone else.

It could be paired with a 1-2 times a year errata update where they can explain their choices and reasonings.

I think it would be healthy for the game and the community as a whole.

Thanks I mean it has the scaling as dependant on your sheath's level as opposed to *your* level makingbit a *lot* weaker as a secondary or tertiary array.

I can't find any wording to suggest that it works this way, or thatbitbwas independant the way faculties are.

Thanks and is it dependant on your sheath level or your nanocyte level? (the way your faculties scale)

Herolab has it as Sheath dependant and I was wondering if I'd missed something?

In regard to the attack given from the 'Swarm strike' knack. It counts as "a special unarmed strike that deals lethal damage, lacks the archaic trait, and has an item level equal to your nanocyte level."

Is his unarmed attack compatible with 'improved unarmed attack'? or does it stay at 1d3 damage with the scaling coming from CON and it's special specialization damage?

Getting 5 "better than a cantrip blasts" per fight is probably a pretty close DPR over an adventuring day

The issue is less pure math on a blast vs blast ratio and one of choice, agency and cost.

For example say I have to pick between say a Druid and a Psychic.

The Druid can tailor their cantrips to hit every save with a couple left for utility, they get better hp, armour, shield block. They can have an animal companion and have enough spell slots to keep some for things like general healing and Utility. By level 4 they can have 3 focus points.

The Psychic gives all that up for having the option to (initially) tank their AC and cast up to 5 of their comparatively weaker focus powers.

Now compare the Psychic to what Bards get as a package and see if any bard would ever give up their class features, composition cantrips, and 1/3rd of all their spells for the chance to cast an amped 'daze', 'mage hand' or 'telekinetic projectile' an extra 2-3 times per combat?

Hey, HEY! it also does 3 + 1 (for every 2 spell levels) damage for your focus point.

Surely that's worth 1-2 8th level spells at high level...right?

Mark Seifter was talking about how you know class design has worked when something *is* balanced but looks 'broken and amazing' (paraphrasing here)

An obvious example would be class feats that allow a draconic barbarian to *become* a dragon.

The issue with the Psychic is that the 'broken' wow factor draw of the class needs to be in its amp cantrips. Because they are picked as a set you give up a *lot* of choice, power and utility for your conscious
mind selection.

...and as it stands a 1d8/spell level version "telekinetic projectile" that's incompatible with metamagic and requiring a spell attack roll doesn't seem like its worth 1-2 level 1 spell slots let alone an 8th or 9th level spells.

Another issue with 'Infinite worlds' is that it's value is highly dependant on what type of campaign your GM runs.

With the same 10ft only radius from levels 1-20 Infinite worlds is serviceable in an AP or adventure that takes place almost exclusively in small rooms and corridors, but that usefulness drops sharply in any wide open space where people and creatures can freely move around it.

So as long as your Space-opera adventure doesn't involve exploring strange new worlds, dangerous locales or wide, exotic vistas then your main class feature is to spend a spell slot on a functional and flexible small aoe effect with a power level roughly equal to a spell level one lower than the one you just spent.

I want a psychic real bad. Im blanking on the mechanics outside the spellslots tho.

Ironically all the spontanious casters stole their mechanics.

Their two big things was undercasting and phrenic amplificications. Which more or less boils down to signature spells and focus powers.

Any new version of the Psychic would need new toys in compensation.

Note: I'm not suggesting that anything really keeps up with Barbarians for pure on hit damage (with the possible exception of precision rangers with an animal companion, using the companion instead of repeatedly attacking to cheese the MAP and get a second bite of that precision damage)

I think specifically in regards to the swashbuckler, a fair chunk of their DPR isn't coming from their own turn (notably the fencer style) with a fair chunk being harder to calculate as it comes from bleeds and opportune ripostes/AoO's.

Using that level 10 comparison, if swashbuckler is building for ripostes they have both Buckler expertise and dance, and goading feint to create essentially a 4 AC difference (5 in regards to a raging barbarian)to fish for ripostes. (2 from the bucker, 2 from goading) with feat to get extra reactions as well. fencing's exemplary finisher+ goading feint also means any riposte/AoO's get are against a flat footed enemy with panache's bonus damage.

It's a bit like how a bomber alchemist gets a chunk of their damage through persistent damage effects as opposed to the direct damage done on their turn.

The average barbarian hit at lvl 10 is 27. The average crit is 60 points. That is with a +1 striking greatpick. That is hard to ignore when other classes are doing 17 or 18 points per hit. The average swashbuckler non-finisher hit with panache is 18.

Isn't that being rather disingenuous? Swashbucklers not using finishers is like trying to do dpr calculations on a Barbarian who doesn't rage, or a Ranger who isn't hunting target VS one that does.

A level 10 swashbuckler with a level appropriate weapon (a +2 striking rapier with a flame rune) makes a single finisher attack each round is doing on average 46 damage with Bleeding finisher (with 1 bleed tick) or around 35 with a precise confident finisher.

That's against average AC for equal level enemies. That single bleeding attack is over two and a half times stronger than your given 18. Hell, with a precise confident finisher is still doing roughly 14 damage *on a miss!* (only 4 less than your average hit with panache)

That and expecting one finisher a round isn't unexpected, as it still gives the swashbuckler 2 actions to set it up.

In my experience, what is and is not worth it in combat depends highly on the opponents.

What about swashbucklers? Between Goading feint and +2 AC bucklers boosting defense directly results in higher DPR through ripostes.

If you are only making one finisher attack a round, attempting to generate panache, and raising a buckler (at lower levels before the stance comes online) with the fencing style you are essentially swinging 4 point difference against a first attack, with even better results if enemies crit fail that goading feint. That setup lends itself to MAP-less reaction attacks especially if an enemy attacks you with penalties.

CRB, p. 302 wrote:

If you take on a battle form with a polymorph spell, the special statistics can be adjusted only by circumstance bonuses, status bonuses, and penalties.

The wild order druid focus spell version of wildshape/animal form etc, gives a specific exception allowing you to use your regular to-hits with a +2 bonus if you use your own stats rather than that given by the spell.(page 401 of the CRB)

You keep mentioning Schrödinger's martials, yet it's not unrealistic to plot out the DPR return of 1,2 and yes 3 action options.

It's not just theorycrafting as the opportunities do show up where a 3 action attack sequence *is* the tactically sound one.

3 action sequences should be seen as the equivalent of a casters highest spell slot options as you only have a very limited set of opportunities to use them each day.

To pretend that 3action attack sequence opportunities 'never ever happen' is just as disingenuous as someone claiming they are a valid turn by turn metric.

The Schrödinger's cat ranger :D

I mean, it will never ever happen to have 5 attacks for 3 actions at level 1. It means that your cat and your character are flanking the enemy and this enemy is already your prey (and you are standing, not stunned, not unconscious, etc...) and your enemy survives the 4 first attacks. It happens once in a blue moon.

I see it as viable as 'impossible flurry' which most ranger discussions seem to fixate on (Which isn't a viable round one option till level 19!)

While full three action attack sequences are unlikely (except in 'All the casters are nerfed!'threads) I tend to regard them like a casters highest level spell slot (in that it's unlikely to be pulled off more than 3-4 times in an adventuring day)

That and While hit and run tactics are usually much more viable, full 3 action attack sequences tend to be round 2-3+ options meaning that your enemy has likely seen some focused fire and your sequence is much more likely to finish them off.

Its worth noting that your animal companion also benifits from your hunted target edge which creates different synergies and tactics.

For example you get more out of a bird with precision edge, as you only want to 'work together' once per target for the bleed and dazzled effect. Later on it's flyby attack pairs well with precisions bonus damage.

On the other hand cats with the agile trait on their class and bonus damage against flat footed targets really likes flurry Rangers. (Note with twin takedown this gives a ranger and his companion 5 attacks for 3 actions right from level 1

Inkfist wrote:

Strike with quick draw

Strike with what? Unarmed attacks aren't weapons so what weapon are you striking with

The thing about switch hitting is that you often switch weapons between ranged and melee.

Assuming you aren't being facetious, using Quick draw let's you draw and strike with a weapon that's not your seedpod or an unarmed strike...such as a big d12 weapon...you know switch hitting.

Monks with their stances don't need to swap out to a different weapon when unarmed, but Rangers (who we are talking about here) do.

Inkfist wrote:

quick draw

Quickdraw doesn't do anything for a seedpod so I'm unsure why you mentioned it.

Its a round one option. Hunt target, command companion, strike with seedpod at up to double the range increment without penalty.

Round 2 if the enemy has closed the gap. Strike with quick draw, Strike, command companion for move and strike (the lack of MAP and the companions access to precisions bonus damage makes this viable.

Quick draw enables a switch hitter play style at no action cost if you start every encounter mode with your hands empty.

It's also viable for precision Rangers from level 2 onwards when quick draw becomes an option. With a bird companion that's an opener of 1d4+4+1d8+1d4 bleed and inflicting a 20% miss chance

I think that using your spell casting DC on Crit specializations that require a save isn't the biggest issue, as only a select few weapon groups have saves as part of their crit riders. (Irori is literally the only God, whose sacred weapon features a save on a crit specialisation effect, and seeing as irori is one of the worst options for warpriest I can't see it being that big of an issue)

Sure, although all Clerics can take Channel Smite as it's not Doctrine specific, Warpriest not really get any weapon proficiency advantage in longer term (and they bizarrely have lower DC on weapon critSpec effects, due to it using spell DC). 1-action normal casting also doesn't favor Warpriest (Spell DC).

Also, I actuallly think Channel Smite is using damage of 2-action version of Heal/Harm, since the ability uses 2 actions and nothing else suggests scope of Heal/Harm.

There isn't a difference in the damage between a 1-2 action heal/harm as the static +8/spell level is explicitly only added when it's used to restore hitpoints.

I also think you are looking at the weapon proficiency/spell dc at the highest levels and not factoring in when their progression occurs. With warpriests their proficiency with their gods favoured weapon only falls behind for two levels in the 1-13 band compared to all non-fighter martial classes.

In the levels 7-11 when their spell DC's are delayed their to-hit when using 'channel smite' is the equal of any Ranger, Champion or monk.

Sure you lag behind in Spell DC's from 15th level on, but in over a decade I've only seen 3 campaigns reach that point. Seeing as levels 1-10 see the vast bulk of play warpriests absolutely shine in that band.

(This reminds me of Ranger discussion where most builds revolve around 'impossible flurry' which is a 16th level feat and not all that useable till levels 19-20.)

Realising that harm as a 2 action spell is a a sub-par damage option, but as a single action it's quite decent, single action harms and channel smite giving a second way of delivering them against targets with a high fort save are part of what makes warpriests better than what people think.

I was a bit miffed about utility spells taking a hit too, until I realised what Paizo did.

A lot of the big utility options have been moved to rituals. Is unseen servant nowhere near as good? Sure, but with a bit of downtime and an attempt or two you can make some animated objects that do the same job.

Moving utility to rituals also opens them up to all characters which means as more content comes out everyone is strengthened rather than just extending the Gulf between casters and martials that we can see in 1e.

I think It's less users making people feeling unwelcome and more calling out some *really* bad faith arguments.

For example look at this one literally from this threads OP:

https://paizo.com/threads/rzs42ux7?Unlimited-Martial-Fireballs-How-the-Pend ulum

Where he claims that barbarians 3 action options outperform casters blast options and can do so all day vs a limited resource.

Which assumes that the barbarian in question:

Is already raging
Is wielding a reach weapon
Is a Giant Instinct Barbarian
Is Level 15+
Has taken the feats for Whirlwind Strike
Is positioned in the middle of a horde of enemies
Can Safely use 3 actions and not move when surrounded by enemies
Can consistently manage to meet all the above criteria several times a day.

and

The caster is using a fireball in a 7th level slot as opposed to one of the more powerful level appropriate spells

Someone pointing out the above argument isn't realistic and doesn't reflect actual play experience *isn't* saying that posters like OP are unwelcome, rather that the argument they are putting forth is flawed or misleading.

I'm playing a warpriest so I sit between martial and pure caster for action usage, and anyone defaulting to just move+cast is hurting themselves and their party.

Sure there are times you need to move, but recalling knowledge,demoralizing groups of enemies, sustaining spells, 1 action focus powers, spells, and cantrips or even weapon attacks are all conditionally more useful.

At low levels blending crossbow strikes with electric arc (and reloading every second round) will likely out dpr many martial builds due to the half damage on a save effect.

It's fools gold. Any martial that's spending those rounds on attacks spends the subsequent turns with the dying condition.

Agreed. On paper it seems like martial classes have a distinct edge, but trying to leverage 3 actions next to an enemy often means blowing your hero points in the next round of so.

Martial have some great 3 action sequences, but without magical assistance (taste, greater invisibility etc) they have very few practical opportunities to use them.

I'm leaning to the opinion that Druids that want to focus on wildshaping are better off starting out as a storm druid.

Storm druids start with 2 focus points, a focus spell that's useful early on and an easier to deal with anathema.

If we feat into the Wild order via order explorer and order magic we get our animal shape *one* level behind a pure wild order druid, and you can kind of bridge the gap at 3 with castings of 'animal form'

Wild morph is frankly terrible from levels 1-3, as a focus point and two actions for what amounts to a pair of short swords (that are missing the versatile trait) isn't a good deal. Spell slots are a more limited resource, but at levels 1-2 Magic weapon and especially Shillelagh completely outshine wild morph.

The Halloween special.

A (Pumpkin) gourd headed leshy ranger with the farm hand background.

Take the precision edge and a bird companion for your first feat.

Now you are a pumping headed scythe-weilding scarecrow that attacks people with a 'dire-crow'

The damage is much better than you'd think, and the persistent bleed and miss chances you hand out are

I was actually thinking about a class feature or feat where a Chirurgeon would be able to spend Elixir of healing to use Battle Medicine without being affected from the timeout.

while it isn't a class feat 'godless healing' from the lost omens book boosts your battle medicine, and drops the cooldown to only one hour for each party member.

While it isn't perfect it makes battle medicine a lot more usable and stretches your life elixirs much further

Strange Fatal is strictly worse than deadly as you level then as deadly does add extra dice depending on your striking rune but fatal doesnt. Seeing as deadly weapons also tend towards rogue builds wouldn't a deadly weapon far outstrip the potential of a fatal one?

I think the reason the Vanguard doesn't have stealth is that it is meant to be a big burly frontline, and I can't image any tank from a video game trying to sneak up on someone.

Whilst that was my first impression, you really aren't rewarded for being a strength/con Vanguard. (Especially at low levels) You lack the mobility and gap closers other melee classes have, shields are too expensive and provide minimal benifit at lower levels (especially as you either need to use your move action to tap close or you don't have one due to full attacking in melee).

The last selling point for me for a dex dodge tank was spaceship combat. With either a background or skill synergy you can be a fantastic pilot or gunner, whereas strength based vanguards are either relegated to being sub-par gunners or left out of things entirely.

From what you said it looks like you ran a Strength based vanguard. Asides from running with a Shobhad for the reach 40 foot speed, strength and extra arms it looks really hard to make a Strength vanguard work at low levels. (Hell, I don't think you *can* get a returning spear, riot shield and anything more than the cheapest heavy armor at character creation, which negates the point of the shield as spending even half of its cost on better armor yields better permanent results.

A dex build looks to take care of any reflex issues, though I agree they are susceptible to will based effects.

Personally i'm OK with entropic strikes doing less damage compared to solar weapons, mainly due to hitting TAC vs KAC. I'd actually wouldn't mind seeing the math DPR wise of full attacking using your weapon for the primary strike and entropic strikes for the others using TAC to offset the penalties.

Nice! I don't know how efficient it is, though, since it only applies on the second hit (or subsequent hits, if you get an AoO or something).

Seeing as how the reach for entropic strikes becomes rather large at mid levels+ You probably wouldn't have to fish too hard for AoO's.

Am I reading things wrong or does stacking shikigami style feats+ catch of guard turn the 1gp sledge tool into a 6d6 weapon?

Due to the Wild Order's higher strength, why would you take 2d8+1, or 1d10+1 (agile) when wild claws gives you the exact same to hit, 2d6+3 (agile), lets you use a shield for reactions, *and* doesn't lock you out of speaking or casting?

With Animal form does the 'damage bonus' replace the Druid's strength modifier or is in addition to the Strength modifier? In the original playtest rules it seems like a replacement, but at a decent bonus.

Currently (unhightened) its just a +1, which seems more than a little weak as Wild order druids tend to have decent strength to fuel their wildshape usage. If the damage bonus is a STR replacement then it looks like at lower levels that Wild claws/morph is the stronger combat option by a decent amount (unless you need a particular climb/swim speed for an encounter)

Is there a rule clarification, or am I missing something?

Pramxnim wrote:

Basically, Monks can have the highest AC in the game with enough optimization. All you need is to start with 18 Dex, keep up in terms of magic armor, and possess a level 14 common magic item type that most PCs will end up getting at some point.

Not in the early game. At level 1, Monks max out at AC 15 (but realistically, probably 13 or 14, since Monks' reliance on Athletics means they need to put Str first to use half of their class abilities). Wizards/Sorcerers can hit AC 16 (and Barbarians, though they're probably raging down to 15), Bards/Rogues can get to 17, and Fighters/Paladins can hit 18.

Remember that monks start at level 1 with expert in unarmored defence. thats 10+Dex mod+level+1. an 18 dex monk starts with AC 16. With most styles offering agile and finesse it seems like dex builds are a stronger option for most builds (dragon and monastic weapons excluded). If you are worried about athletics remember Crane style gives a ridiculous +4 to jumps (on top of extra distance) which more than mitigates your strength lagging behind by 2-4 points.

That flat check on the Armor of Fortification seems pretty rough.

As a flat check it still works out as 15/30% chance of critical negation (same as 1e) the big difference that with anything that's 10+ higher than your AC counting as a crit (and Frits doubling damage+higher level potancy of weapons) suggests that fortification may be stronger in 2e than it is currently.

Inquisitech?

Equalibris: they balance the scales.

Inkfist wrote:

Yeah ignoring feats, and abilities like rage sure make things look like trap classes. By that standard barbarians and Fighters are utterly useless too...

What's currently being left off of the list for the Shifter in that comparison then? Bearing in mind it should probably be posted in the math thread.

Wolverine aspect notably gives rage and rage powers. He's also missing the feat for the extra scaling attack.

Due to items like Bestial rags, a level 8 shifter should have three aspects to chose from and can pick the most beneficial minor aspect bonus.

If we are comparing DPR shouldn't we be comparing the higher damage options? Tiger is a combat form yes, but it exchanges the damage and survivability of the wolverine for pounce, grab and an extra 10 feet of movement.

Seeing as the "Kineticist does less DPR than a commoner with a bow" did the rounds for a solid six months after release, shouldn't we be more honest in our comparisons and builds?

Has anyone compared the Shifter to the Unchained Monk? That would probably be the most comparable previously existing class.

Significantly less damage than a Umonk 2 hand power attacking with a sansetsukon for those first few levels. Though your defences should be slightly higher. There is a bit more parity between fists vs claws with the shifter doing well if they could snag a race with a primary natural bite or gore attack.

At 4 Shifters get a nice boost with the size and stat bonuses from wildshape. Things like grab, trip, rage and super early access to pounce are all very nice toys. (actually Umonks with flying kick are the only full BAB class that get access to a pounce like ability anywhere near as soon, though they have wait several levels before its quite as strong)

Later on the UMonk tends to make more full bab attacks and has a stronger nova options and shenanigans like medusa's wrath. Shifters get options to hit harder and look to have ways of boosting their HP, defences and survivability more easily.

Yeah ignoring feats, and abilities like rage sure make things look like trap classes. By that standard barbarians and Fighters are utterly useless too...

Except that he's going off a 25 point buy. starting with a 16, putting the +1 in it at four and grabbing a +2 headband for a few thousand gold seems a steal for more AC/Will saves/+ a full Bab scaling damage attack.

Painful bugger any reason why you didn't pump wisdom a bit more to qualify for the mutated form (Or something like that) feat at 7 giving you an extra scaling attack?

Wildshape is worded as functioning as Beast shape II with the exception that it is tied to one of your selected aspects.

This is exactly the same as a Wildshaping 6th level druid. Both get the tiny/large size bonuses from beast shape II. (otherwise it would be called out in the in the "Acts like beast shape II *except* part)

As for the body wrap, I find it hard to justify waiting till level 11 to gain your enhancement bonuses to 3 attacks, seeing as its both barely cheaper than the amulet and that most combat forms have 3 natural attacks at level 4. Seeing as with feats some forms can have up to six attacks the bodywrap will never be as slot effective or gold effective as the amulet version.

As for an amulet of natural armor, defensive instinct gives up to a +5 bonus to AC on top of whichever wisdom modifier to AC you are using.

Has there been a confirmation that the shifter gets Size bonuses?

Seeing as It is worded as shifter Wildshape counts as Beast shape two the following is in play

"Tiny animal: If the form you take is that of a Tiny animal, you gain a +4 size bonus to your Dexterity, a –2 penalty to your Strength, and a +1 natural armor bonus.

Large animal: If the form you take is that of a Large animal, you gain a +4 size bonus to your Strength, a –2 penalty to your Dexterity, and a +4 natural armor bonus."

The major problem with this item (Bestial rags) is that it competes with the Body Wrap of Mighty Strikes for the body slot.

Why buy a bodywrap of mighty strikes when for most forms an amulet of mighty fists is the better option? Seeing as you get scaling bonuses to natural armour it's not competing for your neck slot in terms of the big six.

Sat down last night with herolab and worked out the numbers for the Shifter. Turns out once you factor in things like the major form abilities, feats and things like Bestial rags they are a lot tankier/stronger than predicted.

I took a look at the Dire bear, Dire Tiger and Dire Wolverine forms and the second they hit 4 they are pretty nasty. Things like rage, size bonuses and super early access to pounce make them rather potent.

Bestial Rags are a steal for the price and open up picking up a utility/movement aspect much more palatable. (8k gold for evasion/improved evasion? +5 minutes of minor aspects? yes please). This means you can have a combat form/ a flight form and a utility form by about levels 6/7.

Strength builds are more viable than I thought with Size bonuses alleviating a lot of the MAD concerns I had on my first read through.

Later I plan to see how a high dex build goes with both the published and errata versions of Shifters edge in play.

Does anyone know if the 'Planar Focus' feat works with Shifters and their animal focuses? If so that may be some of the scaling and utility that people felt was missing.