Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber. Organized Play Member. 373 posts (593 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 12 Organized Play characters.
I am curious to see what everything thinks on these two points.
What is functional to hit for spell attack?
What is the acceptable crit chance on a spell attack after including the best common case for teamwork math swings?
My simple take is for them to take a page from the Kineticist book. Their impulses are like spells in so many ways and they get Attenuators to add to their attack roll (but not saves). Simply give casters similar items and call it a day. It keeps Kineticists behind (level wise) martials for a while, but makes them feel so much better as things scale.
Maybe I'm just playing devil's advocate here, but I feel like the sheer fact that this many people were this invested in this particular cantrip exclusive to this subclass of this class -- to the point that it's completely dominated a forum ostensibly about a completely different book -- might just be a good indicator that it was dominating the meta and there was a good reason to knock it down a peg.
Seriously, were all of you actually playing this exact same build?
Couldn't agree more. I came here hoping for Necromancer, Runesmith, or other new content speculation and discussion, and what I found was just more the the exact same Magus/Psychic discussion that has dominated so many other threads.
Given how big of a discussion topic it seems to be, I agree that it was probably too much (or people just theory crafting and like to complain about theoretical). I GMed a Magus for 11 levels and they never used Psychic archetype and also never felt underpowered. Sure, they were feast or famine type, but they never seemed to lack in power between spellslots and Gouging Claw.
True enough, and it is a corporate decision no doubt. Guess I preferred when Paizo functioned less like the typical corporation and engaged more freely with the community in creative ways. Again, using the Magus/Summoner playtest as an example, the primary creator of each of the classes participated (mostly passively or in ways to provoke thought) and were obviously proud to discuss what they and their team created. Sometimes it was just to thank somebody for an "actual play" rundown and mention things like "I never thought of..." It felt engaging and rewarding to be part of the discussion.
Perhaps its nostalgia of an old fart that has been following and buying Paizo products for the whole of both PF1e & PF2e runs (as well as proud owner of every Dragon magazine). I've enjoyed how they encouraged their devs. to talk to people and just feel this playtest (and last one as well) are a sad separation of that into a different mindset. It isn't bad exactly, but...
That said, I appreciate that we are still doing playtests at all and hope to hear some news mid-playtest, or at least some teasers from the team.
I'm well aware I may be flamed for this post, but I'm going to post this anyway. I miss the playtests with Dev. interactions. It has become less with more recent playtests and while I get it, they want unbiased and raw feedback, the lack of any dev. interaction on this playtest has been deafeningly silent. I miss the playtests where a dev. would occasionally pop into the forums and make a clarification on a poorly written feature or feat, or an acknowledgement of an unintended interaction, a question to induce conversation, or even a "thank you" and quick comment about some feedback.
All of these things made the playtests feel interactive and important to Paizo. The playtest going on now, with lack of any seeming interest by the dev. team just seems bland, even though it is with some extremely exciting classes and mechanics. I don't know, I just miss playtests like we had with the Summoner/Magus where it was obvious that the Paizo team was following it with great attention and fervor. Where it was clear they were proud of their creation and genuinely wanted to hear the feedback from the playtesters.
All that said, I'm sure they are taking all of our feedback and will do great things, I just can't shake how this one feels different is all. Heck, we are a month in and they still haven't even said boo on what makes it an "Impossible" playtest, not even teasingly.
I can totally understand why people who want the occult spell list are voicing their opinions, but why would anyone try to shut down others from having the option to choose between the two lists? If you don't like divine spells, then just choose to play occult.
You're right. While on the topic, I think my Fighter should have the choice to trade weapon expertise for Sneak Attack. Rage, or Exploit Vulnerability. Don't limit my choices!
Post 7 I think the damage output should be pretty good.
Before level 7 it's harder to use all your potential, but that could change in the final book if they adjust thralls.
Thos is exactly what ive seen in my actual play playtests. Pre-Level 7, the class is clunky and a little painful at times. Level 7 and beyond, it feels smooth and interesting.
I REALLY hope they adjust this in the final. I've seen nothing in my level 3 (as a player) or 5 playtests (as a GM and posted here with play-by-play) that suggest 2 thralls at that level de-balances anything.
My two cents then I'll leave. I respectfully disagree. Occult works with Necromancer theme and has most of what the Necromancer would want as has been thoroughly discussed and debated in another thread (frankly to an exhausting level).
The gaps we see in the Necromancer's toolkit, I thoroughly believe, will be filled in the book that Necromancer comes out in by no doubt adding additional on theme spells.
My breakdown:
Divine: No, as this is barrowing or being given power by a greater being. I don't like this concept for Necromancer as the Necromancer seems to me to be the concept of rigorous research and development to impact their own destiny and not rely on another entity
Primal: Nothing to do with Necromancy as a rule
Arcane: possibly, but it is more of a wide tradition and at a personal level I think Occult simply jives with the Necromancer theme better
Unfortunately there are a lot of undead it won't work on though. Many are immune to Mental abilities and Soothe has the Mental trait. Thos includes Thralls (so no healing the special thralls with Soothe).
Soothe having the mental trait is one of those things that makes the occult list feel like a poor fit thematically
While I agree that Soothe isn't a great fit, I actually like the Occult list for Necromancer.
I have no doubt that the book in which Necromancer is released will have plenty of new and on-theme Occult spells to add to the spooky and necromancy utility and undead feel.
I'm playing in a fifth-level one-shot tomorrow, and using the chance to play a necromancer. Conveniently, I already have a necromancer raccoon who keeps skeletal minions in her extradimensional clothing-maws. That translates pretty naturally to a tanuki necromancer, so let's get started.
One-shot information: Grim Symphony, a PFS scenario set in an Ustalavian mad scientist's manor.
Martials receive 100 gp, a +1 striking weapon, +1 armor, and a magic item up to 4th level. Casters receive 100 gp, a staff (or converted coda) up to 5th level, a wand of a 2nd-rank spell, and a magic item up to 4th level.
Necromancer Ira
Ancestry: Tanuki, subbing in for raccoon.
Heritage: Steadfast, picking up Teakettle Form. This allows her to turn into a talking skull, which is a really fun trick for a necromancer.
Ancestry feats: Scorched on Cracked Mountain for first level, just being grabbed to avoid skewing playtest results too much with more of tanuki's shapeshifting. Hasty Celebration to fit the character by bursting into celebrations if one of her thralls crits.
Background is Academy Dropout because she's the least dignified of my mage trio. Dubious Knowledge suits her.
Necromancer
Bone Shaper, since she's going with skeletons.
Feats are Necrotic Bomb for a save-based focus spell and Bone Speaker to have a broader knowledge base, and to test if Necromancer can afford to take a fun feat instead of another focus spell.
Feats: Toughness, Read Psychometric Resonance for out-of-combat options, and Pickpocket for shenanigans.
Spell prep:
Cantrips: Figment, Telekinetic Hand to kind of make up for thralls being unable to do anything, Void Warp for a save-based cantrip, Shield, and Needle Darts (reflavored as bone shards) to have a 60ft. ranged option.
1st: Fear (c'mon, she's a necromancer), Illusory Disguise to disguise party members as mindless zombies - probably need to swap that out, since the staff covers it
2nd: Soothe for emergency healing, Ghoulish Cravings as an up-close debuff. Thralls...
Looking forward to your thoughts and whether you see the same things as my players did. If I remember that scenario though, I feel you'll have less issue with AoE attacks as my players did, but you'll also find Void Warp doesn't have much mileage in that scenario as it is undead heavy and Mater of Life and Death doesn't change its targeting parameters (so can't target undead or constructs with it).
That scenario is a PFS season one scenario and very fun, but also an easy one in terms of difficulty. Still stands out as a personal favorite of mine as PFS goes.
Why would a Necromancer ever prepare Soothe if they have access to Heal (or Harm to heal their undead thralls) ?
I really feel this would be stepping on the Divine casters' territory way too much.
MC Divine caster should be enough to fill the need for those who want it IMO.
They wouldn't and shouldn't. Heal is necromancy, soothe isn't. My take has been that the necromancer should be divine. No toes are being stepped on, necromancy is power over life and death and divine does it the best
It might have Soothe since it can heal Undead and living creatures.
Unfortunately there are a lot of undead it won't work on though. Many are immune to Mental abilities and Soothe has the Mental trait. Thos includes Thralls (so no healing the special thralls with Soothe).
I like that we can summon Thralls without some limit, beyond the actions spent and the minute duration.
If you summon too many and it becomes a hinderance to your team, that is on you. Any Necormancer worth his weight in bones wouldn't do something that foolish.
That being said, I wouldn't be oppossed to or find it themetaicaly inappropriate for a Necromancer to have a way to dispatch his thralls, likely at teh cost of an action.
I could also see Create Thrall, or a seperate cantrip, being able to make a single existing thrawl move and or attack.
I just want something cool to do with them that doesn't require a focus point. Doesn't have to be that strong, just something reliable.
Consume Thrall ALMOST scratches that itch, but it is a 1 per 10 minute thing (rightfully so). Maybe just something like
Essence Transference
1 Action
Destroy one of your thralls to give you or one of your allies 2 Temporary Hit Points that last until the end of your next turn
Heighten +1: Increase the amount of Temporary HP gained by 1
Thanks for the feedback! I don't wanna only hone in on a small part of what you said, but IIRC isn't the Summon Thrall attack optional? You can create a Thrall, choose not to attack, then two action spell attack at no MAP right?
Yes, it's optional, and the best option if you want to use a spell with a spell attack. But it's obvious that you're giving up the possibility of dealing this extra damage, even if it's not that great. I think that incentivizes the use of spells with a save.
Of course you can choose not to attack, but then you're losing damage so your attack roll spell needs to be better than the combination of the attack from Create Thrall & whatever saving throw spell you cast. Which pushes the Necro towards picking saving throws spells over attack roll spells, if the two spells would otherwise be similar in power.
Not to mention that saving throw spells are generally considered to be a bit stronger already, but that's a whole separate issue.
100% this! Not attacking with your thrall so you can do an attack spell, basically negates part of the reason to summon the thrall. It basically makes your focus spell simply a 3 action spell, and as they are, they aren't worth three actions on their own (granted I know they can still flank, but still...)
I don't think dismissing the fact that they can flank is wise
That is not a "but still"
That is a big caps holy crap this is awesome and strong
I but the thrall attack as a more commitment no resource bread and butter option, not something I'm missing out on if I choose to go a different way.
I'm not dismissing this benefit at all. However, before level 7 you only get 1 thrall per casting to fuel your primary source of damage and control via Grave Spells. So often you are blowing them up before they can stay long enough for this in many cases.
So, what you have is that, without the attack, you basically are casting things like Bony Barrage as an affective 3 action focus spell and quite frankly none of the focus spells are tuned high enough to be worth three actions.
At least with the ones that are saves, you can get the attack for some decent (1 action) damage and then get primary effect of your Grave Spell.
Granted once you hit level 7, this dynamic changes and you have the extra thrall to provide the great flanking benefit without feeling like you are missing out on a grave spell. However, given most fights last 3 to 4 rounds, spending one round to setup multiple thralls before level 7 is often a tough pill to swallow (especially if you have two martials who can flank with each other which is often the case in my experience, but that experience may vary).
Of course now that leads to my suggestions, which I will leave in other threads, on the need to have more than 1 thrall a casting before level 7 would make the class much smoother play. But that isn't the topic here.
Thanks for the feedback! I don't wanna only hone in on a small part of what you said, but IIRC isn't the Summon Thrall attack optional? You can create a Thrall, choose not to attack, then two action spell attack at no MAP right?
Yes, it's optional, and the best option if you want to use a spell with a spell attack. But it's obvious that you're giving up the possibility of dealing this extra damage, even if it's not that great. I think that incentivizes the use of spells with a save.
Of course you can choose not to attack, but then you're losing damage so your attack roll spell needs to be better than the combination of the attack from Create Thrall & whatever saving throw spell you cast. Which pushes the Necro towards picking saving throws spells over attack roll spells, if the two spells would otherwise be similar in power.
Not to mention that saving throw spells are generally considered to be a bit stronger already, but that's a whole separate issue.
100% this! Not attacking with your thrall so you can do an attack spell, basically negates part of the reason to summon the thrall. It basically makes your focus spell simply a 3 action spell, and as they are, they aren't worth three actions on their own (granted I know they can still flank, but still...)
I feel like my gut answer is that two thralls at once isn't too much at level 1, but 6 thralls in a turn is. So I'd be receptive to gaining one free thrall when you roll initiative maybe- but I'm also someone who would be fully happy spending turn 1 just triple casting Create Thrall for kicks
If 2 per casting is too much, I'd rather the ability I proposed so as not to have cases where you get a thrall at initiative roll and then it be dead by the time your turn comes around.
As for potentially 6 per turn, I honestly don't see much difference between lvl 1-6 doing that and level 7 doing that. In this test, as you can see from the lvl 5 encounter, adding an extra thrall per casting wouldn't have tilted the necromancer into OP at all. As it was, "Bony" was woefully less effective than any of the other three characters (and none of them were optimized by any means). Adding in an extra thrall would have at least given the character a few opportunities to feel better.
Here's a thought. Perhaps thralls differ based on the type summoned and thus feel more mechanically useful and varied.
When you create thrall you get the initial choice of:
Skeleton - attacks when summoned
Flesh - attempts to grab when summoned
Ghost - attempts to intimidate when summoned
All would use your SA modifier and all would then be treated exactly the same after the initial roll. All of these things are things any PC can do from lvl 1 so I don't see it as OP, but it would make for some cool variety and make my thralls feel special.
If thos is too strong by some accounts, perhaps that is based on the initial Grim Facination you choose and then there are level 1 feats you can get to add the other choices.
with those I can see an issue with Ghost not interacting with MAP like the other two and, if using Demoralize rules, each creature targeted would then be immune for 10 mins
I dont see it not interacting with MAP as a problem as Demoralize is a legit 1 action tactics you or anybody can do anyway. Frankly I see it as action compression like so many other actions various classes get (thrall plus demoralize).
As to being immune for 10 minutes, that's an issue, but can be approached a few ways. If you rule it is the thrall (not Necromancer) making the Demoralize attempt, then a new thrall could do it just fine. This may be a bit too powerful though. If you rule it is the Necromancer making the Demoralize, then they would be immune, though it is similar to the Braggart Swashbucker and their Intimidation to gain Panache.
Here's a thought. Perhaps thralls differ based on the type summoned and thus feel more mechanically useful and varied.
When you create thrall you get the initial choice of:
Skeleton - attacks when summoned
Flesh - attempts to grab when summoned
Ghost - attempts to intimidate when summoned
All would use your SA modifier and all would then be treated exactly the same after the initial roll. All of these things are things any PC can do from lvl 1 so I don't see it as OP, but it would make for some cool variety and make my thralls feel special.
If thos is too strong by some accounts, perhaps that is based on the initial Grim Facination you choose and then there are level 1 feats you can get to add the other choices.
For me it is more about being able to use thralls without having to use a hero point. Something akin to Consume Thrall, but that is spammable and less powerful.
To me it comes down to a Recall Knowledge check. They can do Recall Knowledge about you (the Necromancer) to understand what thralls are and the likelihood that what you summon is one. Or they can Recall Knowledge on the thrall which will have a DC by level of 13 (lvl -1) to identify it.
If an enemy did this, as a GM I would probably let them do a Recall Knowledge against one of them and then be able to recognize any other thrall as a thrall (as no matter how hard you try, they won't look exactly like another undead) given they know what they are about now.
So on the number of Thralls created issue, do you think up to 6 thralls at level 1 would be too many?
I was wondering if something along the lines of "if you have no Thralls created by this spell, you make 1 additional Thrall when casting" would work?
That way you can't spam out too many bodies easily, but you can get the ball rolling.
I like the basic idea but tracking which thralls were created by the spell and which by abilities like Inevitable Return might cause too much headache.
How about making one extra thralls that's (even more) temporary? You create the current number plus the temporary one, which will only last until the end of your current turn. Would give you "ammunition" for your focus spells and other abilities like Draining Strike without taking up space on the battlefield.
Honestly, no, I don't think 6 thralls if one uses all three actions is too much even at level 1 given that they still make the same number of attacks, map is applied, and movement isn't much different between level 1 & 7.
That said, if Paizo believes they are too much (perhaps they plan to buff them) then my suggestion would be a once per 10 minute ability something like:
Free Action
Trigger: Your turn begins
Frequency: Once per 10 minutes
Description: Create a thrall within 30 feat.
This would be simple to implement and thus could be used to get started with 1 extra thrall once per combat. Personally I would just prefer 2 thralls per casting of create thrall, but this would help a lot if Paizo doesn't like that idea.
The prevalence of Necrotic Bomb use is a bit…narratively underwhelming. I guess, when mapped to an RPG being a Necromancer, turning your undead minions into exploding void-stuff makes sense, but it definitely feels very video-gamey. And much more akin to an Alchemist lobbing a different kind of bomb. Creat your thrall, have them attack and then…at the end of your turn…when well positioned between a bunch of enemies…blammo. And…repeat.
I agree with most of that, though I think I am fine with the fantasy of blowing up my minions. That said, you are spot-on with the prevalence of Necrotic Bomb and my players definitely felt this.
In this playthrough Fleshy's player definitely felt more powerful than Bony's player did. Bony Barrage had its moment, but still felt like he was missing out on the big trigger of Necrotic Bomb.
And to be clear, I think other, more interesting options needs to be brought up to Necrotic Bomb level rather than Necrotic Bomb taken down. Even with that option, the damage output was at around un-optimized Kineticist level and without it the damage was below even that.
One piece we talked about was how the Living Graveyard was really cool, but not level 20 cool. More options like that toned to be throughout the leveling career would be neat to have. I mean heck, most of our games spends most of it's time at levels 4-8 and we want fun variety there too.
The players found a trapped door, but didn't have the skill to disable it. Necromancer summoned a thrall, but since the trap triggered on the door opening, all the thrall could do was stand there with it's nose on the door and stare. The players thought it was absolutely stupid that they could make the thrall attack somebody, but couldn't teach it how to simply push on a door.
The players found a trapped door, but didn't have the skill to disable it. Necromancer summoned a thrall, but since the trap triggered on the door opening, all the thrall could do was stand there with it's nose on the door and stare. The players thought it was absolutely stupid that they could make the thrall attack somebody, but couldn't teach it how to simply push on a door.
I'm all about the Necromancer being INT and having to study the dead and the balance between life and death.
As for the dirge, it is a song often composed for funeral rites. A song doesn't have to be off-the-cuff or done through feeling alone. I think Necromancers more as a composer and some of the best music composers in history have used mathematics and learning to compose their songs (Mozart, Xenakis, Cage, Bach, etc.)
In other words, music doesn't have to mean charisma.
Good advice and I agree they should have used their cantrips a bit more on this, though each fight was relatively short, so they wanted to use their big guns. Additionally, their cantrips were SA as well and so would be penalized by MAP (or their thrall would get MAP) as they had Needle Darts and Telekinetic Projectile as their damage ones given the Occult list. Void Warp should have been used though in retrospect.
Another interesting alternative if they are playing with humans, elves or gnomes (and any other class that can take primal/arcane cantrips via ancestry feat/heritage) is to take Electric Arc (or similar like Scatter Scree, but let be honest it's hard to overcome the efficiency of EA in this game). It's something that I do basically with every non-arcane/primal casters that I made.
Good thought, though we didn't for two reasons.
1) For the playtest we decided to rely as little as possible on specific ancestry or equipment, just trying to stay basic to see the class on its own merits only.
2) Since Necromancer is an INT based class and those things give innate casting, it makes the DCs lower (given all innate casting uses CHA). For one Necromancer this would have only been one lower than their normal DC, but for the other, who dumped CHA, it would have been near useless at being 4 lower of a DC.
That said, using a Spellheart would work fine and something we often do, but it was decided against for this game.
-You don't have to attack when you create a thrall. It doesn't feel great, but you can create thrall and get a no MAP Bone Spear in the same turn.
Yes, we realized that towards the end of the fight, but my players then felt like the Grave Spell was basically a three action spell and its power level was pretty weak for a three action spell.
Witch of Miracles wrote:
-Did they get any use out of inevitable return? I don't notice any mention of that reaction.
They did when the first squirrel died in the moderate encounter. However it was significant distance away from the second one and so didn't play a factor. It did raise a discussion I forgot to include though. We had two Necromancers who procced that and we assume the thrall raises in the square of the dead enemy. So I just ruled one rose in that square, and the other rose adjacent to it.
No thrall was created when the Crawling Hand Swarm was taken down because it was undead and technically they don't die, but are destroyed. Wording in Raw says one won't raise for destroyed undead.
Witch of Miracles wrote:
-Did the players feel like the class had a lot of options to juggle, in a bad way? I'm curious if they felt like it was too difficult to pick up. Forgetting spells and reactions can indicate they're new to the class, sure, but it could also indicate the class felt cluttered in play or had more options than the players felt was appropriate. Is that some of what they were getting at with the bounded caster comment?
Actually they loved the complexity. That was one of their favorite parts. My group is pretty well experienced and get bored with straight forward classes as a rule. The Gunslinger, for example, was getting bored to tears (he figured he'd try it since this was a one shot).
Forgetting about the spells was less about inexperience I think, and more about the focus of the class is very much thrall creation, usage, and battlefield placement. They were having fun with that side of it and never felt the need to dip into the handful of spells they prepared.
What we were getting at with the Bounded Caster discussion was that the power really didn't seem to be much in the spells or even want to be in the spells. We can't see a Necromancer getting rid of spellcasting as that would feel off, but we thought that it would allow more power budget to be allocated to class features that perhaps did more with thralls and didn't require a focus point (like Consume) and/or ramp up the grave spells power level so that the extra resource cost felt more powerful. It probably also goes to show that one player's favorite class is Magus and my favorite class is Summoner (such a misunderstood class), so bounded casting doesn't feel like a disadvantage, but an interesting play style.
Martialmasters wrote:
They can summon more than one thrall at level 1 by spending more than one action.
Yes, they realized this, but felt that it was not very well rewarding at this level in part because the MAP on the second SA roll almost guaranteed a miss and they simply weren't needed for flanking. There was only one Melee character besides the Thralls and so they often had the flanking. Not to mention that the Kineticist had other options besides an attack roll if the thrall wasn't there to flank for whatever reason.
YuriP wrote:
Instead just use a normal cantrip/spellslot spell and create a thrall in the first turn. This will allow then to keep the flanking and in the next round you can use the existing thrall to use Bone Spear and then create a new one to repeat the cicle.
Good advice and I agree they should have used their cantrips a bit more on this, though each fight was relatively short, so they wanted to use their big guns. Additionally, their cantrips were SA as well and so would be penalized by MAP (or their thrall would get MAP) as they had Needle Darts and Telekinetic Projectile as their damage ones given the Occult list. Void Warp should have been used though in retrospect.
Beyond that though, the rounds where they did keep their thralls "alive" they were destroyed before they could be used. The squirrels had AoEs that popped them and the dragon used its -10 MAP frenzy to pop them. It did do a great job of wasting two actions for the Crawling Hand Swarm though. With the second fight specifically, this is again where they felt having more than one thrall without having to spend two full actions (thus no spell or cantrip) would have felt better. That said, they could have used the Aid action or something like shield or guidance, but again, that just didn't fit with what they wanted to do out of the class.
I ran a short scenario to playtest the Necromancer as a few of my players were really interested in how the class played. We played a moderate and a severe encounter.
Party Composition:
*Necromancer - Bone Shaper
Bone Spear
Bone Speaker
Bony Barrage
*Necromancer - Flesh Magician
Dead Weight
Necrotic Bomb
Reach of the Dead
*Gunslinger - Sniper
Hit the Dirt
Risky Reload
Running Reload
+1 Striking Arquebus
Out-of-Combat Healer with Medicine
Our nefarious band of fortune seekers have heard of a cave where a horde of precious gemstones could bring them a fortune, so of course they decide to find the danger and ignore the warnings of certain death to obtain it. Besides, two members of the party are intimate "friends" with death itself, so they fear not!
Moderate Encounter:
* Two Taldan Cave Squirrels
While the Sniper successfully avoids notice, the rest of the party aren't exactly quiet and so shortly after entering the cave one cave squirrel sees them and uses their Defensive Scream to alert his mate who was burrowing for more gemstones to add to their collection.
Round 1
Squirrel 1 (S1) spits at the Kineticist (who is closest) and hits dealing 14 damage (Kin makes his Fort Save). S1 uses 2 actions to burrow and look for more gems (it only had one)
Gunslinger (Gun) has no targets in site, but saw the squirrel burrow, so readies an action to attack if an enemy resurfaces
Squirrel 2 (S2) pops out of the ground and takes a devastating critical attack from the gunslinger for 34 damage. It then attacks the Flesh Necromancer (Fleshy) and hits. It uses its last action to successfully grab him.
Fleshy succeeds at his acrobatics check to escape, moves away, then uses Create Thrall. The attack misses by 3 (due to the MAP).
Kin uses Lava Leap to get to S2 who succeeds her Ref. save and takes 4 damage. He ended his leap so as not to hit the thrall and was 10 feet away from the S2. He then renews his aura and throws a blast that misses the S2.
Bone Necromancer (Bony) creates a thrall and hits for 8 damage. He then goes to use Bone Spear. However I remind the player it only has a 10ft range, so he decides to get closer and moves within range. Since he doesn't have the actions for bone spear now, he decides to intimidate the squirrel (he has intimidating glare) and succeeds.
Round 2
S1 resurfaces and spits at Fleshy dealing 12 damage (Fleshy succeeds his fortitude save). It spits again and hits (because Fleshy is off-guard) for another 11 damage (he again saves his fortitude).
Gun reloads and hides, shoots at S2 for 5 damage, then running reloads to get further away.
S2 claws Fleshy for a crit and 18 damage. It tries to maintain the grab and fails and then does a Screaming Force for damage in a 30 foot emanation (that doesn't hurt squirrel friends). This is basic save for 11 damage. Fleshy succeeds, Bony Fails, Kin Succeeds, and both thralls pop.
Fleshy wants to hurt the squirrel, but also has to be warry of friendly fire. So he creates a thrall 10 feet from the squirrel, which unfortunately can't reach to attack. He then blows it up with Necrotic Bomb. The S2 fails its save and takes 22 damage. Unfortunately this took all his actions (and a focus point) and so he can't move away from S2.
Kin moves into flanking with Fleshy and does a 2 action melee blast that hits (because S2 is off-guard) dealing 19 damage.
Bony is annoyed his thrall is gone, but really wants to get Bone Spear off so creates another one (but he can't flank due to positioning of Kin and Fleshy). The thrall hits for 10 damage which is enough to kill S2. So, Bony moves close to S1 and creates another thrall, which misses its attack.
Round 3
S1 is heartbroken that his mate was killed, so does a Screaming Force. Everybody makes their saves and take 6 damage, which also pops the thrall next to it. It then moves to Bony and misses with its bite attack.
Gun shoots for another big crit doing 45 damage! He then hides/reloads and shoots again (almost critting again, but was 1 off) for 11 damage.
Fleshy creates a thrall next to S1 and hits with the attack for 4 damage. He then blows it up for 18 damage (S1 failed its save).
Kin lava leaps for 13 damage (S1 makes his save so only takes 6). He then renews his aura and makes a melee blast that misses
Bony really wants to use Bone Spear, but realizes that if he creates the thrall in a flanking position he would hit his ally. So he creates the thrall in a non-flanking position. Its attack hits for 8 damage and he then uses Bone Spear which misses due to MAP (missed by 4)
Round 4
S1 is in a dire spot and burrows, then runs away, ending combat.
Between Combat:
* party heals up by Gun using medicine
* both Necromancers refocus
* Kineticist makes a fire for them to chill around during this time.
* Party continues on their way and come across an old set of large double-doors and inspect it realizing it is trapped.
* Unfortunately nobody has any thieves tools (Gun kicks himself for not putting ranks in Thievery)
* Bony decides to use a thrall to set off the trap, but after creating it, we realize that it actually can't set off the trap because it can't open the door (no actions and no way to give it a manipulate action to open the door in front of it). After some argument about how dumb that is that it can attack, but can't push on a door, I rule that this is a playtest and we are playing it by RAW.
* So, after lengthy discussion they do rock-paper-scissors to decide who opens the door while the others stand back.
* Kin loses and opens the door which sets off a trap that sprays gas into his face.
* Kin succeeds his Fort save, but is still sickened 1
* Immediately upon opening the door Kin is hit by a large pink set of jaws for 20 damage due to the dragon inside waiting for the doors to open after hearing the bickering and commotion from the other side of the door.
Severe Encounter:
* Young Omen Dragon
* Crawling Hand Swarm
Round 1
Gun shoots the dragon and hits for 9 damage, reloads, shoots again and misses
Dragon (Pinky) takes a step forward and breaths to catch Kin, Fleshy, and Bony in its breath for 28 damage. Kin crit fails, but uses a Hero Point to reroll that into a regular failure. Fleshy and Bony both fail and so all three are Slowed 1
Bony creates a thrall which misses the dragon, then uses his only other action to go into the large room. That's when he sees a swarm of undead hands writhing in the corner and alerts his party.
Fleshy goes into the room in the opposite direction of the creepy hands and uses Reach of the Dead to create a thrall next to the swarm. It attacks and hits, but most of the 9 damage is resisted (he made it slashing) which allowed 4 damage to go through.
Crawling Hand Swarm (Handy) moves to encompass the thrall and attacks it, killing it. Fleshy smiles as that is exactly what he was hoping to do (eat up 2 of the swarms actions) and then it moves to encompass Bony, but it doesn't have the actions left to attack.
Kin immediately wretches with his first action and then with his only other action moves into the room.
Round 2
Gun reloads, shoots at Pinky and hits for 11 damage and then hides/reloads in the rubble
Pinky Moves and uses Draconic Frenzy to hit Kin with a wing for 15 damage, hit Bony with a claw for 16 damage, and destroys the thrall with a claw
Bony does a recall knowledge on the dragon using Undead Lore (with Bone Speaker) and learns it's worst save is Reflex (which is relayed to the group). This helps as 3 of the players have the ability to target different saves. He then creates moves out of Handy's swarm and uses his last action to create a thrall on the other side of Handy. The attack misses.
Fleshy creates a thrall, but ops for positioning over attacking. He creates the thrall between Handy and Pinky in such a way that his Necrotic Bomb can hit them both without hitting Kin or Fleshy. Unfortunately this means it is not within reach to make its attack. He then blows it up for 25 damage. Both fail their reflex saves and since all Necromancers have Mastery of Life and Death, this deals vitality damage to Handy. It also triggers Handy's area damage weakness for a very satisfying turn.
Handy has three fairly close targets (Bony, Kin & Thrall), but none spaced to where he can get more than one. So I roll a die to determine where he goes and he goes for Kin. He moves, then does two Pummeling Grasps. The first hits for half damage doing 4 damage and the other hits for full damage doing 9 damage and knocking Kin prone.
Kin opts to stay on the ground (gutsy) to activate Thermal Nimbus and then uses Flying Flame which can hit both Handy and Pinky. Pinky succeeds his save taking 8 damage and Handy fails taking 16 damage plus triggering its area weakness.
Round 3
Gun no longer has any line of sight on bad guys in the room, so spends two actions to double move into the room and in a corner. He then shoots at the swarm as he sees a lot of the hands are not moving and the swarm is thinning out pretty badly. He hits dealing 11 bludgeoning damage which is enough to kill it despite it's resistance (it only had 2 HP left).
Pinky takes 2 damage from Thermal Nimbus and then can't resist the Kin on the ground prone. It attacks with a jaw and crits for 36 damage. It attacks with a Wing and hits for 14 damage. It attacks with a claw and misses and then rolls a Nat. 20 for its last claw attack to finish up Draconic Frenzy and does 38 more damage taking the Kin down to dying 2
Bony decides to creates a thrall next to the dragon whose attack misses and then activates Bony Barrage and Pinky fails the Reflex save taking 12 damage.
Fleshy uses Sooth to bring Kin back up on his feet and then creates a thrall next to the dragon. The attack misses
Round 4
Gun uses Running Reload to move to a corner with a lot of rubble, then attacks dealing 18 damage and then uses hide/reload.
Kin stubbornly stays on the ground and turns his aura back on and activates Thermal Nimbus again. Then uses Flying Flame on Pinky. Pinky succeeds their save and takes 7 damage.
Pinky moves and positions itself so it can get the thrall, Bony, and Kin in its breath attack. The thrall is immune so sticks around. Kin fails his save and Bony succeeds. Kin takes 22 damage and goes unconscious (not dying since it is mental damage) and Bony takes 11 damage. Pinky looks disappointed.
Bony creates a thrall which hits for 5 damage. Then uses it for Bony Barrage which Pinky succeeds against, but still takes 7 damage which is exactly enough to kill Pinky.
With combat over, they get Kin up off the ground and start looting Pinky's hoard!
Our Conclusions:
* Overall feel, both players enjoyed the Necromancer class and felt their rounds gave them options to think about and interesting choices.
* Both players commented that they almost forgot they had spells though (except the one use of Sooth) which sparked a conversation about how this class could probably due even better as a Bounded Caster which would allow a bit more power in the thralls and Grave spells
* Only creating 1 thrall at a time until level 7 is rough on action economy and feels bad in a game that emphasizes tactical movement and spells with the attack trait THIS WAS THE BIGGEST COMPLAINT BY FAR .
The group thought of two potential solutions to make combat much more fun and dynamic.
1) Simply create 2 thralls at lvl 1 and up it by one at each proficiency increase. We didn't see anything game breaking in this
2) Give Necromancer a class ability to use a free action to create 1 thrall as a once per 10 minute ability so they can start the fight with one active thrall. This can come with the caveat that it can't attack when created this way
* Both Necromancer players were a little disappointed they couldn't get a small horde going because the thralls died either before they could make another and sometimes before they could use them. Going back to the point above, being able to create 2 at lvl 1 doesn't seem broken, but would REALLY help the class feel better.
* Bone Spear looks awesome, but that 10ft range is an HUGE downer. 30 Ft range (keeping the line the same size) would be fine. Additionally, as an attack that uses a thrall, if you don't have a thrall already in place from a previous round, the attack is hard to land because of MAP caused by creating the thrall that round.
* Necrotic Bomb was very fun to use both mechanically and thematically
* Bone Speaker was very cool and did help on the dragon fight to know what save to target. Though most of the table thought it would be nice if this was a built in feature rather than a feat, given it is limited to creatures and some other specifics.
* Positioning was always in the forefront of the Necromancer players' minds.
* Even for focus spells that required saves, it was often hard to get both the thrall attack and grave spell off effectively. Thralls seem like they want to be flanking buddies, however the abilities that use them often do area damage that would hit their flanking buddy. So more than once the thrall was summoned in a place where it couldn't reach to attack so that the spell wouldn't hit their friend. I don't know how I feel about this, whether it is strategic, or overly punishing. My table was split on the opinions.
* Damage output was on par with the Kineticist from what I could tell
* We were disappointed that Dead Weight didn't come up for a good time to use it, it seems fun.
* Frankly we forgot about the Flesh Magician enhancement that makes destroyed thralls difficult terrain, however in retrospect, I don't think it would have impacted any of the fights. We did remember the Bone Shaper's enhancement, but none of the damage to them required a Reflex save, so it never came up (squirrels called for Fort and Dragon called for Will)
* Not being able to use the thralls at all, even for basic RP or menial tasks like opening the door really detracted from the fantasy. This was especially prevalent when they tried to use the thrall to spring the trap and all it could do was stand there with its nose on the door, unable to push it open.
CONCLUSION - I really like the Necromancer as a whole, but feel there are some clunky gameplay that needs to be worked out for it to shine. Thralls are very cool and with some tweaks will be great. We all agreed that a lvl 7 Necromancer would play much smoother due to creating multiple thralls, but that waiting for it to come online at level 7 is not great.
We had a lot of fun creating and playing this class and I hope this real world example can help mold the class for its future release. I, for one, can't wait to get my hands on a, hopefully, smoother version when it comes out fully fleshed out (pun intended).
I could get behind Bounded Casting and give more power budget to the class in how they use Thralls both with and without focus points. However a Necromancer without spell casting at all just doesn't seem right.
For me, getting rid of an unwanted Thrall without the need for a focus point gets me two things. 1) something else interesting to do when I don't have or want to spend a hero point and 2) ensures that if a Thrall is where an ally wants to go, I can be a team player and get rid of the Thrall.
I'd love to see an ability built into the class that does something like:
The place feels deserted os a good way to say it. I thought the same thing when I posted on Monday. In past playtests I felt the Debs were engaging. Sometimes clarifying an oddly worded rule, sometimes weighing in on designer thought process. That's something I really appreciated about Paizo and their willingness to engage with their player base.
I don't get thos take as it os clearly written (nearly identicalto the wizard). Learn a Spell is a very specific activity and is capitalized in the text for a reason. Necromancers use this activity the same as Wizards do. Their Dirge expands pretty easily.
I saw the BadLuckGamer video where he ranted about this and I was yelling at my screen that he was spreading misinformation due to his lack of understanding the rules. I knew this would come up after that video.
Creating a thrall is almost always better than moving one to a new position in range (and if you allow thralls to move out of range, that's a noticeable buff). However, as soon as people start moving the token over the board, more cognitive processes engage and more people will start talking. I'm going to second Tridus- If Thralls start moving frequently, certain players are going to slow the game to a crawl, and I don't think, "Just don't let them play Necromancer" is a good solution.
I would like a Base Kinesis-like activity for thralls doing menail stuff out of combat, though.
Fair enough point, and something I didn't consider given the playerbase as a whole.
I think the big one for me was the flavor and a Base Kinesis style class feature for out of combat things would certainly scratch that itch.
For instance, if the creature were immune to void and had no resistance or immunity to vitality damage, it would take vitality damage from the spell or ability.
indicates that a skeleton enemy - which is immune to Void damage and has no resistance or immunity to Vitality damage, would take Vitality damage from Void Warp.
Unless you are arguing that this ability only applies to spells or abilities that would deal both Void damage and Vitality damage in the one casting. At which point the entire purpose of the ability is very, very niche use.
No, the stickler here is that Void Warp has a target that specifically says "Targets 1 living creature" since that skeleton is not a living creature, it still cannot be targeted by Void Warp as the ability says nothing about changing the targeting parameters.
I'm very excited for the Necromancer's interactions with Thralls and believe this is a great way to get the feel of a horde with the mechanical balance of PF2e.
I'll start off by listing my personal Pros/Cons on how I think this is implemented and will give more as I do real world playtests and hope others will add to the discussion as well.
Pros:
- Easy to deploy (love that I could send out 3 on turn one at level one if I want)
- Interactions with focus spells are awesome and very flavorful. I want my minions to be expendable
- Battlefield control is the Necromancer's vibe and these are a great way to do it.
- Bone Spear!
- Life Tap!
- I'm going to stop there...most of the feats look really fun
Cons:
- I really want to be able to move them for both flavor and mechanic. - Proposed Solution - Perhaps under "Create Thrall" add a line that gives you a choice to either create one or move an existing one with both options ending in said thrall making an attack
- There is no way to get rid of unwanted Thralls if you don't have the right focus spell and have already used the Consume Thrall ability in the last 10 minutes. - Potential Solution - Give the necromancer an action that is not on a cooldown and doesn't use a focus point that destroys a thrall for a minor benefit.
- What do I do with my thralls when I'm out of focus points?
- Would like a little more variety on the saves they can target, fortitude is often pretty problematic (mathematically speaking)
Questions:
- While I get that they always fail saves and are hit by attacks, I'd love some clarification on how checks against their DCs works. The big one is that Tumble Through is an untrained activity and so I'm wondering if it is the intension for enemies to auto-succeed on these, or if they have some form of DC. If their stats are simply listed as 0, then mechanically the DC would be 10 (10+modifier), but not sure if that is the intention.
- Dead Weight is a cool ability, but why would a creature try to "escape" when they can auto-succeed at attacking it and get rid of the condition?
I'm sure I'll have more as I get my hands on this class in a game!
Necromancer is an int-based, prepared, occult caster with 2 slots per rank. At level 1 they get a focus cantrip called Create Thrall that, as 1 action, makes a thrall w/in 30ft that lasts a minute. Thralls are creatures with 1 hit point that are always hit by attacks and always fail saving throws. They have no actions, but can provide flanking (some feats/focus spells let you move thralls or have them attack with your spell attack modifier). You can destroy your thralls to do various things...
Wow that doesn't sound like a minion master at all. It sounds more like a bank-resources-before-the-fight-then-spend-them-during concept. Personally I'm okay with that, but it's probably not the concept that a lot of the folks clamoring for a necromancer wanted.
That post left off a number of things. I added one just above your post that elaborate more. I think it is looking a lot like a minion master class honestly, though kept within the balance of PF2e and avoids the 30 minute turn issue.
1-action cantrip to summon a Thrall that can flank, gets to attack upon being summoned, takes up a square, has no apparent limit on how many you can have, scales in damage, scales at proficiency ranks for how many it summons, and fuels feats and focus spells or to replenish a focus point!
Psychic progression spells that allow for more power budget to go to class feats and class abilities while still giving decent slots
Int based class (I personally love Int based classes)
Scaling undead lore with a feat that lets it be used on any creature with a skeleton!
One thing left out of the paragraph about the summon Thrall cantrip is that as part of the summoning the thrall gets an initial attack. It goes off your spell attack modifier and damage is low (that scales), but this makes a HUGE difference in my opinion.
After reading all these things about the Animist, I feel one of my PFS Oracles will finally end up as an Animist. It's so sad to move away from the Oracle class but at least I have a Divine caster with a nice feel.
I just started a new campaign yesterday and rolled up an Animist. I can't quite explain why, but it had a very Oracle like feel to it. I played Oracle about a year and a half ago, and yesterday's session gave me flashbacks.
What I find funny about the mythic proficiency is that inversely scales with level to a certain extent.
If you are level 2 and use rewrite fate to re-roll a saving throw with mythic proficiency and are only trained in the skill then you get an equivalent of a +8 to that save (& a reroll) if you are levl 15 and legendary in that save you get a +2. Now a +2 and a reroll is still really really good but a +8 plus a reroll is insane so rewrite fate at least is going to have less of a wow factor as you level.
Correct.
It's absolutely intentional. I would argue a few key things there.
The first is that low level PCs need the help more. They're notoriously fragile. These sorts of boosts help them stay alive. Low level in general even without mythic is extremely swingy. One crit can save your bacon.
The other is that high level PCs would be much more likely to break the game with it. Forcing +6 to save DCs against a fireball is one thing. +6 to save DCs against fabricated truth would be completely unhinged.
Not only all of that, but higher level characters in a Mythoc campaign have more options to use their Mythic Points on. Basically, at low levels, this is great and usually optimal. At higher levels, you probably want to use those Mythoc Points for something else.
I can understand sometimes a bystander familiar getting caught in an AoE. But, as an example, having the enemy who's fighting for his life against a player party suddenly stop hitting the things that are killing it and focusing his attention on the tiny animal that just sits there and isn't a threat seems kinda... insane (to be polite)?
Sometimes the enemy both isn't actually fighting for their life and is also a prick. If they're pretty clearly winning and being cruel is in character it's 100% on the table.
Maybe within character, but still a dick move by the GM. This sounds too much like the toxic "that's what my character would do" to me.
I can understand sometimes a bystander familiar getting caught in an AoE. But, as an example, having the enemy who's fighting for his life against a player party suddenly stop hitting the things that are killing it and focusing his attention on the tiny animal that just sits there and isn't a threat seems kinda... insane (to be polite)?
Exactly. Even if the Familiar is technically in an AoE (such as on the character's person) I won't have the AoE impact them. That is, unless they have made the familiar an active participant in the fight, but that is rare (outside of the Witch).
It's just rude to shut down a familiar, especially when it is primarily for out-of-combat coolness.
You can take a calling as early as lvl 1 if you are playing with Mythic rules and basically they give an extra Edict and Anathema you have to follow. Then, each one time you do crit succeed at something specifically called out by your Calling, you gain a Mythic Point. Additionally, some of the mythic feats below 12th level have prerequisites that you have a certain Calling.
Most of the callings are pretty self explanatory in what their themes are based on their names. Hunter's Calling, for example, is focused on hunting and tracking. Thief's calling is focused on picking locks & stealing. For a full list of Callings, I listed them all out earlier in this thread.
I mean, yeah. It is a normal familiar so use it for normal familiar things. Most GMs will even rule they are out of combat if tucked away and don't target them unless you do something to make them viable target in combat, though the Familiar Satchel and Absorb Familiar are also great.
I was just pointing out that it is extra dangerous for them to be in combat, in case anybody was thinking of a witch style of play.
It's on the grid, it's a target.
Yeah, I typically play it that way as well and so do most GMs I know. However, most, myself included, don't put them on the grid unless the player specifically starts doing something with them in combat. Outside of that, I typically just consider them hanging out inside their coat or under their hat or something and basically protected.
I'm surprised at prophesied monarch, since after Aroden died no prophecy works at all.
I'll focus on this part of your post. Prophesied Monarch is less about prophesy and more about the person of myth to lead us in our time of need trope. It even calls out that while the prophesies are gone, these people still exist.
Basically it is about a soul born in a time of great need to lead their people through a hardship or to a destiny. Even if/when you die, your memory lives on and your soul does not move through the river of souls. It simply waits to be reborn again to take up the mantle and lead once more when next they are needed.
