John R.'s page

I just started a similar build (fighter with druid) using unlimited free archetype. I'm only level 6 and I've only played 2 or 3 sessions so a lot of this is still theory but....

My main takeaway is that you're suffering lowered AC for increased reach and improved movement and senses. I doubt the temp hp is going to make up for loss in AC.

Later you can get Rip and Tear or heightened untamed shift can help add some persistent damage, 2 types if you take Insect Shape while keeping a good AC.

Spell slots will probably be able to add more utility when needed, maybe ranged cantrips if you can't manage to fly. If you have adequate time before a fight, there's plenty of options to buff yourself beforehand. Enlarge lasts 5 minutes so that's fairly easy for a pre-buff. Resist energy and mountain resilience also have long enough durations so you can save them for a big fight for the day while ensuring they last throughout the fight but also not spend much if any actions during the fight on casting them.

Fighter is nice because you get to use most of your feats in untamed form still. I looked at monk as well and was really heavily considering it. If monk is quickened while not polymorphed, they can do something like Flurry of Blows, stride a long distance or just strike again or use a maneuever and then cast something like electric arc. It really came down to action economy and higher defenses (mountain stance) versus accuracy, MAP reduction and what I find to be more interesting feats, most of which only mattered while NOT polymorphed.

I believe The Raven Black is referring to how the Martial Artist archetype no longer contains the following:

"Whenever you gain a class feature that grants you expert or greater proficiency in certain weapons, you also gain that proficiency rank in all unarmed attacks."

Therefore, you can no longer have a constantly crazy high attack bonus while polymorphed with untamed form, such as if you were a fighter multiclassed into druid followed by Martial Artist.

I'd buy 3rd party for hybrid material. I'd almost buy such 3rd party exclusively if they went really gonzo style with it.

This could be part of the problem. As the only tanky character, the repetition of '(1) EV, stride, raise shield, (2) step, strike, raise shield' is not really being caused by your class, it's being caused by your role in the party.

This is a great point. Thaumaturge is generally not a tank. It's another rogue-type of class. If you do want it to act as a tank, you don't even have the right implement, being the amulet or shield. You probably need to either re-build your character or just not tank anymore. You're likely no more suited to tank than the party rogue....or even the gunslinger. In fact, the rogue can actually wield a shield without it being a detriment to their class's functionality.

We might still get this book next gencon... Hopefully.

I really don't expect it to take that long. The playtest was released Dec. 2024. I expect the book to release Q1 or early Q2. A whole year and a half sounds WAY to long. So far I think books have usually released 13-14 months after playtest, not 18.

I just realized the playtest explicitly states that the book will be released in 2026, so that has me less confused and concerned on why we haven't gotten much new info on this yet.

John R. wrote:

From my end, it looks like you need to adjust some spacing or something on pages 6 and 10. A whole half or full page starts on the far right edge but is severely cut off.

That's a running issue with the Homebrewery; depending on your browser size and resolution it can cause text to go over the readable columns. I've asked the developers about this, and the workaround is so clunky and manual as to not really be feasible unfortunately.

Yup, just switched from phone to PC and it reads fine now. Will look it over.

From my end, it looks like you need to adjust some spacing or something on pages 6 and 10. A whole half or full page starts on the far right edge but is severely cut off.

I thought they maybe didn't want it to overshadow SF2's launch but...not even an announcement on the title...yeah, very confusing and almost concerning.

Kinda glad this topic came up because it addresses a concern I had. I have a character that I want to give heavy wooden armor purely to keep up with a druidic ascetic but it seems like the downside should be its lack of durability. If it's common practice to just ignore equipment durability, is taking the lighter bulk and benefits of the wood armor group just cheesing the system at that point? Is this something I should be concerned about? I'd rather not influence the use of exploits.

I'd say for one last shot, try to get your GM to run using proficiency without level. It's probably the only way to get closer to what you want with summons. It can make games more swingy however.

Oh this isn't an issue nor does it need clarifying errata. The abilities interact exactly as they say they do with Foundry also having this fully automated. You have also accurately found the reason why.

Fighter gets a proficiency bump when using a certain weapon group, And not all unarmed attacks are in the brawling weapon group nor is there anything that would put them in said weapongroup unless otherwise stated. Infact of the top of my head I know of like a dozen unarmed attacks from the Sling, Dart, club and knife groups. And even those lacking categories entirely.

Ugh. I'm not very familiar with unarmed attacks granted from ancestries since I usually play humans but those are some pretty damning examples. Thank you. Not happy with the answer but it's pretty convincing.

I was building a fighter with the druid dedication. I was pretty confident it would work, then the automation on Foundry wasn't upgrading my proficiency for my battle form unarmed attacks. I looked into it and I guess since these unarmed attacks aren't explicitly in the brawling group, they don't qualify for the upgrade.

It looks like this is an issue others have ran into but I can't find any official clarification. Has this been errata'd or clarified yet or do we have to assume fighters can't advance all unarmed attacks early based on wording?

John R. wrote:

If I ran with a player using Annoint Ally as an exploration activity, I'd probably give them drained 1. Otherwise, I don't see any issue with spending an action to slap it on an ally before they open every door with a potential threat on the other side.

This can get more and more hilarious. Days have passed, the sorc is pale, drained 3, feels terrible, his pals all have blood runes all over them.

Sorc is begging for rests and is eating as much food as he can.

As they reach the entrance to the dungeon, the fighter is carrying the pale, unconscious sorcerer who has drained all his blood to keep the ally anointed.

___

Yeah. I'm not allowing that. The rules may allow it, but it looks crazy in play. Too strange.

XD

Keeping a continually open wound such that you lose even as little as a drop of blood per second will have you lose over 2 liters in half a day, which is usually the amount considered to be fatal. It’s the same principle as when you’re told to fix leaks in your pipes and faucets even if it seems like a slow drip: it adds up, and quicker than you think.

So I think your point here is that, unless the sorcerer has some means of magically extracting a drop of blood without breaking skin, the sorcerer is going to either need to create an open wound significant enough that it won't heal without intervention to regularly supply blood OR they will end up riddled with hundreds of pin pricks over the course of a day which in themselves will likely lead to infection or maybe exhaust the body through forcing it to actively heal multiple small injuries (not sure if that's really a thing). Yeah, I can see that.

Oh, but further:

Generally, a person can lose up to 10% of their blood volume (approximately 500 milliliters) without feeling any significant effects.

And:

The average adult human body contains about 5 liters of blood, though this volume varies by factors like weight, age, and sex.

So 10% of 5000 mL is 500 mL which is far more than the 50 mL produced in a 24 hr period....

So maybe, the character actually wouldn't suffer any adverse effects from a very slow continuous bleed (1 drop/minute).

Forgive me for using Google AI answers:

Trying to define "a drop":

A single drop of water typically has a volume of approximately 0.05 milliliters (mL).

The new cells are formed in the bone marrow and transported through fine bones to the bloodstream. On a normal basis the rate of loss and reproduction is about 50 millilitres per 24 hours.

That translates to roughly 0.035 mL of blood produced a minute.

Yeah, a drop of blood a minute would actually actively slowly exhaust a typical human of their blood overtime.... I think after an extended period, a realistic penalty is warranted.

I think the key point is that Defend is an exploration activity, Annoint Ally is not. Defend gives the benefit of having your shield raised but is not the same as Raise Shield. Same relationship between Search and Seek. Annoint Ally does not have an exploration activity that keeps it up at all times.

However, there is this sub-section of exploration activities:

"Improvising New Activities

If a player wants to do something not covered by other rules, here are some guidelines. If the activity is similar to an action someone could use in an encounter, such as Avoid Notice, it usually consists of a single action repeated roughly 10 times per minute (such as using the Sneak action 10 times) or an alternation of actions that works out similarly (such as Search, which alternates Stride and Seek). An activity using a quicker pace, corresponding to roughly 20 actions per minute, might have limited use or cause fatigue, as would one requiring intense concentration.

You might find that a player wants to do something equivalent to spending 3 actions every 6 seconds, just like they would in combat. Characters can exert themselves to this extent in combat only because combat lasts such a short time—such exertion isn’t sustainable over the longer time frame of exploration."

So I think using Annoint Ally as an exploration activity can be ran as RAW but its still early and my coffee hasn't woken my brain up completely yet.

If I ran with a player using Annoint Ally as an exploration activity, I'd probably give them drained 1. Otherwise, I don't see any issue with spending an action to slap it on an ally before they open every door with a potential threat on the other side.

John R. wrote:

I think the other practices just need another minor action to ride on sustaining as well. Recall knowledge or seek for seer, strike for medium and command familiar for shaman all seem fine to me.

Famously minor action Strike.

Considering you can currently pull off a free sustain with Skirmish Strike, I don't think a single strike is too far fetched, especially if they reversed the order with the bonus action triggered by the sustain and not the other way around, as it currently is.

What's weird is that in the playtest the Animist had Sustaining Dance, a 2nd-level class feat that let you Step or Leap and Sustain in one action. Although the effect was already considered very strong back then, it was still a lot less prone to abuse than Dancing Invocation, and had the benefit of being available to Animists of any practice. An assortment of different feats that let you Sustain a vessel spell at the same time as some small action, like Recalling Knowledge or even Demoralizing, could definitely help Animists get their action economy in a way that could cater to a variety of flavors and builds.

Yeah...it's almost like they went in the completely wrong direction with it...other than making it a 9th level ability...

I think the other practices just need another minor action to ride on sustaining as well. Recall knowledge or seek for seer, strike for medium and command familiar for shaman all seem fine to me.

Not gonna lie, the real reason I don't like liturgist is the narrative. I don't want all my animist characters hopping and dancing around. It's the minstrel bard trope all over again. Lol.

I see, access means you’d have to pick when you make your character what apparitions are even in your potential pool of apparitions.

Yes.

That makes option 1 really bad and makes it almost impossible for them to use feats that burn apparitions throughout the day. It also removes the class narrative of the Animist being the class that can come to the river and reach out to commune with the spirits of the river because it is there, and then reach out to commune with other spirits as they encounter them in the world.

The only one that would be able to play that way is locked in to one primary apparition all the time and that doesn’t really make sense.

Again, this is a hastily thought up idea for an overhaul that would require a lot more work to flesh out properly, both mechanically and narratively. It's not like I'm throwing out ideas and expecting them to be top-selling 3rd party material.

There is also the fact that 10 secondary apparitions turns your abilities that burn them into nearly limitless resources. When you first hit apparition’s quickening, you’d be able quicken almost every apparition spell that could be quickened.

If you're referring to my alternate practice idea, read it again. I never suggested having 10 attuned apparitions at once. Also, if the class were to ever be overhauled THAT much, I'm sure there would be major changes to some feats as well.

You know your whole spell list with no effort nor cost

That's something I've taken for granted that is a big deal, especially when mixed in with all the signature spontaneous spells animists get. It seems minor but I think it's a subtle but major strength of the class.

John R. IIRC gave examples a while back of practices that would let you choose a larger number of permanent apparitions versus a smaller number of daily apparitions, which would allow fans of either type of model to be happy. Alternatively, rather than offer more fixed apparitions, practices could offer some equally powerful benefit as an alternative to daily apparitions, such as a version of Dancing Invocation at level 1 or something equally build-defining.

Yeah, it was in another thread and I also threw out the idea during playtest (perhaps further fleshed out). The only issue with that is it would add a lot more complexity to the class's entirety and I'm not sure if simplifying other aspects would still overcome that added complexity to generate a net positive in favor of simplification. It'd make it simpler to play AFTER building a character but it'd be a nightmare for some looking to build one for the first time.

Here's that last post about it:

Another idea I had that I suggested during playtest was having the subclass dictate different allowances in the number of accessible apparitions, limit of attunable apparitions, primary apparitions and ease of swapping primaries and/or attuned apparitions. It'd be way more complex but allow for possibly the most diverse class.

For example:

Practice 1 - access to 10 apparitions, can attune to 2 max, stuck with 1 primary each day and can't swap primary

Practice 2 - access to 6 apparitions, can attune to 3 max, 1 primary, able to swap primary during refocus

Practice 3 - access to 4 apparitions, can attune to all 4, attuned apparitions are always primary

I'm sure there could be 1 or 2 other variations but yeah...I thought it was a cool idea but probably broken on what's acceptable for complexity.

Oh yeah...forgot about Channel Smite. That looks like a mighty tasty multiclass for a melee animist now...

How do we feel the animist compares to warpriest on martial capability, keeping polymorph options in mind (not that they necessarily matter)?

I think Easl might be expressing that the animist's slot progression feels like a psychic with a non-occult witch multiclass (but with a faster progression). Since you only get 2 slots per rank of occult and 2 slots per rank of whatever other tradition, you miss out on the ability to spam particular spells as much as a bard or sorcerer might enjoy in exchange for the versatility.

Aside from the flexibility, I like the animist because it adds a ton of flavor to divine spellcasting which I find to be very bland. The cleric and oracle are definitely effective but they don't have the flair I get from arcane and animist adds that.

in practice, that power doesn't necessarily translate to enjoyment so much as annoyance.

"With great power comes great responsibility." - Some Buzzkill

To me, it falls into the pattern that I see generally in the Animist. You do competetive things in your role as a mostly divine caster as you should, and you have a solid chassis, but if you branch out into other roles like martial or crafter/skill monkey, you never reach the overall effectiveness of a specialist of another class in that role.

Yeah, this is where I'm at but where I can sympathize with Teridax as well. Animist doesn't have the raw power of a specialist but can also copy their gimmicks which I think is what Teridax is after.

For example, yes, at level 1, an animist can pull off 2 reactive strikes....but they have to spend 3 actions prepping to do so (embodiment of battle, Circle of Spirits, store time).

So it's kinda like:
"Look what I can do guys!"
"Pfft...yeah, I can do that too...just gimme a minute...almost there...*pop* There we go! (Not so special now are we?)"

I think it really just depends on the group or player on if copying a gimmick is OK if it's balanced out with extra action cost (which liturgist then often violates).

John R. wrote:

Have you read my animist guide and the section on how the animist can cover the function of a lot, if not most, basic skill actions with their apparitions?

Yeah, and I fundamentally disagree with your view of lore skills, like a lot of people in the comments IIRC.

Thinking that circus lore can allow you to replace acrobatics or forest lore can allow you to replace survival is just something that doesn't happen.

If your GM does it this way (or if you're the GM and you do it this way) then more power you, and it certainly gives a huge power boost to the animist.

I'm talking mostly through spells. Your spells can accomplish the goals of a lot of basic skill actions if not more.

John R. wrote:

-the animist class is not being argued as broken due to power. It is being argued as broken due to covering too many roles well inside its chassis.

What can the (liturgist) animist cover well ?

- Casting (duh)
- Thievery skill
- Some lore skills
- Some exploration abilities through shapechanging.
- Can somewhat dabble in fighting

What can the (tome/regalia) thaumaturge cover well ?
- Legendary skills (better than anyone)
- Accuracy against bosses (better than anyone)
- Recalling knowledge (better than anyone)
- CHA skills (better than anyone)
- Using scrolls (better than anyone)- Melee fighting
- Ranged fighting (surprisingly)
- Can somewhat dabble in casting

I don't know which one looks the most broken here.

Have you read my animist guide and the section on how the animist can cover the function of a lot, if not most, basic skill actions with their apparitions?

I think we need to acknowkedge a couple things because I think people are getting the wrong impression:

-ignoring exploits, liturgist is not necessarily broken within the context of the system, just when compared to the other practices.

-animist does NOT have an amazing action economy. Liturgist just makes it more on par with most other classes.

-the animist class is not being argued as broken due to power. It is being argued as broken due to covering too many roles well inside its chassis.

It wouldn't make sense to compare the thaumaturge and the animist with each other since they're totally different. Like you said, the animist is a full caster. It is only fair that the thaumaturge is leagues better than the animist at melee (and it is), and only fair that the animist is leagues better than the thaumaturge at casting (and it is). The only time I compared them was when you said the animist could be played as a melee (and it cannot).

Unless I misunderstood the point of the whole thread, it was more about comparing thaumaturges to other melee and animists to other casters. I do believe that a Thaumaturge casts a bigger shade over other melees than an animist does over other casters.

Yes, I really think you need to reread the OP.

The point of the thread was comparing both classes in how they compete with all other classes and roles. They each do so in different ways. The argument is dynamic versatility is stronger than static versatility.

And an animist can most definitely be played as melee. I've already pulled off a few crits with an ogre hook using Grudge Strike and it feels amazing. Teridax has referenced plenty of 1st hand examples of procing multiple reactive strikes. It's not a strength of the class but it's definitely capable.

Tome grants the infinite sure strike effect. Weapon gives the +2.

Yeah, I think people are forgetting the major point of this thread. Thaumaturges have build diversity. Animists don't because they can innately do everything at least OK, if not well. One argument may be valid for why the thaumaturge may cover one base but in doing so, you've tied that character down with a build choice. Animist doesn't suffer such limitations. It doesn't have to remain tied to 1 or 2 or 6 apparitions permenantly. It can select any of the 13 of them each day.

Why would Thaumaturges depend on strength for strong melee attacks? They have their vulnerabilities and generally lack the action economy for athletics maneuvers. I'd say strength isn't a priority.

They should have one of their attack stats high, if not maxed...more damage is more damage. They can use dex if they want but they can fill their reflex saves with bulwark if they upgrade their armor proficiencies.

- Master spellcasting is what the animist gets if he wants to use EoB (since he loses 2 DC).

Except for war priest this is permanent. For animist it's very temporary.

I've never heard before this thread people complaining about an animist "stepping on their toes" or "eating their lunch". But I've heard it said a lot about the thaumaturge because he makes every recall knowledge class useless (another reason why INT should be buffed all around), he's an incredible skill monkey, he can use any scroll he can put his hands on, and eventually cast spells from ANY TRADITION AT A WHIM, all while being a great DPS and a boss-killer.

It's definitely been a thing in a few recent threads. I think Teridax might be the only person arguing the point though I understand where they are coming from.

As my OP stated, the difference between the animist and thaumaturge stepping on others' toes is, the thaumaturge has to lock in a couple roles to focus on and often, they still need to focus on a single target to perform that role. The animist can competently swap into any role overnight and their only real cost is in sustaining vessel spells which aren't even necessary to function. They're more of a bonus a lot of the time.

What Liturgist's Dancing Invocation actually does is letting you sustain Vessel spells for free if you move in certain ways. It does not give you that movement.

If I were playing another caster that had an equal need to reposition and be in the frontline, like say, a War Priest, without compromising my action economy so I could still cast and strike/trip/whatever in one round I would use the same methods. Because it's the same problem, obviously, and it's a solved problem. I have actually played a War Priest like that, so this is nothing new, special or unique.

This mobility really has nothing to do with the strength of the Animist Class, and I had used no Animist class feat or feature to action-compress away my mobility. Really, every caster who wants to can do this. Every single one.

Obviously, and this is really, really important: not every caster needs to do this. Needing to do this and having to invest to be able to do so isn't exactly a positive or some 'immense strength'. And certainly not every caster has to deal with sustaining. The ones that do, like Witch, get tools to deal with it. Arguably...

I couldn't quite understand what you are getting at about action economy but...Warpriest never gets beyond master in spellcasting though and they are still limited to the divine list. That's significant when talking about overall balance.

Their key attribute is Charisma, putting them between a -1 and a -2 in Strike accuracy relative to other martial classes. This also makes them inherently MAD, since in addition to the usual trifecta of Dex/Con/Wis they also depend on Charisma for their important checks, while still depending on Strength for strong melee attacks.

Oh yeah (duh!). Though, I do think they can function perfectly fine with a fairly low charisma. But yeah, being behind on your attack stat is definitely a weakness especially since they don't have much for special attack actions to make up for that. They pretty much just get extra flat damage in return.

Yeah, comparing something like embodiment of battle (a caster getting better martial stats) to Cursed Effigy and scrolls (a martial getting better caster stats) would seem even but the thaumatruge innately suffers from being -1 behind on their primary function. Then animist can get Cardinal Guardians on top of it all...yeah, I can see animist as unbalanced in comparison.

the Thaumaturge has clear weaknesses in their own chassis relative to other martials that the Animist simply does not have compared to the average caster.

Other than having 8 hp/level, what weaknesses does the thaumaturge have compared to the typical martial?

I suggest the chalice's 10 limit cooldown to either be removed or the healing increased

My biggest issue with chalice is the adept ability is SO limited in application (only lasts a turn and only triggers from bleeding or a crit from slashing or piercing?...REALLY!?) and I think a similar effect to the paragon ability, managing/curing debuffs, should just replace the adept ability. Maybe increase amount of uses of drinking to 3 or something for paragon.

the bell probably shouldn't require a save (thus the intensify vulnerability effect should be changed, and since we are it, move its effect to the Cursed Effigy feat to have the -3 penalty if you crit against the target)

I don't mind the save since it targets what is likely the creature's lowest save...but I'd take it. I'd prefer removing the mental trait. It increases usability a smidge, plus the thaumaturge should be able ignore any logical reasoning like the mental trait. A bell symbolizing the a death knell should be adequate to doom ANY undead to true death, regardless of intelligence. Otherwise, yeah, the bell just needs more interesting improvements and the intensify effect is fairly lame and redundant with Cursed Effigy.

lantern...I don't know, do something with it. I find weird that lantern being the iconic's implement feels so bland and boring.

Personally, I love lantern as is. I've been able to spot so many traps and secret doors just from the initiate ability. Detecting invisible creatures later is nice. Maybe the paragon could use a boost...but I like it a lot already, overall.

Not predicting but hoping:

-the bell and chalice implements get warranted buffs.

-Amulet might need a tweak as well with it competing with the new shield implement.

-One More Activation could use a bit more clarity on if it can be used once per day, absolutely or per item.

-Thaumaturge's Demense could do without having its location locked down as well and maybe just have it automatically upgrade to gain Unlimited Demense effects. I don't think anyone was ever taking those feats, especially the later at level 20.

My thinking might not align with what other people had in mind.

I was thinking Deriven was suggesting a single skill increase per +1 in intelligence. This would require some reworking of the general rules on skill increases, more or less just allowing skills to be bumped up to expert at lvl 1. You'd still not be able to access expert tier skill feats until lvl 3 (so just keep their current level reqs).

Trying to max out as many skills as possible, I got the following:

Investigators at lvl 20 would have:
7 legendary skills, 2 master skills and 2 trained skills.

Wizards at lvl 20 would have:
4 legendary skills, 1 master skill, 1 expert skill and 2 trained skills.

Barbarians at lvl 20 (starting at 0 INT and taking a +1 to INT at 5, 10, 15 and 20) would have:
4 legendary skills and 1 expert skill.

It seems like it'd still be properly balanced between classes.

I really think it should provide more skill ups to show intelligence and learning rather than just more trained skills.

I would actually LOVE this.

Nothing feels as dumb as when you get a +1 to INT at lvl 20 and get TRAINED in a skill you haven't been using your entire career.

Plus, even a low INT rogue would still be ahead, overall, on skill increases and they still have the advantage of more skill feats.

AND this would actually define the investigator as THE skill monkey of the system.

We have like... the 3rd INT martial in Runesmith for instance and I'm 90% sure it's because it's crafting related and not really power budgeting related..

More than that...

Alchemist
Commander
Inventor
Investigator
Magus (if counted as martial)
Mastermind Rogue