And I would absolutely agree ^^
Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:
If I understand correctly, the point behind calling for a summoning focus spell is that it would be possible for a summoner to conjure creatures in a fight multiple times per day without using up all of their top-level spell slots. Much how Druid can use wild shape to cast several polymorph spells on a recharge.
Yeah, I know and I'm saying that any kind of focus spell like that would be too weak to bother with ^^.
Think about it, summoning a creature 3-4 levels below your own costs one of your highest level spell slots. Focus spells are generally weaker than real spells. That isn't going to change because you can summon one with a custom stat line. Wild Shape can work like it does, simply because it replaces what you can do at that moment, usually a full caster with a discount martial. Summoning spells add to what you can do by virtue of giving you an additional team member. Yes, you have to give up one action per turn, but two actions still allow you to cast.
So yeah, I wouldn't hold my breath :/
The whole "summon a creature with a custom stat block rather than something from the bestiary" idea was actually proposed, but narrowly didn't make it. People seem to like summoning exactly the monster they could have fought, so that won. But yeah, I'd like to have the other option as well. Not as a focus spell, because then the power budget would be too low, but as a regular spell.
They don't get anything exclusive to compensate, but it really isn't that big of a deal. At least from everything I've seen and played, swapping out cantrips is rather rare. Spontaneous casters that really want different cantrips commonly pick up Cantrip Expansion and the odd staff.
If you really need to do it anyway, a spontaneous caster can do so when leveling up or via retraining.
You can invest whenever you want, as long as you haven't reached your 10/day limit. It might just take a moment, as it typically takes the same time as donning the item.
And this is really a non-issue, as all of those things can/do happen during your daily preparations, not at the end. You can decide on whatever order you like, so using Advanced Alchemy to make bombs and then investing your bandolier works perfectly fine.
Yeah it does, that's because it is wrong :)
The funny thing is that, as far as I can tell, Versatile S on a piercing weapon and vice versa offer extremely fringe benefits, but don't seem to be budgeted that way. Overlap of slashing/piercing resistance is almost 100% and weakness (or something similar) to only one type is similarly rare. Zombies having slashing weakness and Rakshasas losing their resistance due to piercing damage are the only prominent example I can think of.
At least piercing can turn your sword into an underwater sword (tm). That saved my character's life once, so I can't dunk on this too much :)
So yeah, that's a bit odd.
Hm, too bad. Thanks, I'll trust you on that, since the best I can do is a super basic analysis of average damage ^^.
But yeah, seems like it goes on the huge pile of "meh" weapons. There's no way I'll ever get enough use out of Brace to justify getting the proficiency.
12th, but that isn't improving things ^^
I just find it interesting that the original post cited the thaumaturge as being the example for a class being broken because their primary stat is not their attack stat.
Meanwhile, when looking at that class all I can think is "damn, Mark (and others ofc) was really cooking with fire when he made this". Of all of the classes that suffer this problem, this is the only one where I really don't care.
Btw, is the nodachi looking like a sort of makeshift d12 reach weapon to anyone else? In the hands of a fighter (or stupid Tyrant build) at least.
I'll have to see how it plays out, because I've always wanted a sword with reach. It was always a little funny how the greatsword doesn't have it, at least without considering balance.
I really don't like Mobile Shot Stance, simply because it only seems to offer a solution. AoOs with ranged weapons are pretty meh, but the "no AoO for ranged attacks" part is a genuine trap. Because guess what also triggers those? Reloading as either part of the attack or as a separate action. You can't afford that either, so the benefit is marginal at best.
Hell yeah, frame it as a literal upgrade. Flavour and mechanics in one package, you love to see it.
It would certainly work, as the archer archetype proves advanced weapons aren't exclusive to classes with the fighter progression. Still weird that this isn't a base option if you are trained in one...
Some things not being as good as others is not any evidence of broken math, but of design decisions. "Broken math" would be a level 1 fighter easily out-damaging a 10th level wizard. Or, you know, a paladin being a full martial and also getting spell slots that allow them to randomly deal twice the damage of everyone else.
1) Ok? How is that confusing, exactly? They get +2 to their attack modifier, just as casters do at level 11. That's it. Monsters take that into account.
2) Sure, there are a handful of feats like that. There being "a lot" is a serious misrepresentation. They are only good in shorter campaigns, but hey, nobody forces you to use them. That isn't the system being broken, that's just a couple of (usually) bad feats.
They have support, they are just never particularly good. They are not supposed to be your main thing after all. While that could be communicated a bit more clearly, I don't think it requires too much system understanding to recognise.
It's interesting now that martial crossbows are now explicitly better than their firearm counterparts minus concussive and certain utility like risky reload. They're solid choices now.
I believe you are referring to the sukgung vs the jezail? Because in that case, I wouldn't really say "better". The jezail's 90ft range is plenty for almost all encounters you'll ever have, so I'd say concussive is better. That said, I absolutely agree that we have some solid choices now.
With volley now being present on one/two firearms, I'd really love for the Gunslinger to get Point-Blank Shot, so I don't have to homebrew it.
(Double post, but it really didn't fit the other conversation, sorry :/ )
Edit: Funny thing, I just noticed that the barricade buster should have 8 barrels around a central rod, but the picture looks like 7 barrels around the 8th XD
Blazons and doubling rings explicitly disallow specific magic weapons. Blade Ally works, but since it's just a straight upgrade even on a regular weapon, it doesn't change anything. Runic Impression works RAW, but somehow feels like it shouldn't.
Lots and lots of cool items in those chapters. Absolutely agreed on the advanced weapons finally having a bit of variety that is actually worth taking. Some cool runes are always great and were much needed, especially for armour. Also, we got a first glimpse at "regular" magic guns. Cool stuff (despite being "just" specific magic items) and I really appreciate changing the name to "spark guns". The star guns / star metal guns thing was weird.
I really hope one of the remaining sections also introduces ways specific magic items relevant (especially the flood of static DCs) or like half or more of the specific magic items might as well not exist. Really one of 2e few glaring issues.
Edit: Btw, if anyone from Paizo reads this - for specific magic weapons that are based on a regular weapon (e.g. "this +1 striking flintlock musket..."), is the base weapon considered when balancing the item?
I don't think Paizo see this from a balance perspective, but rather a lore perspective. Like Necrogiant said, if the lore of an ancestry doesn't justify a flaw, it won't get one. Therefore I doubt we'll see any change in the way they're doing things for each individual ancestry. Any change - which I doubt they have the space for in the CRB - would be a generic one like the errata change.
In my opinion, the core of what constitutes a blue dragon's personality is not only their affinity for schemes, but also being incredibly smug about those schemes. Especially if they succeed. As long as she is given space to do that, I'd doubt that your players would mistake her for anything else :D
Fair point well made. We'd still need text to get around the "You typically can’t try to Sense the Motive of the same creature again until the situation changes significantly.", but that's easy enough.
Wow, I realise I made a massive error. It completely slipped my mind that Recall Knowledge is a secret check as well. So technically, a Mastermind already wouldn't learn whether they get Sneak Attack until they've successfully hit. Not that I would ever run it that way, but damn, there is always another wrinkle to this subclass D:
While I agree some of the crit specs are a little underwhelming and should be improved, I really don't think raising the ceiling that much is a good idea. Sure, it would be fine on most classes. But the fighter and gunslinger would have a very good chance every round of basically neutralizing an enemy, even if they don't kill it. If you've ever had a lucky Sniper or Stunning Fist Monk in your party, you know strong that can be.
Not a bad idea, but I don't think that is a good solution for several reasons. The primary one from a mechanical side is that Sense Motive is a secret check. If you used it, you wouldn't know whether you'll get Sneak Attack or not. That is an absolute dealbreaker. From a story perspective, Mastermind is framed more as the "puppet master behind the scenes". A schemer, not someone who is typically meeting face-to-face. So Sense Motive doesn't quite fit as a core skill. There are more reasons (e.g. WIS-based, last line of SM), but I think these are the most important.
I think a good solution wouldn't need to be very radical. It couldn't be, really, because the space available is very limited. So something like this might work:
When you use Recall Knowledge to identify a creature, in addition to the normal effects, also compare the result to the standard DC of the creature's level. If that number would be a success, that creature is flat-footed against your attacks until the start of your next turn; if it would be a critical success, it's flat-footed against your attacks for 1 minute.
Fair enough ^^
Why not just mute the video, pause and read the text? It should all be visible on screen.
Yeah, I agree, the whole class archetype deal is incredibly unlikely to change, so if anything, the changes you suggested would be it.
I think from everything we have seen, we can be very sure that Paizo are aware of the issues we discuss and make the changes they can and want. While I would appreciate official confirmation, I don't think it's worth the work and additional expectations people would have.
I think most of the clarifications and necessary fixes have already been heavily discussed, so I've set my sights on something more in the design changes area. A difficult topic for this type of product, but you never know, maybe Paizo can make it happen ^^
1) Recall Knowledge and Mastermind
Speaking of RK, we really shouldn't have core combat mechanics entirely based on it. Case in point, the Rogue's Mastermind Racket. Not only do you need to keep up to 5 skills "updated" at all times, there's also the DC adjustments to consider. Bosses and similarly significant opponents are almost always unique, meaning a healthy +10 to your check. Also called "you don't have an ability" until you are in the level 15+ range. The +2 and +5 adjustments for uncommon and rare enemies are less severe, but also a lot more common. Add to that the suggested adjustments for repeated use - inferred to be the usual +2/+5/+10 - and you have an ability that is extremely inconsistent and often dysfunctional against significant threats.
This was already heavily criticized during the Thaumaturge playtest and changed accordingly. While I would appreciate a similar change for the Mastermind, eliminating the DC adjustments for the base mechanic (not RK) would already be plenty. Possibly accompanied by a change to the critical success effects, since those look like they take that unreliability partially into account.
2) Spellshot really doesn't have to be a class archetype
The spellshot class archetype should be changed to a regular Way. The only change is that it makes your character worse by tying your class DC to INT. That is not usually part of a Way, or at least that is the only mechanical explanation I can see for this oddity. Not that I see that as a particularly good reason, especially given the additional downsides.
Because part from the usual archetype restrictions, the Spellshot dedication is also just terrible. It gives you a reload that is rendered useless by your turn ending on a full chamber (read: almost always) and in 99% of situations has no benefits beyond saving a single copper. This is only useful in the extremely unlikely event that you have no ammo at all, which is already conveniently solved by Munitions Crafter. The Call Gun + Conjure Bullet interaction deserves a mention for the incredibly niche situation that you have to go in somewhere entirely unarmed, but doesn't justify Conjure Bullet being otherwise useless. Let's not forget the opportunity cost of missing one of the best level of gunslinger feats (Fake Out, Pistol Twirl, Risky Reload and Quick Draw).
So yeah, please change this.
So far, I've only really seen the Nonat stream (the RPGBot article barely had anything in it), but I really like the addition of what is basically buff food. Not only is that awesome for RP, as that is what people would absolutely buy instead of only trail rations, it is also a good mechanical addition.
Some of them are even an attractive alternative to taking certain feats, like using exploration activities at full speed or the "can use stealth without concealment" type feats. There is even coffee that buffs the investigator's strategic strike damage, so now every investigator ever will be a coffee addict XD. Not how I would like that particular issue being (partially) addressed, but it is still cool.
Also, Cooperative Waffles.
Jedi Maester wrote:
I think thaumaturge, ranger and some flavours of warpriest would like to be added to that list ^^. And I think giving everyone else the option via a dedication should be done as well.
I want reasonable reload weapon support for anyone that isn't the gunslinger, i.e. reload feats. And by reasonable I mean as a level 1 class feat and/or level 2 archetype dedication feat. Currently, the first available one is Running Reload at level 4 (!) for the ranger or 6 via archetypes. For what is essentially basic functionality, that is absurd.
My group wants to do an all-rogues-party for a low-level homebrew adventure, so I'm strongly considering Mastermind (with some adjustments for balance) to cover the ranged problems of my friends. A crossbow would fit very well narratively, but I'm pretty much discouraged from using it for mechanical reasons. Ofc, I'm gonna do it anyway, but that is still rather annoying.
None of the classes you list have a substantial problem on the story concept front. One could maybe make the argument for the witch and the 5e warlock comparison, but that is details, not a core issue. Swashbuckler and Investigator have no problems at all.
Same with the mechanical concept. Swashbuckler is easily one of the least controversial classes in the game (as far as I can tell), whose mechanics noticeably set it apart from the rogue. I've only played one briefly, but they certainly didn't feel like the same. The Investigator being underpowered I agree with, but that isn't because the core mechanics somehow don't work. The intended scope of Pursue a Lead could be clearer, but apart from that, the core mechanics are some of the most fun ones I've seen. For me, it's just an issue of the numbers being too low and the class lacking more impactful combat feats. The former is more difficult to fix, but certainly doesn't require a major rework. The latter is just a question of adding more feats, which is another thing a lot of people want.
So yeah, I don't agree with your point. None of this would have been any better as an archetype, quite the opposite.
Calling any class in 2e non-functional, APG or not, is just incorrect. Some are a bit underpowered, sure, but none of them are even remotely broken. It's just that for some classes, the creators cooked with tabasco pepper and fire, like the thaumaturge. For others, they used mild curry, like the witch or alchemist (or investigator to a lesser extent). Both are perfectly edible, but one is a lot more spicy.
Since the APG, class releases seem to have been very successful and accepted by the community. So calling that a "repeat mistake every year" seems baseless as well.
Lastly, we are silencing nobody. We are simply stating that in our opinion, any kind of archetype solution is insufficient for the "inquisitor" concept. And by saying we would need like 5 to get to that point, you illustrated our point, that's all.
Could the Inquisitor be a Cleric's Doctrine?
Doctrines are way too limited in both scope and power to adequately fill the inquisitor concept. Their current iteration is for shuffling some proficiencies around, not major mechanics like having a full set of spell slots or not.
A class archetype would be weird as well. You'd be ripping everything but the god and maybe a bit of spellcasting out of the cleric, only to replace it with something new. At that point, a class archetype really isn't the right tool for the job anymore.
I think the need for "maybe 4 or 5 archetypes" to cover the concepts of the inquisitor is speaking volumes already :D
Not really. No other focus ability in the game works that way and even the psychic's built-in upgrade (Clarity of Focus at lvl 5) says "Increase the number of Focus Points in your focus pool by 1. This ability doesn't change the number of Focus Points you regain when you Refocus.". It seems clear to me that the interaction you describe is not intended.
As far as I can tell, yes, it works like that. However, you can't get to 3 points without Deepest Wellspring. The relevant part here is "[...] you regain 2 Focus Points when you Refocus, up to your maximum of 2.".
My experience is mostly limited to my group of 6, but for us, it highly depends on the class. Some of us have a strong tendency to build "backup" characters, so there are quite a few ^^. DEX monks are way more common than STR ones - the current count is 3 to 1. I have one (unplayed) DEX fighter in my back pocket, as the free-hand/duellist route is great with either stat. Thaumaturges (unplayed as well) are a mix of one-handed melee weapons (STR), often with reach, and ranged builds (DEX) so far.
That's basically it. A lot of it comes down to one's vision of a class, for example, I'd be hard pressed to even consider a DEX champion, as wearing heavy armour is an essential part of how I picture a champion. Also, I picture most such classes as being necessarily "strong", so prioritizing STR and Athletics is normal for me.
The other part is mechanics. If you like damage, you basically need an extra damage feature to consider finesse weapons. If you don't have one, d10 reach and d12 weapons are just strictly superior in my eyes. I usually build for high damage, because that is my typical role.
Those are the reasons for me.
Thanks for the video, I haven't seen that one yet ^^.
And yeah, fair point (heh), I should have been more specific ^^. Spear and shield is amazing in a group formation, because there it doesn't really matter how agile your weapon is or how varied your attack patterns can be. In the Pathfinder context we are talking what is basically a duel or at least you are unlikely to fight in formation. In that context, the combination is rather poor.
Edit: I think that is demonstrated rather well in the video ^^
I really, really want a one handed reach spear as the baseline "one handed reach weapon" that all others should be compared against.
Ignoring real-life practicality for a moment, this really seems like a no-brainer from a fantasy perspective. The "short spear and shield" combo wins hard on looks alone.
For a more conservative pick, I'd say spears need some love. I love spears both from a fantasy perspective and from what little training I had with them. So it is kind of sad to see so few good variations (imo) of it here. At my table, they see so little use that I actually forgot they have their own crit spec.
For a more wild thing, I want more magitech. Automatons were an amazing addition, especially now that STR isn't hard-coded into them anymore. Same with sky ships and hopefully starmetal guns in the future. So I want more of that good stuff. Not necessarily too much into the Starfinder direction - i.e. very futuristic stuff - but rather things that are more fantasy, usually relics of an ancient civilization. Pseudo-staffs ("spell lances"?) that are functionally a ranged weapon instead of a regular casting device. Ancient superweapons are always a great trope. So are ancient constructs in general, which is a vibe I'm missing from the otherwise excellent clockwork enemies. Artificial limbs and such that can also give you appendages you didn't have before - non-gamebreaking ones like a tail, wings or replacing your lower half with a mechanical scorpion. You know, normal things :D. I'm currently blanking on more, but there is a lot to explore here.
Something related to that is a class archetype for the Inventor that gives it a more impactful innovation and gets rid of the explode feature would also be great. And the option for it to be augmenting yourself, because mad science clearly hasn't gone far enough yet ^^.
Anyway, sign me up for aberration and body-horror stuff as well. Imagine living in a world with so many entities that are so vastly more potent than you. Magic is a thing, so the idea of "I'll have some of that, please" is quite understandable and interesting to explore.