Leotamer's page

180 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 180 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

If I remember correctly, Thaumaturge doesn't use their key ability stat often and the primary reason that they need it is for esoteric antithesis, which people have complained about since you need to "roll for rage."

I would prefer to play a wisdom thaumaturge, but if that is not an option, then maybe remove the role from esoteric antithesis and let the thaumaturge choose between strength, dexterity and charisma. Then make charisma worthwhile by actually giving the class a good charisma options, like having it so that you can rely on wand for your primary source of damage.

I wouldn't mind esoteric antithesis becoming simpler and less powerful because that could free up design space for the rest of the class, which feels like it could be tuned up.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I would really want the wand to be a good primary source of damage, because at least then if the thaumaturge remains as MAD is it, having a good ranged charisma weapon/pseudo-cantrip, it would give you room to have higher int/wis over dex/con. And I think using a wand is pretty thematic for a more mental-focused thaumaturge.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like the idea of implements, but I think there are a few problems with the rules as they are currently written:

Why is possible that you can permanently lose several class features from losing your class feature? There is a feat that helps mitigate it, but even after taking it, there is an explicit way to lose your implement.

A more minor note, but since the thaumaturge doesn't have a way to recover implements and second/third implement doesn't explicitly state that you obtain those implements, then by pure rules as written, those two features do nothing. The only reason is that this is minor is that I don't think anyone would reasonable play it like that.

Also, apparently all shop-keepers are meta-gamers. Implements can't typically be sold, but they are also mundane items. How would most shop-keepers know the difference between an ornate antique incense burner and the lantern implement of a thaumaturge?

If implements are irreplaceable, than they should be glued to their thaumaturge's hip with how many features they have that depend on them. Otherwise, I would just suggest that a thaumaturge be able to turn any mundane item into the appropriate implement they have. If it is a problem that would let thaumaturges with weapon's implements change what weapon they are using, then just state that they have choose the appropriate weapon when they gain the implement choice, but considering the focus on retraining, I don't see why that would be a big deal. Other than that, you would just need a caveat that when you make a new implement of a certain type, your previous implement of that type returns to just being a mundane item.

5 people marked this as a favorite.

"Convincing the universe" seems like such a weak explanation for the class to be Charisma-based. Furthermore, why would the universe care about sophistry and rhetoric? Communing with the fundamental forces of reality seems more fitting of wisdom, the stat of perception and intuition, rather how personable you are.

It seems like the only benefit of Charisma is that you can invest more items. Considering how little focus the class gives investment, and that it must forgo having a base stat that would increase its accuracy, wisdom seems more than reasonable with giving the class several useful benefits.

I do think there is a point that raw states that they can have property runes placed into them, and runic impression only gives the benefit of a weapon rune.

However, there is the problem of if magic staves are weapons, and thus valid targets for runic impression.

So it seems like your mile may vary.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

55) While exploring the sewers, I had noticed acidic corrosion scarred the floor and walls. When we encountered the filthy ooze, I had prepared myself with special incense, imbued with aromatic herbs and limestone dust.

6 people marked this as a favorite.

23) By painting the imagine of a vampire on to a mirror, I give the vampire a reflection and in turn steal a fundamental aspect from them.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I couldn't find the really semantic definition of stride, but from what I understand, can't you just stride 0ft? The only rule I could find is that you can only move up to your speed. So with threatening approach, if you are already adjacent, you are already adjacent and move 0ft, and then you make the demoralize check.

Having a level 2 dedication feat give you a level 1 feat plus a skill increase and lore seems reasonable. Monk level 2 feats options are lackluster, but I would think that would mean Monks need better level 2 feats. The downside is that it is a level 2 dedication feat instead of a level 1 feat. If you want ki strike and a stance, you already have the option of being a human.

Having Student of Perfection work very well with the monk (or as a possible alternative to monk subclassing) seems like a feature, not a bug.

Drunken master feats for the monk could be fun. (Though that is often more about pretending to be drunk, but either way would work for me)

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Everything written as a game mechanic is not an observable, in-universe rule. It is a game mechanic, with its own design concerns, and is merely a representation of lore.

This is only a problem if you take all mechanics hyper-literally, which has a host of problems.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Unannounced races I would like Vanara (Monkey-People, Some Cool Racials, Sun-Wukong), Kitsune, and Genie-kin.

There are also new wizards (after half the previous batch explodified themselves)

And the careful wizard may want to have a back-up spell-book in case the worst happens to their own.

However, non-wizards have reason to buy a wizard spellbook, whether out of curiosity or wanting to show-off a rare curio at brunch. Having your rich friends gawk at the silly wizard pictures while being nonchalant about how much money you spent on it is always good fun.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The chaotic neutral champions remain secretive, despite their chaotic good brethren entering the spot-light. They are still doing the god's work, in pranking all wizards and alchemists of Golaran by continuously befuddling them and distorting the true nature of their divine power.

I think the intention for Core is that shurikens are supplement weapons. If you already have monastic weaponry, then it doesn't hurt to carry a handful on you just in case. There one copper and you can draw/throw them in one action.

I hope there is more support for them later, but CRB space was at a premium, and I think they wanted to focus more on unarmed attacks for the unarmed class than weapon builds.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

My two-cents is that classes are like many other mechanics. They are abstractions of the lore for the sake of gameplay.

A studied in-game person would know what arcane magic is. They would know some people are born with it, while others go through intensive training. They would also know that a person could have both arcane and martial training. They could tell roughly how skilled a person is in each. But they probably couldn't tell the difference in a wizard/fighter, eldritch knight, and a magus (besides performance).

They would know what a Magic Warrior is, but in the same way, we would know who the knights of the roundtable are.

8 people marked this as a favorite.

Is it a bad thing that when an adventure is set in a specific place, people play races that are common to the region?

Human-Ranger, Unconventional Weaponry, Dual Wield Clan-Daggers. Bounty Hunter background for maximum edge.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Semantics is the philosophical/linguistic understanding of the meaning of words. Whenever you are discussing linguistics, you are likely going to be discussing it, unless you want to talk about syntax.

6 people marked this as a favorite.

The GM always determines what is allowed and what isn't. The rarity system is just guidelines. If you think your GM would use the rarity rules to screw with you, I suggest finding a new one.

With a human, I think you can get monastic weaponry and tiger stance. Tiger stance only requires you to be unarmored, and I believe it can be used one-handed. You could use your temple sword to trip, and then follow-up with agile tiger claws.

Chirgueon's class benefit is a bonus to medicine checks (by using their primary stat) meaning that they work well with healer's kits.

Continual Recovery gives it a 10-minute cooldown, making it comparable to Lay On Hands, which you get one level later, and it needs a roll. And this with multiple general feats.

The alchemist may need a buff, but the Chirgueon would be better off leaning into medicine. (Like being able to treat their alchemy tools as a medicine kit at level 1)

How did you get from "No weapons" to "Only this specific weapon/s" When it would stop you from the following:
Attacking while raging if you are mcing until level 6,
Using racial natural weapons such as Razortooth,
Using combat maneuvers that you don't have traits for,
Etc, etc.

Yes, if you have a silly interpretation of the rules, you will have silly results. The point is that you are unarmed/natural weapon subclass, so you can only use unarmed/natural weapons.

"The barbarian subclass focused around unarmed/natural weapons can only be used for unarmed/natural weapon characters, of which several exist."

It seems like the only thing you lose is the ability to have animal skin on any Barbarian MC.

How is this not the system working as intended?

I agree with adaptive shifter being the baseline. Subclasses can fill out your particular forms, and I would like it if you could mix them.

I don't particularly like basing them on synthesist, because while I think focusing on one form should be valid; I think you should also have the choice of having different forms for different situations.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Clearly one would be little h-hunter, and the other would be big H-Hunter. And if you are a noble, no matter how many times you went out into the woods to hunt with your fancy falcon, if you decided to be a ranger, then you will never be a hunter/Hunter.

For an acid bloodline, there is always oozes.

What is peak bandolier? A combat medic alchemist could have two for alchemy/healing kit, and two for potions.

But sure peak bandolier is more impressive.

I think it is to soon to judge poison alchemists before we get the poisoner alchemist subclass.

If we have prepared/spontaneous for all lists(+any list), with just the player handbook and advanced player guide, we would only have three more slots for casters.

I think it is more likely that will see repeated combinations than a new spell-list, though it isn't completely impossible.

I am not a big fan of the summoner. So, I don't have much to say about it.

But I would like a summoner path which allowed you to have an equine eidolon focused around riding. If I played a mounted character, I would like the option of riding around on a nightmare. (Pegasuses are also cool, but probably will be level-locked.)

The kineticist is not a spell-caster, and so shouldn't be balanced off them. The Monk/Paladin is a better comparison point if they are focus-caster, otherwise probably the rogue/ranger.

I think you could make it so that the kineticist could have access to a significant amount of infusions without spending any resources (though potentially more actions) and they only need to take burn/use focus when they do something big.

I think they should be useful all-day and all-encounter. And I disagree with the idea of refocusing in combat. I am skeptical of Kineticist becoming focus casters, but I think it will be fine if there focus spells are limited to utility talents and nova infusions.

I see no reason for kinetic blasts to have the flourish tag. Being able to go pew-pew-pew as a Kineticist isn't much different than a ranger shooting three arrows or a bomber throwing three bombs.

Also, having a mechanic where you start at three and count down to 0, functions identically to a mechanic where you start at 0 and count up to three. Unless you want to cool down at the end of the day, but that would make it worse for the Kineticist than just using Focus.

The Elemental Planes are associated with Material Essence. Each spellcasting tradition is composed of two essences. Arcane is material/mental, and Primal is material/vital.

I would be fine if wild talents were considered spells. I am not a big fan of them being cantrips, but it wouldn't ruin the class.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Archetypes and multi-classing seem to be working as intended. If you want to do something outside of your class, you need to become less like your class to do it.

I think that current multi-classing might be too weak, but I feel like that is a different argument.

"If you want to invest in something that is not related to your main class, pick an archetype" is the entire point of archetypes.

I agree with making burn a condition. Focus-based utility talents could work.

Making kinetic blasts cantrips is not terrible, but I believe that you could make them wild-talent spell attacks.

However, making all infusions focus-based is a terrible idea. It either kills the mechanical flavor of the class, or you need to bend Focus until it breaks.

Kinetic Blade and Kinetic Fist should not cost additional actions or resources. Pulling and pushing infusion should be covered by more actions, to name a few clear cut examples.

I am ok with focus-gating big-damage infusions, but they shouldn't be a class that does three interesting things per combat and then becomes rangers. If you are not using focus to limit the amount of something to up to three times per combat, then you shouldn't use focus.

I don't see the need for the Kineticist to have spell slots or focus points.

Kinetic Blast could be a one-action innate ability. You can balance it against a rogue with a bow. (It is there primary method of doing damage and needs to hit reasonably hard, but they have additional utility beyond it.)

Gather Power could help bring Kinetic Blast more in-line with a bow, as they both require two free-hands.

Infusions could cost between zero and two actions. The action economy can handle balancing them. And if you want to print a powerful infusion which you don't want to be spammable, make them inflict a Burn condition.

You can call them cantrips, but I don't see why they wouldn't be wild talents and infusions. They are not spell-like under the logic you used for dragon rage breath. They are supernatural powers used by channeling energy from the elemental plane through superhuman biology. If anything, wizards and sorcerers are using magic to emulate the powers of Kineticist, and natives of the Elemental Planes.

There are several spell-like abilities in pf2 that are neither spells nor focus powers: the alchemist class, rogue's hidden paragon, barbarian's dragon rage breath.

Firstly, adding more options is broadening the class, by definition.

Secondly, Kineticist lacks a strong tie to vital magic. Con is a stat and is a measure of physical health. As far as I know, no vital caster uses Con as a spellcasting score. Burn is a measure of over-exertion and can counter-acted by gathering power. Nothing about it applies you tapping into vital energy.

Three, Cross-pollination is a design concern, but it also a flavor concern. A Kineticist, an elemental master, should not be able to access powers that are not associated with one of the classical elements. They include aether (greek and others), wood (Wu Xing), and void (Godai). It makes more sense to have a metal element or even a sulfur element than giving them animal-based powers.

Four, if the Kineticist, Shifter, and Hunter are different classes, that does not prevent them from sharing the Burn mechanic.

I believe you are missing the scope of Elemental magic. The Kineticist doesn't need significant additions, because Elemental magic is already broad. You can have Kineticist feats that relate to other things, but it should be under the lens of elemental power.

If the characters need something unrelated to Elements, then that is the purpose of archetypes.

If we equate the Kineticist to primal, which is reasonable, they should materially connect to nature, as the elemental planes are associated with material magic.

In pf1, wood was an element. But this is because it is one in the Chinese system (and possibly others).

There is a desert-based Kineticist, but it seems like its focus is on "considering the harsh nature of the desert as a tempering fire to cleanse the soul."

A Jungle Primarch shouldn't be a druid with fire magic. I am unfamiliar with the Chinese system, or other systems which include wood. But I think basing it on the Wood Element would be better than copying and pasting from the druid. (The Golaran Wood Element could also be the baseline. I am not very familiar with it. Feywilds is the partial source, and that is all I know.)

I also forgot to consider subclasses, of which there are several options I would like to return. To encompass the full range of options as a Primarch, you would need the kineticist subclass, a sub-sub-class, and an elemental choice.

After considering the Primach (Kineticist/Shifter/Hunter) class, I realized my problem with it. I don't think it is a terrible idea, but I don't think it works.

The problem is that you would have nested subclasses, you would have the Primach class, the Kineticist subclass, and your element bonus feat. I believe this would either over-complicate the Class or over-simplify the Elements.

I would want the Elements to be a crucial part of the Kineticist, and so I believe it would work better as a druid-like subclass. (You can choose to pick Feats from other elements, but you can also only focus on Feats for your one.) Rather than as a Subclass of a Subclass.

Possibly the Primach could be (Shifter/Hunter), but I like MMC point about them being specialists as opposed to the druid's generalist playstyle.

I think it would be reasonable to have Kineticist/Shifter/Hunter be Primarch subclasses, with a druid-like feat to poach wild talents from the others, allowing them to progress down those feat trees.

Right now, my idea is that infusions cost zero to two actions, and you could take the burn condition to improve them. (For either Kineticist or Primarch)

At first, I disliked the Kineticist/Shifter/Hunter class idea, but I am starting to come around to it. I still don't want them combined with Champion, but they might be able to come together as a class.

Wild Talents thematically fit Hunters and Shifters (Infusions less so, but I think it still fits). And wild talents could be mechanically unified as "things which cost 1-actions for martials, but more magic."

(Kineticist) Kinetic Blast- Firing a bow
(Shifter) Manifest Natural Weapon- Drawing a weapon
(Hunter) Command Animal- Literally a thing martials can do, but more magic.

I think I still prefer Kineticist to be its own thing, but I am seeing a way where I think I could see it work.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The importance of the Kineticist is that it is a middle-ground between martial classes and spellcasting classes. It allows people to play a magical character, with some of the flexibility of spell-casters, without getting bogged down with spell-lists.

Martials have one or two weapons, and they typically do one, maybe two, things.

Spellcasters have a whole list of spells which do wildly different things and consumes a daily resource. They also have cantrips, but they are often quite limited.

Kineticists have kinetic blasts and a manageable amount of infusions, which are straightforward but flexible.

If the Kineticist or Kineticist Stand-in ever have a spell-list, it would immediately remove most of the appeal for me.

The reason why I believe Kinetic Blast can be one action is they are competing against weapons, not cantrips. The bulk of the spellcasters power budget is their spell-list, where with martials, it is their weapon use. Kinetic Blast is where Kineticist put most of their power budget.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You play your flute, and suddenly "duunnn dunnn... duuuunnnn duun... duuunnnnnnnn dun dun dun dun dun dun dun dun dun dun dunnnnnnnnnnn dunnnn"

Cleric shows up that you can have one spell-list, while still poaching other spell-lists. I imagine that will happen with Oracle, Witch, and later Shaman.

My wild guess for Investigator is that they only get advanced alchemy (at least at level 1) as quick alchemy feels like it is the alchemist niche. And if so, they would probably have other uses of their reagents, which would also allow you to do things with the investigator alchemy that you couldn't with the alchemist. I want to be able to CSI: Golaran.

I feel like Shaman would slot into spontaneous primal thematically, and they did make bards occult. "Prepared Any" is supported by pf1 mechanics. It isn't impossible, but I don't quite think they have the flexibility of sorcerers to justify that, but it could be my own bias. I am unfamiliar with the shaman in pf1.

Though considering two more spellcasters, we will only have three more tradition/preparation combinations, so they probably will double up. So Shaman could be prepared any, or prepared primal with the ability to poach spells.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Based on the advanced player guide announcement, I think it is safe to assume we are getting very specialized archetypes, considering we are getting 60 of them in one book. (4 will presumably be for multi-classing)

What I want a swashbuckler class:
The ability to step and attack as a single action, in either order, preferably multiple times a turn*.
A step speed of 60ft.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think there is room for a gish class which has rogue weapon/armor proficiencies (trained in unarmed, simple and a select few weapons + trained in light armor, with options to invest into medium and possibly heavy), lesser casting proficiencies, fewer slots but full-spell list, and ability to cast while wielding weapons.

Spell-strike can be incorporated, and they should be able to something to blend magic and martial training, but there are other interesting concepts beyond that. Bladebound is the standout, with its fancy sentient sword pseudo-familiar.

New archetypes may alleviate the need for a magus class, but you shouldn't need to wait until level 4 or 6 to play the character you want. And right now, I believe it is around level 11 to play a gish with a gimmick.

1 to 50 of 180 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>