Rage Prophet

Puna'chong's page

745 posts. Alias of pwntrooper.


1 to 50 of 745 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Being the matter of interpretation that it is, I think Intelligence works well for Witches as others have said; they study lessons from an unorthodox tutor to bend magic to their will. There is seemingly still study and learning involved despite the patron and familiar, only you trade a magic university's administration for a patron and professors for the familiar. By learning the building blocks of the world and how to manipulate them you're only limited by how well you can execute the verbal/material/somatic components and what you actually know is possible

This is different from Wisdom-based magic which to me seems more about having full access to a huge, unfathomable amount of power but having to wait for guidance on how to channel it through yourself so as to not, y'know... Pop. Wisdom spellcasting doesn't make magic, it moves magic. Deities and other higher powers turn on the tap for you, but only give so much as they need you to have or that you've demonstrated you're capable of controlling

I think Witch could work for both, but the patron/familiar relationship to me leans the class towards Intelligence. The patron doesn't give the witch power, it says--through the familiar--"Hey, kid, try wiggling your pinkie when you chant this, see what happens..." That's more like book learning; the patron doesn't channel power through the Witch, it teaches the Witch through one tradition or another, and the Witch still has to practice

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Lyz Liddell wrote:
Hi, everyone! I'm seeing this discussion and a similar discussion in another thread, and I want to let you all know that Cackle is something we looked at a lot while building the class, and it's something we're very open to tweaking further based on your feedback. We want to make it a fun ability that works well with the class, and it's clear that we haven't quite hit that mark yet, so we'll definitely be making some changes.

My own input is that for many other classes this level 1 ability (or the ability presented the same way as Cackle is) is a defining, niche-carving ability. Divine Font lets Clerics heal very well. Arcane Bond lets Wizards be flexible with their spell list. Flurry of Blows allows Monks to be really mobile. Barbarians Rage and Rangers Hunt Prey and Champions have a reaction to punish enemies and protect allies...

The Witch Cackle isn't on that level right now, and doesn't carve a niche that I would say most players not frequenting the forums care about. If I told one of my newer players that Cackle sustains a spell.... except without the concentrate tag! I'd get a blank stare

If it instead pushed the envelope on hexes like a Wizard's bond helps them with casting, then it'd be more relevant to everyday Witchery, I think. Especially if a Witch gets to add interesting riders to their Cackle and make sustaining spells and hexes a big part of what sets the class apart

1 person marked this as a favorite.

More than lessons, too, it'd be cool if different patrons gave different, exclusive abilities to the familiar. If the familiar is going to be such a big part of how the class operates then I think it should have more to differentiate it from another caster's familiar, and be useful as more than a walking spellbook

A ritual caster who relies on focus spells is what I've drafted up for a 2e occultist homebrew, incidentally. I think it's a fun concept but my own anecdotal experience from having two witches and a shaman at my table in 1e is that people also like having the flexibility that a full spell list provides on top of the raw hex power

I'd be cool with some hexes being focus cantrips and some being regular focus spells. Whether it's 1/day on a target should depend on the ability rather than categorically make every hex a 1/day thing. 10 minute immunity is also very effective; my players love using Guidance and have embraced its usefulness as a sort of encounter bonus. I think that's intuitive as well and fits the paradigm 2e seems to be going for

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Debuffs are really pretty good in this edition. Having a character who is more focused on debuffs in combat whereas a rogue is more focused on damage sounds reasonable to me and fits the theme; an investigator would focus more on capturing people alive than outright sneak attacking them to death

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think it's easy to justify, personally. I had a player during combat with a villain say he wanted to try to convince the villain that they were there to join him, not fight. The other characters said they'd give him a shot, but if he moved funny they'd attack. I let this player roll Deception while everyone else did a regular Perception roll

If a Swashbuckler wanted to, say, start their turn by leaping into action I'd regularly allow them to do an Acrobatics check for initiative provided they started their turn with a tumble or a long jump or whatever in circumstances where they can't leap from a platform or swing from a chandelier. I think the initiative rules are fluid enough for that

Of course if it doesn't make sense then it doesn't make sense. But I'm all about letting players explain alternatives to me to use a different skill for initiative

Yeah, let's see where this goes

6 people marked this as a favorite.

I personally like the idea of the familiar being as much (if not more) of an agent of the patron than of the witch, and the patron not necessarily being a friend or even a mentor. The witch could be a pawn who becomes more than the patron can handle. The patron could be in that role because of a desperate deal, with the familiar reminding the witch constantly of the debt they owe...

I think that flavor differentiates it from a deity, or a mystery, or a muse

General patrons and lessons are fine, but some more built-in freedom (even just a side bar) for players and DMs to make their own would be really cool. One witch's relationship with Baba Yaga might be totally different than another's. Each has the same patron but might receive totally different powers. Being able to represent that mechanically is something you could do with some build-a-patron guidelines

I think not having divine witches is fine. We have clerics and sorcerers and oracles, each of which seems capable of filling that role. I'm not even totally sold on witches gaining the arcane spell list

Really excited to make an unarmed drunken master Swashbuckler. Can't decide if feinting or combat maneuvers are better for it (fencer or gymnast), but the idea of taking Monk dedication and throwing out panache-fueled punches after tumbling around sounds like a lot of fun. Once you get to Flurry late in the Monk dedication, too, you can Flurry, do a Finisher, and then be ready for a Retort! A lot of the feats seem to work well with the concept too, from an initial glance

Plus, flavoring my buckler as a keg or beer bottle or something sounds great. Class looks fun, cheers!

Chessex mat. I have one I've been using for going on 20 years now. When I run games on Roll20 I use pre-generated map templates and lay the squares over them, or if I have a ready-built adventure like Fall of Plaguestone I'll of course use the provided maps

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Naturally I think it depends on the class and the situation in combat, but as a DM I've found that my players who have Shield Block tend to use it to mitigate smaller hits so that the big one doesn't take them out, and to try and make the hardness account for the largest fraction of damage it can. Though the Fighter generally just raises their shield to get the AC bonus and use AoO instead of Shield Block because AoO hits more often than not

I think shield HP might be like hoarding potions or other items; it's only useful if you use it. Repairing items is very easy in 2e. Even just blocking three attacks with a steel shield at level one saves you a heal spell, not to mention however many hits didn't land or weren't crits because of the AC bonus

I do hope they do more with higher level shields and materials, though I haven't done anything with my table past level 8

1 person marked this as a favorite.

No, I have a very strong suspension of disbelief

Lots of scribbled-out material component shopping lists. Maybe a week of half-hearted exercise tracking on one page

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Speaking of creepy nuns and a breeding programme, I've always kind of thought of this like the people with extraordinary abilities in Dune, specifically how the noble class uses and employs these people with extraordinary abilities. Most nobility just hires Bene Gesserit or Mentats, partly because it's rare or even impossible for an individual to become one in the first place, but also because then the nobles can spend their time practicing statecraft and not getting stabbed or poisoned

I think most nobility would just hire a wizard, pay them well, and retain their services rather than ship off all of their progeny to go waste away for 8 years in an academy or under a wizard's tutelage (if they don't die). That's time they could have spent palling around with other nobility, getting in tight with people who could advance the family's interest, "networking."

If we accept that an average human has 10's across the board in their stats, how many people actually have the Int modifier to get into and finish at a magical academy? How many people with a good score actually want to sit through all of the lessons, write all of the papers on proper inflections for the light cantrip depending on the prevailing leyline forces, clean up familiar poop, get hazed by bored students in the transmutation college, do everything but actual practical magic? How many of the nobility would subject themselves to being bored to tears for years rather than just throw money at someone who did that already?

Being a wizard is like being a fantasy academic. It's probably very nitpicky stuff, with a majority of the focus of wizard colleges being on improving the art rather than blasting holes in things. It's boring to everyone but you. Most of the time a wizard's not blowing holes in things but rather pondering the nuances of why it was a hole and not a square, or arguing that--in fact--a hole wasn't blown in the thing at all, but instead the spell simply transported the the matter elsewhere which created the explosion, yadda yadda...

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I think Word of Truth seems super useful for roleplaying and social encounters, but I do agree it would require a nice GM. Or at least a GM who's on board with the idea that people who are servants of a deity are likely treated as generally trustworthy and respected folk and Word of Truth takes it a step further. I like to let Clerics and Champions get some free goodwill, depending on where they go (and which deity they represent)

Say, level 1, a request from the village to go hunt down some roving goblins? Get in front of a gathering of the village and guarantee that the party will put an end to the scourge, activate Word of Truth. Holy light fills the scene, the villagers are nice and impressed and who knows; you might get something extra for the display to help you on your way. Or an NPC might not exactly trust your party because of a botched social roll earlier; pop that beacon of truth and reassure them that you aren't here to swindle them or whatever. I might be a pushover, but I think if it's explained well I'd be happy to let Word of Truth at least give bonuses to skill checks and be appropriately impressive for people who might not be accustomed to big displays of divine assurance

Incidentally, it is pretty good for general "civilized" business. Need a notary? Find someone who can use Word of Truth and call them up if you need to check on the veracity of that affidavit. I imagine Clerics of Abadar (edit: actually, Abadar doesn't have the Truth domain. So maybe Irori?) might use it to sit in on depositions or whatever, and if something is in doubt they could attest to the truthfulness of what they heard. It'd also be useful for contracts or other things where multiple parties could otherwise lie about what they said or did. Good alternative to some sort of magically binding contract, which I'd bet is more LE's shtick than LN

As for a lawyer character, I think a Bard with the Polymath muse could use Versatile Performance starting from the very beginning to use Performance (oratory) for all of their litigation needs. That'd be more of an advocate than what feel like are the more bureaucratic functions of Cleric-lawyers. The character could have been a roving barrister, moving between hamlets like the circuit judges mentioned in Fall of Plaguestone, barding it up by collecting tales but also defending (or prosecuting) criminals, negotiating contracts or settlements, etc. When you think about it the world probably doesn't have too many lawyers, and at any rate most of them are almost certainly settled in large cities. An adventuring lawyer doesn't sound all that far-fetched

Goblin sorcerer is what I'm currently toying with. The Cha and Dex boosts are nice, and I like the idea of an Aberrant goblin with tentacles and teeth spewing out all over the place. Or a Diabolic goblin who seduces people with promises of power while also getting a little bonus to fire spells

I use Devargo instead of Piltz in my campaigns. I haven't had a group outright kill Devargo yet, so that's probably a big part of it. He's a great NPC to use, though, if you can, and the one time I used Piltz for a campaign he didn't really send quite the same message or have quite the same effect as Devargo.

I'd highly recommend using Devargo if you can. If not, yeah; play up Piltz a little ahead of time if the party offs Devargo.

RoW is pretty rough. I really stuck to the cold rules, wind rules, and poor visibility rules when I ran it. The third book has a pretty nasty dungeon, and if you play the 5th book as a sandbox that will come all at once and beat you up, rather than patient encounters, that's also nasty. And the final boss in the 5th book can be a serious resource drain, depending on what the party's already done that day.

I'd say it's one of the nastier APs, definitely.

Council of Thieves and Reign of Winter would be pretty good.

alexd1976 wrote:
Matthew Downie wrote:
Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
Why is your kitchen knife getting dull after a few years of use on soft ripe tomatoes and wooden cutting boards?
Why can my barbarian destroy someone's breastplate with a single blow of his rapier, and without damaging the rapier in any way? The problem here is that both sides are trying to apply common sense to a rule set that can't possibly be complicated enough to simulate reality, and to a substance that behaves like nothing in nature.
Funnier still, how can you do non-lethal with that same rapier? :)


I use 15 for a few reasons:

First, I've got a table of six players. It helps me balance the lower-level encounters a bit to have slightly weaker PCs

Second, we enjoy having the first few levels be a bit harrowing or rough. That's usually when we have the most fun, actually, since that's when the game has the most on the line (can't afford to be resurrected, restoration is mostly out of reach, etc.)

Third, it's not really that much or less powerful than 20. It just seems more fun because you have an extra bonus or two. It also doesn't really matter that much once you start getting stat-enhancing items.

Lastly, most monsters seem lowballed in the Bestiaries. Having lowballed PCs reduces the need for me to add templates to everything just to make them challenging.

I'd say 15 or 20 both work, and neither is "wrong" in terms of how they work out in play. They're both fun. 25 seems like a lot for an AP though; I'd think that would trivialize a lot of lower-level counters as written, which just means you have to compensate as a DM more and more.

Mathius wrote:
I like the E6 but as far as I can tell the has not yet brought in all the classes or archetypes.

I didn't follow the E6 or even Pathfinder E6 rules/guidelines. I just fiddled with bonus feats and split them into three "tiers." A player can build their own feat chains, like feat LEGO. To take a tier 2, you have to have an open tier 1 to stack it onto. To take a tier 3, you have to have an open tier 2. Once you "stack" a feat onto a lower tier, you close off that lower feat. So, since I play E8:

Tier 1: Any feat the character currently qualifies for.
Tier 2: Any feat that has a level or BAB up to 10 that you meet all other requirements for
Tier 3: +1 BAB, +1 to saves, treat character as level 12 for one class ability, etc.

Let's say you qualify for Weapon Focus. That's Tier-1. Now, you could stack Improved Critical onto this as a T2. Then let's say you take Iron Will as another T1. On your next bonus feat you could take a T2 to stack onto Iron Will, take a T3 to stack onto Imroved Critical, or take another T1.

My players liked this, since it let them essentially make their own feat chains. I liked it because it kept me from having to make up new feats or class features. I also ruled that taking things like "Extra Talent" or "Extra Rage Power" as a T2 let them count as up to level 10 as well, which came in handy for the Investigator and Barbarian in our last campaign.

Metal Sonic wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
If you can dig out of prison with a spoon, imagine how much more quickly you could do it with an adamantine dagger.
Thanks for validating my point.

I can corroborate digging out of prison with a spoon. My grandfather did this to escape a Communist prison camp in the 40s.

Witches are very strong, if only because of their Hexes giving them something useful to do every single round of combat. Slumber is wicked powerful, and once the witch gets into Split Hex being able to potentially drop two enemies with one standard action is brutal. This is on top of a decent spell list with full casting. A lot of hexes also have an effect even when the opponent saves against them.

I'd argue that a Shaman is stronger, if only because the Unsworn archetype gives them a lot of versatility (and access to, like, whatever spell they want), but Witches are powerful and flavorful additions. You bring them for the debuffs and the potential to straight-up end an encounter with one action.

Guru-Meditation wrote:

As another option i'd give you to remove all Fullcaster-Classes from your setting.

I've been (lucky?) that my players really aren't that into playing full casters, except for one, and outside of unintentionally breaking the game once by playing a Conjuration (Teleportation) wizard--which he just thought sounded like a cool concept--he's been pretty good about just going with the flow. And with E8 it's pretty difficult to break the game as a full caster, since you have 3-4 spell slots for 4th-level spells and spamming them is usually what makes them powerful.

I will say that my favorite games to DM are those with parties stuffed with 3/4 BAB classes. They're usually sooooo much more interesting mechanically than full-BAB or 1/2+full caster classes. I'd much rather see a shaman than a witch, for example, if only because the shaman can play around with buff spells. I also DM for a party of six, so we usually end up with one full caster and one full-BAB class. You might get some mileage out of encouraging all 3/4-BAB classes.

I don't think 4th-level spells are the culprit for spellcaster superiority. 5th start edging into the territory, and while E10 would work out as well, having access to teleport and raise dead are things that have the potential to trivialize certain iconic adventure types. It's really into 5th-level spells where the game stops concerning itself with "Can we get to the top of that mountain?" and more "When we fly up there, how many drakes and lightning bolts from the storm are we going to be contending with?".

I really don't think banning 4th is necessary, though. A lot of 4th-level spells are also super fun, like wall of fire or stoneskin. These are the spells where casters--I think--start to come into their own, and a lot of these are staples. I suppose you could see it as taking away the 2nd iterative for martials; 4th-level spells are the caster's version of the 2nd iterative.

I'd recommend E8 over E6, since a lot of classes really come into their own at level 8 through class abilities. A LOT of stuff in Pathfinder either upgrades or becomes active at level 7 or 8, often things that make classes really mechanically unique. You can turn 4th-level spells into rituals like the new Occult Rituals, which make only certain spells actually viable (no black tentacles, for instance, but you get scrying and remove curse, etc.). I've actually played through this with 4th-level spells and it works great, since the spell slots are pretty limited for full casters. It also has the nice side-effect of giving 3/4 BAB classes their second iterative.

Having played through two campaigns so far this way, I'd highly recommend it.

You can enchant clothing to give armor bonus, and you can UMD to cast (or have someone cast on you) mage armor and shield, barkskin, blur, mirror image, and other defensive spells. Most of these are also first level spells, so they're relatively cheap.

You can always fight defensively if you notice that you aren't having much trouble hitting, which isn't the most efficient but if you just need AC it can be a small boost. Same with the oft-reviled, oft-overlooked, and oft-totallycrappy Combat Expertise.

Best bet is probably spells, in general.

I've taken to rolling on random mundane loot tables a few times for each dragon to give them some things they're really into. One was an art collector, another was interested in books and finely crafted, comfy chairs, and so on. The older they are the (usually) more willing they are to talk to the PCs before they kill them; they know parties of adventurers can potentially be dangerous, and why risk accidentally destroying the loot when you can get it without a fight (and THEN eat them)?

Younger dragons tend to just want to fight and are too arrogant and prideful to go for diplomacy first. There's a reason there aren't a ton of elder dragons, and you only get there through caution.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Vudra. 200% Vudra.

1 person marked this as a favorite.


Rakshasa and asura and aboleths are my jaaaaaaaam

It's a good thing. Sometimes a player picks out a feat or takes an ability that doesn't really end up working all that well in practice. Or they choose some anti-undead stuff for the early bit (or other creature-type specific thing; happens all the time in APs) and then find out the next three books don't have a single undead encounter. It uses resources, it can have as much or as little roleplaying as you want, and it really can only happen in the confines of downtime. I will admit, though, that I'm a nice DM when it comes to swapping out options that just aren't working out. Nobody wants to sit around for the rest of a campaign with a character that isn't as fun as it could be, and at the end of the day Pathfinder is a game, not a series of business meetings.

Kineticist seems to have been one of the bigger FAQ bits. I think part of that is what Mark's been saying in a bunch of his posts, that it got hit hard with the copyfitting and some text was reworded to take up less space but lost the meaning in the process. It also seems like he had originally intended to have less repetition in "Infusion Wild Talent" kind of stuff that got plugged in and gave the class issues with copyfitting in the first place.

Most of those were resolved pretty quickly though. The most gnashing for OA I've seen is people complaining about Kineticist damage. Last I checked the damage thread, though, it seemed like there was some resolution that Elemental Annihilator did good damage, even though it sacrificed half of the class ability stuff, while energy blasts are basically ehhh; if you want damage, go physical.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Feels to me like I'm able to do more with less in Pathfinder.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

They are all pretty balanced, solid classes overall though. It might be that the complexity is what creates classes that don't break themselves or the game. Except summoner, which is usually broken by its simpler bits like standard-action summoning instead of super-complex eidolon min-maxing, it seems pretty often that the less moving parts a class has the more likely it is to snap something. Maybe it's no coincidence that the Core classes are usually touted as the most powerful ones?

Feels like a good direction for the company and the game, honestly. The classes are gated a bit by system mastery, but if I had brand-new players I would probably have them practice with a CRB class first to get the hang of it before I hand them a Medium. And I've been fiddling with them and haven't noticed anything ridiculous; either way too powerful or way too weak.

Kineticist is complex on paper, but in practice I've noticed it's really straightforward, though from what Mark's been saying it seems like it got hit pretty hard with copyfitting, so there's that. But you have things that add burn, you have things that subtract burn, and you have a total allotment of burn you can spend in a round. And you're handed only one or two things each level, so in play there's lots of time to go over what you can do and how you do it.

I usually try to set up in EoA that potential war with the Shoanti is part of the reason for so much tension in Korvosa. Ileosa pulling a Marie Antoinette and draining the coffers while a conflict is brewing makes people uneasy and tense; when the king dies it's like handing Miss America 2015 the reins while some heavy diplomatic stuff looks like it's on the horizon. Helps round out the fourth book, I've found.

I'd have him leave at 7DttG, saying something about trying to mediate for the Sklar-Quah.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Keep in mind, too, that Arkona is operating on a totally different level of evil from Devargo or Gaedren. Those two are sort of your common bosses, like a Tuco Salamanca or a Fagin. They're nasty and do nasty stuff, but at the end of the day they don't really have much desire or ability to play big.

Arkona is a Gus Fring.

Arkona is pure malevolence in backwards-handed tiger form.

He'd probably only use Devargo and/or Gaedren as long as they're useful. I'd imagine that seeing the unrest in the city and seeing heroes trying to stop it, he'd be on board with using them for his machinations, especially since they've already beaten back the two thug-bosses. He's playing the meta-game, and has no attachment to pawns that are less efficient or less capable. The book represents him a little weaker or a little less conniving than I think a rakshasa in that position would be (I think it also gives Ileosa the short shrift too, as a villain), and one of my favorite parts when I run the campaign is having the players get swept up in politics and these schemes that ancient creatures have had going for centuries.

That said, Devargo could have some ambition, and since he has some skill at running Eel's End there's also some ability there to back it up. He does, however, have to compete with a demon spawned for the sole purpose of doing long-term lawful evil. I just don't know if a creature like a rakshasa or a personality like Arkona would be all that miffed if Devargo ate it, especially if it means that his plans get to continue to flourish.

But! Devargo and Gaedren teaming up in Old Korvosa for book 3 would be awesome. I've never had a party that didn't want to murder Gaedren, and his brand of depravity would be fitting for what's going on.

I'd allow it if it's reasonable: mostly time frame, since lately I've only been running APs and they can have tight schedules. None of my players have ever requested it though. Not sure if they know it's a thing... It's good to let 3/4 BAB classes spend resources to catch up a bit in BAB-gated feats, like retraining to Power Attack at level 2.

Occultist and Medium (lesser extent Kineticist, too) really seem to have gotten the short shrift when it came to the class-specific feat options. Especially Medium. I'd love to see some feat like "As long as you have at least 3 points in your necromancy focus, all of your created or summoned undead get X" or a Transmutation one that gave different small bonuses depending on which physical attribute you have active.

Legacy Weapon taking a standard makes sense, though, since a more efficient economy on that sort of ability is more a Warpriest/Magus thing. Makes up for the fact that they can do three other things at the beginning of the day that other classes can do.

blashimov wrote:
I'm imaging the medium/occultist duo. The entire genre of a few exceptionally adaptable PCs grips my imagination.

A party of two mediums and two occultists could potentially cover every base, though it'd probably be on the weak side (or at least dependent on UMD). You could do a fun Extraordinary Gentlepeople campaign with that setup.

And yeah, the biggest issue/balancing factor for the Occultist is that it's heavily gated by action economy. That's why I'm hesitant to say it's actually "better" than an Inquisitor, since it takes a couple rounds to really set up once combat begins.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, and we can always get more material for Vudra, Arcadia, and Tian Xia. I've wanted to run a campaign in Vudra but haven't, just for lack of in-depth stuff like we get on places like Absalom or Kaer Maga.

Edit: There's always a certain hut that's more than happy to planet-hop...

They're a pretty versatile class, probably my favorite thing to come out of OA. Depending on what implements you've chosen and where you invest your mental focus, you can switch between a couple different roles every day.

The main thing is to look at each implement and see what their resonant power does for you and check on their "on use" power. Some, like Transmutation or Abjuration, require a lot of investment for their resonant power to be useful, and end up being sort of your primary focus for the day. Others, like Necromancy, have super useful activated powers and moderately useful resonant ones, so you could put as many points as you have left over into these and just use their ability as needed. That's not always the case, and it'll change day by day, but the implement powers are the baseline. You also get powers that you attach to a specific implement (like Aegis for Abjuration). These use up points from that implement but give it a wider range of options.

A cool thing is that you can hand off the implements to party members and they get the effects of the resonant power. It's not a best-case scenario always, and it gimps you a bit, but say you were down to your last Evocation charge for the day but it had a good resonant bonus: you could hand it off to your wizard who has a chain lightning still prepared and they would get the bonus damage from your implement.

The summoning circles are really cool and a fun addition, and getting advice from a specific outsider along with Object Reading and Divination implement stuff makes them really good at cracking campaigns open.

They can also be super tanky and pretty good at combat if they go for Transmutation, Abjuration, and Divination. Though they'll use up their resources buffing themselves that's not much of a problem, and they can perform admirably in the role. The main thing is like people have said above; they can fill in the cracks for the party, and they're really good at being what's needed on a daily basis. They get Disable Device and UMD, martial weapons, shields, medium armor, and a good number of skills.

Having seen one play for a little bit now I'd say they're at least on par with an Inquisitor, maybe even better because of how Legacy Weapon works (Transmutation is seriously strong) and the fact that they have access to the arcane spell list.

MeanMutton wrote:
Furthermore wrote:

A wand of Silent Image is one of the trickiest things you can have in the right hands. If you're DMing, maybe throw a wand of that spell with seven charges on it into the dropped loot and see if they get used well. Minor image kicks it up a notch.

Until you get the GM who hates illusions and consider that any interaction results in a save without needing to use up an action...

Well, RAW Illusions--especially silent image--aren't quite as powerful as people want them to be. Each type (figment, phantasm, glamer, shadow, pattern) has different limitations. People often try to use a figment as a glamer and then get upset when a DM rules against it, even if it's RAW and RAI. There's also some debate as to what "interacting" means, but in the end that's really your DM's call. Like I wouldn't allow a silent image to make a bucket over someone's head to replicate blindness/deafness, because they would immediately notice that they can't feel a bucket on their head, and as soon as they try to move would notice that the bucket doesn't act like a bucket at all. If suddenly the world went dark all around except for some space below where you can see the ground, you'd probably immediately at least reach up to get the thing off your head.

I mean, yeah. You can get a jerk of a DM who just kiboshes everything fun with illusions, but players get confused a lot with what they really can do with figments. So for instance, you can't use silent image to make something look like something else. That would be a glamer effect. You COULD use silent image to make an image of a boulder and then hide inside of it, but you couldn't make a bolder look or feel like a house; you could just put a really big house image over the boulder, though, if you have enough range to create something like that.

Slithery D wrote:
Legio_MCMLXXXVII wrote:
I'm still trying to figure out if the Illusion resonant power means I can try to stealth any time I have it up. If yes, that's insanely good. My spells are silent, and I can buff myself like a monster before I open things up on whatever I'm trying to kill.
What do you mean by "try to stealth"? You can always try! But I don't see how a miss chance helps you out until you hit level 18 and are invisible.

If you end your turn in cover or concealment you can maintain stealth.

Flame Effigy wrote:

I don't know about physical fire, but acid would work for energy earth, wouldn't it?

Or something

Tons more archetypes and talents can never hurt, and I hoooonestly would have rather have seen Kineticist Adventures than Occult Adventures.

Oh, I think Occult Adventures is rad. I really like the other classes, except Psychic, which turned out how I expected.

But! Expanded Kineticist stuff would be awesome. "Subdomain" elements could be sweet, like Shadow from cold blasts, or having guys focused on things like negative energy or positive energy.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Occultist: Osiriani occultist, the latest in a long line of treasure hunters. Her father before her, her grandfather before him, and so on, have all raided tombs for as long as they can remember in the effort to find proof that their family is, indeed, descended from the first Pharaohs. Her implements include her lucky hat, her grandfather's compass, and a an adventuring vest that's been passed down from before her great-grandmother's time.

M1k31 wrote:
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
Puna'chong wrote:

20) A dungeon that's all treasure, high-level magic items, and great loot. It turns to dust when you leave.


That's not eccentric! That's just mean! :P
No, what's mean is that before the party entered they contracted with an NPC to pay them to carry around their stuff, with the NPC getting paid based on the value of the items acquired/carried... you now have to pay up, the party is good-aligned, and you started with nothing... welcome to crippling debt...

I'd call it "The Dungeon of Neutral Evil Conversion." Especially if that NPC is a djinni who does this all the time. Heyoo!

I will say, though, that being able to blast all day has made a couple of my players very, very happy. Even if the class hurts a bit because of it, the fact that fire dude can be fire dude all day makes those "Timmies" pee their pants.

1 to 50 of 745 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>