RaptorBonz's page

I also thought that getting more impact from which apparitions you connect to, but making them more restrictive would feel stronger from a building standpoint. As you level you build your "wheel" of available apparitions not just full access to all of them much like OP described.

I feel like the direction of feats is really well explored and has the potential to create a lot of diversity in builds so long as that aspect is not overshadowed by how reliable their spell list is. I would like to say that I am really happy with the apparition spell lists individually, despite not liking set lists like this generally.

I like the idea of a nature/Occultism split probably based on class path? I think it should keep the religion skill since that's the primary casting source.

I dislike splitting between Wis/Int. I think it is good as just a Wis caster. It's already sufficiently complex and with the availability of Ability bonuses I don't think it's necessary to choose Int to cast with. I would like to see some exploration of a more researcher-style animist, that's super cool.

With regard to RAW vs RAI and house rules, I would like to point out the sidebar on 444 which specifically states that if something has multiple interpretations, problematic repercussions, or seems out of line, it is something to resolve at the table. Saying a familiar is dragging or carrying or teleporting are all RAW since those are what different tables determined and this specific rule about ambiguity addresses such concerns. (this same sidebar also has the specific overrides general note.) I know many folks dislike 'GM Discretion' as an answer but if I sit down at different PFS tables and ask this question I will get different answers and all of them will be correct under this clarification. Honestly, my solution to a GM who makes rulings under this umbrella that I dislike is to find a different GM (possibly myself). They are playing by the rules, we are just not a good fit together.

I kind of love discussions like this. But taking a dictionary term to a game mechanic is challenging and naming those game mechanics is equally challenging. I assure you that you are not the only one who noticed it, just like many folks have noticed that colossal and gigantic are also synonyms, but I find value in *creating* nuance and finding inspiration from it as you seem to have as well.

I think this is a table tone question. as a DM I would go with taking the average if it is higher and roll, only take the flat damage if it is at least 1 whole point higher. but that is me. I can see plenty of tables that would rather go with the consistent value and especially lethal tables would house rule and compare both values round by round. I could also see using the average value and truncating it instead of rolling but I personally think that is not as exciting.

Average meaning take a dice roll, calculate the average, and use that as the comparison.

You could carry some Hatchets/light hammers to throw, try and get magic ammunition at the earliest opportunity, and/or pick up gravity weapon feat from APG for a little extra oomph (this won't change type though).

I'd just like to Put here A big Thank You to the devs for working hard and being open to community criticism which often comes of harsher than we maybe intend. I'd love to hear their thoughts on the Playtest again, but -as many others have said- completely understand if it is not feasible.

So I'm going to raise this thread from the dead for a quick but possibly important question.

In the Targeting, it targets willing creatures. Is that fundamentally different for the 3-action version? Do creatures need to ID the spell to receive the benefits if they are foes?

Ressy wrote:

However, if 2-action cast+Strike is too powerful, we could see a flexible free action attached to the 3-action cast+Strike, similar to Slide Casting. For example as base allow Step, then with feats or auto-progression move to allow things like raising a shield, Stride, casting a 1-action cantrip (shield), reloading a ranged weapon, or other options.

This is exactly what I would imagine a Eldritch Knight Archetype Mechanic to look like. Although note that for the ranged version, it seems like the developers are pretty confident that 3 actions to cast a spell and make a ranged attack is as many things as you need to load into a single activity. I doubt we get something that is squarely better than what the eldritch archer already has.

I was thinking as a base class feature (or maybe you get it lvl 2-3) they could have free action that is something like the first time you miss with your striking spell each round you can take a step or an action with the manipulate trait. But that might be open to too much abuse?

I feel like I might be jumping into the cookpot here, but I also want to say my piece about the class designs and this is an active thread for sure so here we go:
things I like
B-The way spells are limited. seems really cool to say your magic scales but doesn't broaden. the numbers need a hard look (2/2; 3/2/1; 4/4; 1/2/1; something else idk) and there should be language to clarify if they count as meeting prereqs for lower level casting
B-feats in general look well tuned/interesting for both more or less
S-a starting chassis for eidolons that dictate your source and grant abilities as you level (I'd really like a combat suit styled construct, but I know that is pretty far from the current iteration)
S- Tandem feats to improve 2xcharacter action economy issues and shard health

things that I'd workshop a minor fundamental change to
S-eidolon abilities/evolutions like witch lessons, maybe they even get a few naturally and can get more through feats
S-die when eidolon dies. Maybe have a snapback effect like (reaction) when your eidolon takes lethal damage instead unsummon it and take damage =your level so when it is down you are not necessarily out too. lets summoners be a little riskier than other classes; might allow a "bomb" style summon one day
S-shared MAP, possibly they have weak attack progression (possibly even none beyond T) but not share MAP, related-ish I might like them better as a Wis caster
S-a few variation choices early could be nice, even if its choose 1-2 attacks and 0-1 specials from Big dmg, Med dmg+minor weapon trait, sml dmg+special trait (like splash or ele type), alt limited move option, or utility innate ability (like fast squeezing or light generation, don't quote me on balance)
M-spell strike being 2 rolls. will it break if it is just 1? What would it feel like to choose to A. make a weapon attack and resolve a spell attack OR B. cast a spell with a save and resolve a weapon strike... even as a 3-action activity
M-focus spells that emphasize the magical combatant feel- terrain manipulation, spatial distortion/movement, illusion/befuddling effects- or the other way, focus spells are what you strike with and your spell list is for these style effects? (would people be happy if the only spell you could spell strike with was a focus cantrip which you could metamagic conditions into?)

If nothing really changes but the balance is solid, I'll probably be more or less satisfied with them, but these are directions I'd be happy to know were well explored.

After reading through this I feel like asking for someone who is basically a fighter with spellcasting and rejecting the offered builds (especially the caster based builds which by a technical look gish from lvl1) sounds to me like wanting a gish is wanting martials to be just worse than half or full casters. losing proficiency, actions, spell slots, and/or feats to be effective in multiple spheres is necessary. As someone who likes to play barbs and fighters that feel fun at all levels, I would be let down if gishing didn't sacrifice something valuable.

I have been really happy with the versatile heritages so far, but I also am in the camp of "if you want narrative stuff talk to me and we'll just write it in" so even if you don't take the X brand of tiefling feat because you want the form, well your form will function as that narratively you will have those characteristics, but you'll have to follow the mechanics for feat chains.

I also have considered a human heritage that is basically "sleeps with everything" which lets you choose an allowable VH and get a bonus lineage feat

I can see how some things feel fairly limiting with the way the lvl 1 locked feats work though, and everyone (not hooman) seems to have low-light vision, which is not something I've fully come to terms with yet!

How does the sustaining of a damage spell even work? I have not really played a caster yet and I was considering rolling a Winter witch. does clinging ice deal damage every round? does the target roll their save every round? It looks more fun than Bards and Wizards to me, but I don't know anything balance-wise

As for Familiars; is the Familiar master Archetype worse than MC into witch/wizard?

+1 Shaman!
That being said I am going to try a Drifter a la Bunraku, a movie about a world where guns are illegal, and If I can't satisfactorily with APG, that would be in contention.

I have not been able to look through and see if this has been addresses, but my PC's want to drag monsters around (and if they are small enough, throw them) I'm doing my best improvising here, but not really sure what this should look like. I can't see very much for advanced grappling options so I'm leaning on athletics/acrobatics a lot for these shenanigans!

Thanks for a really fun game!

I am on fire about the duskwalker, genie bloodline, and Iron wall. Would love to see the Barbarian options (Hoping for a no-magic and a storm style barb, but really I'd be happy just to know XD) I can't even let myself think about the 30-some archetypes!

I'm eager to see how setting a base of operations is handled through the lens of a published adventure. It's one of the things I love encouraging players to do to ground them in the world more strongly than they might otherwise do.

Thanks Mark for the exciting write up! I'm doing something mad and Giving my Players 3 hours to build a world together without my input and then running in that universe. The monsters are going to be really important to supporting whatever madness comes out of it and I am very pleased to see so many interesting beasties all along the level spectrum!