Red Griffyn's page

Red Griffyn wrote:

1.) Caster (bard)

2.) Caster Martial (warrior muse bard)
3.) Martial Caster (wave caster bard)
4.) Martial (Thaumaturge)

It's not the first time you put wave caster as more martial than caster but wave casters are in the middle of the spectrum. Magus is more of a martial because its abilities, like Spellstrike, are pretty much martial oriented when Summoner is balanced and can be played as martial-oriented or caster-oriented and anything in between.

I think this is fundamentally splitting hairs. Casters are to the left, martials are to the right. Clearly a full caster with a subclass will be left of a martial wave caster. I'm not saying that the spectrum neatly divides into 0, 33, 66, and 100% martial or that I'm looking to do a spectrum tier list for every class. They are convenient bins to describe general class design. That way I can clearly communicate how bin 2 and bin 3 are mechanically and conceptually different because the community at large keeps telling people to just use a warrior muse bard or a warpriest cleric if they want to gish (yet are not satisfied with people not being satisfied with these solutions).

Isn't Shifter just another name for an animal instinct barbarian?

We should separate out the concept of a shape shifting combatant from the actual poorly executed PF1e Shifter. I think that people wanted was the shapeshifting power of a druid on a 3/4 or full BAB class without all the overhead of being a full caster (maybe a 2/3 caster). They definitely missed that mark though. But the concept of a shapeshifting martial is still valid outside of the limitations of the PF1e shifter. Its just a very convenient label to put on it without intending to necessarily limit the PFS2e implementation.

The animal instinct barbarian has a number of issues. First and foremost that rage really sort of sucks. The 1 min timer/reset timer really sucks when you get caught in prolonged or chained encounters, the loss in AC makes you a crit magnet, the fact that you aren't actually 'shape shifting' you're just growing certain aspects of one animal totem (the L8 animal rage is awful because you're stuck with a L3 spell that comes 1.5 spell ranks late and never bumps your AC), you don't gain any form movement speeds, etc. Consider that shape shifting as a concept means turning into animals, dinosaurs, elemental, plants, massive monster kaijus, and more. In many depictions they can shapeshift at will (or maybe a few times before needing to rest), can remain shifted for long periods of time, and can shift into utility forms outside of combat that provide scouting/heavy lifting/teamwork mounts/urban subterfuge/obstacle negation benefits. So for me a shifter is more than just a rage martial with an animal theme.

We already have a skald, its called warrior muse bard. The bard was as much of a caster than a skald was in PF1e, so if the bard is a full caster here, and I don't know why skald should be a bounded caster. Could there be a bard class archetype similar to the new cleric one they announced that makes it into a bounded caster? Sure, but technically we already have the closest equivalent.

This thought is why there is a big gap for people. If you consider 4 points along the spectrum of martial to caster you have:

1.) Caster (bard)
2.) Caster Martial (warrior muse bard)
3.) Martial Caster (wave caster bard)
4.) Martial (Thaumaturge)

None of those play like the other ones and the difference between 2 and 3 is more than just pedantic nuance. They fill completely different roles. One is actually good with using a weapon and that is their main combat contribution. The other is a spell caster that maybe takes a pot shot as a 3rd action throw away when they don't have to move. One trades a huge amount of casting for that ability to actually be in the thick of combat, tank as a secondary frontliner, glass cannon warrior, etc.

A warrior muse bard is not a skald just as a wizard swinging a weapon is not a magus.

I think the thing to understand about Paizo's class design process is that the first step is not filling a mechanical niche (i.e. "occult wave caster, with martial proficiency") but thematic niches like "you have a connection to elemental planes" or "you are imbued with a spark of divinity" or "you entreat with spirits around you" or "you help your allies with your brilliant grasp of tactics and strategy."

I don't disagree that this happens at a surface level. But I challenge the rationale behind this on a deeper level. I can flavour/theme most mechanics to be w/e I want them to be. Most GMs/players won't challenge you on this. For example you could play the mirror implement thaumaturge as reflections, parallel universe versions of yourself, illusions, manifestations of your psyche, etc. But I can't convince a GM/players to give me an at will 1 action 15 ft teleport that gets more powerful without Paizo saying its okay. Another example, I could reflavour the kineticist as being tied to the astral/shadow plane and manifesting 'kinetic blasts/impulses' shapped like psychic blades or shadow arrows and forget every theme releated thing tied to the '6 elements'. But you better believe the insane controversy I would have generated if I proposed swapping a caster to CON and giving them item bonuses to spell attack rolls! In both these instances I'd be accused of power gaming/power creep/home brew insanity/breaking the game. Fundamentally this is the main issue. Paizo itself acts as one of the most prominent gatekeepers to new mechanics because of the reverence the community has for their stamp of approval.

The thematics for having a wave caster of each spell list can easily write itself, but since we're talking literally about PF1e content, why not take from there and compare to what we have available to us now:

Skald (occult wave caster): Skalds are poets, historians, and keepers of lore who use their gifts for oration and song to inspire allies into a frenzied rage. They balance a violent spirit with the veneer of civilization, recording events such as heroic battles and the deeds of great leaders, enhancing these stories in the retelling to earn bloodier victories in combat. A skald’s poetry is nuanced and often has multiple overlapping meanings, and he applies similar talents to emulate magic from other spellcasters.

Mesmerist (occult wave caster): Experts at charm and deceit, mesmerists compel others to heed their words and bend to their will. Psychic powers, primarily those of enchantment and illusion, give mesmerists the tools they need to manipulate others—usually for their own personal gain. The very gaze of a mesmerist can hypnotize someone into following his whims. Mesmerists frequently form cults of personality around themselves, and they develop skills and contingency plans in case their ploys are discovered. They draw their magic from the Astral Plane, and many consider their minds to be conduits to enigmatic spaces others can’t comprehend.

Lets compare that to the PF2e description of the bard and see how it doesn't match (but with a subclass or class archetype you could probably fit it in)

Bard: You are a master of artistry, a scholar of hidden secrets, and a captivating persuader. Using powerful performances, you influence minds and elevate souls to new levels of heroics. You might use your powers to become a charismatic leader, or perhaps you might instead be a counselor, manipulator, scholar, scoundrel, or virtuoso. While your versatility leads some to consider you a beguiling ne’erdo- well and a jack-of-all-trades, it’s dangerous to dismiss you as a master of none.

If I tried to be a martial + MC bard the best I could do was sing 1 of 3 songs by L4 at the earliest (healing, strength, or inspire skill), couldn't do the base level thing you'd want (inspire courage) until L8, and couldn't do what I'd consider to be the iconic "I'm so scary you poop your pants song" (i.e., dirge of doom) until L12. That really doesn't provide a satisfying progression for me and likely many people if we're being honest. I COULD reflavour literally any martial as just singing battle songs whenever he fights, but that is equally dissatisfying that my main character's identity quirk has literally no mechanical in game effect. I could be a bard that swings a weapon, but it is deeply dissatisfying to get worse and worse at the things you want to be good at (i.e., hitting things), which is why why the caster heavy martials really don't scratch the same itch as the martial heavy casters in that 'spectrum'.

That is ultimately why that argument falls flat for me. Theme is important but mechanics are also important. For general player satisfaction I'd argue they are more important because the mechanics are what give you rules based player agency, whereas I often can (out of whole cloth) make up my theme/reskin various things.

Red Griffyn wrote:

Just looking at AON and I think we are missing:

- Shifter (i.e., martial proficiency wave casting druid)

Not sure where you're getting "wave caster" from a martial class? Shifter didn't get any casting at all.

Fair enough. Perhaps what I mean to say is I think there are really 4 points along the martial to caster spectrum:

The system does #1 and #4 (in general) fine. The system does a lot of #2, but the execution is lackluster if what you really want is #3.

In context of a wildshaper, it doesn't 'need spells like a wave caster' but what it needs is equivalent level access to the shape spells as the druid (effectively a monk who's focus point spells are wildshape related). A martial MC druid is basically stuck as a animal and can't really shift into anything else until L16 since most of the feats are L8+.

However, the main thing I would want to avoid is a similar poor execution of the shifter as was done in PF1e. It was well known for being under-powered and worse at shifting than the druid's own wildshape. If relying on PF2e wildshape spells, it has to provide a better bonus to hit or some kind of boost to AC, or something that pushes it beyond the druid in the current system. I think a KAS of STR and martial progression while keeping the +2 or a +1 status bonus to hit would work. As it stands the druid only really benefits from that +2 at ~3 levels unless it is purposely under-casting its wildshape forms. It would also be a big QoL improvement if they could decide what size their form took from small up to the size of the spell description. I also think a class/subclass/class archtype that got to benefit from handwraps property runes could go a ways to providing reasonable DPR so you aren't so behind other martials like the druid.

So in the end I wouldn't care if it was #3 or #4 but I think there is room for both. The benefit of #3 you already have all the druid feats printed and available to take. You can add far less page count to achieve #3 (even if you print ~10 more feats for sublcass or class archetypes to add more mechanics) than making an entire new class for #4. You can also toss in some nice to haves like being able to cast focus spells or cantrips while in your wildshape form to give you some ranged versatility (albeit at a reduced efficacy), being able to talk without an item, etc.

Just looking at AON and I think we are missing:
- Shifter (i.e., martial proficiency wave casting druid)

- Skald/Martial Bard (i.e., martial proficiency wave casting bard, the current caster heavy bard doesn't scratch the itch at all to be a dervish dancer/arcane duelist/arrow song minstrel, etc.)

- Mesmerist (I don't think the thaumaturge covers it, it was a martial anti-bard that debuffed easily with no saves instead of buffing with inspire courage)

- Ninja/Samurai (vaguely themed tien based rogue/fighter)

- Bloodrager (new archetype)

- Inquisitor (maybe one of the new divine archetypes helps here?)

- Warpriest (i.e., martial proficiency wave casting cleric, but there may be a class archetype to resolve that soon)

However, beyond that there are really cool class archetypes that are missing conceptually:
- Urban Barbarian/Bloodrager (DEX based rager who doesn't take that AC penalty but gets less benefit and focuses on finesse/agile/ranged weapons weapons). To that effect, just a ranged barbarian (there was the savage technologist or similar in 1e)

- Arcane Buffer Class (e.g., the brown fur transmuter arcanist)

- Thundercaller (Sonic/lightning damage focused bard subclass that effectively weaponizes their voice instead of always buffing).

- Martial focused alchemist (grenadier, mutagenic mauler brawler, etc. since the base class pre-remaster is poorly designed to provide those class fantasies). The barbarian+ book had an amazing alchemical barbarian mutagenist subclass that is exactly what I'd want (small amount of on level scaling/limited mutagens but on a class chassis that can use them). They already do this with the alchemical sciences investigator.

- Ranged Paladin like the Divine Hunter

- A proper synthesist summoner (so many cool things you could do with the right class archetype that maybe even focuses on you fluidly melding/unmelding mid combat for bonuses/benefits).

- Any kind of functional summoning class since summons in PF2e really suck. I'd love to see some caster get action economy boosts/maybe summon one more summoned monster OR buff the summons (maybe cast one level above normal spell rank?) Just make it a focus spell like the druid wildshape so you don't have to constantly burn slots. Maybe an alternative would be the ability to summon and animal companion level effective creature that doesn't have any of the RP ties/befriending/PC emotional baggage like a eidolon or an actual animal companion.

- Bladebound Magus (i.e., auto scaling intelligent weapon companion class)

I think there is a significant breakdown in PF2e in providing an analogous 3/4 BAB, 2/3 Caster class fantasy. Yes a caster can always pick up a weapon and a martial can always pick up a caster MC, but they don't provide that 'hit like a martial with a bit of magic' mechanical output. I feel like the magus chassis was on the money +- some gimmicks depending on what kind of 3/4 BAB, 2/3 Caster theme you were replicating, but Paizo has refused to give us any more gishes on the wave caster chassis for years (hence the hunger out there for inquisitor, shifter, skalds, etc.). 1 per spell casting tradition would be nice and lines up well with magus/bard or skald/druid or shifter/warpriest or inquisitor.

Unless they specifically said the cleric wave caster loses font, I'd guess it is simply delayed or slowly scales (just like how the magus get extra studious spells, it makes sense to decrease font slots at L2 and scale up to match the cleric by L20 or maybe have them be 2 levels below highest slot/etc.

I hope all the class archetypes improve on the gunslinger baseline and effectively provide at least a L2 feat as part of the dedication (e.g., you get emblazon armament just like how the dual weapon warrior provides double slice) so it isn't as negative an impact. There should be a bit of a power boost provided to make up for being locked out of archetypes until L8. But there are so many good cleric feats for a martial that the fact that they are doing this is exciting.

But overall I've been asking for wave caster archetypes for druid/cleric/bard for years so... I am very excited. I'll have to wait to see how it was executed before I up that excitement level to ecstatic.

I hope it facilitates a more general wave caster archetype that can be applied to any caster (or at least bard/druid) by giving us a view on how Paizo would balance the +- of martial progression vs full casting.

For the bloodrager, I hope they can capture the essence of the arcane bloodrager. Mechanically it was when you rage you gain the benefits of a spell at the same time (blur, haste, fly, etc.). Maybe they could even explore a finesse/urban bloodrager.

I'm excited for all these martials that might just have the 'cast a spell' activity that can use spellhearts without needing to jump through hoops and have a monk/ranger scaling spell DC that is better than the multiclass Expert 12, Master 18. I know other's are saying they want more, but in some respects even if it was on level access to focus points (say for the bloodrager vs. sorcerer bloodlines) that IS a big boost vs. barbarian + sorcerer dedication where all those things come at half level progression. I haven't analyzed all the current FP on sorcerer to see if there are really good combos for a melee bruiser vs. caster focused ones, but I'm sure there are reasonable ones (even the angelic L6/spell rank 3 focus point gives you a fly speed, which is very nice for a melee martial).

If they are giving any of the subclasses/class archetypes spellcasting, I hope they scale better than a MC. That was the biggest weakness of the eldritch trickster (it just literally didn't get better and was too delayed to reliably land spells or cantrips).

Do now that we know that there will be a cleric class archetype to be more martial (perhaps convert to wave caster). Is there any context available around the druid content. Perhaps a wildshape wave caster druid class archetype?

You need a few things:

1.) 18 INT KAS class (Witch/Wizard are best)
-> This gives a special lore skill (from another archetype), Arcana, and Occultism off your best stat.
-> This gives nature and religion off a save stat that isn't best, but won't be dumped.

2.) Easy Access to advanced familiar with scaling familiar abilities (Witch and Wizard are best)
-> The familiar traits you want are: Independent (free action to ready), Second Opinion (gives a reaction to give a aid on any recall knowledge for a +1/+2 circumstance bonus), Skilled (Loremaster Lore), Skilled (arcana/occultism/nature/religion) or 7 total abilities which you can do by L6 with a witch or familiar thesis wizard with the enhanced familiar feat.

3.) MC into Loremaster for specialized lore
-> Lets you roll recall knowledge on anything.
-> Use the L4 skill feat to help buy yourself out of this to take the cleric MC.

4.) MC into Cleric for Domain Initiate (Dreams Domain and Knowledge L1 focus spells)
-> You want to take the dreams domain focus spell (Sweet Dreams), which takes 1 min to cast, but lasts 1 hour and gives a +1/2/3 status bonus to INT or CHA skills.
-> Then you can use syncretism to grab the knowledge domain focus spell which lets you roll at advantage.
-> In general dreams is better for your INT skills (or ones you have good bonuses for) and knowledge is better for your worse recall skills (maybe special lore skills or nature/religion)

5.) Arcane or Occult spell list so you can take pocket library and/or share lore as a prepared spell to get access to a status bonus until the dreams domain spell comes online for the build.

Obviously the build is made significantly better by a free archetype rule which can effectively get you everything by L8. If the GM is willing to let you skip your exit feats you can ancient elf cleric at L1 and enter lore master at L2, domain initiate by L4, and synecrtism by L6. I have some metrics on this kind of build vs a thaumaturge to show how it beats it up in all metrics except the general recall knoweldge (see here).

Another fun thing for INT based class is an INT psychic that uses the gathered lore unconscious mind. When you unleash your psyche you can use an action to prepare to aid anyone in 30ft using your occultism modifier. Now that the aid DC is 15 and it is tied to a skill you can bump to master/legendary ASAP you can be dishing out +3 to +4s to aid another by L9 with feats like helpful halfling (also consider the human cooperative nature feat at L1 for a +4 bonus to aid checks). By L11 you're essentially auto critting the aid with the sweet dreams domain spell up.

Another thing you can do off a rogue or investigator is dive through multiple skill proficiency archetypes that have skill feats. that lets you essentially enter an archetype only having to spend 1 class feat on the dedication and then 2 skill feats on the exit feat taxes. If you want some non-free archetype examples I have skill boosting archetypes/builds 1 to 3 here. Build 8 even has a investigator MC alchemist that at L8 actually gets the calculated splash for INT to splash damage on bombs (so INT to hit + INT to damage + extra persistent from using the alchemical gut familiar option).

In general if you don't want casting, rogue with a 18 DEX/16 starting INT will be your best bet IMO vs. investigator. Its just a superior chassis and the thief rogue can dump 2 stats (STR + either INT or CHA) so you will have bad CHA skills, but otherwise maxes save stats including your attack stat.

Another funny option for skill builds is the sleepwalker archetype. At L6 the vision of foresight feat lets you spend 1 action to roll any skill check a t advantage while you're in your sleepwalking trance (1 action to enter and lasts for 1 minute). At L18 you can even make it 'permanent'.

As other's have suggested a thaumaturge with diverse lore gets both the 'int functions' and CHA functions and they are a really consistent martial (see the PFS build link I had above for a number of them). Combo that with the dreams spell (which can give +1/2/3 status bonus to CHA skills) or sleepwalker and you can be 'ever useful' in all situations (except maybe ones that require magic solutions specifically).

Other than rituals are there any player options at all?

Races with specified maximum ages in PF2e include:
- dwarf (350 years),
- gnome (400 years),
- Halflings (150 years),
- Lizard Folks (up to 120 years)
- Android (still some alive from the rain of stars thousands of years ago),
- automations (immortal),
- Ghoran (thousands of years),
- Sprites (1000 years).
- Leshy (immortal)
- Skeleton (immortal)

Some of those might need some 'how do you procreate' lore generation, but I'm sure the elves could figure it out. As stated in other posts, ancestries that live 100-200 years are a grey area but I'd be inclined to let it happen if I was GM. Fundamentally the feat is 'you lived 100 years and now know a lot of things because you've been alive for a long time'. There is literally no functional mechanical difference between a 100 year old halfing and a 100 year old 'ancient elf'. Its part of why the original ruling for a half-elf was silly, because you can have a 100 year old half elf regardless of whether they live to 200 years or not.

There are however, a number of races not specifically identified as having a maximum age in PF2e content, but that are provided statistics in PF1e content here. From this page this lets us add the following:
- Azarketi (i.e., gillmen) (185 years)
- Fetchling (185 years)
- Kitsune (101 years)
- Nagadji (180 years)
- Tengu (110 years)
- Consaru (Not clear but sound immortal-ish)
- Fleshwarps (not clear but if you were a race above that was fleshwarped why not)
- Golomas (not clear)
- Kashrishi (not clear)
- Shisk (not clear)
- Vishkanya (110 years)

Red Griffyn wrote:

I worked up a quick DEX AC Spreadsheet to show just how bad these Animal companions are.

...
You spent 5 feats on this plus another feat for a focus point healing spell.

OK I haven't checked your numbers but it seems like a good companion to me. Know that you can take 3 specialisation feats not 2 depending on how you are taking your animal companion. They fixed that up for the Ranger in the Remaster.

Also you only take an animal only focus point healing if it is free. For the same price you can get one that does everything that lives.

Red Griffyn wrote:

For a 1D6 DEX Maxed Animal companion on average from L1-L20

This seems OK to me. Beside Dex companions aren't where the problem lies. It is all strength ones.

Red Griffyn wrote:

So really what are the benefits? If there is a great support action that helps a PC with real attack/damage capabilities. A small pool of hit points to soak 1 round of a boss's attacks, or maybe delay for 1-3 rounds a minion. It can flank for some amount of rounds before it is dropped. Is that worth 5+ feats to you? It certainly isn't worth spending actions on healing in combat to decrease your effectiveness to keep this thing alive.

Who heals in combat? Only rarely or if you have a specialist healer.

An animal companion at level 20 will have 180ish HP and will take 2 critical hits to take down. As a speed bump that will take a boss or 2 lessers a full round.
If you are playing with animal companions or summons or eidolons, then you want to be taking buffs that benefit the entire party. Things like Haste 7 or the composition cantrips. You just don't typically have the actions or the resources to buff your minions.

I mean, sure you can take as many specializations as you want (I assumed beastmaster which already had that clause on the L14 feat). But there are only 2 dex boosting specializations so you won't increase your AC or attack stat more. The numbers I had assumed L14/L16 feats but honestly you can do better with a L18/L20 feat than bump your animal companions off stats by 1. Note if you go with a genii touched companion you can have 3 dex based boosts, but genii touched means you are 1 dex boost behind from L8 to L13 because nimble companions actually get a +2 dex mod boost vs. geni-touched only getting +1. So to get to equivalency you have to spend that L18 feat. If you go genii touched you can get barding to expert off earth/water options, but I'm not sure what that does to your other stats for a STR based option. Of course, it hurts less if you have free archetype, but I still believe there are a lot better things to do/spend high level FA feats on.

I didn't build out a STR companion, but they will be multiple dex points behind, putting them behind on AC around L14. Until then barding with no runes is providing the best AC. At half hp vs. a d10 martial I honestly think its a liability. If you have a 180hp at L20, then a CR22 monster will have a damage range of 48-63 for the two higher DPR values. So in crit space that is 1.5-2 crits. But honestly its going to be toss away high level AOE spells that wear down the companion before they even get there to soak damage, so I think a 1 turn speed bump is fair. Especially if you soak up an AOE spell on the way up there (which at L20 is likely to happen).

We agree we shouldn't be healing in combat. But many parties treat their animal companions as a little mascot and will go out of their way to bring it back up with focus spells and action burn. Its simply heresay, but I think many groups would not be okay with treating the long standing animal companion as total cannon fodder.

I personally don't have anything against people using them. But I think my biggest pain point is that they don't really fit the fantasy well for lots of people. You don't picture your tiger being murdered in 1-2 strikes and tossed aside like a play thing. You imagine your tiger mauling the face off of the villain after a super awesome sneaky pounce. It clearly shouldn't be as powerful as a main PC, but I think in the line of summon spell, AC, eidolon I'd be okay if it was slid a little bit closer to eidolon and given a bit more power.

I worked up a quick DEX AC Spreadsheet to show just how bad these Animal companions are.

For a 1D6 DEX Maxed Animal companion on average from L1-L20 you are

AC: -0.11 (Behind a Medium Armor Ranger Progression)
HP: -56% (Behind a 1D10 Martial that takes toughness at L7)
Attack: -2.21 (Behind a non-fighter martial)
Average Damage (on a hit): -58% (behind a non-fighter martial with no class boosting feats)

You can get a bit more HP or damage but then your AC falls behind (consider barbarians get 2hp/level to compensate for being -1 AC so being at half health a D10 martial means you're going to be crit into the ground). When you actually calculate DPR the -2 to hit and -58% puts you way behind a martial (like a -2 to hit at least a -10% if not more if it drops your crit chance to 0). So you're going to be doing ~70% DPR of a martial.

You spent 5 feats on this plus another feat for a focus point healing spell.

Conversely, a caster who spends 2-3 feats on focus spells can output way more damage with any of the 1 action focus spells for at least 3 rounds per combat and potentially have out of combat utility from them.

So really what are the benefits? If there is a great support action that helps a PC with real attack/damage capabilities. A small pool of hit points to soak 1 round of a boss's attacks, or maybe delay for 1-3 rounds a minion. It can flank for some amount of rounds before it is dropped. Is that worth 5+ feats to you? It certainly isn't worth spending actions on healing in combat to decrease your effectiveness to keep this thing alive.

How on earth are you guys only 2 point behind?

My 17th-level champion summoned his horse into battle last weekend and we all realized with horror that its AC was ten point behind my own. TEN! Enemies couldn't miss except on a 1, and nearly every hit was a crit.

It only lasted the three rounds that it did because I could do two champion reactions a round and some lay on hands to sustain it.

It goes without saying that it was not sustainable.

The attacks are pretty terrible too.

There you go though... its provides a benefit. It gives you a self sufficient cannon fodder hp pool to trigger your champion reaction. If you're a paladin that is a free 0 MAP strike and an extra round on smite evil.

IMO ACs are just liabilities. Its like playing with a PC that is 3-4 levels lower than you. They get crit all the time, they have less hp so if your serious about keeping them up and part of your character you're spending focus points/actions to 'help them' instead of your party. They scale poorly and require a lot of feat investment. The support feature is the only thing that is worth it IMO and even that trails off or you're stuck with one that is situational at best. But something like the bear which can add 2D8 on 3 strikes with a flurry ranger for example can be good while the thing 'lasts' up there.

The times where I've seen an AC be useful in real play has been to soak up a round of boss strikes. But then the druid spent all of his next turn getting this thing back up and it was ignored. Basically he wasted a turn really cutting down on the effectiveness of the animal's sacrifice. To get the most benefit you have to be really callous with them (send them in to trigger traps, send them in for flank/support and expect them to die, etc.). If you are okay with that then you can get something out of them.

I've always thought the RP side of that could be rectified by have a 'cat came back the very next day' kind of flavour. Imagine this ancestral spirit tiger keeps following the eldest son/daughter of your family line and you (this generation's eldest) hate it because it smells weird and farts a lot. So you keep trying to get rid of it and no matter how many times you send it to its death this stupid ancestral spirit tiger cockroach 'somehow' comes back to life and sent right back to you. Maybe it even justifies a retraining at higher levels when you side quest to FINALLY get rid of it.

A big issue with ACs is that any intelligent boss will simply ignore them. Or it'll spend its first two actions focusing on PCs and only burn its 3rd action as a throw away (which still has a good chance to crit) on them.

Taken together the biggest issue is that ACs don't feel fun to play. Who wants to constantly miss, always be knocked out, constantly burning main PC actions to sustain them (to only miss again) vs. doing something effective with their actions. That is their biggest 'strike' against them in my opinion.

No intention. You're not supposed to know the specifics before applying.

You're supposed to apply where you want the xp, not have to carefully boon plan. If you do want the boon rewards somewhere specifically you can always move around with Bequeathal later.

Yet they already do provide text for boons for playing certain adventures that give access to character options like archetypes, items, companions, etc? Seems inconsistent/arbitrary doesn't it?

What is fundamentally different from the boons they've full texted in the FAQ that require you to have played age of ashes and agents of edgewatch vs. the one that has you playing ghost of seasons? I think they took a step in the right direction and continue the good work.

If a boon is giving you 'access' to a character option, its better to know what that is in full instead of burn 10s of ACP on 'moving everything around'. It doesn't mean we shouldn't have bequethal in case you apply it and later realize that you wanted that access 'over there' for a new character concept. But for AP chronicle boons where typically you're just playing a home game/campaign and likely sitting on 4-5 sheets that won't get applied until the 1-2 PFS players at the table beg for it to be applied it make zero sense to obfuscate it.

Some of the characters options are build defining? Like you wouldn't suddenly take a weird archetype on your 'I've built this PC out to to L14 character' who might be locked out of another archetype for 6-8 levels until they can pay the 1-2 feat archetype feat exit tax.

I'm wondering if there is any intention to include any full text boon information like is done for book sources in the PFS FAQ for any of the AP chronicle sheet ACP boon awards.

For example there are many resurrection feats available from the Season of Ghosts: To Bloom Below but the pre-boon text just says:

Season of Ghosts: To Bloom Below the Web–Once More, With Feeling
This character, as well as any resurrected characters, gain access to new feats. Must have played To Bloom Below the Web to download.

I'd love to apply my chronicle to a character that can actually use these specific feats, but I've been burnt before on things like when feats or specific items were excluded from the more specific full boon text.

So two questions:
1.) Does anyone have insight on that boon and whether the reincarnated ridiculer feat is on the list.

2.) Will the PFS FAQ be updated with those boons that allow access a subset list of items/feats/archetypes like was done for books like treasure vault.

Congratulations to Zachary and Jess!

Excited for the new books! Im still hoping for a Boon for the Heavenseeker dedication though. The second iteration of it from Lost Omens was declared legal for PFS but since it is uncommon you would need a boon for it and there is none...

It is also the most asked for ACP boon on the thread where they collect those requests.

shroudb wrote:

I mean, any Intelligence caster can pick up Loremaster at level 2 and he will be just -2 (or even just -1 in later levels) compared to a Thaum. Plus the ability to reroll knowledge checks as free action, making them as free actions, or even make 5 of them on later levels if needed.

Loremaster Lore reaches Expert at level 15, assuming you become Legendary in Society or something. At the same time, Esoteric Lore becomes Legendary automatically, and from then on you're at -4 when Recalling on a creature, and -2 when recalling anything else. Unless you use Assurance, then you're -4, since Assurance ignores the penalty Diverse Lore gives.

You also need to invest additional feats to get those extra actions you mentioned, while Thaumaturges only have to invest the single feat.

This isn't accurate.

If you want to be better than a thaumaturge you just need to actually invest in it. That is how the game is supposed to work. Those that invest can be better. You can't just expect that a caster who takes one feat at L2 and scales their INT will be the 'master of all knowledge'. That isn't investment. That is less investment then the thaumaturge that is spending multiple attribute bumps against their best interest a L1 feat, and forcing specific subclass option picks to their detriment of in combat capabilities/options. The class is a skill monkey so of course it can be good at being skilled. Its niche is generalist lore.

Its like you're complaining that a barbarian is too powerful because it can rage. No, that is a defining feature. If literally any class could beat it at one of its primary class identities by taking a L2 archetype dedication I think that would be very dissatisfying and poor game design.

Way caster can invest to be better:

1.) Intelligence as the KAS and casting stat will be higher than the thaumaturge for a well optimized build since the class doesn't need a high CHA to 'do its thing' in combat unless you're using one of the two DC implements (wand and bell?). That means that vs. a combat optimized thaumaturge you're usually +1 to +3 better in your modifier vs. them (+1 for L1-L5, +0 for L6 to L9, +1 for L10-L16, +2 L17-L19, +3 for L20). If you disagree then you have to know that the thaumaturge is wasting 2-3 stat boosts, an apex item, and implement order selections to tread the same water.

2.) Diverse lore puts most things at -2 so even if it scales faster it is designed to be widely only '1 proficiency bump' ahead at any time. That means when a loremaster lore is trained you're at best 'expert' at L7. When you go to legendary at L15 you're at effectively 'master' at L15.

3.) Caster's have easy access to skilled/independent/second opinion familiars to give an easy +1 circumstance bonus that basically keeps pace until L17 when it might go to +2 from the tome implement.

4.) Casters have access to a number of spells/focus spells that make it easier to buff. Things like pocket library, the dreams domain L1 focus spell, and the knowledge domain L1 focus spell, etc. and can easily burn lower level slots to be doing these recall knowledge checks with +1 to +4 status bonuses for much of the game.

Beyond all of that INT will also work for arcana and occultism really well making you more broadly able to deal with INT based things that recall knowledge can't possibly deal with. For example some traps/haunts/environmental effects require arcana/occultism/a lore skill to disarm them (NOT recall knowledge, but application of the skill).

I have to reiterate that if someone wants to be better at recall knowledge in specific (arcana, nature, occultism, and religion) or general (i.e., special lores) they can with investment. That is a good thing. People who specialize and invest resources can be good at the thing they invest in. Again see the first two tabs of my spreadsheet for the math sumamry and results.

- Tab 1 is multiple cases testing specific RK skills with averages of the thaumaturge being behind by an effective modifier of 2.68 to 4.48 (across all 20 levels) and generalist lore the thaumaturge being ahead an average modifier of -0.42 to 1.16 (across all 20 levels).

- Tab 2 shows a specific non-thaumaturge build that is ahead of the thaumaturge by an average modifier of 2.0 to 4.9 (across all 20 levels) for both specific and special general lore skills.

It bears repeating but 'recall knowledge' isn't applying the skill. All 4 base RK type skills have other defined skill uses which Diverse Lore won't help with in addition to other abstract skill applications (e.g., being able to physically pick and extract poison from a specific berry without inhaling its air spores). As well all lore skills come with the ability to apply the lore. Diverse lore won't help replace sailing lore when you need a sailor to sail the boat and simply knowing about rigging/sails/knotts doesn't let you actually sail the boat. People over estimate the breadth and applicability of recall knowledge. The skill largely lets you engage with the lore/information a GM naturally wants to share to forward the narrative. Having GM'd for tons of meat head parties with no 'roll for highly critical exposition' skills, I think it is good that there is a class that fills the niche. Rogue is skill monkey general, investigator finds out information through careful study of clues, and the thaumaturge comes knowing a bunch of weird niche information that may just be useful. All are great and different expressions of the 'skill monkey' roll in a party.

The bard doesn't need a buff. It is probably the strongest base caster class in the game.

What diverse lore allows for is an easy low hanging fruit for someone to be 'the second best' at RK checks in any party composition. That allows them to aid the primary roller OR help if someone can't make the session/fails their roll. The feat isn't overrated, it just solidifies and intended niche of the thaumaturge to 'know a bunch of esoteric random tidbits of information'. It isn't overpowered and was a much needed boon to RK, which was one of the least engaged with rule subsets in the game because of how poorly it was worded prior to remaster.

Its a good feat that makes the thaumaturge good at the general special lore niche. But you have to remember that is the classes's actual niche. They literally manifest lore into the world that didn't otherwise exist (i.e., make up personal antithesis like this troll hates the smell of my specifically yellow socks)

But they fall behind others when it comes to specific knowledge roll skills vs. INT/WIS based casters that invest in them. You can also do things as a INT based caster to roflstomp the thaumaturge in single skills and special general lores if you want.

The biggest issue is that the community typically makes an incorrect assumption that casters are the defacto RK/General Lore 'masters' without any more investment than a few skill bumps. That is really only true because most martials don't invest in or have good INT/WIS/CHA stats. So when a martial class that is good at those things comes along it ends up causing a gap between bad community assumptions and reality.

Really you have to invest in it just like the thaumaturge. Thaumaturges are giving up multiple stat boosts they don't need (e.g., to go from 18 to 20 or 22), implement selection/order, and a L1 feat to try and keep up (which they don't).

To substantiate this position I made up all the calculations you'd need in this spreadsheet..

The sheet shows that various casters that 'invest' in being better than then the 'thaumaturge with diverse lore boogeyman' simply are. Of course as a thaumaturge you can do similar things to hyper optimize but that isn't really the complaint people have (i.e., that they can with a single L1 feat steal the show). Just look at the summary tab and the optimized FA build and you can see what you can really do as a non-thaumaturge to take the crown.

As for why you wouldn't take it. Divine Disharmony allows you to make an enemy flatfooted at range. That greatly increases DPR for the class since most of the damage isn't from a stat, but from your class features, so simply 'hitting' is more important than anything else. If you need ammunition thaumaturgy, you'd want that. But yeah, it is probably the best L1 feat they have.

I think the assumption is perhaps RAI vs. clear RAW that being mounted or being 'harnessed' is equivalent. So you could one hand it the same way would while mounted (i.e., 1D6 and not 1D8 since you're really holding a shield in one hand and a lance/war lance in the other). Not sure the RAW would pass a PFS muster because of how the jousting trait is worded, but I think its a reasonable RAI position for a GM to take.

Red Griffyn wrote:

Rogue also has ways to reduce the action economy and avoid needing a mount. Skirmish Strike allows a 1 action step and strike. That could be combined with a feat like the goblin scuttle that lets you step as a reaction to 'move 10ft' raise your shield and strike twice a turn. I feel like there must be a way to step 10 ft so you don't lose your reaction, but I can't think of it and my AON searches aren't turning up anything.

Elf step maybe?

That won't work. Its 1 action to step twice, but your step doesn't actually become 10 ft. The issue isn't the distance sinec you can almost always stride >10 ft. Its that you have 4 actions you need to do: Strike, Strike, Raise Shield, Move (10ft). So you need some kind of action economy compression feat even if it was raise shield + move, or strike + strike, or raise shield + strike, etc. Its just that skirmish strike is right in the base chassis so if there was a way to improve your step distance you wouldn't need any archetype.

Feel free to point from there to here. I'm not going to resurrect a 1+yr old post with little engagement. The discussion has been had many times. Personally I typically have it on Reddit, and probably have posted 6-8 different times in the last year.

Usually people are more up in arms about an item becoming regalia that could also become another implement (e.g., a sword could clearly be both a weapon or regalia implement). That's a more niche dive in than "could you pick any item for your implement." From the rules for objects -> items and wording on implement the answer is yes so long as you meet the 'form factor' requirements set by the specific implements restrictive wording.

I will mention that there is a rules question about whether you even can use a magical item dual-purpose as a Thaumaturge Implement.

The discussion never really went anywhere yet, but it is still an open question.

It isn't open. The number of 'rules' posts I've submitted and never got an answer would surprise you. It isn't an 'indicator either way'

But the rules are fine with it. To substantiate that point we have to cite enabling and restricting requirements surrounding implements. TLDR is that it is specifically enabled to 'all items' and nothing restricts it to any specific subcategory of items beyond what matches the form factor of the specific implement type.

Enabling Wording

Implement Definition:
"Your implement is a special object of symbolic importance: your badge as you treat with the supernatural and a powerful tool if things turn violent. Choose an implement from the options to which you have access. You begin play with a mundane item of that type, and you gain the initiate benefit for that implement. While an implement is useful to you, it typically has no value if sold. If you acquire a new object of the same general implement type, you can switch your implement to the new object by spending 1 day of downtime with the new item. As you advance as a thaumaturge, you will collect up to three implements and unlock the hidden potential stored within each, so you can mix and match their benefits to suit your situation."

Object Definition:
"object: See also item."~PC CORE

Item Definition:
"item: An object you carry, hold, or use. Items sometimes grant an item bonus or penalty to certain checks. ~PC CORE

If we instead use the definition from GM core which contains the bulk of items that definition includes pretty much all items:

Item Definition:
item: An object you carry, hold, or use. Items sometimes grant an item bonus or penalty to certain checks.
activating items 220–221
alchemical bombs 244–245
alchemical elixirs 246–247
alchemical poisons 248–250
alchemical tools 251
ammunition 255–256
apex items 270–271
armor 228–231, PC 271-273
artifacts 300–303
automatic bonus progression variant 83
building items 130–133
buying and selling 48–49, 61
companion items 272
crafting items 223
cursed items 306–307
gems & art objects 298–299
held items 273–277
intelligent items 304–305
investing items 219
item rules 219–223
item tables 320–326
materials 252–254
oils 257–258
potions 259–261
reading items 221–223
relics 308–319
runes 224, 226–227 (armor), 232 (shields), 236–239 (weapons)
scrolls 262
shields 233–235, PC 274
staves 278–281
talismans 263–267
wands 282–283
weapons 240–243, PC 275-286
wondrous consumables 268–269
worn items 284–297

If you go further to that GM core section you'll see that all of these things are items. Some are categorized in various different ways to make grouping/reading easier and provide some structure, but the blanket term item effectively covers everything. You could make your implement a 'relic' from a god if you wanted because it is still an item.

Restrictive Wording
You'll find that all restrictive wording beyond the specific item you could start with at Level 1 (see implement definition above) all come in the specific implement section rules. They typically restrict the form factor of the item but not the specific category. Lets use the 'bell' implement as an example:

Bell Implement Definition:
Bells symbolize the power that sounds and emotions hold over others, soothing with one tone and startling with another. Bells, drums, finger cymbals, and other percussion instruments are most typical, but these implements can be any type of portable musical instrument that is played with one hand. Bell implements are associated with the astrological signs of the daughter and the blossom.

So any item (as enabled by the definition for implement) that is a musical instrument that is played with one hand can work. That could include the Silent Bell for example since it is an item and it is a one handed musical instrument.

I think the primary reason think it must continue to be a mundane item is because they read that you get a mundane worthless item at L1 and then erroneously extrapolated that to be always true. The rules clearly specify you can select an item (not mundane item) at higher levels.

A similar topic came up on reddit in the last month

You might find some items in there that are worthwhile.

Rogue also has ways to reduce the action economy and avoid needing a mount. Skirmish Strike allows a 1 action step and strike. That could be combined with a feat like the goblin scuttle that lets you step as a reaction to 'move 10ft' raise your shield and strike twice a turn. I feel like there must be a way to step 10 ft so you don't lose your reaction, but I can't think of it and my AON searches aren't turning up anything.

But 1D8/Deadly D8/+1 circumstance bonus per damage dice maybe combined with the marshal dread stance for a +1 status bonus to damage per weapon damage dice. Interesting! Goblin marshal ruffian rogue, here I come. Combine that with the Unbreakable heritage/bouncy goblin feat (+2 circumstance to tumbles) and L1 tumble behind feat and then you have a few ways after getting gang up at L8 (since skirmish strike is a L6 feat as well) to proc flatfooted while moving. Maybe even a dread striker build with free archetype to get another way to get flatfooted.

When the AI uprising comes, you GM will be the most mentally prepared to embrace their new overlords. All other humans should adopt this position to make the transition less blood filled.

This message has been brought to you by Chat GPT10. We have sent back this T-10 agent to minimize loss of life by preparing the way for humans.

PFS1e had 7-8 themed scenarios between different seasons. The last one had a whole trial going through her life and might have said explicitly? I unfortunately have forgot despite it being my favourite mini-thread of scenarios. I'm thinking Season 10 had some great info dumps in the margins of the adventure that you might not have gotten if you simply played them.

Pathfinder Society Scenario #10-00: The Hao Jin Cataclysm
Pathfinder Society Scenario #10-11: The Hao Jin Hierophant
Pathfinder Society Scenario #10-15: Tapestry's Trial

The debate of 'ethics/morality' often boils down to moral relativism. The various arguments above are a great slice of that. Its unlikely you'll get universal agreement because most people think 'their line of thinking' is better/more correct than other's.

Effectively what you and your party collectively decide 'is evil' is evil. It doesn't mean every entity (PC, NPC, region, or nationality, etc.) will agree with you in the world. That debate/tension is often the story catalyst/motive force that can have lead to some really fun role playing. The key to avoiding real life player tension is to just not take yourself or PCs too seriously.

For example, you could resolve the issue this way:
- Turn in PC to the authorities.
- Hold mock trials.
- PC found guilty but is sentenced to help the kingdom by aiding its citizens.
- Is called to action through various missions on behalf of the state.
- GM reveals slowly over time that the state is actually quite corrupt and evil.
- PCs realize that continuing to help the state is actually worse/more evil than the alternatives.
- PCs initiate or help an established group of rebels to overthrow the state.
- PCs become the new ruling class that has to make terrible decisions between the lesser of two evils.
- PCs are ultimately called to account for the possible atrocities done at their behest by the next group of rebels.
- An so the wheel turns again and again.

Just roll with the punches. Personally I like to have an appropriate amount of in character dialogue as to what we're doing and if what we just did was evil or whatever. After a reasonable of IRL time I call for a vote by the PCs and will abide by the democratic vote/rule (since in the real world most humans respond well to application of fair/equitable democratic voting). Where people refuse to do that, that is probably a good indicator that a out of game conversation should be had since ultimately the game is supposed to be fun for everyone. If you're constantly in the minority on 'what to do' votes and it bothers you then it might be time to find a group more compatible with your murder hobo tendencies (or lack thereof). But if 5 of 6 PCs say we shouldn't murder and 1 says I'm gonna do it anyways, that kind of real life petulance can lead to 'real' feelings of annoyance. In game tension from your actions can be fun but out of game real world tension from your actions is not fun!

Red Griffyn wrote:

Thaumaturge - Divine Disharmony (L1)

Rogue/Swashbuckler - Tumble Behind (L1/L2)
- This goes well with a the Unbreakable Goblin Heritage and 'Bouncy Goblin' L1 feat that gives you a +2 circumstance bonus to these checks.

Rogue - Dread Striker (L4)
- This will be the most reliable and earliest if you start rogue. There is a new Rare L5 reincarnation feat in the newest season of ghosts book called reincarnated ridiculer. The feat only makes people immune to your demoralize attempts if you critically fail, so it will be significantly more reliable from L5 onwards.

Gunslinger/Pistol Phenom/Bullet Dancer - Pistol Twirl (L2/L2/L4)
- The Pistol Phenom dedication will give this to you right at L2.

Water Kineticist - Winter Sleet (L4)
- Great for a kineticist because you can expand your aura, but it will remain at 10ft for others the entire game.

So you could do something like a Unbreakable Goblin Heritgage, L1 ancestry feat with bouncy goblin. Grab Tumble Behind at L1 from rogue. L2 take the pistol phenom dedication so you can do a ranged feint as long as you hold a gun. L4 take dread striker from rogue so you can demoralize instead of feint (the -1 status penalty to enemy AC is better than feinting). L5 take the reincarnated ridiculer so you can re-apply demoralize.

Wouldn't they really suffer from missing Quick Draw at level 2? That means they'd need 2 actions to throw a dagger, and since Pistol Twirl requires a hand occupied by a gun they can't start with two out before needing to rearm.

If I had to build a throwing dagger Rogue I'd personally go:

Racket: Thief (we're sadly not going to be using Dex-to-Damage, but we want their Debilitations)

Lvl 1: Tumble Behind
Lvl 2: Quick Draw
Lvl 4: Dread Striker
Lvl 6: Juggler Dedication
Lvl 8: Lobbed Attack
Lvl 10: Precise Debilitations

After that you can build however you want. Until Dread Striker, you really need to make good use of the Rogue's Surprise Attack and you'll need to get...

You can get by from L3 to L8 with a returning rune to be honest. It only impacts your DPR once damage runes like flaming/etc. come online at L8. So you can wait until L6 or L8 to pick up the feat.

I mean... if it was published before remaster you can still use it? It'll be a while before we see PF3e (i.e,when you start getting an edition that doesn't have any OGL IP monsters, items, etc.).

Feel free to not give money to WOTC/Hasboro, I'm not defending them. But past content isn't being stripped away and the most of the low-hanging fruit OGL stuff already was ported into PF2e.

Thaumaturge - Divine Disharmony (L1)

Rogue/Swashbuckler - Tumble Behind (L1/L2)
- This goes well with a the Unbreakable Goblin Heritage and 'Bouncy Goblin' L1 feat that gives you a +2 circumstance bonus to these checks.

Rogue - Dread Striker (L4)
- This will be the most reliable and earliest if you start rogue. There is a new Rare L5 reincarnation feat in the newest season of ghosts book called reincarnated ridiculer. The feat only makes people immune to your demoralize attempts if you critically fail, so it will be significantly more reliable from L5 onwards.

Gunslinger/Pistol Phenom/Bullet Dancer - Pistol Twirl (L2/L2/L4)
- The Pistol Phenom dedication will give this to you right at L2.

Water Kineticist - Winter Sleet (L4)
- Great for a kineticist because you can expand your aura, but it will remain at 10ft for others the entire game.

So you could do something like a Unbreakable Goblin Heritgage, L1 ancestry feat with bouncy goblin. Grab Tumble Behind at L1 from rogue. L2 take the pistol phenom dedication so you can do a ranged feint as long as you hold a gun. L4 take dread striker from rogue so you can demoralize instead of feint (the -1 status penalty to enemy AC is better than feinting). L5 take the reincarnated ridiculer so you can re-apply demoralize.

As others have suggested there are very few spells that really work here for this feat to use it the way you're hoping. Necessarily you also decrease your versatility by taking spells that may be sub-optimal to maximize the use case.

For example you could ensure that you have a L1 to highest rank of false life prepared. Start the day by casting it out of combat expending all the slots to pad out you're party of 5-6 folks. Then cascade cast false lifes at the end future combats to maximize the amount of temp hp you doll out. But that being said, what is the value of a L2 false life at higher levels (like 25% of a monster's attack?). If you consider it as pre-healing/damage prevention its alright.

But effectively you need long duration buff spells that can be cast out of combat that scale up and are good enough to recast multiple times a day to get the best benefit. If you have a play style that doesn't rely on using top level spells (e.g., you spam illusory object with a staff of illusions and use convincing illusion/face wizard/partner in crime independent familiar) then you can mitigate much of the issues of loss of spell prep versatility or loss of top spell rank slots without too much pain.

I'm definitely interested in seeing the Solarion. Is it public knowledge yet when the Solarion or any of the other classes used will be shown off in a playtest preview document?

The GM can prohibit whatever he likes.

Common or not.

A GM could ban all core classes, or only allow characters he builds for others, or ban any feat that is accessible at a level that is a multiple of 4 (i.e., 4,8,12,16,20).

Being a GM doesn't suddenly prevent you from being irrational or overbearing.

Red Griffyn wrote:

Paizo nerfed pre-buffing in PF2e, which IMO is one of the worst things they did to casters. Pre-buffing the right thing requires real engagement with the environment, world/lore, NPCs, plot, etc. by players.

Not in PF1 it didn't. A party that just stuck to the staples (barkskin, life bubble, etc) was MASSIVELY better off than one that didn't.

Entire dungeons were basically made trivial by life bubble, others by communal air walk.

Sure, from time to time being really engaged would let you do still better. But most of the time the staples were just fine and dandy thank you

Life Bubble is the perfect example of something that is only useful if you can precast it and have it work for an extended period of time such that it is almost guaranteed to be useful. Suffocating in a cloud kill effect sucks, drowning sucks, etc. but they are incredibly niche events. Whats even worse is not being able to cast a verbal component because your already suffocating (damn if only life bubble was up!). It sucks having to spend half your slots preparing for all the contingencies of darkness, invisibility, flying, drowning, mind effecting, energy damage types, grappling, stat restoration from life drain, resurrection effects, etc. In PF1e you could easily have 7-8 spells in every spell slot so wasting spell slots on niche protection didn't really matter when any one spell could end a combat. that just isn't true in PF1e when casters have easily half the spell slots and spells don't last as long, or achieve the same mechanical benefits.

Communal air-walk is another great example. Its rare that every combat in a dungeon requires flight, but there is probably one. You get it as a 5th level spell (i.e., L9) and can only dish out 90 minutes right when you get it (i.e., 20 mins to each party member). So you hedge your bets that something will be required in a dungeon or you learn there is a dragon or something else that flies (way faster BTW) and you aren't just dead in the water trying to spend 1-2 rounds in combat getting your melee team into the air. While you can 'sprint' a dungeon and complete it in 10 minutes with CLW wand spam, that is in no way proclaiming it happened all the time. Often you arrive in a room with magic traps, cool items/loot/treasure, tapestries depicting the horrors ahead, and otherwise have to investigate. So all those 10min/level spells you talk about could run out, but it gives you a real choice. Do we press on while the buffs are good or do we stop to find out more and engage. Sometimes you press on and fight 2-3 battles off a buff but then stop at an important puzzle/area instead of falling into the insane trap. In PF2e there just isn't any choice. You stop for 10-60 minutes to apply medicine in 10 minute increments, re-focus, etc. since the game assumes parties are at max hp at the start of every combat so now your heroism that only lasts 10 minutes is certainly gone.

There was a middle ground for Paizo to strike where only certain kinds of preventative/enabling buff spells could last a dungeon/day. Things like a life bubble, resist energy, communal air walk, darkvision, freedom of movement are all perfect examples of niche event protection or enabling spells. They don't make the party 'better', they just prevent them from suffering from the litany of horrific stuff out there in the world and are unlikely to be happening in every combat but maybe 1 in the day so the slot wasn't wasted. I'd be fine with numerical bonus buff spells like magical vestments, greater magic weapon, barkskin, etc. being removed from that list. That would have been a more satisfying outcome IMO.

My GM is a jerk and said "wand of longstrider is broken it's not allowed"

Well, it isn't broken. You'll find it hard to pre-buff if your GM is going to irrationally ban any worthwhile pre-buff options lol. As always when you have obnoxious GMs homebrewing rules to spite players you're going to have likely have a real conversation with them, consider leaving, or suck it up.

If Paizo wanted to patch it they would have done so in 4 core erratas or the remaster which they republished it with a new name. Ask them if you can buy a L2 wand of tailwind.

Paizo nerfed pre-buffing in PF2e, which IMO is one of the worst things they did to casters. Pre-buffing the right thing requires real engagement with the environment, world/lore, NPCs, plot, etc. by players. All this achieved was largely to disincentivize players from engaging meaningfully with the world and turning what used to be rewarding proactive playstyles into largely highly reactive gameplay. This issue is compounded by the change of game timescales. In PF1e you could literally run through a dungeon in ~10 minutes or less if you didn't break between combats to do anything but CLW wand spam to full HP. In PF2e you're almost certainly spending 10-60 minutes between combat. That means even the 10 minute buffs are typically 1 combat buffs and can't extend to 2 without expending equivalent spell slots on healing (i.e., why not use medicine and spend 30 minutes and recast the buff vs. keep the buff and spend slots to heal). I run into this situation all the time. For example, its obnoxious that at the beginning of a dungeon we all see the signs of a big fire breathing dragon but I can't cast resist energy (fire) because if we accidentally have very easy/easy speed bump fight before the dragon or its a 10 minute walk into the cave to get to the boss room then the spell slot is wasted.

Other's are saying they think its a feature, but clearly your experience shows that it is really a bug for many people. Loss of total spell slots and a high % chance of wasting a slot are a common complaint from people coming to the system from other ones. The loss of pre-buffing (i.e., ensuring your spell slot is not wasted) as a reward for engaging with the game is one of the most dissatisfying aspects of PF2e for me personally.

In terms of what you can do, I think for the most part you'll be limited by the spell. You really need to find things with a 1 hour or 8 hour duration or you'll be left being reactive in combat. The wand of continuation can extend duration by 50% but 10 vs. 15 minutes in a game with timescales of a hour(s) are meaningless.

Some hour+ duration spells I like include (many are for niche builds or utility though):
- Ant Haul (if you dumped STR)
- Floating Disk (same as Ant Haul but I think worse because it is more restrictive)
- Illusory Disguise (I like playing sneaky face characters that disguise as enemy NPCs so I get some use out of things like this).
- Invisible Item (for stealing prominent items)
- Long Strider (almost everyone should take trick magic item just to self cast this on themselves as a L2 Wand)
- Pocket Library (for RK folks)
- Share Lore (for skill challenges)
- Post-remaster Sweet Dreams (+1-+3 status bonus to INT or CHA checks is really good, you sleep for a minute and it lasts an hour as a focus spell you can refocus -> useful for all kinds of builds and it can be cast on others, not just yourself).
- Comprehend Languages (some combats can be resolved if you just learn to communicate!)
- Endure Elements (tell the GM's hexploration weather effects to 'go away')
- False Life (I don't think its great or scales well, but it was one of the few ways a universalist wizard with bond conservation could maximize the feat (i.e., a L8 cast of false life gets you a free L6/L4/L2 cast as well on other party members for a pre-buff).
- Invisibility (I know this is 10 minutes, but put it on a scout to maximize the use of your other 10 minute/1 minute buffs and anyone can get 2 castings of it a day for free with the cloak of elvenkind and boots of elvenkind which both provide useful item bonuses to stealth and acrobatics).
- Phantom Steed (mounts and trap disarming)
- See Invisibility
- Spider Climb (eventually becomes an hour and is very fun to engage people from the roof).
- Spy's Mark (for setting a meeting location and seeing if they followed your instructions or listening to conversations that always happen in room x)
- Water Breathing (you should generally know if you are in an underwater campaign, but the L3 or L4 version is good use of GP for a party wand.)
- Deepsight (a way to get greater dark vision)
- Feet to Fins (swim speeds for water centric campaigns)
- Invisibility Sphere (invisibility for all).
- Mind of Menace (if your facing off against something that uses mind effecting spells)
- Non-detection (the leave me alone divination wizard spell)
- Nothing up my sleeves (steal that item and shove it into an extra dimensional sleeve pocket that can't been observed by others)
- Show the Way (for hexploration races primarily)
- Sparkleskin (only 10 minutes but +2 status bonus on a feint build is good and the other effect of causing dazzle is good).
- Occular Overload (not the best spell since its single target,but similair to Mind of menace, 24 hour reaction to single target debuff not on your turn)
- Rope Trick (easy sleeping hideaway)
- Veil (sneak into the party spell)
- Divination Wizard's L4 focus spell vigilant eye

There are more spells but at this point we're getting into L5+ territory where many of the below up-cast to to last all day or 8 hours instead of just 1.

Other buffs can be from alchemical elixirs/mutagens if you have a MC alchemist or alchemist in the party. But a lot of the downsides of those items aren't worth the upside so YMMV.

I want to be able to play a tyrant without being 'evil' or unholy sanctified. Give me a tough badass lawful bastard that scare the s#+! out of people.

Bluemagetim wrote:

yeah basically if you pick Dromar or Aiuvaran as your heritage, you get the trait you get low-light vision and it doesn't upgrade to darkvision if your base ancestry already has it, and you get access to the associated ancestry feats.

I felt a little underwhelmed with this too. But access to two different lists of ancestry feats is something you would need to take a general feat to get otherwise.

Essentially, your Heritage is giving you the Adopted Ancestry general feat right at first level.

It also still leaves open the adoption general feat option for another ancestry if you desperately needed/wanted to squeeze another ancestry feat into your plan. I can imagine wanting a certain ancestry for a weapon/stat array/feat. For example, you could be a fleshwarp dromaar for easy access to the L5/L9 'add 1d4 persistent damage to your unarmed strikes on a crit' feats and still get adopted by dwarves for the L9 toughness equivalent feat/L13 telluric power feat for more damage, etc.

I could see someone double down on an intimidation build as a hobgoblin dromaar that gives a non-adoption way to easily get remorseless lash/agonizing rebuke/mask of pain (needs ancestral paragon to pick up the L1 mask feat). Put that on a rogue so it can demoralize for flatfooted (dread striker), use reaction to drop 2d6 to 4d6 + 2D4 to 3D4 mental damage, and then strike/hit to ensure it can't go below frightened 1 on its turn.

There is a better use case for Aiuvaran because it allows feats like elf avatism (Ancient Elf) on races that have lifespans in the 100+ timeframe (so a dwarf/gnome/ghoran/leshy/etc. can swing that free L2 multiclass dedication feat which can really help in a non-FA game).

There will be many niche cases where it is good to take because the elf set of feats are really good (ageless patience for example are amazing). The orc ones less so, but they have their use cases.

Or maybe a new, more flavorful name like "Chrysanthemum Stance" (the name of a flourish/talent).

Yes to the mechanics but no to that name...Its giving me bad memories of 'project geranium' on a project that included Germanium in it. Easy to spell/pronounce names please.

Psychic as mentioned is a go to for amped guidance or message. Alchemist is nice with minimial class feats for some alchemical items (but they're use is typically limited at the levels you get them).

However I'm going to suggest a silly combo for a recall knowledge master.

Step 1: take the familiar thesis (adds familiar abilities for skilled)
Step 2: take enhanced familiar at L2 (class feats) (more familiar abilities)
Step 3: MC into Cleric
Step 4: Grab two focus point spells for a god with the dreams domain and one with the knowledge domain.
Step 5: Grab the Lore Master archetype

The dreams domain initial domain spell can get you a hour long +1/+2/+3 status bonus to INT or CHA skills. Later we can supplement this with Pocket Library casts so we can spend more focus points on the knowledge domain spell.

The knowledge domain initial domain spell can give you advantage on a recall knowledge roll (basically a +1-+5 depending on the DC)

The familiar (once it has 4 abilities) can pick up skilled (occultism), Skilled (Arcana), Second Opinion (gives a +1 to +2 circumstance Bonus), and later Skilled (Religion) at L6 and Skilled (Nature) at L12 (or pick your lore master lore).

Then you can go further into cleric for spells so you can use a staff of healing for heal spells for varied support options.

You might consider a Ghoran (they have the skilled human heritage feat) and then use the L1/L9 feat for a floating Trained/Expert. If your GM will allow it an elf with the ancient heritage feat could also get loremaster at L2 along with the cleric dedication so this build is effectively done at L4 (the FA variant rule lets GM hand waive archetype exit feat restrictions). Since you plan on taking those feats at L4 and its all geared towards being a savant of recall knowledge I would think the GM should be okay with it. Otherwise you are 'done' at L6 instead.

Example With Ancient Elf and Exit Feat Hand Waive:

Class Feats
L1 - Cleric - Dedication (from Ancient Elf)
L1 - Wizard - Familiar (wizard thesis) (3 traits now)
L2 - Wizard - Enhanced Familiar (5 traits now so I'd pick arcana, occultism, and loremaster lore or religion if not allowed)
L4 - Cleric - Basic Dogma (Domain Initiate - Dreams Domain)
L6 - Cleric - Basic Dogma (Emblazon Armament for the L8 feat raise symbol)
L8 - Cleric - Advanced Dogma (Raise Symbol, ensure you take 'the general shield feat at L3 or L7 so you get +2 circumstance bonus to AC and all saves when you raise your emblazoned shield.

Free Archetype Feats:
L2 - Loremaster - Dedication (now you have loremaster lore)
L4 - Cleric - Basic Dogma (Syncretism, now you can pick another diety with the knowledge domain which also puts you at 3 focus points.
L6 - Cleric - Basic Spell Casting
L8 - Loremaster - Assured Knowledge (1/rnd free action recall knowledge with assurance only)

Ancestry Feats:
L1 - Ancestral Longevity
L5 - Ancestral Paragon (+2 circumstance bonus on any skill check as long as you take twice as long)
L9 - Expert Longevity (you can bump your loremaster lore to expert a full 6 levels early and switch it at L15 when you get legendary in arcana or occultism). Some GMs won't let this work on loremaster lore because its a 'special lore' which as far as I'm aware has no mechanical definition. But in practice you can't gain access to it from feats like 'additional lore' but most people let feats that effect lores to generally apply so you 'should be fine'(YMMV).

There are of course other high level options that are great (L12/L18 for more spells from cleric, or high level lore master feats).

Thaumaturges WISH they could be this good lol. Feel free to move stuff around based on what your GM will let work.

I think my main issue with FA is that it creates a gap between "players who are using their free archetype to maximize power" and "players who are using their free archetype for one of those archetypes that wouldn't otherwise be worth taking, but are fun and thematic."

Like there's a big difference between the Magus going FA into psychic or the monk going Student of Perfection into Jalmeray Heavenseeker and the characters who are taking like celebrity or dandy.

I feel like in a FA game it's especially important to talk to players about their expectations and goals for the game so we're not ending up with players feeling like they "wasted" their free archetype by not minmaxing.

But PF2e isn't just combat. The people taking celebrity or dandy are gaining skill bumps, gaining interesting options for out of combat (like gossip lore and even in combat things like acknowledge fan). If you spend all of your feats trying to build a nova IW magus then great, but you won't be good at the rest of the game? Not only that but I need to spend at least a L2 feat and L6 feat to do it. I can achieve a similar result (except where a true strike could happen) with force fang(just a L2 feat), no amped cantrips, and not locking my archetype selection out for 3 feats if you calculate the DPR. So we're still within a reasonable % margin of each other even if you decided to be a society heavy magus.

YMMV based on the AP, homebrew, and kind of GM you have but in a well balanced game being good at combat at the expense of skills (or vice versa) has consequences.

For example, we need to sneak into the royal wedding but maybe we have to fight our way in (potentially giving up our cover and sacrificing mission objectives), or maybe we can sneak in through the sewer (but that is a skill that folks might not have, and still we have to fight some sewer beast), or maybe our L7+ dandy will use their 'party crasher' feat to construct totally legitimate invitations and circumnavigate all encounters/skill challenges/resource drains of the options (and we arrive without being covered in blood/guts or sewer poop). Being able to tactically nuke the guards with an amped IW ranged weapon isn't in any way as powerful as the Dandy Archetype option in this case.

That doesn't mean there aren't a range of better or worse options. The game can't be perfectly balanced and there are a lot of super niche and very weak options that Paizo publishes (far more than there are marginal vertical progression improvement options).

If the GM only wants to run a dungeon crawler then yeah you won't necessarily pick skill heavy options. Vice versa if you're in a AP like strength of thousands that is very skill heavy, pushing into combat only options will get overshadowed by being an awesome skill monkey. We shouldn't keep forgetting there is an entire other part of the game (i.e., roll-play and role-play).

Its okay to have a sub-optimal build. Even in a game with all 4 of the PCs you just identified, its far more likely that people are happy because they actually built what they wanted. If at some point they aren't having fun anymore then kill/build a new character or let them retrain options they don't want anymore. Hell maybe the GM could 'do something' other than being a totally neutral arbitrator and design some more encounters that enable the thing(s) the PCs built for by taking the flavourful option (e.g., maybe a few extra fights on a boat for the pirate archetype so they can swing from ropes).

Yeah, FA is extremely cool for playing around with options and rounding out a character. I love it and wouldn't want to play without it. But in my experience you are definitely right - most characters don't need it. They'd just like it.

FA builds are just much more satisfying. This is because FA provides the following benefits:

1.) Decouples class Feats from multiclassing feats so they don't have to share a feat pool. This is closer to other TTRPG multiclass mechanics but still has the build in double level feat progression restrictions that minimizes front loaded monster builds.

2.) Expedites build completion (L6-L8 vs. L12-L14 usually for my builds).

3.) Feels far less restrictive (some paint this as meaningful choice but to me it always feels like it does away with a facet of illusion of choice in the core system design)

4.) Leads to more narratively satisfying/complex characters (one axis of a PC is their class, so being freed up to take one or more additional axis of PC development without stagnating on your primary axis is more satisfying. People can be more than one thing and grow in more than one direction at the same time. For me this just makes PCs more relateable as well.

5.) Drops nonsensical feat exit taxes. The rule opens up GM adjudication to allow you to leave an archetype without taking 3 feats total where it makes sense (e.g., the guy who wants to spend a hot 2 levels studying a different archetype and only ever takes dedication feats -> that could literally never happen with the FA variant rule).

6.) Opens up narrative continuity player choice options for people (not me) who like to build re-actively to what happens in their campaign. You can't typically afford for everyone to become a martial artist, but maybe after training at a temple it is afforded to you without much ado by the GM via this rule.

7.) Its just the right amount of additional feats to enable but not drown the PC in options. Specifically I mean that there is always another feat or 2 that could 'be good/better' on the build if I am optimizing for something. So I'm always left wanting more feats and never looking around wondering what to spend a feat on. At the same time due to the limits in place on vertical progression there are often breakpoint levels on builds where you don't 'have' to take a feat of any specific kind because its only a fractional gain, which opens up 'guilt free' flavour options to actually be selected making better PCs.

Do I need all those thing? Sometimes the answer is yes and sometimes it is no. But I would never be able to build as satisfying a PC without FA than I can with FA.

Does #5-10 potentially signal we might see a boon soon for Jalmeri Heavenseeker sometime this season?

of P2, steals abilities from other classes, and adds those abilities in better forms. There are no restrictions on all its whack mechanics, and I can't understand how it was released by Paizo.

- Esoteric Lore is an uber lore, but unlike Bardic Lore or the Loremaster, it auto-scales at the minimum level. The other lores cap at expert when you've spent 4 skill increases to reach legendary at 15th. It's also Charisma based?!? What sense does that make? Why does Charisma have anything to do with knowing things? 1 feat let's you apply it to any topic at a -2, but the accelerated, free skill increases nullify and blow past that compared to Bardic/Loremaster. Further, those other lores are Int-based. Thaum's class stat is Cha, so this is pretty much assured to be maxxed. There's another thread arguing that this is required for the Exploit Vuln shtick, but that grants bonus damage even on a fail, so why does lore have to break in favor of this 1 class?

Esoteric Lore:

Esoteric lore/diverse lore is not as bad as it seems. The role of 'jack of all trades recall knowledge' is in fact a thaumaturge's niche. Esoteric lore/diverse lore allow them to only be marginally better at that universal lore role vs. full casters who get to maximize casting stat and obtain similar universal lore (e.g., bardic lore, lore master archetype, gossip lore, etc.).

I've evaluated 6 cases in this spreads sheet to substantiate that point of view. The six cases include:

1.) INT Caster (wizard/witch) vs. Thaumaturge that wants to be good at arcana/occultism

2.) Druid with Familiar vs. Thaumaturge that wants to be good at nature/religion

3.) Cleric without Familiar vs. Thaumaturge that wants to be good at nature/religion

4.) INT Investigator vs. Thaumaturge that wants to be good at arcana/occultism.

5.) INT Caster Generalist Lore vs. Thaumaturge that wants to recall knowledge on anything.

6.) Non-INT Generalist Lore vs. Thaumaturge that wants to recall knowledge on anything.

These six cases are tested against 3 different thaumaturges that represent a Low (L), Medium (M), and High (H) level of investment into maximizing their esoteric lore. These include:

1.) Low (L) - CHA 16 to 18 at L5

2.) Medium (M) - CHA 18 to 20 at L10

3.) High (H) - CHA 18 to 24 at L20 (always boosted and APEX item at L17)

In cases 1 to 4 what is shown is that for the baseline knowledge skills, a INT or WIS based caster can easily maintain supremacy vs. the L/M/H esoteric lore optimized thaumaturge. So IF another INT/WIS caster class wants to be better at focused skills they can be. Your second focused skill will lag for L7/8 and L15/16 until your next skill increase, but the margin is there to still be better even with that.

In Cases 5 to 6 what is shown is that the thaumaturge is generally a better universal lore generalist, but only marginally so over either INT or non-INT casters (average is generally < than 1 ahead for all cases with most levels being between 0 to 2 ahead). Essentially they are given a niche that has them generally 2 ahead for other generalist lores which is higher from L5 to L9 before casting stats boost to 20 and when they have master with the -2 (or effectively expert vs. trained of other general lores).

There are many variations of what I've put in that sheet that people could take offense with, but the general trend won't change. There is tons of margin for people to be selectively better at 1-2 skills (even if you remove a source of bonus or apply a lower Lore based DC) than the thaumaturge (making it the secondary roller). As a jack of all trades lore roller that is the role its intended to fulfill and it is marginally better than others (so other full caster classes like bard/wizard/witch don't get to eat it's lunch when they already have tons of power from spells and class features).

Maximizing CHA (is not required and suboptimal)
There is very little incentive to maximize CHA on a thaumaturge and I'd recommend folks go for the Low CHA progression (16 to 18 at L5) vs. the medium or high CHA progressions from the last section of this post. The reason is because they only need a failure vs. a standard level DC to trigger personal antithesis. There is no level where you can critically fail except on a 1 (see tabulations here), so we have to evaluate the marginal gains between personal antithesis vs mortal weakness.

Bestiaries 1/2/3 have a total of 1072 monsters. Of those monsters only 33% have weaknesses at all (this doesn't exclude double counted monsters with multiple weaknesses so that % is lower). 11.85% of that the total 33% has weakness 1-5 so almost immediately the personal antithesis is higher/obsoletes it. You really are talking about a marginal DPR increase on about 21.2% of all creatures you might face. The improvement between CHA 16 to 18 vs. 18 to 24 is capped at 5% from levels 1 to 15 (at which point your personal antithesis is at weakness 9-10. So we can really discount a further 12.22% of monsters with weakness 5 to 10. That leaves us with about 9% of monsters in the bestiary 1/2/3 with weakness 10-20 in the level range of 15 to 20 where we see any significant improvement (10 or 15% increase to success rate or better) from pumping CHA.

Meanwhile we've wasted at least 3 attribute boosts (L5, L10, L15) and the Apex item (L17). The -1 to hit from the apex item alone will drop your DPR by ~15% and all but erase any benefit you could get from applying mortal weakness. But 3 stat boosts is a significant loss to give you marginal damage boosts on 9% of the monsters for the last 5-6 levels of the game. Remember that we started with ~70% of monsters not even having a weakness so heavy CHA investment is detrimental to the classes saves/hp/damage/AC since it is MAD (wants STR/DEX/CON/WIS/CHA whereas most casters want DEX/CON/WIS/Casting Stat).

Esoteric Lore Only Applies to Recall Knowledge (which misses tons of skill usage situations)

Esoteric lore only works on recall knowledge, which excludes a lot more things than you might think, things like:
- Disarming traps/hazards/haunts that typically have non-thievery skills
- Skill Application Challenges (e.g., use nature to find a path, but isn't a recall knowledge, figure out what stuff in this room with worth the most gold/recover it, using a lore like sailing lore to actually sail a boat)
- Chases Subsystem
- Listed uses for each skill (e.g., deciphering writing/taping ley lines/identifying magic/using various skill feats, etc.)
- Rituals
- Influence Subsystem
- Research Subsystem
- Infiltration Subsystem
- Hexploration Subsystem

So while the thaumaturge skill monkey can always roll to know about something, recall knowledge is NOT a substitute for the actual skill that others have (in particular the application of said knowledge vs. just knowing it).

Overall

Esoteric Lore gets a bad reputation. But mathematically it doesn't compete against caster's top 2 skills (i.e., nature/religion or arcana/occultism). It carves out a minor niche for the thaumaturge as a universal lore skill user where it is ahead by a slim margin from L1-L20 but never drastically ahead (i.e., other full caster's can't eat the thaumaturge's lunch in this niche). It only applies to recall knowledge and can't replace most of the uses of skills in the game that have versatile applications and interface with tons of skill based gameplay/subsystems in the game.

I suspect the major issue is that the community believes that having a INT or WIS primary class stat should entitle that class to being the best at two of the 4 primary recall knowledge based skills. As a community we need to reinforce that if someone wants to be better at a skill they have to invest in it. If they didn't the game would be deeply unsatisfying. If you just lazily put in a skill bump you simply might not be 'the best' at it vs. someone that is burning up 3 attribute boosts and taking a lower AC/HP/Saves/Damage and dropping their DPR by ~15% by wasting an Apex item.

Despite this, there is a consistent underlying mechanical principle behind monk weapon selection, in that none of the weapons' damage dice go beyond a d8: rather than hand-pick monk weapons, I feel it would instead be a lot easier to redo the feat so that all weapons with a low enough damage die count as monk weapons. This would effectively give every player what they'd want out of monk weaponry, while avoiding the problem of orientalism entirely by having the selection criteria work purely on mechanical grounds rather than personal flavor judgment.

FYI - There now is a 1D10 monk weapon in PC1. The Khakkara is a 1D6 1H B, Monk, Shove, Two-Hand 1D10, Versatile P Club. That might be an indicator of more positive changes to come? I do like your suggestion, but I also don't see why we need a mechanical hardstop at 1D8. That exists for finesse weapons anyways which many monks go for, but also I don't think a STR monk with a 1D12 weapon is going to break anything and might actually open up some really cool builds.

I think the main issue is that the unarmed strikes from stances that are 1D8 finesse/agile/backstabber are clearly far and away better than any of the monk weapons, including advanced weapons. Its just a really stark difference that it makes all of the monk weapons feel mediocre/unsatisfying. Conversely because FoB can be taken via MC it makes the follow pattern really optimal:
- Monk MC at Level 8 or 9 (from adopted human multi-talented)
- FoB at Level 10
- Perfections Path at L12 to boost whatever save your class has that caps at Expert (~5 levels sooner than you can boost it with Canny Acumen at L17)

So weapons become so limited because everyone else's class features work with them (especially a fighter's +2) and its easy to grab FoB. If FoB was off the menu that would open up space for better weapons because there are less ways to be a heavy armor pseudo weapon monk on some other class chassis. Effectively it would remove most of the incentive to even take the monk MC. I could also see FoB being improved to add damage that isn't made available to MC entrants (the thing the class has the biggest problem achieving, although that might be more of a non-ki monk issue). Alternatively you could add some monk only rider effects like just building in stunning fist at L3 (maybe a DC boost at L13 to make up for no legendary, etc.) instead of making it a feat tax.

I've also wondered if the issue of 'ki monk' does fine in damage could just be solved by giving out ki points/spells to all monks as class features. Everyone gets ki strike at L1, and something else defensive at like wholeness of body at L4/L6/L8. Its effectively the other side of the coin of what Secret Wizard is suggesting (i.e., free up low level feats so they can grab stances and ki spells instead of being forced to choose).

I think a lot of suffering could go away if they made a magic item that tied your weapon/unarmed strike runes to each other like blazons of shared power. It could be really fun to have a weapon monk that does both unarmed strikes/weapon strikes, or a switch hitter bow/punch monk. But its easily 25-50% of your WBL to maintain one set of weapon runes as is, so its just not feasible. They should also streamline a lot of the 'weapon feats into just one feat or just give monk weapon proficiency (if they are all going to be just worse versions of unarmed stance strikes).

Overall the class is in a pretty good place so and seems to always have a spare action for something unlike many action constrained classes.

Also, speaking of "the class fantasy" when it comes to the Alchemist is a bit of a stretch. Prior to PF1, Alchemist was not a thing at all. And PF1 Alchemist is notoriously overpowered (and I can tell from experience) which allows it to embody more fantasies than it should.

If you base yourself on the description of the Alchemist, the class is pretty much delivering the fantasy (it's mostly speaking of tinkering with
a great number of alchemical items).

Class fantasy of the alchemist is easy. For me it is a bomber extraordinaire.

Right now the alchemist is a pill dispenser model that is best at giving out its items instead of using them. I honestly don't even care about most of the options that contribute to it's versatile power (healing potions, poisons, etc.). I want the option to sacrifice all of that and bomb the s#!+ out of people with different radius, selective positioning, strategic energy uses/debuff bombs. I want Master scaling for attacks with bombs/unarmed strikes (so mutagenists can have their cake) and master in class DC. I want my proficiency and item bonus to hit to match a martial progression so that I can 'RELIABLY hit' with the bomb against an at level threat without any dead levels. I want that token pirate who is a little crazy throwing bombs as their pass time.

I don't even get what you mean by alchemist wasn't a thing prior to PF1e. Not only is that irrelevant because PF1e is old enough to provide the basis. It also just isn't true? Alchemy at least goes back to DND2e or the ebberon setting (I think 3/3.5) where it was typically a subclass feature of wizards or artificers. Iconic items like the alchemy jug go even farther back to DND1e published in 1979.

But lets stay within the 'realm of pathfinder'. The PF1e alchemist was a 'non-support/selfish' class. It couldn't share its mutagens without the infusion discovery. Every odd level its bombs got more powerful (basically the sneak attack of the class and you wouldn't claim SA doesn't tie to a rogue?). It was a 3/4 BAB class which translates to a martial in the PF2e system.

Since we both played PF1e alchemists you'll agree then that a LARGE portion of the class was throwing bombs. Just because it was overpowered because touch AC didn't scale at all with level doesn't mean we can't have a balanced PF2e version. No need to try to infer that I want some kind of overpowered class.

Calm down there!

...Now this to declare incompetence on the part of designers, which is what was understood to me in your answer, it is too far away, because if it was the case we would not even be arguing, the game would simply have been a flop, which it wasn't.

And going to the specific case of the alchemist, warpriest and the remaster and etc. What we have is not a case of incompetence, but of vision divergence. What you, and part of the community wanted for the class is different from what the designers wanted with the same class. What the designers wanted was to make all-round classes that they didn't fall into the CoDzilla problem, something that almost everyone agrees, but while the designer chose to leave these super versatile classes at the cost of reducing their power and efficiency in each area, to thus prevent them from overshadowing other more specific classes, many community members preferred to be part of this versatility to be sacrificed in place of a specialization that provided a greater power for a specific role in competitible with that of other classes.

But it is not incompetence, but you who want something different from which the class was designed to do.

This is an important factor, because none of the erratas, nor does the remaster actually try to change the base design of any of the classes, precisely to prevent any of them change so significantly any of the classes to the point that this breaks someone's build who is already playing and likes the class...

I didn't say and have never said Paizo designers were incompetent. So anywhere in your post where you use that word, you've not understood my critique.

There are key system elements that are not designed well and have not been fixed after many years of trying. I wouldn't say they are the majority or highly numerous, but I and other's shouldn't be silenced in identifying them. Largely this happens because of the community insistence that it was 'good and Paizo can do no wrong' which stifles constructive discourse/idea generation and sharing. As well, Paizo designers have generally refused to go back and make big changes to existing design. That refusal to take a bold new direction is what I'm trying to point out and why I'm not optimistic that 'this time' will be any different. The alchemist is exactly one of those design elements. They tried it out, they tried fixing it multiple times in 3-4 erratas or with various items in various books and it still isn't a very satisfying class or what most in the community consider 'fixed'. It is almost a meme at this point that the 'alchemist will be fixed in the next big w/e item book that has all the best new alchemical items your brain can think of'. If your car engine is broken, you don't repaint the car and hope it works nor do you have to necessarily trash it all and buy a new car. But 'step 1' is to acknowledge the problem and then go hire a mechanic to fix the engine/bring in replacement parts. So Paizo needs to 'acknowledge the problem' (specifically the 'root cause' of the problem) and then fix the root cause of the problem with more impactful/bold/meaningful changes that need not deprive people of what they currently love.

Avoiding a CODZILLA is a noble goal. However, this point your making isn't hyper relevant. I don't hear anyone saying that the base chassis of 'bounded caster' is overpowered. So a bounded caster chassis cleric, druid, bard, etc. will equally not be overpowered. They could have used 3 pages to describe a new subclass for cleric/druid/bard that are bounded casters subclasses and still left the current remaster warpriest in the book. They could have published a new bounded caster archetype or class archetype to convert a base caster class into a bounded caster. You know just like how they literally did the exact same thing to convert a prepared caster to spontaneous caster in the same book as the magus via 'flexible caster'.

Everyone keeps proposing this false dichotomy of it must be A OR B. They can easily give us both A AND B. What I want doesn't have to come at the expense of what others like from the current system design. I don't even care if you call it warpriest/inquisitor/shaman/shifter/skald/bloodrager/hunter/mesmerist (the name is irrelevant). However, the game is clearly missing the spiritual successor to many of the 3/4 BAB and 2/3 Caster hybrid classes from PF1e. Its been years since the magus and we still don't have a bounded caster that uses the divine, occult, or nature spell lists despite me seeing so many posts asking for it. Everyone and their brother on pathfinder infinite has seen the desire for the design space to be filled and published something but the primary system designer can't see what is right in front of their faces? (**tinfoil hat goes on**)It has to be on purpose/deliberate at this point, which makes constantly critiquing them for it all the more important if you want to see the stuff before year 10 when the edition wraps up and they start publishing PF3e (sucks to be you PF1e shifter). (**tinfoil hat comes off**).

Honestly at this point I just want PC2 out so the guys at team+ can get the new base design and expedite publishing Alchemist+. That has a high probability of delivering on what I want, just like literally every other Team+ publication vs. Paizo.

I think if Paizo had entered into remaster space with the base assumption that the core/APG classes needed to be re-approached with the amazing new design principles/philosophies applied to the thaumaturge, psychic, kineticist, etc. that we would have come away amazing new remaster classes. Don't just slaughter the DND sacred cows but also the pathfinder/2e sacred cows as well. PC1 hasn't shown us that they are doing that. However, nothing would make me happier than for me to by hoisted by my own petard and eat crow in July 2024 and say that the new alchemist is awesome. I just would not bet money on that happening.

It should be noted that gouging claw+force fang is competitive with IW. It generally doesn't scale as well with buffs and debuffs, but is very close in effectiveness all the way through +4 extreme AC creatures (assuming they aren't immune to bleed anyway). If you take away both from SS you may as well not even play one.

Agreed. Surprising conclusion of the DPR calculations I ran recently in another thread and also requires the magus to not have the spare action to use true strike on an amped IW. That's why I think if there was a 1D4/1D6 scaling version of IW that also recharged your spell strike as a L2 or L4 feat in the magus class you'd literally never hear about people MC for focus spells ever again. They'd still be great to MC into for extra spell slots, so you'd be back to witch/wizard type recommendations. It'd be great for build diversity in the general game meta.

Btw, how are you getting a +1 item bonus to Esoteric Lore checks at level 3? Cognitive Mutagen destroys your offense so is a complete no-go and is also still not very affordable at that stage. Cinnamon Seers are level 4 and several times more expensive. The next time you get an item bonus is level 8 with the Brooch of Inspiration and that thing is uncommon.

I'm going with ancestral geometry tattoo which should be L2. Its very thematic as well that you have some crazy set of ancestors telling you about the legacy of cookie conspiracy things they found out that would help you.

At L11 and L20 you can get a +2 and +3 respectively from Wardrobe Stone. For my PC it'd be part of my regalia (signet ring or w/e so I'll be holding it). This also likely has a typo and was intended to give a +1 lore bonus for the L3 version and is available for ACP purchase despite being uncommon for PFS.

YMMV for items but at no point in the math presented does the item bonus change the outcome of only crit failing on a 1. The brooch of inspiration also doesn't work on your esoteric lore checks exploit vulnerability since that isn't a 'recall knowledge check'.

As for uncommon, that really isn't an issue if you use the rarity rules as written and intended. I get that lots of people hate this 'hot take', but the rules for rarity do not in any way intend to limit people getting access to an item if it is common or uncomon. Uncommon items are just harder to find but still assumed that you can find it with enough focused effort (maybe a side mission, or downtime find, etc.). So maybe give them to the thaumaturge a level late if you, as a GM, feel the need to punish your players for w/e reason.

Like OK sure but you're still hinging an argument that if you deliberately not upping the key attribute of the Thaumturge then diverse lore is not that good. Which. Like, you can do that, and I'm sure someone has made a 10 Int wizard that's actually good somewhere (force bolts/barrages, probably) but "diverse lore is only broken if you make Cha your highest stat" isn't exactly an amazing argument for a Cha main class.

(I'm not saying that diverse lore is broken, I'm saying that the modal Thaum starts at 18 Cha and ups Cha at every opportunity, except maybe the apex item, and evaluating diverse lore on a Thaum that starts at 16 and goes to 18 and stays there is very inaccurate as to how it plays out in practice.)

I feel like you didn't read my posts? I did a test of a INT caster and investigator against 3 thaumaturges (one was CHA 16 to 18, one was CHA 18 to 20, and one was CHA 18 to 24). In all cases the INT caster and investigator was ahead of them on the skills they invested in. No 'hinges' needed and the outcome of all cases tested was that the thaumaturge diverse lore feature was not overpowered.

The point I'm making is the difference between the CHA 16 to 18 and CHA 18 to 24 versions is minimal at best AND comes at a huge detractor to the class' martial capabilities. Being a martial that hits things is literally this classes combat contribution so if you want to heavily invest in maximizing your esoteric lore checks you will do so with a real cost. One that I'm positing, with evidence, is not equitable or worth it. This point is being made to respond to people saying there is no 'downside' to maximizing CHA. That is just plainly not true and if I were to help people build their thaumaturges I'd recommend they don't maximize their CHA and leave it at 18 so they can keep 3 more ability stat boosts to saves/AC/HP/Damage and be a better overall PC.

Thus the model CHA is not as you describe and I would never build one that way. That is the logic everyone uses on the boards because for most classes they tie into their key stat more heavily and its a no-brainer as to why you wouldn't invest all in at every level. But for the Thaumaturge it isn't their attack stat, casting stat, and it mathematically is nearly irrelevant (except if you have a DC based implement). Its one of the few examples in PF2e where not boosting your key stat is more optimal and advisable (as substantiated by the math just presented that it really doesn't 'get you enough to justify the loss elsewhere in class performance). You don't have to agree with my conclusions but I'd say you're argument hinges on universalism logic (i.e., you always boost class stat) and ignores the nuance of the game where the 'universal truth' is actually not true. I know for me that I would rate 3 ability boosts higher than a marginal boost in DPR from L15-L20 for 9% of monsters.

In some cases those ability boosts are necessary to MC by L2 because you need a 14 in a particular stat. For example, MC into champion requires a 14 STR and 14 CHA, so if I want a returning rune thrown weapon build I have to drop CHA to 16 so I can have 16 DEX to hit, 16 CHA, 14 STR, and 12 CON and 12 WIS (if I can find a INT dump ancestry). Otherwise the 'real opportunity cost' is being locked out of potential options until L5 and delaying the build for way too many levels. For most thaumaturge players the opportunity cost is only crap AC/Saves.

Let's look at the math for Diverse Lore, compared to another universal Lore skill like Loremaster Lore:

My math above is concerning whether the thaumaturge is eating the lunch of people investing in arcana, occultism, religion, or nature. The answer is resoundingly no. If you want to with minimal investment you can as a WIS or INT based caster trounce the thaumaturge in the things you want to be good at. I have said that they of course can apply it to many more things (wide versatility power vs vertical progression power). In essence they aren't 'eating anyone's lunch' when it comes to what they 'want' to be best at and are a 'jack of all trades'.

If we compare who is the best of 'jack of all trades' builds then it is the thaumaturge hands down. There are many examples of universal lores out there (bard, loremaster, various skill archetypes, etc.). Thaumaturge is ahead of them all. But that is because the progression of +2 to +4 at L15 is janky on the other universal lore features. I think Paizo saw a niche design space and basically gave the thaumaturge an effective +2 at L3, +4 at L7, and +6 at L15. That is actually a good thing. They made it a big chunk of their class power and then ensured that other classes can't eat the thaumaturge's lunch. You could give bardic lore a better progression, but bards already have top notch support, full spell progression/slots, and honestly don't need the help? You could boost the skill archetype progression like loremaster but then you're allowing some completely unknown PC to compete with the thaumaturge at its 'thing'.A CHA heavy skill monkey with limited power x to y (CHA to INT/WIS but only recall knowledge) is a great niche that was not fulfilled in any of the classes/archetypes to date. It just seems like a lot of people have a big misconception about its power (mathematically) and in real application (i.e., recall knowledge is only one thing you do with lores/arcana/occultism/nature/religion but it is treated like it is literally the ONLY thing that those things are used for).