Repentia's page

17 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Very good work magnuskn.
I hope your impressive work will be acknowledged by the devs and lead to the necessary changes that need to happen.

I like the new system because of the potential is has.
However, the current version is deeply flawed imo. Most of the design flaws have been pointed out already and I hope the designers of Paizo will notice and change them.

shroudb said wrote:

so... if all Int classes start with 3+Int
and all martials start with 3+int

why should sorcs, druids, clerics, and others NOT start with 3+int?

Exactly. Penalizing INT-Classes makes no sense in the current version of P2e.

The Sarcastic Sage said wrote:
You are forgetting the domain power (Wis Bonus) times per day, so technically it's 2 1st level spells, +Heal/Harm 6 times per day, +4 uses of their domain power (which at first level, is set to 1st level). So it actually ends up with a first level Cleric casting 12 first level spells. Now while that may be 1 less first level spell per day then your PF1 example, considering the reduction in spells per day amongst all casters in PF2, I feel that Clerics suffered the least.

You are forgetting that PF1e clerics have them too. They can use most of them WIS +3 times a day. So 12 against 21? ;-)

But i agree with you about the current state of the cleric. The class is clearly one of the most powerful at the moment.

The Sarcastic Sage said wrote:
Also, unless your GM was being very generous with points for point buy, and you are willing to eat a lot of 7's in your other attributes, or you were the luckiest guy at the table, having a 20 Wisdom, and an 18 Charisma at level 1 was highly improbable in PF1. Having an 18 Wisdom and 16 Charisma in PF2 is simply a matter of player choice.

Of course it is. So what?

PossibleCabbage said wrote:
I mean, a level 1 Cleric with 18 wis and 16 Charisma can cast 9 first level spells now!

He can cast 2 level 1 spells and 6x Heal/ Harm through channel energy = 8?

A Cleric in PF1e (20 Wis, 18 CHA) could cast 4 level 1 spells and channel energy 9 times (3 + CHA + 2 Extra Channel Feat) a day.

shroudb wrote:
Secondary, martial in this edition do much more damage than blasters.

Can you proof that claim?

Sorcerer spell level 9 Cone of Cold: 19d6+9 = average 75 damage in a 30/60 feet cone.
Sorcerer spell level 9 Disintegrate: 18d10+9 = average 108 damage to a single target against touch AC.

Show me how a martial class that can even come close to that.

shroudb wrote:
The only case for martial/caster discrepancy comes from picking up their early damage options through multiclass (notably double slice)

This is not true.

A Caster can raise his STR to 20(22 with item) and can take armor training/ martial weapon training with general feats. No multiclassing needed.

That's right, i made a mistake with the level-5 creatures, which can actually crit on an natural 20.
Still a very small chance though.

I Think there is a serious problem with the two "summon" spells.
While decent at low levels, they seem to fall behind quickly at higher levels.

A few examples to make my points clear:

Level 1, Animated Broom, +7 attack against an average AC of 15
Level 5, Animated Armor, +8 attack against an average AC of 20
Level 10, Lesser Elemental, +13 attack against an average AC of 27
Level 15, Elder Elemental, +22 attack against an average AC of 35
Level 20, Treachery Demon, +25 attack against an average AC of 44
Once per day you could sacrifice your 10th level slot summon a phoenix with +28 attack.

When you add the need for concentration and the limited control over the summons, Summon Monster/ Natures Ally seems to be an awful choice to prepare/ learn at higher levels.

My suggested fix:
Change the summon level forumula to spell level x2 -2.
This would lead to the following changes:

Level 1, Animated Broom, +7 attack against an average AC of 15
Level 5, Gargoyle, +11 attack against an average AC of 20
Level 10, Stone Giant, +18 attack against an average AC of 27
Level 15, Boar Demon, +26 attack against an average AC of 35
Level 20, Mutilation Demon, +29 attack against an average AC of 44
Once per day you could sacrifice your 10th level slot summon a shoggoth or kraken with +32 attack.

What do you think?

10 Monsters at level -2 are 40 XP above the extreme encounter budget and therefore should be the end of most groups.

But what i mean by "low level monsters" against "high level characters":

10 Monsters at level -5 will hit characters at 14-16+ and can not crit.

10 Monsters at level -10 will hit characters only on a natural 20.

You see the problem here?

More crits against low level enemies are not relevant, because they are next to no threat to high level characters.
Creatures of the same or higher level than the party are the "real encounters" with challenging combats.
That seems to be the current state of PF2e.

This would be much less extreme if there is no level-bonus.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I agree.
After the recent errata the wizard is the only class with 2+INT skills, which makes no sense.
Maybe it would be a good idea to add signature skills based on the spell schools?

Something like this:
Abjuration - Survival
Conjuration - Occult or Religion
Divination - Society
Enchantment - Diplomacy
Evocation - Intimidate
Illusion - Deception
Necromancy - Medicine
Transmutation - Acrobatics or Athletics
Universalist - 1 free

Nice build.
However, i can see some significant weaknesses:

#1: Lacking option to attack flying enemies.
Even with a backup shortbow he will deal pathetic damage and miss a lot.
Suggested solution: Take Fly for your level 4 slots.

#2: Bad Reflex and Will Saves.
+23/+22 against DCs of 34+ is really bad. You will be charmed (unable to act hostile) and/or criticaly hit by Combat Spells. 7d12x2+ Damage hurts, even with a nice HP-pool.
Suggested solution: Try to invest more into DEX and WIS by lowering CHA and INT. Iron Will is mandatory.

#3: Bad Attack Spells.
Baleful polymorph (awful spell DC) and Wall of fire (pathetic damage) will do next to nothing.
Suggested soultion: Take more utility spells instead. Teleport would be a good idea.

I agree with MrShine here.
My group has already begun to question the usefulness of pure martial classes in general.

Clerics and wizards in particular can reach equal levels of offensive power with their weapons AND have 10th level spellcasting at their disposal.
Not to mention powers like Channel Energy.

These are some valid points.

I think #4.5 is more of a gerneal problem with a lot of powers and spells. Small modifiers with a short effect durations paired with high monster saves can be very frustrating for players.

This will lead to generic blaster casters with very few utility spells.
And that is sad imo.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Vic Ferrari wrote:
You would have to adjust elsewhere, because there would be a lot more crits (the legendary guy has an extra +3).

I think more crits for players is not necessarily a bad thing.

Even more so when you take the new monster stats into account.

Honestly, i think the -2 untrained modifier is already close to a "dump skill".
As an example, a level 10 fighter with 18 DEX will have an untrained stealth of +12.
He already needs to roll a 16+ to sneak past a slaver demon or tyrannosaurus (both creatures of level 10).
An untrained diplomacy roll with CHA 10 against an equal challenge would even be more disastrous.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Why not change the proficiency modifier to -2 untrained, +0 trained, +2 expert, +4 master and +6 legendary?

That way the difference between untrained and legendary will be a lot more noticable.

This also leads to better skills/ saves/ attacks/ Spell DCs in line with the new monster stats and gives player classes an edge over them at high levels.