Ryangwy's page

Not only is that not indicated anywhere in the rule, the critical fusion trait implies that hitting with a melee weapon does not discharge any linked ranged weapon, or else the trait does not work (it allows you to optionally discharge the ranged weapon on a crit for added effect)

Finally, I will point out that "The Wizard is worse than the other classes" is a positive claim, but the "the Wizard isn't bad" would be proving a negative, particularly in such a radically balanced game, I'm trying to argue in good faith along the positive line "the wizard is good" but most of that seems self-evident because I'm not being given much of a reason anything is actually bad-- most of effectiveness for a caster is baked into the number of slots and the base proficiency which they all share, even some of the actual arguments being made aren't committing to that and are staying on the side of 'fine but uninspiring' as a more nebulously subjective proxy for what other people are solving as 'bad.'

I think it's fair to say that the wizard can't be a bad class, because a 3 slot caster with +1 highest rank slot baseline will never be completely unplayable, but that now it's by far the worst caster class and the existence of a few worse-performing martial class doesn't really change the fact the wizard needs a lot of looking at.

They have by far the worst baseline proficiencies on every axis, they have no native way to get a third focus point, and because schools tie their focus spells and school spells together you have a lot less flex about just picking something that gives you better focus spells because unlike e.g. Witch you can't just grab better focus spells/granted spells via feats. The thesis are split into 'gives you way more slots at higher level, exceedingly meh at lower level' and 'give you QOL benefits that may never come up' and they're the only subclass that forces you to pick like that, it's ridiculous (OK, Animist, animist subclass design also sucks though).

And in the end they can still fire seven top or top-1 spells of their choice a day and archetype out for better focus spells... if you ignore their terrible chassis... but you could also just play a class with those focus spells and other benefits built in and buy a scroll.

I also think Spell Substitution is overrated for similar reasons. It's great when the situation aligns where there is a spell for this situation, you have it in your book but don't have it prepared, you have time to wait to get the spell, it's high enough level that its not practical to just carry a scroll, and you can't solve the problem with skills instead.

My understanding is that Spell Substitution is great for keeping the balance of your spells in place. You start with, say, two each of reflex, fortitude and will targeting spells in your top slots, maybe some general use but still not always useful things like Dispel Magic at rank-2 or an AoE incap in your 4th top rank slot. Two copies of Fly, perhaps. Then as you go through encounters and deplete them, you reshuffle to maintain the same balance, maybe to align with what appears to be the dungeon theme. Using a lot of Reflex spells against the mindless constructs? Probably time to wave goodbye to the Will spells you prepped.

You basically try to always have a generalist spell list prepped, whereas prepared casters, by design, become less generalist as they spend spell slots

I think there's maybe also some underestimating of how many people don't want to be sold Wizard a third time in the same edition.

I know I personally would prefer a new class (for example, a dedicated magical researcher class) to getting a Wizard overhaul. It's just not very interesting to talk about how I'm generally okay with Wizard. I can understand people who do want an overhaul, it's just less interesting to me than something brand new, or more space being used for options in a hypothetical options book.

The Wizard is, IMO, in a situation where it could be fixed with some effectively compulsory low-level feats, which can occupy less page space (though admittedly, 'this class only gets good if you grab these specific feat from a non-core book' is kinda dumb but hey, here we are).

The key asks are a) some way to expand the school spells, b) some way to easily get a 3rd focus spell natively and c) some way to get a second thesis (the usual ask is spell sub). The first two could easily be bundled (for non-universals) as a order explorer type set of two feats, one that adds the spells from a second school to your school list and one that adds the focus spell. The third can be a higher level feat that lets you gain a second thesis. It's a very low hanging fruit, but then again wizard class archetypes that are successful don't seem to need to make many tweaks.

The namesake Oracle of Delphi got a vision of the future that nobody believed, while animists are based on the shamanistic traditions who are famed for having visions of the future that are believed and acted on.

Since it's kind of hard to RP 'but nobody believes' instead Oracle gets a bunch of divinatory flavoured buffs that only works for them.

And thus, all threads arrive as they are supposed to: with Wizard talk.

As well as feats that recharge spellstrike while, say, recalling knowledge (they won't make a feat that recharges spellstrike on crit, that's too feast-or-famine for an already feast-or-famine class)

I mean a lot of the old oracles were very unique spellcasters with little gishness. Battle Oracle isn't the only oracle people miss. Blind Flame Oracle, Tempest Oracles who got the damage boost on the rarely used water/air spells, life oracles uniquely suited to spells that used hp as a power source... all of them are dead now.

Sure, we got a sorcerer-sidegrade with a bunch of stuff, but sorcerer already existed. Who cares about yet another 4-slot divine caster with ways to access off-tradition spells via deities and a second pool of per-encounter resources? Apparently a lot of people, but I'm still mad.

With the example of your life oracle from premaster I think one design decision was to roll back something they may have thought of as a mistake. ofcourse I dont know if thats it, but it looks that way to me. The oracle was doing things they felt spell casters should not be doing. Like with your idea of taking champion and oracle dedication as a way to do what you did premaster it really seems like the statement is that oracle should not have filled some of the roles their curse benefits enabled premaster.

Naturally, they then proceeded to print Animist, which absolutely did the thing intentionally.

No, I think the Oracle remaster happened exactly as the previews said. The original Oracle designer left, and someone who disliked the Premaster Oracle was put in charge of it, with a plan to 'widen it's appeal'. Time ran out, so the remaster, which prior to this point was largely stripping away the identity of each individual Curse, needed something to hold it together, and that's when the 4th slot and possible some of the more generically powerful but not particularly oracl-y things like granted spells came in.

For people who follow Magic: the Gathering, this may sound very much like the chain of decisions that led to such luminaries as Nadu, Winged Wisdom and Uzumeya's Jitte being printed, except for once Paizo really doesn't have the excuse WotC does with their deadlines and actually large number of moving parts.

All of my gold I gained from being a merchant comes from downtime using mercantile lore, which keeps things in balance.

Although my pretend intent is to sell it all, I always have a backpack stuffed with as much as I can carry. I have lots of consumables of all types, but heavy on healing, and then I pack every item I can afford that has 0 bulk. Just today, I was able to pull out a brass ear to help other PCs over here in a conversation. So I end up saying this a lot. "I was going to sell this, but think it might be better if we use it now."

Another way I play a merchant without breaking the game's gear progression is bartering instead of selling.

An actual trade deal did come on it play today. We were in a village that did not like strangers. So I tried to buy some local clothing to fit in better, and hoped spending some coins would help get the merchant to give us some info we were looking for. The merchant was trying to overcharge us, and I was able to figure that out and get a better deal, and the info using mercantile lore.

In some scenarios, being a merchant helped with missions, setting up a trade deal for the Pathfinder Society. So a lot of it is more making deals than making sales.

As far as combat goes, I'm getting too tired to explain how, but today, after the boss monsters killed me with 2 massive crit hits, each single hit doing more than my total full HP, the boss monster died from the persistent fire damage I had started.

Honestly, it sounds like the 'merchant fantasy' is really just the 'itemcrafter fantasy' in most ways? We have an alchemist class and half a dozen archetypes that both provide a free supply of items and makes it easier to craft them, so I guess case closed.

Might be funny to think of an alchemist's versatile vials as, like deals you make along the way, bartering various stuff that's not worth gp exactly until you get something approximating a useful alchemical item. That flavour is obviously harder to pull in some compaigns than others, but maybe you're haggling with the interdimentional barter realm every 10 min to recharge your versatile vials while walking through the manor of the crime lord you're fighting.

Or you just skip that and use a guide, but "you need a guide to build a character because the options are so hard to find without expansive system mastery" is a PF1 throwback that PF2 is better off without.

PF2R Oracle is very much a PF1e throwback so that tracks

And also - can this class fantasy be better expressed as an archetype that can be taken on any class with the right set of skills?

What I did, for Abdomination Vaults, was to offer a selection of curated archetypes (you know, all the undead killing ones), and offer quests to unlock feats from them, let's see if I can dig them out...

Anyway, how it went was that you had 'free archetype' but only for those feats, you didn't run into archetype lockout, and could retrain any feats regarding those unlocked archetypes for free, and sometimes I added more heft to an archetype by adding extra feats (I gave the Captivator spellcasting chain to the Ghost Hunter, for instance).

I try to pick enough of them so everyone can have something which shouldn't be too hard if everyone has bought into the theme.

The jauntily dressed stage magician passes you a mug of ale in the back-room of the Osprey Club "You ever heard what happened to the Thirsty Alpaca? Place is a ruin, now, and supposedly there's haunts everywhere. Interested in paranormal investigation?"

Ghost Hunter Training
"Well, first you'll have to get the bosslady's permission before I can share with you the fun stuff. Union rules!"

Objective: Become Liked with Crook's Nook. All

Reward: Add the Ghost Hunter Dedication to your 2nd level Free Archetype slot. If you're not trained in either Religion or Occultism, retrain a skill proficiency such that you are, for free.

The Original Definition of Necromancy
"It's not easy to get past the haze of being dead, but spirits can be awfully chatty once you do. If you haven't got the experience, we can hop down to the Graveyard to practice!"

Objective: Succeed on a Diplomacy check with an incorporeal undead or haunt OR pay 16sp and spend half a day of downtime to make a DC19 Diplomacy check (if you critically succeed, get back 8sp; if you critically fail, pay another 16sp)

Reward: Add the Grave's Voice to your 4th level or higher Free Archetype slot, if you have Ghost Hunter Dedication.

I See DEAD PEOPLE
"There's only one way to develop the required twitch reflex to spot spirits even when you're doing something else, and that's experience! The Thirsty Alpaca's this way."

Objective: Succeed on a Recall Knowledge check with an incorporeal undead or haunt OR pay 16sp and spend half a day of downtime to make a DC19 Religion or DC17 Spirit or Haunt Lore check (if you critically succeed, get back 8sp; if you critically fail, pay another 16sp) Kara

Reward: Add the Investigate Haunting to your 4th level or higher Free Archetype slot, if you have Ghost Hunter Dedication.

Occult Spellcasting For Dummies
"Yes, I know how to cast spells. You want to learn, too? Alright, let me get my props..."

Objective: Use the Learn a Spell for the spell you want to learn, using either Religion or Occultism and ignoring the requirements. You must repeat this for the 2nd and 3rd level spells granted by the feat, and can retrain the spells at any time using this mechanism. Kara

Reward: Add Spirit Spells to your 4th level or higher Free Archetype slot, if you have Ghost Hunter Dedication.

More Occult Spellcasting For Dummies
Objective: Have innate spells from at least three different spell ranks.

Reward: Add Spirit Spell Intensity to your 4th level or higher Free Archetype slot, if you have Ghost Hunter Dedication.

Cast Fist
"Punching ghosts can be very hard, or very easy. Let me introduce you to easy..."

Objective: Spend a can of Ghost Charge (Lesser) and succeed on a DC23 Religion or DC20 Spirit or Haunt Lore check

Reward: Add Sacred Armaments to your 6th level or higher Free Archetype slot, if you have Ghost Hunter Dedication.

Looking at the dark side of life
"If you don't exorcise your ghosts, they keep coming back. Pesky thing, that"

Objective: See a ghost or haunt you defeated but did not exorcise come back. Kara

Reward: Add the Peer Beyond to your 8th level or higher Free Archetype slot, if you have Ghost Hunter Dedication. You also gain Additional Lore in either Spirit Lore or Haunt Lore, whichever you have trained, as a bonus feat.

Occult Spellcasting For Budding Occultists

"Yes, some of those early spells you learnt are getting on with age. I'll explain."

Objective: None. You already paid to learn the spells. Kara

Reward: Add Heightened Spirit Spells to your 8th level or higher Free Archetype slot, if you have Ghost Hunter Dedication.

Occult Spellcasting For People who want to learn more
"Congrats, you're now on par with an actual sorcerer! Uh, for a while, at least."

Objective: Use the Learn a Spell for a 4th level spell you want to learn, using either Religion or Occultism and ignoring the requirements. You must repeat this for the 5th and 6th level spells granted by the feat, and can retrain the spells at any time using this mechanism.

Reward: Add Expert Spirit Spells to your 10th level or higher Free Archetype slot, if you have Ghost Hunter Dedication.

She's working in the kitchen at Crow's Cask, but a glance at her limbs will show she's no mere cook. After the graveyard incident, her soup special is just flying off the shelves, but eventually she finds some time to sit down. "Well, you said you wanted to learn. Where's your shield?"

First Training: Know Thy Enemy
"There sure has been a lot of different types of undead recently, aren't there? Fight them, and tell me how they are."

Objective: Successfully Recall Knowledge on at least two different Undead in combat. Luciel

Reward: Add the Lastwall Sentry Dedication to your 2nd level Free Archetype slot. Retrain Reactive Shield for free, if you have it. Gain access to the Familiar Foe and Final Rest skill feats

Be On Watch

"Not bad. Now, you need to practise being on your watch"

Objective: Have Expert Perception. While rolling Perception for initiative, beat every undead in that battle in initiative. Luciel

Reward: You may add Eye of Ozem to your 4th level or higher Free Archetype slot.

On your Flank

"The dead are cunning, but it''s a consistent kind of cunning"

Objective: Kill an undead that you are off-guard towards Luciel

Reward: You may add Always Ready to your 4th level or higher Free Archetype slot.

Let not the wicked touch you

"You'll have to let all those gribblies roll over you, you know?"

Objective: Critically succeed on a save by a undead or haunt, or an effect that deals negative damage Luciel

Reward: You may add Necromantic Resistance to your 4th level or higher Free Archetype slot.

PLEDGE TO RESCUE

"The shield in your hand isn't just for holding, you know"

Objective: Make at least 3 successful attacks in a single day using your shield against undead

Reward: You may add Rescuer's Press and/or Bless Shieldto your 4th level or higher Free Archetype slot. You may retrain one class feat of your choice to Everstand Stance for free, if you can take it.

Second Training: Oath Sign

"It looks like your successes have attracted some people interested in knighting you. If you do, well, I'll pass you to them."

Objective: Decide whether to swear the Shining Oath (if trained in Religion) or the Crimson Oath (if trained in Survival or Stealth) Luciel

Reward: You join the Shining Sentinels or Crimson Reclaimers

I Smell Dead People

"Sniffing out undead is really easy! Also really disgusting, but that's the job for you."

Objective: Either beat the Stealth check of an undead, or Seek an undead in combat. Luciel

Reward: You may add Grave Sense to your 6th level or higher Free Archetype slot.

MUSCLE MEMORY

"Give me the answer and make a strike at the same time! Vampire! Ghoul! Mummy!"

Objective: Make a successful attack against an undead you Recalled Knowledge about. Luciel

Reward: You may add Practiced Opposition to your 6th level or higher Free Archetype slot.

Batter Down

"Alright, now here's a trick you may not know yet..."

Objective: Shove an undead successfully.

Reward: You may add Repulse the Wicked to your 6th level or higher Free Archetype slot.

CAST FIST

"Punching ghosts can be very hard, or very easy. Let me introduce you to easy..."

Objective: Spend a can of Ghost Charge (Lesser) and succeed on a DC23 Religion or DC20 Spirit or Haunt Lore check

Reward: You may add Sacred Armaments to your 6th level or higher Free Archetype slot.

Light Them Up

"It's like the trick where you use a sword and shield to make sparks, except more effective"

Objective: Shield Block attacks from an adjacent undead of 7th level or higher Luciel

Reward: You may add Flashing Shield to your 8th level or higher Free Archetype slot.

Negate the negative

"Shields can block a surprisingly large number of things if you know how"

Objective: Take negative damage from a 5th level (or spell level 3) or higher source while your shield is raised

Reward: You may add Necromantic Bulwark to your 8th level or higher Free Archetype slot.

Let not the wicked touch you 2

"I mean you already learnt it last time, this is just a bit extra"

Objective: Have Necromantic Resistance

Reward: You may add Necromantic Tenacity to your 8th level or higher Free Archetype slot if you have Necromantic Resistance.

I see dead people

"Once you get a hang of it, it's like a tingle at the back of your mind. Don't attend ghost parties, though"

Objective: Hit an undead with a miss chance while you have Grave Sense

Reward: You may add Grave Sight to your 10th level or higher Free Archetype slot if you have Grave Sense.

For one other's sake

"Watching others be hurt when you could have saved them…"

Objective: An ally within 10ft is hit by an undead when you have your shield raised

Reward: You may add Lastwall Warden to your 10th level or higher Free Archetype slot.

(I also had Undead Slayer, Beast Gunner, Soul Warden, Ghost Eater and Familiar Master but you get Ollie from Troubles in Otari as your familiar)

Besides, simple damage traps do have another purpose: showing up in combat encounters, as a cheap XP filler that still does hefty damage (once). For when you want to spruce up your encounter with a level -3 opponent but worry that opponent isn't worth the effort.

I think I like putting them on doors leading to the known enemy encounter. Maybe use it as punishment for players who obviously prebuff outside the door. They're worth so little XP that you won't feel bad not awarding players that 8XP!

I certainly hope so. One class I'd love to see return is the Mesmerist. Frankly, I just want a magical face class that isn't a performer, if that makes sense.

Aren't both the Sorcerer and Psychic Cha-based (well, sometimes for Psychics)? They don't get the specific Performance based skill tricks the Bard do but they do get other ways to boost their Cha skills.

Ryangwy wrote:

I wonder what a reasonable set of 'magic effects worth one rank' could be given to spells that make sense as a long-term modification to your spells rather than a spellshape. Or, well, actually just permanently adding a spellshape (for no action cost) is already pretty cool, isn't it?

Spellshape is 20th level, back in our day campaigns ended at 12th level.

I meant what PF2eR calls spellshape, that is to say metamagic. Since all one action spellshapes are already 'balanced' to be added to a spell for an action cost, it shouldn't be too out of line to bake them into the spell without the action cost. Reach and Widen strike me in particular as stuff that's probably worth a rank up in lieu of an action.

As much as I do criticize certain archetypes in 2e, especially class archetypes, I don't think this is an absolute truth. The Wellspring Mage is a really fun class archetype, as is the Runelord even with the clarification/nerf they received to their staff spells. It is absolutely possible to create a class archetype that is fun and flavorful, and if you're trying to replicate the flavor of a Magus here, I feel that may be the better way of achieving your goal, instead of the current mess of proficiencies and stat replacements you're suggesting in a bid to essentially transplant a Magus onto some other class.

I think that, given the Magic Warrior wants things that doesn't really replace anything in the Magus cleanly (like, what feature would you drop for the mask?) it can also be a general archetype that goes better on a Magus than any other class.

I do agree the archetype should not be inherently giving anyone the magus proficiencies.

I refer to see alchemist Magic Warriors, barbarian Magic Warriors, champion Magic Warriors, druid Magic Warriors, exemplar Magic Warriors, fighter Magic Warriors, etc., implying that Magic Warriors can come from all walks of life.

See, the problem with giving proficiencies out of line with standard archetype feats is that you don't actually achieve that - the sheer power of granting master weapons with such a minimal investment is that it actually centralises things on a specific set of classes - casters, to be precise. In fact, due to how you set up the shapeshift, Magic Warrior is, as it stands, kind of useless for non-casters. If your vision is to make it seem that Magic Warriors can come from all walks of life without shooting themselves in the foot, you may need to consider some serious changes.

Also, yes, a rogue Magic Warrior should be better at stabbing than a animist Magic Warrior, it doesn't make sense otherwise?

I'll never stop hoping for 3.5e tome of battle style martials

Clearly that's just the punch kineticist /hj

I would improve the wizard class in the game by having rules set up for players to reinvent magic. What things made a spell more or less powerful, etc. Encourage creativity while being fair on the level test. No if you make the spell that powerful Xador it will have to be a tenth level spell.

I wonder what a reasonable set of 'magic effects worth one rank' could be given to spells that make sense as a long-term modification to your spells rather than a spellshape. Or, well, actually just permanently adding a spellshape (for no action cost) is already pretty cool, isn't it?

That would be more magically elegant. I could scale it off the Mystic Armor spell. On the other hand, the mask does give a way to use actual armor runes instead of mimicking them with a scaling spell.

Nevertheless, Champion archetype gives light and medium armor proficiency, so gaining armor proficiencies from an archetype has happened before. And the PF1 magus Magic Warrior...

Note the PF1e Magic Warrior had that... because they were a magus. If you're opening it up to non-magus, let them use their own proficiencies, it's cleaner.

Also, the intention was the mask can hold the runes, yes. It can be done like all the ancestry feats that grant armour, with something like the rainment rune to give the disguising trick.

Yes, I have a reason. The reason is similar to the difference between casting a Summon Animal spell and adopting an Animal Companion. The Summon Animal, Animal Form, and Untamed Form spells are a one-shot appearance of a different animal each time. Animal Companion and a Magic Warrior mask are about keeping to the same animal or animal form.

We already have tech for 'Animal Form but only this specific one', I beleive both Animal Barbarian and Red Mantis uses it. The issues with using an Animal Companion are manifold - adjusting attributes mid-combat, which nothing in PF2e does, the fact ACs are balanced around being a 3rd action, meaning they fall behind compared to polymorph spells, that most of them have their identity bound in their actions which you don't make available, giving a PC mount...

Anyway, if regular animal form doesn't satisfy you, I think it's better to give each of the ten known masks a avatar-style template (hp scaling, senses, unarmed attack, Speeds, base AC/saves, important skills) and tell GMs to use them to make custom masks. Have the spell build in the scaling for hp, ac, saves and skills. As it stands, I believe the spell falls off hard.

Is a Magic Warrior magic (caster) or warrior (martial)? The Ten Magic Warriors were apprentice wizards, except that Azure Leopard was known as a defender, Ibex was known as a healer, Shifting Frog was known as a ranger-like elf, Verdant Spider was known as a baker, and White Bull was known as an architect. And the archetype outright states, "You mix magic and martial prowess, following in the tradition of the Ten Magic Warriors of Old-Mage Jatembe."

... Which is why the PF1e archetype was for magus only!

I am really iffy of giving master weapon so cheaply, because it doesn't cost them legendary spellcasting (which every PF2e gish has to take on the chin). Like, if you insist, I'd rewrite it to be one feat that has prerequisite of master spellcasting and expert in unarmed, that gives a +2 status bonus to your Strikes while wearing the mask. Absent a buffer, this does keep you on level, and martials aren't likely to take a 20th level feat to get a +2 status bonus (and if they do, good on them I guess).

My original thought on this was that you'd get to pick up ANOTHER archetype dedication (which you can take when you should take feats in this archetype) but that second archetype's abilities can only be used while transformed. The Idea is less "Beast Boy" and more "Jekyll and Hyde" or "Hulk" or "Shazam"

Though I do hear what you're saying about cutting off a significant portion of power budget, so it would have to add something substantial to the mix to work.

Less 'power budget' and more 'ability to use the base class's feats' - every class archetype so far, including the ones that go on multiple classes like elementalist, are fully compatible with all of the base class feats except subclass ones (which never went on every single version of the class anyway). Applying the summoner to the shifter would scrap all tandem feats, require very heavy rewriting of evolution feats, and while its possible you'd still be spellcastery enough to use the spellcasting feats I don't think 'can cast 9th rank heal' is something people want from a shifter.

Especially since the intent is to pick up a combat archetype to provide most of the feats, in which case you might as well go back to the source of half of those combat archetypes and make it a fighter class archetype instead. You can't do worse than Warrior of Legend!

I think "Shifter class" should be a class archetype for the Summoner. You would be locked into a play style where instead of summoning some other creature you are turning into that other creature. you would receive limits on how long you could stay transformed, but gain benefits like being able to take an archetype FOR the transformation

Doesn't that like... waste just about everything about a summoner, though? The entire dual proficiency chain is borked. All tandem feats stop working. All caster feats have low value because you aren't a caster. I guess the evolution feats now apply to you, but then what? You've got a class archetype who can only use 1/3rd of the feats printed and needs a total revamp of... everything.

I don't like how you give so many proficiencies via feats, and in ways that don't match how they're given normally via archetype. It's very jarring, looking at a PF1e relic kind of feeling.

Mask Armor Feat 4

Your mask becomes armor. You are trained in light armor, medium armor, and unarmored defense. When you cast Don the Mask, the mask can transform to clothe you in explorer's clothing, leather armor, quilted armor, or hide armor for as long as you wear your mask. Removing the mask is still an Interact action, but casting Don the Mask again can make the armor disappear while masked. You may attach armor runes to the mask that become active when its armor appears.

Extremely awkward, nonscaling proficiency in armour when there's no reason why wearing a mask makes you comfortable wearing medium armour in the first place. Make it a bespoke armour that you can choose between the stats of leather armour or hide armour for but that uses your unarmoured proficiency, and maybe give it a free rainment rune.

Mask Transformation [one-action] Focus 2

Uncommon Manipulate Polymorph
Based on Magic Warrior Transformation, World Guide pg. 95
Requirements You are wearing your Magic Warrior mask.
Duration 1 minute
You transform into the animal from your mask. You transform into a battle form copying your mask's creature, following the polymorph rules. You gain the features and attributes in the creature's Animal Companion entry, except all the attributes are increased by 1, you keep your original hit points, and you do not gain the creature's Minion trait, Support Benefit, nor Advanced Maneuver. You gain the animal companion entry's initial hit points as temporary hit points. If your form has the mount trait, you do not lose an action when a character rides you. Handwraps of Mighty Blows still affect your unarmed attacks. You can Dismiss this spell.
Heightened (4th) Your animal form's Strength, Dexterity, Intelligence, and Charisma increase by 1. This can increase a +4 into a +5.
Heightened (5th) The duration increases to 10 minutes. You may automatically spend a focus point at the end of the duration to continue it for an additional 10 minutes indefinitely, even if unconscious. This automatic extension renews the temporary hit points.

Is there a reason why you went against the standard polymorph template (especially when animal form is right there) for this instead? It looks pointlessly messy when you could just make it untamed form.

Magic Warrior Expertise Feat 6

Archetype
Archetype Magic Warrior
Prerequisites Magic Warrior Dedication
You've dedicated yourself to the warrior side of Magic Warriors. Your proficiency ranks for weapons and unarmed attacks in which you are trained increase to expert.
Magic Warrior Mastery Feat 14
Archetype
Archetype Magic Warrior
Prerequisites Magic Warrior Expertise
You've mastered the combat techniques of Magic Warriors. Your proficiency ranks for weapons and unarmed attacks in which you are expert increase to master.

The last similar one got purged in fire, and honestly I really don't see why you need this if your primary combat is through a polymorph spell (you know... a regular one). Let the martials be martials and the casters be casters.

Honestly, given that they're called schools and not 'innate mental understanding', I think Wizards thematically can get their own version of multifarious muse/order explorer - a second level feat to add the school spells of another school to theirs, and a fourth level feat to get their basic focus spell. If one school can't cover what theme you're looking for, maybe two or three can! You'd need some kind of cutout for class archetype schools and school refusers but it should be doable, I think.

This would also mean wizards could genuinely get really narrow schools like school of lightning - right now I think because whatever school you are commits 1/4th of your spell slots and all your focus spells to the theme, they end up picking broad, unsuited themes which I've complained about already. If every wizard can just go to school again (and really, why shouldn't they?) then 'staff of fire but a school' is now perfectly printable.

That's a good point. I'm gonna put some work into making them more significant. Maybe something like:
- Swap one of the free feats from the "study" feats into "you now gain a unique power based on your specific mask, within reason for the level of this feat"
- Make using masks part of expressing your spirit-face a part of all rituals

Maybe make the Steeped in History or Branch Familiarity extremely circumstantial skill bonus into the item bonus of the mask?

Those bonuses sure are useless (and worse, overlap) - if SoT wasn't my 'play when we're short of players' game and thus is played entirely RAW, I would have redone the whole ciruculum to integrate this better.

Oh! New idea! What if Magic Warrior was a 12th level archetype which doesn't lockout Magaambyaan Attendant/Halycon Speaker, and that can be taken as a mythic destiny like Mortal Herald? That lets you put a lot more power into the mask if it's that high level, better matches the story of the Ten, and allows you to gate truly legendary stuff behind mythic point use.

Teridax wrote:

Despite being the archetype you pick to pick up the legacy of the Ten Magic Warriors, the archetype doesn't actually let you access the feats that give you the mask powers of those warriors.

In fairness, those feats came out considerably later than the Magic Warrior archetype did; Magic Warrior was from World Guide, while those feats are from the final volume of Strength of Thousands.

That being said ... I'm legitimately surprised this archetype was never touched again, or redone. We got both a book about the Mwangi Expanse, and an old school six volume AP set there; it feels weird that we never see the archetype touched up or changed.

I think Magaambyan Attendant/Halycon Speaker is considered the 'signature' Magaambyan dedication, so I would hold out more hope for masks with powers being folded into the mask familiar line than Magic Warrior ever becoming halfway workable.

... also, SoT gives you the one set of masks then drops it forever. None of the teachers or students wear masks, the masks don't have improved forms... my players have masks in their inventory that exist because they're L bulk and so keep forgetting to get rid of them.

Oh yeah, Halcyon Speaker isn't free, but because you get the requisite three Magaambyan Attendant feat for free, it's a great way to get more archetype spellcasting without the usual cost in feats you don't want.

Strength of Thousands never mentions the Magaambyan Attendent, Halcyon Speaker, and Magic Warrior archetypes.

Running Strength of Thousands, I should note the first two are very much untrue - SoT doesn't just mention them, they give them as free feats via the academic system! Assuming you're using the FA Druid/Wizard concept, I'd say you can take feats from those two archetypes as FA feats (once you reach the appropriate level) but even if that's not the case, getting the feats for free isn't nothing.

In my experience, it really does. +2 means 10% less chance of being hit and crit, and that really saved my bacon in the long run. I agree it's not the end all be all of fighting, but it's still better than nothing.

Can't you just take a regular shield? Both Elegant Buckler and Extravagant Parry just turn them into a standard wooden shield unless you desperately need the panache or want to hold a torch in your free hand.

Whereas I want a game with tactical thought. I design encounters with tactical thought put in which you seem to want to keep claiming "Oh you're rewarding a play style and letting the enemies just die."

...
Encounters that are meant to challenge the PCs are built to do so. But they are rare encounters so the PCs feel like heroes and get to feel the intelligent tactical choices they make have an impact in the majority of fights.

You don't have to get so defensive, I'm just pointing out that you have already started with the premise that the players will always be able to get the monsters to fight them on a situation that's tactically advantageous for the players, for a confluence of factors including how you run exploratory actions, the battlemap and how you runs monsters reacting to PCs.

The default assumption of PF2e is that, due to a combination of player skill, GM skill and how people deploy battlemaps, encounters are 'meeting engagements' where both sides make contact in a place that's favourable to neither side, or mildly favourable to the monsters, and the fight takes place on the spot without either side retreating to use terrain outside of the room. Not even as a challenge thing, trivial to extreme encounters are all based on this presumption.

(4e goes even further, monsters are expected to have the terrain advantage most of the time)

Why do you think most enemy groups have more capabilities than the PCs? Do you make every single enemy group in the game superior to your PCs at every tactical option?

PC parties are tactically superior to the majority of what they face. If you make every single enemy able to counter what they do, then what are you doing as a GM? Making your PCs choices pointless?

I have already stated multiple times that in major fights, the enemies are made to counter the PCs and force a challenging fight.

But in most fights wandering around, the PCs maintain a tactical advantage because they are PCs with a far more diverse skill and ability advantage. You should know this. You really should. Most enemy groups have nowhere near the tactical diversity of a group of PCs, especially high level PCs.

I think it's better to say that NPCs have their non-combat options left 'to the author' and you're the kind of GM who interprets this as 'they don't have it' which isn't a universal statement. A Severe encounter can consist of three monsters at the same level as the PCs (and since you're talking about 5 players, one that's level-1), why assume they don't have 3/4th of the tactical diversity of PCs?

I mean the answer is that you have OCD about making rewarding a specific mode of play and so if the players find a good tactical spot you make the enemies come towards them instead of baiting an encounter then running away once they see buffs have been cast until the heroism runs out. Which means your group will never be able to make use of classes like the kineticists designed around 'but what if it's the fifth encounter of the day and the sorcerer spent all their top rank and -1 slots?'

Y-yeah, I can see how if the players are always able to dictate an engagement then some classes just Don't Work - PF2e does try to accomodate all kinds of playstyles but it's very clear that the 'default' engagement distance for which all classes are expected to perform is around 30ft frontline to frontline - the APs back this up.

Basically I don't think they can address the 'weak' classes because you kind of threw out exploration mode, focus points and initiative and so you're running, like, half of PF2e. Kineticists do have issues but 'does not function for games played in initiatve mode for 100 rounds over a battlemap 300ft across where enemies only enter initiative when engaged' isn't really addressable.

Iunno about you, but I find that a lot of combat tends to start within one move action (and certain abilities, like Battle Cry, don't function if this doesn't happen) and so the ability to pick the engagement on your terms is often worth losing one action.

There's, hmm, the last book of Extinction Curse where that wasn't true, but in those cases the monsters had some pretty nasty range and/or move options, especially if you don't shove a Reactive Strike martial in their face first. Did you know all high level demons premaster can teleport 100ft? I don't think either the gunslinger nor the cleric liked having a marlith dropped into their face with 6 Reactive Strikes. Now of course if everyone is spending their action to move that's complicated, but if one person spends two action to do it, now you're talking.

I remain convinced that the biggest single target DPR contribution a kineticist can make is casting Four Winds - it's a haste that stacks with haste!

... Admittedly as a 1st level impulse with no save/attack, it's far more poachable via the archetype, which only requires +2 Con. As is Timber Sentinel. Put it on, say, a witch or bard who wants to spam 1 action cantrips and you can go to town from there.

... damn, now I've talked myself around. A Faith's Flamekeeper Witch that multiclasses into Air Kineticist can deliver a flurry ranger/DS fighter/monk straight into the enemy while giving them a hefty per-attack bonus. And move the bard that's going to Dirge of Doom and cast Heroism as well.

Okay, coming back at the "Mystic Ninja" concept... like... that's just Naruto, the least ninja ninjas in media.

Historical Ninja are so much cooler BECAUSE none of it was magic, or ancient dynasties. They started as peasants who fought back with what humble tools they had (which is why I objected to katana and wakizashi, those are the tools of the nobles).

... Besides the fact that ninjas were in fact codified as using magic, through folklore tales and stage shows as mentioned, most of the iconic shinobis were, in fact, of the military caste (samurais, in other words) themselves. Naruto is actually really accurate as to what ninjas are.

I mean, this thread consistently shows what I said, that Paizo can't make a culturally respectful ninja, because the english speaking RPG community has this concept of a ninja divorced from its Japanese roots (the 3.5e ninja class flat out says they just borrowed the name for a sneaky class that uses some magic which has no relation to the real one) and that also is something that's already covered mostly by existing classes so we keep ding-donging between 'we need a sneaky class that can optionally use some magic but not as a key thing' and 'we already have an existing sneaky class, if you just want to add magic it's called a spellcasting archetype'.

I've written two whole ninja outlines here and we still end up at 'in order to respect 70s action film ninja, we need to recreate the rogue but like slightly different'.

Honestly, Foundry modules are built robust enough you can just make a team of four and run them through things, reading entries as they come up. Uh, maybe not for AV or SoG. But for the more linear ones it's doable. I've done it for OoA and it's held quite fine.

also wouldn't knock those asking for non-magical ninjas, as the originals IRL were infiltrators and spies, and it's only following a later period in Japan's history that they were mythologized with more magical powers. The Sengoku-era ninja with proficiency in espionage and infiltration sounds right up the Rogue's alley, and the post-Meiji era version sounds like something that could work particularly well with an improved Eldritch Trickster racket.

I feel like I need to be specific here - ninja was a term that was invented in the Meiji era, and postfactually assigned to the Sengoku people (largely samurai) that fit the mold (like the Sanada Ten Braves or Goemon)... and at the same time ascribing them all those magical powers. So while technically there existed a person named Sasuke or Goemon who did infiltration and espionage during the Sengoku, the ninja Sasuke and Goemon always had the magic powers. It's like how there probably was a King Arthur who wore Roman era armour, used Roman era weapons and prayed to the local gods but when people say King Arthur they mean the plate armour wearing, magic greatsword wielding seeker of the Holy Grail... because King Arthur is primarily defined by the French (late) medieval works.

Ryangwy wrote:

Beyond the fact that this is still the Guardian thread, the PF1e cleric is, in fact, the warpriest doctrine, not the cloistered cleric, and they got medium armor in PF1e as well, so everything works out. The Oracle actually lost medium armour, too.

Oracle never had Medium Armor. Only Battle did, but they also had Heavy because using its Curse benefits left you -2/-1 to your AC, effectively making you the same as Light/Medium armor wearers on first contact in an encounter.

They had it in PF1e, unless I'm reading AoN wrong. Which was my point, even if you were (somehow) comparing cloistered cleric to PF1e cleric, it's not the only class that would have lost armour proficiency between editions. And that the cleric couldn't be the armoured caster of PF1e if it had the same proficiencies as the druid and oracle and shaman and... actually, medium armour was everywhere in PF1e huh. No wonder CoDzilla was real.

I mean, basically you don't play a game where the kineticist at-willness will ever come up, so their damage will always be poorer than a non-focus spellcaster for you. That's... well, can't do anything about that. My habit is that the moment battle ends, I mash the +10min button - can't search or investigate in less than 10 min, RAW, so unless the players don't want any loot they sit down, and once that happens they just go all the way. So focus points and infinite use abilities come up a lot more.

Think a party that never searches is the exception, not the norm. My players finally did that right at the end of Extinction Curse, on account of being 20th level and finally using the ablative armour plating (and also the cleric realising that 20th level herbalist dedication has all the drugs) and so they (rightly) assumed nothing they could pilfer was worth more than keeping the 3 9th rank heroism up, but that's not standard.

Other players don't like to get hit. They tell other players not to hit them with AOE. That is why chain lightning is such a popular spell with I would imagine many groups that don't want to hit their allies. With critical saves and 100 plus damage being done, players don't care for having AOE dropped on them.

Healing impulses are weak. The healing kineticist is not considered an option when other powerful heal options are far more effective. My players only like highly effective options. They ditch or avoid suboptimal options. I've even had players test options to see if they can get them to work and retrain off them when they perform poorly.

Players are far more likely to get the success to crit success ability than monsters, so you may be surprised how harmless a fort-based AOE is when your frontline is a barbarian and fighter. If your players don't know how to appreciate that, drop some monsters with that same gimmick on them.

Re: healing, my group gets their 1 hour break between fights, so truly the only hit point that matters is the last. After the cleric went power-mad with AoEs, I think lay on hands ended up being the primary source of healing in most fights, so the kineticist does Just Fine in that setting.

I don't know why people keep talking about casting spells for a ninja.

and I'm going to re-state: a utility focused commander. they have number "arts" they can prepare each day from a list. Things that make them more stealthy, better at tracking, disguise, etc

Because, as I've made the case, the ninja is a spellcaster in its core incarnation - somehow, people keep referring to some larger grouping of questionably mystic spy and assassin tropes as a ninja. Because of the relatively large power budget having a large number of low level utility slots costs in PF2e, this kind of ninja is by far the hardest to portray natively, whereas the non-magical version is... a rogue. Or maybe a monk, if walking on water is as spicy as you can accept.

When I think of the most iconic representations of ninja they are swift martials, stealthy, and only dabble in magic to further enable stealth and fighting.

Seriously, where are these non-magic ninjas people keep bandying them about as though it's obvious (and then it turns out they're discussing five separate martial concepts whose only shared identity is sneakiness) but I've consumed a lot of Japanese ninja media, down to the OGs, and I'm not seeing... whatever you all are seeing.

In the case of kineticist, I see problematic class design when it comes to single target fights or fights with few targets where precision is required. Certain mechanics that seem to have been created to allow the use of AOE strikes with allies in range do not work with Overflow mechanics. The vast majority of kineticist AOE blasts at higher level are overflow. So you remove the kineticists best attacks from use by making Overflow not work well with the ability known as Safe Elements that allows you to turn an AOE impulse into a usable single target impulse.

It's little design choices like this that make me scratch my head. The designers created a feat like Safe Elements to make AOE impulses work in a crowded combat with allies, then create an Overflow impulse system with 3 action impulses that don't work with Safe Elements. It seems in cases like this there wasn't a good deal of thought put into how these two game design choices would cancel each other out leading to a weaker, less effective class.

I think you're overthinking this - plenty of players who play AoE classes firmly believe that 'some of my allies might take damage, but that is a sacrifice I am willing to take', especially if they can blunt that with resistance.

Safe Elements is an optional feat, after all. Why taking that instead of a healing impulse that you pinky swear you'll use?

This isn't to say Deriven's GM sucks, just that they likely have some predictable habits that a gang of hardcore optimizers can easily play around: I've noticed Deriven talking a lot about how solo boss encounters are the only ones that matter to the story, for example. He and his buddies have perfectly adapted to that environment

Yeah, Deriven's party always are able to scout out the perfect angle of approach so long as they have the right skills, which might be realistic from a certain perspective, but I'm a lazier GM that reads the AP, places the tokens on the map and goes 'roll for initiative, looks like the gunslinger starts within reach of three instances of reactive strike' but fortunately my players are lovely sports who don't mind it all that much. Definitely would have preferred a Kineticist to the Gunslinger that fight, though.

Also, in regards to clerics in particular, I really don't understand why the base class doesn't have armor proficiencies and the warpriest only goes up to medium armor without a (horrible) feat. The cleric was the armored caster of D&D 3.5 and PF1e so I find really strange that now it doesn't begin with at least light armor, with the warpriest going up to heavy armor. I also won't ever be convinced that Warpriest's Armor isn't a bad feat. It's literally a general feat for the price a class feat. The animist, bard, druid, and oracle have at least light armor proficiency, so why doesn't the cleric?

Beyond the fact that this is still the Guardian thread, the PF1e cleric is, in fact, the warpriest doctrine, not the cloistered cleric, and they got medium armor in PF1e as well, so everything works out. The Oracle actually lost medium armour, too.

Kinnies just kinda... operate about the same... regardless of how much the party invests in them. Which makes sense as they're designed to be the self-sufficient, fit-anywhere, go-all-day class, but it hurts them in hyper-optimized parties. You don't need area control and multi-target blasts if you have a wizard. You don't need perpetual healing if you have a cleric. You don't need defense if you have a champion or guardian. Kinnies pay to have access to all these things at once by giving up single-target damage and skill progression--two things rogues really excel at--but that access just isn't needed in a gang of dedicated specialists.

Chiming in to support this - I recall Deriven having similar issues with the Summoner, another self-contained class. I run for my players two campaigns, one four-player and one for when someone drops. The first is a similarly high synergy team, centered around the sniper gunslinger instead, with a cleric to spam heroism and a trip fighter to inflict prone, allowing the gunslinger to consistently land crit Vital Shot for a lot of damage (and one barbarian). When I allow them to rebuff, when the enemies come in at the right angle, that's the result Deriven gets - the party utterly ends somebody's day when the gunslinger has a turn, and they can blitz through multiple moderate and severe encounter while keeping heroism up.

But sometimes the enemy is immune to trip or precision and bleeding, or heroism ran out, or the gunslinger rolls a nat 2 into a nat 1 three turns on a row and things fall apart, the cleric blows an entire font of heals and the fighter breaks his shield in the retreat.

Meanwhile, the three person game, by chance (although it is a smart move), is all the more self sufficient kind. Summoner, monk, champion, witch, they won't do much damage but whichever three are present they also just won't die, and the Summoner not needing any buffs to be a menace is great in this team. They're the main source of damage consistently, whereas if this was the four people team one of the three combo-ers being missing would sink the whole thing. The kineticist would fit well here (probably better than the monk) too.

That said, I believe that the kineticist has something to offer boss-killing parties. Up until the commander, air kineticist was the only at-will way of moving allies out of turn, meaning they can deliver your hasted melee rogue or flurry ranger right to the target so they don't even need to move. That seems an important role! This is all theory, since I'm an eternal GM, but I'm curious if that works.

We've been having arguments about whether wizard's talking raven familiar is stealing the rogue's niche since D&D 3.0.

Flying out of reach of a lot of enemies, and looking like a natural animal is such a vast advantage in many scouting situations that it's only the extreme vagueness of what PF2 familiars can do on their own that's stopping them from completely outclassing rogues for scouting. Well, that and door handles in dungeons.

Scouting is basically broken right now. Just purely by the numbers, it doesn't work; boss monster perception is too high.

But that's why I think there's design space for a class that has special abilities that let it do so. If the ninja is really able to ghost into a place, get into rooms without alerting everyone by opening doors, and able to get advance intel without alerting bosses, that's a class-defining ability right there.

Then in combat, give them a completely different way of fighting dirty than rogues. Don't give them anything that looks like sneak attack. Flanking should be no better for a ninja than it is for most other martials; nice, but not the thing that turns your engine on.

They're going to need some kind of damage booster to be reasonable, since we kinda imagine ninjas fighting with weapons that usually don't have really big damage dice, and we've already given away dex to damage to rogues. But maybe ninjas are more defensive/slippery than high damage; hard to pin down in melee. So more on the side of defense-heavy classes like monks and champions than on hard hitters like rogues and thaumaturges.

You have, strictly speaking, described the 3.5e ninja.

The 3.5e ninja was also very much Not A Ninja, openly saying so in the class description, but as everyone here seems determined to make a class without reference to the actual ninja, I can at least recommend the 3.5e ninja for having a stronger thematic class identity than 'all the spy/assassin stuff not already on the rogue or an archetype'.

The 3.5e ninja's gimmick, for those not familiar with Complete Adventurer, is that they get Ethereal-related abilities as their ki spells. They can turn invisible, then ethereal, they can phase themselves out partially to give attacks against them miss chance, they get ghost touch (and the ability to touch things if they're ethereal) and eventually they can just go to the ethereal plane.

... Is the Ethereal Plane still a big deal postmaster?

Then how would you cast spells with both hands full?

Psychic spellcasting allowed you just that PLUS being fully armored.

Maybe have some resistance to emotion effects so you don't cower everytime?

Uh, did you miss that you can always cast with hands full in PF2e? And that psychics do have psychic spellcasting, replacing verbal components premaster with a concentrate component and material with somatic - that doesn't do anything anymore, but certainly did make the tiny handful of premaster spells that needed a hand for the material component not need it.

In other words, it already exists

Ryangwy wrote:

Wait, so is the problem the existence of feats that punish Taunted enemies not attacking the Guardian or is the problem you feel that by its description a Taunted enemy has to always act the same way? Because these are two different issues.

I'm not pointing as a concern, just a question because it is up to everyone to choose each feat but do you really expect that feats that depend on from enemies ignoring Taunt to work frequently as expected.

I'm saying this since I was read some people planning to do 2-handed weapons guardian, probably depending on from these feats to work.

Much like Exalted Reaction, this is going to depend on your GM, fortunately, neither the Champion nor the Guardian hinges on those feats so you can always retrain if it turns out your GM tends to do the other thing.

Remember, the reverse applies - a GM that always ignores the Champion/Guardian can render, say, investment in shields defunct! That's just how it is.

Wait, so is the problem the existence of feats that punish Taunted enemies not attacking the Guardian or is the problem you feel that by its description a Taunted enemy has to always act the same way? Because these are two different issues.

That's the part that doesn't makes sense. The troll is now Taunted and its focus and fury are now into the guardian. This troll doesn't care about guardian abilities.

The point is. The troll now hates the guardian to a point that it becomes too distracted if not attacks the guardian. A character that is so distracted by a taunt to a point that it got mechanical penalties if not focus into the source of its hate also doesn't care about anything more.

That's the thematic reason. The mechanical reason is even weaker IMO. A character could already be off-guard due to other reasons, so this “weakens” the Taunt effects. So, the GM to ignore the guardian is a reasonable option in some edge cases where he chose to focus into the healer or a character that is focusing into the creature weakpoints. This could justify the feats, but this will ignore all the thematic about Taunt.

I mean, if your GM consistently does that then you... just don't pick those feats? The Champion has similar reaction-boosting feats - you'll know by the time you pick them if the GM is going to regularly trigger them or not.