eoptap's page

It feels like a good portion of criticism of the Necromancer class revolves around the static and largely inanimate nature of their thralls: the reasons behind that are mechanically understandable, as the class is built to just create more thralls instead of controlling them all on an individual basis, but thematically that's chafed with quite a few players, who see the class more as this more generic token-mancer than the master of an undead horde. I imagine it feels like something's missing in that respect, and I wonder if that's a gap that could be filled with an extra starting grave cantrip. For instance, something along the following lines:

Rouse Thrall (One-Action, Cantrip 1)
Traits: Uncommon, cantrip, concentrate, grave, manipulate, necromancer, thrall

With a command, you spur a thrall to action. The thrall Strides up to your Speed, or Burrows, Climbs, Flies, or Swims instead of Striding if you have the corresponding movement type. If the thrall ends its movement adjacent to an enemy, it can make a melee unarmed Strike using your spell attack modifier for the attack roll. This attack deals your choice of 1d6 bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing damage. This Strike uses and counts toward your multiple attack penalty.

If you have the expert necromancy class feature, you can command up to two thralls, increasing to three if you have master necromancy and four if you have legendary necromancy. A target can't be targeted by more than one thrall's Strike at a time, and you do not increase your multiple attack penalty until all of the Strikes have been made.

Heightened (+2) The damage increases by 1d6.

---

Effectively, instead of creating an existing thrall, you could move one around and have it make another attack from potentially farther away. This'd probably still not be a great ability to have at low level, especially given how a lot of thrall-based abilities have such short ranges, but with multiple thralls, this could potentially get more interesting...

I just resummoned a new thrall when i heeded them to move, or attack. part of the initial summons was move and attack. Als they pop after any damage so i would cycle at least one new one a round.

Runes:
I treated them as potency runes. They lasted until triggered, and number of runes on an item was the same as what was limited by the rules for potency runes.

This left me waiting until they were triggered or just replacing one rune with another.

I so wish it was a prepared list, with access to all the runesmith at the level they are granted. The known would change to the number prepared, making the class a little more versatile.

Old school rune I guess we get the listed free formulas, and assume we can just buy new formulas so we can craft others.

I loved the option to take a feat and whistle the runes at range for one action, instead of the two action ranged trace.

I think that they need to exist, but I think at this point it needs to official be changed. Racial Weapon feats should be automatic for the race for free. It would not hurt the mechanics and take out the requirement stock. The exception to this is if you take adopted ancestry, your weapon feat changes to that of the "adopted" heritage. You can still take the original weapons group, as you qualify, you just no longer get it free, as adopted changed what you get for free.

With the two new classes from "Imposable Playtest" They have class weapon feats for the two classes. This should be automatic for the class not a feat tax. These New feats are a waste, and should be part of the class, not a feat tax for the class they are part of. They could also be available for other classes , as a flavor for the build, or a replacement for they original feat list for the class. That last part may need more work.

Functionally though the racial/class feat tax is not something that should be kept in the game. This is a rule that gets house ruled away, at least for the racial weapon feats, in all games I have been in, by every gm I have played with.

They are runes treat them as potency runes, and you ae limited by how many you can activate at a time limit 2 until after 4th level. Once you trace the third runs, if you already have two active one of the others dissipate, unless it was already set off. It was much more satisfying to whistle runes onto the barbarian, and rouges weapon than fighting myself.
So if you follow the preset rules for runes it fixes some of the issues you have. The class is mostly balanced, except for the direct damage runes level 1-4, by level 6 though it is not so terrible. Lowering the damage on some of the damage runes is probably what they will do even though it is very playable as is, 4d6 damage added to a barbarian is fun to watch the big bad evaporate. The party loved the way I was handling the runes. The only issue was the damage out put at 4th. Running them like potency runes works. I king of felt the limit of two active runes felt restraining, but it kept the class from being broken. The number of active runes are interesting, and just look at the level 1 runes as cantrips. bring them in like with some of the most powerful cantrips. Run the runes like potency runes. The ability to craft the normal runes is also nice.

I still need to test the runesmith better to give a more elaborate answer. But from what I've seen so far, both from my own analysis and from analyzing other people's external opinions, for me the biggest problem with the class is not the damage or the damage rune. But rather the fact that you can use Trace up to 3 times in a round!

Almost all the problems with the runesmith that I've seen so far come back to this question:

Direct damage too high: First of all, the damage from the runes is too high. They should be at the average of the kineticist's impulses without overflow. In other words, at most 2d4 or 1d8 every 2 levels! And yet being able to apply 2 runes to the target, each with a single action and exploding it is still very powerful. If the number of runes traced per round were limited to 1, this wouldn't happen.

Diacrit runes are not worth it: One of the main reasons why diacrit runes are not worth it is because it is better to simply use Trace on 2 different common runes than to try to change an existing one. Since the cost of actions is the same also you have a limit on the number of runes you know, it ends up being impracticable to learn diacrit runes since they will also compete for space in your repertoire. If the number of runes that can be traced were limited to 1 per round, these runes would already be more naturally interesting. If they worked as if they were a kind of spellshape for runes, and you could Trace them together with another rune using 2-actions, it would be perfect in my opinion.

Engraving Strike is not worth it: Since it is possible to use Trace with a single action, using Engraving Strike to attack ends up not being worth it because it adds a failure effect that does not exist in Trace. If the Trace limit were 1 per combat, it would be fairer to change Engraving Strike to Trace even in case of failure (similar to SpellStrike with saving spells and Live Wire) because it would just become a compression of actions at the cost of a feat and there would be no risk of...

You get to trace at a distance of 30" with a feat you need a perform check.

"RUNE-SINGER FEAT 1
RUNESMITH
You practice the lost art of using music to guide the act of
carving your runes, singing them into existence as much as
crafting them. You can use Performance instead of Crafting
when attempting Crafting checks related to runes. Once per
minute, you can Trace a Rune with song alone, removing the
need to have a free hand, removing the manipulate trait from
Trace Rune, and allowing you to use the 2-action version of
Trace Rune as a single action. You don’t need to be able to move
your hands when Tracing a Rune using song, but you do need
to be able to sing in a clear voice."

I treated them like one use runes having to be applied after use. I also followed the proficiency rules for the number of runes on an item. It worked out great to buff party members damage. It needs to be prepared for runes though for versatility. Also need to flesh out the rules for when putting it on creatures. I guess if you have to touch them it would be a strike, and if you whistle could be a ranged strike, or would it make sense for it to be a save.

The class works great other than not being a prepared caster.

That's not quite how I read Runic Crafter. To me it sounds like they get only the listed fundamental armour, shield and weapon runes. While that is all the fundamental runes currently, it means if any other fundamental runes are added to the game, the Runesmith doesn't get them."

They would be able to buy the formula for other runes, like any other crafter.

The more I use the Runesmith, the more I'm convinced they shouldn't have a set Repertoire."

I agree with this, prepared would be the better way to do the runesmith. I also found it more useful to treat them as potency runes, so I was buffing my allies or myself every round. Otherwise it would be a little bland at 4th. The gm thought at 4th level 4d6 with the damaging runes was a but much, but at 6th it balanced out.

I think the necromancer is mostly playable, as is. I just wish they would add heal/void spalls somehow. Some type of domain so they are not adding them to the whole spell list of occult. Or take the fluff out about picking void/heal when casting a spell.

Make it intelligent it can play itself, and have +10 perform string, it takes a 10, automatically getting 20, and that is before any int bonus or any other type of bonus. It has no need to sleep or eat.