
Feros |
8 people marked this as a favorite. |

Before I go into question answering again, I'll put my two cents worth on the Shifter and the oozemorph.
This really isn't that bad, considering the combat capabilities. The claw attacks eventually hit 1d10/x3 and ignore DR/cold iron, silver, adamantine, and — (barbarians beware!)
The oozemorph CAN stay longer than an hour at a time in humanoid form, it just takes effort (ie. a Fort save). True, at low levels the oozemorph can't use equipment. But from 1st through third this big inconvenience is balanced somewhat by being immune to sneak attack, flanking, and critical hits and being able to attack with piercing, bludgeoning, or slashing at will.
At fourth the oozemorph would be able to stay in humanoid form for four hours at a stretch twice per day—eight hours. Here is where magic items and equipment start becoming vital and the class and archetype support it.
All in all, it isn't a bad class from my point of view. Obviously others are taking a different view and that is their right.
To me it seems alright.

![]() |

Rysky wrote:The Druid and Shifter’s aversion to metal armor (note no aversion to using metal weapons) comes from the fact that metal armor represents civilization and production of manufactured armor that “messes”, more or less, with nature. As opposed to wearing hides.That doesn't hold up to comparison. Stoneplate is druid-legal, despite also requiring quarrying and chemical treatments. Pursuit of quality hides has sure destroyed ecosystems for the sake of industry up here in Canada, not to mention all of the extra chemicals involved in making cow skin offer protection. I've said it before and I'll say it again: Gold represents less industry than leather since the former can be found just lying around and only needs to be shaped.
Quarrying and chemically tearing something isn’t quite the same as industrialization. Chemicals make up nature, they aren’t by themselves anti-nature, just how they’re used. And the real world fur and hide industry isn’t same as people scrapping together armor in s fantasy world.

The Sideromancer |
I'm well aware that chemicals are not inherently unnatural, but there's plenty of examples of tanning chemicals being both dangerous and ill-disposed of.
And if we're bringing in the possibility of nonmatching levels of industry, what is stopping there from being non-industrially produced metal armours?

![]() |

I'm well aware that chemicals are not inherently unnatural, but there's plenty of examples of tanning chemicals being both dangerous and ill-disposed of.
And if we're bringing in the possibility of nonmatching levels of industry, what is stopping there from being non-industrially produced metal armours?
The fact that there rally can’t be? You need a forge to make metal armor.

Gisher |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

The Sideromancer wrote:The fact that there rally can’t be? You need a forge to make metal armor.I'm well aware that chemicals are not inherently unnatural, but there's plenty of examples of tanning chemicals being both dangerous and ill-disposed of.
And if we're bringing in the possibility of nonmatching levels of industry, what is stopping there from being non-industrially produced metal armours?
You also need a forge to make a scimitar.

Heladriell |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |

I found the shifter very weak as a combatant class. It lacks an increased precision mechanic (like weapon training, rage, favored enemy, etc...) the damage from the claws starts too low to mean anything (1d4, which you can get for free with some races), the only meaningful defensive feature is much like the monk AC (nothing regarding saves, immunities, resistances, DR, SR...). Also the attribute bonus from aspects is enhancement, which won't stack with most spells and magic items.
The concept is great, but the class is lacking so much that I can't find a use for it.

Mbertorch |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |

Rysky wrote:You also need a forge to make a scimitar.The Sideromancer wrote:The fact that there rally can’t be? You need a forge to make metal armor.I'm well aware that chemicals are not inherently unnatural, but there's plenty of examples of tanning chemicals being both dangerous and ill-disposed of.
And if we're bringing in the possibility of nonmatching levels of industry, what is stopping there from being non-industrially produced metal armours?
I've always thought it dumb that Druids got scimitars and not greatclubs.
Not a helpful statement, I know. But I wanted to say it.
On topic, can the debate of the Shifter's usefulness/viability be discussed elsewhere? I feel like people's legitimate questions about the class, other archetypes, etc. are getting buried amidst the argument.

Feros |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

What did the bard get?
Filidh: A bard that uses music to invoke natural magic (divine) and can see the life as it is and even the future.
Cultivator: Uses music to grow plants and control them.
Thundercaller: Their voices summon thunder and lightning and incite rage in allies.
They also get a few new spells and a new feat that allows you to extend the range of your bardic performance in wild areas.
Are there any class specific feats for kineticist, sorcerer, oracle, and/or swashbuckler?
New archetypes: Blighted Defiler—draws lifeforce out of surrounding plant life to enhance their power.
Terrakineticist—not as good at pulling from the elemental planes,
they enhance their abilities by supplementing them with what they can find in the natural world.
Leshykineticist—Leshys only. See here for details.
What did the oracle get?
Elementalist Oracle: connected to the elements and their manifestation in the natural world.
River Soul: Their power stems from a bond with rivers and their flow.
Tree Soul: They feel a bond not only with trees, but those items carved from them.
New spells as well.

Ventnor |

It represents civilization (and you kinda need more than an anvil and torch), and while you can produce weapons you don’t cloak your body in them.
Turning animal hides into leather is also an industrial process that requires chemicals which are harmful to the environment. In fact, making any kind of clothing is an industrial process in a way.
So let's just say that Druids can only use their abilities if they're naked. That way they're all-natural.

knightnday |

Rysky wrote:It represents civilization (and you kinda need more than an anvil and torch), and while you can produce weapons you don’t cloak your body in them.
Turning animal hides into leather is also an industrial process that requires chemicals which are harmful to the environment. In fact, making any kind of clothing is an industrial process in a way.
So let's just say that Druids can only use their abilities if they're naked. That way they're all-natural.
Actually they do that in the Iron Druid series of books. Druids can bind your clothing together or otherwise entangle you with it, plus clothing is problematic for shape shifting. For most druids any amount of iron inhibits spell casting as well. Which is why the Iron Druid is so unusual.
But I digress.

Feros |

Can someone tell me how many feats are in the Wilding Strike feat chain? How do they compare w/ the Rending Fury (3) feat chain < UC?
Thanks.
Wilding Strike increases your unarmed strike damage. That is all.

Feros |

I've only got one question: Did they nerf the Snowball spell?
So...yeah, pretty much.

Feros |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |

Paladinosaur wrote:What are the shifters weapon proficiencies? And would this class work well with the Skinwalker race?Oh yeah that’s something I’ve been wondering about for awhile.
I don't see great advantages, but the racial feats and ability to take on bestial form could allow for multiple aspects effectively in play much earlier if, say for example, a werebear-kin were to take owl as their first Shifter aspect...
;)

David knott 242 |

How much does the Elementalist Oracle archetype differ from this version in People of the Sands?

Alchemaic |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Whoa, the Thundercaller got a reprint?! I hope they tweaked it, because it certainly pushed the Over-Powered envelope.
Thundercaller was considered OP? It seemed like it was pretty decent, trading out support and more tricksy abilities for the ability to help out in combat more directly.

Gisher |

I'm interested in the Familiar rules. My understanding was that they were going to clarify a lot of outstanding questions. Did they? I'm thinking of the many questions regarding Tumor Familiars (I saw the previous post regarding the Protector archetype), how Improved Familiar works with Shamans, if multiple Familiars are possible, etc. I'm not asking for a point by point breakdown, just an overall assessment of whether this book does a good job of addressing the major areas of confusion.

Feros |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

How much does the Elementalist Oracle archetype differ from this version in People of the Sands?
Otherwise, the same.

Feros |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

Feros,
One quick question about that one Bard archetype!
** spoiler omitted **
Sorry for the confusion!

![]() |
Question that never got answered. The blighted defiler kineticist archetype.
I heard that you can be a good character, but not gain their ability to drain the land.
Is there any point of playing one then? Or will playing one just be a significant nerf to your character? I wouldn't be able to use burn at all, right?

Feros |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

I'm interested in the Familiar rules. My understanding was that they were going to clarify a lot of outstanding questions. Did they? I'm thinking of the many questions regarding Tumor Familiars (I saw the previous post regarding the Protector archetype), how Improved Familiar works with Shamans, if multiple Familiars are possible, etc. I'm not asking for a point by point breakdown, just an overall assessment of whether this book does a good job of addressing the major areas of confusion.
They didn't. They did make a list of magic item slots for companions and familiars, but the bulk of the section is on new archetypes, familiars, companions, tricks, and companion feats.
Tumor familiars, Improved Familiar with a shaman, or multiple familiars didn't come up.
EDIT: It was my understanding that they were going to EXPAND familiar options in the book, but can you tell me where you heard about the clarification of rules? Curious.

Gisher |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Gisher wrote:I'm interested in the Familiar rules. My understanding was that they were going to clarify a lot of outstanding questions. Did they? I'm thinking of the many questions regarding Tumor Familiars (I saw the previous post regarding the Protector archetype), how Improved Familiar works with Shamans, if multiple Familiars are possible, etc. I'm not asking for a point by point breakdown, just an overall assessment of whether this book does a good job of addressing the major areas of confusion.They didn't. They did make a list of magic item slots for companions and familiars, but the bulk of the section is on new archetypes, familiars, companions, tricks, and companion feats.
Tumor familiars, Improved Familiar with a shaman, or multiple familiars didn't come up.
That's too bad. It seems like a missed opportunity. But thanks for the response. :)

![]() |
Gisher wrote:I'm interested in the Familiar rules. My understanding was that they were going to clarify a lot of outstanding questions. Did they? I'm thinking of the many questions regarding Tumor Familiars (I saw the previous post regarding the Protector archetype), how Improved Familiar works with Shamans, if multiple Familiars are possible, etc. I'm not asking for a point by point breakdown, just an overall assessment of whether this book does a good job of addressing the major areas of confusion.They didn't. They did make a list of magic item slots for companions and familiars, but the bulk of the section is on new archetypes, familiars, companions, tricks, and companion feats.
Tumor familiars, Improved Familiar with a shaman, or multiple familiars didn't come up.
Even the protector familiar + tumor familiar combo? I heard from someone else under protector familiar it states they can't get it with tumor familiars.

Mark Seifter Designer |
6 people marked this as a favorite. |

EDIT: It was my understanding that they were going to EXPAND familiar options in the book, but can you tell me where you heard about the clarification of rules? Curious.
I imagine it's because I said the rules for familiar archetypes would get clarifications, which was more specific in scope but over time people remembered what I said but not the exact details.

![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Disappointment about lack of varied shapeshifting aside (something we've known about the class for a while), I can't help but remember the Kineticist. There were a million threads about how the class was terrible when Occult Adventures came out. But people eventually warmed up to the class, and now it's generally regarded as a fun and well-balanced option (yes, I know someone's going to contest this the moment they see it.)
My own experience with the Hunter also comes to mind. I thought the class was a waste of space, a major misstep on Paizo's part, for the longest time. But just within the last few months, having built, played, and witnessed other players using the class, I've begun to warm up to it.
The Shifter could certainly be awful. Sometimes a class is just bad. However, I'm going to be cautious making any judgements too immediately.
And if it turns out the Shifter is bad, we'll probably get a player companion that has some fixes in a year or so.
I have similar thoughts man, in particular about the Hunter, who not only recieved some of the most extensive updates and overhauls during the playtest processs but who actually benefited the most from the whole experience. In it's original form it couldn't even give its animal focus to its animal companion, only had the druid list, and didn't treat as a druid and ranger for feats and abilities just to name a few, and in the playtest helped bring those changes about.
This I think is the biggest issue with not having the playtest, as both of those classes benefited from the public testing that went into them before their release and it feels like the Shifter would have benefited as well. At the very least it could have acclimated people to the idea they were going for, this weird druid/monk hybrid, rather than an actual wildshaper.

![]() |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

Gisher wrote:Rysky wrote:You also need a forge to make a scimitar.The Sideromancer wrote:The fact that there rally can’t be? You need a forge to make metal armor.I'm well aware that chemicals are not inherently unnatural, but there's plenty of examples of tanning chemicals being both dangerous and ill-disposed of.
And if we're bringing in the possibility of nonmatching levels of industry, what is stopping there from being non-industrially produced metal armours?
I've always thought it dumb that Druids got scimitars and not greatclubs.
Not a helpful statement, I know. But I wanted to say it.
Agreed man. I'd actually like to see the greatclub just moved from the martial category into the simple and be done with it. It actually makes it a much stronger choice then, benefits more classes, and in general feels more thematically appropriate. What I've done in my home games and I gotta tell ya, rogues with greatclubs and druids with baseball bats is pretty fun when you don't have to dump a feat for it ^-^.