It's more like a sorcerer where you can change all of your spells known every day. Sorta like a Spirit Shaman if you remember that class from 3.5.
No- it means that, like a sorcerer, the Arcanist can cast any spell that they have prepared, up to their spells per day. Like a wizard, however, they have a much broader range of spells to choose from for preparing each day, as opposed to the sorcerer's limited number of spells known.
So, for instance (pulling numbers out of the air, not looking at the playtest document atm), if an Arcanist can prepare 2 cast 2 second level spells per day, but can prepare four, then he could prepare 4 different spells. He could then pick and choose from those 4 spells when he casts, casting up to his maximum per day (2).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It seems to indicate that an arcanist has unlimited use of each spell slot, as long as a spell was prepared for it. Is that acrually how the arcanist works?
The Arcanist is a Sorcerer who can change her spells known every morning by preparing them like a Wizard. In exchange for this, she gets less spells per day in each spell slot. She otherwise uses spontaneous casting like the Sorcerer.
Edit: Now with TWICE the Ninja'd power!
I guess im pretty dense today... can't the wizard cast any spell they've prepared for the day too? I guess im not seeing how they can cast spontaneously if they still have to prepare their spells each day. i dont know why i cant wrap my head around this. Thanks for the help.
The redesign on counterspell was intended to limit is utility a bit. The previous version encouraged arcanists to burn through their spell slots and reservoir at an alarming rate, and the end result is that opposing spellcasters had a very hard time getting any spells off at all. I am not convinced that the change went too far, but the previous rule was not working as intended (which for the record, is meant to make counterspell an occasionally useful option, not a prime strategy). There might be room for an exploit chain to enhance this option if the build is one that is truly desired, but even then, it is going to have to nerf Spell Parry in its language. That combo is ridiculously good.I think a build that can counterspell effectively (even if it's limited to only one class) is a great idea, even though I agree it should take more investment than "Hey, here's one exploit every single arcanist is going to take."
With 3.5 material you could get similar abilities with a Cleric taking Divine Defiance, Spontaneous Domain Casting (Magic Domain), and the Inquisition domain (whether natively or from a level in Church Inquisitor). That's 3 class features and a feat, and you can get it online by level 5. I'd expect an arcanist to need a similar level of investment.
What about an archetype that gets better at it as it levels?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I guess im pretty dense today... can't the wizard cast any spell they've prepared for the day too? I guess im not seeing how they can cast spontaneously if they still have to prepare their spells each day. i dont know why i cant wrap my head around this. Thanks for the help.Consider these three characters:
Walter the Wizard has Slow, Haste and Fireball memorised as his level 3 spell slots. He casts Fireball. If he wants to cast another level 3 spell he has to use Haste or Slow.
Sue the Sorcererss knows the Haste spell and has 3 level 3 spell slots. She can cast Haste three times per day.
Andy the Arcanist has 3 level 3 spell slots and has prepared Haste and Slow. If he casts Haste he now has 2 level 3 spell slots but can still cast either Haste or Slow.
Does that make sense?
Makes perfect sense, thank you! Pretty elegant way to combine the two ways to cast.
Does bloodline development count as actually having a bloodline. Hope so, makes sense to me.
I really think an Archtype that would make the Arcanist a Time Mage would prod some serious buttock.
I will remember that phrase forever.....thank you.
|
What about an archetype that gets better at it as it levels?The redesign on counterspell was intended to limit is utility a bit. The previous version encouraged arcanists to burn through their spell slots and reservoir at an alarming rate, and the end result is that opposing spellcasters had a very hard time getting any spells off at all. I am not convinced that the change went too far, but the previous rule was not working as intended (which for the record, is meant to make counterspell an occasionally useful option, not a prime strategy). There might be room for an exploit chain to enhance this option if the build is one that is truly desired, but even then, it is going to have to nerf Spell Parry in its language. That combo is ridiculously good.I think a build that can counterspell effectively (even if it's limited to only one class) is a great idea, even though I agree it should take more investment than "Hey, here's one exploit every single arcanist is going to take."
With 3.5 material you could get similar abilities with a Cleric taking Divine Defiance, Spontaneous Domain Casting (Magic Domain), and the Inquisition domain (whether natively or from a level in Church Inquisitor). That's 3 class features and a feat, and you can get it online by level 5. I'd expect an arcanist to need a similar level of investment.
That would be an excellent option, I'd say. Archetype exist to both add a version of the flavor the class is missing as well as expand/modify existing class abilities. A spellkiller archetype feels like it'd very much be on the Arcanist's level; one who exists not just to mix around with magic, but to specifically screw with enemy's spells.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The redesign on counterspell was intended to limit is utility a bit. The previous version encouraged arcanists to burn through their spell slots and reservoir at an alarming rate, and the end result is that opposing spellcasters had a very hard time getting any spells off at all. I am not convinced that the change went too far, but the previous rule was not working as intended (which for the record, is meant to make counterspell an occasionally useful option, not a prime strategy). There might be room for an exploit chain to enhance this option if the build is one that is truly desired, but even then, it is going to have to nerf Spell Parry in its language. That combo is ridiculously good.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
So just play tested this. Exactly as expected, I died because I was unable to counter the enemy's fireballs with my 5th level arcanist. The wizard I rebuilt to do this could have at least readied a dispel magic to counter. But instead I had no 4th level spells to counter with nor the ability to prepare fireball (or dispel) to counter with.
What's so bad about an arcanist making it hard on another caster? I thought that was the point. In addition to losing a slot just like the enemy, the arcanist is also losing a point and their swift action for the round. I don't think a chain is necessary. If you're worried about spell parry (I don't see it but I'll cede that point) fix that. It didn't need a full redo that ruined what was easily my favorite part about the entire play test.
What's so bad about an arcanist making it hard on another caster? I thought that was the point. In addition to losing a slot just like the enemy, the arcanist is also losing a point and their swift action for the round. I don't think a chain is necessary. If you're worried about spell parry (I don't see it but I'll cede that point) fix that. It didn't need a full redo that ruined what was easily my favorite part about the entire play test.
I think there were some specific usage (notably in combination with Spell Parry) that made it too good, and that it needed to be tamped down. This version may have gone too far in the other direction, but there's a learning curve, and I think the devs would rather be a little extreme one way or the other for testing purposes as a method of trying to find that balance.
I wouldn't be surprised if the final version changed somewhat from the v.2 playtest as well.
What's so bad about an arcanist making it hard on another caster? I thought that was the point. In addition to losing a slot just like the enemy, the arcanist is also losing a point and their swift action for the round. I don't think a chain is necessary. If you're worried about spell parry (I don't see it but I'll cede that point) fix that. It didn't need a full redo that ruined what was easily my favorite part about the entire play test.I think there were some specific usage (notably in combination with Spell Parry) that made it too good, and that it needed to be tamped down. This version may have gone too far in the other direction, but there's a learning curve, and I think the devs would rather be a little extreme one way or the other for testing purposes as a method of trying to find that balance.
I wouldn't be surprised if the final version changed somewhat from the v.2 playtest as well.
I hope so.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I definitely saw some of our suggested exploits show up in this PDF, namely mine for a free MIC feat.
I think an exploit that lets you take apart magic item enchantments and put them back together differently would be really cool.
Example: An arcanist with Craft Magic Arms & Armor comes across a hammer with Impact on it, the Arcanist wants to convert that into a different +1 enchantment, so he hacks into it's magicyness and changes a couple of wires and BAM now it's no longer an Impact hammer, but a Spell Storing one.
I really like this idea! If he doesn't have the time to completely rewrite the magic item (say maybe it takes about as long as crafting it ftom scratch but costs less) then he can temporarily rejigger an item for a battle... so if he has a +1 fiery sword and he's fighting a fire giant he spends reservoir equal to the plus of the benefit and it becomes icey... If he has a few days he can permanently make a +2 blade into a +1 icey....
I love the image of twisting the enchantment into something more desirable rather than just tacking a couple of plusses and bonuses on a non magical blade.
My .02$
The redesign on counterspell was intended to limit is utility a bit. The previous version encouraged arcanists to burn through their spell slots and reservoir at an alarming rate, and the end result is that opposing spellcasters had a very hard time getting any spells off at all. I am not convinced that the change went too far, but the previous rule was not working as intended (which for the record, is meant to make counterspell an occasionally useful option, not a prime strategy). There might be room for an exploit chain to enhance this option if the build is one that is truly desired, but even then, it is going to have to nerf Spell Parry in its language. That combo is ridiculously good.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead DesignerSo just play tested this. Exactly as expected, I died because I was unable to counter the enemy's fireballs with my 5th level arcanist. The wizard I rebuilt to do this could have at least readied a dispel magic to counter. But instead I had no 4th level spells to counter with nor the ability to prepare fireball (or dispel) to counter with.
What's so bad about an arcanist making it hard on another caster? I thought that was the point. In addition to losing a slot just like the enemy, the arcanist is also losing a point and their swift action for the round. I don't think a chain is necessary. If you're worried about spell parry (I don't see it but I'll cede that point) fix that. It didn't need a full redo that ruined what was easily my favorite part about the entire play test.
Also, I'm aware that even if counter spell didn't require level +1 I'd have been unable to counter 3rd level spells. But that's the point really, it was already a fairly challenging thing. And that's the status quo until level 18. I do t think what happens to a level 18 character should nerf one of the most fun builds for levels 1 through 17.
Also, I'm assuming dispel magic doesn't work with the exploit, but what happens if say, an arcanist with a darkness spell prepared tries to counter a light spell?
My suggestions:
- Make the Arcanist the ultimate magic tinkerer, being able to modify magic items, create temporary ones with his pool(maybe even constructs) and changing the way magic works around him.
- Increase the power of his counterspell machanic. He should be able to foil the spells of a wizard of the same level, even if he cannot cast spells of the same level.
- Give him various options to increase his pool, including dangerous and questionable ones.
- Give him options to invest a permanent part of his pool in return for persistent powers.
- Allow flexibility with the pool. Lending other caster some of the power, taking from other caster, sensing how much magic other casters still have. Also trading hit points for AR points (blood magic).
- Make an Arcanist-themed Magus(please).
|
|
- We will be taking a close look at consume magic items to try and find a way to make this viable without breaking game balance. I've got a number of solutions in my head right now and I need to work with them a bit to find one that fits.
Rather than try too hard to fix the number of AR points gained from use of the ability, would it help to attack the problem from the other direction?
Amend the AR cost of some of the abilities?The crowd who are saying 'Consume Item is weak' are evaluating its ability to power the weaker exploits.
The crowd who are saying 'Consume Item is powerful' are evaluating its ability to power the stronger exploits.
"I'd never eat a level 2 item, just to fuel a flame arc." is a valid statement.
But equally valid is the statement "I'd always trade an unwanted level 2 item, to fuel a more flexible, non-provoking version of a (level 4) Dimension Door!".
Or "I'd always trade an unwanted level 2 item, to apply metamagic without increasing the casting time."
Or "I'd always trade an unwanted level 2 item, to increase caster level, and thus include my whole party in a spell effect, that would otherwise have left someone out."
(consider how a potion of something 'meh', like barkskin effectively 'becomes' the equivalent of two potions of haste, with no drinking required by the users. Hell yes. Every time.)
Or "I'd always trade an unwanted level 2 item, to fuel a dispel attempt (level 3 effect) on a (higher spell level) debilitating condition affecting my ally"
You have to balance the Consume Item ability against what it will most likely be used for, not least likely.
The redesign on counterspell was intended to limit is utility a bit. The previous version encouraged arcanists to burn through their spell slots and reservoir at an alarming rate, and the end result is that opposing spellcasters had a very hard time getting any spells off at all. I am not convinced that the change went too far, but the previous rule was not working as intended (which for the record, is meant to make counterspell an occasionally useful option, not a prime strategy). There might be room for an exploit chain to enhance this option if the build is one that is truly desired, but even then, it is going to have to nerf Spell Parry in its language. That combo is ridiculously good.I think a build that can counterspell effectively (even if it's limited to only one class) is a great idea, even though I agree it should take more investment than "Hey, here's one exploit every single arcanist is going to take."
With 3.5 material you could get similar abilities with a Cleric taking Divine Defiance, Spontaneous Domain Casting (Magic Domain), and the Inquisition domain (whether natively or from a level in Church Inquisitor). That's 3 class features and a feat, and you can get it online by level 5. I'd expect an arcanist to need a similar level of investment.
This is my thought too. Being able to BUILD a counterspell specialist is very interesting. It should take a bit of more investment however just as Craft suggest. An exploit chain combined with the feat investment for Spell Parry I think makes it very balanced. After all. You are talking a big investment for taking care of ONE type of enemy.
3 exploits (as an example)
2 Feats
Proper Spell selection for countering.
---------------------------------------
All that and it just takes care of enemy spellcasters. Not creatures with spell like abilities. Not melee brutes. Not traps, social encounters, ect. And its not even taking the enemy spellcaster out of the fight... it simply is keeping him from affecting the battle.
With the same investment I could max out an obsene DC on Save or Suck spells and it works on every enemy type. In fact it does so better. Unlike countering spells... your are knocking that spellcaster out of the fight completely. Or the Barbarian. Or the Genie. Or whatever else. A counterspelling specialist that bounces spells back at the caster would simply be a fun and extreamly specialized caster that would be very effective against one enemy type.
|
|
- Are there any other exploit ideas that folks would like to see. We've got a few that we are planning to add, but I want to see what you have to say.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
A lot of the possibilities for 'moulding arcane energies' already exist as metamagic feats.
With the ability to add these on the fly, without sacrificing casting speed, many of the things people would like to see, already exist.And more such abilities get added to the list of possibilities, every time new metamagic feats are introduced.
I don't envisage the arcanist is going to be short of ways to jigger with the spells she casts.
What I don't see, and am surprised not to see, are ways to add some kind of static defence.
Much of what the arcanist is doing is reactive; actively countering, tinkering, disrupting, siphoning.
It results in the class having a very twitchy, paranoid feel, which isn't a bad thing.
I don't see options for;
- setting up a personal shield of spell resistance/suppression, or
- deflection (as per entropic shield), or
- energy resistance, or
- transmogrifying incoming energies to other types,
I don't know if that's a deliberate design decision. The class already contains a fair amount of versatility, that it could choose to take abjuration spells, but the addition of some defensive exploits, which mimicked the effects of entropic shield, fire shield, resist energy, globe of invulnerability could be nice, even better if they didn't directly mimic those spells.
A personal field that dissipated incoming energy attacks into a cloud? Arcanist avoids the brunt, but splash damage to adjacent squares?
Converting incoming attacks into their opposite element?
I still wanna see AR based off CHA + 1/2 level, and maybe a few more exploits that have to do with changing the schools of spells to really get into the whole 'hacking into the way magic works' theme.
|
|
In answer to the calls that the Arcanist is fragile at low level, and that the blast exploits are weak;
Instead of increasing damage, to compete with the spells of [caster level/2] she has available, and making the class more of a glass cannon, how about if the blast exploits provided a corresponding temporary resistance to their own energy type?
Using flame arc therefore causes small fires to erupt from her skin, dying down in the next round (or two?). During this time, she gains fire resistance of [level], deals [level/2] fire damage to grappling creatures, and is immune the automatic damage from fire-susceptible swarms.
It adds a small amount of survivability, to the low-level arcanist, at no extra cost. Very useful when she has only one or two exploits to her name.
It protects them from some low-level spell damage and other attack forms that are bad news to a caster. A goblin may not know the flames are temporary, and would hesitate to pin her for a coup de gras, and swarms are bad news for any low-level group.
I hope so.What's so bad about an arcanist making it hard on another caster? I thought that was the point. In addition to losing a slot just like the enemy, the arcanist is also losing a point and their swift action for the round. I don't think a chain is necessary. If you're worried about spell parry (I don't see it but I'll cede that point) fix that. It didn't need a full redo that ruined what was easily my favorite part about the entire play test.I think there were some specific usage (notably in combination with Spell Parry) that made it too good, and that it needed to be tamped down. This version may have gone too far in the other direction, but there's a learning curve, and I think the devs would rather be a little extreme one way or the other for testing purposes as a method of trying to find that balance.
I wouldn't be surprised if the final version changed somewhat from the v.2 playtest as well.
I second this hope. Just give me the earlier revision but say it doesn't work with parry or something.
Also I'm glad I'm not the only one unhappy with the spell counter mechanic, thought I was going mad there for a bit >.>
Im sorry, but i am having difficulty understanding this line:
"An arcanist must prepare her spells ahead of time, but unlike a wizard, her spells are not expended when they’re cast. Instead, she can cast any spell that she has prepared, assuming she hasn’t yet used up her spells per day for that level"
It seems to indicate that an arcanist has unlimited use of each spell slot, as long as a spell was prepared for it. Is that acrually how the arcanist works?
This very question, while answered, means that the wording of the ability should be clarified. Probably by adding clause explicitly stating that instead of prepared spells, daily spell slots are expended because it is only implied instead of being stated explicitly.
In answer to the calls that the Arcanist is fragile at low level, and that the blast exploits are weak;
Instead of increasing damage, to compete with the spells of [caster level/2] she has available, and making the class more of a glass cannon, how about if the blast exploits provided a corresponding temporary resistance to their own energy type?
Using flame arc therefore causes small fires to erupt from her skin, dying down in the next round (or two?). During this time, she gains fire resistance of [level], deals [level/2] fire damage to grappling creatures, and is immune the automatic damage from fire-susceptible swarms.
It adds a small amount of survivability, to the low-level arcanist, at no extra cost. Very useful when she has only one or two exploits to her name.
It protects them from some low-level spell damage and other attack forms that are bad news to a caster. A goblin may not know the flames are temporary, and would hesitate to pin her for a coup de gras, and swarms are bad news for any low-level group.
I don't think blasts are so bad now that the save does not reduce the damage (it only stops the secondary effect, right?). However, that does little to help them at low levels when they have so few AR points.
I don't think blasts are so bad now that the save does not reduce the damage (it only stops the secondary effect, right?). However, that does little to help them at low levels when they have so few AR points.In answer to the calls that the Arcanist is fragile at low level, and that the blast exploits are weak;
Instead of increasing damage, to compete with the spells of [caster level/2] she has available, and making the class more of a glass cannon, how about if the blast exploits provided a corresponding temporary resistance to their own energy type?
Using flame arc therefore causes small fires to erupt from her skin, dying down in the next round (or two?). During this time, she gains fire resistance of [level], deals [level/2] fire damage to grappling creatures, and is immune the automatic damage from fire-susceptible swarms.
It adds a small amount of survivability, to the low-level arcanist, at no extra cost. Very useful when she has only one or two exploits to her name.
It protects them from some low-level spell damage and other attack forms that are bad news to a caster. A goblin may not know the flames are temporary, and would hesitate to pin her for a coup de gras, and swarms are bad news for any low-level group.
Flame Arc still gets a save for half damage, which makes no sense as the enemy gets two chances to 'dodge'.
I don't think blasts are so bad now that the save does not reduce the damage (it only stops the secondary effect, right?). However, that does little to help them at low levels when they have so few AR points.In answer to the calls that the Arcanist is fragile at low level, and that the blast exploits are weak;
Instead of increasing damage, to compete with the spells of [caster level/2] she has available, and making the class more of a glass cannon, how about if the blast exploits provided a corresponding temporary resistance to their own energy type?
Using flame arc therefore causes small fires to erupt from her skin, dying down in the next round (or two?). During this time, she gains fire resistance of [level], deals [level/2] fire damage to grappling creatures, and is immune the automatic damage from fire-susceptible swarms.
It adds a small amount of survivability, to the low-level arcanist, at no extra cost. Very useful when she has only one or two exploits to her name.
It protects them from some low-level spell damage and other attack forms that are bad news to a caster. A goblin may not know the flames are temporary, and would hesitate to pin her for a coup de gras, and swarms are bad news for any low-level group.It is bad damage. Ask anyone that ever played a Warlock.
At 10th level you are going to do 5d6 with fire (best one). That averages 17.5 damage. That IS really pathetic damage for a 10th level character, especially since other classes will be doing more than one attack. Further, at higher levels you have more spells, so the likelihood that crappy damage is ever going to look appealing becomes less and less. You also have better ways to spend those AR points, such as increasing the DC on a spell by 2.
I'd rather see them as unlimited use, spend an AR for an additional effect. You'll see them replace Crossbows at low levels, but the use will still peter out to little to nothing at higher ones....
How would you increase the damage to make it viable? Maybe add your int modifier to the damage? That would boost it, but it wouldn't improve the scaling all that much....
I would also love to see them unlimited. I'd also be fine with boosting the damage and compensating by targeting regular AC (though there's not really much precedent for that, so it probably won't happen).
I like the blasts a lot, conceptually, so I'd love to see them turned into a desirable choice.
I don't think blasts are so bad now that the save does not reduce the damage (it only stops the secondary effect, right?). However, that does little to help them at low levels when they have so few AR points.In answer to the calls that the Arcanist is fragile at low level, and that the blast exploits are weak;
Instead of increasing damage, to compete with the spells of [caster level/2] she has available, and making the class more of a glass cannon, how about if the blast exploits provided a corresponding temporary resistance to their own energy type?
Using flame arc therefore causes small fires to erupt from her skin, dying down in the next round (or two?). During this time, she gains fire resistance of [level], deals [level/2] fire damage to grappling creatures, and is immune the automatic damage from fire-susceptible swarms.
It adds a small amount of survivability, to the low-level arcanist, at no extra cost. Very useful when she has only one or two exploits to her name.
It protects them from some low-level spell damage and other attack forms that are bad news to a caster. A goblin may not know the flames are temporary, and would hesitate to pin her for a coup de gras, and swarms are bad news for any low-level group.It is bad damage. Ask anyone that ever played a Warlock.
At 10th level you are going to do 5d6 with fire (best one). That averages 17.5 damage. That IS really pathetic damage for a 10th level character, especially since other classes will be doing more than one attack. Further, at higher levels you have more spells, so the likelihood that crappy damage is ever going to look appealing becomes less and less. You also have better ways to spend those AR points, such as increasing the DC on a spell by 2.
I'd rather see them as unlimited use, spend an AR for an additional effect. You'll see them replace Crossbows at low levels, but the use will still peter out to little to nothing at higher ones....
Hey: it is something to do when I don't want to use up my real spells. And at level 10, it seems to me that the blast is worth around a level 1 spell (like a slightly weaker snowball for instance).
At higher levels, I am going to call these blasts the equivalent of level 2 or 3 attack spells (whose damage will be capping out at around 10 die anyways and the saves will be around the same as against those level 2 or 3 spells too with the half-level mechanic offsetting the lower charisma)
And I think you are wrong about them replacing crossbow bolts. You don't have enough blasts a day for that.
They are still weak, but have one or two of them is not so bad if it will only cost me a feat or whatever.
...I don't think blasts are so bad now that the save does not reduce the damage (it only stops the secondary effect, right?). However, that does little to help them at low levels when they have so few AR points.In answer to the calls that the Arcanist is fragile at low level, and that the blast exploits are weak;
Instead of increasing damage, to compete with the spells of [caster level/2] she has available, and making the class more of a glass cannon, how about if the blast exploits provided a corresponding temporary resistance to their own energy type?
Using flame arc therefore causes small fires to erupt from her skin, dying down in the next round (or two?). During this time, she gains fire resistance of [level], deals [level/2] fire damage to grappling creatures, and is immune the automatic damage from fire-susceptible swarms.
It adds a small amount of survivability, to the low-level arcanist, at no extra cost. Very useful when she has only one or two exploits to her name.
It protects them from some low-level spell damage and other attack forms that are bad news to a caster. A goblin may not know the flames are temporary, and would hesitate to pin her for a coup de gras, and swarms are bad news for any low-level group.It is bad damage. Ask anyone that ever played a Warlock.
At 10th level you are going to do 5d6 with fire (best one). That averages 17.5 damage. That IS really pathetic damage for a 10th level character, especially since other classes will be doing more than one attack. Further, at higher levels you have more spells, so the likelihood that crappy damage is ever going to look appealing becomes less and less. You also have better ways to spend those AR points, such as increasing the DC on a spell by 2.
I'd rather see them as unlimited use, spend an AR for an additional effect. You'll see them replace Crossbows at low levels, but the use will still peter out to little to
I'm going to combine this suggestion with something someone recommended earlier.
Each day, when an arcsnist prepares spells they may forfeit access to X (2-3) points of their spell reservoir to gain the [flame arc] ability. They may use the ability at will until they rest 8 hours and prepare their spells.
Something to that effect. Alternately, what if the blasts worked like scorching ray and you got more of them as your caster level goes up? That could be a seperate exploit I suppose.
...I don't think blasts are so bad now that the save does not reduce the damage (it only stops the secondary effect, right?). However, that does little to help them at low levels when they have so few AR points.In answer to the calls that the Arcanist is fragile at low level, and that the blast exploits are weak;
Instead of increasing damage, to compete with the spells of [caster level/2] she has available, and making the class more of a glass cannon, how about if the blast exploits provided a corresponding temporary resistance to their own energy type?
Using flame arc therefore causes small fires to erupt from her skin, dying down in the next round (or two?). During this time, she gains fire resistance of [level], deals [level/2] fire damage to grappling creatures, and is immune the automatic damage from fire-susceptible swarms.
It adds a small amount of survivability, to the low-level arcanist, at no extra cost. Very useful when she has only one or two exploits to her name.
It protects them from some low-level spell damage and other attack forms that are bad news to a caster. A goblin may not know the flames are temporary, and would hesitate to pin her for a coup de gras, and swarms are bad news for any low-level group.It is bad damage. Ask anyone that ever played a Warlock.
At 10th level you are going to do 5d6 with fire (best one). That averages 17.5 damage. That IS really pathetic damage for a 10th level character, especially since other classes will be doing more than one attack. Further, at higher levels you have more spells, so the likelihood that crappy damage is ever going to look appealing becomes less and less. You also have better ways to spend those AR points, such as increasing the DC on a spell by 2.
I'd rather see them as unlimited use, spend an AR for an additional effect. You'll see them replace Crossbows at low levels, but the use will
Unlimited use might be fun, but it also might be O to the P (that is to say OP). It would largely replace damage dealing spells at level 1 and at higher levels it would replace most damage spells levels 1 through 3.
I am not saying Warlocks were broken good. I am saying they would have been if they also had full casting as a crown on top.
I think the blasts need to work closer to the bloodline and school powers.
L1 arcanist with flame arc: 1d6 rta; save for half; 1 time a day (3 if she consumes every spell.)
L1 wizard (fire): 1d6 20' line; save for half; 6 times a day (assuming 16 int) still has spells.
L1 sorcerer (elemental; fire): 1d6 rta; (6 times a day (16 cha) still has spells.
At third level it changes to
L3A: 2d6; 2/day (5 if she consumes every spell)
L3W: 1d6+1 6/day
L3S: 1d6+1 6/day
skip down the road a bit
L10A: 5d6; 6/day (56 if she consumes every spell, but by now I assume she has spells she wants to cast)
L10W: 1d6+5 7/day (assuming int bump)
L10S: 1d6+5 7/day (assuming cha bump at 4 & 8th levels)
If I wanted to make a fire mage (I do) I would start with bloodline development, then school understanding so that by level 3:
flame arc: 2d6; 2/day
flame jet: 1d6 20' line; 6 times a day
fire ray: 1d6 rta; 4 times a day (choosing int over cha) I am rebuilding my 1st level arcananist in PFS for this reason.
Back to the point, I think the scaling on flame arc is wonky and needs to be closer to the bloodline/school powers.
How would you increase the damage to make it viable? Maybe add your int modifier to the damage? That would boost it, but it wouldn't improve the scaling all that much....
I would also love to see them unlimited. I'd also be fine with boosting the damage and compensating by targeting regular AC (though there's not really much precedent for that, so it probably won't happen).
I like the blasts a lot, conceptually, so I'd love to see them turned into a desirable choice.
No AR: Level/2 d4 or d6 (depending) means they'd be ok now and then. Add an AR option to give +1 damage per die and add your Charisma to damage with the save effect (remember, these are all Charisma based).
Hey: it is something to do when I don't want to use up my real spells. And at level 10, it seems to me that the blast is worth around a level 1 spell (like a slightly weaker snowball for instance).
At higher levels, I am going to call these blasts the equivalent of level 2 or 3 attack spells (whose damage will be capping out at around 10 die anyways and the saves will be around the same as against those level 2 or 3 spells too with the half-level mechanic offsetting the lower charisma)
And I think you are wrong about them replacing crossbow bolts. You don't have enough blasts a day for that.
They are still weak, but have one or two of them is not so bad if it will only cost me a feat or whatever.
What do you mean something to do when you aren't using up real spells? You need real spells to power them. Or are you giving up on the very, very nice power boost AR provides and instead using AR just to do crappy damage? Not a very wise choice, my friend.
They are weaker than level 1 spells at level 10. By that level, 1st level attacks are ALL weak. 5d4+5 magic missile? Not very good damage at all. If you are depending on your level 1 spells for damage here, then you've made a bad choice. Relative to the hit points of enemies these blasts actually get...
The Warlock tricks were pretty sorry. And one AR point is one level one spell or half a level two spell. At level 15 (for instance) that one level one spell is roughly as good as a level 2 or 3 spell depending on how you invested in your charisma.
And I kind of think you are a chump for using spells to deal damage almost ever. Throw a cavalier at that problem. Literally throw the cavalier.
I am just saying the blasts are super economical and I would feel okay wasting one or two to speed up a fight that I am not being counted on to win. Resource management~
Arcanist is the weakest level 1 class rules as written, though. I AM saying that is true. I have been saying they need some lame throw-away power that they can do from time to time like Sorc. or Wizard.
The Warlock tricks were pretty sorry. And one AR point is one level one spell or half a level two spell. At level 15 (for instance) that one level one spell is roughly as good as a level 2 or 3 spell depending on how you invested in your charisma.
And I kind of think you are a chump for using spells to deal damage almost ever. Throw a cavalier at that problem. Literally throw the cavalier.
I am just saying the blasts are super economical and I would feel okay wasting one or two to speed up a fight that I am not being counted on to win. Resource management~
Arcanist is the weakest level 1 class rules as written, though. I AM saying that is true. I have been saying they need some lame throw-away power that they can do from time to time like Sorc. or Wizard.
Warlocks had some decent control via AoE Eldritch Blasts that could Nauseate or the like. Not so crappy. They just couldn't kill anything worth a darn.
At level 16 you're doing 8d6 damage. Worse than any level 2 or 3 spell, PERIOD. It's not roughly as good at all. And you know what? If you are using a level 2 or 3 slot for damage at level 15/16 in a fight, then you're insane unless that fight is a joke. Those slots are worthless for damage by that level, unless you are just screwing around. By then you have plenty of higher level slots.
Well, that's not entirely true. You can use level 1-3 slots to meh to decent effect with metamagic rods. Can't use the blasting exploits like that of course.
They actually aren't economical, because you are forgetting that each round the enemy is alive and active is another round it is doing damage. That damage requires resources to heal. So a round you use your "economical" blast is a round you've just told someone else to waste more resources on healing.
That ignores the fact, of course, that AR is better spent buffing your own spells or doing other much, much better things. So you are actually being wasteful doing this, especially since you have plenty of...
Listen: Arcanist is hella spell-poor. I am casting two real spells a fight at maximum for most of my career. If I was a wizard, that means that I can pet my fluffy magic kitty-cat for those rounds. For arcanists, I am shooting a little lazer beam that I will refill by taking a bite out of my staff later or using an extra rune of power that day.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I really like the class, but mostly because its the TYPE of spell caster I've always wanted: One that uses a number of prepared spells that can be freely interchanged for a number of uses.
Because I've wanted this mechanic for so long, I'd love this class even if it had no Arcane reservoir at all. But, giving up familiars, specialty schools, and bloodlines does require some sort of balance, and Arcane Reservoir and Exploits does that pretty well.
Some of the exploits are obviously better than others, but nothing stands out currently as absolutely broken.
I agree with everyone's opinion that regarding the damaging exploits, Flame Arc's reflex save seems to not be worth the net 1 point of damage (on average) per die rolled.
I like the idea that the actual Arcane reservoir equals 1 + 1/2 Arcanist level, as that isn't a lot, and how there are no "roll-over" reservoir points. It COULD be tweaked, I suppose, to make it more charisma related, like the reservoir refilling equal to the Arcanist Level + Charisma Bonus + 1. or it could just be tweaked down a bit to 1/2 level + Charisma Bonus (minimum 1). If relative power level seems to be the biggest overall concern by players, this alone should greatly resolve the issue.
I like the flavor the reservoir and exploits provide. I think there is a place in my game for such a class.
I've played Wizards, and I've Played Sorcerers. I still see reasons to play both of those classes even in a world where Arcanists exist.
I get that some people will feel like it gives too much of what people like about the Sorcerer and Wizard classes with not enough of the downsides. I don't really have an argument for that as so much of what people want is subjective. Some players see familiars as a liability while other see them as a huge advantage. Some people see spell books as all advantage and no downside, while others see them as a liability as they can be stolen, set on fire, lost, damaged by fungi, mold, vermin, liquids, stains etc. It depends on your play group, your GM, and your collaborative play style.
Final Opinion:
I can't speak for everyone's game, but for ours the Arcanist as written is a reasonably balanced addition to the available spell casters (though it might be tweaked a bit with a slightly smaller number of refilling reservoir points) and will appeal to many players, myself included, because of the overall flavor and the mechanic for a mix of spontaneous and prepared spells.
Sometimes popularity can be a warning bell for OP. Sometimes, its just a sign of "something that's been missing that players want". I see this as more of the latter than the former.
Jason, I'm going to ask straight out: what are you guys trying to do with the blast exploits?
If it's to provide the Arcanist with a low level damage option that isn't reliant on spells, then I think we need to talk about reducing the scaling damage and increasing the number of usages.
If it's to provide the Arcanist with a damage option that scales decently into mid levels until the Arcanist gets enough spells not to need it, then it think we need to keep the usage about where it is but work on increasing the power and abilities of the various blasts so that they're worth taking.
If it's something else, let us know so that we can refocus the conversation. At this point, we're repeating ourselves. We can fine tune and propose alternatives, but only if we know where you want to take this.
Exploit ideas? Okay.
Metamagic Mastery(Su): When using the Metamixing exploit to apply a Metamagic feat to a spell, you may spend additional points from your arcane reservoir in order to reduce the spell slot increase required by the use of that metamagic feat. The cost in points is equal to twice the number of levels reduced - casting a Maximized Burning Hands using a 1st level spell slot would require 6 points from your arcane reservoir. Casting the same spell using a 3rd level spell slot would only require two points. You may only use this exploit upon spells of an original spell level of 1st to 3rd. You may take this exploit up to three times - when you take it a second time, you may reduce metamagic costs on 4th-6th level spells as well. If you take this a third time, you may affect spells of up to 9th level with this exploit. You must have selected the Metamixing exploit in order to select this exploit.
Wild Sorcery(Su): When casting a spell which requires an attack roll, you may choose to infuse your spell with raw energy, increasing your spell's chances of striking for critical damage at the risk of backlash from the wild energy. Your effective critical hit range becomes 15-20 on your spell's attack roll, while you automatically miss and risk a fumble with a roll of 5 or less on the die. You must still confirm either the critical threat or the fumble. If you fumble, your spell backfires on you and deals damage to you as if you were the original target of the spell.
Elemental Resilience(Su): Choose an energy type when you choose this exploit (Acid, Fire, Cold, Electricity, or Sonic). You may spend a point from your arcane reservoir to gain energy resistance 10 to that energy type for 1 hour per arcanist level. At level 10, this resistance increases to 20. At level 15 it increases to 30, and at level 20 it grants immunity to the energy type chosen. You may select this exploit up to three times, each time selecting a new energy type.
Shatter School(Su): Choose a school of magic when you select this exploit(Abjuration, Conjuration, Divination, Enchantment, Evocation, Illusion, Necromancy, or Transmutation) When counterspelling spells of this school, you may use a spell of equal level or higher to counter the spell, and you gain a +5 bonus to dispel checks against spells of that school. You may select this exploit more than once, each time selecting a new school of magic.
Power Sync(Su): - By selecting this exploit, the arcanist learns feed her Arcane Reservoir from her other class abilities. An arcanist with this exploit may convert any number of uses of abilities she possesses which can be used a limited number of times per day (such as ki points, panache, or arcane pool points) to points in her arcane reservoir, and back. This conversion requires a standard action which provokes an attack of opportunity. A multiclassed ninja/arcanist with 4 points in her ki pool could convert all 4 of her Ki points into Arcane Reservoir points, or choose to only 1 or 2. An Arcanist/Swashbuckler could convert an Arcane Reservoir point to a point of Panache and then convert it right back to enhance her magical powers. This exploit does not allow you to exceed the maximum size of any point pool you possess.
Spell Inversion(Su): - The arcanist has learned how to turn enemy spells to his own advantage. If the arcanist has successfully identified a spell which provides a static bonus or penalty, she may reverse the effects by spending Arcane Points equal to the spell's level and succeeding on a Dispel check with an added DC of +5 (a standard action which provokes attacks of opportunity). If successful, the effects of the spell are reversed - any positive modifiers are made negative and any negative modifiers are made positive. (Mage Armor now provides a -4 penalty to AC.) The effects of any spell which has a paired opposite (those which counter and dispel one another) change into their opposing spell. For example, if an Arcanist uses Spell Inversion on a target who has Haste cast on them, they lose the effects of Haste and are now under the effects of a Slow spell. The effects of this exploit last for a number of rounds equal to the Arcanist's Charisma modifier, after which the spell returns to its normal state. This spell cannot be used on spells with a duration of instantaneous or permanent. You must have selected the Spell Disruption exploit before you may select this exploit.
Some of these ideas may not be entirely clear the way I wrote them - I'll clarify them if asked, and I'm always willing to discuss balance issues.
Exploit ideas? Okay.
Metamagic Mastery(Su): When using the Metamixing exploit to apply a Metamagic feat to a spell, you may spend additional points from your arcane reservoir in order to reduce the spell slot increase required by the use of that metamagic feat. The cost in points is equal to twice the number of levels reduced - casting a Maximized Burning Hands using a 1st level spell slot would require 6 points from your arcane reservoir. Casting the same spell using a 3rd level spell slot would only require two points. You may only use this exploit upon spells of an original spell level of 1st to 3rd. You may take this exploit up to three times - when you take it a second time, you may reduce metamagic costs on 4th-6th level spells as well. If you take this a third time, you may affect spells of up to 9th level with this exploit. You must have selected the Metamixing exploit in order to select this exploit.
This is cool, but complicated and can lead to problems.
I think personally if it cost AR = difference in spell level squared it would land about correct in power. Reducing a spell by one level would cost 1 AR, reducing by two would cost 4, reducing by three would be 9, and if you want to reduce a spell slot by 4 levels it would cost you 16 AR. Of course you cannot lower the spell beyond its original level, and I wouldn't bother with having them take it multiple times to affect different spell levels, that just complicates things.
Good stuff! Spell inversion is too powerful, but I like the others!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't see it as any more complicated than many other abilities that currently exist in the game.
Your proposal is very close to what I originally thought of for this - if it costs enough AR, that is enough of a limit because even at level 20 you start your day with a meager 11 points of AR. Frankly, I think spending 3 AR per spell level reduced would be plenty - quickening a spell would essentially bust you for the day, even at high levels. (Unless you're maybe farming your higher level spells for it, but then you might as well be using those slots for the metamagic.)
The reason I think dividing up the levels is a good idea is 1) it requires a heavy investment to be able to use metamagic on spells which you otherwise could never use it on - a Quickened Prismatic Sphere is plainly impossible for anyone else, and I don't want that to come easily. One exploit shouldn't give you access to spells that nobody else can achieve. Three? Well, you earned it by investing in the concept.
I might even lower the AR cost somehow, considering how tight of a resource it is. I just think it should be an option to make Metamagic easier to love - but I don't want it to be TOO accessible.
Good stuff! Spell inversion is too powerful, but I like the others!
I considered making it require a melee touch attack as well, but I felt like making the dispel check harder should be enough to make you think twice about spending AR on it every single chance you get.
Any other ideas on how to balance it? I love the concept but I'm not sure if it can balance out right considering things like Mage Armor and Barkskin at lower levels. Maybe it should only last half your charisma mod in rounds, minimum 1? Hmm.