| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So I had ample opportunity to test the arcanist in the last couple of months, and it has become blantantly obvious that this is one of ,if not the, worst balanced class I have ever seen.
One should expect that a sorcerer wizard hybrid should end up somewhere between the the two classes as far as powerlevel is concerned but this one outstrips both classes by far.
Multiability dependence? No trace of that.
There is no reason to ever invest anything into charisma with the arcanist as the powers you can choose are limited and the powers that are not reliant on charisma are ten times better than those that are.
And man are those powers powerful.
Problems due to the lower number of spells? Nuh-uh.
It might be a problem if it wasn't for the arcanist exploits(fittingly named BTW) that can easily serve as a mainstay on top of spells at lower levels and that get downright ridiculous at mid to higher levels.
Limited number of pool points? Nope.
The number of pool points arcanists get is large enough to more than make up for the lost spells compared to its parent classes at very low levels and after a few levels these things are pretty much an unlimited resource.Not only do you get the ability to sacrifice a first level spell to get an arcane pool point that can then be used to create effects that are better than first level spells, you can simply buy a second level wand for 4500gp and get 10 arcane pool points for each whenever you need them.
Or in short: the limitations placed on the arcanist that are supposed to keep them balanced are a farce.
What you get with this class is an arcane caster with a hugely superior casting mechanic,more staying power than a sorcerer,the spell versatility of a wizard, a simple way to boost all of your spell DC's by two,your choice of a sorcerer bloodline arcana(wich then can be used to boost your spell DC's even higher). And a bunch of class features where one is more broken then the last.
The arcanist is a more effective caster then its parent classes in virtually every way, and there are no drawbacks at all.
Those issues may be fixed already
Probably not though. We have a track record to keep. Shorter number of spells is a false balance to begin with, its about the quality of the spells to begin with. Imo anyway.
|
I can only speak for myself and my experience. I have been playing an Ifriti Arcanist, specializing in "fire magic" in a home game I am playing in. My GM is running the "reign of Winter" AP. We have a 4 man party. 1 cavalier, 1 cleric, 1 Arcanist, and one home brewed shape shifter class ( Kind of like a Druid).
We are playing with a 25 point build. My feats thus far have been Skill focus: Knowledge Arcana, and Eldritch Heratiage: Arcane. I chose Arcane Bond: object (an amulet) so I can get to cast one spell a day from my spell book. My character's two exploits are dimensional slide, and bloodline development: Elemental : fire.
Now perhaps I am playing the character wrong, We have gotten up to 4th level, So far, and the GM agrees, my character fits in along with a sorcerer or wizard, about the same power level .
So far, and the GM agrees, my character fits in along with a sorcerer or wizard, about the same power level .
If it matters, individual spells only get more powerful than another caster of the same level as you augment them, and most of your options are the same as the wizard or sorcs. So as an example of how an individual arcanist can augment his spells: An arcanist can choose a bloodline and school to both bolster spells, such as admixture or draconic(I like divination myself for a school, but admixture is way more blasty!), then you can cast it with potent. So you can throw out a fireball of any element you want, get a +1 to damage per level, and also give it +2 to CL or DC. That's from class features alone and before feats and metamagic, and there are probably better combinations and uses for potent(metamagic battering blast maybe?).
I was also told spell tinkering can be used for crazy things, but I'm not keen on any of that myself. Dimensional slide is pretty awesome though.
Oh! Your also only level four, so your not really going crazy with metamagic or mixing all those nice things together yet probably. Not that you should try.
I'm DM-ing for a group with an Arcanist and the first 3 levels were painful to watch. He didn't get many spells prepared each day, though the versatility was certainly welcome. The only reason he survived at all was through clever use of his arcane pool and using good strategic moves to make his 2-4 spells per day count. Now that he has 2nd-level spells it's not so bad.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We need more info. Tell use how an adventuring day went that had more than 2 encounters.
I'm DM-ing for a group with an Arcanist and the first 3 levels were painful to watch. He didn't get many spells prepared each day, though the versatility was certainly welcome. The only reason he survived at all was through clever use of his arcane pool and using good strategic moves to make his 2-4 spells per day count. Now that he has 2nd-level spells it's not so bad.
When you can prepare so few spells per day, Color Spray trumps all. Sleep is a "Free Encounter EXP" spell too, but it's nowhere near as strong. Also, Daze cantrips are crazy-good in the first couple levels.
I will agree that an Arcanist is a much better blaster considering he gets abilities to increase Spell DCs and Damage as part of class features he can choose from, and that there aren't that many good Arcanist Exploits dependant upon Charisma, but it runs into the same problem as the Fighters normally run into: Becoming MAD ruins overall viable effectiveness.
But you also have this to consider: He doesn't get too many spells, and the spells he does get, he will have to invest into crowd control/save or suck spells in order to get the most out of the spells he has. Yes, he's a better blaster, but blasting mooks or the BBEG is a complete waste of time, since you already have BSFs for that, and it's much easier to simply nullify the mooks while your BSF cleans them up later.
| 14 people marked this as a favorite. |
About that time again, eh fellas? Four points to remember:
1. The game is not balanced around optimizers - nor should it be.
2. The class you are complaining about was in Beta. You are complaining about something that has not even been released yet.
3. Most of the tricks people pointed to that made the Arcanist unbalanced (oh my, color spray and sleep at low levels!) are tricks available to sorcerers and wizards. Most of the 'playtests' were farcical and did little examine the class in play.
4. Optimization can unbalance anything.
So yeah. Not a problem, not likely to be a problem, and probably blown out of proportion even if it does become a problem.
Will the arcanist become the weapon of choice for optimizers? Time will tell. For my money I couldn't care less if it does. That you can break a system when you attempt to do so is not impressive or interesting to me.
|
The main problem for the Arcanist, and what I hope Paizo "fixes" in the released matarial, is the replenishment of the Arcane pool, or to be specific, the fact that the best way to do so is to drain magical items.
This will be a money sink for the class, one that looks to be a balancing tactic against the other casters because of having sorcerer casting choice with having a spellbook seems wrong somehow to the developers of the game.
I would think that draining items should be nixed completely and another way to replenish points should be done instead, but I don't hold out much hope.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The main problem for the Arcanist, and what I hope Paizo "fixes" in the released matarial, is the replenishment of the Arcane pool, or to be specific, the fact that the best way to do so is to drain magical items.
If it matters, the biggest problems with replenishing with magic items is that its not internal with the class and might vary heavily with campign, and that it isn't a scaling cost. So it might be cool if its an optional bonus, but bad to balance around.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You could find "useless" magic items you could drain or items that were good at the beginning of the game that become kinda meh later or situational items for this to work. A wand, scroll, or staff that casts feather fall, water breathing, sleep, owls wisdom etc. they can be awesome in the right situations but most of the time they would be useless. The DM could work with you allowing you to find said items in treasure cashes.
The DM could work with you allowing you to find said items in treasure cashes.
In pathfinder you ideally use the WBL chart thingy and keep up with the magic item treadmill.
Mana cookies sound delicious though... Can we get that in a cookie form instead of a scroll? Cookies sound more appetizing.
|
|
You could find "useless" magic items you could drain or items that were good at the beginning of the game that become kinda meh later or situational items for this to work. A wand, scroll, or staff that casts feather fall, water breathing, sleep, owls wisdom etc. they can be awesome in the right situations but most of the time they would be useless. The DM could work with you allowing you to find said items in treasure cashes.
Well, using said situations you mention in PFS really isn't feasible. The WBL paradigm prevents superfluousness usage such as this.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mana cookies sound delicious though... Can we get that in a cookie form instead of a scroll? Cookies sound more appetizing.you my friend play too much WoW
Nah, my frost mage has long since progressed beyond cookies. Onwards to strudel, and cake, and mana pudding! Now that's a sign I've played too much.
Or in short: the limitations placed on the arcanist that are supposed to keep them balanced are a farce.You could say this about any caster really, pathfinder balance is really that bad
Wizard: What, I only made reality my slave three times today and ended the combat in one round once out of those three. I mean we've only been in combat once and the other times I ignored gravity and summoned up a succubus to fetch my shoes, but I've got like... 27 reality breaking castings left. Totally balanced!
More seriously, I think a lot of the post so far were comparing them to other full arcane casters. That's a lot closer to apples to apples than comparing them to bards, barbarians, and monks at the same time. The whole x/day thing being balanced has long being a farce regarding balance.
I probably shouldn't have brought it up. After all it isn't realeased yet.I should have waited until the hardcover is out so we can have a million little FAQ's about it.Not that I think that any of the issues will get adressed until the final release.
And balance doesn't matter anyway right? Man, this disingenuity (or is it simply ignorance) pisses me of big time. Crane Wing is nerfed, a feat that was already printed ,and the new feat text is about three times as long as the old one.So it seemed important enough to spend extra money on print and editing.Titan Mauler, Totem Warrior, Monk Flurry ,Spell Combat...do I need to continue?
But why bother investing time to balance and improve a class , it will sell either way.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Flurry debacle most likely caused some tension as it made the Monk archtype (insert name here, I can't remember it. I keep thinking Arcane Archer... arrgh!!) useless. An exception was made and then it was changed back (thankfully).
The Monk really needed a complete revamp from the 3.5 ruleset instead of just "tweaked" with Ki and little adjustments.
1. The game is not balanced around optimizers - nor should it be.
They release options more and more stronger every book. Every new book make easier to optimize characters and the gap between the non optimized and the optimized grows wider. Also, and I do not know for certain, the last season of PFS was much harder than before, I see alot of people complaining that if you do not optimize your char then you die.
Excerpt from inner sea gods page
Tons of new feats to help optimize your character and make you a champion of the church.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The idea that the arcanist, in either of its incarnations from the playtest is overpowered, is frankly laughable. It has to drain magic items to power most of its abilities, which are quite weak to begin with. It doesn't have as many spells per day as a wizard or sorcerer, ensuring that combat for combat, day for day, it will be in a worse situation than the average wiz or sorcerer. Over a long period of time, it has the same ability as the wizard (though more limited) to adjust based on expectations, but it has the same drawback in the form of needing those expectations to play out.
We need more info. Tell use how an adventuring day went that had more than 2 encounters.
Admittedly, our group was playing in Kingmaker and many days never had more than 3 encounters on the average day. When they did, however, the problems with the class became apparent. To explain, the group I'm DMing for has 2 people dedicated to the game and 2 more coming in soon, and the dedicated players are a half-orc arcanist and a dhampir shaman (lore spirit with some investment in martial abilities).
On days when he has no way to prepare for the coming battles he tends to prepare a mix of Save or Suck and AoE damage spells (usually Burning Hands and either Color Spray or Sleep). His level 1 exploit was the one that lets you spend a point for +2 CL or +2 DC, and his level 3 exploit was the one that gives Detect Magic at will.
The first set of encounters pitted the two casters against mites, a giant tick, and a giant centipede. The tick and centipede were vermin (and thus immune to his color spray) and he spent every arcane point and every spell slot on Burning Hands. Even with that he and the shaman barely put it down, and by the end the arcanist had his sword out and waded into melee. If the remaining enemies had been anything but mites his obituary would be posted in the Kingmaker threads shortly thereafter.
Later on he challenged a druid (level 6) to a duel. This druid had a +9 will save and cast Resist Energy on himself before the duel after seeing his penchant for fire. The arcanist literally spent every arcane point and spell slot (1st and 2nd) on Burning Hands and Flaming Sphere, desperately trying to overcome his fire resistance because he had no other options available. He did actually manage to overcome the energy resistance, but had to spend every slot to deal enough damage to put him under, and it was only by pure luck (read: terrible attack rolls) that he survived.
Make no mistake, the arcanist is a powerful class and is a little stronger than your average sorcerer due to the ability to "know" different spells every day. Even so, they still run into the same limitation that sorcerers do with their spells known at early levels.
Of course, I'm much more concerned about spells like Charm Person. An arcanist can easily reach DC 18 at level 1 (10 + 1 (spell level) + 4 (Int mod) + 1 (Spell Focus) + 2 (Arcane Point w/ Exploit) = 18) without much effort. This spell single-handedly solved most problems out-of-combat.
Kingmaker was way to easy for my group also. If I ever run it again, one encounter per hex is not going to happen.
Again just forget that I said anything discussing this stuff here is pointless.When you show an obvious problem like the wand draining stuff and you get an answer like " It has to drain magic items to power most of its abilities, which are quite weak to begin with." then you know you are wasting your time.
Again just forget that I said anything discussing this stuff here is pointless.When you show an obvious problem like the wand draining stuff and you get an answer like " It has to drain magic items to power most of its abilities, which are quite weak to begin with." then you know you are wasting your time.
Table Variation will always affect what someone perceives as a problem, so what is obvious is really subjective.
If someone were to give a description of a typical adventuring day, not just one or two combats, detailing an actual experience that gives more credibility than an opinion without specific data to back it up.
Personally I have not played the class yet, but I would like to try it soon.
Kingmaker was way to easy for my group also. If I ever run it again, one encounter per hex is not going to happen.
The first book was much too easy since the players could set the pace. If you're running Kingmaker again I'd stress the time limit aspect of the quests and make them think rationally in-character as to how long they can delay their quests. That'd probably mitigate some of the problems, and making the random encounters more common would probably help with the rest. My group ran into an owlbear and 6 wolves the first time they left the fort and never hit a random encounter again. I'd suggest making the random encounter chance cumulative rather than a static % chance.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
1. The game is not balanced around optimizers - nor should it be.
Eh, I dunno about that. You have to keep a few things in mind: the first is that pathfinder, as a system, not only rewards but expects some degree of optimization. I think perhaps you meant rule lawyers or those that scour every means to eke out as much power as possible as opposed to simple optimization. I can assure you optimization is not inherently bad, and I'm willing to bet money you in some way or another try to optimize your characters to some degree.
Also, when you say it shouldn't be balanced around optimizers, keep in mind Pathfinder Society is a thing and likely one of Paizo's biggest draws. Given all the different varieties of players it's even more important to make sure things are balanced.
I don't think that optimization on a very basic level is inherently a bad thing, but the scale on what constitutes moderate optimization seems to have shifted over time away from "I'll take this feat because it seems to work for my goals" to "This is the absolute most effective way to play, and doing it another way is stupid / you should plan out all your feats and traits to take advantage of specific blending of them in eight levels".
My largest issue with most optimization is that (especially at a higher level) it aims to do something inherently antithetical to the game as a whole. Trivializing combat with encounters at the proper level doesn't really accomplish anything I find noteworthy or meaningful in any way, since unlike in an MMO or computer RPG your Gm can scale (easily or with difficulty) encounters to whatever power level you are at. All trying to break the game does is create more work for the guy nice enough to spend 10-15 hours a week prepping and running the game for you.
Of course, for me the game is not about winning - at least in terms of combat. Combat rules and mechanics as a whole are a means to an end in expressing randomness and chance in what is functionally a storytelling exercise between the players and the GM. What I find appealing, more than any combat victory, is expanding the story, making it richer and deeper, and playing a character I want to play without having to worry about the fact that I didn't tank my strength score on my wizard for those extra points of intelligence and constitution. I like being able to play a wizard that says 'screw you, enchantment is evil' and 'I don't really like necromancy'.
4. Optimization can unbalance anything.Eh, I wouldn't go that far. I mean if you optimize a fighter to be really good at fighting, I doubt you'll break the game, especially when things that don't involve fighting come up.
"Breaking the Game" outside of combat is a simple matter of what your GM will let you get away with relative to what your plans are. The vast majority of commentaries I've seen about how spellcasters break the game out of combat (enchantment spells, teleport, ect) rely on a GM not having NPCs respond to player actions in any meaningful way, along with a favorable reading of the spell.
Doesn't change raw numbers, and it doesn't change the reality of most games, which don't allow all the ridiculous tricks theorycasters can pretend are commonplace or expected.
No Kain, we've just been playing wrong. Kat should be flying and invisible at all times. I also should have really maxed out stealth and need to divest my self of all feats, spells, and items that don't directly contribute to my combat power.
Also, you've been holding out on me by not letting me buy any spell I want of any level in Sasserine for a nominal fee.
I like being able to play a wizard that says 'screw you, enchantment is evil' and 'I don't really like necromancy'.
You're in luck - Enchantment is the go-to Opposition School, and Necromancy is right up there with Evocation for the second.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Chris, my reply contained zero personal insults, and specifically avoided quoting the original post to avoid this very thing from happening. What the heck?
Chris, my reply contained zero personal insults, and specifically avoided quoting the original post to avoid this very thing from happening. What the heck?
Posts that are in reply (not just quoting) to a removed post are also removed for continuity.
Chris, my reply contained zero personal insults, and specifically avoided quoting the original post to avoid this very thing from happening. What the heck?Posts that are in reply (not just quoting) to a removed post are also removed for continuity.
If it's okay to ask, why is this? Does the forum's coding system not allow you to just scrub the quote?
|
|
Whatever happens, one of my PFS characters is an Arcanist, so I am going to play the class no matter what changes or if it breaks or it breaks the game.
Hopefully, in the distant future, PF Ver2 will have a codified, universal magic system much like the Sorcerer mechanics with possibly cool downs instead of sticking with the Vancian "fire and forget" sacred cow.
If it's okay to ask, why is this? Does the forum's coding system not allow you to just scrub the quote?
Chris, my reply contained zero personal insults, and specifically avoided quoting the original post to avoid this very thing from happening. What the heck?Posts that are in reply (not just quoting) to a removed post are also removed for continuity.
I'm pretty sure that it has nothing to do with coding and everything to do with an active decision to remove posts in response to deleted posts to, as Crhis says, avoid creating confusion and continuity questions on a thread.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You could find "useless" magic items you could drain or items that were good at the beginning of the game that become kinda meh later or situational items for this to work. A wand, scroll, or staff that casts feather fall, water breathing, sleep, owls wisdom etc. they can be awesome in the right situations but most of the time they would be useless. The DM could work with you allowing you to find said items in treasure cashes.Well, using said situations you mention in PFS really isn't feasible. The WBL paradigm prevents superfluousness usage such as this.
Actually, it should work greatly in PFS.
Note: You may use any item that you find during the scenario for free until the end of the scenario, but you must purchase the item when the scenario is over in order for your character to be able to continue to use the item. This rule is most applicable to consumables such as potions, scrolls, and so on, but also applies to weapons, magic items, and so on.
Translation you can drain the magic items you find in a module without problem or affecting your WBL. Even if you drink/drain/consume a magic item it will be still available for purchase at the end of the adventure if it is one of the item listed in the loot that you can purchase at the end of the adventure.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Whatever happens, one of my PFS characters is an Arcanist, so I am going to play the class no matter what changes or if it breaks or it breaks the game.
Hopefully, in the distant future, PF Ver2 will have a codified, universal magic system much like the Sorcerer mechanics with possibly cool downs instead of sticking with the Vancian "fire and forget" sacred cow.
I certainly hope not. That method sounds terrible. But then I am a fan of the Vancian magic system.
The entire reason for the popularity of Pathfinder is the changes to sacred cows in 4e. This isn't edition bashing, but just stating historical perspective that makes tossing Vancian magic unlikely to say the least.
I wouldn't say its the entire reason. I'd say its a number of things and that they like sticking to the whole martials full attack and casters use vancian gig and don't show plans to change that.
The entire reason for the popularity of Pathfinder is the changes to sacred cows in 4e. This isn't edition bashing, but just stating historical perspective that makes tossing Vancian magic unlikely to say the least.I wouldn't say its the entire reason. I'd say its a number of things and that they like sticking to the whole martials full attack and casters use vancian gig and don't show plans to change that.
I think JJ have said that if pathfidner II see the light of day, he would liek to make the full attack go away.
I think JJ have said that if pathfidner II see the light of day, he would liek to make the full attack go away.
Awkwardly we see martials doing nothing but full attacks and filling their life with full attacks while they full attack and forget they do other things than full attack but sometimes augment their full attack to be a better full attack because their thing is full attack and they solve problems with full attacks against monsters who also love to full attacks because full attacks are just the only option. Full attack.
Have I mentioned they full attack?
Eh, long ways away before we see what happens. In the meantime... Arcanist! Who probably aren't people who full attack much.
I think JJ have said that if pathfidner II see the light of day, he would liek to make the full attack go away.The entire reason for the popularity of Pathfinder is the changes to sacred cows in 4e. This isn't edition bashing, but just stating historical perspective that makes tossing Vancian magic unlikely to say the least.I wouldn't say its the entire reason. I'd say its a number of things and that they like sticking to the whole martials full attack and casters use vancian gig and don't show plans to change that.
Not going to lie, that sounds like a fantastic idea (the fact that this is something I've been in favor of for awhile helps).
|
|
I certainly hope not. That method sounds terrible. But then I am a fan of the Vancian magic system.Whatever happens, one of my PFS characters is an Arcanist, so I am going to play the class no matter what changes or if it breaks or it breaks the game.
Hopefully, in the distant future, PF Ver2 will have a codified, universal magic system much like the Sorcerer mechanics with possibly cool downs instead of sticking with the Vancian "fire and forget" sacred cow.
I still want to "prepare" spells from a spellbook, mind you, but use the spells as "Known" spells when casting. What should have been done in 3.0 from the very beginning.