I can imagine plenty of characters I'd rather build as sorcerers instead of arcanists. Mechanical power isn't everything.
If the ACG invalidates a class I have no issue with it. In fact I see it an evolution of the game. For example if the Slayer can do what people are using the rogue to do and do a better job of it then that is just the evolution of class. The rogue may even fade into obscurity that's not really a big deal. I take it as natural way to fix problems in the game with changing the core rules. This is good thing to me.
I think Paizo does a great job, I might not like some things but on the whole it's a great game.
I'd still play a rogue even with slayer around.
It's a much more narrow niche though. But slayer is filling the niche the rogue just couldn't (DPR assassin).
I can imagine plenty of characters I'd rather build as sorcerers instead of arcanists. Mechanical power isn't everything.
If you accomplish the same concept, whats the difference except being able to do more?
Not that I'm saying the Arcanist will marginalize the Sorcerer.
I can imagine plenty of characters I'd rather build as sorcerers instead of arcanists. Mechanical power isn't everything.
Just the only thing that matters, AMIRITE!?
Yeah, its not everything, but its a strong part of the game that you want something most resembling what you want and the one most capable. A lot of people point to powerful because of that. Fluff being mutable makes that even better. If a class underperforms at a job people aren't going to point you to it, they're going to point you to the one that does it well. That doesn't preclude having fun with the class, of course, but on the other hand you could feasibly have fun with a commoner.
The 3.5 warlock was "underpowered" but it was FUN. And still could be quite strong.
True, but it seems the Arcanist are very likely to be silver bullet mages. This can be a role and would be fun for some people.What is a silver bullet mage?A silver bullet mage is basically a mage that has the exact spell needed to counter every situation, a 'silver bullet'.
For example, say you get suddenly attacked by a Red Dragon in a frozen wasteland, chances are high you don't have Resist Energy (fire) going, but an Arcanist could take a full-round action to prepare a Communal Resist Energy and cast it, while a Wizard or Sorc might not have it.
Basically, any spell that is an awful choice, but situationally extremely powerful (like Control Construct) is something the Arcanist would be amazing for. He could re-prepare Control Construct and then seize control of that Canon Golem from the BBEG and turn it against him. Why? Because he's probably a Wizard who tanked Charisma while the Arcanist needs Charisma for his exploits.
Oh! I see. Yeah, if that arcanist power goes through then it really will become that! I think that's actually the definition of tier 0 too isn't it? I mean as a base I don't think its nearly there, but my gosh, with the ability to burn an arcane point to say "There's a spell for that!" That's pretty powerful!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A wizard can use his Arcane Bond to do the same thing.
For what its worth, I feel the arcanist marginalizes the sorcerer more than the wizard. Wizard is still better at PRCing, and with all the new full casting choices some of these are very powerful choices. The wizard is usually weaker without a PRC past level 8 though.
The arcanist is very scary as an NPC even more than a player though. I've used a few in my homegame and the ability to dispel and throw around insane damages in the same round is very powerful, thats less useful for a PC where you have to worry about resource management to some degree, and often enemy casters are a higher level than you can dispel.
Regardless, I see all three classes still being used for different reasons, and unlike the slayer getting rid of rogues (whether or not that happens) I don't think arcanist will get rid of wizards and sorcerers.
I'd still play a rogue even with slayer around.
It's a much more narrow niche though. But slayer is filling the niche the rogue just couldn't (DPR assassin).
Can I ask what the rogue's niche is with the slayer around?
I think a larger thing is that the game will have combat. So if the rogue and the upcoming investigator are a bit short on that, that's really going to hurt them in the long run. Intrigue is great, but not a lot of APs and Scenarios without combat or totally skippable combat, if any, and most of this game is built around combat.
A wizard can use his Arcane Bond to do the same thing.
In a very limited way though, and your giving up a familiar to do it. Familiars are versatile and fun things themselves!
I can imagine plenty of characters I'd rather build as sorcerers instead of arcanists. Mechanical power isn't everything.If you accomplish the same concept, whats the difference except being able to do more?
Not that I'm saying the Arcanist will marginalize the Sorcerer.
Sorcerer bloodlines are really evocative, for one. A pyromancer with the Fire bloodline just feels differently than a pyromaniac wizard or arcanist who focus on fire magic to put in their spell books.
Oh! I see. Yeah, if that arcanist power goes through then it really will become that! I think that's actually the definition of tier 0 too isn't it? I mean as a base I don't think its nearly there, but my gosh, with the ability to burn an arcane point to say "There's a spell for that!" That's pretty powerful!
Sad thing is, the intent behind Quick Study seems obvious that the Arcanist is supposed to have the spell in his spell book, but nowhere in the quoted ability by Jason does it actually state he needs the spell in his book.
The Arcanist received a number of cool new exploits not seen in the play test. Here is one of them. Quick Study (Ex): The arcanist can prepare a spell in place of an existing spell by expending one point from her arcane reservoir. Using this ability is a full-round action that provokes an attack of opportunity. The arcanist must be able to reference her spellbook when using this ability. The spell prepared must be of the same level as the spell being replaced.
RAW, the spell prepared doesn't even need to be on his spell list! Completely against intent, but by the most RAW and broken reading I can think of, the Arcanist can spend a point from his reservoir to prepare any spell, arcane or divine, of the same level.
Sorcerer bloodlines are really evocative, for one. A pyromancer with the Fire bloodline just feels differently than a pyromaniac wizard or arcanist who focus on fire magic to put in their spell books.I can imagine plenty of characters I'd rather build as sorcerers instead of arcanists. Mechanical power isn't everything.If you accomplish the same concept, whats the difference except being able to do more?
Not that I'm saying the Arcanist will marginalize the Sorcerer.
I think those values are ones you give it. In gameplay they're mostly the same. You don't get a guy who can freely play with fire with any of those or slowly becomes more [fire]. though sorc ideally does its mostly "look I got a ray!" until 20th level where he... gets immunity to crits? There's something to be said about getting that occasional narrative ability, though execution leaves a lot to be desired.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It says "he can prepare...", making reference to the act of "preparing spells", a specific set of actions defined for prepared arcane spellcasters. A neccesary condition for "preparing a spells" is that the spells is in his spell list, so no problem under RAW.
feel like bad philosopher
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think those values are ones you give it. In gameplay they're mostly the same. You don't get a guy who can freely play with fire with any of those or slowly becomes more [fire]. though sorc ideally does its mostly "look I got a ray!" until 20th level where he... gets immunity to crits? There's something to be said about getting that occasional narrative ability, though execution leaves a lot to be desired.
I do care a lot more if my character is interesting and fun to role play than I do about 'winning' the mechanical portion.
Sorcerer bloodlines are really evocative, for one. A pyromancer with the Fire bloodline just feels differently than a pyromaniac wizard or arcanist who focus on fire magic to put in their spell books.I can imagine plenty of characters I'd rather build as sorcerers instead of arcanists. Mechanical power isn't everything.If you accomplish the same concept, whats the difference except being able to do more?
Not that I'm saying the Arcanist will marginalize the Sorcerer.
An Arcanist can grab a Bloodline with an exploit. They get the Arcana all the time and the 1st level power. As a Swift action they can spend 1 point to treat their Sorcerer level for that bloodline as equal to their Arcanist level. For a minute, but that'll be most encounters anyways.
Fire Bloodline abilities are only really used in combat, therefore for a very cheap price, an Arcanist effectively gets all of your abilities and then some.
I can imagine plenty of characters I'd rather build as sorcerers instead of arcanists. Mechanical power isn't everything.
That still woudl not make a class lke that good designed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sorcerer bloodlines are really evocative, for one. A pyromancer with the Fire bloodline just feels differently than a pyromaniac wizard or arcanist who focus on fire magic to put in their spell books.I can imagine plenty of characters I'd rather build as sorcerers instead of arcanists. Mechanical power isn't everything.If you accomplish the same concept, whats the difference except being able to do more?
Not that I'm saying the Arcanist will marginalize the Sorcerer.
An Arcanist can grab a Bloodline with an exploit. They get the Arcana all the time and the 1st level power. As a Swift action they can spend 1 point to treat their Sorcerer level for that bloodline as equal to their Arcanist level. For a minute, but that'll be most encounters anyways.
Fire Bloodline abilities are only really used in combat, therefore for a very cheap price, an Arcanist effectively gets all of your abilities and then some.
You and I play the game very differently.
I can imagine plenty of characters I'd rather build as sorcerers instead of arcanists. Mechanical power isn't everything.That still woudl not make a class lke that good designed.
But it might make it 'good enough'. Seriously, game design is hard, and hindsight is 20/20.
I think those values are ones you give it. In gameplay they're mostly the same. You don't get a guy who can freely play with fire with any of those or slowly becomes more [fire]. though sorc ideally does its mostly "look I got a ray!" until 20th level where he... gets immunity to crits? There's something to be said about getting that occasional narrative ability, though execution leaves a lot to be desired.I do care a lot more if my character is interesting and fun to role play than I do about 'winning' the mechanical portion.
Roleplayer vs. Rollplayer, round 8, FIGHT! Not really but uhh... okay? That's not what I was getting at all. Thanks for sharing? I don't think it was at all about winning
Mechanics play a heavy part into roleplay. Mechanics are the toys. You give someone the power to play with fire and they can do it! You give them the power to turn into living fire and that's pretty rad. Heck, even making harmless flames or lighting a teapot is great for narrative.
Moving back to the ACG thing, yay new toys.
I think those values are ones you give it. In gameplay they're mostly the same. You don't get a guy who can freely play with fire with any of those or slowly becomes more [fire]. though sorc ideally does its mostly "look I got a ray!" until 20th level where he... gets immunity to crits? There's something to be said about getting that occasional narrative ability, though execution leaves a lot to be desired.I do care a lot more if my character is interesting and fun to role play than I do about 'winning' the mechanical portion.
Yes, because being mechanicaly better makes you incapable of making a character interesting and fun to roleplay. You can't just pick an arcanist and use the same fluff you would have for the sorceror.
I mean, I could, but I'm just better like that.
Roleplayer vs. Rollplayer, round 8, FIGHT! Not really but uhh... okay? That's not what I was getting at all. Thanks for sharing?
That not quite what I was trying to say, either.
I do care a lot more if my character is interesting and fun to role play than I do about 'winning' the mechanical portion.Yes, because being mechanicaly better makes you incapable of making a character interesting and fun to roleplay. You can't just pick an arcanist and use the same fluff you would have for the sorceror.
I mean, I could, but I'm just better like that.
But it might make it 'good enough'. Seriously, game design is hard, and hindsight is 20/20.I can imagine plenty of characters I'd rather build as sorcerers instead of arcanists. Mechanical power isn't everything.That still woudl not make a class lke that good designed.
Perhaps, IF those problem are unnoticed. I mean, if you publish something and then some random optimizer number chuncher on internet finds totally unexpected and definitelly non intentionals ways to make it broken then there is nothing you can do about it (except a couple of erratas, and I definitely would like to see some more erratas in this game)
But when you do a playtesting and people show all the problem and you still publish it, you can not complain when people complain about it.
DIsclaimer 1: generic "you" and not you.
Disclaimer 2: I have no idea if the statemnts about the arcanist are true or not, just talking in general terms.
You and I play the game very differently.
I must have missed where I stated how I play my games.
I'm simply pointing stuff out mate. Whatever conclusion you come to is fine by me.
I think that ability sounds a bit too good to be true. It sounds a bit too good to gain the entire Bloodline of a Sorcerer for 4 encounters a day, generally for the entire encounter by 6th level.
This is of course not taking into account how they can replenish their pool of course. I think it's pretty damn evocative to drain a Wand of Burning Hands to repower as a Pyromancer.
But hey, I'm just pointing stuff out.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think those values are ones you give it. In gameplay they're mostly the same. You don't get a guy who can freely play with fire with any of those or slowly becomes more [fire]. though sorc ideally does its mostly "look I got a ray!" until 20th level where he... gets immunity to crits? There's something to be said about getting that occasional narrative ability, though execution leaves a lot to be desired.I do care a lot more if my character is interesting and fun to role play than I do about 'winning' the mechanical portion.Yes, because being mechanicaly better makes you incapable of making a character interesting and fun to roleplay. You can't just pick an arcanist and use the same fluff you would have for the sorceror.
I mean, I could, but I'm just better like that.
It's not about mechanically worse being more interesting or vice versa. Those are orthogonal. But a sorcerer doesn't have a spell book, and that's kind of a big deal.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Many people freak out when new classes come out, and feel their favorite class is going to be overshadowed.
I don't think anyone can have any concrete opinions, until the final book comes out, and a little time has passed.
You can have concrete opinions on the playtest, but that is exactly what that is for.
Mainly, I am trying to say, don't panic.
It's just new, and many are just not comfortable with it yet.
It's not about mechanically worse being more interesting or vice versa. Those are orthogonal. But a sorcerer doesn't have a spell book, and that's kind of a big deal.
Ahh, spellbook only matters for that hour a day your in study. After that you can FWOOSH! with the best of them! Provided you prepared some fwoosh today.
Personal preferences tend to be subjective though.
Sorcerer bloodlines are really evocative, for one. A pyromancer with the Fire bloodline just feels differently than a pyromaniac wizard or arcanist who focus on fire magic to put in their spell books.I can imagine plenty of characters I'd rather build as sorcerers instead of arcanists. Mechanical power isn't everything.If you accomplish the same concept, whats the difference except being able to do more?
Not that I'm saying the Arcanist will marginalize the Sorcerer.
An Arcanist can grab a Bloodline with an exploit. They get the Arcana all the time and the 1st level power. As a Swift action they can spend 1 point to treat their Sorcerer level for that bloodline as equal to their Arcanist level. For a minute, but that'll be most encounters anyways.
Fire Bloodline abilities are only really used in combat, therefore for a very cheap price, an Arcanist effectively gets all of your abilities and then some.
You missed this part:
She does not gain any new abilities from this use, such as those gained at 3rd level.
But yes, often the first two abilities are the best anyway.
Personal preferences tend to be subjective though.
Yes. Exactly. That is what I was trying to say, not bring up role/rollplay.
I'd still play a rogue even with slayer around.
It's a much more narrow niche though. But slayer is filling the niche the rogue just couldn't (DPR assassin).
Can I ask what the rogue's niche is with the slayer around?
I think a larger thing is that the game will have combat. So if the rogue and the upcoming investigator are a bit short on that, that's really going to hurt them in the long run. Intrigue is great, but not a lot of APs and Scenarios without combat or totally skippable combat, if any, and most of this game is built around combat.
Three things are pretty big for me.
3. The slayer does miss out on some particular rogue things, but I forget which exactly.
2. Skillmastery is a very strong unappreciated mechanic. I don't believe the slayer gets this at all.
1. Slayer does not depend on sneak attacks. I actually have more fun playing a rogue in combat than an alchemist. Using the pile of tricks I've accumulated to get sneak attacks is a far more interesting mechanic than "I throw a bomb at it". Along the same line, the rogue is not the full-attack-at-all cost mundane. The slayer is. Sneak attack is nice to have as a slayer, but you will still priorities full attacks over sneak attacks. You are basically playing another "full-attack!" variant. I already fill that need with Fighter. When I want to play the stealth fighter, I'll play a slayer. But that is a poor reason to play a rogue.
Rogue problem comes from sneak attacks just not quite measuring up to full-attacks. The conditions they apply with their subpar DPR are bleeds and strength damage. This is useful, but really hard to account for in theorycraft. Because things like bleed are more than just a DPR boost. I've seen bleed force critter to not run away because they were bleeding to death. Downed opponents die by themselves with bleed on and are less likely to be picked back up. Then there is strength damage, which does interesting things too.
Sure slayers can do that. But they will do it less. They don't need to build their kit around sneak attacks. They don't need to sneak attack every turn. If the Slayer starts next to an enemy, they are going to full-attack, not move to flank or feint to flank. Or greater feint and opportunist for two sneak attacks and 4 strength damage. No. Slayers are full attackers. For rogues, full attacks are something nice to have with sneak attacks, but a full-attack without sneak attacks are worthless.
Sorcerer bloodlines are really evocative, for one. A pyromancer with the Fire bloodline just feels differently than a pyromaniac wizard or arcanist who focus on fire magic to put in their spell books.I can imagine plenty of characters I'd rather build as sorcerers instead of arcanists. Mechanical power isn't everything.If you accomplish the same concept, whats the difference except being able to do more?
Not that I'm saying the Arcanist will marginalize the Sorcerer.
An Arcanist can grab a Bloodline with an exploit. They get the Arcana all the time and the 1st level power. As a Swift action they can spend 1 point to treat their Sorcerer level for that bloodline as equal to their Arcanist level. For a minute, but that'll be most encounters anyways.
Fire Bloodline abilities are only really used in combat, therefore for a very cheap price, an Arcanist effectively gets all of your abilities and then some.
You missed this part:
She does not gain any new abilities from this use, such as those gained at 3rd level.
But yes, often the first two abilities are the best anyway.
Ah thanks. Still, the Bloodline Arcana is gained permanently and that is pretty nuts since I'm definitely willing to dip as a Wizard for that stuff.