Oh, and this is already banned in PFS! And it found its way on my banned feat list for my home games, weird!
you havent' stated why this is so broken, it deosnt make oracles and clerics that much better, they have to sacrafice a feat, which is super valuble because of other feats those two classes could have choosen instead, and i don't see the big deal if it allows some paladins to get divine grace back at a cost, because while it is easy for paladins to get domains, it's not cheap.
This feat has been banned in PFS already, literally before its even out. Now, its not a crafting feat. So take your guess about power-level.
The only compelling argument I've heard FOR the feat is that the devs don't care about balance, which is fine and dandy and where is my Improved Weapon Finesse feat.
This is quite an exaggeration. Mystery Theurge can be easily entered at level 5 without any racial SLAs, only a one level difference.
Not entirely sure this is what was meant, but standard entry for Mystic Theurge is at Level 7, not 5.
it think it was banned in PFS because i think it meant oracles wouldnt have to buy cloaks of resistances, and i could see why they wouldn't want that, given the semi-competitive nature of PFS
this feat is OK
this feat is not power attack. and nowhere near power attack, and that's the base line how devs have stated they determine the power of a feat.
the feat does not make oracles more powerful, they do not become more versatile, there spells do not get any better. and yes, i can think of alot of oracles who would rather take an extra revelation than this feat.
if you were telling me that a fighter/rogue/slayer/swahbuckler could get this feat easily then i could see your point.
this feat is ok. This is not power attack, this feat is not going to make or break any oracle, this feat is not a must have feat. it's nice feat but that's about it.
there are not going to lines of poeople desperate to play oracles because of this feat.
This feat takes charisma based characters like the Bard, Oracle or Summoner and makes their saves pretty much only fail on a one. All it requires is a one level dip and 5 ranks in knowledge religion.
This is quite an exaggeration. Mystery Theurge can be easily entered at level 5 without any racial SLAs, only a one level difference.Not entirely sure this is what was meant, but standard entry for Mystic Theurge is at Level 7, not 5.
I should have been more clear, but what I was referring to was that you can easily enter mystic theurge at level 5 regardless of race with the trickery domain/fate inquisition/wood mystery. This was addressing the claim in the OP that all mystic theurges are aasimar or tiefling, when an aasimar/tiefling MT only has a one level advantage in entry, with Wizard 2/Cleric 1/MT X rather than Wizard 3/Cleric 1/MT X.
I think this conversation will be more productive if we can differentiate out feelings between this feat and the SLA ruling. Is Divine Protection extremely powerful? Absolutely. But I don't think that the SLA ruling, which gives this feat to classes like the swashbuckler and the bard, objectively weaker classes than the oracle, is at all the cause of fault here.
One thing I never got; Where do SLAs specify whether they are arcane or divine. I presumed they were either neither or arcane.
EDIT: Nevermind I found out and its clunky. You figure out if it appears on spell lists starting with Wizard then Cleric then Druid and so on. If its on an arcane caster's list first it's arcane. Same for divine.
A lot of people are calling this a buff to oracles/clerics and calling for balance, while I am sitting here thinking this is a big nerf to most offensive spellcasters. The fact that any martial class with a minimal dip (which martials can dip far easier than full caster classes) and than clerics/oracles without a dip, can take 1 feat that boosts their defense vs most things a wizard/sorcerer or full caster is going to throw at them, hurts the full caster more doesn't it?
I mean, if an oracle, bard, cleric, or _______(insert class here) gets a +4 or more to all saves from 1 feat, who does that effect? It doesn't hurt archers, or grappling monks, or 2 weapon fighters, or barbarians. Most of the "weaker" classes don't target saves anyways. A feat like this being available at all (admittedly some require a small dip), is a fairly powerful indirect nerf to all save or suck casters, blasters, and basically any caster that uses spells that allow for saves.
I am not trying to say it is too strong, and poor wizards have got the shaft, I'm trying to point out that there has been a lot of talk on the boards that wizards and full arcane caster classes are too strong, and this looks like a step towards reigning them in.
... How? Unless your group is heavy into PvP, the odds of this ever coming up in a PFS game are zero, as it's already been banned, and homebrew games are going to give this a lot of stink-eye, even when it comes to building BBEG's.
This feat takes charisma based characters like the Bard, Oracle or Summoner and makes their saves pretty much only fail on a one. All it requires is a one level dip and 5 ranks in knowledge religion.
For Bards and Summoners, the reason it takes a 1 level dip is the SLA ruling. Removing that ruling, a Bard or Summoner would need to take 3 levels in order to get 2nd level spells - that's hardly a dip. That said, this feat is still bonkers for an Oracle. Very surprising level of power for a feat, but that's what house rules are for, if you use them.
And for the record, the point of my original post (which I obviously didn't make clear enough, from a few of the responses) is less this particular feat (though it does make a good example) and more "The ACG is putting out new Core Rulebook line content. Are there any odd applications of the SLA ruling now?"
As I said in the OP, I don't like the ruling, but I also don't hate it. (I house ruled it a while ago.) Powerwise, the ruling seemed fine when it was first made. Having not read the ACG myself yet, I can't even provide my own (lowly valued) opinion on if that's changed or not. What always bothered me about it was things like Gnome Barbarians gaining access to arcane strike at the same scaling level as a Magus or Wizard, etc.
Perhaps I'm in the minority with my opinion, and if so, that's perfectly fine. We all play the game a bit differently, and the fact that it can be played so many ways is a good thing. I just wanted to open it up for discussion because when it was originally made, there was a bit too much "passion" on both sides for people to discuss their opinions clearly. Now seemed like as good a time as any to reopen that discussion.
most martial class are not going to dip for this. dipping in a 3/4 bab or 1/2 bab class for a martial is extremely costly and this feat is not worth the cost. power attack gets delayed, your BAB feats get delayed, your iritive attacks gets delayed.
it think it was banned in PFS because i think it meant oracles wouldnt have to buy cloaks of resistances, and i could see why they wouldn't want that, given the semi-competitive nature of PFS
this feat is OK
this feat is not power attack. and nowhere near power attack, and that's the base line how devs have stated they determine the power of a feat.the feat does not make oracles more powerful, they do not become more versatile, there spells do not get any better. and yes, i can think of alot of oracles who would rather take an extra revelation than this feat.
if you were telling me that a fighter/rogue/slayer/swahbuckler could get this feat easily then i could see your point.
this feat is ok. This is not power attack, this feat is not going to make or break any oracle, this feat is not a must have feat. it's nice feat but that's about it.
there are not going to lines of poeople desperate to play oracles because of this feat.
What do you mean they "wouldn't have to"? Although PFS difficulty level isn't hardly that high to warrant, it's still an insane power boost. Don't forget, PFS isn't the only kind of gameplay that Pathfinder is accommodated for, so using PFS, which is already set with numerous houserules that betray the originally published game in the first place, as a means to balance something is not really a feasible argument. Especially given that in the games outside of PFS, players do get the Big 6 as regular loot items. Several of my encounters ended up with Cloaks of Resistance +1 or +2 numerous times dropped from foes, and instead of the Oracle sitting here saying "Yup, my saves are already at 10 or higher, but maybe a bit of a boost so I don't have to roll a 1 would be really nice!" And what would they get from selling it? 500 gold? 2,000 gold? Not much to spend with for the kind of power that lets you nigh-automatically make any save ever.
Additionally, that same argument I stated above was thrown at the Devs when it came to the Crane Wing nerf, and quite frankly, they didn't really care. They actually went so far as to ban people from the forums for throwing such arguments (profusely, sure, but regardless of that, people who simply mentioned it did get banned). It actually betrays my original assertion here: They cared enough about their choice to back it up by taking action against those who said it was imbalanced/unfair/ridiculous/whatever, which betrayed their vision and intent behind it. It's yet another bullet in my arsenal of ammunition that goes into Paizo's coffin that is labeled "Balance."
Of course it's not Power Attack. Power Attack is for people who go melee combat and deal physical damage for attacks. The sad part? Outside of maybe a couple skills or semi-relevant class features, Martials don't get intriguing feats that enable unique options or features, both melee and ranged, outside of "Oh hey, I get a feat that lets me deal more damage!" This feat also isn't as de facto as Power Attack is to Martials, simply because most casters won't bother with it unless they planned to get the relevant required features all along, such as ability to cast 2nd level Divine spells, and the Domain/Blessing/Mystery class features. Whereas every Martial who is Strength-based (so, 90% of them, since there are so few Dexterity-based options available that are any good, and Paizo thinks Dexterity-based builds are too OP for them to decide to include any more?) will be snatching Power Attack and going two-handed, because the other options are simply lacking and not viable.
Quite frankly, this feat alone will defeat the entire need for an Oradin, since with this feat, they can now go straight Oracle and get all of their benefits without having to dip and sacrifice/delay spellcasting for Charisma to Saves. Sure, they won't get it until 5th level, but a small price to pay when you get your full spellcasting and mystery progression. Similarly, I would do this same thing with my Bard Arcane Duelist if I wasn't so feat invested that I could not adjust my feats for whatever reason period.
And that's just a couple build concepts. MTs are another one, and there can be even more, given the other options of ACG available, so this impact is a lot bigger than you (and probably even I myself) can possibly imagine it to be. From just one feat alone granting the effect of a Martial's core class feature that is praised indubitably for its potential (and generally followed) power.
I have no issue with the SLA ruling. If there is an issue with a feat, it's with the feat.
This feat takes charisma based characters like the Bard, Oracle or Summoner and makes their saves pretty much only fail on a one. All it requires is a one level dip and 5 ranks in knowledge religion.For Bards and Summoners, the reason it takes a 1 level dip is the SLA ruling. Removing that ruling, a Bard or Summoner would need to take 3 levels in order to get 2nd level spells - that's hardly a dip. That said, this feat is still bonkers for an Oracle. Very surprising level of power for a feat, but that's what house rules are for, if you use them.
Problem is, as given in an example before - the dip is still prohibitive for both classes. Between spells, the slow progress of bardic music and the uses of an eidolon, the dip is still costly, to an extent.
Anyway, seeing your elaboration in this post; I must apologize for my previous post - it was unnecessarily combative. Still, I do maintain the ruling, whilst a bit clunky, doesn't actually upset the balance of the game.
However, you said you don't contend it power-wise. But, for flavour - I would argue (for Arcane Strike at least) that if we're having SLAs scale with level as they do - doesn't that already imply some increase in that innate power and ergo, some increase in the ability to channel that into attacks?
However, I doubt the ACG will add anything that feels odd. Or, at least, more so than things that can already exist. Indeed, whilst the ruling would struggle to be described as graceful; I'd say it's as good or bad as the player using it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
yes, the oracle, a full caster have to spend a feat to have a +4 to +10+ to all saves, what an incredibly sacrifice.I might as well go ahead and say it out loud, since it seems nobody has the gall to: Paizo doesn't care about balance. It's that simple. It seems downputting and negative, but I don't mean it that way; it's the facts, and thems the breaks. It's evidenced by their statements of saying that the Fighter and Rogue are the best at what they do in regards to combat and skill, respectively, even though many sorts of theorycrafting and playtesting with other classes say quite the opposite. And that's just on the Martial side.
Needless to say, I'm glad a Martial character has to take 2 levels of a single specific "shoehorning" Martial class to get a feature that a full-progression Divine Spellcaster has to only invest 5 ranks into a Knowledge check (that every Divine Spellcaster should have maximized anyway) and spend a feat for.
You'd think Fighters would get some of their own class-specific feats that are that strong and cool, since they're supposed to be the king of feats...but no. All they get for "cool" class-specific feats is the ability to reduce DR/- by 5 by 16th level (in other words, nullify their capstone, before they even get access to it). And that takes a lot of Feat investment to do.
I...unfortunately have to agree.
Obviously this apporach have been succeesful or at least have not hurted their selling.
I do find bhotersome tha they do not admit it.
I'd rather say that they have admitted it on multiple accounts. IIRC, the big boss JB himself has stated that Fighters and Rogues are working as intended, as well as every other class; this is even when people were throwing out all kinds of theorycrafts and playtests displaying this upset of balance. There were some slight fixes they made to other martial classes, as well as the splatbooks which increase their power (but not the Fighter's or Rogue's), which were all authorized by the big boss himself. He knew the disparity was growing and growing with all of these options going to the other Martials (and Spellcasters too), and what did the devs at Paizo do for the Fighter and Rogue?
Not a damn thing. And that's just one subject. Taking the polar opposite of "Wizards/Clerics are OP," and the occasional "Paladin Alignment Restrictions are a Dumb way to balance the class" arguments, as well as the several others that may lurk around on this forum, you're filled with a chaotic maelstrom of imbalance.
In reality, the problem is people either didn't want to accept their inadvertant admittance, or simply thought that Intent = Balance, which it doesn't, as evidenced by the big boss himself and the devs that work with him in comparison with the theorycrafts and playtests (which hold the more scientific and explained evidence contrasting the creators themselves and their vision).
As far as I can tell, their vision for each subject is more important than the balance of the combined subjects as a whole and how they interact with each other (and in contrast of each other), and with each splatbook that Paizo makes, it only becomes more and more obvious to me that that is the case.
Don't get me wrong, no system is flawless, and there is no such thing as an absolutely correct or fair balance in a given game; it's something I've grown to accept because that's how Life works, and is a subject that's far before Pathfinder and its predecessors. However, it definitely beckons to question whether balance is really a core value to Paizo's design implementation when it comes to their PFRPG products, which only becomes more and more prevalent, and gets asked more and more often with each splatbook they make that follows the same patterns (and thusly, makes similar, yet slightly different enough mistakes) as the previous printed products they design, which hasn't changed since they've first printed the Core.
Quite frankly, this feat alone will defeat the entire need for an Oradin, since with this feat, they can now go straight Oracle and get all of their benefits without having to dip and sacrifice/delay spellcasting for Charisma to Saves. Sure, they won't get it until 5th level, but a small price to pay when you get your full spellcasting and mystery progression. Similarly, I would do this same thing with my Bard Arcane Duelist if I wasn't so feat invested that I could not adjust my feats for whatever reason period.
I'm pretty sure the point of the paladin levels of the oradin are the swift action healing of Lay on Hands and (usually) the extra channel pool of the hospitalar, not divine grace.
Quite frankly, this feat alone will defeat the entire need for an Oradin, since with this feat, they can now go straight Oracle and get all of their benefits without having to dip and sacrifice/delay spellcasting for Charisma to Saves. Sure, they won't get it until 5th level, but a small price to pay when you get your full spellcasting and mystery progression. Similarly, I would do this same thing with my Bard Arcane Duelist if I wasn't so feat invested that I could not adjust my feats for whatever reason period.I'm pretty sure the point of the paladin levels of the oradin are the swift action healing of Lay on Hands and (usually) the extra channel pool of the hospitalar, not divine grace.
I do not see the point in lay of hand. It is ok but 1d6 of healing is nothing really. Extra cannel is good, I suppose, but is nothing compared to full spellcasting not being delayed.
I can not speak for others, but I went oradin with this one just so I can use cha for AC and all saves.
Quite frankly, this feat alone will defeat the entire need for an Oradin, since with this feat, they can now go straight Oracle and get all of their benefits without having to dip and sacrifice/delay spellcasting for Charisma to Saves. Sure, they won't get it until 5th level, but a small price to pay when you get your full spellcasting and mystery progression. Similarly, I would do this same thing with my Bard Arcane Duelist if I wasn't so feat invested that I could not adjust my feats for whatever reason period.I'm pretty sure the point of the paladin levels of the oradin are the swift action healing of Lay on Hands and (usually) the extra channel pool of the hospitalar, not divine grace.
The Lay on Hands scaling at-best with two combined Wrist slot items into a single 30K+ wrist slot that turned your mundane 1D6 Lay on Hands (which is a pitiful way to spend a Swift Action later in the game) into a decent enough 3D6 Lay on Hands that gets the Diseased Mercy effect (even if you don't have the Mercies class feature) and a Lesser Restoration effect, all 1/day without further investment.
You're telling me that's more important than a +5-11 to all saving throws, which can save you from a lot more than a disease (which becomes irrelevant by the later levels) and a couple attribute points, or the fatigued condition?
Additionally, the Hospitaler archetype won't do any good until 4th level for the Channel effect, given it's a 4th level ability which replaces their standard Channel Energy feature, and most of the time the Oradin won't dip for more than 2 levels (and if they do, that's goodbye to 9th level spells and an outrageous delay to their spellcasting progression).
The Lay on Hands scaling at-best with two combined Wrist slot items into a single 30K+ wrist slot that turned your mundane 1D6 Lay on Hands (which is a pitiful way to spend a Swift Action later in the game) into a decent enough 3D6 Lay on Hands that gets the Diseased Mercy effect (even if you don't have the Mercies class feature) and a Lesser Restoration effect, all 1/day without further investment.You're telling me that's more important than a +5-11 to all saving throws, which can save you from a lot more than a disease (which becomes irrelevant by the later levels) and a couple attribute points, or the fatigued condition?
Additionally, the Hospitaler archetype won't do any good until 4th level for the Channel effect, given it's a 4th level ability which replaces their standard Channel Energy feature, and most of the time the Oradin won't dip for more than 2 levels (and if they do, that's goodbye to 9th level spells and an outrageous delay to their spellcasting progression).
I've been under the impression the concept of an oradin was a character who was primarily a combat healer using life link, lay on hands, shield other and channeling. As far as I know this is the guide that coined the term. If you're just using an oradin as an oracle who dips two levels for charisma to saves, then yes, this feat is great. But at least from my knowledge, 'Oradin' is more a concept referring to a build that is more paladin than oracle.
I've been under the impression the concept of an oradin was a character who was primarily a combat healer using life link, lay on hands, shield other and channeling. As far as I know this is the guide that coined the term. If you're just using an oradin as an oracle who dips two levels for charisma to saves, then yes, this feat is great. But at least from my knowledge, 'Oradin' is more a concept referring to a build that is more paladin than oracle.
The Lay on Hands scaling at-best with two combined Wrist slot items into a single 30K+ wrist slot that turned your mundane 1D6 Lay on Hands (which is a pitiful way to spend a Swift Action later in the game) into a decent enough 3D6 Lay on Hands that gets the Diseased Mercy effect (even if you don't have the Mercies class feature) and a Lesser Restoration effect, all 1/day without further investment.You're telling me that's more important than a +5-11 to all saving throws, which can save you from a lot more than a disease (which becomes irrelevant by the later levels) and a couple attribute points, or the fatigued condition?
Additionally, the Hospitaler archetype won't do any good until 4th level for the Channel effect, given it's a 4th level ability which replaces their standard Channel Energy feature, and most of the time the Oradin won't dip for more than 2 levels (and if they do, that's goodbye to 9th level spells and an outrageous delay to their spellcasting progression).
Maybe it is. It depends on if you really want to give up the full spellcasting or not, and most people don't, given Paizo's track record with 9th level spellcasters.
However, I'd find that an 18 Oracle/2 Paladin would wreck the floor with a X Oracle/Y Paladin (where Y > X) in any contest, given their spell availability. Although the 18/2 will be fairly weak leveling up, he won't be as weak as the X/Y, and he'll bring much more to the party. And now with this feat from the ACG, you don't need to ever dip 18/2 anymore, which was the only reason you needed to dip as an Oracle.
Maybe it is. It depends on if you really want to give up the full spellcasting or not, and most people don't, given Paizo's track record with 9th level spellcasters.However, I'd find that an 18 Oracle/2 Paladin would wreck the floor with a X Oracle/Y Paladin (where Y > X) in any contest, given their spell availability. Although the 18/2 will be fairly weak leveling up, he won't be as weak as the X/Y, and he'll bring much more to the party. And now with this feat from the ACG, you don't need to ever dip 18/2 anymore, which was the only reason you needed to dip as an Oracle.
Oh, I absolutely agree. I personally find that the Oradin as referenced is a rather weak build compared to straight oracle, due primarily to the existence of the Heal spell and the incredible power of full casting. However I've almost never seen the term Oradin used without referring to the life linking/lay on hands/channeling build with a more significant investment in paladin, so it seems like I misunderstood your original intent. If we're discussing the 18/2 build, I agree that build is largely defunct with the existence of divine protection. However, as you said yourself, this is largely an oracle build that dips out for a tasty bonus to saves.
Anyways, to avoid derailing the topic, I'll finish and just say I agree this feat is incredibly strong. I'm not sure it derails entire character concepts, though. If you want to dip paladin, you can still get precise shot through divine hunter and save another feat on divine protection, or take something like the Sword of Valor archetype that was previously a terrible choice due to lack of divine grace.
Oracle dip for synthesist just got even better.
You mean pf unchained plans to make fullcasters the best class from their previous position as the best class? That seems like the wrong direction imo.Pathfinder is moving further away from the 3E mold, especially now that a new D&D version is a competitor. I think we'll see a new level of balance when Pathfinder Unchained is released (without getting into current balance discussions). If my guess is correct, it looks like ACG and possibly the Technology Guide are balanced to the PF Unchained level of power.
I suspect there will be errata and updates to which ACG content is allowed for PFS play about a month or two after ACG hits the shelves. Paizo gets a lot of feedback from PFS play, and make money by continuing to provide an RPG people will buy and play. I believe RavingDork has already posted some fairly powerful ACG builds, and the combination of Technology Guide and ACG should keep the boards busy with new builds and new debates for a few months.
That's about as logical as the XBox 360 joke...
The sad part is that is exactly what's going to happen. I mean, it's happened in every book Paizo has released so far, why would this be any different?
@ Christos Gurd: I'm not really familiar with the Summoner class. I should be, but a lot of people cry wolf over the class, so I don't really involve with it too much. However, you stating that this feat will make Summoner Dips into Oracle much more viable dares me to ask how that's the case.
The synthesist will add cha to almost every defense.
I just took a quick loot at it; I did not know that the Summoner was Charisma-based for its casting. I thought it was Intelligence like the Wizard. Guess you learn something new about Pathfinder every day...
It makes a lot more sense now with that in mind. Seems like a pretty dumb question in hindsight.
This is probably slightly less shocking than a feat for cha to saves, but Believer's Boon appears to grant a 1st level domain power in exchange for a feat. It's worth noting that this can be used to take the trickery domain and qualify for the divine portion of Mystic Theurge easier for some builds.