Would it surprise you to hear that fire's currently looking at some nice new infusions (both form and substance), all of which so far are before level 16?Surprise! This is exactly what the defensive boosts do. You max out Feel the Burn by increasing your defensive talents, which means AC for water (good) and DR for earth (really good). Air is a little mediocre and fire is hardly worth using, but hey, fire is kinda crap in general in the current iteration so I expect that'll change.Indeed, however, the lasting bonus should be better than the lasting penalty. Things like natural armor, element resistance, or greater damage bonus maybe.I see the point in the Str 16 Con 20 comparison. It's a fair trade, just like if you switched both. However, If it's a fair trade, shouldn't it be boosted to an advantage? I mean, it's a major class feature, like favored target from Slayer, it should end up being much better than not having it.Well, if it's a fair trade if you just sit around burning yourself for no gain except activating FtB, then what about if you burn yourself for a good reason? That becomes your advantage. :)Fire pays off with consistent Spell Resistance ignoring touch damage but that is not until you get composite specialization and that pure flame thingy and/or explosion (so level 16). I will also note that going fire, rock, fire (so you can get all your blue flame shenanigans at level 17) is pretty serviceable.
That may be too little too late for me, though.
Oooooo exciting.
So... I think my concern got a little lost, recent as it was. Very active thread and don't have the time to search through 2k+ posts.
Are my kineticists going to be forced into kinetic blade and iteratives to contribute damage to the party? Much as I like the idea, some of the concepts I've got in mind are more artillery than melee. Which, from what I've managed to grasp earlier in the thread, is a sub-par option? Particularly with non-touch blasts?
There's two ways to look at it. Mark has said that increasing the base damage, but not accuracy, is the goal. Basically, he wants us to be balanced around hitting once per turn seems to be the goal here. What this means is that while the Whip may have a higher POTENTIAL damage than the ranged, if it only hits one time it won't really have much more (if any) ACTUAL damage than the ranged. You trade being in melee for getting attacks of opportunity. THat's supposed to be the idealized trade there, if I understand it correctly. Whether that will be a successful balance, I'm not sure. If feels very difficult to maintain, especially considering Vital Strike may work with the Melee version (giving them far more damage on that first hit we count on) but not on Ranged. As such, Vital Strike on ranged attack might be the best balancing act we'll see between the two.
There could be a 2 burn shape form (like: kinetic bow) that lets you use the blast as a ranged weapon attack with 1/2 range. Still, that would end up shackling the class to vital strike.
I also think that you can hit on your second attack pretty damn consistently if you are aiming for touch and you have some FtB going. You can put up pretty wacky damage if you quicken yourself into ride the blast and then full attack (essentially accessing the fabled pounce ability but better).
As I was saying: you use ranged touch attacks in the morning and touch attacks at night. The real trick is actually having both in your repertoire at the levels you need it.
So I start with touch and end with touch? ;)
And if I build up no burn during the day? Or is I CAN'T because of damage? I'd want to build my character with the assumption that I wouldn't take ANY burn though out the day unless it was an emergency.
I meant to say end with ranged attacks at night xD
Brain fart, yo.
Would it surprise you to hear that fire's currently looking at some nice new infusions (both form and substance), all of which so far are before level 16?Surprise! This is exactly what the defensive boosts do. You max out Feel the Burn by increasing your defensive talents, which means AC for water (good) and DR for earth (really good). Air is a little mediocre and fire is hardly worth using, but hey, fire is kinda crap in general in the current iteration so I expect that'll change.Indeed, however, the lasting bonus should be better than the lasting penalty. Things like natural armor, element resistance, or greater damage bonus maybe.I see the point in the Str 16 Con 20 comparison. It's a fair trade, just like if you switched both. However, If it's a fair trade, shouldn't it be boosted to an advantage? I mean, it's a major class feature, like favored target from Slayer, it should end up being much better than not having it.Well, if it's a fair trade if you just sit around burning yourself for no gain except activating FtB, then what about if you burn yourself for a good reason? That becomes your advantage. :)Fire pays off with consistent Spell Resistance ignoring touch damage but that is not until you get composite specialization and that pure flame thingy and/or explosion (so level 16). I will also note that going fire, rock, fire (so you can get all your blue flame shenanigans at level 17) is pretty serviceable.
That may be too little too late for me, though.
That makes me feel better. Yeah.
As I was saying: you use ranged touch attacks in the morning and touch attacks at night. The real trick is actually having both in your repertoire at the levels you need it.
So I start with touch and end with touch? ;)
And if I build up no burn during the day? Or is I CAN'T because of damage? I'd want to build my character with the assumption that I wouldn't take ANY burn though out the day unless it was an emergency.
I meant to say end with ranged attacks at night xD
Brain fart, yo.
LOL Knew what you meant, it just amused me. ;)
1) Can you add Light and Darkness as additional key elements, in addition to Aether, Air, Earth, Fire and Water? I know you made Electricity an Air stuff and Cold a Water stuff, but for these twos, they deserve their own spots.
2) Can you make the Explosion, Spray, Torrent, Cloud and Cyclone talents available to every element instead of making them exclusive?
3) Can you add Acid for the Geokinecist, considering how often Acid is linked to the Earth subtype?
4) Can you add the following talents?
- conjuring an elemental construct, like the Animate Breath spell
- healing from keyed element
- Deflecting/reflecting key element
5) Can you make an upgrade to Kinetic Blade to create a two-handed weapon, such as a second higher-level talent?
In theory, using the Touch attacks isn't supposed to be stronger than using the regular attacks because you don't get +1/die and full con on the damage. You get all three iteratives, but lose 30 +1.5xCon damage on the total attack. There's probably gonna be a bit of tweaking still, frankly I'd take the other half of Con too (after boosting the base Blast damage for everyone involved), but still I can't see the Devs letting the class fall to being a Melee only design. Something will be done to make sure that no matter which way you dice it, it's fair to build how you want. And if not, it's already close enough to houserule.
I think in terms of the expected value of the damage that you do, it is going to be pretty rare that your AC targeting full attacks are going to do more damage than your touch attack dealing attacks. "Total damage" is a fool's measure. It is thinking like that that leads people to think that power attack is a must-have feat even without access to furious focus.
towards that point:
5) Can you make an upgrade to Kinetic Blade to create a two-handed weapon, such as a second higher-level talent?
See this guy right here? He wants furious focus.
Or... maybe he just wants to look rad? I cannot decide now.
5) Can you make an upgrade to Kinetic Blade to create a two-handed weapon, such as a second higher-level talent?See this guy right here? He wants furious focus.
Or... maybe he just wants to look rad? I cannot decide now.
Kinetic Blade only allows you to add either your Constitution mod to damage or half your Constitution mod to damage... and I'm not reading anything that can allow you to added 1.5 times your Constitution mod to damage, such as holding the Blade in two hands, like any One-Handed weapon, so...
Design Manager
|
wouldnt that be basically like say to a barbarian "no matter what you will always be fatuiged after a rage, nothing you take can stop that" just personally thats how something like that comes off, but thats just me, other folks will no doubt say that a feat like flagellant is OP for a kineticist, but is it really? your still staggerd right? wich means either a move or standard action, so no reducing the burn by move action, i mean it really wouldnt be that bad for them to have a feat like flagellant, at least in opinion lol
Except it wouldn't matter that you can't reduce the burn at that point since it can never really take you out. You just burn all day long with Flagellant and damn the consequences.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you don't like (Feel the) Burn and want more accuracy... just use Touch blasts. Pretty simple.What about Feel the Burn though? Burn is something I just didn't care about and felt was flavorful but Feel the Burn makes taking burn mandatory. Would be different if there was some other native way to boost accuracy but with Feel the Burn being the only way in the class features I'm not rewarded for my sacrifice I'm actively taking a huge risk for piddly numerical bonuses that I desperately need. Would also be different if that reward was huge.
As it stands, or at least for me, Feel the Burn is right next to the class skill list in terms of things I don't like about the class.
Only now I have a class feature that doesn't really do anything.
5) Can you make an upgrade to Kinetic Blade to create a two-handed weapon, such as a second higher-level talent?One-handed weapons can be wielded with two hands.
Yet no rule is written that you add 1.5 times your Constitution mod to damage... nor is it written that you can wield the Blade in two hands.
|
Only now I have a class feature that doesn't really do anything.If you don't like (Feel the) Burn and want more accuracy... just use Touch blasts. Pretty simple.What about Feel the Burn though? Burn is something I just didn't care about and felt was flavorful but Feel the Burn makes taking burn mandatory. Would be different if there was some other native way to boost accuracy but with Feel the Burn being the only way in the class features I'm not rewarded for my sacrifice I'm actively taking a huge risk for piddly numerical bonuses that I desperately need. Would also be different if that reward was huge.
As it stands, or at least for me, Feel the Burn is right next to the class skill list in terms of things I don't like about the class.
The option to benefit from burn is still there, but you are not forced to use it.
There could be a 2 burn shape form (like: kinetic bow) that lets you use the blast as a ranged weapon attack with 1/2 range. Still, that would end up shackling the class to vital strike.
I also think that you can hit on your second attack pretty damn consistently if you are aiming for touch and you have some FtB going. You can put up pretty wacky damage if you quicken yourself into ride the blast and then full attack (essentially accessing the fabled pounce ability but better).
I think in terms of the expected value of the damage that you do, it is going to be pretty rare that your AC targeting full attacks are going to do more damage than your touch attack dealing attacks. "Total damage" is a fool's measure. It is thinking like that that leads people to think that power attack is a must-have feat even without access to furious focus.
towards that point:
5) Can you make an upgrade to Kinetic Blade to create a two-handed weapon, such as a second higher-level talent?See this guy right here? He wants furious focus.
Or... maybe he just wants to look rad? I cannot decide now.
Oy, watch those quotes tags. Lol
I'm not the one who said that.
Haha. Sorry. Fixed it. I shoot from the hip on here, Shiroi.
5) Can you make an upgrade to Kinetic Blade to create a two-handed weapon, such as a second higher-level talent?One-handed weapons can be wielded with two hands.
My strength based geokineticist is using hit kinetic blade two-handed to get maximum benefit from both power attack and furious focus.
I reread furious focus. You are right. I thought that was 2 handed weapons only rather than wielding weapons in two hands. Going to use vital strike and devastating strike too? The more I think about it, the more I am convinced that vital striking with composite blasts is going to end up being better than full attacking with composite blasts. I have not written out the math yet, though.
|
|
Yet no rule is written that you add 1.5 times your Constitution mod to damage... nor is it written that you can wield the Blade in two hands.5) Can you make an upgrade to Kinetic Blade to create a two-handed weapon, such as a second higher-level talent?One-handed weapons can be wielded with two hands.
A one-handed weapon can be used in either the primary hand or the off hand. Add the wielder's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with a one-handed weapon if it's used in the primary hand, or 1/2 his Strength bonus if it's used in the off hand. If a one-handed weapon is wielded with two hands during melee combat, add 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls.
Benefit: When you are wielding a two-handed weapon or a one-handed weapon with two hands, and using the Power Attack feat, you do not suffer Power Attack’s penalty on melee attack rolls on the first attack you make each turn
You can choose to take a –1 penalty on all melee attack rolls and combat maneuver checks to gain a +2 bonus on all melee damage rolls. This bonus to damage is increased by half (+50%) if you are making an attack with a two-handed weapon, a one handed weapon using two hands, or a primary natural weapon that adds 1-1/2 times your Strength modifier on damage rolls
Emphasis mine.
- Kinetic Blade is classed as either a light or one-handed weapon at the users discretion.
- Kinetic Blade contains no text altering the standard rules for wielding weapons.
- Standard rules allow one-handed weapons to be used in two hands.
- A one-handed weapon used in two hands qualifies for Furious Focus and the higher bonus from Power Attack.
No, you don't add 1.5x Con, nor did I ever imply you did.
|
Except it wouldn't matter that you can't reduce the burn at that point since it can never really take you out. You just burn all day long with Flagellant and damn the consequences.wouldnt that be basically like say to a barbarian "no matter what you will always be fatuiged after a rage, nothing you take can stop that" just personally thats how something like that comes off, but thats just me, other folks will no doubt say that a feat like flagellant is OP for a kineticist, but is it really? your still staggerd right? wich means either a move or standard action, so no reducing the burn by move action, i mean it really wouldnt be that bad for them to have a feat like flagellant, at least in opinion lol
well besides you having a limited number of burn points availbe though, it seems folks miss that it says "A kineticist can never choose to accept burn if it would put her total points of burn over her Constitution modifier + 3"
No, you don't add 1.5x Con, nor did I ever imply you did.
Well, in this case, point is moot, I misread it. The Constitution modifier is applied to the blast's regular damage, NOT to replace your own Strength modifier.
Still... the lack of a two-handed option, or least a clarification of it, is apparent.
Only now I have a class feature that doesn't really do anything.If you don't like (Feel the) Burn and want more accuracy... just use Touch blasts. Pretty simple.What about Feel the Burn though? Burn is something I just didn't care about and felt was flavorful but Feel the Burn makes taking burn mandatory. Would be different if there was some other native way to boost accuracy but with Feel the Burn being the only way in the class features I'm not rewarded for my sacrifice I'm actively taking a huge risk for piddly numerical bonuses that I desperately need. Would also be different if that reward was huge.
As it stands, or at least for me, Feel the Burn is right next to the class skill list in terms of things I don't like about the class.
This is entirely true (well, it's more like two class features since you can never use a Metakinesis for anything but Empower, possibly barring 19th level Maximizes if you're weird).
It's also entirely true that the class feature doesn't really do anything because of nothing more or less than your own decisions.
I respect and understand that you don't like Burn. But, just as a player choosing to run a Barbarian and never using Rage, you do need to come to terms with the fact that it's inherently limiting to you to make that choice, and that you are responsible for the consequences of that choice.
I don't dislike Burn, I dislike Feel the Burn. Feel the Burn rewards me after I use Burn to perform some kind of trick which to me is often too little too late.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't dislike Burn, I dislike Feel the Burn. Feel the Burn rewards me after I use Burn to perform some kind of trick which to me is often too little too late.Only now I have a class feature that doesn't really do anything.If you don't like (Feel the) Burn and want more accuracy... just use Touch blasts. Pretty simple.What about Feel the Burn though? Burn is something I just didn't care about and felt was flavorful but Feel the Burn makes taking burn mandatory. Would be different if there was some other native way to boost accuracy but with Feel the Burn being the only way in the class features I'm not rewarded for my sacrifice I'm actively taking a huge risk for piddly numerical bonuses that I desperately need. Would also be different if that reward was huge.
As it stands, or at least for me, Feel the Burn is right next to the class skill list in terms of things I don't like about the class.
This is entirely true (well, it's more like two class features since you can never use a Metakinesis for anything but Empower, possibly barring 19th level Maximizes if you're weird).
It's also entirely true that the class feature doesn't really do anything because of nothing more or less than your own decisions.
I respect and understand that you don't like Burn. But, just as a player choosing to run a Barbarian and never using Rage, you do need to come to terms with the fact that it's inherently limiting to you to make that choice, and that you are responsible for the consequences of that choice.
It should be rewarding you just before you do the trick (I mean, if you're playing the avoid-burn strategy and then you pull out the big guns, I want to make sure you get the accuracy on those big guns you pulled out). If the wording isn't clear, I'll make sure it's clear that it applies before you roll to hit on the blast.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Burn... The problem with Burn...
1- HP is a very valuable, very scare resource (from level 1, characters can often deal more damage than they can take).
2- Feel The Burn doesn't give you an accuracy advantage. It simply makes you catch up with other medium BAB class (for as long as they don't use their own class features). And this comes at an increasingly high cost. If something is obligatory to make the class function properly (and ftB is), it should harm you for using it.
3- There is a huge difference between "This is a limited resource, I better save for when it's absolutely necessary" and "This is a limited resource, I hoe I never have to use it because it makes me weaker than i was before". Burn is literally the only class feature in Pathfinder that players will do their best to avoid using. If a players doesn't like the idea of using their character's class features, those class features are poorly designed.
4- It makes no sense. The Kineticist never gets better at reducing the cost of burn.
5- You're sacrificing Con for the ability to sue your class features, or, doing the inverse, and sacrificing the ability to use your class features for high Con. Essentially, FtB basically means you got a 5~10 points lower point buy just for the "privilege" of using your class features.
6- Burns becomes more costly as the levels go up. Which the complete opposite of what happens to every other class feature in the game, which get more and more uses as the character levels up.
7- No other class features makes you weaker than you were before using them. Burn is akin to a Wizard losing health to cast spells and taking a penalty to skill points because he's able to focus on Int... Or Fighters suffering a penalty to Str to "compensate" for Weapon Training.
8- "But the percentage of health stays the same" is not a valid point, because percentage of health means absolutely nothing. Only flat numbers matter. It's better to have 50% of 80hp than 100% of 30hp.
9- It exacerbates the problem of Rocket-Tag Combat. "Lose all this health and hope you can one-shot the enemy... Because if it survives, it'll surely one-shot you!"
I mean no disrespect to Mark, but Burn is an awful mechanic.
Last couple pages there were some pretty compelling arguments for why Spell Resistance in general kinda blows for Kineticists. Any chance we can see that removed?
Burn... The problem with Burn...
1- HP is a very valuable, very scare resource (from level 1, characters can often deal more damage than they can take).
2- Feel The Burn doesn't give you an accuracy advantage. It simply makes you catch up with other medium BAB class (for as long as they don't use their own class features). And this comes at an increasingly high cost. If something is obligatory to make the class function properly (and ftB is), it should harm you for using it.
3- There is a huge difference between "This is a limited resource, I better save for when it's absolutely necessary" and "This is a limited resource, I hoe I never have to use it because it makes me weaker than i was before". Burn is literally the only class feature in Pathfinder that players will do their best to avoid using. If a players doesn't like the idea of using their character's class features, those class features are poorly designed.
4- It makes no sense. The Kineticist never gets better at reducing the cost of burn.
5- You're sacrificing Con for the ability to sue your class features, or, doing the inverse, and sacrificing the ability to use your class features for high Con. Essentially, FtB basically means you got a 5~10 points lower point buy just for the "privilege" of using your class features.
6- Burns becomes more costly as the levels go up. Which the complete opposite of what happens to every other class feature in the game, which get more and more uses as the character levels up.
7- No other class features makes you weaker than you were before using them. Burn is akin to a Wizard losing health to cast spells and taking a penalty to skill points because he's able to focus on Int... Or Fighters suffering a penalty to Str to "compensate" for Weapon Training.
8- "But the percentage of health stays the same" is not a valid point, because percentage of health means absolutely nothing. Only flat numbers matter. It's better to have 50% of 80hp than 100% of 30hp.
9-...
1: It sure is handy that this is a class that gets to specialize in constitution rather than having to buy up strength or charisma.
2: Touch attacks give you an accuracy advantage and if it weren't for kinetic blade, this class would not need to rely on iterative attacks for damage. I have already said that I wish this class could get more accuracy for its burn, though.
3: Grit and other things make you lose class features when you use them up and casting enough 9th level spells means you don't have access to any 9th level spells. I recognize that the cost is high, but you are getting things in return.
4: Why does that make no sense?
5: You still get con for fort saves and you still have a big buffer that keeps you from death.
6: That is a good point, I think. Toughness at level 1 is a really good feat for this class (it will absorb 3 points of burn for you), but that is kind of the nature of the beast.
7: This is the same point as 3 reworded.
8: I agree. That is a dumb argument.
9: True enough. I think it is kind of neat that you kind of change your role over the course of the day, though. And you can spend a little bit of burn each morning to buff up your defenses.
I think burn is pretty cool and different. I just think there should be more accuracy by the end of things.
I am going to say the accuracy problem is probably worse than what Lemmy is saying here. A rogue is going to max out dex or str first and then have a magic weapon. Meanwhile, this class is naturally going to be MAD. That means that your AC-based blasts are going to be less accurate that a rogue's first attack (which is okay but not great) even when you are maxed out on your FtB.
Last couple pages there were some pretty compelling arguments for why Spell Resistance in general kinda blows for Kineticists. Any chance we can see that removed?
I think that is an important factor of balancing touch attacks against the AC attacks.
However, I do think it would be cool the have FtB to spell penetration or something.
You can gain back grit/panache just by killing an enemy or scoring a crit. But you can't get the HP damage from burn back except by rest.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
1: It sure is handy that this is a class that gets to specialize in constitution rather than having to buy up strength or charisma.
2: Touch attacks give you an accuracy advantage and if it weren't for kinetic blade, this class would not need to rely on iterative attacks for damage. I have already said that I wish this class could get more accuracy for its burn, though.
3: Grit and other things make you lose class features when you use them up and casting enough 9th level spells means you don't have access to any 9th level spells. I recognize that the cost is high, but you are getting things in return.
4: Why does that make no sense?
5: You still get con for fort saves and you still have a big buffer that keeps you from death.
6: That is a good point, I think. Toughness at level 1 is a really good feat for this class (it will absorb 3 points of burn for you), but that is kind of the nature of the beast.
7: This is the same point as 3 reworded.
8: I agree. That is a dumb argument.
9: True enough. I think it is kind of neat that you kind of change your role over the course of the day, though. And you can spend a little bit of burn each morning to buff up your defenses.
1- Yeah... And then lose the whole benefit of focusing on Con... It's like a Wizard suffering a penalty to skill points to compensate for focusing on Int. Or a Cleric suffering a penalty to Will saves to compensate for focusing on Wis. Or a Bard suffering a penalty to Bluff/Diplomacy to compensate for focusing on Cha. -.-'
2- Then either make all attacks a touch attack or do something for non-touch attacks to not become a waste of time without FtB.
3- And yet, Grit can be easily recovered. Losing all your spells doesn't make you weaker than you'd be if you didn't have spells in the first place. Sames goes for all other class features.
4- Because it doesn't? Avoiding Burn should be something every Kinetics would try to become better at. Why don't they?
5- Yay... You get half the benefit for all those points invested in your attribute... Why should you be punished for being able to focus on Con? If Mark doesn't want the class to have more health, then why even bother making it Con-based? Besides, Burn often leaves the Kineticist with less health than other d8 classes.
It's like your own class features are fighting you and doing what they can to stop you from actually using them...
|
|
3- There is a huge difference between "This is a limited resource, I better save for when it's absolutely necessary" and "This is a limited resource, I hoe I never have to use it because it makes me weaker than i was before". Burn is literally the only class feature in Pathfinder that players will do their best to avoid using. If a players doesn't like the idea of using their character's class features, those class features are poorly designed.
People who do not understand Burn will avoid using it.
Those who understand Burn will use it every single day, before they ever encounter their first opponent. They will then avoid using it for trivial fights, holding Burn as an option for when the #!@$ hits the fan.
The cost of burn only increases with level if you neglect your CON as you level. If you invest in CON, you get far more out of Burn than what it costs you.
1- Yeah... And then lose the whole benefit of focusing on Con... It's like a Wizard suffering a penalty to skill points to compensate for focusing on Int.
Why do you think a class that spends its entire life with its nose stuck in a book only gets 2 skill points/level?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
3- There is a huge difference between "This is a limited resource, I better save for when it's absolutely necessary" and "This is a limited resource, I hoe I never have to use it because it makes me weaker than i was before". Burn is literally the only class feature in Pathfinder that players will do their best to avoid using. If a players doesn't like the idea of using their character's class features, those class features are poorly designed.People who do not understand Burn will avoid using it.
Those who understand Burn will use it every single day, before they ever encounter their first opponent. They will then avoid using it for trivial fights, holding Burn as an option for when the #!@$ hits the fan.
The cost of burn only increases with level if you neglect your CON as you level. If you invest in CON, you get far more out of Burn than what it costs you.
In my playtest, I used FtB every day... Because I had to. It's necessary for me to use it, and yet... All it does is put me on par with Ninjas...
The cost of Burns increases one wya or another. It doesn't matter if you have Con 10 or Con 200. It'll cost more to you at 10th level than it cost at 5th, even though it gives you exactly the same benefit. And if you focus on Con, you're not focusing on Dex, so your accuracy suffers. I chose to focus on Con... Then mal told me I should have focused on Dex.
And no matter what... You still lose a huge chunk of your hp just for "privilege" of using your own class features.
Why do you think a class that spends its entire life with its nose stuck in a book only gets 2 skill points/level?
You mean "Just as many as Clerics, Paladins, Fighters, Sorcerers, Summoners, Antipaladins and Warpriests, none of which are Int-focused"? Because, at least according to the ACG's class design guide, Paizo apparently believes every class should have as few skill points as possible.
You also gain the benefits of Burn all day, not just for a single action.
And your hp is still gone all day as well... Meanwhile, the Gunslinger who recovered Grit is just as strong as he was before he spent it all in the first place.
Similarly, a Barbarian who runs out of Rage isn't made weaker than he'd have been if he didn't have Rage at all. At worst, he's fatigued for a couple minutes.
|
|
In my playtest, I used FtB every day... Because I had to. It's necessary for me to use it, and yet...
My barbarian uses her rage every single day, it's necessary for me to use it.....
All it does is put me on par with Ninjas...
It has already been stated that damage may well be increased. Very few people disagree on this point. It has little to do with the burn mechanic, which open a lot of doors for all day buffs, whose strength is at the kineticist's discretion.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
People who do not understand Burn will avoid using it.
Those who understand Burn will use it every single day, before they ever encounter their first opponent. They will then avoid using it for trivial fights, holding Burn as an option for when the #!@$ hits the fan.
If your meant to use it at the start of the day just for the defensive powers and decent accuracy, then doesn't that negate the flavour of it. I mean, it's a flavourful ability, unless your using it how it's been designed....
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
4: Well, he kind of gets better at avoid Burn through Infusion Specialization, etc.
5: But the points in Con you "sacrificed" (Actually you still get all other benefits of the Con except for the HP. Granted that is the most import aspect, but "sacrificing" Con is still an exaggeration.) give you most benefits from the equivalent points in a damage stat (in addition to the actual effects of the Burn usage). And the benefits you don't get are easily canceled out by the benefits of Con you still get.
7: Rage makes you weaker than you were before using it. Alchemist Cognatogens too. I'm certain there are quit a few more.
4- Except in the case of composite blasts and metakinesis. And those also stack with whatever else you use.
5- It's still punishing you for the ability to focus on Con. Which makes no sense... If focusing on Con is so powerful, then why make it Con-based in the first place?
7- It doesn't. Those features have drawbacks, but they are very short-lived... Usually only lasting for as long as you use said features. Burn's drawbacks not only are far more serious, they also last all day long and get worse and worse every time you sue your class features..
I'm happy with the mechanics of Burn and FtB , since I'm not like this vocal minority of people who have a psychological problem with sacrificing anything for a by comparison larger benefit.
The problem we have is not about making a sacrifice, but about making a huge sacrifice for benefits that are simply not all that good. That bonus from FtB? All it does is give you the accuracy and damage you lost due to not being able to use magic weapons.
You're not getting a larger benefit, you're catching up to those who didn't have to make the same sacrifice.
My barbarian uses her rage every single day, it's necessary for me to use it.....
And when he stops using Rage, he is not weaker than he'd be if he didn't have rage. And multiple uses of rage don't make you weaker and weaker until a mook can beat you with a single hit. At worst, you'll be fatigued for a couple minutes... And with the right resources, you can heal that fatigue in one round... Or even become completely immune to it.
It has already been stated that damage may well be increased. Very few people disagree on this point. It has little to do with the burn mechanic, which open a lot of doors for all day buffs, whose strength is at the kineticist's discretion.
And that's great and all... But it only addresses part of the problem with Burn.
|
|
My barbarian uses her rage every single day, it's necessary for me to use it.....And when he stops using Rage, he is not weaker than he'd be if he didn't have rage. And multiple uses of rage don't make you weaker and weaker until a mook can beat you with a single hit. At worst, you'll be fatigued for a couple minutes... And with the right resources, you can heal that fatigue in one round... Or even become completely immune to it.
The benefits I get from Burn don't go away, they last me the entire day. Unlike Rage.
[It has already been stated that damage may well be increased. Very few people disagree on this point. It has little to do with the burn mechanic, which open a lot of doors for all day buffs, whose strength is at the kineticist's discretion.And that's great and all... But it only addresses part of the problem with Burn.
I don't have a problem with Burn. I get far more out of it than what it costs me.
Why do you think a class that spends its entire life with its nose stuck in a book only gets 2 skill points/level?You mean "Just as many as Clerics, Paladins, Fighters, Sorcerers, Summoners, Antipaladins and Warpriests, none of which are Int-focused"? Because, at least according to the ACG's class design guide, Paizo apparently believes every class should have as few skill points as possible.
I am unconvinced that everyone agrees with you on this point. Every kid who wants more skill points says "Every class with 2 skill points per level that isn't based on intelligence should get more" or something to that effect. Though I maybe do think that intelligence casters should not be penalized skills for specializing in intelligence.
However, intelligence is not a stat every character wants and needs. Constitution is. Basing this class on constitution is sort of a balancing factor by itself in my opinion. And I really think you get a lot of value out of constitution just by not being dead. If I were a wizard, I would take a full attack from the dragon and be dead. If I am a Kineticist with a lot of burn, I am just unconscious. I still was able to drop my nova though, and knocking me out is probably going to be the last thing that dragon does.
Or maybe it won't if there is not an accuracy buff. That isn't burn's fault though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't have a problem with Burn. I get far more out of it than what it costs me.
Well... I do have a problem with Burn and it cost me more than it's worth.
|
|
I don't have a problem with Burn. I get far more out of it than what it costs me.Well... I do have a problem with Burn and it cost me more than it's worth.
You are free to not use Burn.
Those of use who enjoy the benefits offered feel the reward is worth the cost, and will have much stronger characters for taking advantage of the Burn mechanics as they currently exist.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am unconvinced that everyone agrees with you on this point.
I doubt everyone agrees with me (or anyone else) on anything... There will always be disagreements.
Every kid who wants more skill points says "Every class with 2 skill points per level that isn't based on intelligence should get more" or something to that effect. Though I maybe do think that intelligence casters should not be penalized skills for specializing in intelligence.
However, intelligence is not a stat every character wants and needs. Constitution is. Basing this class on constitution is sort of a balancing factor by itself in my opinion. And I really think you get a lot of value out of constitution just by not being dead. If I were a wizard, I would take a full attack from the dragon and be dead. If I am a Kineticist with a lot of burn, I am just unconscious. I still was able to drop my nova though, and knocking me out is probably going to be the last thing that dragon does.
Or maybe it won't if there is not an accuracy buff. That isn't burn's fault though.
Here is the problem... Mark knew what Con did when he created the class. If the character having lots of hp is a problem... Then why make it Con based?
Is kinda like making Bards based on Cha, then worrying about it being too good on Bluff/Diplomacy and deciding to give the class a penalty to those skills.That's a bad idea. It's like fighting your own class design. If you don't want a class to have lots of hp, don't make Con-based. If you don't want it to have lots of skill points, don't make it Int based, you don't want it to have great Initiative, don't make it Dex based.
Instead, we get a Con-based class... That is punished for being Con based. But the "balancing" factor that punishes it simply outweighs the benefits... To the point where the Con-based class effectively has less hp than it would have if it were based on another attribute but didn't suffer Burn.
The Kineticist is supposed to be Con-based an be able to deal great amounts of damage with a single standard action... But every thing in the class punishes him for that. You lose hp for using your class features, and you need a move action to lose slightly less hp for using your class features...
And to make it worse, it has pointless restrictions, like the feat that only allows you to grab feats of lower levels. Why does it have that restriction? No other similar feat has anything like that.
IMO, Mark grossly underestimated the drawback of Burn and was too conservative with the power scale of quite a few class abilities, including said feat.
I understand he doesn't want his first official Paizo class to be overpowered, but as it's, I'd say it's barely better than Ninjas, which are quite underpowered themselves, despite having a few nice tricks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You are free to not use Burn.
Those of use who enjoy the benefits offered feel the reward is worth the cost, and will have much stronger characters for taking advantage of the Burn mechanics as they currently exist.
I'm also free to criticize what I see as poor design and hope it's reworked. In fact, that's the whole point of the playtest.
"You're free not to use Burn" is like saying "You're free not to use your class features". I want to use my class features. Every player does. But this particular class feature is poorly designed. A class feature that players are doing their best to avoid using is a poorly designed class feature.
And I disagree. I think those of us using burn will have much weaker characters than they should have, due to using Burn mechanics as they currently exist.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I really really hope you guys reconsider not having a second playtest round.
Showing some of the mechanics you feel boost the class enough make Burn worthwhile would restore some faith, or at least re-focus the playtest parameters.
|
|
You are free to not use Burn.
Those of use who enjoy the benefits offered feel the reward is worth the cost, and will have much stronger characters for taking advantage of the Burn mechanics as they currently exist.
I'm also free to criticize what I see as poor design and hope it's reworked. In fact, that's the whole point of the playtest.
"You're free not to use Burn" is like saying "You're free not to use your class features". I want to use my class features. Every player does. But this particular class feature is poorly designed. A class feature that players are doing their best to avoid using is a poorly designed class feature.
And I disagree. I think those of us using burn will have much weaker characters than they should have, due to using Burn mechanics as they currently exist.
If a class is not suited to your playstyle, don't play it. There are quite a few classes I disagree with and won't play.
Kineticist, and the associated burn mechanics, are shaping up to be a class it looks like I will enjoy. The class does have a few issues, low skills, low utility, low damage, but the core mechanics are sound. I don't want to see them change. I am good at resource management and want to see a class that rewards this skill.
I'm not going out of my way to have my Fire bender kineticist *avoid Burn. I'm actually going out of my way to make sure I've got at least a little Burn going at all times. Because it feels pretty awesome, and almost like Limit Breaks the way they worked in Final Fantasy VIII.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If a class is not suited to your playstyle, don't play it. There are quite a few classes I disagree with and won't play.
Then why don't you stop replying to this thread and be content with whatever comes out? After all, you don't have to play the class...
Just because I think Burn is poorly designed, doesn't mean I don't want to play the class.
You know what? I don't care anymore... I'm not in the mood to repeat the same arguments over and over again just because people want to pretend those issues are not issues at all.
Obviously, those who criticize Burn are not welcome here. I'm getting the impression that anything that is not praise won't be heard... So I'm going to bed before my frustration gets the better of me.
It's up to Mark now
If he decides to listen to those who feel Burn is poorly implemented... Good. We'll have a better designed class.
If he decides the criticism on Burn is unfounded... Too bad. I'll just resign myself to have yet another flavorful class with bad mechanics and houserule the hell out of it.
My humble request is that Mark takes a serious look at the criticism directed at Burn and if he disagrees with them, that it at least doesn't be because of "arguments" such as "you can always choose not to use your class features or play a different class.", since those are not real arguments, just another version of "My way or the highway!"