| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
My solution is to buff the base effectiveness of the class and rebuild Burn to be "emergency power" or used for very powerful effects.
That way a Kineticist could fight just fine without burn, but can blow up HP to do something amazing.
I think most people would be ok with this.
Also if we made elemental Body have a faster progression for size and lower duration it would make a great "amazing" emergency ability.
I think that this class is amazing. It's strange for a caster to cast with CON, maybe is better with CHA or INT? Doing it with COS will generate only characters with poor abilities except for DES and COS.
EDIT:... and maybe is better if in the prerequisites of the wild talent will be written what kind of kineticist can cast it, and which one is universal.
|
My solution is to buff the base effectiveness of the class and rebuild Burn to be "emergency power" or used for very powerful effects.
That way a Kineticist could fight just fine without burn, but can blow up HP to do something amazing.
I think most people would be ok with this.
Also if we made elemental Body have a faster progression for size and lower duration it would make a great "amazing" emergency ability.
I value sustained abilities far more than burst abilities. Part of the reason I never had a problem with burn was I was never tempted to use it simply for burst DPR.
Burst abilities look good on paper, but consistent, reliable performance is where I prefer to put my money.
My solution is to buff the base effectiveness of the class and rebuild Burn to be "emergency power" or used for very powerful effects.
That way a Kineticist could fight just fine without burn, but can blow up HP to do something amazing.
I think most people would be ok with this.
Also if we made elemental Body have a faster progression for size and lower duration it would make a great "amazing" emergency ability.
I value sustained abilities far more than burst abilities.
Burst abilities look good on paper, but consistent, reliable performance is where I prefer to put my money.
I would also note that all 9 level casters are already filling that resource economy style.
Then you should have no problem with my suggestion that the Baseline of the class be BROUGHT UP.
Thematically Burn is supposed to represent emergency, non-sustainable power increases and exertion.
Burn currently being used for all day buffs and becoming a huge elemental is actually non-thematic.
It makes more sense to make Kineticists better all the time so that Burn can become a real "emergency" mechanic.
I see many people saying that the aether defense is good for its regenerative HP. The ability to regenerate 1 hp/ minute is close to nothing from mid to high levels, and the amount received at low levels is not meaningful. It has been said that it does not have the intent prevent non-damaging touch attacks. Right now, it's not nearly close to the other defenses in power. I support the idea of a temporary hp pool that regenerates automatically every round, and that can be regenerated as an immediate action through burn.
Then you should have no problem with my suggestion that the Baseline of the class be BROUGHT UP.
Thematically Burn is supposed to represent emergency, non-sustainable power increases and exertion.
Burn currently being used for all day buffs and becoming a huge elemental is actually non-thematic.
It makes more sense to make Kineticists better all the time so that Burn can become a real "emergency" mechanic.
I love the idea that this class should gain all-day buffs from burn. I do think the class as a whole has an accuracy problem that must be addressed, though.
I will again return to the idea that the accuracy bonuses from FtB should be an innate bonus to ranged blast attacks. Meanwhile, the FtB bonus should just add to damage (where you get an extra damage die for each point of burn).
The ability to regenerate 1 hp/ minute is close to nothing from mid to high levels and the amount received at low levels is not meaningful.
I think the truth of the first statement is extremely dependent on the campaign. Rapid encounters are not the only possible mode of playm. But, yes, raising the regen, probably to something like 1+Burn per minute or Con per minute or something like that would definitely help.
I definitely disagree with the second point, though. You give up a couple hp for a couple that regenerate. How is that not meaningful?
|
|
The ability to regenerate 1 hp/ minute is close to nothing from mid to high levels, and the amount received at low levels is not meaningful.
I've been in way too many games where the GM ruled the caster's minute/level spells wore off after every encounter.
A kineticist with Force Ward in either going to have substantial regeneration in such a game or the wizard is going to find his spells lasting much longer.
Those are hp that cannot be healed, the number is minimum and at higher levels being able to be healed is a key to survival. At level 1 what we have:
Earth: -1 hp from each physical attack (good);
Water: -20% or -10% chance to get hit(good);
Air: -20% chance to get hit (ranged, circumstantial, weak)
Fire: 1d6 damage against contact attacks (very circumstantial, weak).
Aether: 1hp for each whole fight that can't be healed through magic, only by waiting (can't imagine how this can be good).
I see many people saying that the aether defense is good for its regenerative HP. The ability to regenerate 1 hp/ minute is close to nothing from mid to high levels, and the amount received at low levels is not meaningful. It has been said that it does not have the intent prevent non-damaging touch attacks. Right now, it's not nearly close to the other defenses in power. I support the idea of a temporary hp pool that regenerates automatically every round, and that can be regenerated as an immediate action through burn.
Its offensive potential is unimpressive as well.
I think the bonus HP should regen faster at later levels (like you regenerate 1/2 or 1/3 your level in temp hp every minute or have excess healing also heal the temp hitpoints).
I also wish that telekinesis had a good basic touch attack and a better aether-aether composite blast.
Maybe kineticist could get a touch blast that just does 1d4 (for every 2 levels)+1/2 con. And then the composite blast (something like "forceful strike") could do 2d6 for every 2 levels (plus con) of piercing/slashing/bludgeoning damage.
Even then, aetheric boost is pretty much terrible. Everything else is doubling the die damage while aether is not even increasing it by not even 1/3. I feel like that should incur just one burn at most when you consider that empower increases die by .5.
I divert from the discussion about burn, I'm more interested in telekinetic blast.
I think that will be a complicated power: I think is unfair to being able to throw a silver ore or a silver dagger on a werewolf and don't bypass his DR. Isn't it better to add a list of material you can trow with this ability (like the ki ability of the monk)that can bybass the DR?
EDIT: About the burn's problem... I think that is better to have a pool of "burn point" like the magus for his arcane pool. Fewer problems and doing so is compatible with mithic rules.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would like each element starting with 3 offensive abilities.
Aether
-Telekinetic blast
-Force blast- 1d4+con mod +1d4 per 2 levels, damage- force, DR no, SR yes, touch attack.
-Telekinesis- as spell.
Air
-Wind blast
-Electric blast
-Cloud Blast- create obscuring mist/fog cloud effect in a 30' cone that you can in, SR none, last for 1 minute/level or until you create a new one.
Earth
Earth Blast
Acid Blast
Crystal/stone growth- create crystals/stones that act as tacks and create difficult terrain in a 20' radius burst, that doesn't effect you.
Fire
fire blast
Light blast- blind one target, touch attack, SR yes, save fort or ref or do damage to undead and shadow creatures.
Smoke blast- create 30' cone of choking smoke, staggered, save fort, SR no.
Water
-Water blast
-Ice blast
-Steam blast- 1d6+con fire damage + 1d6 per 2 levels, DR no, SR yes, touch attack.
I would like each element starting with 3 offensive abilities.
Aether
-Telekinetic blast
-Force blast- 1d4+con mod +1d4 per 2 levels, damage- force, DR no, SR yes, touch attack.
-Telekinesis- as spell.Air
-Wind blast
-Electric blast
-Cloud Blast- create obscuring mist/fog cloud effect in a 30' cone that you can in, SR none, last for 1 minute/level or until you create a new one.Earth
Earth Blast
Acid Blast
Crystal/stone growth- create crystals/stones that act as tacks and create difficult terrain in a 20' radius burst, that doesn't effect you.Fire
fire blast
Light blast- blind one target, touch attack, SR yes, save fort or ref or do damage to undead and shadow creatures.
Smoke blast- create 30' cone of choking smoke, staggered, save fort, SR no.Water
-Water blast
-Ice blast
-Steam blast- 1d6+con fire damage + 1d6 per 2 levels, DR no, SR yes, touch attack.
I think the third of all of these (plus light blast) should probably be form infusions, composite blasts, or substance infusion.
I also think it kind of makes sense that fire only gets a touch blast without composite-ing. However, maybe it should get something like an "explosive blast" that does 1d4 fire damage but can ignore SR (since the actual "magic" is happening from an explosion near the target creature rather than effecting the target directly with magical fire). That is just a random thought, though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's perfectly fine for certain elements to get different options than others. However, I believe every element should get upgrades to their basic blasts automatically.
Earth, for example, should just automatically upgrade to metal at 7th (which allows for rare metal infusion on a basic blast).
Water should upgrade to ice when you get cold, too, allowing slashing and piercing.
TK should get to bypass dr based on what the throw because it takes damage, too, so, it will get really expensive to throw around silver and cold iron all the time.
That kind of thing.
Artanthos, every time I see you post about 'burn is a good benefit' it always revolves around being a hydrokineticist, or using elemental form, or both.I've not even built a hydrokineticist. I've posted a geokineticist and an aerokineticist.
Force Ward is an equally viable defense to generate burn, starting at low level. The only one who gets shafted on a good way to generate burn before level 7 is the pyrokineticist.
Have you stopped to consider the trade off of Burn when you're not playing in the most optimal way possible!?!?!How much sympathy would you have for a charisma focused barbarian who complained about low DPR? How much sympathy for an archer that failed to take precise shot?
As a player you make the choices that define your character. Some of those choices are more functional than others.
No, you haven't built one, but you have consistently fallen back to the Hydrokineticist and Geokineticist when it comes to talking about how 'burn is fine' in your arguments. The most recent example being in this post.
1. I pump by con, gaining +damage even without Burn
2. I accept 2 points of burn to use Kinetic form 2
3. The bonus hit points I would have received from CON are now fueling:
. . FtB - +to-hit/+damage
. . +4 Dex - +to-hit/+AC
. . +3 Natual armor - +AC
4. I use burn to augment my elemental defense
. . AC, DR, or regenerating temp HPMy available hit points remain equal to, or higher than, a character who took a 14 CON. I have traded by extra hit points beyond 14 for persistent bonuses: +to-hit, +damage, +AC. Not only does CON add to damage directly, it allows you to withstand burn and gain a second second bonus to damage.]
Notice the above only references either Kinetic Form, or Hydro, Geo, or Aether kineticists.
Have you stopped to consider the trade off of Burn when you're not playing in the most optimal way possible!?!?!How much sympathy would you have for a charisma focused barbarian who complained about low DPR? How much sympathy for an archer that failed to take precise shot?
As a player you make the choices that define your character. Some of those choices are more functional than others.
I'd like you to point out where it is I recommended playing a Charisma focused barbarian, and then complained about DR. Please do so.
What I said, I pointed out is that there are people who don't want to be forced into one of two elements that give very positive trade offs for their defense burn, or be forced into playing an elemental for the majority of their character's lifespan.
It's odd to me how you equate not playing a hydro, geo and/or not using kinetic form with being an par with a charisma focused barbarian. This is telling me that, in your own eyes, if you don't play those elements and use that wild talent, you may as well not be playing the character at all.
Wouldn't that be almost the definition of a cookie cutter build? Play the kineticist this way, or don't play because you suck?
I am also aware of the fact there will be more wild talent options available in the final book. However, if the options for burn are as dismal as what exists in this playtest, then I strongly feel that the Kineticist will devolve into nothing more than a handful of possible builds and everything else is considered trash because the trade offs just aren't worth it.
|
|
No, you haven't built one, but you have consistently fallen back to the Hydrokineticist and Geokineticist when it comes to talking about how 'burn is fine' in your arguments. The most recent example being in this post.
The aerokineticist build I was referencing when posting those numbers.
After taking burn she has 83 hit points available, the exact same number as any other 10th level d8 character with a 14 CON and FCB applied to HP.
Is it possible to apply talent like precise shot and point-black shot on the simple blasts?
No, you haven't built one, but you have consistently fallen back to the Hydrokineticist and Geokineticist when it comes to talking about how 'burn is fine' in your arguments. The most recent example being in this post.The aerokineticist build I was referencing when posting those numbers.
After taking burn she has 83 hit points available, the exact same number as any other 10th level d8 character with a 14 CON and FCB applied to HP.
Yes, you use Kinetic Form and Water's defense ability to fuel your burn, because any other option your class has is sub-optimal. I notice you didn't take burn to increase the miss chance from Envoloping Winds, why is that?
Is it because it's not worth the trade off? Because it's sub-optimal?
If the benefits from accepting burn are worth it, shouldn't you have also spent burn to increase your miss chance? Or are only Kinetic Form and the defense of Water and Earth (possibly Aether) worth the cost of accepting burn?
Does this mean that people who or those who don't want to play one of those two (maybe 3) elements just shit out of luck?
The only arguments I've ever seen you use to say that the cost of burn is fine, consistently reference Kinetic Form and the defense of the Hydrokineticist or the Geokineticist. Your own, "aerokineticist" takes Expanded Element and Expanded Defense to take use the Hydrokineticists defense. Melinda may not have selected a Hydrokineticist at 1st level, but she still became one in the end.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is it because it's not worth the trade off? Because it's sub-optimal?If the benefits from accepting burn are worth it, shouldn't you have also spent burn to increase your miss chance? Or are only Kinetic Form and the defense of Water and Earth (possibly Aether) worth the cost of accepting burn?
Does this mean that people who or those who don't want to play one of those two (maybe 3) elements just s@!& out of luck?
I fail to see how this is an argument against burn when it seems to be an argument about how much better some elements are than others.
Also seriously people, you don't have to take everything so personally.
Is it because it's not worth the trade off? Because it's sub-optimal?If the benefits from accepting burn are worth it, shouldn't you have also spent burn to increase your miss chance? Or are only Kinetic Form and the defense of Water and Earth (possibly Aether) worth the cost of accepting burn?
Does this mean that people who or those who don't want to play one of those two (maybe 3) elements just s@!& out of luck?
I fail to see how this is an argument against burn when it seems to be an argument about how much better some elements are than others.
Also seriously people, you don't have to take everything so personally.
With the exception of a very small subset of abilities, taking burn is not worth the cost of the effect you achieve.
The three defenses of Water > Earth > Aether are worth the cost (in descending order), while the only Wild Talent that is truly worth the cost of the damage you take for using it, is Kinetic Form. This means that the negative drawback of Burn is not worth it when used with any other ability.
This is not saying the elements are unbalanced (we already know that), it's a point that the cost and effect of taking burn is not worth it outside of a small subset of abilities the Kineticist can choose from.
This results in people who want to actively avoid taking Burn as much as possible, unless they have to. Even then, many times you will feel punished for taking that Burn.
No other class feels like it's getting punished for using it's class abilities.
I think it's perfectly fine for certain elements to get different options than others. However, I believe every element should get upgrades to their basic blasts automatically.
Earth, for example, should just automatically upgrade to metal at 7th (which allows for rare metal infusion on a basic blast).
Water should upgrade to ice when you get cold, too, allowing slashing and piercing.
TK should get to bypass dr based on what the throw because it takes damage, too, so, it will get really expensive to throw around silver and cold iron all the time.
That kind of thing.
Well, I think every element should probably get a single touch-targeted attack if only because accuracy is a big problem otherwise and it lessens the problem with people feeling as though they "must" take burn to function.
I'd really like a clarification on whether you can use substance infusions to modify your blast while channeling the blast through a conductive weapon. If it does, a magnetic blast archer could be pretty cool. I'm having trouble building it though due to a lack of attractive wild talent options for lightning Kineticists.
The weird thing is that fire's defense actual puts out some pretty amazing amounts of hurt if you burn into it. My teen-level pyro playtest character could pull 8d6 damage to monsters who dared to attack her, which is fairly substantial given that it's per hit. And she didn't even have flame shield or it would have gone from 28 average to ~34 average, which generally would mean they hurt themselves more than they hurt me. The pyro was rarely targeted due to being a blaster instead of melee, but I calculated that some of the enemies would kill themselves on average before they killed me, even if I didn't attack them.
The weird thing is that fire's defense actual puts out some pretty amazing amounts of hurt if you burn into it. My teen-level pyro playtest character could pull 8d6 damage to monsters who dared to attack her, which is fairly substantial given that it's per hit. And she didn't even have flame shield or it would have gone from 28 average to ~34 average, which generally would mean they hurt themselves more than they hurt me. The pyro was rarely targeted due to being a blaster instead of melee, but I calculated that some of the enemies would kill themselves on average before they killed me, even if I didn't attack them.
You know: I actually have kind of been thinking that, but I was kind of taking people's word that it is terrible. However, I am not sure how many natural attacks I really see relative to weapon attacks.
Maybe it would be more exciting if it was to all natural attacks or melee attacks from targets 5 feet away.
So, lessee, you're trading 4 Burn/At least 48 HP (2d6 --> 3d6 ---> 4d6 ---> 6d6 ---> 8d6 assuming it follows the INA progression, since it's not very clear) to do some damage to enemies that attack you, in melee, without a weapon. When by your own admission you're not being attacked in melee much (so you're not making use of it at all most of the time). And there's a good chance the enemy will be using a weapon anyway.
Yeah...no. It's not worth trading a significant chunk of HP for something that MIGHT work to do a bit of damage to an enemy who has also damaged you by the very fact that it works.
The weird thing is that fire's defense actual puts out some pretty amazing amounts of hurt if you burn into it. My teen-level pyro playtest character could pull 8d6 damage to monsters who dared to attack her, which is fairly substantial given that it's per hit. And she didn't even have flame shield or it would have gone from 28 average to ~34 average, which generally would mean they hurt themselves more than they hurt me. The pyro was rarely targeted due to being a blaster instead of melee, but I calculated that some of the enemies would kill themselves on average before they killed me, even if I didn't attack them.You know: I actually have kind of been thinking that, but I was kind of taking people's word that it is terrible. However, I am not sure how many natural attacks I really see relative to weapon attacks.
Maybe it would be more exciting if it was to all natural attacks or melee attacks from targets 5 feet away.
Yeah, the natural attacks get hurt even from reach. The upgrade's no-save damage applies to non-reach melee weapons.
Generally, I've found that things with natural attacks tend to be more dangerous and harder for your buddies to mess with than things with manufactured weapons, but not always. For instance, with the new infusions I had, I'm fairly confident that my pyro could really ruin the day of most melee weapon enemies.
So, lessee, you're trading 4 Burn/At least 48 HP (2d6 --> 3d6 ---> 4d6 ---> 6d6 ---> 8d6 assuming it follows the INA progression, since it's not very clear) to do some damage to enemies that attack you, in melee, without a weapon. When by your own admission you're not being attacked in melee much (so you're not making use of it at all most of the time). And there's a good chance the enemy will be using a weapon anyway.
Yeah...no. It's not worth trading a significant chunk of HP for something that MIGHT work to do a bit of damage to an enemy who has also damaged you by the very fact that it works.
If I recall correctly, she was attacked by a few enemies in melee and never at ranged. Not because there weren't ranged enemies, but because the switch-hitter geo's MO was to ride the blast up to any he saw and get in their face. They nearly always focused him after that. While she didn't need heat too much, she also definitely didn't need those 48 hp (pyro, so she was Con>>Dex and she was rarely focused)
The reason the Fire defense is so bad is twofold:
1.) The damage really isn't that high compared to the cost.
2.) Unlike all the other abilities, it doesn't provide an actual DEFENSE. All of the others, to varying degrees, attempt to make you take less damage.
The Pyrokineticist is both encouraged to take damage, and burn HP to make his "defense" more punishing...meaning that each hit now becomes even more significant.
Sorry I lied, 3:
3.) It's so CONDITIONAL. IF they attack you, IF they attack you in melee, IF they hit, IF they hit with a non-manufactured weapon, and IF they do little enough damage that the trade is worthwhile...it has a lot more hoops to jump through than Earth (If they attack me, and if they hit), Water (if they attack me), Aether (if they attack me and damage me), and even air (if they attack me at range).
It's just a wonky trade.
The reason the Fire defense is so bad is twofold:
1.) The damage really isn't that high compared to the cost.
2.) Unlike all the other abilities, it doesn't provide an actual DEFENSE. All of the others, to varying degrees, attempt to make you take less damage.
The Pyrokineticist is both encouraged to take damage, and burn HP to make his "defense" more punishing...meaning that each hit now becomes even more significant.
It's just a wonky trade.
Encouraged to take damage = doesn't care as much when he takes damage. It also acts as damage mitigation when the first two attacks of a monk's flurry makes him fall unconscious and thus cannot make the remaining 4 attacks.
Which is an unlikely scenario and shouldn't be what the ability is balanced around.
What's more common...an enemy Monk with no HP, or an enemy Fighter with a Greatsword who simply doesn't GAF about your defense?
Or a creature with Fire resistance who attacks with natural attacks?
Or a creature who attacks at range, with arrows or spells?
Which is an unlikely scenario and shouldn't be what the ability is balanced around.
What's more common...an enemy Monk with no HP, or an enemy Fighter with a Greatsword who simply doesn't GAF about your defense?
Or a creature with Fire resistance who attacks with natural attacks?
Or a creature who attacks at range, with arrows or spells?
Well, I do think it should be extended to melee attacks in general as long as the enemy is close enough.
And my example can be easily expanded to more likely scenarios.
E.g. I am in melee with a t-rex; he bites me and dies and then cannot swallow me next round. I am fighting a bear; he bites me and claws me twice. Next round, my allies will kill the bear before he can act again. The bear would not had died if it were not for my hot body. I am saved from another bear full attack.
The idea, and granted I'm not saying the idea is guaranteed to be realized, is also that enemies will prioritize you later on their priority lists if they have to eat so much damage each time, or force their allies who can ignore your heat to hit you while they hit someone else in a mixed group (thus spreading damage instead of focus-fire). This definitely seemed to be the case for my pyro and contributed to her lower damage taking. So in that way it's a defense, and a very fire-style defense.
I think fundamentally it has to be possible for this to be the case. I mean, if it did 10 damage per kineticist level with no save to all who harm you with any attack, it's basically suicidal to attack you in any situation without fire immunity and thus will certainly protect you via targeting choice.
I wonder if anyone else other than me played a pyro who focused on heat and has feedback on whether it affected targeting (it's something lacking in the playtests we have so far).
My problem with the Pyro defense is that, well, it's not a defense. It doesn't keep you from harm at all. In fact, it is predicated on you getting hurt, since it does absolutely nothing if you don't get hit.
See, I'm always playing in "extreme resource hoard mode," and that's exactly why the class being entirely at-will with awesome all day buffs is right up my alley. I'll give up HP for sure, because I am expecting never to be hit. Getting AC and regenerating THP is exactly the sort of thing I want because it saves me on limited resources (i.e. healing magic and items).
Using Fire's defense feels wrong, because I have to take on the mindset of "I AM going to get hit." I don't want that mindset. I hate the idea that I will be harmed at all and do not want to play assuming I will.
Secondly, as high as the damage can apparently get (and I admit, now, I totally don't understand the way the damage steps up--you really need to include the chart here), it's save negates. Most things that have natural attacks have strong Reflex saves. Plus, I hate using abilities with saves, because my experience over the years is that saves are made more than they are missed.
Yeah, I'm thinking of lowering the damage and removing the save, btw, or at least making it save for half. 4d6 per hit at level 2, for instance, is pretty crazy high, even for 8 nonlethal.
My problem with the Pyro defense is that, well, it's not a defense. It doesn't keep you from harm at all. In fact, it is predicated on you getting hurt, since it does absolutely nothing if you don't get hit.
See, I'm always playing in "extreme resource hoard mode," and that's exactly why the class being entirely at-will with awesome all day buffs is right up my alley. I'll give up HP for sure, because I am expecting never to be hit. Getting AC and regenerating THP is exactly the sort of thing I want because it saves me on limited resources (i.e. healing magic and items).
Using Fire's defense feels wrong, because I have to take on the mindset of "I AM going to get hit." I don't want that mindset. I hate the idea that I will be harmed at all and do not want to play assuming I will.
Secondly, as high as the damage can apparently get (and I admit, now, I totally don't understand the way the damage steps up--you really need to include the chart here), it's save negates. Most things that have natural attacks have strong Reflex saves. Plus, I hate using abilities with saves, because my experience over the years is that saves are made more than they are missed.
Oh man. I forgot save negates. Yeah. It is not great.
However, I do argue that it is a damage mitigation mechanic as it makes enemies in melee with you more likely to become dead enemies (and thus do less damage to you).
Which is an unlikely scenario and shouldn't be what the ability is balanced around.
What's more common...an enemy Monk with no HP, or an enemy Fighter with a Greatsword who simply doesn't GAF about your defense?
Or a creature with Fire resistance who attacks with natural attacks?
Or a creature who attacks at range, with arrows or spells?
Well, I do think it should be extended to melee attacks in general as long as the enemy is close enough.
And my example can be easily expanded to more likely scenarios.
E.g. I am in melee with a t-rex; he bites me and dies and then cannot swallow me next round. I am fighting a bear; he bites me and claws me twice. Next round, my allies will kill the bear before he can act again. The bear would not had died if it were not for my hot body. I am saved from another bear full attack.
At the level a T-Rex is a challenge (9th at the highest), you're boosting the damage to 4d6 with 3 Burn (1d8-2d6-3d6-4d6), taking 27 damage in the process, of your likely 114 total (Average HP+22Con+FCB+Toughness).
You're dealing an average of 14 damage to the T-Rex. It has 153 HP.
It hits you for an average of 36. Its basic damage dice, before its massive Str to damage, is as good as your defense.
The T-Rex kills you in 3 hits.
You'd need to take 11 hits to kill it with this.
So yeah.
You will fare likewise against the Bear.
Oh, and I just noticed, even BETTER, the thing allows for a Ref save to negate the damage.
So...the Monk Flurrying you probably doesn't have any issue.
You guys are a great thought-board, so here's a hypothetical: Say I cut it by two steps (so it starts at d3, and that means the max you can burn it up to is 2d6 at level 2) but no save. Still only to natural attacks until the upgrade, but let's say that if they use a manufactured weapon (including reach) it also hits the weapon and thus may harm it if it beats hardness (probably onyl for wooden weapons or at 7+).
You guys are a great thought-board, so here's a hypothetical: Say I cut it by two steps (so it starts at d3, and that means the max you can burn it up to is 2d6 at level 2) but no save. Still only to natural attacks until the upgrade, but let's say that if they use a manufactured weapon (including reach) it also hits the weapon and thus may harm it if it beats hardness (probably onyl for wooden weapons or at 7+).
Well, as someone who usually GMs, I would prefer not to have to deal with item damage and need to keep track of that number every other fight.
Is it really such a big mechanical advantage to have it work on enemies attacking in melee in general?
You guys are a great thought-board, so here's a hypothetical: Say I cut it by two steps (so it starts at d3, and that means the max you can burn it up to is 2d6 at level 2) but no save. Still only to natural attacks until the upgrade, but let's say that if they use a manufactured weapon (including reach) it also hits the weapon and thus may harm it if it beats hardness (probably onyl for wooden weapons or at 7+).
I already didn't think it was worthwhile when I glossed over the save part, so halving the damage doesn't really endear it to me further.
I'd like that much more than where it is now.
Hmm...yeah. Or let's look at it from the perspective of the bad guys. Let's say you're a bad guy and you notice that one of your foes has this defense that does 3d6 fire no save to your natural attack dudes (and may harm your metal weapons on a high roll of 3d6). How do you deal with that foe damagewise? Divert your ranged to hit that one while others go elsewhere? Try to deal with everybody else first so your melee and ranged can focus the burny foe together and only deal with the pain at the end when necessary? Either way, you probably don't assign melee resources to that one if you can avoid it, right?