First, one could reason that firing off a kinetic blast - or using any spell-like ability, for that matter - is an action that's performed as organically as drawing a sword or charging at a foe and requires no more concentration or focus than either of those. There's no verbal or somatic motions that are actually required, and one doesn't need to have a focus to channel that elemental energy through or material components to draw it from; the energy for a kinetic blast just appears in their free hand for them to lob at a foe as a ranged attack. If you look at the closest analog to a kineticist in other media - Avatar style bending - you see that pretty much any act of bending is done as a natural part of fighting. Benders don't use their elements as magical spells, they use them as weapons, as extensions of themselves. Kineticists, IMO, are no different than their assumed inspiration; kinetic blasts are their weapons. If this wasn't the case we'd have never had the confusion of whether kinetic blasts incur the ranged-weapon-thrown-into-melee penalty. The only kinetic blast I can think of that might break this, specifically, is Telekinetic Blast, as it requires loose objects around a fighter to be used, and even then it requires little concentration if any to just telekinetically fling a random piece of loose anything toward a foe.
You can reason that, but it doesn't change the text- wild talents are a kind of spell like ability (one of those that lack somatic/verbal components). It keeps the only relavent part of a spell- concentration.
Also, nothing says it is actual bending from avatar. You can stand there as a general psychic.
There is no need to humor that these are spell like abilities, it says it directly:
Wild talents are typically spell-like abilities (though some are supernatural abilities), and take a standard action to use unless otherwise noted.
That includes the listed blasts, utility talents, infusions, etc. Well, there are probably a few utility talents that are SU abilities (most likely the things like flying or earth glide; preexisting SU abilities, basically).
Also, this includes kinetic blade. Unless it is specifically labeled as supernatural, it goes with the more general rule that wild talents are spell-like abilities.
Overall, you are trying to twist this to your advantage, but I doubt you would get far in the rules forums.
Usually, a spell-like ability works just like the spell of that name. A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus.
The bolded part is the part that matters. Usually (unless stated otherwise of course), spell-like abilities work as spells.
This means you forgot to add the other relevant quote from the book.
To cast a spell, you must concentrate.
So, if there is an (Sp) on a class feature, unless it specifies otherwise, it requires concentration (which makes sense or it'd be a swift action instead of a standard action).
So, if you have a class feature that can not be used while concentrating (Rage, Bloodrage), you can't use any (Sp) ability.
Kinetic Blast is an (Sp) class feature, and is not part of the Bloodrager spell list (if it were, Blood Casting would indeed let you use it).
This is also why it doesn't work for Kinetic Blade/Whip. Those Forms would have to change the type of the blast to (Su) for it to be interpreted as "instinctive and natural".
As for the Activate Kinetic Weapon, Rage, Attack...
Those are 2 different Standard Actions if you separate them. They are only a single Standard Action if you do them together.
I like the idea, I'd allow it as a GM because I'm the kind that House Rules anything that sounds like fun, but from a RAW point of view, it'd definitely be a house rule, not canonical. :/
You're right for the most part; if we go specifically by the rules of spells and spell-like abilities, then kinetic blasts can't be used in the midst of a rage. And being the likely inspiration or closest analog for the class doesn't necessarily make this work exactly like bending, otherwise electric blast would be linked to fire and there'd be no Aether element at all. But that's why I put forth the second argument, since kinetic blade is used as part of an attack action, not part of a kinetic blast like most other infusions.
Infusions, though, are not spell-like abilities, but rather supernatural abilities. The class feature bears the (Su) label, so it's pretty reasonable to assume that unless it's specified otherwise as the other wild talents are (and none of the infusions are), any infusion can be considered a supernatural ability. Whether this changes anything is another thing, of course, but the distinction is there. And it's that distinction that makes me think my second argument has merit (at least far more than the first). I can see the other side of the argument too though; if I'm using a kinetic blade, I need a blast for it to take the traits of, so one could say I'm using the blast itself to form a weapon, or one could also say that a certain amount of concentration might be required to actually form a blade or whip out of elemental energy.
Alright, so for now let's take barbarian and bloodrager off the table. How about swashbuckler? One of the things I noted is that a large part of their abilities revolve around the use of a light or one-handed piercing melee weapon, which is exactly what kinetic blade forms. It doesn't say I need to be wielding or holding the weapon either, only that I'm attacking with it (and in a couple of cases, that it's not considered a natural weapon, which a kinetic blade certainly isn't). The "light or one-handed" part isn't really in contest, since kinetic blade specifies that the weapon formed is of those types. What I'm concerned with in this case is the "piercing" part. On one hand, there's plenty of blasts that use the piercing descriptor: Earth, Telekinetic, Blizzard, Ice, Metal, and Sandstorm all apply, along with any of these modified by Aetheric Boost. On the other, kinetic blade only specifies that the damage takes on these descriptors, not the weapon provided, and in fact states that the shape the weapon takes is purely cosmetic, so I'm not entirely sure using, say, an Earth kinetic blade would allow the player to accrue Panache or use Deeds connected to weapon type. Honestly, though, with a swashbuckler, I can see kineticist being better as the secondary class using the Overwhelming Soul archetype rather than primary with one of the better archetypes, as I only need 5 levels of kineticist to apply kinetic blade for free so long as I'm cool with it only dealing 3d6+3+Cha mod damage per hit...
Actually, now that I think about it, there's a chance this may not work at all regardless, simply due to the way kinetic blade works. Do we even get to apply bonuses like, say, the extra damage from the swashbuckler's precise strike? Or the ghost strike undead bloodline talent gained by bloodragers? As it's worded it almost makes me believe it literally can only deal a blast's damage, and that's it, no extra damage from anything else unless it specifically affects light, one-handed, or kinetic blast weapon types.
Beyond those two classes, there's also slayers, cavaliers, fighters, and paladins that I might consider, but of those I really don't see what's gained from 4 levels in fighter or paladin as being more beneficial than just going pure kineticist. And of the orders I researched, none really grant a benefit I like much aside from Order of the Scar, which is an order devoted to eradicating occult power from the world, so I'm not sure that'd mesh too well with an occult class. Slayer's an interesting option but honestly it's not one I'm especially enamored with.
The problem with the Swashbuckler (and most other classes as well) is that the Kinetic Blast class feature actually states that: "The kineticist is never considered to be wielding or gripping the kinetic blast (regardless of effects from form infusions").
That last part obviously talking about Kinetic Blade/Whip. :(
I think the reason is because it's intended to look like the picture on page 11. The halfling with a "flame whip" going on...
Well, since you are so SAD, you could spare some cha.
Thus, you could go with a couple levels of paladin for a bunch of stuff. Saves, smite, etc.
Besides that no, you don't get much at all.
EDIT- looking into it, here is a rather vague area- does the blast count as a weapon in general, or only for feats. I ended up questioning how a kineticist/paladin gestalt might work out (fairly well, if I am going earth, since it clears up DR problems, and it would be sturdy as all hell with tons of DR and swift action healing).
I was looking at various thing, like bonded weapon (or at least divine hunter, who treats ranged weapons in general as good aligned for DR)
The problem with the Swashbuckler (and most other classes as well) is that the Kinetic Blast class feature actually states that: "The kineticist is never considered to be wielding or gripping the kinetic blast (regardless of effects from form infusions").
That last part obviously talking about Kinetic Blade/Whip. :(
I think the reason is because it's intended to look like the picture on page 11. The halfling with a "flame whip" going on...
I haven't checked their deeds beyond the 3rd level ones (since I had no intention of taking more than 4 or 5 levels of swashbuckler in a kineticist hybrid build anyway), so I don't know about the abilities gained at 7th level or higher, but I didn't see anything regarding the swashbuckler needing to wield his weapon for any of those abilities' requirements. I mean, the intention is obviously there, as typically you kind of have to hold a weapon to do anything with it and you don't generally think of magical or psychic abilities in connection with them, but I didn't see anything in the abilities that specifically state you need to have the weapon in-hand:
Critical Hit with a Light or One-Handed Piercing Melee Weapon: Each time the swashbuckler confirms a critical hit with a light or one-handed piercing melee weapon, she regains 1 panache point. Confirming a critical hit on a helpless or unaware creature or a creature that has fewer Hit Dice than half the swashbuckler's character level doesn't restore panache.
Killing Blow with a Light or One-Handed Piercing Melee Weapon: When the swashbuckler reduces a creature to 0 or fewer hit points with a light or one-handed piercing melee weapon attack while in combat, she regains 1 panache point. Destroying an unattended object, reducing a helpless or unaware creature to 0 or fewer hit points, or reducing a creature that has fewer Hit Dice than half the swashbuckler's character level to 0 or fewer hit points doesn't restore any panache.
In no place does it mention wielding or holding anything here. Only that you're either confirming a critical or reducing a creature to 0 or less HP (with a few restrictions), and that you do so via a light or one-handed melee piercing weapon. Kinetic blade counts as a light or one-handed weapon, so the only thing in question is whether it also counts as piercing for this purpose if you use it with one of the piercing blasts.
Same as above, there's no requirement that the weapon be in-hand, just that it's used to hit. Again, the only questionable thing as far as I can tell is if the kinetic blade with a piercing damage blast is considered a piercing weapon for this purpose.
This one's also questionable for the above reasons, but also because the kinetic blade is stated to deal the blast's damage, and I'm not sure if the precision damage bonus can modify that. However, this is also pretty interesting in that a telekineticist could use telekinetic blast to throw weapons that fit those descriptors. There's also the further limit that basically forces the kineticist to rely exclusively on their main weapon for attacking and that they can't use this with a two-handed weapon or by using the kinetic blade in both hands, but that's kind of the intention anyway.
I listed this one too since it can probably apply to a telekineticist, since they need a weapon to infuse their telekinetic blast into. But this is the only ability I saw that would limit its usefulness to kineticists, and that's only because their kinetic blade is never sheathed anyway, as it doesn't exist outside of their attack.
But yeah, I didn't see anything saying the weapon has to be wielding, nor held. It's mostly the piercing aspect I'm cloudy on, being unsure if it's enough that the blast being infused with kinetic blade does piercing or if it literally has to be a weapon with piercing being a descriptor. Honestly this is probably a no-brainer thing, since logic kinda would dictate that piercing damage means it's a piercing weapon, but there's a few rules already that don't follow my own brand of logic.
Well, since you are so SAD, you could spare some cha.
Thus, you could go with a couple levels of paladin for a bunch of stuff. Saves, smite, etc.
Besides that no, you don't get much at all.
EDIT- looking into it, here is a rather vague area- does the blast count as a weapon in general, or only for feats. I ended up questioning how a kineticist/paladin gestalt might work out (fairly well, if I am going earth, since it clears up DR problems, and it would be sturdy as all hell with tons of DR and swift action healing).
I was looking at various thing, like bonded weapon (or at least divine hunter, who treats ranged weapons in general as good aligned for DR)
To be honest, I don't like the idea of paladin/antipaladin mostly because of the enforced alignment. I guess I just don't like to play purely lawful/good or chaotic/evil characters, particularly if losing that alignment would result in not being able to use their abilities at all. But then that's all just personal taste, nothing to do with game mechanics. Besides that, if it was the paladin's Lay on Hands I was more concerned with, I'd use the Kinetic Chirurgeon archetype, since that replaces infusions with tacking Mercies onto the healing ability hydro- and telekineticists have access to.
As it is, I don't believe the blast is a weapon all its own, any more than a ray might be. If you're thinking of applying Divine Bond, you'd need a physical weapon to do so, since it applies its bonuses to a weapon, as opposed to a type of weapon. This wouldn't work for a telekineticist with kinetic blade either, since bonuses on a weapon aren't considered; it's the energy surrounding your weapon doing the damage, not the weapon itself. Perhaps it could be feasible if you're enhancing every kinetic blast with the Quicken metakinesis so you can manifest it, enhance it with Divine Bond, then launch it, but that's gonna be a decent chunk of burn being expended if you don't Gather Power first.
The Divine Hunter thing, though, that may apply if it says it affects ranged weapons as opposed to affecting a specific weapon as Divine Bind does. You'd need to be 14th level paladin for it though, which means you're a paladin first and kineticist second, but I can see that being a pretty viable combo.
You are still prone to concentration checks when using a sla, that kinda proves that they do in fact need concentration, and thus are unusable during rage.
Your blasts are sla, even if an infusion is (su), that doesn't make the blast (su).
That's more the point I've been arguing against; while other infusions modify the effects of the kinetic blast ability, kinetic blade and its kin modify attack actions instead by applying the effects and damage of a kinetic blast to them, at least in my interpretation of the wording for kinetic blade. Obviously, my opinion's not the popular one, though, so it seems if I'm gonna do it it's gonna be relegated to house rules and homebrew archetypes.
To be honest, I don't like the idea of paladin/antipaladin mostly because of the enforced alignment. I guess I just don't like to play purely lawful/good or chaotic/evil characters, particularly if losing that alignment would result in not being able to use their abilities at all. But then that's all just personal taste, nothing to do with game mechanics. Besides that, if it was the paladin's Lay on Hands I was more concerned with, I'd use the Kinetic Chirurgeon archetype, since that replaces infusions with tacking Mercies onto the healing ability hydro- and telekineticists have access to.
As it is, I don't believe the blast is a weapon all its own, any more than a ray might be. If you're thinking of applying Divine Bond, you'd need a physical weapon to do so, since it applies its bonuses to a weapon, as opposed to a type of weapon. This wouldn't work for a telekineticist with kinetic blade either, since bonuses on a weapon aren't considered; it's the energy surrounding your weapon doing the damage, not the weapon itself. Perhaps it could be feasible if you're enhancing every kinetic blast with the Quicken metakinesis so you can manifest it, enhance it with Divine Bond, then launch it, but that's gonna be a decent chunk of burn being expended if you don't Gather Power first.
The Divine Hunter thing, though, that may apply if it says it affects ranged weapons as opposed to affecting a specific weapon as Divine Bind does. You'd need to be 14th level paladin for it though, which means you're a paladin first and kineticist second, but I can see that being a pretty viable combo.
Well, I did say 'gestalt'. Obviously a multiclass is not somethign to consider besides maybe a 2 level pally dip for cha to saves (and a boost to will) and the 1/day ability to ignore DR. Maybe a free feat from divine hunter...
In the same line, chirugen is...not quite as good, since it introduces burn management into the mix (which hurts you- you have more buffer, but that needs you to fill it...and that can be terrible in night raids), so lay on hands is slightly better there for general sturdiness (plus, I prefer the Dr of earth; in contet of sturdiness, it is king for this place). But again, I would avoid multiclass- this would be for a gestalt where you get the full paliden stuff as well (so lay on hands would end up scaling fairly well)
Obviously, my opinion's not the popular one, though, so it seems if I'm gonna do it it's gonna be relegated to house rules and homebrew archetypes.
You know, when I insisted that Kinetic Blasts didn't get the -4 for firing into melee, my opinion was also not the popular one. :P While it's still not the popular one, it's at least being questioned now and not disregarded, so don't go giving up on defending your position if you feel it can be supported.
However... the rules for Infusions does state that it does modify the effects of the Kinetic Blast, so I don't think your interpretation has much defense. :(
Also be careful when you are working on multi-classing as you are. We tried it as well (with a Paladin no less), but dropped it after awhile because we realized that without the addendums of special properties to the weapon, you were doing far less than you could. Kinetic Whip is awesome, but a Keen/Holy adamantine 2-handed weapon with power attack is even better since the level dipping loses too much in other areas.
|
That last part obviously talking about Kinetic Blade/Whip. :(I think the reason is because it's intended to look like the picture on page 11. The halfling with a "flame whip" going on...
That isn't a halfling, it's a human child.
You are still prone to concentration checks when using a sla, that kinda proves that they do in fact need concentration, and thus are unusable during rage.
I knew this already. I just wanted those asserting it to quote the rules for those not in the know.
That isn't a halfling, it's a human child.
That last part obviously talking about Kinetic Blade/Whip. :(I think the reason is because it's intended to look like the picture on page 11. The halfling with a "flame whip" going on...
Nice! Thanks. :)
So the bloodrager has a feat, Mad Magic, that lets it use any spells while in a bloodrage, which I believe would let it use any SLA it has too, thus a bloodrager with that feat can mix with the Kineticist and rage and blast.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So the bloodrager has a feat, Mad Magic, that lets it use any spells while in a bloodrage, which I believe would let it use any SLA it has too, thus a bloodrager with that feat can mix with the Kineticist and rage and blast.
Absolutely, if your GM lets you use that feat. I don't see why not.
So the bloodrager has a feat, Mad Magic, that lets it use any spells while in a bloodrage, which I believe would let it use any SLA it has too, thus a bloodrager with that feat can mix with the Kineticist and rage and blast.
See, that's almost exactly what I was looking for, but for some reason when I filtered out for rage as a prerequisite that feat didn't show up in the combat feats filter. In fact the only page it does show up on is that main page for feats. I do still fear spell-like abilities wouldn't be allowed (since it specifies spells) so it'd still need to be a ruling on the DM's part. Are there any such feats that specifically mention spell-like abilities?
No, no if it is not a ray, you dont need PBS and PS. -4 is only for weapons, Sp's are only weapons if they are rays, only because rays are treated as weapons. The moment you decide KB is not a ray, you lose all the rules of the ray, it is not a pick n choose thing.
I rather vehemently disagree with this interpretation.
Unfortunately, it's a variation of a debate that's been going on for some time over multiple threads regarding "non-ray" ranged-touch spells; a debate that hasn't had good, concrete resolution from Paizo designers.
Kinetic blast is a ranged attack. It requires aiming, and is thus affected by BAB and Dex, like all other ranged attacks. It is therefore subject to concealment, cover, firing into melee, as well as the feats to avoid those penalties (e.g., PS). It is also subject to bonuses that affect weapon attack and damage rolls (e.g., bard song).
No, no if it is not a ray, you dont need PBS and PS. -4 is only for weapons, Sp's are only weapons if they are rays, only because rays are treated as weapons. The moment you decide KB is not a ray, you lose all the rules of the ray, it is not a pick n choose thing.I rather vehemently disagree with this interpretation.
Unfortunately, it's a variation of a debate that's been going on for some time over multiple threads regarding "non-ray" ranged-touch spells; a debate that hasn't had good, concrete resolution from Paizo designers.
Kinetic blast is a ranged attack. It requires aiming, and is thus affected by BAB and Dex, like all other ranged attacks. It is therefore subject to concealment, cover, firing into melee, as well as the feats to avoid those penalties (e.g., PS). It is also subject to bonuses that affect weapon attack and damage rolls (e.g., bard song).
Mine is not an interpretation. I give you RAW. Yours is interpretation because, although it makes perfect sense, you have no rules to support it.
The goal isn't to get away with no -4 for firing into melee, and my character takes those 2 feats first thing by 3rd level because I interpret it as a ray. The goal is to get it in writing as either that we treat it as a ray, that it is a ray, or that there's a -4 penalty for firing into combat. Until one of those takes place, we are using interpretation, not the rules as written.
The rules as written are very clear. Weapons and Rays.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Per Mark Seifter, the penalty applies.
All those things take the penalty.Mark, does a Kinetic Blast or other non-ray ranged attack spell take a -4 penalty for firing into melee?
Since the Shooting or Throwing into a Melee section of the Combat chapter only mentions weapons, and only rays are called out as working as weapons, some people are claiming that kinetic blast, and spells such as Telekinetic Projectile, Acid Splash, Acid Arrow, and the like do not take the penalty.
|
So the bloodrager has a feat, Mad Magic, that lets it use any spells while in a bloodrage, which I believe would let it use any SLA it has too, thus a bloodrager with that feat can mix with the Kineticist and rage and blast.
If you consider "Spell-like abilities are magical and work just like spells" from the Universal Monster rules to mean that SLAs count as spells for the purposes of the feat, then I would say you absolutely could at that point. Personally, I would say that works for me.
Hmm... I might just have to do a VMC Kineticist/Barbarian now instead of straight Kineticist.
Slightly off-topic, but what do you guys think would be better? VMC Fighter or VMC Barbarian (assuming the Unchained version of rage?)
|
|
you wont get "bloodrage" for Mad magic with barbarian vmc.that means you will only be able to cast on that one round that you use moment of clarity with a straight barbarian.
still a dip on bloodrager isn't bad (maybe?) for a few rounds/day (quite a few since your main stat is con) boost to your damage/dc
While it's a narrow road to get it and it won't come online until later, the prerequisites for Mad Magic is "Bloodrage class feature or Perfect Clarity rage power", and you can get Perfect Clarity as a Barbarian.
Basically, it comes down to getting Weapon and Armor training (with Weapon training being boosted by Gloves of Dueling and Armor Training helping with the max dex bonus) or getting Rage. I'm leaning toward Fighter since you get more-or-less equal bonuses without having to jump through extra hoops of rage powers and a feat. Just slip on some gloves and there you go: a nice bonus to your attack and damage rolls.
Mine is not an interpretation. I give you RAW. Yours is interpretation because, although it makes perfect sense, you have no rules to support it.
Oh, you're using RAW as a club when it's still just your interpretation of parts you choose to quote without acknowledging the whole.
As others have pointed out—in this very thread—there are multiple rules and designer rulings to support my interpretation.
I chose not to quote any because it's an argument that has been hashed out in many other places, and if you still persist in your position despite that other evidence, I'm not going to be able to convince you.
The rules say when attacking with a weapon to someone engaged in melee. Currently there are no rules to say that acid splash is a weapon-like spell the same way ray spells are. Thus it wouldn't get bardic bonuses but also not melee penalties. If rules come out and say that it is a weapon-like spell then the reverse is true.
you wont get "bloodrage" for Mad magic with barbarian vmc.that means you will only be able to cast on that one round that you use moment of clarity with a straight barbarian.
still a dip on bloodrager isn't bad (maybe?) for a few rounds/day (quite a few since your main stat is con) boost to your damage/dc
While it's a narrow road to get it and it won't come online until later, the prerequisites for Mad Magic is "Bloodrage class feature or Perfect Clarity rage power", and you can get Perfect Clarity as a Barbarian.
Basically, it comes down to getting Weapon and Armor training (with Weapon training being boosted by Gloves of Dueling and Armor Training helping with the max dex bonus) or getting Rage. I'm leaning toward Fighter since you get more-or-less equal bonuses without having to jump through extra hoops of rage powers and a feat. Just slip on some gloves and there you go: a nice bonus to your attack and damage rolls.
those are the prerequisites yes. but the benefits are:
cast while BLOODrage, and when in perfect clarity you keep your rage bonuses
so yes, while you get the feat, the only benefit for a barbarian is "bonuses while perfect clarity" and you still don't have BLOODrage feature
Any Barb can cast during the moment of clarity since it says you lose the bonuses and the restrictions, with no restrictions means you can cast. So the feat lets you remove the restrictions of the rage but keep the bonuses of the rage. Thus doing the same thing as a bloodrage for being able to cast spells. It is more limited because of how often you can do moment of clarity, but that's a separate deal.
The rules say when attacking with a weapon to someone engaged in melee. Currently there are no rules to say that acid splash is a weapon-like spell the same way ray spells are. Thus it wouldn't get bardic bonuses but also not melee penalties. If rules come out and say that it is a weapon-like spell then the reverse is true.
As someweirdguy pointed out earlier in this thread if you're making an attack roll, you're using a weapon (even if only a natural one), either melee or ranged.
As I said before, the handful of people, like you, who keep insisting otherwise are stubborn enough about it that quoting rules seems to have little effect anyway.
Absent a clear statement from on high (and maybe not even then), your mind is not going to change no matter which rules I cite, how many designers are quoted, nor how much sense it makes.
So the bloodrager has a feat, Mad Magic, that lets it use any spells while in a bloodrage, which I believe would let it use any SLA it has too, thus a bloodrager with that feat can mix with the Kineticist and rage and blast.If you consider "Spell-like abilities are magical and work just like spells" from the Universal Monster rules to mean that SLAs count as spells for the purposes of the feat, then I would say you absolutely could at that point. Personally, I would say that works for me.
Hmm... I might just have to do a VMC Kineticist/Barbarian now instead of straight Kineticist.
Slightly off-topic, but what do you guys think would be better? VMC Fighter or VMC Barbarian (assuming the Unchained version of rage?)
you wont get "bloodrage" for Mad magic with barbarian vmc.
that means you will only be able to cast on that one round that you use moment of clarity with a straight barbarian.
still a dip on bloodrager isn't bad (maybe?) for a few rounds/day (quite a few since your main stat is con) boost to your damage/dc
That was the whole reason I was thinking of taking some bloodrager levels in the first place. If I was going for this build it'd be either earth/aether/earth or aether/earth/(water/fire/air), picking up expanded defense as one of the utility talents so I get both flesh of stone and force ward (I'd also consider aether/earth/aether if not for the fact that, from what I can tell, force blast sucks pretty bad). I could go earth/(water/air/fire)/aether too but the trade there is that I'd get force ward at 20th character level rather than 12th, and in return I get my composite blast much earlier, and if I do that I still am stuck paying the full 2 Burn for the composite blast until 20th level anyway.
Regarding the rage itself, aside from getting a little extra damage per hit, I'm also getting a small bonus to attack rolls too from the Str boost (the purpose of this was to stick with kinetic blade/whip, so the Str mod is still used for his attack rolls, even if it doesn't do much of anything else for him). This isn't to say Str is something to actually stack up, since kinetic blade's already getting elemental overload's attack roll boost (although not its damage boost), but it's no longer the dump stat it is for most kineticists. So, if I stick to mad magic (assuming it works with SPAs like it does with spells) and raging vitality (giving me an additional +2 Con during rage) as bonus feats, raging will be +3 to damage and +2 to attack rolls, and this isn't accounting for any bonuses I'd get from my bloodline talents and rage powers.
Anyway. From what I can tell, barbarian would be a far greater boon to you than fighter, but if you want to utilize mad magic, unless you're going to use a bloodrager, you NEED to get moment of clarity and perfect clarity as your rage powers so you qualify for the mad magic feat. If you're aiming to use ranged blasts while raging, that's on top of needing point-blank shot and precise shot to help with the penalty to attack rolls, but that's partially mitigated by elemental overload (since unlike my idea which relies on kinetic blade, a regular kinetic blast will get the attack roll boost). I do wonder if accurate stance wouldn't help too; I was thinking of taking that as one of my bloodrage powers myself should this build work, but a kinetic blast would have to be considered as a "thrown" weapon for the purpose of using it with this rage power without using kinetic blade/fist/whip. Anyway, regardless, unchained barbarian would be miles above core barbarian for this purpose thanks to being able to take accurate stance as well as danger sense adding that bonus to perception to trap sense with absolutely no drawbacks.
I didn't see much in the realm of archetypes you'd wanna shoot for here, but primal hunter is a great one, since it adds a +2 bonus to ranged attack rolls while raging, making it great if you're going with the long-range variant (unless this bonus doesn't stack with elemental overload). Urban barbarian could be useful as well since you can modify exactly which physical ability scores get modified and you get to use Int, Dex, and Cha skills while raging, and wild rager could be useful if you stick with kinetic blade/whip and the rest of your party can utilize ranged attacks to stay out of your way, since it adds an extra attack to your full-attack actions, but at the risk of becoming confused while raging. Hurler might be useful so long as the bonus can be applied to objects thrown via telekinetic blast, but is otherwise pretty meh.
If you went with fighter, at least with the baseline, you'd need to be at least fifth level to get any real benefit to kinetic blasts, and that's only if the DM allows you to include kinetic blast as a weapon type you can take weapon training for and assuming he considers using a kinetic blast as attacking with a kinetic blast weapon. One level of bravery is... eh. It's useful enough. You do get those extra three bonus combat feats though, plus the ability to swap a bonus feat at 4th fighter level, so you do get a slight bit of flexibility to adjust your character to fit the direction the campaign is going.
As for fighter archetypes, free hand fighter may actually be useful if you're taking fighter up to 5th, since the only requirement for the singleton class feature is that you hold a weapon, not that you're actually using that weapon to deal your damage. Same applies to mobile fighter since leaping attack's bonus applies so long as you've moved 5 feet, or to a lot of other archetypes that modify weapon training, like the roughrider or two-weapon fighter. A mutation warrior could actually strongly benefit from his mutagen ability, since you can boost his Con by 4 (adding 2 damage to each of your blasts) at the cost of 2 Cha (which you won't need unless you're an overwhelming soul kineticist, which I kinda doubt you plan to be).
Aight, I've rambled on about these long enough. What other classes might be useful to dip into as side-classes for a kineticist? Maybe the ranger class?
EDIT: Okay so, I don't know why I did all that as if you were gonna use traditional multiclassing when you clearly said it was gonna be variant multiclassing XD
So, if you VMC barbarian in this case, you're not even going to be able to use kinetic blasts until you get at least 9th level, I think, as opposed to having it by 5th if you do traditional multiclassing, and that's only if you take moment of clarity when you get rage at 3rd, an extra rage power as your 5th level bonus feat to grab perfect clarity, then take mad magic as your 9th level feat. By contrast, a VMC fighter won't even get the chance to use weapon training until 11th level. I can see the benefits overall though, since VMC barbarian will get greater rage, bringing his Con bonus up to 6 (and therefore getting an extra 3 damage to blasts during rage), and a VMC fighter will eventually get to improve his weapon training with kinetic blast (although I don't know what second weapon you'd choose, nor do I think it'd matter). Honestly if you can deal with waiting a while for raging kinetic blasts I'd still favor barbarians for VMCing.
The rules say when attacking with a weapon to someone engaged in melee. Currently there are no rules to say that acid splash is a weapon-like spell the same way ray spells are. Thus it wouldn't get bardic bonuses but also not melee penalties. If rules come out and say that it is a weapon-like spell then the reverse is true.
As someweirdguy pointed out earlier in this thread if you're making an attack roll, you're using a weapon (even if only a natural one), either melee or ranged.
As I said before, the handful of people, like you, who keep insisting otherwise are stubborn enough about it that quoting rules seems to have little effect anyway.
Absent a clear statement from on high (and maybe not even then), your mind is not going to change no matter which rules I cite, how many designers are quoted, nor how much sense it makes.
so does shooting a fireball through a little hole make it a weapon since you're making a range touch attack for it? but otherwise it's not a weapon?
you wont get "bloodrage" for Mad magic with barbarian vmc.that means you will only be able to cast on that one round that you use moment of clarity with a straight barbarian.
still a dip on bloodrager isn't bad (maybe?) for a few rounds/day (quite a few since your main stat is con) boost to your damage/dc
While it's a narrow road to get it and it won't come online until later, the prerequisites for Mad Magic is "Bloodrage class feature or Perfect Clarity rage power", and you can get Perfect Clarity as a Barbarian.
Basically, it comes down to getting Weapon and Armor training (with Weapon training being boosted by Gloves of Dueling and Armor Training helping with the max dex bonus) or getting Rage. I'm leaning toward Fighter since you get more-or-less equal bonuses without having to jump through extra hoops of rage powers and a feat. Just slip on some gloves and there you go: a nice bonus to your attack and damage rolls.
those are the prerequisites yes. but the benefits are:
cast while BLOODrage, and when in perfect clarity you keep your rage bonuses
so yes, while you get the feat, the only benefit for a barbarian is "bonuses while perfect clarity" and you still don't have BLOODrage feature
XD This actually changes a little now that I look at the wording. Mad magic would still be absolutely necessary for a kineticist/barbarian, but this means using up your swift action every round. I still would give the edge to barbarian regardless of which multiclass rules are being used, honestly, because you're still going to get that boost to Con, so long as you're restricting your actions a little more than you would if you weren't going to use blasts. IMO it still beats the pants off of the VMC fighter's weapon training, and even moreso the traditional multiclass fighter.
XD This actually changes a little now that I look at the wording. Mad magic would still be absolutely necessary for a kineticist/barbarian, but this means using up your swift action every round. I still would give the edge to barbarian regardless of which multiclass rules are being used, honestly, because you're still going to get that boost to Con, so long as you're restricting your actions a little more than you would if you weren't going to use blasts. IMO it still beats the pants off of the VMC fighter's weapon training, and even moreso the traditional multiclass fighter.
you wont get "bloodrage" for Mad magic with barbarian vmc.that means you will only be able to cast on that one round that you use moment of clarity with a straight barbarian.
still a dip on bloodrager isn't bad (maybe?) for a few rounds/day (quite a few since your main stat is con) boost to your damage/dc
While it's a narrow road to get it and it won't come online until later, the prerequisites for Mad Magic is "Bloodrage class feature or Perfect Clarity rage power", and you can get Perfect Clarity as a Barbarian.
Basically, it comes down to getting Weapon and Armor training (with Weapon training being boosted by Gloves of Dueling and Armor Training helping with the max dex bonus) or getting Rage. I'm leaning toward Fighter since you get more-or-less equal bonuses without having to jump through extra hoops of rage powers and a feat. Just slip on some gloves and there you go: a nice bonus to your attack and damage rolls.
those are the prerequisites yes. but the benefits are:
cast while BLOODrage, and when in perfect clarity you keep your rage bonuses
so yes, while you get the feat, the only benefit for a barbarian is "bonuses while perfect clarity" and you still don't have BLOODrage feature
Moment of clarity is only once per rage, so unless you get a way to rage cycle it's up about once a fight.
Moment of clarity is only once per rage, so unless you get a way to rage cycle it's up about once a fight.XD This actually changes a little now that I look at the wording. Mad magic would still be absolutely necessary for a kineticist/barbarian, but this means using up your swift action every round. I still would give the edge to barbarian regardless of which multiclass rules are being used, honestly, because you're still going to get that boost to Con, so long as you're restricting your actions a little more than you would if you weren't going to use blasts. IMO it still beats the pants off of the VMC fighter's weapon training, and even moreso the traditional multiclass fighter.
you wont get "bloodrage" for Mad magic with barbarian vmc.that means you will only be able to cast on that one round that you use moment of clarity with a straight barbarian.
still a dip on bloodrager isn't bad (maybe?) for a few rounds/day (quite a few since your main stat is con) boost to your damage/dc
While it's a narrow road to get it and it won't come online until later, the prerequisites for Mad Magic is "Bloodrage class feature or Perfect Clarity rage power", and you can get Perfect Clarity as a Barbarian.
Basically, it comes down to getting Weapon and Armor training (with Weapon training being boosted by Gloves of Dueling and Armor Training helping with the max dex bonus) or getting Rage. I'm leaning toward Fighter since you get more-or-less equal bonuses without having to jump through extra hoops of rage powers and a feat. Just slip on some gloves and there you go: a nice bonus to your attack and damage rolls.
those are the prerequisites yes. but the benefits are:
cast while BLOODrage, and when in perfect clarity you keep your rage bonuses
so yes, while you get the feat, the only benefit for a barbarian is "bonuses while perfect clarity" and you still don't have BLOODrage feature
Heh, yeah, I caught myself and was gonna edit my comment but you beat me to the punch. Yeah, not really worth it unless you're gonna rage, MoC, toss a blast out, then end the rage, all on the same round. And that's gonna hurt you a little since you're stuck being fatigued for two rounds (and while you could feasibly do this two rounds in a row with roused anger, that's then gonna leave you exhausted for three rounds afterward, I believe, so it's not worth it unless you're 100% sure you're gonna finish the battle off that way or you can rely on your allies to protect you while you rest up from overexerting yourself).
|
|
Onyx Tanuki, I'm talking about VMC, which is very different than regular multi-classing. The Bloodrager doesn't have VMC rules written out so I can't use Bloodrager for this. I'll hide the general rules and the gnitty-gritty VMC-specific discussion in a spoiler tab. Basically it boils down to getting a +3 to hit and damage all the time, Armor Training, and Bravery for the Fighter VMC. For the Barbarian, I would get +2 to hit and damage only when doing melee, Uncanny Dodge, and having to deal with being able to use my blast once per rage (dictated my Moment of Clarity only working once per rage) which means rage-cycling.
VMC lets you trade out feats at specific levels to gain very specific abilities from a second class. More specifically, you trade out 3rd, 7th, 11th, 15th, and 19th level feats. You also can't use archetypes of the secondary class when doing VMC: only the basic class. You retain the full abilities of the main class (in this case, Kineticist).
This is what Fighter VMC gets:
Level 3: Bravery at a -1 progression.
Level 7: Armor Training 1
Level 11: Weapon Training 1
Level 15: Armor Training 2
Level 19: Weapon Training 2
Barbarian VMC:
Level 3: Rage (If regular rage, it's useless to me because of Weapon Finesse. If Unchained, I get a decent bonus when doing melee. I can't use Urban rage since it's an archetype)
Level 7: Uncanny Dodge
Level 11: A Rage Power
Level 15: Dr/3-
Level 19: Greater Rage
It would have to be the Unchained Barbarian rage since regular Barbarian would be useless to me since there's absolutely no reason to not use Weapon Finesse for Blade/Whip outside of specialized builds. Getting a bonus to Strength won't help me at all, so if not Unchained that leaves the rage bonuses very lacking to start with.
While not the best damage outright, I plan on using energy blasts (and plan on using Blade/Whip a lot as well) so my accuracy is pretty good so Point-Blank Shot and Precise Shot aren't very necessary. Especially paired with a +3 to hit from the Fighter VMC + Gloves of Dueling that basically negates the penalty for firing into melee with ranged (when I do happen to do it), I'm basically getting Power Attack to my ranged blasts (-1 to hit for a +3 damage, since I'm hitting Touch-AC that's just pure gravy) and a straight boon when I use melee abilities that help close to the gap in damage between Energy vs Physical blasts.
Since I'm using energy blasts mostly, I can go without getting Precise Shot meaning the couple lost feats aren't going to hurt that bad if going with the Fighter VMC. Since Barbarian VMC is only given a single rage power while leveling up I would have to spend two feats for extra rage powers. I either pay 15,000gp (Gloves of Dueling) to get +3 attack and damage to both ranged and melee, or I spend two (already limited) feats to get +2 attack and damage only to melee.
That being said, I can see a Bard VMC being very good for an Overwhelming Soul.
so does shooting a fireball through a little hole make it a weapon since you're making a range touch attack for it? but otherwise it's not a weapon?
I'm assuming you're referring to the spell fireball, which does not specify an attack roll , so moot point.
If your GM is having you make a d20 roll, he or she is adjusting on the fly to an unanticipated situation by adding rolls that aren't part of the spell description. (And the roll is to not hit something rather than hit something, so again, moot.)
Onyx Tanuki, I'm talking about VMC, which is very different than regular multi-classing. The Bloodrager doesn't have VMC rules written out so I can't use Bloodrager for this. I'll hide the general rules and the gnitty-gritty VMC-specific discussion in a spoiler tab. Basically it boils down to getting a +3 to hit and damage all the time, Armor Training, and Bravery for the Fighter VMC. For the Barbarian, I would get +2 to hit and damage only when doing melee, Uncanny Dodge, and having to deal with being able to use my blast once per rage (dictated my Moment of Clarity only working once per rage) which means rage-cycling.
** spoiler omitted **
Since I'm using energy blasts mostly, I can go without getting Precise Shot meaning the couple lost feats aren't going to hurt that bad if going with the Fighter VMC. Since Barbarian VMC is only given a single rage power while leveling up I would have to spend two feats for extra rage powers. I either pay 15,000gp (Gloves of Dueling) to get +3 attack and damage to both ranged and melee, or I spend two (already limited) feats to get +2 attack and damage only to melee.
That being said, I can see a Bard VMC being very good for an Overwhelming Soul.
Yep, and I stated as such when I edited that reply. I'm actually not sure unchained barbarian is gonna benefit as much as you need from rage, since the bonuses don't apply to ranged weapons other than thrown ones (so maybe to a telekinetic blast), so you're not getting anything out of this build without the melee form infusions. You'd probably have to argue that you're "throwing" the blast, but that's something up to the DM to determine.
I'm also wondering why Weapon Finesse is even being mentioned. If you're going to use the blasts at range, you're not going to benefit from Weapon Finesse at all. If you take Weapon Finesse, though, then all that does is ensure that you can't use a melee infusion effectively with core barbarian's rage, either. If you're going to stick to melee? Yeah, unchained is clearly the better, and Weapon Finesse would be a good idea so you don't have to worry about your Str for when you do use melee infusions. But ranged blasts aren't going to benefit from rage at all unless either you can argue that a kinetic blast is a thrown weapon or you just go with core barbarian.
Beyond that, core barbarian is going to be fatigued for less time than unchained unless you spend at least five rounds in rage (which means if you go with a rage on, MoC, blast, rage off strategy, you need to wait ten rounds instead of two to blast with the benefits again) and there's a slight difference in how the bonus HP works (although I don't think it especially matters unless you have temporary HP from another source), but neither is really that big an issue.
I think my own biggest problem with going VMC barbarian, regardless of whether it's core or unchained, is that you're not going to have the ability to kinetic blast during your rage and actually have the benefits apply until 9th level, minimum. You have to pick up moment of clarity at 3rd, perfect clarity at 5th (via extra rage power as a bonus feat), then mad magic at 9th. If you use traditional multiclassing with barbarian in either form, you cut it down to 5th level (moment of clarity and perfect clarity at 2nd and 4th, mad magic at 5th) and multiclassing with bloodrager only requires one level (although you'd have to clear kinetic blasts as usable via mad magic during a rage with the DM). And another bonus is that multiclassing would lead to a slightly higher BAB, just breaking the +16 threshold at 20th character level if you take four levels in barbarian, whereas VMC uses the kineticist's natural BAB progression, maxing you out at +15 unless you can get extra BAB from somewhere else.
He's referring to the part of the spell that states ...
Right. You and I seem to be in agreement, but my language could use some cleaning up. Edited above.
|
|
Yep, and I stated as such when I edited that reply. I'm actually not sure unchained barbarian is gonna benefit as much as you need from rage, since the bonuses don't apply to ranged weapons other than thrown ones (so maybe to a telekinetic blast), so you're not getting anything out of this build without the melee form infusions. You'd probably have to argue that you're "throwing" the blast, but that's something up to the DM to determine.I'm also wondering why Weapon Finesse is even being mentioned. If you're going to use the blasts at range, you're not going to benefit from Weapon Finesse at all. If you take Weapon Finesse, though, then all that does is ensure that you can't use a melee infusion effectively with core barbarian's rage, either. If you're going to stick to melee? Yeah,...
Sorry for the confusion, I started writing my response before your edit. It was meant in response to your post that didn't have any VMC talk in it, but I took a while writing it due to back-and-forth checking of my facts. We're definitely both in agreement that Barbarian VMC just wouldn't be good at all compared to the Fighter VMC or even just regular Kineticist (because at least then you have some feats to burn on Extra Talent and the like).
The reason I brought up Weapon Finesse is that ranged blasts already use Dexterity as a bonus to hit so a Kineticist is going to have high dexterity anyway. There's no reason not to capitalize on that and just go with Weapon Finesse to get Dex-to-hit with the Blade/Whip, making any boosts to Strength extremely moot and non-beneficial in the grand scheme of things. I was essentially using, "I'm using Weapon Finesse" as supporting the claim, "Having a normal Barbarian's Rage doesn't help me because a bonus to Strength does nothing, so it would have to be Unchained Barbarian to be useful".
Actualy, checking in the Magic section of the SRD, there is nothing to explain how to make attack rolls. As such, we have to go to the combat section, in the combat area we find the following -
No! No, that's not how things work. If there's not a rule for something, you don't just go pick another rule you think might apply because that is, by it's very definition, "interpreting".
The rules:
Spell-Like Abilities (p221): "works just like the spell"
Spells (p214): Rays: Some effects are rays, you aim a ray as if using a ranged weapon.
Shooting into Melee: You take -4 for shooting into melee
NOTE: Without the 3 above rules, not a single spell would take the -4 for shooting into melee. So, if you want to apply the rules for spells to come up with the -4 for shooting, you must be able to apply all 3 of the above rules, and our Blast stops at the 1st rule since it fails to have the effect that grants it the 2nd rule.
Precise Shot: You ignore the -4 for shooting into melee
: All those things take the penalty.
Yeah, we know, now it needs to be made official by existing in a FAQ or Errata for 3 reasons. 1) Mark is a developer, not the officiator, which is why he kept stating that he had to check with people during development, and why he had a limit on word count, etc. 2) Because the FAQ/Errata always includes a "why", which in this case is most likely going to be that "it's (treated as) a ray" (which is why it may appear in the Errata instead of the FAQ) 3) Because people don't go reading forums for rules. Out of the 2 groups I belong to, and the last 3 groups I've been in, I'm still the only forum member I know, but they all had copies of erratas and faqs.
Lastly TomG, let's not be insulting of others please. Both myself and ChessPwn use the -4 for firing into melee rules, because we know that's how it was intended. The point of the discussion is NOT to convince anyone to quit using the -4, it's to get clarity that it is a ray, should be a ray, or needs an official ruling that the -4 is included.
There's no doubt, based on spells like Ray of Frost/Cold Blast, Scorching Ray/Fire Blast, etc, etc... that the blasts -should- be tagged as rays. They likely avoided it because they thought it would cause confusion for the area-effect infusions like Fan of Flames, despite the fact that nothing about ray excludes area-effect.
However, until they add rules that let you fire your blast at someone you can't see, fire into the dark, and take -4 on firing into melee (things we all just "interpret" that you can do), it's not official. It makes sense to do these things, it's supported by "similar" effects (which happened to be called "rays"), but RAW, those rules do not apply.
No! No, that's not how things work. If there's not a rule for something, you don't just go pick another rule you think might apply because that is, by it's very definition, "interpreting".
Actualy, checking in the Magic section of the SRD, there is nothing to explain how to make attack rolls. As such, we have to go to the combat section, in the combat area we find the following -
Sorry, but that IS the way things in Pathfinder work though. For example, the rules for bonus stacking appear in the Magic chapter of the Core Rulebook. By rights, it should only apply to magic. Yet, it also applies to feats, mundane items, mundane abilities, etc. This is something the designers themselves have confirmed to be true. There are literally dozens of examples of "cross-referencing rules" like this. It's what people here on the forum often refer to as the "unwritten rules"--something that most players generally know and take for granted, but that isn't explicitly spelled out anywhere in the book.
Okay, I'll respond piecemeal.
Lastly TomG, let's not be insulting of others please.
Golly. Sorry you were offended. Not my intention.
Both myself and ChessPwn use the -4 for firing into melee rules, because we know that's how it was intended. The point of the discussion is NOT to convince anyone to quit using the -4, it's to get...
Well, that's not how it's come across. If that's the rule you follow, then why are you creating contention when there is none? If it's clear enough for you or anyone else to apply that, then there isn't a need for a FAQ as the rule is understandable. Why then are you insisting the opposite?
Mind you, I'd like to see a FAQ, because there *are* people who believe the line of argument
There's no doubt, based on spells like Ray of Frost/Cold Blast, Scorching Ray/Fire Blast, etc, etc... that the blasts -should- be tagged as rays. They likely avoided it because they thought it would cause confusion for the area-effect infusions like Fan of Flames, despite the fact that nothing about ray excludes area-effect.
It seems you're on a different track than interpreted from your previous couple of comments. (As you didn't say—or I missed where you said—in the past couple of comments that you were talking about these penalties for blasts rather than spells, even though that's how the thread started.) We agree, then, that ranged touch spells should be considered rays for most practical purposes.
Kinetic blasts, while similar to rays, should *not* be considered rays, IMNSHO, but rather simply "ranged weapons" just as rays are. The big difference is Weapon Focus (ray) and Weapon Focus (kinetic blast) need to be different, and calling the blast a ray muddles the two further. There are many similarities, but they are different, and calling them the same leads to confusion.
Again, how are you making an attack roll if you're not using a weapon? There is no explanation ANYWHERE for how to make an attack roll that doesn't use the word weapon to determine what Ability Score you use to modify your roll.
Thus, RAW, you cannot be making an attack roll unless you are using a weapon of some sort. Again, the -4 for firing into melee states that when you fire a ranged weapon. Therefor, you are using a ranged weapon when making a ranged touch attack roll for a spell.
So let me see if I understand what you're saying...
You're saying that, because Simple Blasts (page 15 OA) states that "blasts are ranged attacks", the fact that it's an (Sp) is irrelevant to this discussion, we move directly to the rules for "ranged attacks" which are given in the corebook on p182 which implies that the kinetic blast must be a "ranged weapon", and in doing so, follows all the rules for ranged weapon, including the -4 for firing into melee.
I like it, makes sense. Now it doesn't have to be a ray, it receives all the bonuses/penalties for being a "ranged weapon". If you can do it with a ranged weapon (universally of course, not item specific things), than you can do it with a kinetic blast. Including, as this thread was started about... firing it into an empty square.
So I agree with you, and no longer need to prove it's a ray because it now gets even more bonuses than a ray would get, since it now qualifies for anything a ranged weapon would qualify for... I'll have to look into this. :)
So I agree with you, and no longer need to prove it's a ray because it now gets even more bonuses than a ray would get, since it now qualifies for anything a ranged weapon would qualify for... I'll have to look into this. :)
Yep.
Although I don't understand your reference to "more bonuses than a ray would get." What bonuses are you suggesting would apply to one and not the other?
As as been discussed in other threads, feats like Rapid Shot would still not apply because of the action economy limitation (spells and blasts are standard actions, not full attack actions), but here again both respond similarly.
So I agree with you, and no longer need to prove it's a ray because it now gets even more bonuses than a ray would get, since it now qualifies for anything a ranged weapon would qualify for... I'll have to look into this. :)Yep.
Although I don't understand your reference to "more bonuses than a ray would get." What bonuses are you suggesting would apply to one and not the other?
As as been discussed in other threads, feats like Rapid Shot would still not apply because of the action economy limitation (spells and blasts are standard actions, not full attack actions), but here again both respond similarly.
Well still looking, but for one, anything that would apply a weapon special ability would be good. Something like Bane Baldric (which itself couldn't be used since you can't hang a blast on it for 24 hours) or Deliquescent Gloves (which wouldn't work because you're never considered to be 'wielding' a kinetic blast). Surely there are other potential benefits as well, I just have to spend time analyzing it.