| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The only thing broken about the class is the damn text scattered all over the book.
I wonder how many people that complain about at will powers have suffered old 3.x Glaivelocks (Warlocks) and Dragonfire adepts with unlimited Slow breath (2 rounds if failed, 1 round if success).
The joke about the internet made my day btw.
Suffered at the hands of two of the weakest classes of 3.5? Daaaang. Was it at least Warlock 1/Barbarian X?
Most people consider kineticist Underpowered.
Oh yeah, I've heard and seen this view posted quite alot. I think they are tier two with some fantastic optics and roleplaying.
Also you can't underestimate what a great change of pace they are for people who are a little burnt out, actually the whole OA roster of classes it like that.
So Mr. OP I'd say no, but sit down and try to explain that it's not the class that's OP it's the damn player! :)
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't remember a kineticist in any of the Terminator movies.
Lady-J: Can you clarify what you mean? It sounds like your saying a DM who doesn't allow every Pathfinder book into their game is stopping people from doing their job. Is that right? Cause not even PCS with its "RAW RAW RAW, imcentivise people to buy every Paizo product" allows all options in all books to be used in their campaign.
Lady-J: Can you clarify what you mean? It sounds like your saying a DM who doesn't allow every Pathfinder book into their game is stopping people from doing their job. Is that right? Cause not even PCS with its "RAW RAW RAW, imcentivise people to buy every Paizo product" allows all options in all books to be used in their campaign.
I believe Lady-J has at least once before argued anything a DM has access to a player should also, this was in a thread about Templates if I'm not mistaken. So that probably is Lady-J's opinion yes.
]By my reading (and I'm no expert on kineticists) I can choose Wings of Air at level 4, which will give me a fly spell all day long (and dispel magic only costs me a standard action to undo). In comparison wizards can only get fly at level 5 (1 full level later than the kineticist) and it only lasts 5 minutes per casting. In order for a wizard to get full day flight, he will have to wait until level 9 (overland flight). Any challenge that relies on flight at level 4, will be circumvented at no meaningful cost to the kineticist by the kineticist, a full 5 levels earlier than the game otherwise ordinarily assumes.
Wild-shaping druids have long-lasting flight abilities too. And, going beyond the Core rulebook, there are flying races like the Strix, and flying mounts...
True a Druid can be a small air elemental for 12 hours a day at level 6, which is arguably better than wings of air.
And have an animal companion and be casting 3rd levels spells.
denying casters options simply because they are casters is denying them the ability to do their job effectively.
Good thing no-one's arguing that position then. I am arguing that introducing certain options (e.g. certain feats, archetypes, spells, items and optional rules) will increase the maximum power level attainable in the game. I personally like to keep the maximum power level attainable to the maximum as defined by the CRB (which IMO is a pretty damn high ceiling). I'll introduce options that allow other classes/builds to reach that maximum threshold but will work hard to avoid introducing options which increases the ceiling.
I believe Lady-J has at least once before argued anything a DM has access to a player should also, this was in a thread about Templates if I'm not mistaken.
If you mean "if NPCs can take option X then PCs should be able to as well" I agree (to a degree. I don't think players should automatically get access to bestiary feats). If you mean "if a DM has a book then the players should have full access to everything in the book" then I strongly disagree and have never seen a DM who plays like this.
Fair point regarding Druid and flight.
Lady-J your one sentence responses are not giving me any information. So here's a bunch of "yes/no" questions for you to try to get more information as to what you're trying to communicate. I've even numbered them for you to make it easier for you to give one word answers.
What would I have to do to "not stop PCs from doing their job"?
1. Do I have to allow every character option including optional rules from all 3.5e/Pathfinder supplements regardless of publisher?
2. Do I have to allow every character option including optional rules from all 3.5/Pathfinder supplements regardless of publisher?
3. Do I have to allow every character option including optional rules from all Pathfinder supplements regardless of publisher?
4. Do I have to allow every character option including optional rules from all Pathfinder supplements published by Paizo?
5. Do I have to allow every character option (excluding optional rules) from all Pathfinder supplements published by Paizo?
6. Do I have to allow every character option (excluding optional rules) from all setting neutral Pathfinder supplements published by Paizo?
7. Can I pick and choose which supplements I allow but am required to use all character options from those supplements?
If your answer is no to every single question above than I completely do not understand what you are trying to say.
Why yes to Paizo and no to 3pp? Paizo is nothing but a 3pp whose rebranded and houserules 3.5. We even have Paizo staff who even run 3rd party companies. Why is product by X automatically allowed with no critical thinking involved when published by Paizo, but product by the same author requires critical thinking when published by a 3PP. If that is your definition of artificially hampering Pcs then it sounds to me like you artificially hamper builds.
Also how do you handle wounds and vigor in your game? Are all Pcs forced to take it? Or just some?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
4.yes(or at the very least allow all content from the collective of books the group owns, yours, and each of the players)
rest of the questions are irreverent as a yes has been given
4. Do I have to allow every character option including optional rules from all Pathfinder supplements published by Paizo?
O_o
There's optional rule to make Stamina fighter only. Your Artificially hampering fighters if you dont let them use it.
Also why is critical thinking involved with 3PP but not Paizo? Paizo has put out some pretty terrible stuff.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So if I am understanding this correctly, if the spellcaster does not have one specific trait the cannot do their job in the party?
That sounds a lot like whining because you didn't get the toy you wanted. Funny how people just assume they can use whatever they want and then get mad when this unfounded assumption is denied.
Blasters could do just fine before two traits came out. If anything, those builds that use them, and I have used them for several characters myself, are boring and lackluster.
Also remember that Traits are, along with everything in the game, merely optional and a GM can say "No, sorry, not in this game" to it.
Don't be like a child in a store, screaming and crying because they didn't a fancy toy they don't need. Be the one that finds other ways to play and have fun.
And that's fine in your game. It is not, however, the rule everyone must abide by.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, if a player demands they can use stuff I don't want to have in my game, and they say they won't play without me allowing a thing I don't really want to have to deal with, then that's basically a self-solving problem...
considering the feat is a staple for a majority of caster builds especially blaster casters and is in nearly 100% of blaster caster builds i would say yes not having access to it makes them s!%$ at their job because they lose out on so much by not having itSo if I am understanding this correctly, if the spellcaster does not have one specific trait the cannot do their job in the party?
That sounds a lot like whining because you didn't get the toy you wanted. Funny how people just assume they can use whatever they want and then get made when this unfounded assumption is denied.
Huh. I've literally never used either option. Designing a caster, even a "blaster", around one spell or even a handful of spells is just too narrow compared to other feat/trait options I could select. Is it really that much of a staple apart from hyperspecialists and thought experiments?
I guess I've never had a caster that primarily casts one spell. We all play how we play, don't we?
if the fighter wants to use stamina and there's a way to make it class specific and the other players don't mind sure they can have it.
Aaah. So you do artificially hamper people's PCs (by your own definition). But you do it via tyranny of the majority.
Suffice it to say I think we can both agree we would hate to play at each other's tables. Thankyou for actually explaining yourself on the issue though.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's no reason to ban anything for being weak. You might want to warn players away from it, but if someone deliberately chooses something suboptimal knowing what they're doing, that's perfectly fine.
There's no reason to ban the Kineticist for being too powerful, unless you're also up for banning like all 9 level casters and a lot of the 6 level ones.
Valid reasons for banning the kineticist include "people being able to toss fire around at will doesn't fit the feel of the setting I'm trying to create" or "It's a mechanically intricate class, and I'm not comfortable with it or up for the resulting headaches." After all, if you adjudicate the class incorrectly, such as by negating the drawback of burn somehow, the Kineticist *might* become too powerful.
I don't get how anyone can consider a Kineticist a 'broken' class in a game with Wizards, Druids, and Clerics.
I would rank Kineticist as either a Tier 3 or 4 depending on which elements they choose. (Some elements would drop it to a low tier 5 even)
I see people referring to these Tiers a lot. I'm assuming Tier 1 is best, but how many Tiers are there? Or is Tier 5 the worst??
Having a thorough lookover some play time the kineticist is broken for this reason. You need to choose between fun utility and mediocre damage.
The fun utility option of aether gets telekinesis which is great fun and a reason to play a class other than the archer, so the designers punish this choice by giving it unusable composite blasts as in spending that burn on anything else is a better choice.
Let's take earth, your powers for the first SEVEN levels will probably be the option to make cover, climb walls and limited tremorsense. For most of your career your powers are extremely limited and boring because you get a good composite blast.
This should not have been the design choice for this class.
The fix here is easy for aether, give it a good composite blast. Harder for other choices, they need fun powers. You only get about 5 scaling powers in the average players career, 7 on rare occasions. You should have low level by at least 4th level that makes the class worth playing beyond theme.
Just playing around but something like
Utility 2 Earth/water/wood
Full round action, create a large or medium platform of rolling earth, swirling water or roots under your feet. You can move this platform at 60 feet as a move action, you must use a standard action to maintain it each round and if you maintain it may move it an additional 60 feet. If the platform is medium it can move across water if made of ice, up stone surfaces if earth or wood. At level X you may maintain the platform as a move action.
I'm just going to jump in here really quick.
I'm currently playing a dwarven geokineticist on the boards here for Ironfang Invasion, and I feel like the kineticist is actually a decent class. I'm doing very decent damage all day, with limited repositioning abilities, more HP than half the party combined (even after factoring in a point or two of burn), DR that's never not great, and even out of combat, I never feel like I'm not doing anything (as one of the party's scouts and some creative thinking). Sure, we're not the most optimized group, but we have fun, and Rogar absolutely pulls his own weight.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I see people referring to these Tiers a lot. I'm assuming Tier 1 is best, but how many Tiers are there? Or is Tier 5 the worst??I don't get how anyone can consider a Kineticist a 'broken' class in a game with Wizards, Druids, and Clerics.
I would rank Kineticist as either a Tier 3 or 4 depending on which elements they choose. (Some elements would drop it to a low tier 5 even)
There are indeed five I believe, although I've seen people make tier 6 for NPC classes.
as a rule of thumb, prepared casters full casters and a couple archetyped spontaneous full casters are tier 1
spontaneous full casters are 2 with I think some archetypes of the summoner.
most 6th level casting classes are tier 3
good full bab classes come in tier 4
bad ones and the core monk and rogue are tier 5.
I think thats roughly it. Whether these tiers are actually useful is another question.
Having a thorough lookover some play time the kineticist is broken for this reason. You need to choose between fun utility and mediocre damage.
The fun utility option of aether gets telekinesis which is great fun and a reason to play a class other than the archer, so the designers punish this choice by giving it unusable composite blasts as in spending that burn on anything else is a better choice.
Having played a few telekineticists, I find that this isn't that big a deal. Prior to level 11 when you get supercharge, you hardly use composite blasts at all in any element since it always costs burn (and the telekineticist doesn't have a lot to give since you're investing your elemental overflow amount in your very good defense.) Instead you just use your gather power for empower metakinesis, which is 1.5x damage instead of 2x damage, but costs 0 burn instead of 1. Even so, you might end up preferring empower even after you get supercharge because you want that other burn from gather power for infusions (because sometimes a wall is more useful than more damage.)
Composite blasts don't become a "normal every round" thing until you get composite specialization at 16, one level after you got your third element. So you're penalized if you go aether twice, but if you pick two other elements that have a good composite (earth and water for mud blast, say) you're only really behind for 1 level.
Don't get me wrong though, "more aether infusions" is high on my wishlist for the kineticist.
There are indeed five I believe...
I think thats roughly it. Whether these tiers are actually useful is another question.
Thank you for that.
Back on topic, this seems 1 of the more mechanically challenging of the new classes to play. I think I would like to try playing 1, but maybe after I've gotten the hang of some of the other classes first. (I'm slowly transitioning from 3.5 to PF.)
Getting the hang of other pathfinder classes probably won't actually assist in making a kineticist they're kinda unique, there are people on these boards that will help you though.
Having a thorough lookover some play time the kineticist is broken for this reason. You need to choose between fun utility and mediocre damage.
The fun utility option of aether gets telekinesis which is great fun and a reason to play a class other than the archer, so the designers punish this choice by giving it unusable composite blasts as in spending that burn on anything else is a better choice.Having played a few telekineticists, I find that this isn't that big a deal. Prior to level 11 when you get supercharge, you hardly use composite blasts at all in any element since it always costs burn (and the telekineticist doesn't have a lot to give since you're investing your elemental overflow amount in your very good defense.) Instead you just use your gather power for empower metakinesis, which is 1.5x damage instead of 2x damage, but costs 0 burn instead of 1. Even so, you might end up preferring empower even after you get supercharge because you want that other burn from gather power for infusions (because sometimes a wall is more useful than more damage.)
Composite blasts don't become a "normal every round" thing until you get composite specialization at 16, one level after you got your third element. So you're penalized if you go aether twice, but if you pick two other elements that have a good composite (earth and water for mud blast, say) you're only really behind for 1 level.
Don't get me wrong though, "more aether infusions" is high on my wishlist for the kineticist.
You are right in that it doesn't really have any really effect until level 11 and it's at odds with my point that most of the time you don't really go far post 10 anyway but it doesn't change that they decided to punish aether in that way because it actually has decent utility. Even the 9th level power they get is far and away the most mechanically interesting.
It's very much the idea playing one that if you reach that level you a clear grade behind in the damage.
I disagree on them not becoming normal until 16, empower with gather power blasts are the new standard at 6, composite with gather power becomes the new standard at 11. You will of course want to use infusions at the cost of power but most often I fall back on straight blasting.
I also still stand by the point that utility powers are mostly boring for the other element. I've humored playing an earth kineticist for some time but the level gap between the first doesn't utility power at level 8 is too much of a stretch.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here is the best Tier breakdown I have run across.
Tier 1: Capable of doing absolutely everything, often better than classes that specialize in that thing. Often capable of solving encounters with a single mechanical ability and little thought from the player. Has world changing powers at high levels. These guys, if played with skill, can easily break a campaign and can be very hard to challenge without extreme DM fiat or plenty of house rules, especially if Tier 3s and below are in the party.
Examples: Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Archivist, Artificer, Erudite (Spell to Power Variant)
Tier 2: Has as much raw power as the Tier 1 classes, but can't pull off nearly as many tricks, and while the class itself is capable of anything, no one build can actually do nearly as much as the Tier 1 classes. Still potentially campaign smashers by using the right abilities, but at the same time are more predictable and can't always have the right tool for the job. If the Tier 1 classes are countries with 10,000 nuclear weapons in their arsenal, these guys are countries with 10 nukes. Still dangerous and easily world shattering, but not in quite so many ways. Note that the Tier 2 classes are often less flexible than Tier 3 classes... it's just that their incredible potential power overwhelms their lack in flexibility.
Examples: Sorcerer, Favored Soul, Psion, Binder (with access to online vestiges), Erudite (No Spell to Power)
Tier 3: Capable of doing one thing quite well, while still being useful when that one thing is inappropriate, or capable of doing all things, but not as well as classes that specialize in that area. Occasionally has a mechanical ability that can solve an encounter, but this is relatively rare and easy to deal with. Can be game breaking only with specific intent to do so. Challenging such a character takes some thought from the DM, but isn't too difficult. Will outshine any Tier 5s in the party much of the time.
Examples: Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Crusader, Bard, Swordsage, Binder (without access to the summon monster vestige), Wildshape Varient Ranger, Duskblade, Factotum, Warblade, Psychic Warrior
Tier 4: Capable of doing one thing quite well, but often useless when encounters require other areas of expertise, or capable of doing many things to a reasonable degree of competence without truly shining. Rarely has any abilities that can outright handle an encounter unless that encounter plays directly to the class's main strength. DMs may sometimes need to work to make sure Tier 4s can contribute to an encounter, as their abilities may sometimes leave them useless. Won't outshine anyone except Tier 6s except in specific circumstances that play to their strengths. Cannot compete effectively with Tier 1s that are played well.
Examples: Rogue, Barbarian, Warlock, Warmage, Scout, Ranger, Hexblade, Adept, Spellthief, Marshal, Fighter (Zhentarium Variant)
Tier 5: Capable of doing only one thing, and not necessarily all that well, or so unfocused that they have trouble mastering anything, and in many types of encounters the character cannot contribute. In some cases, can do one thing very well, but that one thing is very often not needed. Has trouble shining in any encounter unless the encounter matches their strengths. DMs may have to work to avoid the player feeling that their character is worthless unless the entire party is Tier 4 and below. Characters in this tier will often feel like one trick ponies if they do well, or just feel like they have no tricks at all if they build the class poorly.
Examples: Fighter, Monk, CA Ninja, Healer, Swashbuckler, Rokugan Ninja, Soulknife, Expert, OA Samurai, Paladin, Knight, CW Samurai (with Imperious Command available)
Tier 6: Not even capable of shining in their own area of expertise. DMs will need to work hard to make encounters that this sort of character can contribute in with their mechanical abilities. Will often feel worthless unless the character is seriously powergamed beyond belief, and even then won't be terribly impressive. Needs to fight enemies of lower than normal CR. Class is often completely unsynergized or with almost no abilities of merit. Avoid allowing PCs to play these characters.
Examples: CW Samurai (without Imperious Command available), Aristocrat, Warrior, Commoner
|
|
The description of power levels is what I was sharing it for, mostly.
Kineticist (depending on element and archetype choice) fits solidly into the tier 3, 4, or 5 range...hardly game breaking in power or versatility.
With the right build, they do 1 thing quite well, while still having a little utility...putting them in tier 3. With a less optimal element or build they drop down into tier 4 or 5.
The description of power levels is what I was sharing it for, mostly.
Kineticist (depending on element and archetype choice) fits solidly into the tier 3, 4, or 5 range...hardly game breaking in power or versatility.
With the right build, they do 1 thing quite well, while still having a little utility...putting them in tier 3. With a less optimal element or build they drop down into tier 4 or 5.
And I for one thank you....like the other poster...I was always completely lost when people started talking tiers....now at least I have an idea what their on about :P
And I for one thank you....like the other poster...I was always completely lost when people started talking tiers....now at least I have an idea what their on about :PThe description of power levels is what I was sharing it for, mostly.
Kineticist (depending on element and archetype choice) fits solidly into the tier 3, 4, or 5 range...hardly game breaking in power or versatility.
With the right build, they do 1 thing quite well, while still having a little utility...putting them in tier 3. With a less optimal element or build they drop down into tier 4 or 5.
Yeah. Tiers aren't exactly a measure of power, despite common misconception. Rather, they're a comparison of versatility and flexibility. While PF still has the C/MD, it's not quite like 3.5, when a cleric or druid could out-rogue the rogue, out-fighter the fighter, and out-spell the *insert any non-9 level caster, and even some of those* at the same time. Or bards, who could out-cleric the cleric. Or wizards, who could out-everything the everything.
Nowadays..... it's still a partial problem, but at least it's not as bad as it was. The Kineticist is a solid tier 3 class, because, properly built, it does some stuff pretty good, with a decent amount of backup tricks as well to fall back on. It even has a few niches that are kineticist-exclusive. Not even a wizard can compare to the sheer amount of battlefield-changing power a mid-high level geokinetecist can put out.
(I'm referring to the standard-action move earth that normally would take a wizard over four hours to accomplish.)
|
|
Tiers are somewhat subjective, especially when it comes to some of the newer or hybrid classes...but those descriptions of what the different tiers are capable of is the best guideline for ranking a characters power level that I have run across.
Some archetypes can raise of lower a characters tier, some race/class combo's can do the same. Multi-classing can drastically alter a characters tier (either up or down), depending on the build.
Back on the subject of Kineticists though, the elements with the most support (Fire, Aether, Earth, etc) I would rank as tier 3...they are solid at what they do, with a decent amount of utility and things to do beyond simply blasting stuff.
The less supported elements (Void, wood, etc) drop down a level or so, mostly because they simply don't have enough wild talents and such to flush them out (unless you use 3rd party materials)
In my opinion, most of the Paizo archetypes for the Kineticist drop them down a tier.
Agreed. With the right element, kineticists have their niche.
As for archetypes, I consider the Kinetic Knight to be a solid side-grade, with the possibility of a slight power and utility increase as well. Most other archetypes aren't as good as the base class, but a properly convoluted build can make a few of them shine.