Can Kineticists lower their damage for their Blasts?


Rules Questions

51 to 100 of 136 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade

@TriOmegaZero There we go again bringing up CL and SR like it Proves that CL effecting damage is a separate thing. When the same applies to Regular Spells. Lower CL to deal less damage and have lower chance to beat SR. It's not even a Double edged sword. Its more like using the Sword backwards or using a wooden one.
I'm trying to cause less Orphans, not kill more of them.

Silver Crusade

Grailknight wrote:
Mars Roma wrote:

"The composite blast’s caster level is equal to the average of the caster levels of both participants and deals damage as the appropriate composite blast created by a kineticist of that level"

Why would the Bold say that in the same sentence of Kineticists level and the effect it has on damage. it says "Equal" to a Kineticists of that Level. It mentions CL First then Kineticists level as if its a directly correlating effect on the power of the Composite Blast. Even before it mentions the average of the two and Kineticists Level.

It is directly calculating a caster level but only for the purpose of giving a number that it then converts into kineticist level. The two having the same numerical value does not make them identical.

Why? Seriously why the sudden separation of the two. I've done nothing but present why they are not separate, present to me a rule that says they don't or don't bother contributing anything at all instead of just saying "No"

Shadow Lodge

5 people marked this as a favorite.

People have. You refuse to listen.

Grand Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Mars Roma wrote:
@TriOmegaZero There we go again bringing up CL and SR like it Proves that CL effecting damage is a separate thing. When the same applies to Regular Spells. Lower CL to deal less damage and have lower chance to beat SR. It's not even a Double edged sword. Its more like using the Sword backwards or using a wooden one.

Regular spells have rules that tie damage to CL, so that lowering CL reduces the damage. And regular spells have rules for lowering the CL when using them. Kinetic blasts do not. Kinetic blasts have different rules for determining damage that do not interact with spell rules. They are SLAs, so they are like spells except where they are different. And this is one of those differences.

Mars Roma wrote:
I'm trying to cause less Orphans, not kill more of them.

No, you're trying to prove that you're right. If you were actually trying to prevent deaths you would never have brought the subject up and just reduced the damage/told players they could reduce the damage.

Bottom line, kineticist level is class level, which is different than caster level.

Getting Started wrote:
Level: A character's level represents his overall ability and power. There are three types of levels. Class level is the number of levels of a specific class possessed by a character. Character level is the sum of all of the levels possessed by a character in all of his classes. In addition, spells have a level associated with them numbered from 0 to 9. This level indicates the general power of the spell. As a spellcaster gains levels, he learns to cast spells of a higher level.
Magic wrote:

Caster Level

A spell's power often depends on its caster level, which for most spellcasting characters is equal to her class level in the class she's using to cast the spell.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mars Roma wrote:
Grailknight wrote:
Mars Roma wrote:

"The composite blast’s caster level is equal to the average of the caster levels of both participants and deals damage as the appropriate composite blast created by a kineticist of that level"

Why would the Bold say that in the same sentence of Kineticists level and the effect it has on damage. it says "Equal" to a Kineticists of that Level. It mentions CL First then Kineticists level as if its a directly correlating effect on the power of the Composite Blast. Even before it mentions the average of the two and Kineticists Level.

It is directly calculating a caster level but only for the purpose of giving a number that it then converts into kineticist level. The two having the same numerical value does not make them identical.
Why? Seriously why the sudden separation of the two. I've done nothing but present why they are not separate, present to me a rule that says they don't or don't bother contributing anything at all instead of just saying "No"

Try this word experiment. Leave off all the words after participants. Now tell me the damage of the ability. You can't because you have no kineticist level given. The "and ..." is there to tell you how to get a number to use for that value and only to get a numerical value not to conflate the two abilities.

Silver Crusade

TriOmegaZero wrote:
No, you're trying to prove that you're right. If you were actually trying to prevent deaths you would never have brought the subject up and just reduced the damage/told players they could reduce the damage.

Sorry for trying to throw in some humor. Also Yeah, I am, thats the whole point of all this. I also realize now If I'm going to be suggesting a clarification and potential change in how Kinetic Blasts work I should present a small 'Provisio'.

Suggested Errata Regarding Kinetic Blasts wrote:
A higher level Kineticist can lower their damage of their blasts to an effective lower level Kineticist. This lowers their effective Caster Level for the purposes of Overcoming Spell Resistance and other relevant checks, Equal to the level of the Highest level of the Kinetic Blasts damage that the Kineticicst Lowered their Damage to.

There, we maintain this separation of CL and Kinetic Blasts that you all want, and we keep the relevance of its CL on other things such as SR.

Or

Alternatively we get someone in here to say No again and all this means nothing, Where Kineticists are allowed to make more Orphans because they cant throttle their power for some reason.

@Dragonborn3 Where? in this entire thread did they do that? Because if its the mark Post that I brought up, sorry If i have a hard time holding that to law when he says "I don't think" following him saying no to CL and SLA's. When I have presented the rules as written saying the Opposite.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm sort of disappointed no one has chimed in with the damage you do with a halfling used as an improvised weapon. Someone has to know this offhand; it's d6 right?

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Mars Roma wrote:
There, we maintain this separation of CL and Kinetic Blasts that you all want, and we keep the relevance of its CL on other things such as SR.

It has nothing to do with want, just what is. I fully support a clause allowing characters to do reduced effects, it just isn't in the rules.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Mars Roma wrote:
I've done nothing but present why they are not separate, present to me a rule that says they don't or don't bother contributing anything at all instead of just saying "No"

No you haven't. You continue to hammer the exact same points over and over and over again. When you DO bring something else, like composite blast, it actually proves you're wrong if you take the time to read and digest it.

So I'll turn around your sentiment from the post I quoted: I've done nothing but present why they are not separate, present to me a rule that says they [/s]don't[/s] are or don't bother contributing anything at all instead of just saying "No" "Yes". To be 100% clear, NOTHING you've presented to date proves anything close to what you suggested.

Now like others, I wouldn't care if someone houserules that you coud lower damage: what I disagree with is someone trying to say it's already a rule.

Mars Roma wrote:
There, we maintain this separation of CL and Kinetic Blasts that you all want, and we keep the relevance of its CL on other things such as SR.

You are ascribing 'want' into this. This is the rules question section: what we are here to tell you is what the rules ARE not what we want them to be.

Mars Roma wrote:
@Dragonborn3 Where? in this entire thread did they do that? Because if its the mark Post that I brought up, sorry If i have a hard time holding that to law when he says "I don't think" following him saying no to CL and SLA's. When I have presented the rules as written saying the Opposite.

it has NOTHING to with Mark... It's about actually reading the material. Several people have given you the info you need and you ignored it. It's not "saying no to CL and SLA's" but acknowledging that CL isn't the same as class level: caster level affects SR for the blast and CHARACTER level affects the damage. That's just the way it is, with or without Mark's post.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

An errata to allow lowering damage would have to go in the Kineticist section of Occult Adventures in the next printing, I’m afraid, and the section doesn’t have room. Aether and Wood both have damage mitigation options, and any Kineticist can take Expanded Metakinesis for nonlethal blasts.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
QuidEst wrote:
An errata to allow lowering damage would have to go in the Kineticist section of Occult Adventures in the next printing, I’m afraid, and the section doesn’t have room.

yeah, I don't see an errata for kineticists beng possible. It MIGHT be possible to get a general FAQ on character level based damage abilities though: they've never shied away from using FAQ for errata after all. There's a HUGE pile of FAQ requests though


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I really hate when people come to the rules forum looking for their interpretation to be vindicated rather than being open to the fact that they're wrong.

Mars Roma, your understanding of the rules in incorrect. People have already enumerated why.

Please listen to them.

I understand it's inconvenient and doesn't necessarily make sense to you, but those are the rules. And in the PFS setting, they are what they are. You are out of luck.

Silver Crusade

True, I can't make it any clearer at this point as to why I'm confused. when SLA's say they are both a Spell and not a Spell and when something says CL has some degree of bearing on damage. That you all look at the points I've made but not the lines I've draw between them. I understand that Caster Level and Class Level are different, but the only thing i asked you all to prescribe to is that since Kineticists are solely dependent on SLA's and nothing else. That the Rules that apply to SLA's apply to them as well.

It's at this juncture that I should point out that me bringing up the CL = HD would cause some problems if they Multi-classed. So i was wrong to do so. But that's why when I found Interweave, it showed another layer to the CL Discussion regarding their Importance to their damage. Not to mention Caster level Equals Class level.

So with all that, I have to concede, and ask only for clarification on whether or not a Kineticists Can lower their Damage. I presented a Solution, Why It should work already, and a way to avoid changing the rules in Kinetic Blasts damage being CL based. Which their damage Shouldn't be based on CL, It would cause too many problems and leave open room for abuse.

You have to understand that I was a bit put off by people who only chimed in with scarce disapproval, Contributing nothing more to the Conversation. I only Ignored some people, but not TOZ and Graystone, I tried to respond to each of your rebuttals you had about my interpretation of the rules. Oskar Clearly didnt read everything as was apparent with a few others. Hence my need to repeat my self. Pointing out what you may have missed like I believed Mark missed because he seemed unsure of all the rules. Highlighting my need to go over them just in case there was something that would suggest that you could.

I haven't Given up, I still think that rules are written say that you can, everything is there. So don't give up on me yet, things are Fun when we are talking about something that does less damage and literally had few other implications that could be potentially game breaking, as is the case with so many other Rules questions.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

We seem to be agreed that the damage is not based on CL.

If it is not based on CL, then there is really no reason why you should be able to lower the damage, any more than you could decide to use d4s instead of d6s. Rogues need specific talents if they want to forgo only part of their sneak attack, Paladins can’t decide to half-smite an evil creature, and Fighters can’t forgo adding strength to their broadsword damage. If you channel the raw forces ripped from another plane of existence, it’s not something than normally comes with a precise dial so that you can return half of the fires of destruction because you don’t need quite that much.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Lets use this simplified example

Kineticists use an SLA that says it does damage equal to its kineticist level. The CL for this SLA could be 10000 or 0, the damage of the blast doesn't care since it's set at kineticist level.

This is the current rule and why your view fails because you're somehow tying damage to CL and that's just not true for this SLA.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Mars Roma wrote:

True, I can't make it any clearer at this point as to why I'm confused. when SLA's say they are both a Spell and not a Spell and when something says CL has some degree of bearing on damage. That you all look at the points I've made but not the lines I've draw between them. I understand that Caster Level and Class Level are different, but the only thing i asked you all to prescribe to is that since Kineticists are solely dependent on SLA's and nothing else. That the Rules that apply to SLA's apply to them as well.

It's at this juncture that I should point out that me bringing up the CL = HD would cause some problems if they Multi-classed. So i was wrong to do so. But that's why when I found Interweave, it showed another layer to the CL Discussion regarding their Importance to their damage. Not to mention Caster level Equals Class level.

So with all that, I have to concede, and ask only for clarification on whether or not a Kineticists Can lower their Damage. I presented a Solution, Why It should work already, and a way to avoid changing the rules in Kinetic Blasts damage being CL based. Which their damage Shouldn't be based on CL, It would cause too many problems and leave open room for abuse.

You have to understand that I was a bit put off by people who only chimed in with scarce disapproval, Contributing nothing more to the Conversation. I only Ignored some people, but not TOZ and Graystone, I tried to respond to each of your rebuttals you had about my interpretation of the rules. Oskar Clearly didnt read everything as was apparent with a few others. Hence my need to repeat my self. Pointing out what you may have missed like I believed Mark missed because he seemed unsure of all the rules. Highlighting my need to go over them just in case there was something that would suggest that you could.

I haven't Given up, I still think that rules are written say that you can, everything is there. So don't give up on me yet, things are Fun when we are talking about something that does less damage and...

Look, we all understand the argument you are making. Spells do damage based on caster level. SLA function like spells in most regards, so they also deal damage based on caster level. A spell caster can lower the caster level of their spells, so they can also lower the caster level of their SLAs. Lower caster level means less damage. Since Kinetic Blasts are SLAs, you can lower their caster level, which should result in less damage, since that is how it works for all other SLAs and spells.

Here is where you get tripped up. The specific wording of Kinetic Blast says that the damage is based on Kineticist level. This supersedes how SLA damage is normally calculated, which is via Caster Level. That is why Caster Level doesn't matter, because the rules specifically state that the Kinetic Blast SLA calculates damage differently. I can't make it any clearer.

Silver Crusade

QuidEst wrote:

We seem to be agreed that the damage is not based on CL.

If it is not based on CL, then there is really no reason why you should be able to lower the damage, any more than you could decide to use d4s instead of d6s. Rogues need specific talents if they want to forgo only part of their sneak attack, Paladins can’t decide to half-smite an evil creature, and Fighters can’t forgo adding strength to their broadsword damage. If you channel the raw forces ripped from another plane of existence, it’s not something than normally comes with a precise dial so that you can return half of the fires of destruction because you don’t need quite that much.

Don't go into thematic's when regarding something as delicate as Rules. Thematically a Person swinging a sword can chose to pull back some power, but seeing as there is no rule to say that you can, You can't. Why cant Kineticists pull from the same area of another plane of existence that they could when they were level one?

I didn't want to bring up Thematic's because of arguments like this^

Please no one bring them up again and further derail this thread.

EDIT: despite how much fun it is to bring them into an argument.
EDIT EDIT: Glad you caught up Oskar, now keep up.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

A large part of why "class level vs. caster level" is such a big deal is because these are very specific terms that can vary quite a bit from each other, depending on circumstances.

Saying "Eh, I'll just pretend they're the same thing" causes nothing but confusion when, for example, someone takes a prestige class that advances caster level (and spells), but not other class features.
Such a prestige class doesn't exist for the kineticist (yet, as far as I know...), but the same principle applies: Other classes have to make sure not to mix up caster and class levels, so the kineticist doesn't get to mix them up either.

Silver Crusade

Rajnish Umbra, Shadow Caller wrote:

A large part of why "class level vs. caster level" is such a big deal is because these are very specific terms that can vary quite a bit from each other, depending on circumstances.

Saying "Eh, I'll just pretend they're the same thing" causes nothing but confusion when, for example, someone takes a prestige class that advances caster level (and spells), but not other class features.
Such a prestige class doesn't exist for the kineticist (yet, as far as I know...), but the same principle applies: Other classes have to make sure not to mix up caster and class levels, so the kineticist doesn't get to mix them up either.

Dont put words in my Mouth if thats what you were doing, which it seems like it was. Also it says Under Caster Level in the Magic section of the CRB explaining Casting Spells. Caster Level is equal to Class Level and since SLA's Function like spells(also stated in the CRB under Getting Started). We have to draw from the same rules that effect spells when its not explicitly stated that they do not interact, as is the case with Metamagic Feats not working but Spell Focus and Elemental Focus does work with SLA's because its not explicitly stated that you can't. Am I wrong to assume that somewhere among all the forums that Elemental Focus works with the appropriate Kinetic Blasts Element.

Searching...
Nothing found specifically but i did find this


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Caster Level IS equal to Class Level... except when it's not. XD

(Really, you can say the same about a lot of rules in this game. That's what you get with a system built around exceptions.)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
"Mars Roma wrote:
Thematically a Person swinging a sword can chose to pull back some power, but seeing as there is no rule to say that you can, You can't.
Quote:
Nonlethal Damage with a Weapon that Deals Lethal Damage: You can use a melee weapon that deals lethal damage to deal nonlethal damage instead, but you take a –4 penalty on your attack roll.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

And that's exceptional helpful because it shows you can't reduce the damage dealt, only change it from lethal to non-lethal at an attack penalty. You still deal the same damage just to another pool.

It's actually very possible for a high level character to deal non-lethal damage and still outright kill a 1 hd commoner because once non-lethal damage equals hp you take the remaining damage to your regular hit points.


Dragonborn3 wrote:
Pathfinder is a permissive rule set that tells you what you can do, not what you can't.

Often stated, never proven.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Mars Roma wrote:
There, we maintain this separation of CL and Kinetic Blasts that you all want, and we keep the relevance of its CL on other things such as SR.
It has nothing to do with want, just what is. I fully support a clause allowing characters to do reduced effects, it just isn't in the rules.

Neither is pooping.

Grand Lodge

By that logic I guess my fighter can fly since there's no rule saying that a character without a fly speed CAN'T fly, just that characters with a fly speed can.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
blahpers wrote:
Neither is pooping.

This isn't F.A.T.A.L.

Silver Crusade

TriOmegaZero wrote:
blahpers wrote:
Neither is pooping.
This isn't FATAL.

Tell that to the settlers on the Oregon Trail

EDIT: or better yet, Settlers Chasing some Oregon Tail. (No Fair Editing it like that TOZ)


TriOmegaZero wrote:
blahpers wrote:
Neither is pooping.
This isn't F.A.T.A.L.

Doesn't need to be that childish. According to RAW, waiting stealthily for the guard on duty to go relieve himself in the bushes (and thus be occupied or at a disadvantage when you make your move) will be a long wait, as nobody does that sort of thing. Tons of things aren't covered by the rules text. Therefore, they never happen. Which is why nobody, and I mean nobody, really believes the rules text is strictly permissive. And I reserve the right to mercilessly taunt anybody who repeats that tired old canard.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Mars Roma wrote:


EDIT EDIT: Glad you caught up Oskar, now keep up.

Maybe save your quips for when you're proven literally anything at all supporting your point.

blahpers wrote:
According to RAW, waiting stealthily for the guard on duty to go relieve himself in the bushes (and thus be occupied or at a disadvantage when you make your move) will be a long wait, as nobody does that sort of thing. Tons of things aren't covered by the rules text. Therefore, they never happen.

No, things that aren't specifically covered in the rules are handled by the Game Master. They don't just "never happen." Instead they go to arbitration. Just because the rules don't define every single kind of interaction possible doesn't mean they aren't permissive. You want to do something, you check if there is a rule. If there is, it defines what you can do. If not, the Game Master arbitrates what is done in that situation and has final say in how things are handled.

Silver Crusade

As Far as I see it, I have, sorry its so hard to explain something like this to other people. If you or anyone else has a problem grasping the concept of what i have explained thus far, Then I'm stumped. I've even gone through the trouble already of explaining further Class Level and Caster Level being more closely related than before. I told you to keep up man and yet you fell behind again. Sorry if I offended you, and that your offense distracted you from reading my previous post between then and now. I would have PM'd you to keep up and not post it in the forums, but I can't, you wont let me and that's your right to do so.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Mars Roma wrote:

As Far as I see it, I have, sorry its so hard to explain something like this to other people. If you or anyone else has a problem grasping the concept of what i have explained thus far, Then I'm stumped. I've even gone through the trouble already of explaining further Class Level and Caster Level being more closely related than before. I told you to keep up man and yet you fell behind again. Sorry if I offended you, and that your offense distracted you from reading my previous post between then and now. I would have PM'd you to keep up and not post it in the forums, but I can't, you wont let me and that's your right to do so.

As I said before, I understand your argument. It is wrong. Class level and Caster level are related, but they are not the same thing. If Kinetic Blast damage was supposed to operate off of Caster Level, then the rules would say that it does. Other classes that have abilities like this will specify when an ability works off of Caster Level and when it doesn't. They say it operates off of class level. I don't care how well connected Class level and Caster level are, they are different concepts and are handled differently by the rules. I don't know how much clearer this could be. The rules state in plain black and white exactly how this works and it does not match up with what you want.

Look, if you want to house rule that it does or your personal DM agrees with you and wants things to work that way, that's fine. But you asked if you could lower the damage of a Kinetic Blast by using the rules for lowering the Caster Level of a spell. You can not. Rules as written say that you can not, because Kinetic Blast damage does not operate off of caster level. Just because Class level and Caster level are often the same does not mean they are interchangeable. If all of my AC is derived from Dexterity and Dodge bonuses, that doesn't mean that my AC and my touch AC are the same thing, even if they have the exact same number. They have a different name for a reason.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

My opinion is that RAW, you cannot. As per the same reasons Mark Seifter gave. Reading over this, I've only seen Mars try to say that Caster Level is Character Level. To which I respond, no it isn't. Caster Level is equal to Character level, but Character level isn't equal to Caster Level. For example, at level 17, if you selected both options as same as starting element, you get +1 Caster Level. This then makes Caster Level equal Character Level + 1. But you are not suddenly a level 18. You only get a +1 Caster Level for where it matters (SR piercing or dispel or similar).

Quote, that you posted, but ignored the second half:
"The composite blast’s caster level is equal to the average of the caster levels of both participants and deals damage as the appropriate composite blast created by a kineticist of that level"

If Class Level equaled Caster Level, that second bolded line wouldn't be necessary. What this says is that the damage is based on Class Level. Not Caster Level.

Quotes on the rules text has already been stated above. Believe me or not, but at this point you are wanting it to be, and refusing to look at the evidence disproving everything you are saying. Caster Level and Class Level are not interchangeable. Varisian Tattoo feat does not make a caster one level higher, nor does the Orange Ioun stone. They are two entirely different mechanics and while they typically correlate, they do not always.

While I would love for what you said to be true, as then you could theoretically get up to 11d6 damage at level 20 by staying the same element (As well as get everything a level earlier), that does not work by the rules. As it would break so many things.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Mars Roma wrote:
As Far as I see it, I have, sorry its so hard to explain something like this to other people.

What was that about being attacked?


Oskar Metalsound wrote:
Mars Roma wrote:


EDIT EDIT: Glad you caught up Oskar, now keep up.

Maybe save your quips for when you're proven literally anything at all supporting your point.

blahpers wrote:
According to RAW, waiting stealthily for the guard on duty to go relieve himself in the bushes (and thus be occupied or at a disadvantage when you make your move) will be a long wait, as nobody does that sort of thing. Tons of things aren't covered by the rules text. Therefore, they never happen.
No, things that aren't specifically covered in the rules are handled by the Game Master. They don't just "never happen." Instead they go to arbitration. Just because the rules don't define every single kind of interaction possible doesn't mean they aren't permissive. You want to do something, you check if there is a rule. If there is, it defines what you can do. If not, the Game Master arbitrates what is done in that situation and has final say in how things are handled.

And there's no rule stating that a player cannot pull their punches/blasts/whatevers. Therefore, the Game Master arbitrates. Of course, the Game Master always arbitrates--that's the point. And unlike the old "permissive rules" saw, that rule's actually in the rules text.


I feel like the nature of the kinetic blast though makes it hard to justify "pulling your punches" except in the two cases where it is explicitly allowed. Like how do you make your giant conflagration of fire less harmful? That doesn't seem to be a thing anybody should be able to do intuitively.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Pulling the punches not being explicitly forbidden doesn't mean it's allowed either. Fighters, wizards, zen archers can't module their damage outside of not hitting as much times as they could. Why should the kineticist be able to ?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mars Roma wrote:
Dont put words in my Mouth if thats what you were doing, which it seems like it was.

I'm not, not really, no.

Your whole argument boils down to "Caster level is based on kineticist level, damage is based on kineticist level, therefore, damage should be based on caster level".
Caster level is a value derived from the kineticist level. It is equal to the kineticist's class level, but it isn't the kineticist's class level.
Damage, in turn, is explicitly based on the kineticist level (thus the class level), and does not mention caster level.

Even Interweave Composite Blast only does damage based on a "virtual" kineticist class level that is in turn derived from the caster level of the blast - not based on the caster level directly.

You just ignore all of that and treat class level and caster level interchangeably. But they aren't.


I could almost swear to having seen something in some D&D edition that explicitly said that spellcasters can intentionally lower their effective caster level, but I think this may have been pre-Pathfinder.

Edit: Found it in Pathfinder:

A spell’s power often depends on its caster level, which for most spellcasting characters is equal to her class level in the class she’s using to cast the spell.

You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell in question, and all level-dependent features must be based on the same caster level.

In the event that a class feature or other special ability provides an adjustment to your caster level, that adjustment applies not only to effects based on caster level (such as range, duration, and damage dealt), but also to your caster level check to overcome your target’s spell resistance and to the caster level used in dispel checks (both the dispel check and the DC of the check).

The middle part is what you want.

Since a Kinetic Blast is a Spell-Like Ability, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the same thing should apply to it.

Grand Lodge

Kineticist not being a spellcaster by itself as nothing in the class states so, and Bloodrager or Paladins as perfect examples on class levels being different from caster level.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
UnArcaneElection wrote:

I could almost swear to having seen something in some D&D edition that explicitly said that spellcasters can intentionally lower their effective caster level, but I think this may have been pre-Pathfinder.

Edit: Found it in Pathfinder:

A spell’s power often depends on its caster level, which for most spellcasting characters is equal to her class level in the class she’s using to cast the spell.

You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell in question, and all level-dependent features must be based on the same caster level.

In the event that a class feature or other special ability provides an adjustment to your caster level, that adjustment applies not only to effects based on caster level (such as range, duration, and damage dealt), but also to your caster level check to overcome your target’s spell resistance and to the caster level used in dispel checks (both the dispel check and the DC of the check).

The middle part is what you want.

Since a Kinetic Blast is a Spell-Like Ability, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the same thing should apply to it.

As was stated several times throughout the course of this thread, lowering the Caster Level of a Kinetic blast is irrelevant, since the damage of the blast is not based on Caster Level. It is based on Kineticist Level, which can not be lowered. It will make the blast less likely to overcome spell resistance and similar things, but will not effect the amount of damage a blast does.


Oops -- just realized that in fact I did somehow miss a major portion of the middle of this thread, which points out that Kinetic Blasts depend upon Kineticist level independently of the Caster Level that normally depends upon the Kineticist level. Weird . . . another example of the Occult classes being unnecessarily complicated (case in point for this thread).


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
UnArcaneElection wrote:

Oops -- just realized that I somehow missed a major portion of the middle of this thread, which points out that Kinetic Blasts depend upon Kineticist level independently of the Caster Level that normally depends upon the Kineticist level. Weird . . . another example of the Occult classes being unnecessarily complicated.

Yeah, honestly I feel like they wanted to avoid having every class in the book be a spell caster, but still wanted to go with the Psychic Avatar-style elemental benders. So they made the Kineticist powers all SLAs so that things like antimagic and SR could balance them out. I feel like maybe they should have instead gone the route of making the Blasts Supernatural Abilities, but saying that they interact with other abilities (such as SR and anti-magic field) as though they were spells with a Caster Level equal to the Kineticist level. Either option is still rather clunky, but it might be slightly more clear how things work in cases like this.


Oskar Metalsound wrote:
I feel like maybe they should have instead gone the route of making the Blasts Supernatural Abilities, but saying that they interact with other abilities (such as SR and anti-magic field) as though they were spells with a Caster Level equal to the Kineticist level.

Side note: Supernatural Abilities are already shut down by Antimagic Fields, no need for an exception.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

also of importance, in the paragraphs just above burn definition (Occult adventure, P11):
* Kinetic blast and defense wild talents are always considered to have an effective spell level equal to 1/2 the kineticist’s class level (to
a maximum effective spell level of 9th at kineticist level 18th).

this means that even if CL had an impact and you could lower it, you could not lower it to a point where damage would be reduced...


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Mars Roma wrote:

As Far as I see it, I have, sorry its so hard to explain something like this to other people. If you or anyone else has a problem grasping the concept of what i have explained thus far, Then I'm stumped. I've even gone through the trouble already of explaining further Class Level and Caster Level being more closely related than before. I told you to keep up man and yet you fell behind again. Sorry if I offended you, and that your offense distracted you from reading my previous post between then and now. I would have PM'd you to keep up and not post it in the forums, but I can't, you wont let me and that's your right to do so.

The thing that baffles me is the refusal to use the solution given in the first reply.

Foe Throw is exclusively an Aether infusion, and therefor based on Telekinetic Blast. Telekinetic Blast says you can loosen the strands of aether in order to deal damage to both the object and the target as though you had thrown the object yourself (instead of dealing your normal blast damage). And if the item was a creature the item deals damage as a one-handed improvised weapon for a creature of your size. If you are medium sized that would be 1d6 + con mod.

So (by the rules) you can do full damage, or you can do 1d6 + con mod. Is that seriously not good enough?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think the OP really just wants things to match their view/interpretation and keeps lashing back because the rules don't match that.

Grand Lodge

Petitioning directly the Paizo staff with compelling but dispassionate arguments won't be worse than ranting on a random topic without any reason.

Silver Crusade

Vrischika111 wrote:

also of importance, in the paragraphs just above burn definition (Occult adventure, P11):

* Kinetic blast and defense wild talents are always considered to have an effective spell level equal to 1/2 the kineticist’s class level (to
a maximum effective spell level of 9th at kineticist level 18th).

this means that even if CL had an impact and you could lower it, you could not lower it to a point where damage would be reduced...

Whats this? a rules citation that doesn't parallel my own and just straight up say No this doesn't work because they are different things. When I have Pointed out that they are the same thing.

Reading that and how lowering Caster level says that if the CL isn't high enough for them to cast the level Spell required, I'd have to say that's the best case anyone here has brought up why they cant lower their damage. In fact, makes it Impossible, because nothing in the rules state that Lowering a SLA's CL lowers the spell level.

I concede that thats why you can't lower Kineticists Blast Damage. Shame. Can we get a FAQ that would allow Kineticists to lower their Damage now?

Silver Crusade

Meirril wrote:
Mars Roma wrote:

As Far as I see it, I have, sorry its so hard to explain something like this to other people. If you or anyone else has a problem grasping the concept of what i have explained thus far, Then I'm stumped. I've even gone through the trouble already of explaining further Class Level and Caster Level being more closely related than before. I told you to keep up man and yet you fell behind again. Sorry if I offended you, and that your offense distracted you from reading my previous post between then and now. I would have PM'd you to keep up and not post it in the forums, but I can't, you wont let me and that's your right to do so.

The thing that baffles me is the refusal to use the solution given in the first reply.

Foe Throw is exclusively an Aether infusion, and therefor based on Telekinetic Blast. Telekinetic Blast says you can loosen the strands of aether in order to deal damage to both the object and the target as though you had thrown the object yourself (instead of dealing your normal blast damage). And if the item was a creature the item deals damage as a one-handed improvised weapon for a creature of your size. If you are medium sized that would be 1d6 + con mod.

So (by the rules) you can do full damage, or you can do 1d6 + con mod. Is that seriously not good enough?

I already addressed this in this thread. please before commenting or posting anything, do try and make an effort to read the entire thread so as you dont continue to make the same mistake in other threads.

I regret bringing up that example, I knew there was a chance people would hang on it for some reason. The intention was for all kineticists to be able to lower their damage on all their blast for the purposes of not out right killing their intended target (the reasons don't matter) without having to be a Specific Element(Wood) or waste a Feat slot(Expanded Metakinesis(Merciful)) to only be able to deal non-leathal damage. Which has been addressed in this thread to be useless when you do 50+ non-lethal damage to a Commoner with 3hp and 10ish CON. But doing 1d6+2(for Physical)+half(for energy) CON+ Elemental Overflow(which can be suppressed). Leans more in favor of the Commoners Survival. Not at certain levels and Higher Con Bonuses, but still.

51 to 100 of 136 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Can Kineticists lower their damage for their Blasts? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.