Having the Shifter now A Thousand Faces, how does that goes with thematic of each archetype? I mean, for Oozemorphs it's good to have an unlimited way to morph into any medium&small humanoid, but for Elementalist and Weretouched shifters isnt that weird?
Outside of the Oozemorph, it doesn't fit thematically IMO.
But really it comes on so late as to not matter anyway....I seldom have a need to build a character beyond 18th level.
Why not just let the shifter pick their natural attack at level one instead of just claws?It gets way too easy to get four or five natural attacks at first level then, selecting hooves.Oh no, secondary attacks! ;)
With claws, raptor and boar skinwalkers can start off with 5 attacks, and raptor can have 6 at 3rd... If the idea was to limit number of attacks it fails: it DOES limit hand use and character customization. I personally think a nice set of horns fits the nature theme quite well as does some satyr-like hooves. If for no other reason, the aesthetics of it works well.
Dragonborn 3: I find it a shame that an agathiel vigilante has the option of [2 claws, a bite, a gore, or 2 slams] while the shifter is stuck with just claws. On top of that they have no limit/day on shape changing uses, equipment doesn't get lost/melded and they pick the abilities they get from up to the beast shape IV spell. But at least shifter has 2 forms that can pounce at 4th...
Yeah, yeah, I know that those options exist, but they did already. A specific option on a non-ARG race that’s already an issue isn’t as big of a concern as having a class providing the rare component and enabling the combo with a bunch of more common races.
Perhaps this paradox may be resolved with thoughtful insight and observation on the part of the Design team, without destroying flavorful options that are already available.
Just playing Devil's Advocate here, from what I've heard the reason they were specifically going against Druid Wild Shape is power creep. Every Bestiary that comes out is a buff to Druid Wild Shape, and they were trying to avoid that. Personally I think they may have gone a bit too far on the limitations (I mean 5 forms at level 20? Don't get a second form until 5? Really? And you can't even shift until level 4 despite that it doesn't seem it would be *that* hard to give level 1 shifting that's about on par with Barb rage.)
Having the Shifter now A Thousand Faces, how does that goes with thematic of each archetype? I mean, for Oozemorphs it's good to have an unlimited way to morph into any medium&small humanoid, but for Elementalist and Weretouched shifters isnt that weird?Outside of the Oozemorph, it doesn't fit thematically IMO.
But really it comes on so late as to not matter anyway....I seldom have a need to build a character beyond 18th level.
Technically, since thousand faces is shifting, it fits very well.
Sure it may fit, but isn't it better for the shifter to have unique abilities instead of stapled on features from it's parent classes?
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just playing Devil's Advocate here, from what I've heard the reason they were specifically going against Druid Wild Shape is power creep. Every Bestiary that comes out is a buff to Druid Wild Shape, and they were trying to avoid that. Personally I think they may have gone a bit too far on the limitations (I mean 5 forms at level 20? Don't get a second form until 5? Really? And you can't even shift until level 4 despite that it doesn't seem it would be *that* hard to give level 1 shifting that's about on par with Barb rage.)
Perhaps this paradox may be resolved with thoughtful insight and observation on the part of the Design team, without destroying flavorful options that are already available.
But what's the point in reducing the new wildshape when the OG version still gets buffs with every Bestiary? It's still a main feature that's lesser in every way to a side feature of an old class. If power creep was such a concern they'd have to redo the Druid too - half measures are worse than inaction, it's a detriment (Like my Dad would say "I'd rather you do nothing than half ass it, that way I wouldn't have to fix what you did poorly before I can get started")
I mean, for Oozemorphs it's good to have an unlimited way to morph into any medium&small humanoid
it's kind of useless for them as their abilities only work in Fluidic Body. they can look like humanoids as long as they don't want to DO anything.
A specific option on a non-ARG race that’s already an issue isn’t as big of a concern as having a class providing the rare component and enabling the combo with a bunch of more common races.
ARG has Kasatha so I'm unsure WHY you make a point about it... And as pointed out, we ALREADY have a full BAB class archetype that provides that "rare component" so it's not unique at this point.
Sure it may fit, but isn't it better for the shifter to have unique abilities instead of stapled on features from it's parent classes?
I think they were going for 'simple', not 'better'.
from what I've heard the reason they were specifically going against Druid Wild Shape is power creep.
#1 I hadn't heard this. any quote/links?
#2 I've only seen them say 'We wanted to make it an easy starter class'.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Technically, since thousand faces is shifting, it fits very well.
I see the Shifter flavor as being more about Animals and Magical Beasts, then Archetypes as changing that focus to another (Humanoids, Elementals,) etc...etc..
Give thousand faces to an Oozemorph at a level that makes it worth while, and I'll sing it's praises.....
Late add in on the Shifter....just feels sort of uninspired IMO.
I mean, for Oozemorphs it's good to have an unlimited way to morph into any medium&small humanoidit's kind of useless for them as their abilities only work in Fluidic Body. they can look like humanoids as long as they don't want to DO anything.
Compression, Morphic Weapon, and their DR function in all forms ;)
Give thousand faces to an Oozemorph at a level that makes it worth while, and I'll sing it's praises.....
Like urban druid early...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
from what I've heard the reason they were specifically going against Druid Wild Shape is power creep.#1 I hadn't heard this. any quote/links?
I think it's an inference from the first post in this thread:
Game design can be tricky that way. We can design to meet peak design, which has the danger of forever pushing the bar of “normal” up and up (aka Power Creep), or we can try to hold the baseline, which itself is an ever shifting target. We chose the later with the shifter, hoping that the class would hold its own, being simple for newer players to get into without running too far outside the norms for what we think a class could do. Its obvious in hindsight that we could have pushed this a bit further, or at least, given you a wider variety of options to play with to build the character in a more diverse manner.
Putting aside that I would never hand a class to a new player that requires them to know the polymorph and natural attack rules and refer to now fewer than 3 books with some frequency (you could certainly make an *easier* class that does this, but it'd be an intermediate class and in any case the druid might be a better call since you don't need to understand half the class features to make a good one), I think the basic idea was that if we give the shifter the druid's wild shape, it has an ability which gets better with every bestiary (and most issues of an adventure path to boot), so if we don't want to make the class too powerful we have to limit what else it gets.
Unfortunately "limiting what it gets beyond Wild Shape goes too far" is the basic problem with the Shifter. It was sort of claimed that the Shifter was the "Nature Paladin" but after level 5 the only new things the book version of the shifter gets are improvements to or more of features they already have, whereas the Paladin still has four auras to pick up in addition to improving existing class features (and, you know, spells).
Compression, Morphic Weapon, and their DR function in all forms ;)I mean, for Oozemorphs it's good to have an unlimited way to morph into any medium&small humanoidit's kind of useless for them as their abilities only work in Fluidic Body. they can look like humanoids as long as they don't want to DO anything.
Kind of leaves Thousand Faces high and dry though, as per a recent FAQ, you only benefit from those features if that form is from Fluidic Body.
An oozemorph's compression, damage reduction, and morphic weaponry function in its oozelike form and any form it takes via fluidic body, though not in forms it takes via other polymorph effects.
E: clarification
Compression, Morphic Weapon, and their DR function in all forms ;)I mean, for Oozemorphs it's good to have an unlimited way to morph into any medium&small humanoidit's kind of useless for them as their abilities only work in Fluidic Body. they can look like humanoids as long as they don't want to DO anything.Per a recent FAQ, only if that form is from Fluidic Body.
An oozemorph's compression, damage reduction, and morphic weaponry function in its oozelike form and any form it takes via fluidic body, though not in forms it takes via other polymorph effects.
And the ability to use Alter Self is via Fluidic Body.
But don't remind me of that cock block......I'm still really angry about it :PThey were just blocking all the builds that were using a racial shapechange to make the class.....you know, playable at 1st level ;)
The quote was about Thousand Faces, however. Which wouldn't work with Oozemorph features, since it's not Fluidic Form.
Though it wouldn't really matter at that point even if you could use all your features with it. By then you already have 9 uses per day at 18 hours each.
They were talking about Thousand Faces though, which wouldn't work with other features.
OOOooooo....I got ya
Sorry I missed the point....Ya, fixing fluidic form is the only thing that's going to save that archetype at this point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They were talking about Thousand Faces though, which wouldn't work with other features.OOOooooo....I got ya
Sorry I missed the point....Ya, fixing fluidic form is the only thing that's going to save that archetype at this point.
It's kind of a low blow to this archetype that it's 18th level ability doesn't work with it's base core abilities...
Maybe we can get an FAQ to FAQ how a FAQ effects another FAQ...
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe we can get an FAQ to FAQ how a FAQ effects another FAQ...
If we get a FAQ to fix a FAQ that's a FAQ for another FAQ, then we'd have to get a FAQ for that FAQ that was made to fix a FAQ that's a FAQ for another FAQ, and quite frankly I think there comes a FAQ that FAQs everything so we don't have all of these FAQing FAQs.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I honestly wonder if "completely rewriting the Shifter and its archetypes for the next printing" wouldn't be a better course of action than a bunch of FAQs.
Like I'm already resolved that I'm going to be better off referring to a SRD somewhere than my paper copy of the Shifter, I just hope the rest of the book has fewer layers of errata.
At the rate all these questions come up as errata comes out, it may be easier to just do that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ya, fixing fluidic form is the only thing that's going to save that archetype at this point.
Once you get out of the level range where being stuck in ooze-mode is a threat, it gets better. Plus, items can attune now as well. Though Fluidic Form is still kind of odd in scaling.
Still, it's an option for someone who wants to be a Clayface or Sandman type character. Or if you really wish there was a playable version of an Apallie.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All of the FAQ entries indicate that these changes are going into errata, so at least we'll have a sheet denoting the changes to slip into our existing physical books. On the plus side, since UW is part of the core line, it's more likely to get a second printing with all of these revisions included than one from a supplement would.
If the PRD ever gets updated again we'll be able to check that for the "official version"...
I honestly wonder if "completely rewriting the Shifter and its archetypes for the next printing" wouldn't be a better course of action than a bunch of FAQs.
I've been thinking this myself. While making small patches here and there does show work in progress [which I sorely needed to keep my pessimism down], there are enough now that there are a lot of moving parts for a 'simple' class and it seems like there will be more to come.
Like I'm already resolved that I'm going to be better off referring to a SRD somewhere than my paper copy of the Shifter, I just hope the rest of the book has fewer layers of errata.
Yeah, I'm with you. At this point, looking at the shifter section is like using a first edition ACG and the errata sheet. I too head to the online pathfinder sites if I need to look up info on them.
As to the rest of the book, there are issues to fix but I don't recall other sections needing multiple errata/FAQ like the shifter so IMO they should be more workable/usable in FAQ/errata form.
I honestly wish we'd get a playtest. Not only is there going to be time, but it would help iron out things the people at Paizo might not think about.
Like Oozemorph. Probably shouldn't let people write things badly on purpose..
While I'd LOVE to get a redo playtest, I think it's fairly unlikely as changes now don't only have to make sense but HAVE to fit 100% exactly in the same footprint in the book. Finding a way to make the shifter a 1000% better would matter little if it takes up more pages then they have for it.
I keep hearing about the writer for the oozemorph writing it badly on purpose but has this been confirmed and if so where was it confirmed?
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Slandering the writers by constantly claiming they wrote something bad on purpose isn’t doing the side that wants a playtest any favors. This post isn’t directed at one single poster in particular, but this claim has been popping up more and more.
The Oozemorph was written with being stuck as blob as downside and being in morphic form as the goal. Claiming someone wrote it to intentionally be “bad” is disingenuous.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I keep hearing about the writer for the oozemorph writing it badly on purpose but has this been confirmed and if so where was it confirmed?
They haven’t and it has not. Numerous posters took umbrage with how the writer designed the archetype and the aesthetic they had planned for it (an ooze trying to regain its shape), and are letting their dislike severely warp what has been stated, that being stuck as an ooze blob was a drawback.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The only problem with that sort of design plan is the flavor blurb goes in the complete opposite direction, and there isn't really that much of an upgrade to the Fluidic Form morphing abilities in any sort of timely manner that could actually keep up with what any other wild shaper cares to do. Especially since you straight up become fatigued at the end of each set of hours you can shapeshift. Oh and there's no way for you to qualify for Wild Shape feats.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I keep hearing about the writer for the oozemorph writing it badly on purpose but has this been confirmed and if so where was it confirmed?I suspect that what people are referring to is this post by (apparently) the writer.
Apparently, the base form was designed to be a penalty that further levels in the archetype help mitigate.
Yep. A drawback.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I keep hearing about the writer for the oozemorph writing it badly on purpose but has this been confirmed and if so where was it confirmed?
It's in the oozemorph thread: blob form was make intentionally bad/punishing. IMO, the original was 'bad' as it required you at start to spend the majority of your time in an intentionally awful form.
The Oozemorph was written with being stuck as blob as downside and being in morphic form as the goal. Claiming someone wrote it to intentionally be “bad” is disingenuous.
Yes, and with the archetype you start off forced to use a form intentionally made awful for 23 hours per day. It's not a BIG leap to take that and say it was built to be intentionally 'bad'. So I don't see any 'slander': I can be looked at as objectively being built to be 'bad' as the form you're force to spend most of your time in was built to be 'bad'. If nothing else, it's hard to say it's not bad [intentionally] at low levels.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I also suspect that a lot of the irritation at the 'reverse direction' of Oozemorph revolved around A. Not being able to carry their gear with them and B. Having an undefined protoplasmic blob that just lent itself to the confusion.
At the current stance, it's definitely not Easy Mode but it's viable for several things that it wasn't before.
It's almost at a point it could be playable in PFS with the corrections, it just needs some way to effectively bridge the 'communication' gap in a legitimate fashion.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
They haven’t and it has not. Numerous posters took umbrage with how the writer designed the archetype and the aesthetic they had planned for it (an ooze trying to regain its shape), and are letting their dislike severely warp what has been stated, that being stuck as an ooze blob was a drawback.I keep hearing about the writer for the oozemorph writing it badly on purpose but has this been confirmed and if so where was it confirmed?
I feel like the fundamental problem with "the ooze is a drawback" is that it does not match the fluff written for the archetype, since "wanting to regain one's form" is not "taking inspiration from [oozes]" and a drawback is not anything to be fearful or distrustful of at least not on a large scale (Shifters associate with druids- druids are *wise*.) I guess you could easily just rewrite the fluff, but I don´t know if "the archetype is itself an affliction" is really a thing to want (I mean, oracles get a lot in exchange for their curses)
Additionally, the drawback part isn't really implemented all that well since it's basically crippling at low levels, and not even remotely a problem once you get to level 6. Smoothing out that curve would go a long way.
Come to think of it, does Pathfinder have a track record with "this class/archetype represents an affliction" (Oracle curses are not purely negative, so don't count)? Only example that comes readily to mind is the Brute Vigilante; I guess the Psychic Marauder is "insane" per the fluff but doesn't really suffer from it in any way whatsoever.
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
They still made the main draw of the archetype bad, did it on purpose, and now we're blocked from the few ways that get around the awful time limit(you know, the time you need if you to be helpful and not get killed in combat?).
It's not "no metal armor." It's not "must be X alignment." It's not "can't lie, use poison, etc." Those won't get you killed. Those don't restrict the amount of time you can talk. Or open doors. Or climb a ladder.
Feel free to disagree. Heck, flag this post if you want. The main feature and draw of the archetype was made bad on purpose.
|
|
I keep hearing about the writer for the oozemorph writing it badly on purpose but has this been confirmed and if so where was it confirmed?
It's in the oozemorph thread: blob form was make intentionally bad/punishing. IMO, the original was 'bad' as it required you at start to spend the majority of your time in an intentionally awful form.
The Oozemorph was written with being stuck as blob as downside and being in morphic form as the goal. Claiming someone wrote it to intentionally be “bad” is disingenuous.Yes, and with the archetype you start off forced to use a form intentionally made awful for 23 hours per day. It's not a BIG leap to take that and say it was built to be intentionally 'bad'. So I don't see any 'slander': I can be looked at as objectively being built to be 'bad' as the form you're force to spend most of your time in was built to be 'bad'. If nothing else, it's hard to say it's not bad [intentionally] at low levels.
Yes, it is a BIG leap to say an archetype having a drawback to be overcome is the same as being intentionally made bad.
It's almost at a point it could be playable in PFS with the corrections, it just needs some way to effectively bridge the 'communication' gap in a legitimate fashion.
"Sign languages
Several groups use sign and gesture languages to communicate. As deafness and muteness are unusually common among Varisians, many know a highly developed sign language; this method is also used by the Sczarni as a silent thieves' cant.Pathfinders also use their own sign language to silently communicate"
You just need to play PFS with someone that also takes sign language.
Yes, it is a BIG leap to say an archetype having a drawback to be overcome is the same as being intentionally made bad.
Can't talk, climb, hold items, ect for 23 hours/day... Yeah, that intentionally bad. If you insist it isn't, I assume you're being intentionally obtuse. :P it goes WAY, WAY, WAY past 'normal' drawbacks. Divine curses of oracles don't do anything close: same with druid. monk, paladin, ect restrictions. Restricting all non-combat activity for most of your day is outside the pale...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Last I heard sign language wasn't legit as a language choice in PFS?
If that is a Gross Conceptual Error on my part, I'd appreciate the correction!
|
|
I don’t consider increasing DR, immunity to crits and precision damage and flanking, and being able to compress yourself as bad. I also don’t see how not being able to be in Humanoid form all day will get you killed.
The archetype has a drawback that gets easier to overcome (and they removed some side-eye inducing work arounds) as you level. Having a drawback is not the same as intentionally being made bad.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don’t consider increasing DR, immunity to crits and precision damage and flanking, and being able to compress yourself as bad. I also don’t see how not being able to be in Humanoid form all day will get you killed.
The archetype has a drawback that gets easier to overcome (and they removed some side-eye inducing work arounds) as you level. Having a drawback is not the same as intentionally being made bad.
If you fail a skill check to fall into a pit you die at low levels. Because you can't climb in your base form until lv 4, at which point you can eventually get out the pits. But being unable to interact with others aside from sign language leads to you relying on the party to do anything but be a meat shield. and even that you don't do very efficiently since you have a whopping 10-14 AC at level 1. DR doesn't help on hit riders that don't care if you're damaged or not.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, arguably one could make pseudopods that were 'finger-ish' to emulate fingers?
from what I've heard the reason they were specifically going against Druid Wild Shape is power creep.#1 I hadn't heard this. any quote/links?
#2 I've only seen them say 'We wanted to make it an easy starter class'.
...Okay on double-checking my source (a good friend, freelance PF writer, and frequenter of Cons I wish I could attend ^.^; ) he admits it was extrapolation and not an actually sourced statement. That said, there have been statements that avoiding power creep was a goal (mentioned in the OP of this very thread at that.) It's a logical leap to theorize that the limited Shifting is an extension of that, and may have even been a test-run of changing how the Druid's system worked (though that may be a bit beyond Errata's ability?) But no, apparently it is not an official statement, sorry ^.^;
|
|
If you fail a skill check to fall into a pit you die at low levels. Because you can't climb in your base form until lv 4, at which point you can eventually get out the pits. But being unable to interact with others aside from sign language leads to you relying on the party to do anything but be a meat shield. and even that you don't do very efficiently since you have a whopping 10-14 AC at level 1. DR doesn't help on hit riders that don't care if you're damaged or not.I don’t consider increasing DR, immunity to crits and precision damage and flanking, and being able to compress yourself as bad. I also don’t see how not being able to be in Humanoid form all day will get you killed.
The archetype has a drawback that gets easier to overcome (and they removed some side-eye inducing work arounds) as you level. Having a drawback is not the same as intentionally being made bad.
*nods*
I’ve never had much issues with pits at low levels, they may show up more in other games but even then in 24 hours you can try again. As for relying on the party, yes that is a handicap that either lead to great role playing potential and fun, or the party might not want anything to do with the ooze, so you should probably bring it up beforehand.
As for non damaging riders those usually go after touch AC so it doesn’t really make much difference what form you’re in. I usually play Barbarians and Rangers so having 14 or lower AC is usually the norm, and I can still whoop stuff as an ooze.
...for a definition of 'hope', that is.
Is it wrong to want to do a Mrs. Incredible using Oozemorph as the means?