|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
With Update 1.6 there have been some big changes for the classes and I wanted to throw out some Ideas to see what people think of them.
Alchemist: Overall I like the changes made, there is only one change i would make. Right now Chirugeon does not benefit from perpetual infusions because at the point you get it your armor potency bonus overrides the bonuses from those elixirs. Either changing the elixir gained or changing those to give circumstance bonuses instead of item bonuses would be better. In fact, as alchemical items are pretty much spells, just change all the item bonuses to circumstance so they resemble spells and that problem is solved (may cause new problems) Poisoners are also a bit weak but at least they can use powerful alchemy at level 8 to raise the poison's dc.
Barbarian: I like the idea of variable rage, but I don't like the implementation. Here is my idea.
1) New condition, Berserk- While berserk you gain a +2 conditional bonus to melee, thrown and unarmed strikes. This bonus is halved when using agile weapons. You also gain a -1 conditional penalty to AC and can not use actions with the concentrate trait unless they also have the rage trait. At the start of your turn if you have the berserk trait make a flat check DC 5x current berserk level. If you fail the check you will lose the berserk trait at the end of your turn and become fatigued. If you succeed increase the level of your berserk trait by 1.
This gives you a keyword so you can then apply it to future effects, such as a rage spell or a poison that drives people mad with anger. Also as you roll the check at the start of the turn it means you can account for when the rage will end (ie no falling out of dragon form mid air).
(also add rage trait to seek in the actions section)
2) Give Barbarians the rage ability, same keywords, same requirements, though making it a free action with the requirement that you start your turn could work as well. Give it the following text: You gain the berserk 1 condition. While you have the berserk condition you gain a number of temporary hit points equal to your level plus your constitution modifier and increase the conditional bonus to damage given by berserk by 1 for every 4 barbarian levels you have. While berserk if you critically hit an opponent or are critically hit you may decrease your berserk level by 1 to a minimum of 1.
This gives the barbarian an improved version of berserk (pretty much the same progression save 1 level later) and leaves them with more variable time raging as if you go on a crit spree you could potentially be raging the whole combat so you want to go balls to the wall aggressive.
Bard: Like the changes, bard is working fine as is.
Cleric: Again, like most of the changes but currently a sword and board or 2 handed weapon cleric can not use the three action heal as material casting requires you to hold your holy symbol and emblazon symbol is gone. Changing hold to wear in material casting would fix this issue.
Druid: Like the changes, same issue as cleric with the same fix. I do think there should be an in class feat that gives the same effect as druid vestments as I don't think a class should be required to take a specific item.
Monk: Like the changes, but Kir Rush and Ki strike need a cost as they currently do not have one. Unless they are free, in which case make them a cantrip (which would be awesome but most likely way too powerful)
Paladin: Love the changes, but Liberating step's damage reduction does not really work as grab is a separate action from the attack. Perhaps make it heal 2+ level instead of DR 2+level. Also it seems like glimpse of redemption should work on spells so perhaps change the trigger to attacks or targets with a spell.
Ranger: Love the changes, no additions here.
Rogue: Love the changes, no additions here.
Sorcerer: Sorcerer has issues, with the wizard changes there is not much reason to play one as the wizard has more spells and more versatility. It needs a niche of its own besides choose a spell list. I suggest the following:
Each bloodline should have a "lesser spell list". This gives more design space for bloodlines so bloodlines are more than just what powers you get. I personally see Imperial as Arcane/divine, Dragon as Arcane/Primal, Demonic as Divine/Primal, Abberant as Occult/Primal, Angelic Divine/Arcane, and Fey as Primal/Arcane.
Then they get an ability at 1st that they may choose 1 spell from a lesser spell list as a bonus spell known. At expert, master, and legenary they may pick another spell. These spells count as bloodline spells for all purposes. Or you could give them at a different rate like every 4 levels or every odd level starting at 3 you can choose a spell 1 under your highest level spell.
However you arrange it giving them the ability to cherry pick from a second school would give them something truly special.
P.S. Also fix familiars so that sorcerers can get the additional cantrip and spell.
Wizard: Again i like the changes overall but the spell exchange has a bit of an issue. Due to not allowing you to gain a bonus spell to the same level twice a specialist will end up with some of their uses coming from levels they have gained a bonus spell in. For example a legendary evoker ends up giving up 2 first for a third, but uses that bonus third and another 3rd to increase their fifth. This may be alright mechanically but I know some people get annoyed at having to do that. Instead, i think specialists should have the same number of exchanges that generalists have, BUT at slot +3 instead of slot +2 maximum.
So, thoughts everyone? Please give your comments, put what you would do instead, etc. Lets give Paizo all the creative juices we can!
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Couple things:
First, while that Sorcerer idea is a little complex I do think it sounds cool. Being able to snag a few spells from another list makes for some interesting choices.
Second, removing a hand from a held item is a Free Action, not an action. Therefore even a 2H Cleric can cast a 3-action Heal in one turn - it just conflicts with the next turns actions a little bit since re-gripping is an action.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
LuniasM wrote: Couple things:
First, while that Sorcerer idea is a little complex I do think it sounds cool. Being able to snag a few spells from another list makes for some interesting choices.
Second, removing a hand from a held item is a Free Action, not an action. Therefore even a 2H Cleric can cast a 3-action Heal in one turn - it just conflicts with the next turns actions a little bit since re-gripping is an action.
removing a hand is a free action but material says if you hold a holy symbol. Holding would require an interact action. Changing from hold to wear allows you to have symbol on surcoat, armor, or hanging from necklace/etc which solves the issue.
I'm gonna have to 100% disagree on poisoner using potent Alchemy with his free poisons effectively:
You need to spend 3 actions (create, apply, strike) in order to deal IF the attack hits, and If the monster fails a save (that has more than 50% chance to make the save even with potent Alchemy) a whole... 1d4 extra damage.
Why not... Swing 2 more times. Surely that's more than the *drumroll* average 0.7 damage of your poison.
For 3 actions, 1-2 class feats, and class Specialisation and path, even if you use a level appropriate poison (and not 1 6 levels lower...) would be fine damage wise.
Especially since poisons only apply 1/4 of the time.
To compare it much more simply :
You spend 3 actions to add less than a die of damage, that also has a saving throw for full negation.
Pick up power attack instead, and with 2 actions you do more damage without even a save!
Even at level 15, 4d6 with a save and 3 actions is much less than 2d12 with 2 actions and no save. And that's comparing a level 1 class feat that's universally thought as bad, with a level 8 feat and a level 15 class ability. And the "bad feat" is still much better...
rayous brightblade wrote:
removing a hand is a free action but material says if you hold a holy symbol. Holding would require an interact action. Changing from hold to wear allows you to have symbol on surcoat, armor, or hanging from necklace/etc which solves the issue.
if we change hold to wear it should also apply to spell components and if so, you can virtually remove the material casting from the game.
Since Ki Strike/Rush don't have power costs listed (I assume it's 1 though) that makes me wonder -the Bard has powers which are cantrips (i.e. don't cost anything except for actions), so could other power based casters (e.g. monks, paladins) get powers which are cantrips?
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
scoutmaster wrote: rayous brightblade wrote:
removing a hand is a free action but material says if you hold a holy symbol. Holding would require an interact action. Changing from hold to wear allows you to have symbol on surcoat, armor, or hanging from necklace/etc which solves the issue.
if we change hold to wear it should also apply to spell components and if so, you can virtually remove the material casting from the game. Would be nice. Material components have been bad jokes that have lingered way too long.
I Don't think Potent Alchemy is particularly effective generally speaking.
I think it should probably also get a DC bonus of proficieny of the tool used as a bonus.
I.e. if you used it with a thunderstone (lv 1) it would do your class DC + your proficiency with bombs (expert or master I guess. Why not ever legendary? unless I missed it) not a huuge bump... but at least it starts to sorta resemble other effects in game.
For poisons, it ought to use the proficiency with the weapon. Representing how and where you applied it (striking closer to a major blood pathway or in the core body, whatever) . Of course for the Alchemist this has the issues that they'll never have more than Expert in non bomb weapons.
This could lead to some weird situations if you can poison bombs (never did look into that. I suppose i should at some point. I'm sure something, somewhere says you can't... But all I can remember is that bombs count as Martial Weapons which would allow it)
but just straight up Potent Alchemy really can't cut it sadly.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Rayous, if you look at the description of the Material Casting action it says you can retrieve (and stow) a material or focus component as part of the action, so degrip+cast in one turn is definitely possible.
That said, I personally feel that since it's not a feat anymore, emblazoning your shield as a holy symbol should be something anyone can do.
PossibleCabbage wrote: Since Ki Strike/Rush don't have power costs listed (I assume it's 1 though) that makes me wonder -the Bard has powers which are cantrips (i.e. don't cost anything except for actions), so could other power based casters (e.g. monks, paladins) get powers which are cantrips? ki powers are worded as "spend ki to gain effects" so yeah, i assume there's a typo missing the cost of 1 ki.
which hilariously was the original Ki strike typo that was also missing that stated cost until it was swiftly fixed
shroudb wrote: PossibleCabbage wrote: Since Ki Strike/Rush don't have power costs listed (I assume it's 1 though) that makes me wonder -the Bard has powers which are cantrips (i.e. don't cost anything except for actions), so could other power based casters (e.g. monks, paladins) get powers which are cantrips? ki powers are worded as "spend ki to gain effects" so yeah, i assume there's a typo missing the cost of 1 ki.
which hilariously was the original Ki strike typo that was also missing that stated cost until it was swiftly fixed Sounds like the Monk Dev is Ki Rushing things.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
MaxAstro wrote: Rayous, if you look at the description of the Material Casting action it says you can retrieve (and stow) a material or focus component as part of the action, so degrip+cast in one turn is definitely possible.
That said, I personally feel that since it's not a feat anymore, emblazoning your shield as a holy symbol should be something anyone can do.
Thanks for pointing that out, seems only sword and board clerics have the issue then.
I will say a holy symbol boss would be really easy to make.
Voss wrote: Material components have been bad jokes that have lingered way too long. In fairness, sometimes they've been GOOD jokes
Euphoric Cloud
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
pauljathome wrote: Voss wrote: Material components have been bad jokes that have lingered way too long. In fairness, sometimes they've been GOOD jokes
Euphoric Cloud Yep. Those mushrooms sure do make you high. Ha.
Is that the joke? I'm not sure that's a joke. Or do rare mushrooms give people gas, and that's the joke?
But if you buy 5 gp of matsutake or morels, and you probably should be eating them.
Voss wrote: pauljathome wrote: Voss wrote: Material components have been bad jokes that have lingered way too long. In fairness, sometimes they've been GOOD jokes
Euphoric Cloud Yep. Those mushrooms sure do make you high. Ha.
Is that the joke? I'm not sure that's a joke. Or do rare mushrooms give people gas, and that's the joke?
But if you buy 5 gp of matsutake or morels, and you probably should be eating them. I find the idea that Magic Mushrooms are the material component for Euphoric Cloud quite amusing. So do at least some of the GMs I play with.
People who fail their save are portrayed as stoned out of their mind.
Humour, of course, is very personal, so YMMV.
But there ARE quite a few jokes in the Material Components. And some work, at least for some people
pauljathome wrote: Voss wrote: pauljathome wrote: Voss wrote: Material components have been bad jokes that have lingered way too long. In fairness, sometimes they've been GOOD jokes
Euphoric Cloud Yep. Those mushrooms sure do make you high. Ha.
Is that the joke? I'm not sure that's a joke. Or do rare mushrooms give people gas, and that's the joke?
But if you buy 5 gp of matsutake or morels, and you probably should be eating them. I find the idea that Magic Mushrooms are the material component for Euphoric Cloud quite amusing. So do at least some of the GMs I play with.
People who fail their save are portrayed as stoned out of their mind.
Humour, of course, is very personal, so YMMV.
But there ARE quite a few jokes in the Material Components. And some work, at least for some people I've always enjoyed the detect thoughts material component, for literally trading a penny for your thoughts.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
no thoughts on alternate ways of doing barbarian? I like mine because it works with the new condition system they have created but I am curious what others would do.
I think we could really use a new bonus type for Alchemical items and spells, they could be Alchemical and Magic bonuses or combined into a supernatural bonus, because right now some stacking scenarios are really silly.
I wonder if the Barbarian change might be better if you had to roll to get out of Rage, rather than stay in it. I mean, that sounds more like the Incredible Hulk. :)
The current method reminds me of a motorcycle with a choke problem. Vrooom, sputter, die. Vrooom, sputter, rev, rev, sputter, die.
Rolling to get out of Rage, and the risk of being trapped in Rage, also makes various feat that let you do other things while under rage, useful.
rayous brightblade wrote: no thoughts on alternate ways of doing barbarian? I like mine because it works with the new condition system they have created but I am curious what others would do. Getting warning in advance for rage is great. The new condition I'm not as much a fan of. Finding conditions in the book is already enough of a hassle (seriously, looking up what a condition does is what slows us down the most right now). Spells and powers have the same problem.
Also, for spells and effects that are similar to rage, I feel like they should usually have a disadvantage over the barbarian rage anyways, because those could be applied to different character classes (like how you can cast rage on a fighter in PF1, but it isn't as strong as a barbarian rage).
That said, barbarians definitely need some foreknowledge on when rage ends if they are keeping the fatigued condition on barbarians. It really sucks to run right into the middle of the bad guys, start building momentum, then instantly run out of steam and have to skip your turn or hope you are faster than the monsters to avoid being critted for days at -4AC and saves.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
I don't have much to add, but I felt the need to pointlessly disagree with your lesser spell list picks.
rayous brightblade wrote: Imperial as Arcane/divine, Dragon as Arcane/Primal, Demonic as Divine/Primal, Abberant as Occult/Primal, Angelic Divine/Arcane, and Fey as Primal/Arcane. Abberant/Dragon/Demonic/Fey/Imperial: Agreed
Angelic: Divine/Primal
Demonic: Divine/Occult
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Parduss wrote: I don't have much to add, but I felt the need to pointlessly disagree with your lesser spell list picks.
rayous brightblade wrote: Imperial as Arcane/divine, Dragon as Arcane/Primal, Demonic as Divine/Primal, Abberant as Occult/Primal, Angelic Divine/Arcane, and Fey as Primal/Arcane. Abberant/Dragon/Demonic/Fey/Imperial: Agreed
Angelic: Divine/Primal
Demonic: Divine/Occult
I was hesitant to go angelic divine/arcane but i wanted them to be the mirror to devil. I would put the agatheon bloodline when it came out to be divine/primal to mirror the demonic bloodline.
The reason why i went primal with demonic is they seem to be very primal in the bestiary. They are all base urges and raw power. When the daemon bloodline comes out i would have set that as the divine/occult. I can see where you are going with this though.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Paradozen wrote:
Also, for spells and effects that are similar to rage, I feel like they should usually have a disadvantage over the barbarian rage anyways, because those could be applied to different character classes (like how you can cast rage on a fighter in PF1, but it isn't as strong as a barbarian rage).
Well my way gave the rage class feature which improves the berserk trait. So barbarians are better than other berserk creatures, no matter the source of the condition.
I do say that no matter the way they go they need to have the rage end with some warning or no one is taking dragon form due to distinct dangers of falling out of the sky (if the dragon form ends when rage ends...currently its unclear as you cast a modified version of the spell and the spell lasts 1 minute).
rayous brightblade wrote: The reason why i went primal with demonic is they seem to be very primal in the bestiary. They are all base urges and raw power. When the daemon bloodline comes out i would have set that as the divine/occult. I can see where you are going with this though. I would put the new Diabolic as Divine/Arcane.
I guess it depends how you view the 3 traditions, I see Arcane as less of a high and noble side, more a case of forcing reality to your will, which fells a little more like the Devils LE, pseudo-BDSM bent to me.
The Primal I see as peacefully working with what exists, and honestly, the Angelic ones really should be Divine/Divine, and traditionally primal was just a variation of Divine, so It's less a case of "Primal fits Angelic the best" and more a case of "Everything else fits them less"
And whilst I am see the bestial side of the Demons, the links with Occult and the Elder Gods madness, more "let's unravel this world", basically more CE.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Ive been thinking more about rage and what do people think of the berserk condition acting like normal conditions (reduce by 1 at end of turn, end when at 0). Then have rage give you berserk 2, improves berserk condition, and if you deal damage or are critically hit you increase your berserk condition by 1.
That would keep the rounds variable, there would be circumstances where you wouldn’t want to use it, but it encourages users to be aggressive.
rayous brightblade wrote: Ive been thinking more about rage and what do people think of the berserk condition acting like normal conditions (reduce by 1 at end of turn, end when at 0). Then have rage give you berserk 2, improves berserk condition, and if you deal damage or are critically hit you increase your berserk condition by 1.
That would keep the rounds variable, there would be circumstances where you wouldn’t want to use it, but it encourages users to be aggressive.
Or your rage lasts until you deal no damage on your turn.
Recent threads in Classes
|
