| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is true, but in context of the full post this is quoted from PF2 Fly works fine for what was being mentioned, which was getting the party over a wall. Someone said that it helps yo but not the rest of the party get over the wall but the quoted poster was pointing out you could have one person fly up and use a rope or something to help the others.
Yes, that's true. However my point was broader than "I can get myself up, but not other people" (durr, rope).
EVERY SINGLE BUFF SPELL IN THE GAME has been similarly nerfed.
Dimension Door used to be:
Range: long (400 ft. + 40 ft./level) and may bring a willing Medium sized creature
Is now:
Range: 60 feet (and within line of sight) and can only take objects you're carrying (spell fails if you are carrying another creature, even one tucked into an extra dimensional space: sorry familiar wizards!)
Resist Energy was:
Duration: 10 min./level
Effect: DR 10 (20 @7th, 30 @11th)
Is now:
Duration 1 minute
Effect: DR 5
Communal version was:
Level 3, duration split among all targets
Is now:
4th (2 targets, 10 DR), or 7th (5 targets, 15 DR), but still only lasts a minute
Bless was:
Duration: 1 min./level
Range: 50 burst centered on caster
Is now:
Duration: Concentration (max 1 minute)
Range: 30 foot aura, centered on caster
Unseen servant was:
1st level spell
Duration: 1 hour/level
Servant cannot fly and moves at 15 feet
Is now:
3rd level spell
Duration: Concentration (max 1 minute)
Duration: 1 minute
Servant flies at speed 30
(The servant can now fly and is twice as fast, sure, but you have to spend concentration actions on it and the duration got cut massively. Given that the servant is literally incapable of making Strike actions, why does this have a combat-duration?)
Levitate was:
2nd level spell
Duration: 1 min./level
Description: "You can mentally direct the recipient to move up or down as much as 20 feet each round; doing so is a move action."
Is now:
3rd level spell
Duration: 1 minute
Description "For the duration, you can spend a Somatic Casting action to move the target up or down 10 feet."
Jump was:
Target creature touched
Duration: 1 min./Level
Gave a +10 athletics skill bonus.
Is now:
Personal
Duration: 1 action
Effect: can jump up to 30 feet.
Magic Fang, Greater was:
+1 bonus per 4 levels
Is now:
Completely and utterly non-existent. Magic Fang does not have a Heightening entry.
I could go on. But I won't.
Even most combat damaging spells got nerfed in some way (mostly a range reduction: 25+5/lv -> 30, 100+25/lv. -> 60, 400+ -> 120), but they're a bit harder to compare. Most damage values stayed "about the same" (but that's actually a nerf too, as HP values went up across the board).
Lets do two. Fear and Finger of Death.
Finger of Death (7th level spell) was:
10 damage/level, fort save reduced it to 3d6+1/lv
(Remember, at 7th, this is 130 damage where a 13th level character generally had less than 150hp. d8 hd and 14 con is an average of about 85, even a barbarian with a d12 hd and 18 con only has about 142!)
Is now:
50 damage, fort save does:
- critical success, no damage
- success, half damage
- failure, full damage
- critical failure, dies outright
(50 damage? Most characters have 100hp by level 10! 8/lv + 8 ancestry + 2 con is 108)
Fear was:
4th level spell
Duration: 1 round/level
Creatures become panicked ("drop anything it holds and flee")
Successful save: instead shaken ("a –2 penalty on attack rolls, saving throws, skill checks, and ability checks") for 1 round
Is now:
1st level spell
Duration: *
Effect:
- Critical Success The target is unaffected.
- Success The target is frightened 1.
- Failure The target is frightened 2.
- Critical Failure The target is frightened 3 and fleeing for 1 round.
Old success is about as good as the new success (with an additional benefit for a critical success), roughly speaking (lasts a round, minor penalties). Old failure is more horrifically bad than the new critical failure (you only have to flee for 1 round and the frightened condition reduces on its own by 1 every round) with a new "not quite as bad, but still bad" failure effect. But actually, the old save ("shaken for 1 round") is almost equivalent to the new failure effect! The penalties were -2 on a save, now they're -1 on a save and the duration on a failure is massively reduced.
But lets set that aside for a moment. It used to hard remove an effected character from a fight and that's been toned down some because it wasn't very fun. Fear got one more nerf.
Targets.
Old: 30 foot cone
New: One creature
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here are the general results of this thread as of now. I had to disconsider those who mentioned a lot of different stuff without at least saying "hey, this is the main one" because that would skew the results a lot.
Classes by number of (specific) mentions:
Sorcerer: 5
Cleric: 4
Paladin: 4
Druid: 3
Ranger: 3
Alchemist: 1
Bard: 1
Fighter: 1
Monk: 1
Rogue: 1
Wizard: 1
Barbarian: 0
Top 3 most mentioned individual issues:
Paladins forcing you into specific things: 4
The Divine Spell List in general: 4
Snares in general: 3
Spell slots and spells being weak were mentioned a lot, but those are not class-specific. Also, the latter is already promised to be fixed.
If I had to be locked into a single change in a single class I probably would say "divine spell list, particularly as it pertains to the sorcerer." Which lines up pretty well with your running totals.
(The lack of alchemical items, however, isn't something I've seen commented on anywhere. I actually went and checked during my last session and there's ZERO level 14 items. Not a single one. What is a level 14 alchemist supposed to get formulas for in this case?)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But Paizo has said they are generally buffing magic, and the damage spell boost was already wildly effective in my games (I mean, spells had been working pretty well in my Doomsday Dawn games already, which has led to me having a lot of trouble synergizing with people's complaints), so I expect they will be pretty strong in the end.
They've SAID this, but it's basically just words.
And with the increase in spell damage, that's further pushed utility spells into a corner requiring much larger changes to bring them back to usefulness.
You're right that Finger of Death does more on a save than it used to (3d6+Lv isn't a whole lot and now it's half of 65) and the tighter math might mean that a -1 is more important than the old -2s, but its still...unsatisfying.
Also, don't forget, with the math as tight as it is, you NEED...sorry:
REQUIRE
...debuffs in order to actually have an advantage against an opponent in this system, especially above about level 15. The math just assumes that "oh yeah, you'll always be constantly under the effects of Bless, all the time forever" when calculating how high monster stats can go for a fair fight.
Remember, a fair fight ("medium difficulty") for a party of four is four level-2 enemies, which have ACs on par with the party's to-hit plus 10, with two difficulty levels above that, and allowing monsters to squash together to be a higher level, but fewer in number. An "Extreme-threat solo boss" is party level +4. Even assuming that monsters gain exactly 1 AC every level (they don't, its more) and assuming that their AC is exactly 10 higher at level-2, that's a +6 increase: the party needs to roll a 16 or better to even HURT the creature.
Even taking into account Conditional AND Circumstance bonuses on the players AND Conditional and Circumstance penalties on the enemy, you're looking at hard capping out at +8 (it is unbelievably difficult to get a penalty or bonus from these categories higher than 2). That means that if everything lines up (it won't: its saves are +6 as well, so good luck getting it to fail its saves and actually taking a -2 penalty!) your fighter is only just barely ahead of even-odds of hitting on every attack.
Meanwhile, that same enemy was already hitting the PCs on 4s (and critting on 14s) and you can't get the same level of penalties on attacks as you can on AC (flat-footed is pretty much the only circumstance bonus that applies here and its only a penalty to AC, not attacks) even if everything else applies on both sides.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I honestly just want the sorcerer to at the very least have auto heightening on all spells or if not that a complete rework as they are now the only reason to play one over the other caster classes is flavor.
Melodious Spell, the bard concealing a spell as a part of a performance, is a level 8 feat. Conceal Spell, the wizard equivalent is level 4. Sorcerers also do this at level 4. To me, concealed spellcasting is something bards and maybe divine casters should be good at, arcane casters should get this later.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Retributive Strike.
Between Retributive Strike's trigger and Smite Evil's conditions (have to witness an ally/innocent be harmed before being able to use it...), 2e paladin does not feel even in terms of flavor like it's about stopping evil, but about avenging buddies. Which may or may not actually correspond to any particularly LG causes. "I don't like my friends getting hurt" is really pretty Neutral. Retributive Strike feels more reminiscent of the Vindictive Bastard ex-paladin archetype than it does of paladins.
And this is in terms of flavor. In terms of gameplay... it's ideal to specifically position oneself in such a way as to not prevent allies from being attacked. That is the opposite of being a paladin. I get that probably these abilities were supposed to feel like "attacking him was a big mistake and you're going to pay for it" cool, but in three segments of Doomsday Dawn as a paladin, it has not felt like that even once for me. It's felt like my main ability differentiating my character from the next guy's, and therefore something where I should be trying to set up chances to use it. But setting up chances to use it means doing things that are cruddy. One of my only mandatory class features encourages not roleplaying that class.
It's also still hard on archer paladins, even with Ranged Reprisal helping a bit. And archer paladins don't need more disadvantage on top of archery losing the feats that made it strong and being stuck with +2 Str.
I think it can work and be cool as an optional class feat with less of the class's scaling and power based around it, but I don't think it should be a central ability.
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
I honestly just want the sorcerer to at the very least have auto heightening on all spells or if not that a complete rework as they are now the only reason to play one over the other caster classes is flavor.
I honestly do wonder why that's the case. It's extra bookkeeping and I don't see why the class really needs that limitation, other than to give prepared casters something in compensation. I'm not happy with either prepared or spontaneous casters at this point and would rather they all move to an Arcanist-like setup.
It's not like an Arcanist is even not preparing their spells. They're still doing their rituals, they're still picking spells for the day and trying to be flexible, but having to predict exactly how many times a particular spell will be used leads to balance problems and boring spell selections. A wizard in PF2 currently is encouraged to prepare multiple slots of common spells, which intrudes upon the fantasy of being studious and having obscure magics at their command. They have a limited ability to flex spell slots into something that just came up, but it's just that - limited. And it's more bookkeeping, making an already demanding class even harder to play. And for what benefit? To make it so the number of spells a caster will actually cast per day extremely unpredictable even for players who know what they're doing? If they cast exactly as many feather falls and grease spells as they prepared, it's going to be a lot more done on that day than a wizard that didn't have a good opporutnity to spend either spell slot.
Arcanist casting lets casting classes use more obscure and fun spells without giving them more spell slots, and makes them better adapted to having fewer slots in general than in PF1. It's been well-received in 5e and it keeps being asked about here.
5e gave Sorcerers metamagic that they could then turn into additional spell slots if the need arised, and that seemed to work just fine. It got across the point that the sorcerer has a more intuitive, natural understanding of magic rather than an academic one. They could also cast those spells at whatever level they damn well pleased, and it worked fine.
I think that's a major component of why casters feel so bad. They can't have an absurd number of slots again because that caused a lot of issues with the game, but making better use of fewer slots I think is a perfectly fair buff and would make the game more accessible to boot.
I honestly just want the sorcerer to at the very least have auto heightening on all spells or if not that a complete rework as they are now the only reason to play one over the other caster classes is flavor.I honestly do wonder why that's the case. It's extra bookkeeping and I don't see why the class really needs that limitation, other than to give prepared casters something in compensation. I'm not happy with either prepared or spontaneous casters at this point and would rather they all move to an Arcanist-like setup.
It's not like an Arcanist is even not preparing their spells. They're still doing their rituals, they're still picking spells for the day and trying to be flexible, but having to predict exactly how many times a particular spell will be used leads to balance problems and boring spell selections. A wizard in PF2 currently is encouraged to prepare multiple slots of common spells, which intrudes upon the fantasy of being studious and having obscure magics at their command. They have a limited ability to flex spell slots into something that just came up, but it's just that - limited. And it's more bookkeeping, making an already demanding class even harder to play. And for what benefit? To make it so the number of spells a caster will actually cast per day extremely unpredictable even for players who know what they're doing? If they cast exactly as many feather falls and grease spells as they prepared, it's going to be a lot more done on that day than a wizard that didn't have a good opporutnity to spend either spell slot.
Arcanist casting lets casting classes use more obscure and fun spells without giving them more spell slots, and makes them better adapted to having fewer slots in general than in PF1. It's been well-received in 5e and it keeps being asked about here.
5e gave Sorcerers metamagic that they could then turn into additional spell slots if the need arised, and that seemed to work just fine. It got across the point that...
I wish I could mark a post as favorite 10 times. This is one of if not the worst legacy thing that they are still keeping for some reason. It's been a headache even to veteran players and as I've said in the other thread, I had multiple players turned down from prepared casters or from the game entirely just for this one fact.
A few thing before I get started griping
- Why do people not like Hunt Target? I think it has WAY more flavor and utility than "Favored Enemy" and the new "Paths" that Ranger has are super fun IMO
- Divine Sorcerers fill the new hole of "Hand of god" that Clerics once held before they got neutered. While I do think the fluff there makes sense, it is disappointing mechanically. And the Divine list doesn't allow the smite happy follower of a "just and vengeful god"
- Rogues feel really weird not duel-wielding, but I'm glad that's confirmed to be getting fixed. I like Sneak getting doubled on a crit, because their nuke potential is now a bit higher
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A few thing before I get started griping
Why do people not like Hunt Target? I think it has WAY more flavor and utility than "Favored Enemy" and the new "Paths" that Ranger has are super fun IMO
1) action economy. The hunt target action consumes an action and provides no practical benefits except "turning on" the rest of your class. Switching targets then re-consumes that action. Even Mark has stated that the DPR average doesn't rise above not-using it until round 3.
2) it doesn't mesh with the rest of the class's features. Your animal companion never gets the benefits of Hunt Target and neither do any other allies. Every feat that makes HT better explicitly denies those boosts to everyone else, eg Companion's Bond. "Animal Companion gets the base benefits of HT, but not any of the feat improvements."
3) of course, half of those benefits are garbage any way. Eg the Monster Hunter feat: "When you critically succeed a knowledge check against your HT gain a +1 to your next attack roll." First you need a 5% unlikely result, then you get a tiny bonus, AND--just to kick you in the nuts--it only lasts one action. Its also a circumstance bonus, so it has a possibility of not stacking with other buffs (eg Bless, Inspire Competence).
What a great advancement option! At least your allies also get the benefit (if you tell them). Does that include your animal companion? Does your AC need to understand language to get this benefit? But they still only get one Strike out of it. At least (with the errata patch) you get a free knowledge roll when you use HT...
Later, you can also get a +1 to saving throws against that specific creature, too.
At 10th you get to finally have those benefits of a success as well as a critical success. It still only lasts 1 action (or less, in the case of Double Strike like actions), still only provides a +1, and is still only against the single creature and not other creatures of its species.
A few thing before I get started griping
Why do people not like Hunt Target? I think it has WAY more flavor and utility than "Favored Enemy" and the new "Paths" that Ranger has are super fun IMO
1) action economy. The hunt target action consumes an action and provides no practical benefits except "turning on" the test of your class. Switching targets then re-consumes that action
2) it doesn't mesh with the rest of the class's features. Your animal companion never gets the benefits of Hunt Target and neither do any other allies. Every feat that makes HT better explicitly denies those boosts to everyone else, eg Companion's Bond. "Animal Companion gets the base benefits of HT, but not any of the feat improvements."
3) of course, half of those benefits are s%%* any way. Eg the Monster Hunter feat: "When you critically succeed a knowledge check against your HT gain a +1 to your next Strike action." First you need a 5% unlikely result, then you get a tiny bonus, AND--just to kick you in the nuts--it only lasts one action. Its also a circumstance bonus, so it has a possibility of not stacking with other buffs (eg Bless, Inspire Competence).What a great advancement option! At least your allies also get the benefit (if you tell them). Does that include your animal companion? Does your AC need to understand language to get this benefit?
1) If you use TWF or Archery you essentially get that action right back on that turn with the extra attack from Hunted Shot/Twin Takedown, while subsequent turns you get those extra attacks for free.
2) As of 1.6 your Animal Companion (And your allies if you use the shared target abilities) gets the benefits of your Hunter's Edge (MAP reduction, +1d6 damage on one hit, or skill boosts). The MAP reduction in particular is great, especially if someone already has an agile weapon.
3) Yeah, Monster Hunter starts rough but Master Monster Hunter fixes it (IMO Monster Hunter should work on regular...
I think people are particularly forgetting that Hunt Target explicitly will let you activate it when you're just tracking a creature - if you do Ranger things and look for footprints or other signs of hostiles, you'll start the fight with an advantage in action economy.
Regardless, I much prefer it to the old PF1 way of trying to guess what type of enemy will end up being most numerous in this particular campaign, and rarely getting to pop off if you guess wrong. Now it's just something you can get whenever you actually make an effort to hunt something.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, "Its also a circumstance bonus, so it has a possibility of not stacking with other buffs (eg Bless, Inspire Competence)", really? You might've checked up before posting that at least. Bless is a conditional bonus, not circumstantial, and assuming you mean Inspire Courage rather than Competence (I assume yo do since we are talking about attack rolls) then that is conditional as well. Like most number buffs.
The fact that I (an largely, no one) can remember what things are Circumstance and which are Conditional speaks volumes about how badly (and arbitrarily assigned) these two names are. In any case, its still almost duckling worthless.
(As for double-checking, I was on my tablet at the time and without a quick and easy reference to the rules)
I think people are particularly forgetting that Hunt Target explicitly will let you activate it when you're just tracking a creature - if you do Ranger things and look for footprints or other signs of hostiles, you'll start the fight with an advantage in action economy.
Whoop de doo.
Speaking of, what happens if you find the tracks of a group of creatures (say, 8 goblins) and then finally catch up to them. Which goblin is your target? Do you know which one is your target?
People also forget that it doesn't have a duration.
Whoop de doo.
Because the fact that one almost always comes from CIRCUMSTANCES and abilities and the other almost always comes from CONDITIONS and spells isn't an easy enough distinction?
Is Flat-Footed a Condition or a Circumstance?
Not what type of bonus the AC penalty is, the fact that one is (or is not) Flat-Footed, is that a Condition or a Circumstance?
Next question:
How many...
- Spells
- Abilities
- Other effects
...grant the Flat-Footed status?
Do Feats grant Conditional or Circumstance bonus/penalty values (via their effects)?
I mean, it may be an unpopular opinion but I'm generally in the camp of "If a rule or other thing is reasonably clear and a lot of people still don't get it, it's not necessarily the rule that's the problem"
But they aren't clear, is what Draco is trying to point out. While base PF had word salad for (de)buff types, at least they were highly consistent with both naming conventions and sources of said types. Having it be "Situational" and "Inflicted" would go a long way to making it easier to read.
There don't seem to be very many spells that land Flat-Footed, it is mostly caused by circumstances like flanking, stealth, and the use of abilities. So I would generally call it circumstance. I do see the confusion there though as flat-footed itself is a condition (Though it usually is a relative condition, that is to say you can be flat footed to one foe but not another as it is usually caused by specific Circumstances like flanking or stealth, as mentioned. There is no such thing as being Enfeebled or Enervated against one opponent but not another.). As I said it isn't perfect, but a general rule. Generally Flat-Footed is caused by circumstances and abilities, so it is reasonably assumed to be Circumstantial.
You're right, there aren't many spells. However, all told there's somewhere between 38 and 46 different ways (depending on how you count: the list I made was 38 items long, but I squished together a lot of the Conditions and other similar effects (i.e. unconscious, prone, and asleep counted as 1)) to be or make an opponent be Flat-Footed (3 were spells, iirc).
Feats also would generally (And at least in every case I have seen) provide circumstance bonuses. As said, circumstance is usually circumstances and abilities. The few feats that do provide numerical bonuses usually do so in a certain circumstance, rather than actually causing a condition. (Of course some active feats like Intimidating Strike cause a condition, those would cause conditional penalties aside from Flat-Footed, bearing in mind the earlier distinction).
A quick cursory glance showed that its almost a complete 50-50 split between Circumstance and Conditional, roughly divided along the line of "is it permanently on or not?" But even that wasn't a very good metric.
I.e. class or race based poison resistance was Conditional while "I perform an action and someone gets +2 to damage" is Circumstantial.
Buuut then we get things like Ancestral Hatred which is Always On, but Circumstance (ok, it only applies in certain circumstances), but there's also Forlorn (an always-on +1 vs. Emotional trait effects) or Hazard Finder, (an always-on +1 circumstance to find traps).
On the other side of the coin, a barbarian's Rage bonuses are all Conditional. A bunch of Cleric feats give "when you channel [some circumstance] the target gains a +1 conditional bonus to X," such as Defense Recovery and Improved Elemental Channel. Crane Stance also gives a +4 Conditional bonus to athletics checks and Dragon Stance a +1 conditional bonus to saving throws, but Crane Stance also grants a +1 circumstance bonus to AC!
I honestly just want the sorcerer to at the very least have auto heightening on all spells or if not that a complete rework as they are now the only reason to play one over the other caster classes is flavor.I honestly do wonder why that's the case. It's extra bookkeeping and I don't see why the class really needs that limitation, other than to give prepared casters something in compensation. I'm not happy with either prepared or spontaneous casters at this point and would rather they all move to an Arcanist-like setup.
It's not like an Arcanist is even not preparing their spells. They're still doing their rituals, they're still picking spells for the day and trying to be flexible, but having to predict exactly how many times a particular spell will be used leads to balance problems and boring spell selections. A wizard in PF2 currently is encouraged to prepare multiple slots of common spells, which intrudes upon the fantasy of being studious and having obscure magics at their command. They have a limited ability to flex spell slots into something that just came up, but it's just that - limited. And it's more bookkeeping, making an already demanding class even harder to play. And for what benefit? To make it so the number of spells a caster will actually cast per day extremely unpredictable even for players who know what they're doing? If they cast exactly as many feather falls and grease spells as they prepared, it's going to be a lot more done on that day than a wizard that didn't have a good opporutnity to spend either spell slot.
Arcanist casting lets casting classes use more obscure and fun spells without giving them more spell slots, and makes them better adapted to having fewer slots in general than in PF1. It's been well-received in 5e and it keeps being asked about here.
5e gave Sorcerers metamagic that they could then turn into additional spell slots if the need arised, and that seemed to work just fine. It got across the point that...
A lot of good points all worth noting thanks for a fun read, I agree the arcanist casting would be a sweet alternative.
Hmm, the stances and rage are an oddball, granted. The rest sounds about right. Channel I get because that's magical.
The problem isn't one or two odd-ball examples, but that I can find more than a handful. Heck, I don't even need to dig deeply into the search results for "circumstance bonus" or "conditional bonus" to find an odd-ball example.lAncestries ping right off the bat, so I skipped reading most of them. I find questionable, but not outright egregious examples in Alchemist, then find a really bad example as early as Barbaian and Cleric!
There's two threads along for them to be renamed, so I'm hardly the first person to find them confusing.
(And ~42 ways to become flat-footed is absurd. Flank? Brutish Shove? Snares? Conditions? Alchemical elixers? Magic? The reduction in the ability to find an advantage went too far)
Not intentional, but I do apologize. Swear words aren't in my tablet's dictionary, so attempts to swipe-type them result in "clever" substitutions (I also regularly run into other words no in it either, like "do." I've slowly spent the last 3 years getting it to remember that "do" is a word).
Something worth noting, that I failed to convey earlier, for the most part Circumstance is physical and Conditional is magical. The few spells that inflict Circumstance are mostly ones that act in a more physical manner, like Black Tentacles or Shield.
Haha nope!
Every condition (sick, fatigue, asleep) are all "purely physical" and can be caused by purely physical means and are all (almost to the last, Flat-Footed is the odd child out) Conditional penalties.
Now, most spells might impart primarily Conditional values, but I don't think that's the breakdown either.
- Name of Effect (most specific trait): Type. "Fluff" (comment)
- Badger Rage (emotional): Conditional. "You enter a state of pure rage for 3 rounds" (ok, not a spell, but is also a conditional bonus; used for comparison)
- Charming Touch (emotional): Circumstance. "You infuse your target with love or lust..."
- Charming Words (emotional): Circumstance. "You whisper enchanting words..."
- Enlarge (transmutation): Conditional. "The target grows to size Large." (you're physically embiggened)
- Hallucination (illusion): Circumstance. "The target can attempt to disbelieve with a large circumstance bonus in circumstances determined by the GM, such as if the target attempted to climb the nonexistent tower." (...maybe the result of physically interacting with it? Bit vague all around.)
- Moonlight Glow (evocation): Circumstance. "any magical script or arcane symbols in the area glow a slightly brighter blue." (Sure, moonlight is a "physical" thing, but runes don't NORMALLY glow in regular moonlight)
- Nightmare (mental): Circumstance. "You send disturbing nightmares to your target."
- Physical Boost (transmutation): Conditional. "You temporarily improve the target’s physique." (I guess it's a magical effect..? But it applies physical results..?)
- Savor the Sting (mental): Conditional. "You revel in your target’s pain" (because the target is physically sick...you get a magical bonus)
- Sweet Dreams (mental): Conditional. "You protect the target’s dreams from malevolent influences and fill them with positive and restful images" (...this is literally the opposite of Nightmare)
- Take its Course (necromancy): Conditional. "You advance one of the target’s toxins..." (that's pretty darn physical)
- Veil (illusion): Conditional. "You disguise the targets as other creatures..."
- Waking Nightmare (mental): Conditional. "You fill the creature’s mind with a vision out of a nightmare that might help or hinder it." (...this is or is this not the same fluff as Nightmare, but with a different penalty type?)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think people are particularly forgetting that Hunt Target explicitly will let you activate it when you're just tracking a creature - if you do Ranger things and look for footprints or other signs of hostiles, you'll start the fight with an advantage in action economy.Whoop de doo.
Speaking of, what happens if you find the tracks of a group of creatures (say, 8 goblins) and then finally catch up to them. Which goblin is your target? Do you know which one is your target?
People also forget that it doesn't have a duration.
Whoop de doo.
Yes, you would know. Because you tracked it, you have the footprints and everything. I would assume the GM would tell you which one you've got the bonus against, as your character would know having gone all Aragorn on their butt. It also has no duration, meaning it will last for as long as you want it to - typically until that target goes down or you need to Hunt another target. That seems perfectly fine. And if you're not just hunting any old goblin, but have the sense to track their leader, or hunting the massive beast they're worshipping, then when the fight breaks out you'll be ready to burst down the largest threat.
You can just track bog-standard gobbos when you're just looking to get ready for the next room in a dungeon crawl. There's probably signs of something that has at one point moved throughout the dungeon, you'll track something. You maybe might need to even scout ahead (how rangery!) to get that hunt target in unseen. Because you're hunting.
Something worth noting, that I failed to convey earlier, for the most part Circumstance is physical and Conditional is magical. The few spells that inflict Circumstance are mostly ones that act in a more physical manner, like Black Tentacles or Shield.
But yeah, there is some oddball and inconsistency. For example I wouldn't have really guessed at stances or Rage giving conditional were I not to have read the first.
The way I understand it is that conditional basically means "buff." Conditional bonuses are buffs, conditional penalties are debuffs. Stances and rage are self-buffs, so they're conditional. The intent is that the party can no longer stack a bunch of buffs before entering a fight to inflate the bonuses to ridiculous numbers.
Circumstantial is meant to mean "tactical." It's done as part of a particular maneuver, or when doing things like flanking or fighting at a higher elevation than your opponent. The intent is to avoid the problem where players went +1 fishing, trying to bring up this or that thing they're doing that's supposed to be giving them a slight edge. Only the most impactful tactic should matter, and if the players can't come up with anything more impactful than what they're already getting they'll pipe down about it.
The issue is that really basic class features like stances and rage are incompatible with team buffs, making for anti-synergy between Barbarians, Fighters, and Monks with your bog standard Bard. Which is extremely unintuitive, Bards kind of need to be able to hand out their buffs to do their thing and they're going to expect to be most helpful to exactly those kinds of frontliners. It's fair enough that if there's more than one buffing character in the party that they should have to do different kinds of buffs that do things other than just give a +1 to damage rolls, but most self-buffs in the spirit of Rage should stack with party buffs. It should probably be a rare kind of untyped bonus for the sake of simplicity, so that basic class identities will always work with every party composition. For less critical optional feats that are very obviously meant to be a "buff" I'm sure it's OK to keep those as conditional bonuses to avoid bloating things too much, things like Master Monster Hunter don't need to be stacked with a bunch of other buffs and would simply become a chore to track.
