So as it happen you can heal from 50% of fire spell damages. So whats exactly stopping a phoenix sorcerer from becoming frontline tank by grabbing himself a protector familiar to artificialy increase its healthpool then drop any lasting fire spell on its position (flaming sphere or in this case maximised empowered Ball lightning (Fire)) to heal him and his familiar for 18d6+ or so about per round? If we go all the way down to get Angelic aspect greater, Giant shape into a troll and use Fiery body I think we in for some automatic health pool facetanking troll?
There are a lot of ways the healing offered by Phoenix Bloodline's arcana can be used to great effect. Wall of Fire, for example, can be held as long as you concentrate on it, resulting in essentially limitless healing. There's also changing ray of frost to fire damage and getting limitless healing that way.
So, there's nothing stopping a phoenix sorcerer from doing what you suggest, even without a familiar.
It's more a question of whether the group would find it fun, and whether the GM will be forced to step in.
The thing with firewall though is that monsters too can jump in to heal themselves. The moment you toss a aoe fire spell its like channel energy, you heal everyone unless you cast with the Selective spell metamagic.
Remember, Selective Spell only works with Instantaneous spells, not ones with a duration (which is why it doesn't work with Black Tentacles/etc) so only single-shot healing would work.
And while this is technically in the PFS Campaign Clarifications -
" Page 24—A phoenix sorcerer's bloodline arcana only affects instantaneous spells whose spell level is 1 or higher. "
Seems to imply that they had the more instant-boom spells in mind.
If we're talking straight RAW, then yea HP tanking could be a thing, but in any game where you're high enough level that it's doable, the GM should already be prepared for such silly shenanigans and adapt to respond. Remember, in the previous case with flaming sphere/ball lightning, it's a move action to keep the sphere up with you, so you're not able to move + cast + move balls - a smart enemy will force you to move out of the sphere and either deny you your action, or leave you with your action but in peril.
This isn't significantly better than just healing using wands of Infernal Healing or Cure light wounds.
It definitely doesn't work with Cantrips. Flaming sphere isn't duration instantaneous so it doesn't work. Neither is Wall of Fire.
Edit: Just realized the above is a PFS clarification on the ability.
The as written ability is much more powerful because it doesn't specify duration instantaneous.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
"PFS Campaign Clarifications" is a hell of a euphemism for "house rules".
|
nothing stop the sorcerer from being a frontliner that heals (everyone, as mentioned above)
the opposite point is what prevents the opponent to completely ignore this non-threat and go to the interesting targets ?
a front-liner tank fighter could AoO, trip, ... a sorcerer will be less impressive in CC or melee damage.
Well, a Maximised Empowered Ball Lightning is a 9th level spell, for that, it's a pretty tame effect. Plus, Fiery Body also does the same, only at full value rather than half.
With enough time, Campfire Wall allows neigh infinite healing as a 3rd level spell. I'd also like to point out Burning Arc and Chains of Fire for nice chain heal effects. Overall, I think playing it as a fairly regular (blaster) Sorc with emergency healing ability is probably best.
nothing stop the sorcerer from being a frontliner that heals (everyone, as mentioned above)
the opposite point is what prevents the opponent to completely ignore this non-threat and go to the interesting targets ?
a front-liner tank fighter could AoO, trip, ... a sorcerer will be less impressive in CC or melee damage.
Eh, I dunno. It means the sorcerer gets to break out all those fun touch spells that never get used.
"PFS Campaign Clarifications" is a hell of a euphemism for "house rules".
It's more like "House rules instated after consulting directly with the developers."
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
"PFS Campaign Clarifications" is a hell of a euphemism for "house rules".It's more like "House rules instated after consulting directly with the developers."
Which are still house rules, and often in direct contradiction with the text and intent of the rules said developers produced. Nothing wrong with that, but presenting them as somehow "more correct" than the house rules used by the GM at your FLGS's weekly Pathfinder meetup is irresponsible.
PFS house rules are not "this is how it was intended to work by Word of God but somehow the rules designers keep messing it up in print". PFS house rules are "this is how we decided it should work given the special nature of a globally shared living campaign and some insight from Paizo rules designers who also knew about that context when sharing said insight". They aren't some ideal to which other house rules should be measured--unless you're also running a globally shared living campaign, anyway. They rule the way they do for reasons that (mostly) make sense for the campaign in question, but the same rulings often make little sense in the context of a weekly standard campaign, an isolated one-shot, or a West Marches-style open table.
Sorry for the derail!
PFS house rules should be considered for home play but not necessarily accepted, depending on the likely rationale for the rules.
In a standard game that allows crafting, there is probably no reason to bother with all the PFS rules that provide replacements for crafting feats. Of course, if you are a generous GM, you may want to let a player who doesn't like the crafting option given take the PFS alternative instead if he prefers to do that.
But I would definitely give serious consideration to using PFS rules that clarify confusing or unworkable rules as written. Their added rules for class retraining synergy would be an example of very useful house rules.
PFS house rules should be considered for home play but not necessarily accepted, depending on the likely rationale for the rules.
In a standard game that allows crafting, there is probably no reason to bother with all the PFS rules that provide replacements for crafting feats. Of course, if you are a generous GM, you may want to let a player who doesn't like the crafting option given take the PFS alternative instead if he prefers to do that.
But I would definitely give serious consideration to using PFS rules that clarify confusing or unworkable rules as written. Their added rules for class retraining synergy would be an example of very useful house rules.
I would not give such house rules any more consideration than any other proposed house rule. Less, actually, for two reasons:
1. The context is completely different (living campaign, neutered GM freedom, etc.)
2. When other players propose house rules, they generally give the rationale behind such rules, which helps the reader decide whether the proposal has merit or could even be adopted to better solve the same problem for their own table. If PFS has rationales behind their clarifications, they seem to be quite difficult to discover in many cases.
Let me repeat: PFS Campaign Clarifications are not errata. They are not clarifications of the original rules. They are documentation of how PFS leadership has decided to interpret--and in many cases completely alter--existing rules for their campaign. That's great--it's exactly what they should be doing given the constraints they impose upon themselves--but it's no reason to treat the CC document as any more authoritative, balanced, or well designed for a more standard game of Pathfinder RPG than your average post on the Homebrew forum. Read them if you like, and adopt what makes sense for your table.
...Getting back on topic: A phoenix sorcerer's bloodline arcana works on any spell that deals fire damage, full stop. It does not have to be instantaneous. (Unless your GM says otherwise, of course, as always.) It's pretty neat!