Kineticist in 2e


Conversions

1 to 50 of 115 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have to admit that the Kineticist was flavor wise one of my favorite classes - if not the favorite class. (Yeah I am an Avatar fan, so what? :P )
Not just because it was cool but also because there were some really cool combinations with other classes that actually made a halfway decend (and concept wise really cool) character.

But I agree with people that the burn mechanic is pretty much...not so much fun.
(Also, since my group mostly played mythic it was kind of uncool to get not support whatsoever but thats a different topic)

Looking at how things work in Pathfinder 2 with action economy, focus points etc I think this class has great potential for the second edition.

The focus caster seems to be a good starting point and the kinetic blasts would probably be class specific infusions.
One could start with the blasts beeing actually weaker then other skills action and an option to increase damage (maybe a little like heal spells with inbuild option to make more when using more actions)

Of course there had to be something to spare oneself from using focus points for every modification on the blasts whatsoever - the gather power action comes to mind which can be more flexible with the new action economy

But there would be one more thing I wish from Paizo: do not use burn again. It was a very unfun mechanic
(Luckily, considering the new nonlethal damage mechanics burn seems unlikely either way)


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Just a mention- Kineticist does have mythic support now! It's pretty strong.

I'm also a big fan of Kineticist, but I agree with different people that burn was a cool mechanic and did a lot for the flavor of Kineticist. I'd be happy to see something like focus casting, with the option to spend burn on Kineticist focus abilities once you're out of focus. It'd be much more friendly towards no-burn players than PF1's version, while still keeping that cast-from-hitpoints feel.

I'd personally be sad to see Kineticist lose one of the parts that made it feel like Kineticist, but I could always work on houserules to add it in again.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Dang, totally missed that...well, pf2 is so close not gonna get it anymore probably

Well, one of the biggest problem with burn was that there are some abilities that like burn and some...not

also, mangling your hitpoints for using skills...eh ....not everyones taste (and if you wanted to be effective you just had to sometimes...often...)

If they add something similar I would love to see it as optional but I fear that that would split the community into one half saying 'you have to do it or you are not using your full potential' and in 'if you waste lifepoints dont complain if you die'


Dang, totally missed that...well, pf2 is so close not gonna get it anymore probably

Well, one of the biggest problem with burn was that there are some abilities that like burn and some...not

also, mangling your hitpoints for using skills...eh ....not everyones taste (and if you wanted to be effective you just had to sometimes...often...)

If they add something similar I would love to see it as optional but I fear that that would split the community into one half saying 'you have to do it or you are not using your full potential' and in 'if you waste lifepoints dont complain if you die'


I made a quick & dirty write up template for the Kineticist for the playtest, I'm gonna polish it for the full version and probably post it somewhere. What I had going was essentially: Kinetic Blast was a dynamic action Focus spell (of cost 0, but you needed one in the bank for it to work) that was 1d6 per action spent, Heightening (+1) +1d6 per action; Gather Power gave you 1 temp Focus point for the round, cost 2 actions. Burn was a single action move that gave you all your Focus back at the cost of some HP, totally optional, it kept the "cast from HP" feel while also being the case that you never HAD to do it. I imagine Paizo would probably do something along those lines, but in a much more elegant manner. They were also CON key stated, Blasts were exotic weapons they had proficiency with, and I tried to emulate their initial training form PF1. Can I see the source of their Mythic support Quid? I've read the Mythic book, and the Occult updates, no specific mention around. Just the standard wording clarification that made Champion Kineticists not suck because Blasts are and also aren't weapons and it was weird.

Silver Crusade

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
nick1wasd wrote:
Can I see the source of their Mythic support Quid? I've read the Mythic book, and the Occult updates, no specific mention around. Just the standard wording clarification that made Champion Kineticists not suck because Blasts are and also aren't weapons and it was weird.

He's probably talking about Chronicle of Legends, which is already on Archives of Nethys


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I like the concept of the Kineticist but the class in PF1 was too full of special, complicated stuff for me.
Burn, Wild Talents, Gather Power, Supercharge, Buffer, Overflow,... - too many unique class features that were so much text for something that amounts to elemental pew-pew.
Compare that to the Witch: Patron, Spells, Hexes.

If they make the Kineticist again, I hope they make the basics (the class features) real simple and add all the advanced stuff as class features to opt in.
I think if they tone it done a bit in the sheer amount of options and follow the basic PF2 class recipe of very few and defined core abilities, 1-2 paths to choose and the rest as feats, this will be a nice class. Utility Wild Talents already behave like class feats, coming at even levels and being utility stuff. Infusions and some other abilities could be packaged into paths with some associated class feats.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Subscriber

I also adore the kineticist. It's so flavorful and variable that it lends to really fun and weird builds. I think the element-manipulator-class will show up in 2e, but likely as part of another class. My hope is that the Elemental bloodline for sorcerer will emulate it close enough.

For my playtest group, I brewed up a druid order for it. Metamagic feats for infusions, beefed up cantrip damage for blasts, and the ability to overspend spell points by taking unhealable damage (like Quicksilver Mutagen). I think it might work better with more spell/focus point outlets or on an elemental bloodline sorcerer (or both).


Kineticist is by far my favourite class, and the one that is making it hard for me to get too excited for second edition. I will be ecstatic when (if) it comes to second edition. Personally I've read and re-read class features and such for kineticist so much that the rules aren't confusing in the least to me, but if others feel they were complicated then I understand if they need to be changed.

I'd be fine with burn being changed to something more simple like a seperate pool of resources that refills only on an 8 hour rest.

I mostly just wanted to chime in and say my favourite things about the kineticist in the hopes that they stick around for second edition. So here's a little list, though I'm sure I'll forget some stuff.

- All day blasting with optional utility. A little less dpr than martial classes but with cool optional infusions to inflict status effects, do aoe, target different saves, etc.

- Utility talents. Again something you can do all day, or at least a strong effect at the cost of burn (or whatever resource they end up getting). Something that fits the element you choose.

- Picking elements. Being able to choose an element and your specialization and weaknesses are based on that. I personally don't like in other games where characters are a master of all elements, I like having to pick one and go with it.

- Less dependence on items. This one is hard to do without getting into 'confusing' rules territory like elemental overflow and such. But I love the flavour of not needing weapons to deal damage or use skills.

- Mostly SAD. Kineticists really only need dex and con. Everything else is optional or for flavour. This isn't a huge one but I like it anyway.

That being said, there are lots of things that kineticists do poorly, such as multiclassing and archetyping. I think that will be fixed in 2e just by the normal rules.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

the problem for kineticist was that it was a really bug strain on the existing framework of P1. It more than any other class REALLY stretched the limits of what the system could handle.

For P2, I would expect this to be much easier. Cantrips in P2 are already what the "blasts" were for P1. An auto scaling at-will spell ability. For wild talents, just have a class feat that adds an action the blast add a new shape for feature or whatever. Also replace Burn with Focus Power. Finally for the utility talents, those can be class feats too.

Without the need for burn, you would shift this away from a Con class to probably a Cha one, as a ranged spellcaster you don't really need all the extra HP, since you're not casting from it.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Seisho wrote:

I have to admit that the Kineticist was flavor wise one of my favorite classes - if not the favorite class. (Yeah I am an Avatar fan, so what? :P )

Not just because it was cool but also because there were some really cool combinations with other classes that actually made a halfway decend (and concept wise really cool) character.

But I agree with people that the burn mechanic is pretty much...not so much fun.

Oh boy don't get me started on burn... :P

For a PF2 class, I think they could have class cantrips for their blasts, and focus powers for their infusions and utilities. For people that wanted to retain the old PF1 feel, they could flavor their regain focus act to punching themselves in the face for 10 min to regain that focus... ;)


Hmmm what re the thoughts of Class Paths being Blaster, Kinetic Blade, and a more utility rocused path.

in this case, just like the druid you could pick stuff from other paths but youll get extra umph from picking the ones associated with your path.

it may also be a two path thing so you pick element and then how the manifestation of the elemental control works.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook Subscriber
pixierose wrote:

Hmmm what re the thoughts of Class Paths being Blaster, Kinetic Blade, and a more utility rocused path.

in this case, just like the druid you could pick stuff from other paths but youll get extra umph from picking the ones associated with your path.

it may also be a two path thing so you pick element and then how the manifestation of the elemental control works.

One of the good things about the kineticist design is that utility options don't compete directly with combat ability.

A kineticist path seems like it would either be the primary element or the primary blast type, and the element makes more sense to me.


"pixierose wrote:
Kinetic Blade

This could be easily done with a different cantrip for melee options.


Can someone explain the big deal about the Kineticist flavour is?
Is it purely linked to Avatar? Or is there something else that generate so much passion for the clsss?

Because if so I would query if that is really enough of a justification for reintroducing it. If we are saying the blast will be like the cantrip blasts and burn really can’t work (and people don’t like it) then surely the blasting elemental character is simply a sorcerer?

I personally don’t like the idea of a Con based caster . Too me con is too powerful a vital stat given the HP and saving throw benefits

Also people are saying they don’t like burn. From my exposure to kineticists I find they don’t take anywhere near enough burn. They are granted many easy ways to ignore it.

But I am really stuck on why elemental sorcerers can’t be the ones to manipulate elements ? Especially as in addition there could well be new elemental bloodline powers that do similar things to current talents

So why kineticists as a separate class other than legacy ?


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Kineticists have a couple things going for them that Sorcerers and Evokers don’t.
- More damage/range/shapes. By focusing exclusively on their at-will blast, rather than having it as a fallback option, they get things like at-will AoE or range comparable to what archers get.
- Thematic utility abilities. A fire Sorcerer can sling fire, but not manipulate it- certainly not as an at-will ability.
- Aether. I want to magical railgun boulders at people and have meaningful telekinesis before, what, ninth level? I want to take a sail and make a giant bedsheet ghost.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Lanathar wrote:
So why kineticists as a separate class other than legacy ?

For a sorcerer, cantrips are the backup and are built to be inferior to weapon and spell attacks: the main job of the caster is to cast spells, the weapon user to hit with their weapons, ect. The kineticists' weapon IS those at will cantrips and should be on par with other classes attacks and not their 'back-up' options.

As to why people like them, it's the at will nature and the ability to alter it to the situation. Change the range, area, riders, damage types, ect. It's just not something the sorcerer can replicate: spells are limited times per day and at-wills are built to be inferior options to supplement their spells not replace them.

AS far as con and burn, I don't really care if it's con based as I'd like to never see burn again... :P


I think it's that they're a completely different playstyle than most casters. I know cantrips are stronger now but not strong enough to base a class around them. But all day blasting is an extremely cool concept to some (me included) and something not other caster can do well. I hate constantly expending resources


I can’t help but feel the new system will not satisfy Kineticist players as the at will blast powers surely can’t be as strong as they were in 1E especially if crits are easier to come by

But the power level of current cantrip abilities would be seen as too low

All that the suggestions above seem to say is that they should get an at will blast that can be powered up a certain number of times per day (as this would HAVE to be limited) - so very much like spell slots per day

Which is where I was saying that it seems like an elemental sorcerer could have scope to have a basic elemental blast and then a bunch of spells that change the range or shape (for arguments sake burning hands , scorching Ray, fire ball, wall of fire on top of a basic fire blast). So what would be really different - other than playing off of con : which is just an understandable desire for HP. But paizo did away with a con based caster before (orc witch) - another reason Kineticist has always confused me


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I don’t think anyone is going to give you a satisfactory answer, because frankly it just comes down to personal taste and you simply expect different things than other people.

Edit: and in case I’m not clear, your opinion is just as valid as anyone else’s. Especially since none of us work for Paizo and will get final say on how the kineticist is translated anyways.


Gaulin wrote:
I think it's that they're a completely different playstyle than most casters. I know cantrips are stronger now but not strong enough to base a class around them. But all day blasting is an extremely cool concept to some (me included) and something not other caster can do well. I hate constantly expending resources

So the “cool concept” is not having to adhere to the same resource management rules as almost all other classes? Or have i missed a subtlety because it is late and I am tired?

That kind of leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Especially because most people then go on to say “but I hate burn”. So the desire it for powerful all day blasting with no restrictions

Why does this make sense ? From a game balance perspective more than anything

What I was trying to say above is the design space now would be to use these base cantrips as a starting point. But you have proven my point by saying they are not strong enough

But why should someone have a stronger unlimited blast that they can power up and do crazy things with and base off of a better stat than the much maligned sorcerer . I know sorcerers aren’t blasting only but it is one of the key ways many people build them and I just fear that they will get left in the dust (like they always have done by wizards in general) for a very nebulous “concept”

Happy to be talked convinced otherwise but not by the argument that resource management is unappealing. That is not a concept

I actually think the opposite to many with regards to Burn if this concept is something that must be portrayed. Rather than it being gone it should be the key thing. It should be very severe but have very very powerful effects. I cannot stand how many “ignore burn” things there are as it stands - it all seems quite contradictory which I guess was playtest related. I wasn’t involved in the Kineticist playtest but I get the feeling burn was even more severe in that based on how hard the class works to try and ignore it...?


AnimatedPaper wrote:
I don’t think anyone is going to give you a satisfactory answer, because frankly it just comes down to personal taste and you simply expect different things than other people.

Well my original question was actually about the origin of the concept. As in is it purely from Avatar or does it have other traditions

People seem passionate about “all day blaster” and I am wondering if this had another origin or if it is just the one source

All day blasting seems a little video gamey to me but as you say it could be personal preference. But things getting too close to a video game was a major flaw with 4E. So I wouldn’t want that route


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Lanathar wrote:
AnimatedPaper wrote:
I don’t think anyone is going to give you a satisfactory answer, because frankly it just comes down to personal taste and you simply expect different things than other people.

Well my original question was actually about the origin of the concept. As in is it purely from Avatar or does it have other traditions

People seem passionate about “all day blaster” and I am wondering if this had another origin or if it is just the one source

All day blasting seems a little video gamey to me but as you say it could be personal preference. But things getting too close to a video game was a major flaw with 4E. So I wouldn’t want that route

Oh. That was 3.5 warlocks, dragonfire adepts, and to a lesser extent dragon shaman. All were introduced, like the kineticist, to be all day casters without actually having to track spellcasts. And yes, the rise of MMOs probably contributed.

There’s been some other attempts over the years, but the warlock especially was the most successful iteration.

Edit: to some extent, I think all of the OA classes were inspired by Wizards “throw spaghetti at the wall and see what sticks” phase of late 3.5.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Lanathar wrote:
Especially because most people then go on to say “but I hate burn”. So the desire it for powerful all day blasting with no restrictions

I hate burn as I don't think of my hp as a resource for my abilities: that has NOTHING to do with wanting other kinds of restrictions. Disliking one kind of restriction doesn't mean a general dislike of restrictions.


I had only heard about warlocks there

The part that I find interesting is that warlocks were d6 HD, 1/2BAB , charisma classes

Kineticist makes a big jump away. So I can only assume warlocks were popular but considered too weak?

It intrigues me how they will fit in the new design since I would assume they would need to draw a line somewhere between element sorcerer and ranged weapon fighter from a game balance perspective

*

If I recall it is also left vague where their power comes from and indeed why Con has such an influence over it. That kind of thing frustrates me. Especially when such a key general stat is picked

I get the whole forcing your body beyond for the extras . But why Con at it’s very core

*

I am highly conflicted because some of the more unusual concepts of magic in more obscure culture use a similar idea to kineticists ;

Sorcerers in Hellequin chronicles (obscure British modern day fantasy book series) use two elements and manipulate them including blasts, swords, using fire for dark vision, air to slow fall etc.

Magic in the short lived “Camelot” series that was inherently destructive. So when Merlin tried to save someone with magic the spell would have killed him. And he had to explain why he couldn’t create a firestorm without causing severe damage elsewhere

All very interesting . I am just not the biggest fan of the current execution and am not smart enough to see how it will balance into the new game system (not helped by it not being out yet!)

It is also not clear what kind of priority kineticists or any of the occult classes even are. It seems like they are relatively keen to put a stamp on the new edition with some new classes...


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Maybe Kineticist could take total advantage of the 3 action system, kinda having Cantrips that you can apply "metamagic".

Per example:

Have the Kinetic Blast cantrip as an one action 1d6 targeting one creature with the Kineticist element, then they can metamagic it with additional actions to increase the effectiveness like increasing damage, making it a line or burst area, changing elements and etc.

If they try to use the Kinetic Blast a second time in the same round they take the Burn.

Their class feats would be more metamagic to change Kinetic Blast...

Damn, now that I wrote it down it really looks like the Warlock from 5e changing Eldritch Blast with invocations... So nevermind lol.


graystone wrote:
Lanathar wrote:
Especially because most people then go on to say “but I hate burn”. So the desire it for powerful all day blasting with no restrictions
I hate burn as I don't think of my hp as a resource for my abilities: that has NOTHING to do with wanting other kinds of restrictions. Disliking one kind of restriction doesn't mean a general dislike of restrictions.

I gather the idea of burn comes from the idea of pushing the body beyond limits. Is this a theme from Avatar as I don’t think it is a warlock thing from 3.5

And I can understand this viewpoint especially because HP is already something tricky to conceptualise

But having a resource pool that doesn’t involve some kind of exertion themed mechanic takes things back in the direction of differently flavoured sorcerer

Which is why understanding the concept is important. Because if the idea is pushing yourself when necessary then a different idea may be needed than self inflicted HP. Something with conditions ?

Or is the “pushing yourself” not really a key part to this concept ?


Kyrone wrote:

Maybe Kineticist could take total advantage of the 3 action system, kinda having Cantrips that you can apply "metamagic".

Per example:

Have the Kinetic Blast cantrip as an one action 1d6 targeting one creature with the Kineticist element, then they can metamagic it with additional actions to increase the effectiveness like increasing damage, making it a line or burst area, changing elements and etc.

If they try to use the Kinetic Blast a second time in the same round they take the Burn.

Their class feats would be more metamagic to change Kinetic Blast...

Damn, now that I wrote it down it really looks like the Warlock from 5e changing Eldritch Blast with invocations... So nevermind lol.

That could be what people want? But I would guess the idea would for something a bit different from that . It is just weather the new system, especially being more simple, really allows for it


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Lanathar wrote:
Kineticist makes a big jump away. So I can only assume warlocks were popular but considered too weak?

All three were considered to be on the weak side. As these were all experiments, no one had a solid bead on how powerful having a slew of at-will SLAs would wind up. Ironically, warlocks were the first to be published, and are probably the most playable of the three (dragonfire adepts can be salvaged with a good DM and metabreath feats, but dragon shaman are just not good).

All were fun to play, IMO. Even my poor DS (admittedly, I gestalted mine with the Paladin class).

As to why CON as a casting stat, you’d have to ask Mark why and how that came to be. That kind of came out of nowhere for everyone, but pairs well with Burn. If you search the forums, he may well have explained it at some point.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Sorcerer's cast 'normal' spells at their base: Kineticist doesn't. If it's made to cast normal spells, it's not a Kineticist anymore IMO. For a normal spellcaster, you'd need to restrict spells to that element, in affect creating a spell-list for each element... You're getting VERY complicated for "differently flavored sorcerer". Fire Kineticist use fire, water ones use water, ect. That's just not what a sorcerer does.

As to con , “pushing yourself” and burn... I never thought of ANY of those core to the Kineticist identity. It's controlling an elementary energy with an at will blasting ability and some associated elemental abilities. I'm 100% fine with everything balance with no burn. Kyrone's idea about metamagic to modify the blast would work well too as it's trading actions to effects.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Lanathar wrote:
I gather the idea of burn comes from the idea of pushing the body beyond limits. Is this a theme from Avatar as I don’t think it is a warlock thing from 3.5

Strangely enough, the people that make up fantasy games for living occasionally get ideas that aren’t direct translations of something else. If anywhere, that came from Wilders in 3.5, who had a similar overclock ability. But could easily have come from the slew of literary precedents where magic is physically taxing, such as Dragonlance.

But like graystone says, it doesn’t have to be a thing. I would personally prefer something along those lines, but not enough to argue about it.

Edit: but since it’s the topic, I’ll move my thoughts from the mesmerist thread to here:

Quote:
I’ve mentioned before, but my preference would be to give kineticists a unique debuff, and once they hit 4+con modifier (or whatever, can be tweaked) they become unconscious, rather than them directly manipulating their HP.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
AnimatedPaper wrote:
Lanathar wrote:
I gather the idea of burn comes from the idea of pushing the body beyond limits. Is this a theme from Avatar as I don’t think it is a warlock thing from 3.5
Strangely enough, the people that make up fantasy games for living occasionally get ideas that aren’t direct translations of something else. If anywhere, that came from Wilders in 3.5, who had a similar overclock ability. But could easily have come from the slew of literary precedents where magic is physically taxing, such as Dragonlance.

Firestarter comes to mind: pushing their abilities caused nosebleeds and brain hemorrhages.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

You know, that's a point. Stuff like burn is usually more associated with Horror than Fantasy. Or at least Low Fantasy instead of High. Appropriate for Occult Adventures, since that steps a bit outside of genre, although not to the extent that Horror Adventures would, but different.

--
If they did reintroduce burn, I hope it gets implemented differently. In PF1, you had several ways to reduce your burn by taking extra actions to perform the task. That works well with PF2, but honestly I'd prefer the opposite: you take burn to reduce the number of actions your activity takes. I also think they should remove the number of things that uses burn (in either direction), which might help you out Graystone. If most of your utility powers were just focus, and burn only really interacted with metakinesis and kinetic blasts, you might not find it so annoying.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
masda_gib wrote:

Burn, Wild Talents, Gather Power, Supercharge, Buffer, Overflow,... - too many unique class features that were so much text for something that amounts to elemental pew-pew.

Compare that to the Witch: Patron, Spells, Hexes.

Kind of an unfair comparison, though. Full casters intentionally have pared down class features in PF1 because spellcasting itself is such a robust and powerful set of tools.

Lanathar wrote:
Can someone explain the big deal about the Kineticist flavour is?

It's less about their flavor and more about the mechanics and how they interact with that flavor.

You could play an elemental sorcerer who generally fills the same thematic role as a kineticist and given the way PF1's balance shakes out, the sorcerer would be way stronger.

But building an actual themed caster in PF isn't really feasible, a lot of your options are going to be outside whatever perceived theme you're trying to adhere to, the at-will capabilities of a caster are much more limited, the abilities themselves don't have any real mix-and-match capabilities in the way a kineticist does with shapes and infusions. A whole slew of kineticist archetypes and themes just don't exist within the sorcerer's framework.

A fireball slinging sorcerer and a flame-primary kineticist definitely have a lot of thematic overlap, but the way in which they execute those concepts are pretty radically different and I don't see why you think that's something that should just be dismissed out of hand.

Lanathar wrote:
So the desire it for powerful all day blasting with no restrictions

Yes, and?

Lanathar wrote:
That is not a concept

That's not how that works. Something isn't suddenly invalid just because you've singularly decided it is.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I think the appeal of the kineticist thematically is the option to go all-in on an element, and the cool options that provides. It's hard for a Sorcerer (or any other caster) to be the 'Master of Water' because inevitably a good bunch of your spells won't be water focused - even if you pick almost all the water ones available, or if you can (like late-stage PF1 for some elements) you'll be a pretty ineffective character. A kineticist can be 'Master of Water' quite easily - and you'll get some useful utility along with the water in addition to your blasting. I've never watched Avatar (or Legend of Korra), but that's an appealing concept to me - I've made an earth kineticist for one of my campaigns that the PCs loved - they were underground and he would earth glide through the caverns, pulling out earthquakes and the like to make their lives hell.

Mechanically, I think they're represented quite well by getting a unique 2-action cantrip that scales well; as a free action when casting the cantrip, they can apply infusions (which are class feats) - making it AoE, applying a rider condition, etc. This costs a focus point - potentially could negate some of this cost by spending an extra action when casting the cantrip. They can spend an action (potentially free action later on - thanks to Elfteiroh in the Mesmerist thread for the idea :D) to regain a focus point (points maybe?) at the cost of gaining a unique condition which reduces their max and current HP. Utility talents flow quite easily from there - focus spells, essentially.

AnimatedPaper's suggestion of minimizing the use of burn is also very much doable - my goal above was for a more 'faithful' recreation of the class, but changes to reduce the bookkeeping are in-line with PF2's goals, as far as I can tell :)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
AnimatedPaper wrote:
If they did reintroduce burn, I hope it gets implemented differently. In PF1, you had several ways to reduce your burn by taking extra actions to perform the task. That works well with PF2, but honestly I'd prefer the opposite: you take burn to reduce the number of actions your activity takes. I also think they should remove the number of things that uses burn (in either direction), which might help you out Graystone. If most of your utility powers were just focus, and burn only really interacted with metakinesis and kinetic blasts, you might not find it so annoying.

The annoying thing was Elemental Overflow: to stay competitive, you HAD to burn yourself to get your bonuses to hit, to damage and bonuses to 2 stats. So you really couldn't avoid burn. If burn was a truly optional thing, I'd feel much better about it.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

For THAT, I hope they take notes from the Solarians and make overflow "elemental attunement" where you slowly gain bonuses to defense as the fight goes on.

Oooh, what if they combined both burn and that. Instead tracking burn at all, you would slowly gain stacking defense and offenses bonuses equal to your level of attunement. Once you hit your con modifier+1, you'd drop out of your attunement until you refocused. Past a certain level, you could also choose to start a combat at a higher level of attunement, or use some high damage or utility abilities at the cost of more attunement.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
AnimatedPaper wrote:
If they did reintroduce burn, I hope it gets implemented differently. In PF1, you had several ways to reduce your burn by taking extra actions to perform the task. That works well with PF2, but honestly I'd prefer the opposite: you take burn to reduce the number of actions your activity takes. I also think they should remove the number of things that uses burn (in either direction), which might help you out Graystone. If most of your utility powers were just focus, and burn only really interacted with metakinesis and kinetic blasts, you might not find it so annoying.
The annoying thing was Elemental Overflow: to stay competitive, you HAD to burn yourself to get your bonuses to hit, to damage and bonuses to 2 stats. So you really couldn't avoid burn. If burn was a truly optional thing, I'd feel much better about it.

That one really doesn't seem like it'd fit with the PF2 goals - it was mostly there to make the numbers work in PF1, whereas PF2 is aiming to make the maths work without any weird tricks for a class. Your accuracy should already be fine - you're full BAB and would presumably be using CON to hit with your blasts - and if the damage is off, you can just increase the scaling on the cantrip/base dice. I do agree that Elemental Overflow was frustrating in PF1 - it's obvious once you know how the class works that you need to take that burn, but easy to miss on a less thorough read/when you're less experienced. Just a frustrating mechanic all-round in my experience.


I very much agree that Overflow at least in the attack boosting was more of a patch due to how PF1 scales (and the fact that kineticists have/had few ways to get attack boosters). As for burn the HP damage itself may not be needed, but as a control mechanism (so you cant just do everything all the time) it made sense.

Having said that, conditions in PF2 are effectively alternate/expanded versions of burn on a variable duration. Instead of Burn X (lose X*HD in hp for 1 day) its Condition X (lose X amount in Y thing for Z duration), etc.

*******************
As for why I find Kineticist fun/enjoyable, well first is the at will thing. The simple fact I dont need to worry about running out of the main ability is great, the fact you can also change it reliably makes it better.

Flavor wise, it's not just about Avatar, half of the elements aren't even in the show (or are a subset, aka wood). Its about the psychics from other sources that dont have usage limits. Things like recreating Ice Man, Telekineticists, Plant controllers (beyond what druids do), Silver Surfer and other "survive in space with no suit" characters, etc. The basic concept for Kineticist might be "element pewpew", but the actual variety is much more that shooting, it's how can I combine these different abilities to create an awesome character?

In away it's the opposite of PF1 martials, the problem isn't how they can help out of combat, it's how overwhelming managing everything constantly can be. (Another way burn can make sense, it's the stress of having to control things without exploding).


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I enjoy having a magic user who can perform their concept whenever. Elemental theme is cool, but I'd be happy if there were non-elemental users with at-will magic as their default. A master of fire and earth who is a master of magma elementals is cool. A master of plants and fae is cool. A master of necromancy and gravity is cool, etc.

At-Will magic definitely doesn't have to be overpowered and there is nothing wrong with a class that doesn't have a resource-meter or slots to do it's thing. Martials often don't have resources they need to expend and yet they're allowed to exist.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I find the Kineticist's main draw was not just Avatar, but the whole "I am one with the elements" feels, you have characters like Cloak (Cloak & Dagger), Bakugo (Hero Aca), Ice Man (X-Men), Scarlett Witch (Avengers) who don't REALLY fit the bill of a Sorcerer (Scarlett might be the exception, although it's hard to properly replicate her kit as a sorcerer, when the Aether Kineticist worked MUCH cleaner), Bakugo/Todoroki are a great example, because they have moves where they cause strain to their bodies to get extra oompf from the powers they use (Bakugo's super-blast during his fight with All Might when his gauntlet broke is a FANTASTIC example of this in action), and I for one actually LIKE burn, it adds some great flavor, and makes you think twice about going all out if you're pressed against the wall.

Arcaian wrote:
They can spend an action (potentially free action later on - thanks to Elfteiroh in the Mesmerist thread for the idea :D) to regain a focus point (points maybe?) at the cost of gaining a unique condition which reduces their max and current HP.

You mean like Drained? Because taking one instance of Drained to refresh your focus is what my write-up had

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
nick1wasd wrote:
Arcaian wrote:
They can spend an action (potentially free action later on - thanks to Elfteiroh in the Mesmerist thread for the idea :D) to regain a focus point (points maybe?) at the cost of gaining a unique condition which reduces their max and current HP.
You mean like Drained? Because taking one instance of Drained to refresh your focus is what my write-up had

I did indeed mean exactly like Drained! I'd forgotten that one existed, my bad. Would want to do a quick check through the Core rules when they come out to make sure there's no strange interactions, but yeah, smack on! :)


nick1wasd wrote:
I for one actually LIKE burn, it adds some great flavor, and makes you think twice about going all out if you're pressed against the wall.

If that's how it actually worked that would be one thing, but in practice it wasn't like that. Normally people went out of their way to fill their overflow meter and then almost never touched burn after that that couldn't be negated with gather of a class ability. It wasn't a "pressed against the wall" ability but that boring thing you're forced to do before you can use your full class abilities.

Now if a new version is made that JUST allows for 'punching about your weight' nova's and punching your limits... That's less sucky: don't like it but I wouldn't hate it as I could avoid it. IMO, I'd much rather just have focus like everyone else.

Maybe an ability to burn hp or gaining drain to regain focus without the 10 min wait would satisfy those that like burn.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm going to be pretty disappointed if the Kineticist doesn't hurt themselves to use their nova mechanic. Since nonlethal works differently now, it probably shouldn't be "unhealable nonlethal damage" but some sort of pain or self-debuff mechanic is essential to the class I feel.

Like an all-day blaster class with endless magic who doesn't run the risk of overtaxing their bodies shouldn't be Con-based.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Kineticist is like the perfect class for PF2E progression system. 1st level you get 1 feat for each type of elemental blast. Feats afterwards offer utility or damage boosts. You gain a spell pool to spend and enhance you blasts to even higher levels


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Gaining Drain to regain Focus sounds cool and would be a nice option when some talents would be Focus Powers.
Sounds like the playtest barbarian being fatigued mid battle regarding deadlyness, and it stays relevant over all levels since HP lost scale.


masda_gib wrote:

Gaining Drain to regain Focus sounds cool and would be a nice option when some talents would be Focus Powers.

Sounds like the playtest barbarian being fatigued mid battle regarding deadlyness, and it stays relevant over all levels since HP lost scale.

*nods* I much prefer it to a 'must hurt yourself' to do any optional abilities: want to nova with another focus ability than you normally could? Sounds about right as that's something you can avoid or use on how important it is to you that you have to hurt your character.


Arcaian wrote:

I think the appeal of the kineticist thematically is the option to go all-in on an element, and the cool options that provides. It's hard for a Sorcerer (or any other caster) to be the 'Master of Water' because inevitably a good bunch of your spells won't be water focused - even if you pick almost all the water ones available, or if you can (like late-stage PF1 for some elements) you'll be a pretty ineffective character. A kineticist can be 'Master of Water' quite easily - and you'll get some useful utility along with the water in addition to your blasting. I've never watched Avatar (or Legend of Korra), but that's an appealing concept to me - I've made an earth kineticist for one of my campaigns that the PCs loved - they were underground and he would earth glide through the caverns, pulling out earthquakes and the like to make their lives hell.

Mechanically, I think they're represented quite well by getting a unique 2-action cantrip that scales well; as a free action when casting the cantrip, they can apply infusions (which are class feats) - making it AoE, applying a rider condition, etc. This costs a focus point - potentially could negate some of this cost by spending an extra action when casting the cantrip. They can spend an action (potentially free action later on - thanks to Elfteiroh in the Mesmerist thread for the idea :D) to regain a focus point (points maybe?) at the cost of gaining a unique condition which reduces their max and current HP. Utility talents flow quite easily from there - focus spells, essentially.

AnimatedPaper's suggestion of minimizing the use of burn is also very much doable - my goal above was for a more 'faithful' recreation of the class, but changes to reduce the bookkeeping are in-line with PF2's goals, as far as I can tell :)

I can definitely see the appeal of a master of elements especially where the talents allow use of elements in ways other than just blasting e.g. breathing underwater for a water focus

It almost seems like a better design would be more around this “master of an element” idea rather than “all day blaster”


graystone wrote:
AnimatedPaper wrote:
If they did reintroduce burn, I hope it gets implemented differently. In PF1, you had several ways to reduce your burn by taking extra actions to perform the task. That works well with PF2, but honestly I'd prefer the opposite: you take burn to reduce the number of actions your activity takes. I also think they should remove the number of things that uses burn (in either direction), which might help you out Graystone. If most of your utility powers were just focus, and burn only really interacted with metakinesis and kinetic blasts, you might not find it so annoying.
The annoying thing was Elemental Overflow: to stay competitive, you HAD to burn yourself to get your bonuses to hit, to damage and bonuses to 2 stats. So you really couldn't avoid burn. If burn was a truly optional thing, I'd feel much better about it.

This I agree with. It seemed to me like Kineticist should just have been full BAB with no overflow and be done with it. I can only guess that this wasn’t the case because there was an unwritten rule that full BAB = d10 HD and that was seen as overkill for a con based class. Or just general attempts to balance out the overwhelming HP benefit a Con focus gives. All guesses of course.


PossibleCabbage wrote:

I'm going to be pretty disappointed if the Kineticist doesn't hurt themselves to use their nova mechanic. Since nonlethal works differently now, it probably shouldn't be "unhealable nonlethal damage" but some sort of pain or self-debuff mechanic is essential to the class I feel.

Like an all-day blaster class with endless magic who doesn't run the risk of overtaxing their bodies shouldn't be Con-based.

I think this is partly what I was trying to get at. All day blasting , some kind of removal or lessening of the burn ability and being con based strikes me as far too good

But I also agree with what others have said about how in practice people take enough burn to switch on overflow and no more unless they can’t avoid it. This is what I have seen happen . And doesn’t appear to have been the original plan

It is interesting trying to think of other examples that fit this class outside of avatar . Avatar is just such an obvious one that it blocked my view! But as has been mentioned it is very comic book inspired in general .
But if I am right their lore is quite limited in the books. How do they access the elements? Is it via astral plan like most of the occult classes?

As to 2E the way the BAB system works should solve the issue about attack roll scaling that forced overflow which should allow for some more fun options

Are cantrips one or two actions in 2E? Or more simply is the ability to blast more than once a round likely to happen from early levels?

I think the design space also allows for some fun elemental themed reactions as well. Obviously water shield doing blocking is one (but it being able to be destroyed should probably be a thing)

1 to 50 of 115 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Conversions / Kineticist in 2e All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.