Elemental Sorcerer changes in 2E - Why?

[spectrevk]

Apologies if this is a rehash of an old topic, but I'm curious about why the 2E elemental sorcerers were designed the way that they were. Some of the changes, like giving them the Primal spell list, seem welcome and interesting. But while Fire elemental sorcerers retain their ability to do Fire damage from 1E with their class spells; Water, Air, and Earth all do Bludgeoning damage. This is problematic for at least a couple of reasons:

1. It makes these options functionally identical, which makes the choice feel irrelevant. This is a shame, since one of my favorite things about 2E character generation is that the choices generally feel important and interesting.

2. It creates a bit of a balance issue, as Fire sorcerers get to deal energy damage, while Water, Earth, and Air are all stuck with physical damage. This means, for example, that the later three are all at a disadvantage when dealing with incorporeal creatures.

Now, I imagine that at least part of the reason for these changes was to create some rarity around access to acid, electrical, and cold damage. And perhaps there was something a little silly about an "earth" elemental dealing "acid" damage (are rocks known for dissolving things?) and "air" becoming more of a "lightning" element, but this solution doesn't sit right with me, or many of the other players and GMs that I've talked to in my area.

I think one possibly better solution, to at least resolve the first issue, would be to have Earth deal Bludgeoning, Air deal Piercing, and Water deal Slashing damage. This makes sense, as pressurized air can puncture objects, and pressurized water is used to cut things in industrial settings. It still doesn't resolve the second issue, though.

[Squiggit]

I think the core of the change is just that, water wasn't water, air wasn't air and earth wasn't earth because they were ice, lightning and acid instead.

By making them bludgeoning damage now you're actually hitting people with rocks or jets of water instead.

I do agree it's kind of bland that three of the elements are identical though, yeah and it would be nice if there were more options like cold, electric, piercing and slashing.

Quote:

This means, for example, that the later three are all at a disadvantage when dealing with incorporeal creatures.

Incorporeal creatures have double resistance against nonmagical damage, but spells are magical so this isn't an issue.

[spectrevk]

Squiggit wrote:

Incorporeal creatures have double resistance against nonmagical damage, but spells are magical so this isn't an issue.

Per the Core rulebook p.452:

"...most incorporeal creatures have additional, though lower, resistance to magical physical damage (such as damage dealt from a mace with the magical trait) and most other damage types."

[Squiggit]

spectrevk wrote:

"...most incorporeal creatures have additional, though lower, resistance to magical physical damage (such as damage dealt from a mace with the magical trait) and most other damage types."

Generally speaking most incorporeal enemies have Resist all:

Quote:

Resistances all 5 (except force, ghost touch, or positive; double resistance vs. non-magical)

5 for Wraiths, 12 for banshees, etc.

Fire damage is going to get reduced by that the same as magical bludgeoning damage. So it's not really an advantage here.

Fire damage is one of the more common weaknesses in the bestiary, which is nice, but it's also one of the more common resistances too.

[Deadmanwalking]

1. They're not actually the same over time, as all three that grant Bludgeoning grant different movement effects.

2. You're getting stuck in the PF1 paradigm here, I think. Elements are not resisted as much any more, but neither is magic physical damage. I'm pretty sure Fire gets resisted more than magical bludgeoning damage.

[Squiggit]

Deadmanwalking wrote:

1. They're not actually the same over time, as all three that grant Bludgeoning grant different movement effects.

To be fair I'm not sure that's necessarily great either. Water doing the same damage type and getting a movement form that's going to be a lot less functional in most campaigns ends up making it feel like a pretty underwhelming choice if your campaign isn't going to heavily feature underwater content.

[Deadmanwalking]

Squiggit wrote:

To be fair I'm not sure that's necessarily great either. Water doing the same damage type and getting a movement form that's going to be a lot less functional in most campaigns ends up making it feel like a pretty underwhelming choice if your campaign isn't going to heavily feature underwater content.

True, but it does mean that at least all four are meaningfully mechanically distinct.

[lemeres]

Squiggit wrote:

I think the core of the change is just that, water wasn't water, air wasn't air and earth wasn't earth because they were ice, lightning and acid instead.

ice is a form of water that can be more easily shaped in a way to cause damage (ie- icicles). Lightning is closely associated with winds and storms, carries a lot of similar themes (fast, airborne, etc), and also seems like a more direct way to cause damage.

...I got nothing for earth. It was really the main complaint people had with the for elemental damage set up.

Anyway, a more interesting method is to steal a bit from the kineticist and give the elements two options- one elemental, and one physical. That would allow a single element to cover more situations. That would likely be a decent class feat to add.

Heck, get fire into it too. While fire is less universally resisted in this edition, a mono element like that could still pose problems. You could easily grant it a bludgeoning option with EXPLOSIONS.

[spectrevk]

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Squiggit wrote:

To be fair I'm not sure that's necessarily great either. Water doing the same damage type and getting a movement form that's going to be a lot less functional in most campaigns ends up making it feel like a pretty underwhelming choice if your campaign isn't going to heavily feature underwater content.

True, but it does mean that at least all four are meaningfully mechanically distinct.

I remembered the movement abilities, but I don't think they are enough to make the choice meaningful. Both swim speed and burrow speed are situational and of lesser utility than flight.

[PossibleCabbage]

I think a big part of it is that an earth sorcerer doesn't really feel like an *earth* sorcerer if all they do is throw acid around.

By all means, add options to have the elemental in your bloodline be a lightning elemental, a magma elemental, an ice elemental, etc. But those aren't the options in the CRB.

Like if I want my character to be a water elemental sorcerer from a tropic area, "I do mostly ice damage" seems incongruous.

[cavernshark]

lemeres wrote:

Anyway, a more interesting method is to steal a bit from the kineticist and give the elements two options- one elemental, and one physical. That would allow a single element to cover more situations. That would likely be a decent class feat to add.

There's nothing stopping you from doing that with your other spells. The elemental bloodlines basically give you three shaped attacks (single target, cone, and blast) with your element that you can use with signature spell to always have an attack in your primary element available. This frees you up to grab other spell energy types using your other spells. Pick up dangerous sorcery if you want to do additional damage on those alternate energy spells too.

As far as the movement types go, if it isn't useful for your campaign you can skip that bloodline power and pick up something else instead.