| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
IMO, the curse should do something (which is inconvenient, but not really a problem per se) and increase to the "YOU ARE LITERALLY ON FIRE" level as you channel more and more power. With refocus being able to move you down on the scale (though perhaps getting back to the baseline during an adventuring day would be more involved than "refocus").
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I definitely think Oracle needs some sort of all-day curse, without having to start it up with a revelation spell.
Also the minor penalties feel insanely strong for what should be all-day things, but I'm really looking at Battle's here when I say that. -2 to all saves and AC except for when you make a Strike hurts incredibly badly, especially for melee oracles. And the worst part is it doesn't synergize at all with Divine Lance.
This may just be the particular setups my group has played in, but I feel Flames has a much more appropriate minor curse level. Impactful, but not so much that it'll destroy you if you don't work around it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would like an all day/lifetime aspect to the curse also. If they do curse increasing which each revelation spells cast, which I dont really like, but if you are going to do it, it should be made more interesting.
1. the penalties are too severe for both the battle and life curses given what those mysteries are trying to accomplish. if the curses were reversed the negatives portions of the curses, where the battle oracle became harder to heal, and life oracle became easier to hit and damage, that would work pretty well imo, and be just about right. It's aggravating but not so utterly frustrating as the current set up.
2. I dont like the immediately passing out after a certain number, that's boring, it takes all the tension out of the mechanic. I would prefer a flat save % around 50-60%, with a bonus to the save from either wis/con since the curses have aspects of boths.
A flat score means the person is neither incentivize or Dincentivized to push themselves. Do you keep pushing your luck knowing the consequences are so terrible, immediate incapacitation. the number should never go too far in either direction. it should never be unless you have - to your con or wis to score that you never to go for it, and it should never feel like a sure thing either.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I despise the falling asleep at a certain revelation level mechanic. You go unconscious, no one can wake you, you get to re-prep spells... from a player's standpoint this is worse than death. At least dying gets you a cool story. "And then I passed out" is so.... boring. And the PCs can bring you back through other means without having to figure out how to wait 8 hours before they do.
Just imagine needing to go unconscious to save another PC in the middle of a dungeon with a time limit. And now... you get to watch the rest of the game... slowly...
Worse still: You do it at the start of the dungeon. And it's like, nine encounters long, so you're unconscious for two and a half sessions...
Most good GMs will find a workaround, but do we really need a class who comes with a disclaimer for the GM to always make sure an NPC is nearby they can play?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Have you...considered not doing it if it would knock you unconscious at a bad time?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Have you...considered not doing it if it would knock you unconscious at a bad time?
Sorry Craig. I didn't really think about when I used my two domain spells so you have to die so I can keep playing.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Have you...considered not doing it if it would knock you unconscious at a bad time?Sorry Craig. I didn't really think about when I used my two domain spells so you have to die so I can keep playing.
The alternative is literally that you only get one usage and get hard capped.
So if you're ever in that situation they're dead anyways. Just like how if you need the same thing but only have 1 point in your Focus pool.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Have you...considered not doing it if it would knock you unconscious at a bad time?
When is it ever a GOOD time to knock your self unconscious for long periods of time? We're just talking about to what degree it sucks, not that it doesn't in fact suck at certain times...
The alternative is literally that you only get one usage and get hard capped.
Or we could lobby for less onerous curse effects couldn't we?
Yeah I dont get hating having the option. Same with people having the choice to overcharge their wands. It seems folks would rather be hand held than their being mechanics with entirely opt in consequences.
IMO, opt in rules like these should be for the gamemastery guide as truly optional rules for those that wish to opt in to them and not main stream core rules. I'd rather see core rules cover those things that happen regularly: I'd have rather the space here was taken to give us swordcane stats instead of a mechanic everyone agrees you shouldn't use...
Have you...considered not doing it if it would knock you unconscious at a bad time?Sorry Craig. I didn't really think about when I used my two domain spells so you have to die so I can keep playing.The alternative is literally that you only get one usage and get hard capped.
So if you're ever in that situation they're dead anyways. Just like how if you need the same thing but only have 1 point in your Focus pool.
Someone mentioned dead being a lot easier to recover from than forcibly unconscious for 8 hours. If that’s the case, let the character die and raise them.
If you don’t like over clocking, make it a hard cap in your head. That’s allowed.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Asking for it to be elsewhere is surprising seeing as your in the "everything I have to ask the gm about is an impediment to playing the game"
Not really as it's something you AREN'T meant to use as an underlying tactic or use on a regular basis: something that's meant to be used once in your characters lifetime isn't the same as something that might happen every round of every game...
I guess that's okay if you personally wouldn't want to use the mechanic any way?
I'd personally like a less sucktastic curse effect on every level instead of a 'if I'm going to die anyway, I might as well try to take someone with me' effect.
Also not possible because the oracle is coming out after the gmg
Totally possible to have alternate more 'impactful' effects in there [or in another future book] for those that want them and have more sane effects in the core oracle but I'd rather the 'more impactful' not be the norm. Nothing stopping those that WANT to knock themselves out from just dropping to the ground and pretending the effect is more severe until then like the other side suggesting we pretend we have a limit on class features. :P
Bottom line, KO'd isn't written in stone yet as it's the playtest: Now is the time to voice concerns and offer advice. It's a bit too early to pretend it's not and tell people to ignore part of the playtest as you're not really in a position to say what the overclock mechanic is like if you do so. People can start with the 'suck it up, that's the class mechanics' once the book is out.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Have you...considered not doing it if it would knock you unconscious at a bad time?Sorry Craig. I didn't really think about when I used my two domain spells so you have to die so I can keep playing.The alternative is literally that you only get one usage and get hard capped.
So if you're ever in that situation they're dead anyways. Just like how if you need the same thing but only have 1 point in your Focus pool.
Someone mentioned dead being a lot easier to recover from than forcibly unconscious for 8 hours. If that’s the case, let the character die and raise them.
If you don’t like over clocking, make it a hard cap in your head. That’s allowed.
Now I have to ask: does the timer remain at 8 hours even if you die?
"So, he's unconscious for 8 hours and there's nothing we can do to speed this up?"
"Yes."
"But if he were to die, that is something we could fix in less than 8 hours, yes?"
"Uh, sure, but where are you going with-"
(one decapitating slash later)
"Huzzah! A problem we can solve sooner."
So when he's rezzed, is he still sleeping?
Does going to Dying reset the sleep timer?
ie, if you get knocked out, can someone stab you to near death, then patch you back up?
...not saying I'd use this tactic, but it seems kind of backwards?
And for those clamoring for 'sucktastic choice options' are they willing to take time from their busy murderhobo day to do unto their own party members to expedite future healing - provided they don't die in the meantime?
I mean, that's a choice, too, right?
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd prefer if overclocking just removed your ability to refocus and stuck you at your highest curse level until you sleep(and thus no more focus spells until you sleep). you can't lower your curse, but you can still play. might make fire a bit difficult though. :D
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah I dont get hating having the option. Same with people having the choice to overcharge their wands. It seems folks would rather be hand held than their being mechanics with entirely opt in consequences.
If the penalty to Oracle was dying rather than this (like Blaze does at 18th), i’d actually like it a lot more.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Curious, if the fall unconscious for 8 hours with no way to wake up was applied to Barbarians after they rage instead of fatigue would that still be fine?
Yes, if they were trying to do it while fatigued. Since that's, you know, more like what the Oracle has.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Curious, if the fall unconscious for 8 hours with no way to wake up was applied to Barbarians after they rage instead of fatigue would that still be fine?
I think this is an unfair comparison. It’d be a bit more like if the Barbarian could rage while already fatigued, but doing so would render them unconscious.
The way I see the Oracle’s ability is as more of a thematic alternative to a hard cap. You aren’t really expected to ever push yourself that hard except in a dire situation. I do prefer the idea of dropping to 0 hp though.
I know this has been brought up before, but the discussion of this penalty kind of drives the point home, the Oracle needs to be able to use their Focus spells more than other classes. In practice, they’re usually getting fewer per combat than other casters.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So if they could rage while already fatigued but it would leave them unconscious for a long period of time with no bypass that would be acceptable?
I know this has been brought up before, but the discussion of this penalty kind of drives the point home, the Oracle needs to be able to use their Focus spells more than other classes. In practice, they’re usually getting fewer per combat than other casters.
No it doesn’t
So if they could rage while already fatigued but it would leave them unconscious for a long period of time with no bypass that would be acceptable?
I know this has been brought up before, but the discussion of this penalty kind of drives the point home, the Oracle needs to be able to use their Focus spells more than other classes. In practice, they’re usually getting fewer per combat than other casters.No it doesn’t
I can’t speak on whether it would be acceptable to most people. I wouldn’t mind it as an addition to how Rage already works. Barbarians lose nothing, and gain a fun back pocket ability that might make for a memorable encounter once a campaign. But it is a more apt comparison to the Oracle, since it’s not like the Oracle’s only means of using their revelation spells is going unconscious.
I agree that it’s a harsh penalty, but as I said, I think it’s intended to be a thematic hard cap. We can debate whether or not it’s good design to have a mechanic that’s mostly fluff in practice, but let’s try to fairly represent it.
As for your second comment, I’m sorry, but I don’t quite follow. No what doesn’t?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don’t even believe it’s that harsh, it’s just so anticlimactic and meh. If they keep the overclocking hope the drawback isn’t, well, silly.
People discussing the overclocking doesn’t really justify that Oracles “need” to be able to cast their Focus spells more often. Or anything really.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The focus spells can, at worst, be cast once per combat. That's the same as having a focus pool with size 1.
So if they could rage while already fatigued but it would leave them unconscious for a long period of time with no bypass that would be acceptable?
I'd 100% be fine with that. Obviously, me using it probably wouldn't come up often, if ever, but having that option to limit break would be great.
Obviously we are debating what should and shouldn't be in. What your arguing for is a reduction of player choice because you personally dont like the option. It's not balance concern, or a dislike of mandatory feature.
No, I'm actually arguing for MORE options: a sane set of curse affects now and a 'more impactful' set later for those that want to knock themselves out. You are the one arguing for less options...
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The focus spells can, at worst, be cast once per combat. That's the same as having a focus pool with size 1.
So if they could rage while already fatigued but it would leave them unconscious for a long period of time with no bypass that would be acceptable?I'd 100% be fine with that. Obviously, me using it probably wouldn't come up often, if ever, but having that option to limit break would be great.
Limit breaking... then falling asleep and not being able to play the game anymore until the timer is up.
People discussing the overclocking doesn’t really justify that Oracles “need” to be able to cast their Focus spells more often. Or anything really.
I’m sorry, I didn’t really connect those two thoughts very well.
What I meant was: this discussion of the penalties that are incurred from casting revelation spells has forced me to re-examine how the Oracle compares to other focus users, and it seems clear that the Oracle in its current state falls short in the “focus spells per combat” metric.
I’ve seen a general interpretation that the Oracle is meant to be the “focus class”, with their revelation mechanics offsetting their fewer spells compared to a divine sorcerer. If that is indeed the intention, then this issue of revelation spells often getting less use than focus spells is something that needs to be remedied.
and it seems clear that the Oracle in its current state falls short in the “focus spells per combat” metric.
Does it? A level 1 Oracle gets effectively two focus points with no feat investment. Oracles get refocus upgrades a level earlier and don't need to spend feats on it. In most regards that's just as good or better than what other classes get.
and it seems clear that the Oracle in its current state falls short in the “focus spells per combat” metric.Does it? A level 1 Oracle gets effectively two focus points with no feat investment. Oracles get refocus upgrades a level earlier and don't need to spend feats on it. In most regards that's just as good or better than what other classes get.
—Removed because I’m a bird brain who can’t read—
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A witch, for comparison, has an extra spell per day, and as soon as 6th level can have 3 focus points available in every encounter.
No they can't. The witch can only gain one focus point until they hit level 12 and take the Lesson of Focus feat.
Although they can use a familiar ability to give themselves one extra focus point per day.
A witch, for comparison, has an extra spell per day, and as soon as 6th level can have 3 focus points available in every encounter.No they can't. The witch can only gain one focus point until they hit level 12 and take the Lesson of Focus feat.
Although they can use a familiar ability to give themselves one extra focus point per day.
D’oh. It looks like I have been misreading the “Refocus” activity all this time! I was under the impression that you could refocus back up to maximum by simply repeating the process.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
and it seems clear that the Oracle in its current state falls short in the “focus spells per combat” metric.Does it? A level 1 Oracle gets effectively two focus points with no feat investment. Oracles get refocus upgrades a level earlier and don't need to spend feats on it. In most regards that's just as good or better than what other classes get.
One extra and one level earlier isn’t much of a prize.
Especially when it’s the core the whole class is built around.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I can't believe that killing and the rezing the oracle is being seriously considered as a way to bypass the curse.
One extra and one level earlier isn’t much of a prize.
Well, one extra to begin with, more extra if you take the revelation feats and they don't need to invest in refocusing. A level 17+ oracle ends up with effectively 6 focus points and refocus 3 for two feats.
A Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer or Witch wanting to do the same thing needs to spend four or five feats and still gets fewer total uses of focus spells per day than the Oracle. Wizards meanwhile can never learn Refocus 3.
There's a clear advantage there.
In any case I'm not really sure it's really their problem. The main feature of the class is the interplay between revelations and curses and right now the curses just aren't all tuned as tightly as they should be.
I think the discussion is a bit too big picture and a lot of the issues the class is dealing with are more specific ones. Curses need some numbers adjustments across the board.
Life desperately needs a new minor revelation spell, because Delay Affliction is too niche for something you're supposed to be casting frequently to cycle your curse.
Flames needs better access to blasting spells. Right now you're stuck with a basically-mandatory level 1 feat that doesn't even give you the spells when you pick it up and still doesn't give you all that much to work with and there's not enough innate support in the Divine List. Feels kinda bad.
Stuff like that I think matters a lot more right now. Oh, speaking of the divine list, we still need clarification on how divine spells work with godless characters.
and it seems clear that the Oracle in its current state falls short in the “focus spells per combat” metric.Does it? A level 1 Oracle gets effectively two focus points with no feat investment. Oracles get refocus upgrades a level earlier and don't need to spend feats on it. In most regards that's just as good or better than what other classes get.One extra and one level earlier isn’t much of a prize.
Especially when it’s the core the whole class is built around.
thats what a oracle gets for free versus a class with as much investment as they muster...
if the oracle spends feat it's 3 extra per day, and they can grab focus spells from domains as well without multiclassing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
D’oh. It looks like I have been misreading the “Refocus” activity all this time! I was under the impression that you could refocus back up to maximum by simply repeating the process.
I, too, had misread the Refocus ability. My excuse is that in my current PF2 game only one player has a class with a focus pool and he is still 1st level with a focus pool of size 1.
REFOCUS
Concentrate, Exploration
Requirements You have a focus pool, and you have spent at least 1 Focus Point since you last regained any Focus Points.
You spend 10 minutes performing deeds to restore your magical connection. This restores 1 Focus Point to your focus pool. The deeds you need to perform are specified in the class or ability that gives you your focus spells. These deeds can usually overlap with other tasks that relate to the source of your focus spells. For instance, a cleric with focus spells from a good deity can usually Refocus while tending the wounds of their allies, and a wizard of the illusionist school might be able to Refocus while attempting to Identify Magic of the illusion school.
The literal interpretation of that requirements line means that if a character has a focus pool of size 2 and spends both focus points in one encounter, then he or she can Refocus once to gain one focus point, but not Refocus twice to gain two focus points, because for the 2nd Refocus, he or she has not spent at least 1 Focus Point since he or she last regained any Focus Points.
I found a discussion in the August 28th thread Focus Points and Refocus questions, but it mostly talks about increasing the size of the focus pool. It does mention that the 10th level champion feat Devoted Focus can get around the restriction.
This means that increasing the size of a focus pool by 1 simply gives the character 1 more casting of a focus spell per day. It does not allow 1 more casting per combat. A champion's Devoted Focus allows regularly casting devotion spells twice per combat.
However, there is also an issue directly related to the Oracle.
You can reduce the severity of your curse from moderate (or worse) to minor by spending 10 minutes using the Refocus activity (Core Rulebook 300) to mentally reconcile the conflicting demands of your mystery and find common ground between them.
That sentence I quoted does not change the requirements on Refocus. According to the literal wording of the restriction on the Refocus spell, an oracle without a focus pool cannot use Refocus to reduce the severity of a curse because he or she doesn't have a focus pool and has not spent 1 Focus Point.
Once Paizo fixes the wording so that an oracle can reduce the severity of a cuse through a Refocus-like activity, Major Curse and Extreme Curse class abilities say that a single Refocus activity reduces the severity all the way down to minor curse. Thus, a 11th-level oracle with Major Curse can regularly cast revelation spells twice per combat, and a 17th-level oracle with Extreme Curse can regularly cast revelation spells thrice per combat.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That sentence I quoted does not change the requirements on Refocus. According to the literal wording of the restriction on the Refocus spell, an oracle without a focus pool cannot use Refocus to reduce the severity of a curse because he or she doesn't have a focus pool and has not spent 1 Focus Point.
while i do think they could put something in there about changing the requirement of refocus, i do think this is ultimately not worth writing out. it's abundantly clear from the text that they "can" do it, as it explicitly says they can. since the rules were written in full knowledge of the current refocus rules, it can be assumed this is specific overriding general.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I’ve seen a general interpretation that the Oracle is meant to be the “focus class”, with their revelation mechanics offsetting their fewer spells compared to a divine sorcerer. If that is indeed the intention, then this issue of revelation spells often getting less use than focus spells is something that needs to be remedied.In Thoughts on a few possible class features for the Oracle comment #3 " ikarinokami said,
personally I am hoping that the psychic becomes the focus caster. focus spells seem ideal to replicate true psionics better than the 1st edition Psion.
I agree with ikarinokami. Let the psychic classes be the focus-based classes.
Pathfinder 1st Edition had a lot of abilities with a once-per-day or twice-per-day restriction. Pathfinder 2nd Edition unified those to use a common focus pool instead, greatly reducing the bookkeeping. Oracle's revelations were often once per day.
For example, the PF1 battle mysery offers:
Battlecry (Ex): ... You can use this ability once per day, plus one additional time per day at 5th level and for every five levels thereafter.
Battlefield Clarity (Ex): Once per day, as an immediate action, ... At 7th and 15th level, you can use this ability one additional time per day.
Combat Healer (Su): ... You can use this ability once per day at 7th level and one additional time per day for every four levels beyond 7th. ...
Iron Skin (Su): Once per day, ... At 15th level, you can use this ability twice per day. You must be at least 11th level to select this revelation.
Maneuver Mastery (Ex): Select one type of combat maneuver. ...
Resiliency (Ex): You are not disabled and you do not gain the staggered condition if you are reduced to exactly 0 hit points. ...
Skill at Arms (Ex): You gain proficiency in all martial weapons and heavy armor.
Surprising Charge (Ex): Once per day, ... You can use this ability one additional time per day at 7th level and 15th level.
War Sight (Su): Whenever you roll for initiative, ...
Weapon Mastery (Ex): Select one weapon with which you are proficient. ...
Five battle mystery revelations said, "once per day," and five did not.
Skill at Arms and Weapon Mastery are two revelations without a limit per day. In PF2 they merged to become the Mystery Benefit of PF2 battle mystery. War Sight is another one without a limit per day and it became the 10th-level class feat Oracular Warning.
Battlecry might have been the inspiration for Call to Arms, the initial revelation spell. Battlefield Clarity might have been the inspiration for Battlefield Persistance, the advance revelation spell. Heroic Feat, the greater revelation spell, has no equivalent among the PF1 battle mystery revelations.
I messaged with my daughter who had played a PF1 battle oracle. She said, "They have a really nice set of revelations for tailoring a combat character for being an unstoppable force (and tailoring to what your DM likes to throw at you), with a second chance for crowd control effects if you fail, Combat Healer to cast healing spells as quick actions, War Sight which lets you roll twice for initiative and take the better, Resiliency which is a better Diehard, and so on. They can often play the role my barbarians usually do, the tanky person in front who grabs all the attention because they're doing way too much damage to ignore."
She went on to explain that a PF1 oracle is a jack of all trades, master of her mystery. She likes versatile characters.
In conclusion, a PF1 oracle is a general-purpose character class designed to perform well in their mystery via revelations. Because many revelations are once-per-day effects, their PF2 version has to offer something like a focus spell. But focus spells are not the base mechanic for PF2 oracles.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It’s a preferable alternative to what we have now.Except you know is actually only an option past certain levels. For the most commonly played levels rezzing isn't an easy thing to do.
A better option would be unconscious (regular not 8 hours) and the doomed condition. It is a very real and tangible drawback that works at all levels.
Nah, still preferable.
Your suggestion is interesting.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
and it seems clear that the Oracle in its current state falls short in the “focus spells per combat” metric.Does it? A level 1 Oracle gets effectively two focus points with no feat investment. Oracles get refocus upgrades a level earlier and don't need to spend feats on it. In most regards that's just as good or better than what other classes get.One extra and one level earlier isn’t much of a prize.
Especially when it’s the core the whole class is built around.
thats what a oracle gets for free versus a class with as much investment as they muster...
if the oracle spends feat it's 3 extra per day, and they can grab focus spells from domains as well without multiclassing.
The other classes get other stuff and aren’t Cursed for it.
Sorcerer for example gets more actual spells, so the question is are the Focus Spells worth it?
I despise the falling asleep at a certain revelation level mechanic. You go unconscious, no one can wake you, you get to re-prep spells... from a player's standpoint this is worse than death. At least dying gets you a cool story. "And then I passed out" is so.... boring. And the PCs can bring you back through other means without having to figure out how to wait 8 hours before they do.
Just imagine needing to go unconscious to save another PC in the middle of a dungeon with a time limit. And now... you get to watch the rest of the game... slowly...
Worse still: You do it at the start of the dungeon. And it's like, nine encounters long, so you're unconscious for two and a half sessions...
Most good GMs will find a workaround, but do we really need a class who comes with a disclaimer for the GM to always make sure an NPC is nearby they can play?
This is why I wanted it to be around 50%. I envision it similar to going for it on fourth down in football. statistically in general the percent chance of going it on fourth down on any particular distance does not change, 4th and 10 is the same chance in the first quarter and fourth quarter, however sometimes it's a good decision and sometimes it's bad decision, sometimes you get lucky and make it, and sometimes you don't get lucky and you fail. however it's always going to be really compelling. I do agree that if you make it automatic as it currently is now, its just boring and no real intrigue and limited agency.
Giving the player the opportunity to "gamble" to push their luck is important. By keeping it 50/50 it's never unsafe or safe.it also opens up for personality for characters, so characters will be more reckless than others always pushing their luck, others more conservative going for it only in the most dire of times.
I despise the falling asleep at a certain revelation level mechanic. You go unconscious, no one can wake you, you get to re-prep spells... from a player's standpoint this is worse than death. At least dying gets you a cool story. "And then I passed out" is so.... boring. And the PCs can bring you back through other means without having to figure out how to wait 8 hours before they do.
Just imagine needing to go unconscious to save another PC in the middle of a dungeon with a time limit. And now... you get to watch the rest of the game... slowly...
Worse still: You do it at the start of the dungeon. And it's like, nine encounters long, so you're unconscious for two and a half sessions...
Most good GMs will find a workaround, but do we really need a class who comes with a disclaimer for the GM to always make sure an NPC is nearby they can play?
The PF1 Kineticist has the exact same mechanic for accumulating too much burn. I used that option in the big boss fight at the end of a one-shot session. I would never have used it earlier in the session.
I don't think the "if you go this high, you are done for the day" thing is really a problem. Since that's basically saying "hey, don't go this high unless it's a really important situation and it's safe to be done for the day hereafter."
Like the Kineticist and the Medium both had it in PF1, which resulted in Medium players just never getting 5 points of influence.
A limit you can transcend at great cost if it really matters is better than a hard limit IMO.
|
|
I don't think the "if you go this high, you are done for the day" thing is really a problem. Since that's basically saying "hey, don't go this high unless it's a really important situation and it's safe to be done for the day hereafter."
Like the Kineticist and the Medium both had it in PF1, which resulted in Medium players just never getting 5 points of influence.
A limit you can transcend at great cost if it really matters is better than a hard limit IMO.
And how would you know this for certain?
I mostly like my solution, because they become done for the day for their focus spells. Sure they can still cast, but that means they can still play. They'll likely be pushing for sleep anyway.