| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Every class that can gain spellcasting innately either has it linked to their class DC or otherwise has a way to make it scale innately. It could be an error that this feat omits it. Or, knowing how Paizo handles proficiency in this game, it could be intentional too.
Malk's off base about it being a mandatory feat either way though, but that's just theoretical discussion anyways so it doesn't matter.
Wait wait.
It's a Rogue feat.
Why does it not scale with Rogue class DC?
Because it doesn't say it does. It tells you what proficiency it gives you, which is Trained unless you have higher from another source.
Or do you mean why doesn't it from a game design point of view? Because then it would give you an automatic ranged attack that scales without gold costs, has better action economy AND is at your highest (likely) bonus. It would be borderline mandatory.
Except that it's char and it is on a Rogue. So it's not that likely to be the highest stat... It also would mean that the character is lacking in other departments.
I think it's very useful and not mandatory. It's still just a cantrip, another tool in your belt that can be substituted by other means of ranged attack.
As presented, it don't look like Minor Magic is primarily meant for attacks; after all, there are plenty of utility cantrips that could be useful to a Rogue even if the Spell Roll/DC doesn't scale.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You may be right, the innate spell rules might make it too overpowered.Wait wait.
It's a Rogue feat.
Why does it not scale with Rogue class DC?
Because it doesn't say it does. It tells you what proficiency it gives you, which is Trained unless you have higher from another source.
Or do you mean why doesn't it from a game design point of view? Because then it would give you an automatic ranged attack that scales without gold costs, has better action economy AND is at your highest (likely) bonus. It would be borderline mandatory.
Not really: proficiency would only go up with your proficiency, not DC and Magical Trickster only works with "succeed at a spell attack roll" as "If your proficiency in spell attack rolls or spell DCs is expert or better, apply that proficiency to your innate spells, too". Since you only get DC proficiency you only get "that proficiency".
A rogue that multiclasses into a cha caster [targeting AC] is FAR better off than a rogue with Minor Magic [targeting saves] since they add sneak attack damage... I grant you it eats up more feats but it's well worth it.
On top of that, to push into "borderline mandatory", you'd have to be a Scoundrel to max out Cha along with your Dex. So a very specific build would really like it: Having a scaling DC and a crappy base stat make it a lot less "mandatory" as a lot of rogues aren't going to be willing or able to toss a lot of points into Cha.
|
Wait wait.
It's a Rogue feat.
Why does it not scale with Rogue class DC?
I agree. Here is how the Errata should read (from my house rules):
Minor Magic (pg 184): Your Charisma is your casting ability modifier and you become trained in the spell tradition from which the cantrips were chosen. Use your Rogue class for DC and spell attack rolls
Here is how the Errata should read (from my house rules):
Minor Magic (pg 184): Your Charisma is your casting ability modifier and you become trained in the spell tradition from which the cantrips were chosen. Use your Rogue class for DC and spell attack rolls
Wouldn't rogue class DC use Dexterity though? (Or Strength or Charisma, depending on the Rogue's Racket choice)
Seems odd to, in one breath, say use the class DC, but not really.
The fewer exceptions we have in the Core rules, the more streamlined and intuitive things will be for new players.
|
Here is how the Errata should read (from my house rules):
Minor Magic (pg 184): Your Charisma is your casting ability modifier and you become trained in the spell tradition from which the cantrips were chosen. Use your Rogue class for DC and spell attack rolls
Wouldn't rogue class DC use Dexterity though? (Or Strength or Charisma, depending on the Rogue's Racket choice)
Seems odd to, in one breath, say use the class DC, but not really.
The fewer exceptions we have in the Core rules, the more streamlined and intuitive things will be for new players.
Ok I see.
In a home game, this is less a problem, but yeah, some clarification may be needed.
What about an extra sentence under Class DC section that clarifies that some abilities that use Class DC may also switch in a different ability score?
(Admittedly now a two-part errata specific to Rogue, but potentially other class later?)
Here is how the Errata should read (from my house rules):
Minor Magic (pg 184): Your Charisma is your casting ability modifier and you become trained in the spell tradition from which the cantrips were chosen. Use your Rogue class for DC and spell attack rolls
Wouldn't rogue class DC use Dexterity though? (Or Strength or Charisma, depending on the Rogue's Racket choice)
Seems odd to, in one breath, say use the class DC, but not really.
The fewer exceptions we have in the Core rules, the more streamlined and intuitive things will be for new players.
Ok I see.
In a home game, this is less a problem, but yeah, some clarification may be needed.
What about an extra sentence under Class DC section that clarifies that some abilities that use Class DC may also switch in a different ability score?
(Admittedly now a two-part errata specific to Rogue, but potentially other class later?)
I don't like the idea of swapping out ability scores for Class DC on an ability for ability basis. Generally I don't see a problem with just using the class DC for everything. Could indicate a difference in how that class approaches things like spellcasting.
I can see a rogue leaning more towards complex somatic components than complex verbal components for example. So Dexterity could very well make sense for their spell DC. I will agree that STR doesn't make nearly as much sense, but for rules consistency (and to avoid making Rogue Caster's MAD) I think it is simpler to just use Class DC as is.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here is how the Errata should read (from my house rules):
Minor Magic (pg 184): Your Charisma is your casting ability modifier and you become trained in the spell tradition from which the cantrips were chosen. Use your Rogue class for DC and spell attack rolls
Wouldn't rogue class DC use Dexterity though? (Or Strength or Charisma, depending on the Rogue's Racket choice)
Seems odd to, in one breath, say use the class DC, but not really.
The fewer exceptions we have in the Core rules, the more streamlined and intuitive things will be for new players.
Your level of proficiency is separate from the attribute added to it. For combat, it's true that it varies between different abilities based on the racket. It begins at Trained, increases to Expert at 11th level, and Master at 19th level due to class abilities. But that is only the 2+, 4+ or 6+level part of the equation. To that you add the relevant ability for what you are doing. In this case, you add it to your Charisma bonus. That happens to be the main stat for Scoundrels, but Rogues of all rackets can take Minor Magic, and must all use their Chr mod bonus with it, same as if they were a Gnome First World Adept Rogue. All Innate spells use Chr. bonus, and Minor Magic works similarly.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wait wait.
It's a Rogue feat.
Why does it not scale with Rogue class DC?
Because it doesn't say it does. It tells you what proficiency it gives you, which is Trained unless you have higher from another source.
Or do you mean why doesn't it from a game design point of view? Because then it would give you an automatic ranged attack that scales without gold costs, has better action economy AND is at your highest (likely) bonus. It would be borderline mandatory.
How is the action economy better? All the damage cantrips are 2-actions to shoot and rogues are proficient in shortbows which are 1-action to shoot.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yup, which drops the action economy of that first shot to be the same as a cantrip if you only had one thing to stow. You still also need to put the bow away afterwards and the action economy savings on the draw your melee the turn after only apply if there is an enemy within your reach when you do it.So the level 2 feat does make the level 4 one a little worse in comparison but not by a lot. It also still requires you to, as you level up, invest a significant portion of your wealth on a back up weapon.
I'm not arguing that minor magic is too good already, but that it has great advantages without using rogue dc. Showing perhaps why the devs kept it at trained and that the errata probably doesn't need errata. It's perfectly clear, it just doesn't do what some people want
As I explained above, you don't automatically use your key stat with the DC/spell attacks just because the proficiency scales a bit at Levels 11 and 19. Well, you do if you are a scoundrel, but other rackets will need to invest a bit in Charisma to get better with the 2 cantrips they get. If the Rogue wants to stick with their Dex bonus they can just use a shortbow. But, I personally feel the Scoundrel is the weakest and probably least popular Racket, so having 1 Rogue ability that just happens to play to his strength is not a bad thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's perfectly clear, it just doesn't do what some people want.
I don't think anyone claimed that it's unclear.
It's just the only instance of a similar ability where a character gains spells in-class and must multiclass if they want to advance it. It's the only ability in the game that works that way and that's kind of weird. Especially when next level you get a feat that lets you sneak attack with those spells.
Also let's be real for a second, even if the proficiency matched your class DC it'd still be behind your attack rolls most levels (5-10, 13-18) with underwhelming action economy and damage and tied to the closest thing PF2 has to a universal dump stat. To call that hypothetical combination of mediocrity overpowered is a stretch.