Given all the hurdles that Feint has to overcome (range, skill investment, weapon and attribute investment, minimum level of required critical success to aid other players), its pretty clear that a cantrip that imposes Flat Footed at ant greater than touch range would be bonkers good - even at two actions.I'm sorry, please show me where I specified a range for this spell?
This is what is so frustrating about talking to you all. You keep adding onto what I'm saying, and then saying that new thing that I never said is ridiculous. Please actually engage with what I say, not what you imagine I'm saying. It really feels like it is more important to you that you get to say "You're wrong" than actually have a discussion.
You didn't, which is why I addressed both the possibility of range (where its amazing even at 2 action cost) and touch (the lower alternative, and where its also likely too good).
I actually went overboard to address this very issue.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It can 100% be done in a balanced manner. But it requires that people stop blindly think the numbers are okay because Paizo made them.Devs can get things wrong sometimes, they are humans just like us. This is why online games get so many balance patches, devs trying to fix poor choices they made. (Although some devs use it to change the meta).
There are already 1-action cantrips in the game and they are... meh.
Bards have a 1-action cantrip that is so strong that they are actually forever Slowed 1. They even had to release a focus spell to sustain it and fight player boredom (I've never seen a Bard without Lingering Performance, so, it looks like a tax feat to me).On the other hand, you have the Summoner with Boost Eidolon that you feel forced to use for your Eidolon to be efficient but which is not strong enough to be fulfilling. As a result, players complain about it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
What do people think a one action damage cantrip would look like, given that daze is a two action cantrip that does ability modifier damage at range 60ft?
And stuns on a crit. Not having the chance to stun would probably help.
Why use the lowest damage cantrip as an example, when there's other cantrips with shorter range but higher damage, and less useful crit success states? It seems like a bad faith argument to use the lowest damage as your starting point and then go "how much lower can this damage go and still be balanced?"
For instance, a cantrip that does not damage at all, but conveys a useful debuff, would be balanced. Throwing out flat-footed on a success or crit success would be within line of the Feint action, but perhaps targeting a save instead of Perception. Letting it minorly damage on top of that would just be a bonus; the real benefit would be the FF state.
I like the idea of non-damage cantrips that instead do a debuff. Guidance is similar except for buffing. You could even do the inverse of Guidance like this:
Curse > (1 action)
Cast: verbal
Range: 30 feet; Targets 1 creature
Duration: until the start of your next turnYou curse a target with misfortune, giving the target a -1 status penalty to the next attack roll, Perception check, saving throw, or skill check the target attempts before the duration ends. If the target takes the penalty, the spell ends. Either way, the target is then temporarily immune for 1 hour.
The example spell here is absolutely broketier bonkers. Compare it to Demoralize, or even a Fear Spell (which is an excellent use of a first level spell slot).
Part of the issue is that it straight up stacks with Guidance, allowing many casters to set up a nearly entirely free "+2 turn" for a martial buddy with zero counterplay.
This sort of ability is not appropriate as general use cantrip in 2E.
See the Evil Eye Hex for what a balanced version of it looks...
I disagree. Demoralize is way more powerful than my proposed cantrip. Curse only affects the first roll the enemy makes. Frightened 1 from Demoralize affects all their skill checks, attack rolls, saves, and AC for 1 round, which is way stronger, which it should be given it requires a skill check. The target is also then immune to curse for 1 hour, where demoralize only has a 10 minute immunity.
Evil Eye is also much stronger than this, but that's fair, since its a focus cantrip. Evil Eye requires a save, but imposes a much, much stronger condition and can be sustained every round. It also only grants immunity for 1 minute as opposed to Curse's 1 hour.
Edit: Guidance/Curse are basically mini versions of Bless/Bane in 1 action cantrip form. It makes sense to have an inverse of Guidance given that Bless's inverse is Bane.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Edit: Guidance/Curse are basically mini versions of Bless/Bane in 1 action cantrip form. It makes sense to have an inverse of Guidance given that Bless's inverse is Bane.
Bane actually allows a Save, though, unlike your proposed spell. And is limited to attack rolls, with a range of 5 feet on the first turn.
With those restrictions, youd probably have something close to what a 1 action debuff cantrip should look like.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Edit: Guidance/Curse are basically mini versions of Bless/Bane in 1 action cantrip form. It makes sense to have an inverse of Guidance given that Bless's inverse is Bane.
Bane actually allows a Save, though, unlike your proposed spell. And is limited to attack rolls, with a range of 5 feet on the first turn.
With those restrictions, youd probably have something close to what a 1 action debuff cantrip should look like.
Ah, I missed that about Bane, in that case, Curse should have a basic will save. Good call. I don't think it needs other limitations as then its way weaker than Guidance.
Curse > (1 action)
Cast: verbal
Range: 30 feet; Targets 1 creature
Duration: Saving Throw Will; until the start of your next turn
You curse a target with misfortune. A target that fails their Will save takes a -1 status penalty to the next attack roll, Perception check, saving throw, or skill check the target attempts before the duration ends. If the target takes the penalty, the spell ends. Either way, the target is then temporarily immune for 1 hour.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Btw another source of problem is things like widen metamagic. Which only give 5-10 ft, even though it costs an action.
Yes it can be useful, but most of the times its just an action sink.
Consider this - if it lets your fireball catch 6 targets instead of 4 (or 3 instead of 2), you've just increased the value of your spell slot by 50% for one action.
If its 2 instead of 1, that's 100% increase.
One action for half a spell slot (the first case) is an absolutely fantastic deal, in an objective sense.
From that perspective, Widen Spell is fantastic.
That said, in a practical sense, a lot of people think it feels bad because of how action limited casters are.
It may have been better if metamagic cost a casters reaction (giving it a non-trivial cost, but which also gave casters something to do with their reaction) or if there was a feat (general, or maybe skill with a expert/master requirement in the spellcasting tradition skill) to unlock such functionality.
Would also have given casters more to do with their reaction.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Edit: Guidance/Curse are basically mini versions of Bless/Bane in 1 action cantrip form. It makes sense to have an inverse of Guidance given that Bless's inverse is Bane.
Bane actually allows a Save, though, unlike your proposed spell. And is limited to attack rolls, with a range of 5 feet on the first turn.
With those restrictions, youd probably have something close to what a 1 action debuff cantrip should look like.
......
Dirge of Doom.
1 action, 60 ft radius, focus cantrip, no save, enemies get frightened 1 and cannot drop below frightened 1.
A 1 action normal cantrip that was single target and stil 60 ft. range is not at all broken.
Dirge of Doom is a class feature as much as it is a cantrip, and one that's commonly considered broketier as well.
Bards are not a good barometer of class power - they're off the top end of the scale as it is.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Edit: Guidance/Curse are basically mini versions of Bless/Bane in 1 action cantrip form. It makes sense to have an inverse of Guidance given that Bless's inverse is Bane.
Bane actually allows a Save, though, unlike your proposed spell. And is limited to attack rolls, with a range of 5 feet on the first turn.
With those restrictions, youd probably have something close to what a 1 action debuff cantrip should look like.
......
Dirge of Doom.
1 action, 60 ft radius, focus cantrip, no save, enemies get frightened 1 and cannot drop below frightened 1.
A 1 action normal cantrip that was single target and 60 ft. range is not at all broken.
To be fair, focus cantrips are balanced differently than regular cantrips. An easy way to tell is compare Inspire Courage to Guidance.
If we want more 1 action cantrips, its better to compare new one's power level to current 1 action cantrips. That's why I'm using Guidance as my baseline for my "Curse" cantrip
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dirge of Doom is not a class feature, its a level 3 feat.
Even then, I specifically said "single target" as opposed to the 60 ft AoE that is Dirge.
It is a 6th level class feat tied directly to the primary mechanic of Bards, Composition Cantrips.
That means its available to non-Bards at 12th level at a minimum investment of 3 class feats?
That is not the same cost as a normal cantrip.
That easily fits the description of "as much a class feature as it is a cantrip", as the investment to obtain it is reasonable if you're a Bard, and prohibitively expensive if you are not.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Edit: Guidance/Curse are basically mini versions of Bless/Bane in 1 action cantrip form. It makes sense to have an inverse of Guidance given that Bless's inverse is Bane.
Bane actually allows a Save, though, unlike your proposed spell. And is limited to attack rolls, with a range of 5 feet on the first turn.
With those restrictions, youd probably have something close to what a 1 action debuff cantrip should look like.
......
Dirge of Doom.
1 action, 60 ft radius, focus cantrip, no save, enemies get frightened 1 and cannot drop below frightened 1.
A 1 action normal cantrip that was single target and 60 ft. range is not at all broken.
To be fair, focus cantrips are balanced differently than regular cantrips. An easy way to tell is compare Inspire Courage to Guidance.
If we want more 1 action cantrips, its better to compare new one's power level to current 1 action cantrips. That's why I'm using Guidance as my baseline for my "Curse" cantrip
I was responding with that because they said the "correct balance" was a super weak bane.
Which gets immidiately countered by things like dirge. That dont cost focus points, can be used infinitely, and have roughly the same cost as a normal cantrip.
(The cost depends on how you get said cantrip, so its hard to pin point. I value it at around 3-4 cantrips due to dedication.)
Paizo considers Guidance balanced for a 1 action regular cantrip. Focus Cantrips shouldn't be part of that equation because that aren't balanced the same as has been pointed out. They are class features/feats. Dirge requires 12th level to get it via dedication for example.
My Curse cantrip is just an inverse/mirror of Guidance except it requires a Will save just like Bane does (the mirror of Bless). I'm not going to suggest homebrew that's stronger than the precedent set by Paizo.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Given all the hurdles that Feint has to overcome (range, skill investment, weapon and attribute investment, minimum level of required critical success to aid other players), its pretty clear that a cantrip that imposes Flat Footed at ant greater than touch range would be bonkers good - even at two actions.I'm sorry, please show me where I specified a range for this spell?
This is what is so frustrating about talking to you all. You keep adding onto what I'm saying, and then saying that new thing that I never said is ridiculous. Please actually engage with what I say, not what you imagine I'm saying. It really feels like it is more important to you that you get to say "You're wrong" than actually have a discussion.
You didn't, which is why I addressed both the possibility of range (where its amazing even at 2 action cost) and touch (the lower alternative, and where its also likely too good).
I actually went overboard to address this very issue.
In your touch example, you also specified a duration that I did not. Why, when I specifically said it would be in line with Feint, did you assume the FF condition would last longer than your next attack against the target on a success? This is an actual question; I'm trying to understand your thinking on this.
Did you also consider the relative merits of a skill action without the manipulate trait versus a spell with that trait, or that selecting a cantrip is also as much of an investment as getting trained in Deception (fewer cantrip slots than skill slots, though proficiency increases are free once you do have the cantrip)? That's partly why I think it is a lot more balanced than you're giving it credit for.
Your point about the ability score investment is fair though; while I had thought of it myself, I won't argue against you pointing out it is easier to maintain your key stat than Charisma for many casters.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think Magic Missile is evidence of much of anything beyond the one action version being lackluster at best.
The Evoker's force bolt is a one action only Magic Missile as a Focus Spell...and is not considered a particularly good Focus Spell at that, which is a good indication that the power level of one action magic missile is well below what a one action spell slot spell should have (since it's apparently mediocre even for a Focus Spell, which are supposed to be worse than spell slot spells), or at least perceived as such.
So the simple answer isn't that people wouldn't do that, it's that Magic Missile's one action version specifically isn't very impressive, or at least isn't seen as being so.
SO when people say they want more one action damage spells, we shouldn't look at the examples that already exist and see how they work if you use them that way?
I highly recommend people consider trying out following up a fireball with a single action level 3 magic missile to finish off the hardest target in the blast area, just to get a feel for what kind of damage output a wizard is capable of putting out.
Then remember that an evoker gets to do this every encounter, while other wizards can think about scrolls and such to keep up. As you go up in level your magic missile can trail your top spell levels and still be enough to be a better finishing move than any martial 3rd attack.
Magic missile is not a good metric because it's value really only comes online vs bosses.
Better example is the sorcerer's elemental toss. As you have to roll to hit so it's damage is higher. It does 1d8 and has a heightened +1 instead of +2.
So at level 12. It would do 6d8 vs 3d4+3 6-48 vs 6-15
Elemental toss is the metric to look at for 1 action spells. There just isn't currently a version of it as a spell.
Elemental onslaught. 1-3 actions. 1d8 per action. Heightened+1.
At 12 it would do up to. 18d8 for 3 actions vs 9d4+9. 18-144 vs 18-45 if I did the math right for my made up spell. Average of 80 vs 30ish. Granted magic missile does better vs bosses.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Table top RPGs are not computer games. Part of the reason PF2 got such a long playtest run was to dial in big numbers for things, because, while some power balancing Errata is possible, massive overhauls are extremely unlikely.
While I do think there is room in the game for some one action cantrips, I just think it is a mistake to assume that a major rebalancing of expected power levels of spells is going to happen by just adding newer, more powerful content, at least from the official design team.
I think any table would be well within their rights to redesign spells and add new rare and unique ones to their own table but I just wouldn't expect massive changes to the overall game balance to come from new content. The closest we will get to something like that I think is feats like bon mot, which is clearly an overpowered option with so much flavor that the developers decided to let it be a little over the top, with limits that are easy for a GM to enforce and bring back down if the players are attempting to overdo it.
Bard options that are team buffs and debuffs I think snuck in to the "this is a tune up a little past what are typical limits," but was done so to make buffing others and spending actions to debuff for others more appealing as options than just setting yourself up.
Any single action spell is going to be evaluated in comparison to a third attack from a martial, and in that regard, force bolt is a really strong ability that is often overlooked.
A single action damaging cantrip is going to have to be less than half the damage potential of an existing cantrip (factoring in the added boost of status modifiers), or it makes all the cantrips it is equal to half or more of a waste of space. MAP would off set that, except the ability to cast electric arc and attack roll cantrip is a pretty powerful turn, so the spell is still can't be better than attacking with a shortbow with a 16 max in your accuracy stat. Ability modifier damage is a pretty reasonable guess for what the spell would do, which would be still be better than a flat D4 or even really a D6.
Maybe spells like this would make everyone happy, but I can promise you that, if you are willing to invest your wealth into items to help you cast more spell slots, you can already do a very respectable amount of damage as a wizard, even against single targets. Because that is true, options that replicate what is already possible, but make it cost nothing just feels incredibly unlikely to me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In your touch example, you also specified a duration that I did not. Why, when I specifically said it would be in line with Feint, did you assume the FF condition would last longer than your next attack against the target on a success? This is an actual question; I'm trying to understand your thinking on this.
See SuperBidis earlier comments on Cantrips that are "mandatory action taxes" (bard cantrips, Boost Eidolon) for my concern that applies if its limited to only applying on your next attack.
At that point, you've created a situation where all spell attack rolls are essentially +1 action, because you're suboptimal if you dont use True Strike or FlatFooted cantrip prior. True Strike already creates this issue. Adding a cantrip alternative just makes it more so.
...I dont think that would fly well, even as a partial "fix" to spell attack rolls, as opposed to a proper fix if its determined by Paizo one is needed.
ALL THAT SAID, I dont necessarily hate the concept you're pushing here - I just think that any such examples should be extremely focused, narrow, and designed so as not to invalidate the options they are emulating. And that something like blanket flat footed is REALLY GOOD.
Especially since casters can already spec things like skills as easily as anyone.
A 1 action cantrip that gives you a scaling item bonus to a given maneuver (feint, trip, grapple, etc.) for your next attempt and trades your cantrip "slot" for the need to obtain the associated item for the bonus feels a lot more in line with a 2E cantrips expected effectiveness, imo.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I just dont want homebrew thats clearly weaker than precedent set by Paizo
Edit: Guidance/Curse are basically mini versions of Bless/Bane in 1 action cantrip form. It makes sense to have an inverse of Guidance given that Bless's inverse is Bane.
Bane actually allows a Save, though, unlike your proposed spell. And is limited to attack rolls, with a range of 5 feet on the first turn.
With those restrictions, youd probably have something close to what a 1 action debuff cantrip should look like.
......
Dirge of Doom.
1 action, 60 ft radius, focus cantrip, no save, enemies get frightened 1 and cannot drop below frightened 1.
A 1 action normal cantrip that was single target and 60 ft. range is not at all broken.
To be fair, focus cantrips are balanced differently than regular cantrips. An easy way to tell is compare Inspire Courage to Guidance.
If we want more 1 action cantrips, its better to compare new one's power level to current 1 action cantrips. That's why I'm using Guidance as my baseline for my "Curse" cantrip
I was responding with that because they said the "correct balance" was a super weak bane.
Which gets immidiately countered by things like dirge. That dont cost focus points, can be used infinitely, and have roughly the same cost as a normal cantrip.
(The cost depends on how you get said cantrip, so its hard to pin point. I value it at around 3-4 cantrips due to dedication.)
Paizo considers Guidance balanced for a 1 action regular cantrip. Focus Cantrips shouldn't be part of that equation because that aren't balanced the same as has been pointed out. They are class features/feats. Dirge requires 12th level to get it via dedication for example.
My Curse cantrip is just an inverse/mirror of Guidance except it requires a Will save just like Bane does (the mirror of Bless). I'm not going to suggest homebrew that's stronger than the precedent set by Paizo.
If you're implying my homebrew is weaker than a focus cantrip, then you're right. It's on purpose. Focus cantrips are stronger than regular cantrips. I'm using Paizo's precedent on 1 action regular cantrips (aka Guidance) to balance my own.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Bard is not broken or near broken. It may be binary but it's also the base level of caster performance. Less than bard and it's underpowered.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not fully buying your logic about it feeling mandatory (does Feint then feel mandatory right now?), but I'm not fully discounting it either.
A 1 action cantrip that gives you a scaling item bonus to a given maneuver (feint, trip, grapple, etc.) for your next attempt and trades your cantrip "slot" for the need to obtain the associated item for the bonus feels a lot more in line with a 2E cantrips expected effectiveness, imo.
This suggestion also isn't a bad place to start. I think a mix of damage, item replacement, and skill replacement spells are decent places to start for 1 action cantrips.
Not that I expect very many even in the long run, but I do expect some of each of those. It would be best if the mechanical downsides are different, like we see with casting Shield versus just using a shield. The upsides and downsides are different, even if the end result to your AC and HP is close. A tough sell to make that balanced, but I have faith in Paizo's thinkers.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not fully buying your logic about it feeling mandatory (does Feint then feel mandatory right now?), but this suggestion also isn't a bad place to start. I think a mix of damage, item replacement, and skill replacement spells are decent places to start for 1 action cantrips.
The thing about Feint, specifically, is that it applies Flat Footed for melee attacks... which is in general pretty obtainable because of how easy it is to set up.
I would consider Flat Footed as a pretty fundamental goal for making melee attacks, to the point that I'm looking for ways to easily obtain it by spending my actions. For melee attackers, thats generally easier to set up with a Stride than Feint.
I assume when we're talking about spells, it includes considerations like wanting to maintain a degree of safety (because spellcasters) or range (because safety, and most spells). Therefore Flat Footed makes most sense in the context of discussion as applying for a ranged spell attack roll, where Flanking isn't already an option like it is for melee spell attacks looking for that flat footed penalty.
In other words, its complicated ;)
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Bard is not broken or near broken. It may be binary but it's also the base level of caster performance. Less than bard and it's underpowered.
A level 9 Bard can reliably increase martial damage by 75%. It starts to be a lot, actually too much for most people.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bard is not broken or near broken. It may be binary but it's also the base level of caster performance. Less than bard and it's underpowered.A level 9 Bard can reliably increase martial damage by 75%. It starts to be a lot, actually too much for most people.
For the party? How are you doing this?
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
For the party? How are you doing this?Bard is not broken or near broken. It may be binary but it's also the base level of caster performance. Less than bard and it's underpowered.A level 9 Bard can reliably increase martial damage by 75%. It starts to be a lot, actually too much for most people.
Probably Synesthesia plus Inspire Courage (or Dirge of Doom), plus maybe Inspire Heroics if going with Inspire Courage. That's basically +4 or +5 to-hit, which is absurd and absolutely equates to that big a damage swing.
It's only vs. one target, and often only for a round, but vs. a boss? That's just ridiculous.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For the party? How are you doing this?Bard is not broken or near broken. It may be binary but it's also the base level of caster performance. Less than bard and it's underpowered.A level 9 Bard can reliably increase martial damage by 75%. It starts to be a lot, actually too much for most people.Probably Synesthesia plus Inspire Courage (or Dirge of Doom), plus maybe Inspire Heroics if going with Inspire Courage. That's basically +4 or +5 to-hit, which is absurd and absolutely equates to that big a damage swing.
It's only vs. one target, and often only for a round, but vs. a boss? That's just ridiculous.
This. You're already at a 7 point swing in accuracy with Synethesia, Inspire Heroics, and Flanking - if someone can provide an assist with their third action, crit rates for everyone's first strike are through the roof.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
This. You're already at a 7 point swing in accuracy with Synethesia, Inspire Heroics, and Flanking - if someone can provide an assist with their third action, crit rates for everyone's first strike are through the roof.For the party? How are you doing this?Bard is not broken or near broken. It may be binary but it's also the base level of caster performance. Less than bard and it's underpowered.A level 9 Bard can reliably increase martial damage by 75%. It starts to be a lot, actually too much for most people.Probably Synesthesia plus Inspire Courage (or Dirge of Doom), plus maybe Inspire Heroics if going with Inspire Courage. That's basically +4 or +5 to-hit, which is absurd and absolutely equates to that big a damage swing.
It's only vs. one target, and often only for a round, but vs. a boss? That's just ridiculous.
But only Inspire Courage/Inspire Heroics is from the bard class itself. Sorcerers, witches, clerics and oracles can cast Synethesia and have flanking party members.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But only Inspire Courage/Inspire Heroics is from the bard class itself. Sorcerers, witches, clerics and oracles can cast Synethesia and have flanking party members.
Inspire is a pretty huge component of things, though. Its just not practical action wise to replicate via casting Heroism.
...also, do you have a link to some errata that lets Clerics and Oracles cast Synesthesia? Because damn that would be awesome.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Whenever i read these threads it feels like im discussing pf2 with people who want to play pathfinder 1.5
They will list that casters are weaker, give specific reasons, and then if you try to point out that class balance is affected by OTHER reasons, they will say you're misrepresenting them or arguing dishonestly.
I'm honestly getting really close to no longer bothering with these forums. In play, casters feel very balanced in my opinion and I and other people have brought up tons of reasons. This reminds me of video game forums like WoW where people just whine for buffs even if their class is performing fine, solely out of greed or a misunderstanding of the game.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But only Inspire Courage/Inspire Heroics is from the bard class itself. Sorcerers, witches, clerics and oracles can cast Synethesia and have flanking party members.Inspire is a pretty huge component of things, though. Its just not practical action wise to replicate via casting Heroism.
...also, do you have a link to some errata that lets Clerics and Oracles cast Synesthesia? Because damn that would be awesome.
Clerics of Narriseminek get it as a Deity Spell option. That's pretty niche, but opens it up to Oracles with the Lore Mystery.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Clerics of Narriseminek get it as a Deity Spell option. That's pretty niche, but opens it up to Oracles with the Lore Mystery.But only Inspire Courage/Inspire Heroics is from the bard class itself. Sorcerers, witches, clerics and oracles can cast Synethesia and have flanking party members.Inspire is a pretty huge component of things, though. Its just not practical action wise to replicate via casting Heroism.
...also, do you have a link to some errata that lets Clerics and Oracles cast Synesthesia? Because damn that would be awesome.
Sadness. That's less than helpful to my divine Summoner who used to be a Cleric of Nocticula.
Thanks for the info (also to MEATSHED)!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Inspire is a pretty huge component of things, though.
Oh, I don't disagree: Inspire is awesome. I'm just setting aside things that are bard only from those that are classes that can cast a specific spell.
PS: beaten to the punch on cleric/oracle access.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks for the info (also to MEATSHED)!
You're quite welcome, I'm always happy to be of assistance. :)
Inspire is a pretty huge component of things, though.Oh, I don't disagree: Inspire is awesome. I'm just setting aside things that are bard only from those that are classes that can cast a specific spell.
Part of Bard's strength is that it's a 10-level Occult caster. Sure, there are others, but they too are among the best buffers/debuffers in the game, just not quite on the level of Bards, since they get the extra +1 from Inspire Courage.
It's not that Inspire Courage alone makes them super great at buffing (though it is very good all on its own), it's the combination of that and their spells. Inspire Courage and the Primal list, while interesting, would not be nearly as good as a buff/debuff specialist.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Part of Bard's strength is that it's a 10-level Occult caster. Sure, there are others, but they too are among the best buffers/debuffers in the game, just not quite on the level of Bards, since they get the extra +1 from Inspire Courage.
Again, don't disagree but recall the post at the start of this: "Bard is not broken or near broken." I was just pointing out that an "increase martial damage by 75%" was in part from that 10th level casting and not from bard in particular much like another post added Flanking which wasn't limited to bards or even casters.
In seeing if a bard seems "broken", IMO you look at what it can do that others can't [like Inspire] more than what others can do as well. Total bonuses you can get are valuable to look at but it's important to remember where all those bonuses come from.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
For the party? How are you doing this?Bard is not broken or near broken. It may be binary but it's also the base level of caster performance. Less than bard and it's underpowered.A level 9 Bard can reliably increase martial damage by 75%. It starts to be a lot, actually too much for most people.Probably Synesthesia plus Inspire Courage (or Dirge of Doom), plus maybe Inspire Heroics if going with Inspire Courage. That's basically +4 or +5 to-hit, which is absurd and absolutely equates to that big a damage swing.
It's only vs. one target, and often only for a round, but vs. a boss? That's just ridiculous.
I'm not sure that that really is unbalanced. A 5th level spell should be reasonably powerful.
But maybe there is a spell which might be a bit too strong. If its annoying too many people they can add the incapacitate trait or declare it Rare, or the GMs important bosses can start taking some extra precautions.
It's not really a broader class or system problem. You do have to expect a few odd corners in the game.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
For the party? How are you doing this?Bard is not broken or near broken. It may be binary but it's also the base level of caster performance. Less than bard and it's underpowered.A level 9 Bard can reliably increase martial damage by 75%. It starts to be a lot, actually too much for most people.
Synesthesia + Inspire Heroics + Inspire Courage. Synesthesia is nearly a given (the enemy needs to roll a critical success not to be affected). Inspire Heroics is harder to succeed but skills (and especially Performance) go very high to the point of making it quite reliable.
It's +2 hit and damage, +3 on a crit (which is possible at very high level) and -3 AC on the enemy. I checked on Citricking's tool, it makes a 70-80% damage bump roughly with only a success at Inspire Heroics. With a crit, you are going closer to 90% extra damage. This is really high in my opinion. I won't say that Bard is overpowered (as I don't have first hand knowledge of how it performs at high level) but it clearly breaks the very tight limits of the game.
I won't say that Bard is overpowered (as I don't have first hand knowledge of how it performs at high level) but it clearly breaks the very tight limits of the game.
Can confirm from running Age of Ashes to the end, it only gets better and it depends on what synergies you have running in the party as well.
Scare to Death (for -2 from Frightened), Inspire Heroics (+2 or better), and Uncontrollable Dance (Flatfooted, no reactions, guaranteed provoke every turn on a successful save - failed save is even worse.) with a 2 hand hammer-fighter with multiple AOO's in the party is dirty as h3ll and doable in one turn if you can set it up ahead of time (touch range on Uncontrollable Dance is the hard part). Pretty much destroys any boss that isn't immune to the dancing by granting the Fighter guaranteed free attacks with a huge bonus.
For the party? How are you doing this?Bard is not broken or near broken. It may be binary but it's also the base level of caster performance. Less than bard and it's underpowered.A level 9 Bard can reliably increase martial damage by 75%. It starts to be a lot, actually too much for most people.Synesthesia + Inspire Heroics + Inspire Courage. Synesthesia is nearly a given (the enemy needs to roll a critical success not to be affected). Inspire Heroics is harder to succeed but skills (and especially Performance) go very high to the point of making it quite reliable.
It's +2 hit and damage, +3 on a crit (which is possible at very high level) and -3 AC on the enemy. I checked on Citricking's tool, it makes a 70-80% damage bump roughly with only a success at Inspire Heroics. With a crit, you are going closer to 90% extra damage. This is really high in my opinion. I won't say that Bard is overpowered (as I don't have first hand knowledge of how it performs at high level) but it clearly breaks the very tight limits of the game.
I presonally just adjust my monsters a bit. Difficulty goes up depending on the party efficiency. I normally am boosting everything by 1 level just to keep it challenging for the players. If it is a more relaxed less efficient group, I play the monsters as read.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Unless it gets nerfed, Electric Arc is an extremely solid mini-nuke against creatures that show up in numbers for the first few levels, or against things with high ACs.
Mini-Nuke?!
It does less damage than a standard longsword swing levels 1-2, averages out at (.5) more at 3rd, then at 4th when striking runes come into play, is back behind a standard longsword.
But it hits 2 targets.
Foregoing that all martial's have the option for 2nd and 3rd attacks as standard (an intrinsic advantage literally never open to casters until they make 1 action damage spells), almost every martial has a way to mitigate MAP as a 1st or 2nd level feat.
Flurry of blows, hunted shot, Twin Feint, Power Attack, etc, etc.
This isn't even wholly a range thing as Barbarians, Fighters, Rangers, Rogues and Swashbucklers can equally do solid ranged builds at early levels as well.
Electric Arc is the best damage dealing cantrips. This highlights a problem with damaging spells, not that it's too strong.
Cantrips could use a boost, especially non-eletric arc cantrips. They are terrible. Not as terrible as PF1, but still pretty terrible for two actions.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Bard is not broken or near broken. It may be binary but it's also the base level of caster performance. Less than bard and it's underpowered.
Bard level power should be baseline for casters. All casters should be around bard power level.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Bard is not broken or near broken. It may be binary but it's also the base level of caster performance. Less than bard and it's underpowered.Bard level power should be baseline for casters. All casters should be around bard power level.
No offense, but this is an incredibly silly view of balance.
If I could take a 1-action effect which let me increase the whole party's effectiveness by ~15%, it'd be a near guaranteed pick on every character.
That's the Bard's level 1 skill.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Bard is not broken or near broken. It may be binary but it's also the base level of caster performance. Less than bard and it's underpowered.Bard level power should be baseline for casters. All casters should be around bard power level.No offense, but this is an incredibly silly view of balance.
If I could take a 1-action effect which let me increase the whole party's effectiveness by ~15%, it'd be a near guaranteed pick on every character.
That's the Bard's level 1 skill.
I'm a tad confused on your position. Are you saying the bard is not merely good, but in fact overpowered?
Are you saying that the bard has something very good, but only they should have something of that level of power (regardless of what the power is, such as buff, debuff, battlefield control etc.) in order to create something of "ceiling of usefulness" we know other casters shouldn't be able to reach? In other words, we should pick a casting class, make it the best, and then balance all other casters below it just to be safe for the sake of the game?
Or are you assuming Deriven meant that all casters should be able to use bard cantrips?
I think what Deriven meant to imply in any case was not that all casters should be bardic super buffers, but in that in their own arena, they should feel like equivalent options to play (rather than say, the witch feeling worse at debuffing, arguably its shtick, than the bard does at buffing.)