| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Considering that's what the PF1 class was, your argument is disingenuous.
You don’t seem to have played much Pathfinder 2nd.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Demonizing those who disagree with you is sure to make your argument so valid, and why this Playtest has gone so swimmingly.
something something Elphaba, something something Melisandre
<3
I do wonder if it's just rose tinted glasses looking back, because I remember some heated discussions in the APG playtest, but I definitely felt like they were more, idk, productive?
And after playing with the actual Classes in play, some of them to me actually play better than the PT versions of some of the APG Classes (mainly Investigator and Oracle, which were still fun but had some weird kinda hindering game moments for my runs personally).
I can't customize my Eidolon and Striking Spell isn't fun have been repeated with different words about a million times. I'm guilty of that too, but it does seem to be circular.
Like I wanna say some of the Witch arguments became pretty nuanced towards the end, but again, maybe I'm just looking fondly on the past.
________________
Also nice right up on this! like Krispy, I disagree and agree on certain things, but the overall feelings you've expressed are definitely on point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Its a matter of Parity with PF1e where they could cast Gate as an SLA.
But I can see what you mean with it being more of a roleplay spell. Which to me means there is less reasons not just just add it as a freebie at no cost.
As long as it doesn't come at the expense of summon 10th level, then I'd be ok with it. It would sit there on your list only being used if the DM developed some campaign element where you had transport something from another plane one way or the other.
Yes, I agree that the summoner needs more summoning support, and that the eidolon needs more customisation options.
But I think using class feats is the best way to go about that customisation.
And yes, summoner needs a better way to get summon spells, though I'd rather in the form of a focus spell rather than a font (plus, if it did get a font, it'd probably only be 6 spells at max, like cleric (as they get a max of 6 extra heal spells at level 20, unless you spend your apex on charisma instead of your casting stat)).
The focus competes with evolution surge. Not sure that would be fun, but I could see them doing this for the Master Summoner making them choose between enhancing the eidolon and summoning a creature.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Demonizing those who disagree with you is sure to make your argument so valid, and why this Playtest has gone so swimmingly.
calling people out isn't demonizing then, the point of a forum and a play test is so people can give feedback so if versan wants to talk about how he thinks more customization eidolons are more important let him do it we can create threads for that reason
it will be over much faster if people feel like their feedback is being listened to rather than invalidated otherwise they push harder which leads to pushing back feeling like they have to justify or explain their views which leads to unnecessary discussion
i understand you don't want op classes like wizard and summoner to be life in pf1 but acting like they don't have any problem and gas-lighting then will not result in people shutting up and saying "wow i guess there must be something wrong with me and my experience" it will just make them more polarized and frustrated
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The focus competes with evolution surge. Not sure that would be fun, but I could see them doing this for the Master Summoner making them choose between enhancing the eidolon and summoning a creature.
Yeah, that was actually my reasoning. I feel a full on summoning font might be a bit much for the class, as it might draw power away from other things.
Having it compete with evolution surge would make it use up less of the power budget. It'd also give some more interesting choices mid-combat, forcing you to choose between a buffed eidolon and an extra body on the field.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Demonizing those who disagree with you is sure to make your argument so valid, and why this Playtest has gone so swimmingly.calling people out isn't demonizing then, the point of a forum and a play test is so people can give feedback so if versan wants to talk about how he thinks more customization eidolons are more important let him do it we can create threads for that reason
it will be over much faster if people feel like their feedback is being listened to rather than invalidated otherwise they push harder which leads to pushing back feeling like they have to justify or explain their views which leads to unnecessary discussion
i understand you don't want op classes like wizard and summoner to be life in pf1 but acting like they don't have any problem and gas-lighting then will not result in people shutting up and saying "wow i guess there must be something wrong with me and my experience" it will just make them more polarized and frustrated
And thank you for proving my point by projecting (claiming I'm gaslighting).
Also I was talking about Temperans post right above yours calling everyone disagreeing with them "yes men".
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Demonizing those who disagree with you is sure to make your argument so valid, and why this Playtest has gone so swimmingly.calling people out isn't demonizing then, the point of a forum and a play test is so people can give feedback so if versan wants to talk about how he thinks more customization eidolons are more important let him do it we can create threads for that reason
it will be over much faster if people feel like their feedback is being listened to rather than invalidated otherwise they push harder which leads to pushing back feeling like they have to justify or explain their views which leads to unnecessary discussion
i understand you don't want op classes like wizard and summoner to be life in pf1 but acting like they don't have any problem and gas-lighting then will not result in people shutting up and saying "wow i guess there must be something wrong with me and my experience" it will just make them more polarized and frustrated
And thank you for proving my point by projecting (claiming I'm gaslighting).
Also I was talking about Temperans post right above yours calling everyone disagreeing with them "yes men".
Except that both of them are right. 90% of your posts I see are antagonizing people for haveing a different view than yours. . .
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Demonizing those who disagree with you is sure to make your argument so valid, and why this Playtest has gone so swimmingly.something something Elphaba, something something Melisandre
<3
I do wonder if it's just rose tinted glasses looking back, because I remember some heated discussions in the APG playtest, but I definitely felt like they were more, idk, productive?
And after playing with the actual Classes in play, some of them to me actually play better than the PT versions of some of the APG Classes (mainly Investigator and Oracle, which were still fun but had some weird kinda hindering game moments for my runs personally).
I can't customize my Eidolon and Striking Spell isn't fun have been repeated with different words about a million times. I'm guilty of that too, but it does seem to be circular.
Like I wanna say some of the Witch arguments became pretty nuanced towards the end, but again, maybe I'm just looking fondly on the past.
________________
Also nice right up on this! like Krispy, I disagree and agree on certain things, but the overall feelings you've expressed are definitely on point.
I have a similar recollection, although I will say that I think the APG classes played closer to the core than the SoM ones. I mean, if you pause and look at them, we have two full casters with unique gimmicks, one martial and a skill monkey. They had their issues, but they didn't challenge the core that much. I also think the nerf hammer was wielded more frequently this time around, though that's just my 2 cents on it.
The Summoner and Magus, however, are attempting something bolder. The former is essentially two characters that must function in tandem and not unbalance things and the latter must combine casting and fighting.
Mechanic discussions aside, I also feel that the 4-slot casting is an inovation that places a greater degree of stress on the table, because if both classes have flawed mechanics, you're no left with a full caster to compensate (this does not mean that I admonish 4-slot casting).
I mean, we already know that a significant portion of the users on these forums disliked Striking Spell and the Eidolon (I didn't play a Summoner that much, so I can't really coment on the Eidolon side of things), but take them away, you're not left with much because these classes are exactly about challenging the core, the power budget or whatever with their unique gimmicks.
So I think a more heated debate was expected, though I don't condone with it.
I could not customize the eidolon within the PF2 balanced math and make it as interesting as PF1. I gave it a try for a few iterations, but the math is too tight. You won't get much variation. I'll leave that up to them.
Nice write-up. I am 100% on board with summoning font. My players' major complaints about the Summoner was that it didn't, well, summon.
If no one beats me to it, I hope to start a thread about HB fixes you guys and girls intend to implement following the playtest. My table will keep both classes as valid options until publication. Will probably do so next week to not spoil any data gathering Paizo still has to do.
One thing that maybe people aren't thinking about when they say that a summoner should get a summoning focus spell is how many summonable creatures can cast a ton of spells. Being able to summon a creature every ten minutes which itself has a giant list of spells to cast would be a liiitle broken imo (later in the game when spell lists are a lot bigger). So something more akin to a divine font would work a lot better.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Except that both of them are right. 90% of your posts I see are antagonizing people for haveing a different view than yours. . .Demonizing those who disagree with you is sure to make your argument so valid, and why this Playtest has gone so swimmingly.calling people out isn't demonizing then, the point of a forum and a play test is so people can give feedback so if versan wants to talk about how he thinks more customization eidolons are more important let him do it we can create threads for that reason
it will be over much faster if people feel like their feedback is being listened to rather than invalidated otherwise they push harder which leads to pushing back feeling like they have to justify or explain their views which leads to unnecessary discussion
i understand you don't want op classes like wizard and summoner to be life in pf1 but acting like they don't have any problem and gas-lighting then will not result in people shutting up and saying "wow i guess there must be something wrong with me and my experience" it will just make them more polarized and frustrated
And thank you for proving my point by projecting (claiming I'm gaslighting).
Also I was talking about Temperans post right above yours calling everyone disagreeing with them "yes men".
The act of disagreeing with your opinion is neither gaslighting nor does it make me a yes man. Apologies that someone not automatically agreeing with you enrages you so.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
One thing that maybe people aren't thinking about when they say that a summoner should get a summoning focus spell is how many summonable creatures can cast a ton of spells. Being able to summon a creature every ten minutes which itself has a giant list of spells to cast would be a liiitle broken imo (later in the game when spell lists are a lot bigger). So something more akin to a divine font would work a lot better.
Unless they boost the DC and/or attack roll of the spells a creature can cast, the spells they cast will be fairly trivial. Even a 10th level summon when you get it is 4 to 5 levels behind even a Challenge+0 to +2 or 3 creature. Given the way PF2 math works, that makes succeeding at a save versus the spells almost automatic and critically succeeding a high percentage chance of success for no effect.
It's why a I recommended a hit bonus increase. A Challenge 15 creature has a +30 to 31 chance to hit. A CR 19 and 20 AC creature is around 45. A Challenge 21 to 23 creature is around a 47 to 50 AC. Without an accuracy boost for your lvl 10 summon, you'll be hitting less than 50% of the time against Challenge+0 creatures and need a 16 to a 19 to land a single hit on a Challenge+2 to +3 creature. Lvl 9 or lower summons would be wasting your time to summon. For summons to be even remotely useful in a fight, they need to be max level spells and even then an accuracy boost would be needed to make them a very effective option over say dropping an AoE nuke.