It finally dawned on me that initial dedications for weapon archetypes are pretty solid for casters with limited weapon choices (it's been talked about before in here but I never really stopped to think about it). What are some casters you've seen or made that took a weapon archetype?
I have an elven wizard with Archer archetype that has been pretty fun. Sitting at max range throwing spells and firing off arrows is a relaxing playstyle when my frontliners are Tripping and Grappling foes/generally keeping them away from me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I haven't made them yet, but I've been toying with the idea of a warpriest of Gorum who goes into Mauler for some great and good greatsword fun.
Hammer quake is something I'd like on a warpeiest
I'm personally a huge fan of archer on most casters; single action strikes amd attack actions make for a nice "filler" after a save based spell.
I also like bastion/bard. If you take armor training, you'll have heavy armor, only be 1 ac below most martials, and if you boost the heck out of strength and take warrior muse, you'll be a pretty competent supporting warrior
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You can exit Sentinel faster since it has skill feats.
I don't think all this investment proves fruitful in the end (and definitely not in the beginning). Archery's fine, but going into melee is asking for much more trouble than you'll dish out. You're still not gaining a significant damage or accuracy boost (like all the martials have), you still have lower h.p. & worse saves, and in the heat of the toughest battles, you'll still want to resort to your spells and put off these silly notions of moving toward danger.
There are exceptions, but I'd make sure to map out a level Xth PC and see how it compares.
Of course much depends on how tough the campaign leans, with PFS being modest and published adventures being high-mid to very high difficulty.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think all this investment proves fruitful in the end (and definitely not in the beginning).
From my experience the beginning is actually where these builds are the best. A low level battle cleric or archer wizard is barely any less accurate than a martial and is probably searching for extra stuff to do in combat anyways.
I played a melee witch to level 4. Used orc weapon familiarity to get a decent initial weapon and got Sentinel at level 2 for AC. I was going to pick up Mauler at level 6 and get the Knockdown feats.
I later semi-retconned him to a Bard with the Marshal archetype for various reasons. Those reasons didn't have much to do with being a martial caster. I'd gladly have kept playing the witch if those issues hadn't come up.
I always say it's important to get your expectations right if you want to play such a character. If you do, a melee caster can be lots of fun.
From my experience the beginning is actually where these builds are the best. A low level battle cleric or archer wizard is barely any less accurate than a martial and is probably searching for extra stuff to do in combat anyways.
I don't think all this investment proves fruitful in the end (and definitely not in the beginning).
So the best way to play a martial dedicated caster is to invest at low levels where that third action attack matters and then retrain to focus more on your casting at around level 10? That seems really jarring from the perspective of realism...
So the best way to play a martial dedicated caster is to invest at low levels where that third action attack matters and then retrain to focus more on your casting at around level 10? That seems really jarring from the perspective of realism...From my experience the beginning is actually where these builds are the best. A low level battle cleric or archer wizard is barely any less accurate than a martial and is probably searching for extra stuff to do in combat anyways.
I don't think all this investment proves fruitful in the end (and definitely not in the beginning).
That's pretty much been my experience, yeah. The archer wizard might keep their bow around depending on what sorts of third-action options they have but for the most part casters get more incentive to discard their weapons as they level up as magical ability increases and accuracy issues get exacerbated.
Strength based martial-casters tend to take a little longer to get online since often you have to buy into better armor though, so that shifts the numbers a bit if you're going that route, though imo those options aren't really as worth it in general.
... Which is sort of ironic, because a Wizard with archery dedication sounds a lot more outside of the box than a Demonic Sorcerer using their own basic focus spell or a Witch taking a witch class feat(eldritch nails), but the latter two are devastatingly bad.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At later levels, a carter's first attack looks like a fighter's second attack, which is not great, but not terrible. Imo, unless you're a 8 hp caster, if you want to use a weapon, you should stick with a bow. The bard I mentioned earlier can get away with using a weapon, but I would recommend using combat maneuvers over actual strikes sonce skills scale better than your strikes, and you'll have the available str yo have a good Athletics skill. You still shouldn't try to grapple the fighty type beast, but you can def get away with grappling the enemy caster
Not particularly. At low levels is when you're still learning and barely have any power (spell slots), at higher levels you have an abundance of slots and no longer need the crutch (from the character's pov), so you can focus more on your magic.
Why does refocusing on new skills mean losing old ones? Have you ever suddenly lost a skill just because you picked up something new or dedicated slightly more time to one hobby than another?
As for the general discussion as a whole:
Why does gaining access to magic do more for a martial class than gaining access to martial skills does for a magical class? Is this just a sign that martial classes have nothing akin to magical buffing spells or any real utility that can't be done more expediently by a spell? Is it a function of martial types getting more benefit from buffs than casters do? Both?
How would people fix it so that a mage that picks up the sword is getting a reward equal to what a fighter gaining spells is getting?
Why does gaining access to magic do more for a martial class than gaining access to martial skills does for a magical class? Is this just a sign that martial classes have nothing akin to magical buffing spells or any real utility that can't be done more expediently by a spell? Is it a function of martial types getting more benefit from buffs than casters do? Both?
It's a function of the game's math. An underlying assumption of PF2 are that class options (usually) shouldn't provide big vertical increases and the ones that do should generally do so in specific ways.
The goal is that a Fighter is always a Fighter and that feats are more like specialization and controlled improvements... but that same idea applies when a Sorcerer starts investing in martial combat too. No matter how hard they go in on it, they'll always still be just a sorcerer.
Spellcasting on the other hand is considered more of a lateral move. A fighter picking up cantrips and low level spell slots isn't really getting better at swinging their greatsword, but is instead gaining entirely new capabilities. That means there's a lot more room to grow there.
I don't think there really is a fix (even if some options like the aforementioned sorcerer bloodline desperately need it), because these are basic assumptions about the game.
If there were to be any, they'd probably have to take the form of feats that only spellcasters could take that are stronger than their martial counterparts, but still noticeably weaker than full martial packages.
Some sort of 'bladewizard training' feat that gives you improved defenses and a conditional accuracy or damage booster that's clearly overbudgeted for a feat but wizards with swords suck and would still suck even with it so it's not like it really matters.
I assume we'll get an Eldritch Knight archetype someday that'll serve to even things out, maybe help spellcasters have better proficiency in weapon in armors for less feats, stuff like that.
Maybe a short selection of magus feats (not related to spellstrikes but more about improving martial abilities) for a lower level (closer to that of the magus) like martial style archetype are already doing.
It'll be interesting to see what kind of casting becomes available to MCD Magus or Summoner. Will it suit martials or casters better?
We'll have to see Temperans. Voicing those concerns is a good thing, this will help them consider options they may not have thought of.
The Dedication feat could give you automatic progression in martial weapons and armors, up to expert, along with 2 cantrips.
Then some could be ported feat from the Magus, but without having the double level delay.
Stuff like:
Raise a Tome
Spirit Sheath
Spell Parry
Early Steady Spellcasting
Bespell strike and bespelled persistance
Schoolshroud
Those would be pretty good feat to transfer to an Eldritch Knight archetype. Along with the Basic Spellcasting things, maybe even a high level feat that lets you become Master in either weapon or armor.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I assume we'll get an Eldritch Knight archetype someday that'll serve to even things out, maybe help spellcasters have better proficiency in weapon in armors for less feats, stuff like that.
Maybe a short selection of magus feats (not related to spellstrikes but more about improving martial abilities) for a lower level (closer to that of the magus) like martial style archetype are already doing.
Eldritch Archer requires level 14 Caster and does not make you better at archery. But a level 6 Martial that takes it gets 8th level spells and master spellcasting.
A level 14 Caster can only get 3 feats (lv 16, 18, and 20). A level 6 Martial can get most of the feats (lv 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20).
To me it seems Eldritch Knight will be treated the same unless Paizo has a change of heart.
Eldritch Archer is very clearly built with a martial chassis in mind; even if you were to waive the prerequisites that make it difficult for a caster to qualify the big payoffs (Eldritch Shot and Enchanting Arrow) are both just crap deals for full casters. I don't think this is a problem, the archetype would have to be built very differently for a caster chassis to want it.
It is entirely possible that Eldritch Knight goes the other direction and is only really useful for casters; I could see it requiring Bespell Weapon and playing off of that feat, for example.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So... an interesting question. Suppose that you wanted an archetype that, say, would make it worthwhile for your elvish wizard to still be hanging on to his bow at lvl 20 and occasionally taking shots. What would that require? How much would you have to cram into that chassis in order to make "and I shoot my bow" a reasonable thing for the wizard to do on turns where he'd already cast a two-action spell (one that, presumably, wasn't increasing his MAP)?
...and, on a sorta-similar but quite distinct note, what would it take for an archetype to make prehensile hair useful on the witch as a long-term thing? I mean, I've built a monk before, who archetyped into witch with his 9th-level human (half-elf) racial, and got potential value out of it (it let him use both of his hands for grappling, and still hit and trip people), but "other classes could grab it via archetype" shouldn't be the core use-case for a class feat.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why does gaining access to magic do more for a martial class than gaining access to martial skills does for a magical class? Is this just a sign that martial classes have nothing akin to magical buffing spells or any real utility that can't be done more expediently by a spell? Is it a function of martial types getting more benefit from buffs than casters do? Both?
Also as an addendum to my earlier comments on this: While it's generally true that martials gain more from spellcsating archetypes than vice versa... it's worth pointing out that they have pretty much the same problem a spellcaster does if they want to use offensive spells. Between accuracy issues and reduced spell level, it's really hard to justify doing any kind of blasting, for instance, with a wizard dedication.
How much would you have to cram into that chassis in order to make "and I shoot my bow" a reasonable thing for the wizard to do on turns where he'd already cast a two-action spell (one that, presumably, wasn't increasing his MAP)?
It depends on how you define reasonable. To some extent, it's already a viable option. An elf wizard can pick up full proficiency with a bow fairly cheaply and since spells are two actions anyways, there's a floating third action there. If you don't have any metamagic you wanna use or some skill action you've invested in, plinking with a bow is probably one of your better offensive tools after you cast a non-attack spell.
But at the same time, that character is never really going to be an archer, so much as a Wizard who happens to have a bow they shoot sometimes.
...and, on a sorta-similar but quite distinct note, what would it take for an archetype to make prehensile hair useful on the witch as a long-term thing?
Melee builds are a bit harder to work with... the big thing that white-hair witches and etc. are lacking is survivability. 6 hit points per level and no armor makes heading into melee really scary (even moreso if you're trying to use a strength based weapon like glutton's jaws or eldritch nails).
So the two biggest things I think a character like that needs is some way to stand up to physical threats.
Beyond that, I think the biggest thing both builds would be searching for are accuracy enhancers. I've had a few melee casters in games I've run and while they do fairly underwhelimg damage with their weapons (which is fair tbh), what always frustrated them the most was how often their attacks just seemed to fail, especially against bosses. The ability to pull off their trick more consistently, even if the result is a lot weaker than what a dedicated martial can manage, would go a long way to making those kinds of builds feel better.
But at the same time, that character is never really going to be an archer,
Melee builds are a bit harder to work with... the big thing that white-hair witches and etc. are lacking is survivability. 6 hit points per level and no armor makes heading into melee really scary (even moreso if...
It hasn’t come up yet as no one has reached a high enough level, but I’ve thought about allowing an increase in weapon skill from expert to master, but just not giving the character greater weapon specialization. The upgrade would be purchased as an add-on to the fighter MC dedication, would be limited to a single weapon of simple or martial status, and be added to Diverse Weapon Expert. I can see allowing similar changes with other archetypes too, eg; Mauler for two-handers.
The whole point is to find a way to have casters feel comfortable making weapon attacks without eating into the damage that martial characters do with those same strikes. Without strength or dexterity as primary attributes and without access to the better damage modifiers, I don’t think there is much of a break.
|
Honestly, if Arcane Archer were to make a return and be built with casters in mind, Casters would very much like that. Specially if you make it so Casters can get it by level 6, but not Martials. Eldritch Archer I agree was made to be a martial thing almost exclusively.
It's quite decent for a warpriest who has a bow as their deities weapon.
And not at all bad at higher levels for a caster. Gives you a decent alternative if your main schtick (e.g., AoE damage) is shut down or proving fairly ineffective.
For most casters class feats are pretty meh so at least the opportunity cost is lower.
Also pick-a-list dilutes the class when a single list allows for more focus.
This I don't understand.
Sure Sorcerer has about half their class feats off limits for any particular tradition. But that is only one class.
Look at Witch. Sure there are things that are not good with Witch, but none of them are because you can pick a tradition of choice. The class doesn't feel 'diluted' because of that flexibility.
Though, since I don't actually know what you mean by 'diluted'...?
Whether a Magus has access to one or multiple traditions doesn't reflect on how broad the appeal of its feats will be. I think any feat-schism is more likely going to be tied to their class track (i.e. ranged, skirmisher, tank) with the bulk of their feats neutral.
I don't think a Magus needs such breadth, but why not? This would be the moment to introduce such elements into the game if ever, and nothing about a Primal Magus (et al) seems askew. And quite likely a Divine version would be appealing to the many disappointed by Warpriests*.
Of course, there may archetypes that do all this instead (or also).
*Because full casting demands a hefty price, not because Warpriests are necessarily bad; the class is just not as martial as many want.
Sorcerer and Witch have to spend about equal amount of feats on each list. Each list also has completely different balance needs. So having 4 spell lists means that about 1/4 to 1/2 the feats are sealed off. While the the remaining feats have to be way more generic to fit all 4 lists.
What witch feat requires access to a particular list? I don't see any.
I suppose your statement is still correct, as "none" is the amount spent on each list from what I can see.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not particularly. At low levels is when you're still learning and barely have any power (spell slots), at higher levels you have an abundance of slots and no longer need the crutch (from the character's pov), so you can focus more on your magic.Why does refocusing on new skills mean losing old ones? Have you ever suddenly lost a skill just because you picked up something new or dedicated slightly more time to one hobby than another?
You aren't getting worse, the enemies and the martials are getting better-- its like when you play baseball as a kid, but as you get older the divide widens between the people who take it more seriously and those that don't, or why kids teams can be gender neutral but by high school they tend to be in gendered leagues, owing to (alleged?) physical differences that make girls who used to be able to compete and thrive against the boys, fall off relative to the athletic ability of the boys who train as much as they do.
(Can you tell I watch a lot of baseball anime? its a common plot point)
In this case, rather than physical differences, the martials and monsters are ascending to a level of skill that takes more dedication than you can keep up with, since your class dictates you're dedicating too much time to practicing your magic instead.
You'd demolish the same creatures you could hit before of course, just like you'd wreck elementary school kids even though you can't keep up in high school or college level play.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Caster taking martial archetype might not get great at using a weapon, but they can get a lot of good utility (reaction,additional skills, additional options in a fight etc...)
In the same way,martial taking spellcasting archetype do not become great at offensive spells, as there spell DC will always be a bit low, what they get is utility.
As for Sorcerer not having a great 1action,i disagree, intimidation & diplomacy have some great skill feats enabling 1 action goodness (and a cleric wasting heals on 1 action hela just to use a 3rd action is wasting it).
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
What caster is using a weapon in PF1 ahead of a fighter’s second attack accuracy? Heck, not even 3.x rogues are keeping up with that by mid to high levels. Casters making an attack with a weapon are in great shape in PF2. Casters trying to buff themselves into being better than martials is not, but good riddance.