Secrets of magic hype

[Kalaam]

They kind of have some stuff like that. Some of the fighter's press attacks have that kind of stuff.

[fanatic66]

I wouldn’t mind seeing more AOE stuff for martials. Part of me wishes all classes had a focus pool for big flashy abilities, but not necessarily magical. Let Fighters or Rogues for example can some badass abilities they can only do once an encounter like focus spells for other classes.

[The Raven Black]

We need Secrets of Martials.

[pixierose]

The Raven Black wrote:

We need Secrets of Martials.

That makes me think of Path of War/book of nine swords stuff.

[Old_Man_Robot]

There already are several feats that enable martials to hit multiple targets. It’s not as common because martial attack generally already have the in-baked ability to hit as many targets as they have strikes and are within reach.

That said, Whirlwind Strike can be a utter beast as well. The Barbarian in my longest game was almost an AoE specialist, but it was at higher levels and they built their character around it. Used a meteor hammer with whirlwind strike always every turn that made sense, with Haste for striding. Opening of combat always made heavy use of demoralise, with Terrifying Howl, Remorseless Lash and Agonising Rebuke - with Terrified Retreat and Attack of Opportunity for good measure.

[The Raven Black]

Then what we need to make a stronger blasting caster is feats, not spells.

[wegrata]

The Raven Black wrote:

Then what we need to make a stronger blasting caster is feats, not spells.

I think I brought up better metamagic for this type of thing. Something like a one action metamagic to make an AoE spell single target like sudden bolt, but increase the die size of damage to be in the expected range.

Or to add riders based on the traits, like persistent damage for acid and burn (separate feats), slow or vulnerable to bludgeoning for cold, etc...

[Deriven Firelion]

Paradozen wrote:

The-Magic-Sword wrote:

Invictus Novo wrote:

Blave wrote:

I think some if the common APG spells used to be uncommon from some early AP (like Object Reading). I'm curious to see if Sudden Bolt made it into SoM. That would be an interesting power increase in single target damage spells.

Honestly I hope not. Sudden Bolt is major power creep on all other damaging spells. I played Extinction Curse and have Sudden Bolt on my PFS Druid and honestly feel bad casting it. I typically don't use it because of the powercreep and that it just annihilates just about anything it touches.

Weird, I played a Wizard with Sudden Bolt and it feels pretty bad to use, like its ok but the AOE on Lightning Bolt the following level is so much more useful, I guess Sudden Bolt stays a damage die ahead when heightening, but for Single Target Scenarios (where the enemies have higher leveled saves and AC, so partial or no damage is likely), I feel like Magic Missile's reliable DPR and 3 action scaling is way stronger in the long run.

Like, I wouldn't say its a bad spell, and it certainly beats naked spell attacks, but I didn't get the vibe it was that powerful, maybe I should lean on it more next time I play a caster at that level.

As a GM with two different players in two different groups who heavily use Sudden Bolt, I agree that it feels kinda mediocre on my side of the screen. It does fine damage, but one of the characters has Tempest Surge which does just a bit less damage but regens between fights and the other character has magic missile as a signature spell that does less damage but is much more reliable, so when they burn through spell slots on Sudden Bolt I assume it's just for the flavor of calling down lightning. Better than Acid Arrow most of the time, but not as good as 3rd level or 4th level spells they are giving up for heightened Sudden Bolts.

I think Sudden Bolt scales very well. At higher level when you aren't doing much with your 2nd level slots, Sudden Bolt can still be dropped for a nice boost in damage stronger than cantrips in general.

When it is your max level slot, it's a mixed bag completely dependent on the enemy save. If you land it with a crit fail, it can be really nice. Mostly it's just ok single target damage.

[Shisumo]

Have any of the magus previews talked about whether there will be ways to access multiple hybrid studies, a la Order Explorer?

[Kalaam]

I don't think so, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was since a lot of casters have some way of delving into another subclass.
Maybe at high level (say level 16) they might get the Cascade Benefit from one other Study through a feat (but not the focus spell?)

[Ashanderai]

Kalaam wrote:

I don't think so, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was since a lot of casters have some way of delving into another subclass.

Maybe at high level (say level 16) they might get the Cascade Benefit from one other Study through a feat (but not the focus spell?)

They have not said anything about being able to delve into another Hybrid Study. But, I would be surprised if there is a way to do that, because all the martial classes that have path build options (like Barbarian, Champion, Ranger, Rogue, Investigator, Swashbuckler, etc.) do not have that capability at any level, are not balanced around that, and the magus is more like the martial classes than it is a full caster class, mechanically speaking.

I would like it if the class had that as a feat or something, but I highly doubt it will happen. Plus, splitting the focus of your class would probably weaken it somewhat in order to gain that level of versatility.

[Ashbourne]

I'm hoping there's a picture of an open spellbook or scroll written in some secret language, and that's it's not just a flavorful picture but an actual spell we have to figure out. Then starts to wonder, has this been done before?

[Kalaam]

Ashanderai wrote:

Kalaam wrote:

I don't think so, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was since a lot of casters have some way of delving into another subclass.

Maybe at high level (say level 16) they might get the Cascade Benefit from one other Study through a feat (but not the focus spell?)

They have not said anything about being able to delve into another Hybrid Study. But, I would be surprised if there is a way to do that, because all the martial classes that have path build options (like Barbarian, Champion, Ranger, Rogue, Investigator, Swashbuckler, etc.) do not have that capability at any level, are not balanced around that, and the magus is more like the martial classes than it is a full caster class, mechanically speaking.

I would like it if the class had that as a feat or something, but I highly doubt it will happen. Plus, splitting the focus of your class would probably weaken it somewhat in order to gain that level of versatility.

Ranger: Level 18 Feat "Manifold Edge".

You gain the level 1 benefit of one of the other Hunter's Edge, you choose which (the level 1 or your normal one) you use when Hunting your prey.

Champions can get another Divine Ally too.

It's not impossible, maybe unlikely but I wouldn't be that surprised if we got a feat that lets us choose between two Cascade Stances.

[HumbleGamer]

Kalaam wrote:

Ashanderai wrote:

Kalaam wrote:

I don't think so, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was since a lot of casters have some way of delving into another subclass.

Maybe at high level (say level 16) they might get the Cascade Benefit from one other Study through a feat (but not the focus spell?)

They have not said anything about being able to delve into another Hybrid Study. But, I would be surprised if there is a way to do that, because all the martial classes that have path build options (like Barbarian, Champion, Ranger, Rogue, Investigator, Swashbuckler, etc.) do not have that capability at any level, are not balanced around that, and the magus is more like the martial classes than it is a full caster class, mechanically speaking.

I would like it if the class had that as a feat or something, but I highly doubt it will happen. Plus, splitting the focus of your class would probably weaken it somewhat in order to gain that level of versatility.

Ranger: Level 18 Feat "Manifold Edge".

You gain the level 1 benefit of one of the other Hunter's Edge, you choose which (the level 1 or your normal one) you use when Hunting your prey.

Champions can get another Divine Ally too.

It's not impossible, maybe unlikely but I wouldn't be that surprised if we got a feat that lets us choose between two Cascade Stances.

it's kinda different.

It would have been like:

your champion paladin gets "glimpse of redemption/liberating step"
Divine allies are not specialization specific.

As for the ranger, it's a trade off ( you wouldn't be able to get that one with a magus I guess ).

it's a lvl 18 feat which gives you a choice between:

1) Get your lvl 1 perk ( hunter's Edge ) and lvl 17 perk ( masterful hunter )

or

2) Get your lvl 1 perk ( hunter's Edge ) and another lvl 1 perk ( another Hunter's Edge in addition to the one you already have ). You forgo your lvl 17 Masterful hunter perk.

[The Raven Black]

The Raven Black wrote:

Then what we need to make a stronger blasting caster is feats, not spells.

I was wondering if Magus is maybe the way to go for a stronger blasting caster, but I have a feeling that the Class' style might not suit the concept of blasting caster as most people envision it.

[HumbleGamer]

Why do we need to make blasting characters even stronger?

A lvl 5 caster throws 6d6 fireballs.
It also casts cantrips which deal 3d4+4/3d6+4 to ranged targets.

A martial hits 2d4/12+4 against a single target.

At lvl 9 a martial character is going to hit the same ( +2 dmg from specialization ), while the caster could blast 10d6 fireballs/8d6 fireballs/6d6 fireballs.

This leaving apart scrolls/wands/staves/focus spells.

[The Raven Black]

HumbleGamer wrote:

Why do we need to make blasting characters even stronger?

A lvl 5 caster throws 6d6 fireballs.
It also casts cantrips which deal 3d4+4/3d6+4 to ranged targets.

A martial hits 2d4/12+4 against a single target.

At lvl 9 a martial character is going to hit the same ( +2 dmg from specialization ), while the caster could blast 10d6 fireballs/8d6 fireballs/6d6 fireballs.

This leaving apart scrolls/wands/staves/focus spells.

Raw damage is not everything : you need to take into account how likely you are to hit your target ;-)

[HumbleGamer]

The Raven Black wrote:

HumbleGamer wrote:

Why do we need to make blasting characters even stronger?

A lvl 5 caster throws 6d6 fireballs.
It also casts cantrips which deal 3d4+4/3d6+4 to ranged targets.

A martial hits 2d4/12+4 against a single target.

At lvl 9 a martial character is going to hit the same ( +2 dmg from specialization ), while the caster could blast 10d6 fireballs/8d6 fireballs/6d6 fireballs.

This leaving apart scrolls/wands/staves/focus spells.

Raw damage is not everything : you need to take into account how likely you are to hit your target ;-)

Well, that's exactly when it comes down to versatility.

Being able bring different spells, cantrips and focus spells which:

- Don't always rely on the enemy AC ( there are also fortitude/reflex/will saves )
- Don't rely on physical resistance ( like for devils or other creatures with physical resistance to all but adamantium ), allowing the spellcaster to avoid resistances or immunities
- Depends the damage, it can trigger a vulnerability or some debuff ( see golems ). And spell slots apart, cantrips allows the blaster to deal all kind of damage:

- Telekinetic Projectile > All Physical damage ( S/B/P )
- Ray of Frost > Cold
- Produce Flame > Fire
- Acid Splash > Acid
- Electric Arc > Electric
- Daze > Mental
Eventually
-Disrupt Undead > Positive ( adapted cantrip )

The only downside of blasters is to hit a Severe/deadly boss with a spell attack ( but martial classes would also have difficulty hitting that high ac too ), especially if the blaster is a hybrid one ( like the druid ), without access to true strike ( though it may be get through adapted spell ).

But knowing that the boss is way more resistant ( which is easy to understand, since the party would be against a single one creature ), the blaster would probably try to support his party instead.

[wegrata]

Right which is why the proposed things allow casters to do both so someone doesn't have to chose between being a e team player and playing the character they want to play. That seems to be one of the disconnects. Just because a caster technically has access to spells that maybe more optimal, they're far enough outside the vision the player had they aren't going to be taken.

The other is pigeonholing casters into a support position. That shouldn't be the expected way to play them in challenging climatic battles.

[HumbleGamer]

wegrata wrote:

Right which is why the proposed things allow casters to do both so someone doesn't have to chose between being a e team player and playing the character they want to play. That seems to be one of the disconnects. Just because a caster technically has access to spells that maybe more optimal, they're far enough outside the vision the player had they aren't going to be taken.

The other is pigeonholing casters into a support position. That shouldn't be the expected way to play them in challenging climatic battles.

"That shouldn't be the expected way to play them in challenging climatic battles" means little when it comes down to party tactics and different encounters.

I didn't expected having to rely on a ranged weapon with my champion ( 10 dex ) during some encounters, but I had to adapt.

Same goes for the blaster, that blasted everything lvl -1/+1 until he met the big one, which he knows it might be hard to take down.

Either debuffing and Enhancing might be a better strategy than blasting the big one, and it's perfectly fine this way. It also doesn't mean that blasting the enemy would result into a failure, but you'll have to test your luck.

To me, what you are suggesting is for the game to adapt to the players choices, while encounters should differs each other, as well as classes, which might shine in some situations rather than others.

I don't know, It would be like seeing a melee character complaining about the fact a monster reduces 10 of his average 18 damage ( though there, the combatant wouldn't have any choice but deal with it ), and seeing the wizard devastating it with its ray of frost.

[wegrata]

I'd agree with your last point, if it was every enemy of a certain difficulty rather than select enemies. So if every difficult encounter reduced their damage.

I'm not expecting the game adapt, buy I am asking that it give more options so players can make thematically appropriate choices regardless of the difficulty of the encounter.

I also don't tend to take a casters vs martials view of things. Both should be able to contribute in multiple ways and select the ones that fit the theme of their character. I'd love to have more archtypes like the marshall ok the game.

[WWHsmackdown]

So some people might get their PDFs today?

[Filthy Lucre]

WWHsmackdown wrote:

So some people might get their PDFs today?

I'm anxiously watching my inbox but I don't know :c

[nephandys]

WWHsmackdown wrote:

So some people might get their PDFs today?

I don't think so because normally I get an email saying my order is in process/getting ready for shipment. Then I get the billed/shipped email. Usually, the billed/shipped email is when I get the PDF. I think the order in process emails are what start going out today. I think that's what they call 'order creation.'

[WatersLethe]

nephandys wrote:

WWHsmackdown wrote:

So some people might get their PDFs today?

I don't think so because normally I get an email saying my order is in process/getting ready for shipment. Then I get the billed/shipped email. Usually, the billed/shipped email is when I get the PDF. I think the order in process emails are what start going out today. I think that's what they call 'order creation.'

And yet, I've checked my email multiple times since 5 AM their time, each time as hopeful as the last.

[Kalaam]

Meanwhile, sane people are waiting for next wednesday.

[Old_Man_Robot]

Kalaam wrote:

Meanwhile, sane people are waiting for next wednesday.

If they're lucky! Hopefully subs won't have to deal with the whole APG PDF issues again.

[HumbleGamer]

Kalaam wrote:

Meanwhile, sane people are waiting for next wednesday.

That's harsh.

[The-Magic-Sword]

In theory, Aaron suggested shipping is still on time in terms of them deliberately doing a very tight window between order generation and shipping to have tried to intake the missing product (and it seems like Secrets of Magic did come in, if the designers having their early physical copies is any indication, but I have no idea if they get those all at once or not.) `

I'll still be shocked if shipping happens at all today.

[Hsui]

I have finally realized why my friends are not hyped about SoM (or PF2 in general). In Paizo's quest to make high level play, they have created a system where character concepts do not come on line until level 12+ (5 class feats with 2-3 available for non class such as archetypes). I am going to see if I tell my friends to start at level 12, that I can entice them back. OF course, this does not help PFS

[WWHsmackdown]

At some point this week we should start seeing leaks.

[The Raven Black]

wegrata wrote:

Right which is why the proposed things allow casters to do both so someone doesn't have to chose between being a e team player and playing the character they want to play. That seems to be one of the disconnects. Just because a caster technically has access to spells that maybe more optimal, they're far enough outside the vision the player had they aren't going to be taken.

The other is pigeonholing casters into a support position. That shouldn't be the expected way to play them in challenging climatic battles.

How would the stronger blasting caster be any different from a martial then ?

Obviously, they cannot be flatly better, or even just more versatile, than the martials.

[Invictus Fatum]

Hsui wrote:

I have finally realized why my friends are not hyped about SoM (or PF2 in general). In Paizo's quest to make high level play, they have created a system where character concepts do not come on line until level 12+ (5 class feats with 2-3 available for non class such as archetypes). I am going to see if I tell my friends to start at level 12, that I can entice them back. OF course, this does not help PFS

I disagree as I find most of my concepts really come together at lvl 4 or 6 with a decent start at level 2. Sure, they aren't fully realized until later levels, but that is development rather than core. Mileage may vary though.

That said, this is a topic probably best discussed in a different thread.

[wegrata]

The Raven Black wrote:

wegrata wrote:

Right which is why the proposed things allow casters to do both so someone doesn't have to chose between being a e team player and playing the character they want to play. That seems to be one of the disconnects. Just because a caster technically has access to spells that maybe more optimal, they're far enough outside the vision the player had they aren't going to be taken.

The other is pigeonholing casters into a support position. That shouldn't be the expected way to play them in challenging climatic battles.

How would the stronger blasting caster be any different from a martial then ?

Obviously, they cannot be flatly better, or even just more versatile, than the martials.

I don't understand the question. They'd be using magic to do damage rather than weapons. So energy damage, target saves, and have a debuff effect on damage vs a single target. Is this what you're asking about or are you looking at it more broadly as utility vs single target damage? This is aside form the difference in defences and thematics, which are important to a lot of people.

I'd it's the single target damage, that's way to broad a niche IMO yo protect.

I'd say during the course of a fight against strong enemies, a caster will do similar damage to a martial, since cantrips are behind weapons and the one or 2 slotted spells.

Note I'm not asking for strictly better, I'm asking for different than what exists so I can play the character I want to play, rather than the one the system forces me to.

[Old_Man_Robot]

wegrata wrote:

The Raven Black wrote:

Then what we need to make a stronger blasting caster is feats, not spells.

I think I brought up better metamagic for this type of thing. Something like a one action metamagic to make an AoE spell single target like sudden bolt, but increase the die size of damage to be in the expected range.

Or to add riders based on the traits, like persistent damage for acid and burn (separate feats), slow or vulnerable to bludgeoning for cold, etc...

A while ago I was toying around with a concept for a new (well, old) metamagic feat and trait.

Maximise Spell wrote:

Maximise Spell [> > >]
Traits: Concentrate, Evocation, Flourish, Charged Metamagic

By Intensivly focusing the magical energy of a spell, you can fully push that spells destructive power to its limits. On your following turn, when you Cast a Spell from your spell slots, if the spell deals damage and doesn’t have a duration, treat the outcome of the spells damage as if highest number on the spells damage dice had been rolled on all dice.

The big change here was the concept of the "Charged Metamagic" trait, as a distinct trait from just normal Metamagic. The key idea being that a Charged Metamagic effect can only effect the outcome of a spell cast on the following turn.

So the trait would read like

Charged Metamgaic wrote:

Actions with the Charged Metamagic trait, usually from metamagic feats, tweak the properties of your spells. You can only use Charged Metamgic feats on the turn before Casting the Spell you want to alter. If you use any action (including free actions and reactions) other than Cast a Spell directly after, you waste the benefits of the Charged Metamagic action. Any additional effects added by a metamagic action are part of the spell’s effect, not of the metamagic action itself. Spells altered with a Charged Metamagic feat also gain the Open trait.

Maximise Spell was naturally the most extreme version. I figured something like Empowered would cost 2 actions, with other versions only costing 1 action.

The initial concept was to provide other things to do with spare actions a caster might have. A mid level feat was also designed to change a single 1 action metamagic feat into a charged metamagic feat, allowing you to start a Charge as a 3rd action and do something cool on the following turn.

Hands up, standing still to charge up your big blast is very anime, but I thought it would be a cool concept to add.

[oholoko]

wegrata wrote:

The Raven Black wrote:

wegrata wrote:

Right which is why the proposed things allow casters to do both so someone doesn't have to chose between being a e team player and playing the character they want to play. That seems to be one of the disconnects. Just because a caster technically has access to spells that maybe more optimal, they're far enough outside the vision the player had they aren't going to be taken.

The other is pigeonholing casters into a support position. That shouldn't be the expected way to play them in challenging climatic battles.

How would the stronger blasting caster be any different from a martial then ?

Obviously, they cannot be flatly better, or even just more versatile, than the martials.

I don't understand the question. They'd be using magic to do damage rather than weapons. So energy damage, target saves, and have a debuff effect on damage vs a single target. Is this what you're asking about or are you looking at it more broadly as utility vs single target damage? This is aside form the difference in defences and thematics, which are important to a lot of people.

I'd it's the single target damage, that's way to broad a niche IMO yo protect.

I'd say during the course of a fight against strong enemies, a caster will do similar damage to a martial, since cantrips are behind weapons and the one or 2 slotted spells.

Note I'm not asking for strictly better, I'm asking for different than what exists so I can play the character I want to play, rather than the one the system forces me to.

Sorry but the way the system is structured without major changes the character you want to play is just well... Suboptimal. It works it deals damage but it will lag behind a martial and won't help as much as a supportive/utility guy. It's not like you can't do it I had a character that was a sorcerer healer with a few blasting spells. Sometimes you do get that demon where you use that nice 6th level searing with weakness and a crit... But most of the times that heroism will boost the damage a lot more(even the level 3).

And I say that it is possible to play that character but that character won't be the best, and I doubt paizo will invest into that concept being the best at blasting when there's already a viable option. If you want to play that I would say go for another system or homebrew that at your table. Or even go for pf1 with spheres or wait a kineticist that may be a better and cooler blaster concept.

[Laclale♪]

Truename spell?

[HumbleGamer]

Hsui wrote:

I have finally realized why my friends are not hyped about SoM (or PF2 in general). In Paizo's quest to make high level play, they have created a system where character concepts do not come on line until level 12+ (5 class feats with 2-3 available for non class such as archetypes). I am going to see if I tell my friends to start at level 12, that I can entice them back. OF course, this does not help PFS

Consider playing with the FA variant rule.

I mean, before quitting try give it a shot at least in terms of comparison with a normal progression.

Being able to get twice the feats every two level is going to drastically speed things up.

Alternatively, playing a campaign from from lvl 12-20 would also help in terms of customization.

I love the system itself, but I share part of your feelings when it comes to a "slow progression", especially if a party isn't able ( speed ) to gain a level in one session or two.

[Blave]

Laclale♪ wrote:

Truename spell?

As far as I know, true names are a thing for investigation and rituals, not slot-based spellcasting.

[WatersLethe]

HumbleGamer wrote:

Hsui wrote:

I have finally realized why my friends are not hyped about SoM (or PF2 in general). In Paizo's quest to make high level play, they have created a system where character concepts do not come on line until level 12+ (5 class feats with 2-3 available for non class such as archetypes). I am going to see if I tell my friends to start at level 12, that I can entice them back. OF course, this does not help PFS

Consider playing with the FA variant rule.

I mean, before quitting try give it a shot at least in terms of comparison with a normal progression.

Being able to get twice the feats every two level is going to drastically speed things up.

Alternatively, playing a campaign from from lvl 12-20 would also help in terms of customization.

I love the system itself, but I share part of your feelings when it comes to a "slow progression", especially if a party isn't able ( speed ) to gain a level in one session or two.

I recommend the same! I share the feeling of certain concepts taking too long to come online, and I have since the playtest. What really unlocked the system for me was when I realized how easy it is to give extra feats. Double class feats and Free Archetype are two methods for this, and one is even officially supported!

The nice thing about the default being a bit too slow from my perspective, is that it's super approachable from the perspective of people new to the system. This gets more people in, and then once they're experienced, it's relatively easy to sell them on the Free Archetype rule.

[wegrata]

oholoko wrote:

wegrata wrote:

The Raven Black wrote:

wegrata wrote:

Right which is why the proposed things allow casters to do both so someone doesn't have to chose between being a e team player and playing the character they want to play. That seems to be one of the disconnects. Just because a caster technically has access to spells that maybe more optimal, they're far enough outside the vision the player had they aren't going to be taken.

The other is pigeonholing casters into a support position. That shouldn't be the expected way to play them in challenging climatic battles.

How would the stronger blasting caster be any different from a martial then ?

Obviously, they cannot be flatly better, or even just more versatile, than the martials.

I don't understand the question. They'd be using magic to do damage rather than weapons. So energy damage, target saves, and have a debuff effect on damage vs a single target. Is this what you're asking about or are you looking at it more broadly as utility vs single target damage? This is aside form the difference in defences and thematics, which are important to a lot of people.

I'd it's the single target damage, that's way to broad a niche IMO yo protect.

I'd say during the course of a fight against strong enemies, a caster will do similar damage to a martial, since cantrips are behind weapons and the one or 2 slotted spells.

Note I'm not asking for strictly better, I'm asking for different than what exists so I can play the character I want to play, rather than the one the system forces me to.

Sorry but the way the system is structured without major changes the character you want to play is just well... Suboptimal. It works it deals damage but it will lag behind a martial and won't help as much as a supportive/utility guy. It's not like you can't do it I had a character that was a sorcerer healer with a few blasting spells. Sometimes you do get that demon where you use that nice 6th level searing with weakness and a...

Maybe my level of system mastery isn't good enough to see that structural changes your referring to, could you describe where spells that target a single opponent's save and provide moderate damage with a debuff doesn't work? I can't see it from a balance perspective, it would be more spells like sudden bolt, that deal less damage and have a rider.

If you're speaking about what's been stated earlier in this tread, that the game assumes casters play a support role in difficult spells, then that's a problem to be fixed in a book focused on martials or with gear like the new spell hearts coming out.

[The Raven Black]

I think we should open a new thread for this blasting caster topic, even though I feel the Magus chassis might be a very good place to start.

[Filthy Lucre]

Hsui wrote:

I have finally realized why my friends are not hyped about SoM (or PF2 in general). In Paizo's quest to make high level play, they have created a system where character concepts do not come on line until level 12+ (5 class feats with 2-3 available for non class such as archetypes). I am going to see if I tell my friends to start at level 12, that I can entice them back. OF course, this does not help PFS

Just use unrestricted free archetype. Problem solved.

[Evilgm]

Hsui wrote:

I have finally realized why my friends are not hyped about SoM (or PF2 in general). In Paizo's quest to make high level play, they have created a system where character concepts do not come on line until level 12+ (5 class feats with 2-3 available for non class such as archetypes). I am going to see if I tell my friends to start at level 12, that I can entice them back. OF course, this does not help PFS

Considering how well Abomination Vaults runs, I haven't found this to be accurate at all.

[Creative Burst]

They hope to here update from last item (tech revolution) in next hour an likely create order this afternoon and start shipping tomorrow or Wednesday.

[belgrath9344]

secrets of magic just got delayed to September 1st. tech revolution to September 22nd

[Old_Man_Robot]

belgrath9344 wrote:

secrets of magic just got delayed to September 1st. tech revolution to September 22nd

Whats the source on this?

I thought they said they were committed to the PDF release by August 25th no matter what.

[Xethik]

Old_Man_Robot wrote:

belgrath9344 wrote:

secrets of magic just got delayed to September 1st. tech revolution to September 22nd

Whats the source on this?

I thought they said they were committed to the PDF release by August 25th no matter what.

Paizo's twitter

[oholoko]

wegrata wrote:

Maybe my level of system mastery isn't good enough to see that structural changes your referring to, could you describe where spells that target a single opponent's save and provide moderate damage with a debuff doesn't work? I can't see it from a balance perspective, it would be more spells like sudden bolt, that deal less damage and have a rider.

They work like I said you can make that character but it's an archetype that probably won't get much more damage. I doubt it will get much better than the sorcerer 2 extra per spell level depending on your bloodline. So I really doubt they will give much support to blasting since it already works and there's not much more that can be done to it I think.

The whole structural changes is because casters always hit at -1 to -3 due to how proficiency works(they don't benefit from item bonuses) this is the biggest problem with blasters they are quite dependent on the opponent weakest save to remain competent. While a martial casts sword all day without problem.

[Old_Man_Robot]

Xethik wrote:

Old_Man_Robot wrote:

belgrath9344 wrote:

secrets of magic just got delayed to September 1st. tech revolution to September 22nd

Whats the source on this?

I thought they said they were committed to the PDF release by August 25th no matter what.

Paizo's twitter

Well, now I have the Big Sad.

I have a really long flight on the 26th and I'd put that time aside for my SoM reading time. Guess I'll just watch Office re-runs or something instead.