| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Have they said it’s changing levels from the PT?
Currently the breakdown is:
- Monk and Champ, master at 17th
- Caster archetype, master at 18th
- Magus and Summoner, master at 19th
yep they said they'll mirror champ and monk. it will not remain as the playtest version
How many times per day can you pull off your still suboptimal combo that still leaves you in melee super squishy?
Looks fine on paper till you go.
Focus spell
Bless
Fear - can't cast fear and maintain bless and...Are you attempting to troll? Because this entire post seems woefully uniformed. While I know that you were corrected about bless, I'd like to bring it back up because it is a blatant representation of the underlying issue. The issue being that some folks don't bother to look at the big picture. They don't bother to actually look at options. They just want to be malcontent. They are like children in an ice cream shop with 31 flavors whining that their blend flavor isn't an option itself and they would instead have to have 1 scoop of each.
Secondly, you claim that, in practice, it won't be as good. I use this alias on purpose. They are very similar build concepts and this one works well, very very well. Yes my HP is low, but because of the measures of using full plate and often using shield, I am missed very often. While it is admittedly harsh, my point still remains when I say, it is not the system's fault you aren't clever enough to make a build concept work. It took me maybe half an hour to come up with the build from above.
Lastly, and this truly boggles my mind that I have to say it, the class is intended to be a full caster class. OF COURSE IT ISN'T INTENDED TO BE SURVIVABLE IN MELEE! OF COURSE IT ISN'T INTENDED TO BE GOOD AT MELEE! In order to pull that off you have to use the spells you have access to (SURPRISE!) and reach outside of your class (maybe to dabble in a martial class because that IS their schtick :O ).
If your character concept is one that is a deviation from what the base class is intended for, you will have to get creative. And you likely won't be amazing at it... because you are deviating. But, this is one of the reasons I really like PF2, you can make it work. I did and I'm not special. So you can too.
I think the thing that some people are tripping up on is that they wish sorcerers had just been given no melee centric options since that core chassis of the class leans away from a character being good in melee combat. I am a little sympathetic to that line of thinking, but it just results in fewer options and less fun combinations.
I think the demonic bloodline is built as the perfect bloodline for an evil character who will MCing either into or from Champion. It has a lot of strong synergy with that. There are a couple of other interesting builds with it, but it is probably not the best default divine bloodline for a traditional party. I imagine we will see quite a few NPCs using it, but probably not as many PCs. I think that is ok.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like to throw something into the ring that I thought of recently. Casters have crappy fort saves. You know who loves fort saves? Paizo loves fort saves. A lot.
A melee caster is gonna be subject to tons and tons of fort saves and I wouldn't be expecting them to do all that well against them. Form spells don't have a bonus to fort saves after all, nor do the crappy claw n' jaw focus spells. Even the mooks with fort saves are gonna be a problem for casters unless they pump con, and they're already working on a tight ability budget with str, dex, and [CASTING STAT] all crying for attention.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not sympathetic because it merely requires thought to be effective.
The demonic blood magic ability gives a -1 to AC as a point and effect, no save. If you cast Fear on 1 enemy you can point at another with the blood magic. With one 1st leve spell, You debuff 2 enemies. If you have bless up and are buffing allies, that is a 2 point swing on 2 enemies for you and your allies.
#simple game understanding
I don't think that is how blood magic works. It has to be a target of the spell and the spell has to be a successful hit or a failed save. That is why the -1 status penalty to AC isn't so great, at least not with fear, it doesn't stack.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll be honest I don't think the fort saves thing matters all that much. They can easily get to Master late game with Canny Accumen, and while that's not as good as getting automatic crit success and happens later...it can happen.
Canny Acumen only gives you master at level 17. That's 6 to 8 levels later than other classes get Master assuming your campaign even gets to that level. I wouldn't call these small gaps.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just let Glutton's Jaws and Dragon Claws use spell attacks that only add Str to damage, I say, without letting them also benefit from item bonuses. One has a tiny bit of extra survivability, one has okayish damage, but people already complain about spell attacks not being especially good options for casters so I think it'd be fine. You can limit the amount of attacks made with the spells to 5 or 10 if you *really* think it's going to be a problem. (Dice Will Roll has a character with the former using spell attacks, even actual healing rather than THP if I recall correctly, and though it did decent work, that's what I expect of a unique mandatory focus spell, and it came up less often as time went on and she got more options. Certainly never outshone the two martials.)
This, though you could potentially get two debuffs on them with Slow which gets better as your 3rd level slots become less valuable.I don't think that is how blood magic works. It has to be a target of the spell and the spell has to be a successful hit or a failed save. That is why the -1 status penalty to AC isn't so great, at least not with fear, it doesn't stack.I'm not sympathetic because it merely requires thought to be effective.
The demonic blood magic ability gives a -1 to AC as a point and effect, no save. If you cast Fear on 1 enemy you can point at another with the blood magic. With one 1st leve spell, You debuff 2 enemies. If you have bless up and are buffing allies, that is a 2 point swing on 2 enemies for you and your allies.
#simple game understanding
I agree it is good on slow, but that means the -1 AC penalty is meaningless until 5th level. That is pretty unfortunate, although getting a +1 bonus to intimidation is good enough to make up for it.
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
If your character concept is one that is a deviation from what the base class is intended for
We're not talking about someone deviating into some esoteric build though, we're talking about a sorcerer using the focus spell they get automatically or a witch using a witch class feat.
It's pretty weak to open by accusing someone of trolling and then immediately act like a class being decent with their own class options is some insane beyond the pale ask.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Again, people here seem to assume that proficiency, in form of the to-hit numbers, are what makes martials distinct from spellcasters. That misunderstands the game engine *so much*.
In fact, the to-hit numbers are the least part of it. The whole system is so skewed that if you don't have the on-level to-hit, you're not merely weaker, you are completely out. Having appropriate to-hit is a prerequisite for making ANYTHING work.
So in short leave to-hit to martials, and make only spell-artilery out of spellcasters?
Where it's certainly most popular option among spellcasters, many ppl, including me, just finds utterly boring. Especially comparing it again with older editions, where you actually HAVE been giving a chance to do something more unique.Also, AC is not the only form of defense.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If your character concept is one that is a deviation from what the base class is intended forWe're not talking about someone deviating into some esoteric build though, we're talking about a sorcerer using the focus spell they get automatically or a witch using a witch class feat.
It's pretty weak to open by accusing someone of trolling and then immediately act like a class being decent with their own class options is some insane beyond the pale ask.
Honestly, the real parts about Eldritch Nails that I dislike are the fact that a) they require Str, which is rough on attributes for a utility-type feat, b) only work with non-cantrip hexes.
Glutton's Jaws are actually decently fine statwise - 1d8 forceful that gives temp HP is pretty good even compared to martial weapons. Yes, it requires Str, but I suspect that if it didn't it'd drop down to 1d6 (and probably lose forceful).
|
If your character concept is one that is a deviation from what the base class is intended forWe're not talking about someone deviating into some esoteric build though, we're talking about a sorcerer using the focus spell they get automatically or a witch using a witch class feat.
It's pretty weak to open by accusing someone of trolling and then immediately act like a class being decent with their own class options is some insane beyond the pale ask.
What an interesting take on my words.
Sorcerers can be decent with their own class options. I very much proved that with the build I presented. What you failed to include with that quote is "...you have to get creative." Sorcerers are not meant to be melee combatants at their base. To try to focus on melee with the class then requires creativity to make work.
I'm not saying that what you ask is silly. I'm saying that why you are asking what you ask is silly. It is unnecessary because it works just fine.
Edit: For clarity, I disagree with the premise that it isn't interacting as it should.
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
If your character concept is one that is a deviation from what the base class is intended forWe're not talking about someone deviating into some esoteric build though, we're talking about a sorcerer using the focus spell they get automatically or a witch using a witch class feat.
It's pretty weak to open by accusing someone of trolling and then immediately act like a class being decent with their own class options is some insane beyond the pale ask.
What an interesting take on my words.
Sorcerers can be decent with their own class options. I very much proved that with the build I presented. What you failed to include with that quote is "...you have to get creative." Sorcerers are not meant to be melee combatants at their base. To try to focus on melee with the class then requires creativity to make work.
I'm not saying that what you ask is silly. I'm saying that why you are asking what you ask is silly. It is unnecessary because it works just fine.
Edit: For clarity, I disagree with the premise that it isn't interacting as it should.
I think the issue with this is just that it's not an option that many people want to opt into, but other choices force them into it. If you want to play an Arcane sorcerer and don't like the idea of an Imperial or Genie bloodline, Draconic is your remaining choice. Playing a dragon sorcerer sounds fun! I'd get to fly around and breath fire on people. Then you check the focus spell, and your only really draconic ability is ... melee attack claws? They're not terrible, and can be built around, as you say. I agree with most of your points when I see them on the forums - there are interesting ways to play casters in melee. It's just frustrating that some class options force you into it - it's a pretty specific niche, and not something I'd want new players to do. I've introduced three different players to PF1 that immediately went for a draconic sorcerer! If they were being introduced in PF2, I'd have to advise them that they won't get to use their focus spell very often, or they'd have to build their character in a pretty against-type way to make proper use of it.
If the draconic sorcerer's first focus spell was a choice between draconic scales (slight AC boost and resistances) or claws (new weapon and resistances), I don't think there'd be anywhere near as much of an argument. Hopefully this will be helped with new bloodlines in the future giving some flexibility - but ideally we'd have a few options to pick from for class options that give focus spells that push up against the limits of what that class is meant to be doing.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I understand what you are saying. I'm not directly opposed to the AC boost as an option, but I am very hesitant. I'm hesitant because it is the 1st level bloodline ability therefore just 2 class feats from an archetype dip. +1 status AC for 1 minute is pretty strong.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I understand what you are saying. I'm not directly opposed to the AC boost as an option, but I am very hesitant. I'm hesitant because it is the 1st level bloodline ability therefore just 2 class feats from an archetype dip. +1 status AC for 1 minute is pretty strong.
Feel free to change the +AC example out for anything else that could potentially be useful to both a martially-inclined sorcerer or a more traditional one. Perhaps it lasts for a minute and whilst it's ongoing, your Shield cantrip is more effective. Perhaps it's unrelated to AC! The point I'm aiming to make is that when these options aren't opt-in (specifically, as opposed to opting into a bloodline) you can end up with quite frustrating outcomes. I don't think Eldritch Nails would be as bad as the bloodline focus spells on this front were it not for the fact that the damage is bad, and there are hardly any focus spells to use it with - but the base concept of giving a feat that lets you opt-in to the more unorthodox play style is a good one, IMO. It might benefit from a single sentence in the feat description that it's a big change from the standard play style, but opt-in is good, IMO :)
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thing is, any bloodline is an opt-in. You choose the bloodline. Maybe not all of the things it gives you is amazingly powerful all the time. That is part of the process of building the character. Just because the claws aren't great for a blaster focused sorcerer isn't really a big deal. The class still has all of the spells per day that it does.
I play with a draconic blooded sorcerer. I have never heard her complain about the draconic claws. And, she often out damages the rest of the party. It is far from the only option to a draconic sorcerer so, that it is less useful to some builds is of trivial importance in my mind.
edit: it was also her 1st PF2 character
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thing is, any bloodline is an opt-in. You choose the bloodline. Maybe not all of the things it gives you is amazingly powerful all the time. That is part of the process of building the character. Just because the claws aren't great for a blaster focused sorcerer isn't really a big deal. The class still has all of the spells per day that it does.
I play with a draconic blooded sorcerer. I have never heard her complain about the draconic claws. And, she often out damages the rest of the party. It is far from the only option to a draconic sorcerer so, that it is less useful to some builds is of trivial importance in my mind.
edit: it was also her 1st PF2 character
I definitely agree that getting a focus spell you don't consistently use isn't going to break a sorcerer - there's lots of good spells, and honestly I don't think most sorcerers rely on their initial focus spell for functionality. The advantage of a thematic focus spell that is used consistently is mostly that it is fun - it makes the character more differentiated, and feels more thematically connected with their bloodline. There's always the option of picking another bloodline that's got a focus spell that works for the mechanics of the character you want to pick, and that'll continue to get easier as more bloodlines come out. It'd just be nice if someone wanted to play a draconic bloodline sorcerer for me to be able to give them an option for a focus spell that fits the gameplay they want to engage in, that's all! In PF1, I could recommend someone go for the Linnorm modification of the bloodline to give them a ray instead of claws, if they were concerned about the 1st level power - but they were such a small part of the class power that I don't think most people cared too much there. That sort of thing would be an interesting alternative to have! :)
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The claws seem pretty thematic in and of themselves. Plus, in addition to the claws, you get scales that give you resistance. That said, if one were to homebrew another option, the cleric's focus spell Fire Ray would be a solid candidate.
I agree that the resistance from claws makes it nicer - I think that the demonic bloodline's Glutton's Jaws are the cleaner example for this, now I think about it. Forceful + no smaller, thematic ability unrelated to the attack makes you have to buy fully into playing against-type for the class to make them work.
I'll say the "you might be forced into it" isnt really an argument against dragon claws but more just the reality of any class system that doesn't yet have infinite content. I don't like getting -1 AC on my barbarian, but I'm forced to because I don't like the flavour of every other option given etc.
This is definitely true, but I think the issue is a combination of a few things:
1: You're forced into it - as you say, something almost every class goes for. Not a big deal!2: There aren't similar options available that don't have the same mechanics - if you just wanted a barbarian without the AC penalty, you could play an Animal barbarian and offset that AC penalty, for example.
3: The mechanics play against the intended role of the class. If the only anti-magic Barbarian instinct only worked with archer barbarians, it'd be an issue. You can play a ranger barbarian - but if you're pushing the only thematic option into playing against the intended role of the class, it can get frustrating, IMO :)
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
And as you said yourself if you want to play an arcane sorcerer, you have other options, just like the barbarian.
For sure, for the general concept of 'arcane sorcerer' - but if you want to play a draconic sorcerer, you don't right now. If you come at it from the perspective of the mechanics ('I want to make a sorcerer casting off of the arcane list') you have other options. The appeal for those I've introduced to the game via draconic sorcerers was the option to have dragon powers + roleplay the draconic connection, which doesn't necessarily translate to playing a high-STR melee sorcerer :)
|
|
Have you compared the claws to all of the other 1st level options? None particularly stand out to me as overly above the rest. It is what it is. Does the fact that the claws require an investment in strength somehow make the...everything else that the draconic sorcerer is unplayable? Do the claws make the draconic sorcerer so very undesirable to play? Are the claws not thematic? Have you noticed that dragon breath is amazing?
Also, why not think about it in this way...
The existence of dragon claws and glutton's jaw give mechanics for a melee sorcerer. They give you interesting and thematic weapon options that don't depend on your charisma to hit or damage. Their existence allows for sorcerer builds that have a lower charisma. Do you desire to take away those options from more creative sorcerer builds just because those options don't make your build even better?
Those focus spells are such a small aspect that don't even get in the way of non-melee casters. It is not like those focus spells somehow prevent sorcerers of those bloodlines from being non-melee casters. They merely don't add to blaster builds. That is their crime, they don't add to some builds...
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, why not think about it in this way...
The existence of dragon claws and glutton's jaw give mechanics for a melee sorcerer. They give you interesting and thematic weapon options that don't depend on your charisma to hit or damage. Their existence allows for sorcerer builds that have a lower charisma. Do you desire to take away those options from more creative sorcerer builds just because those options don't make your build even better?
This is just a baldly bad faith argument that I actually laughed out loud as I read it. But to address your semblance of a point;
No. We want the options to be BETTER so that people aren't PUNISHED for attempting to make those "creative sorcerer builds" you are touting. We want them to exist, we like that they do exist, we do not want players to be pigeoned holed mechanically OR forced into a position where they have traded their ability to be mechanically effective for their character concept.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is just a baldly bad faith argument that I actually laughed out loud as I read it. But to address your semblance of a point;
No. We want the options to be BETTER so that people aren't PUNISHED for attempting to make those "creative sorcerer builds" you are touting. We want them to exist, we like that they do exist, we do not want players to be pigeoned holed mechanically OR forced into a position where they have traded their ability to be mechanically effective for their character concept.
Just wanted to boost, this is a very nice summation! :)
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
All this goes to the heart of the "Tall vs Wide" paradigm in most TTRPG's.
Character concepts intersect with the mechanics of the game to give the players access to "The Character". A character idea or trait that doesn't seek to have a mechanical output or express is all RP, but those ideas or traits that do need a mechanical output must intersect with the rules. Even rules lite systems operate like this, it's just the general principle we are working under here.
PF2 is a "Short and wide" game as opposed to PF1 which was both "Tall and Wide".
Tall denotes an intersection of concept and mechanics that's expressed through sheer numerical advantage. A character that can hyper specialise in one particular thing, generally to the detriment of all other options, that specialising then defining their space at the table. Think of the 3.5 era "Jumplomat/Jumplomancer" as the ultimate example of this. A character that was so good at jumping that they could rule kingdoms and turn hates enemies into best friends with the power of their impressive jumps. The build could do almost nothing else, but it was the Tallest of the Tall.
Wide, then, denotes an intersection of concept and mechanics that are expressed through mechanical diversity and the sheer number of options. Generally, its the unique combination of options where we seen the rubber hit the road of concept and mechanical cashout.
Since PF2 is a tight math game, characters can't ever be truly tall. I can't make a Monk who hyper specialises in deception and be so much better than others at it that it defines the space and role of the character at the table. There just isn't the wiggle room. I can go "wide" on the concept through feats and archetypes that give me different options, but it can't be expressed as being better at it than others really.
In situations then where the intersection of the concept and mechanics prevents a character from being wide, (i.e - you want to be a dragony sorcerer, well this is all you can have) then the characters tall-ness needs to be at least on par with other options, or else the character is punished by being neither allowed as tall or wide.
It operates as a discouragement/punishment for those looking to express a certain character concept. Especially in those cases, the idea is nominally supported by the game.
These differences don't have to be big to be felt as well. Set up a character so that the player is predisposed to failure and that player is going to stop having as much fun as they should.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A bit excessive I'll admit.
Punished? That is an odd word choice. Sorcerers have a chassis that is not meant to be melee. They have full casting. THAT is what the class is built to do. If you want to DEVIATE from what the class chassis is built for, it will be an uphill battle. This is because you are trying to put a square block in a circular hole. The system obviously intended that a full caster can never be equal in melee to a martial. This is because, unlike in the previous edition, you cannot forsake the full caster aspect of your chassis. Regardless of what class, general, and skill feat choices you make, you will have the same spellcasting progression. And, because you have access to 9-10 levels of spells, you have ALL of those options. That counts for something, and not a small amount. Whether or not you want, or choose, to use those spell options doesn't matter. You have them and always will. As such it is very reasonable that there is a limit to how well you can do martial things...again, because you have 9-10 LEVELS OF SPELLS TO SUPPORT YOU!...which a martial class does not.
This is also why the dawning of the magus is such a big deal to 2e. It will reveal a chassis that is, hypothetically, not a full caster nor full martial, but a blend.
This is why, as I expressed earlier, that everything is working as intended.
|
|
Punished? That is an odd word choice. Sorcerers have a chassis that is not meant to be melee.And in this one line, you have 180'ed your previous argument.
What a fun way to twist it.
Both statements are true. It is true that the sorcerer chassis is not meant to be in melee. It is also true that there are build choices that can make a sorcerer decent in melee. I proved that earlier with my build.
|
|
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm going to cut to the quick of this one because your post style in this thread has been abrasive, to say the least.
1) Your argument fails to consider the game holistically
2) The sentiment behind your argument fails to consider the player experience as they play.
3) "End Game" based balancing in TTRPG's is an unhealthy approach as it fails to respect the players time investment on the way to that end-game.
4) Your party is not your competition. Your notif character doesn't 'lose' because your fellow players 'win'. The issue is the loss of fun and engagement that can be felt by players when their desired concepts are mechanically predisposed towards failure and thus limiting their ability to affect the shared game experience on par with their team.
5) No it's not black and white
6) Yes, this isn't a wholly caster issue, they just seem to have the lions share of this disparity.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Have you compared the claws to all of the other 1st level options? None particularly stand out to me as overly above the rest. It is what it is. Does the fact that the claws require an investment in strength somehow make the...everything else that the draconic sorcerer is unplayable? Do the claws make the draconic sorcerer so very undesirable to play? Are the claws not thematic? Have you noticed that dragon breath is amazing?
Also, why not think about it in this way...
The existence of dragon claws and glutton's jaw give mechanics for a melee sorcerer. They give you interesting and thematic weapon options that don't depend on your charisma to hit or damage. Their existence allows for sorcerer builds that have a lower charisma. Do you desire to take away those options from more creative sorcerer builds just because those options don't make your build even better?
Those focus spells are such a small aspect that don't even get in the way of non-melee casters. It is not like those focus spells somehow prevent sorcerers of those bloodlines from being non-melee casters. They merely don't add to blaster builds. That is their crime, they don't add to some builds...
More than anything for me, it's that if you've got an option that goes significantly against the intended mechanics of the class, that option in particular should be opt-in - or at least not provide any flavour that isn't similar to other accessible options. I like the existence of dragon claws and gluttonous jaws! I like the existence of strange melee sorcerer builds! I just don't want to tell new players that the only demonic stuff they'll get is only for melee for a fair few levels. If it's a cool feat that lets you do the melee stuff, I'm all for it! If there were a balor (melee) and succubus (not-melee) bloodline, that's cool! I'm not even saying it needs to double-down on an area the sorcerer is good at, just provide a possible advantage for the expected build of the class.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Imo Dragon Claws is fine, but that's because it's also a 1-action auto-heightening Resist Energy.
Glutton's Jaw just doesn't provide any bonus if you don't have any Str.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm going to cut to the quick of this one because your post style in this thread has been abrasive, to say the least.
Fair
1) Your argument fails to consider the game holistically
Interestingly, have been saying the same thing. My whole argument that everything is working as it should is a holistic argument. To expect full spellcasters to be able to achieve the same martial prowess as martials goes against the design of the game.
2) The sentiment behind your argument fails to consider the player experience as they play.
That is far too subjective to be worth caring about. It is such an ambiguous and undefinable metric that it cannot be discussed to a conclusion.
3) "End Game" based balancing in TTRPG's is an unhealthy approach as it fails to respect the players time investment on the way to that end-game.
I agree.
4) Your party is not your competition. Your notif character doesn't 'lose' because your fellow players 'win'...
Agreed
...The issue is the loss of fun and engagement that can be felt by players when their desired concepts are mechanically predisposed towards failure and thus limiting their ability to affect the shared game experience on par with their team.
This I think is rooted, as with some other people's arguments, in an expectation issue. I think that many folks have the expectations that the characters they build will interact with the game and NPCs(enemies) the same way that they did in PF1. That is simply not the case. Also, with the mechanics the way that they currently are, trying to play a full caster as a melee is going to be difficult. If your concept has you gishing, maybe save the concept until there is a class chassis that can better support that concept. There isn't a whole lot of material out for PF2 yet. Maybe patience is the answer.
5) No it's not black and white
Agreed...but the game mechanics are. That is why they are game mechanics and this game is considered a 'crunchy' game.
6) Yes, this isn't a wholly caster issue, they just seem to have the lions share of this disparity.
I agree that in the middle levels and into the high levels there is a game mechanics math issue with spellcasting and enemy defenses.
If it's a cool feat that lets you do the melee stuff, I'm all for it! If there were a balor (melee) and succubus (not-melee) bloodline, that's cool!
I agree. Those sound like very neat ideas for additional material in future Paizo products.
But...with sorcerers bloodline stuff is not feat dependent. Bloodlines have set abilities that they grant. Set focus spells that they give. And, right now, what is there is not bad. I'm very excited about more material coming out to supplement with more bloodlines. Maybe even an implementation of a bloodline focus spell choice. That sounds good.
I totally understand why it would be fun for players to be able to pick and choose every option that you get with your character, but it is also possible that things like sorcerer bloodlines, wizard schools, and druid orders are very much designed around all of the components you get them with together. If that is the case, making it too easy to just switch one element for another could make maintaining balance very difficult if the options become a total free for all.
It kind of seems like if first level focus power switching was going to be a game element, that would be something that needs to be available within the core of the game and not something that is going to be introduced in a later book, especially if it is not happening in Secrets of Magic. It seems like characters that want more flexibility with their focus spells are pretty strongly encouraged to do so by picking up an archetype that grants one.
If you are a demonic sorcerer desperate for a different focus power, you can have 1 by level 4, and a much more powerful one by level 6. PF2 is much more inclined to grant new options rather than swapping options. We see this with attributes to damage, focus spells and class abilities. There are exceptions, but they are few and far between.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I totally understand why it would be fun for players to be able to pick and choose every option that you get with your character, but it is also possible that things like sorcerer bloodlines, wizard schools, and druid orders are very much designed around all of the components you get them with together. If that is the case, making it too easy to just switch one element for another could make maintaining balance very difficult if the options become a total free for all.
It kind of seems like if first level focus power switching was going to be a game element, that would be something that needs to be available within the core of the game and not something that is going to be introduced in a later book, especially if it is not happening in Secrets of Magic. It seems like characters that want more flexibility with their focus spells are pretty strongly encouraged to do so by picking up an archetype that grants one.
If you are a demonic sorcerer desperate for a different focus power, you can have 1 by level 4, and a much more powerful one by level 6. PF2 is much more inclined to grant new options rather than swapping options. We see this with attributes to damage, focus spells and class abilities. There are exceptions, but they are few and far between.
I mean, Bards already get to grab whatever muse options they want, and their focus powers are generally stronger than Sorcerers'. Druids and Clerics as well. Given that any non-Sorcerer class can grab literally any bloodline's initial Focus Spell with the archetype, I find it quite difficult to believe that a feat that gave Sorcerers the same option would destabilise the finely tuned balance of 2e. So since it is probably balanced (given no other class has had an issue with grabbing Sorc focus spells) and people pretty clearly would like some choice regarding the focus spell they're shackled with (because some people perceive some of them as garbage), I don't think your argument holds water.
From what I've heard, there are pretty much no class feats for casters in Secrets of Magic, so I really hope that's not any kind of indication for future caster feats. Mwangi expanse is adding a variant Draconic bloodline (another Divine bloodline for some reason, which makes 6 Divine bloodlines vs 3 for any other tradition), who's to say future variants won't swap out some focus powers as well.
How are you defining variant? It is the draconic bloodline but only changes magic tradition?
Additional bloodline are exactly what I expect, as well as possibly a feat to pick up a focus spell from a different bloodline. I don't think any of that is counter to the design of the system.