| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Glutton’s jaws are a harder sell to me because the rest of the bloodline gets in its own way, where draconic stacks much more cleanly. Especially if you are trying to not be evil demonic is playing the sorcerer on hard mode. I think that is kinda intentional. Clerics and champions are pretty tied alignment to mechanic as well.
|
Glutton’s jaws are a harder sell to me because the rest of the bloodline gets in its own way, where draconic stacks much more cleanly. Especially if you are trying to not be evil demonic is playing the sorcerer on hard mode. I think that is kinda intentional. Clerics and champions are pretty tied alignment to mechanic as well.
But doesn't that feel thematically right though? Your blood is demonic. It seems like a perfect setup for some cool rp of fighting against the pull of your bloodline.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dragon Claws is not Elemental Toss. If you want Elemental Toss, I'd encourage you to play the elemental bloodline.
I agree, Glutton's Jaw is a harder sell.
If I want to play a Sorcerer with magical power gained from dragons or demons, I have exactly one option for a mandatory focus spell, and nothing about the above concepts suggests to me that I should also have to build to be a melee combatant to use that focus spell. Dragons and demons have melee attacks, sure...so does just about everything else you can have in your bloodline. It's a little sad if your beautiful tapestry tells you that the best way to play a concept you liked is to ignore the primary flavor thing you're given or reflavor something else, isn't it...?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Alright, so, congratulations, you actually beat out the Fighter (and by proxy, the Monk and Champion, too,) that purposefully gimped themselves of damage dice strictly for flavor purposes. Bravo. You want a medal?Yes! And, I appreciate you showing the math that reveals that a level 1 class ability of a full caster can out damage multiple martial classes.
EDIT: with a lower strength score at that!
I mean, sure. But again, this assumes an inoptimal choice in weaponry by comparison, though, which feels disingenuous if the assumption is we are comparing an optimized Melee Sorcerer to an optimized Martial. Just as well, those numbers assumed an 18 Dexterity, 16 Strength Sorcerer (which gives them the same to-hit and almost identical damage via Finesse, which was the point of the damage comparison, comparing like-trait weapon choices), something that's essentially illegal without compromise elsewhere, and/or including Voluntary Flaw rules. That Sorcerer is either going to have to cut down Strength (which means less or no flat bonus damage; even a modifier that is 1 less will mean they do less average damage than Fighters, Champions, and Monks), or cut down Dexterity (which makes it far less palatable for a Finesse weapon comparison, the whole point of the math demonstration).
Ignoring Finesse trait arguments for the purposes of more realistic damage comparisons (because somebody thought it was "unfair" to compare non-Finesse weapons to Finesse weapons, which is particularly absurd when the Sorcerer could use another feasible non-Finesse weapon, like a Longspear for example), a Fighter using a D12 or even Reach D10 weapon will still do more damage (the latter having Reach capacity as well to make full use of AoOs, thereby improving overall DPR expectations), by design, not even factoring in optional feats which can provide more damage, such as Power Attack, something very easily likely to possess by 1st or even 2nd level for a Two-Handed specialist.
Plus, by 5th level, they will be over 4 or 5 points above what you would otherwise do with your Claws. They might not have as much of a damage gap, but considering how sacred that accelerated proficiency bonus is to Fighters, you can bet it makes a difference in the overall math. I blame this more on the fact that Paizo overvalued the benefits of 3rd level spells to account for adequate proficiency scaling, but the simple fact of the matter is that 5th and 6th level is the first point in the game's math where Dragon Claws really start to fade out of usefulness, and that's really been the argument this whole time. It might shift back to its original values by about 11th level, but it will go right back down come 13th, when proficiency scaling resumes its previous tick, and when Apex items come into play, you're either getting more behind or sacrificing main schtick capacity to keep pace, which is ultimately a lose-lose situation. Good luck getting +3 Major Striking Handwraps by 20th level without losing a major chunk of endgame WBL that could have been used for scrolls, wands, staves, etc. And let me tell you, those endgame items are powerful for Spellcasters, since they have Fighter-tier scaling with their spell to-hit and DCs by 19th level, assuming appropriate optimization.
|
|
If I want to play a Sorcerer with magical power gained from dragons or demons, I have exactly one option for a mandatory focus spell, and nothing about the above concepts suggests to me that I should also have to build to be a melee combatant to use that focus spell. Dragons and demons have melee attacks, sure...so does just about everything else you can have in your bloodline. It's a little sad if your beautiful tapestry tells you that the best way to play a concept you liked is to ignore what you're given or reflavor something else, isn't it?Dragon Claws is not Elemental Toss. If you want Elemental Toss, I'd encourage you to play the elemental bloodline.
I agree, Glutton's Jaw is a harder sell.
It is not sad at all given that we have been talking about 4 out of the 13 currently possible bloodlines. Hardly a majority. Do you consider it ridiculous that 2 out of the 13 currently possible bloodlines are geared toward melee?
|
|
I mean, sure. But again, this assumes an inoptimal choice in weaponry by comparison, though, which feels disingenuous if the assumption is we are comparing an optimized Melee Sorcerer to an optimized Martial.Alright, so, congratulations, you actually beat out the Fighter (and by proxy, the Monk and Champion, too,) that purposefully gimped themselves of damage dice strictly for flavor purposes. Bravo. You want a medal?Yes! And, I appreciate you showing the math that reveals that a level 1 class ability of a full caster can out damage multiple martial classes.
EDIT: with a lower strength score at that!
That is hardly the best representation of an optimized, melee sorcerer.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is not sad at all given that we have been talking about 4 out of the 13 currently possible bloodlines. Hardly a majority. Do you consider it ridiculous that 2 out of the 13 currently possible bloodlines are geared toward melee?If I want to play a Sorcerer with magical power gained from dragons or demons, I have exactly one option for a mandatory focus spell, and nothing about the above concepts suggests to me that I should also have to build to be a melee combatant to use that focus spell. Dragons and demons have melee attacks, sure...so does just about everything else you can have in your bloodline. It's a little sad if your beautiful tapestry tells you that the best way to play a concept you liked is to ignore the primary flavor thing you're given or reflavor something else, isn't it...?Dragon Claws is not Elemental Toss. If you want Elemental Toss, I'd encourage you to play the elemental bloodline.
I agree, Glutton's Jaw is a harder sell.
I consider it ridiculous that 1 out of the 1* bloodlines (each) for playing a draconic or demonic Sorcerer are "melee".
*(We'll soon have Wymblessed, but...it has the same focus spells as Draconic.)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I consider it ridiculous that 1 out of the 1 bloodlines (each) for playing a draconic or demonic Sorcerer are melee.It is not sad at all given that we have been talking about 4 out of the 13 currently possible bloodlines. Hardly a majority. Do you consider it ridiculous that 2 out of the 13 currently possible bloodlines are geared toward melee?If I want to play a Sorcerer with magical power gained from dragons or demons, I have exactly one option for a mandatory focus spell, and nothing about the above concepts suggests to me that I should also have to build to be a melee combatant to use that focus spell. Dragons and demons have melee attacks, sure...so does just about everything else you can have in your bloodline. It's a little sad if your beautiful tapestry tells you that the best way to play a concept you liked is to ignore what you're given or reflavor something else, isn't it?Dragon Claws is not Elemental Toss. If you want Elemental Toss, I'd encourage you to play the elemental bloodline.
I agree, Glutton's Jaw is a harder sell.
The 13 options are not hidden to you. You have the option to choose something else. That you choose 1 of the 13 that you don't like...is kinda on you.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The 13 options are not hidden to you. You have the option to choose something else. That you choose 1 of the 13 that you don't like...is kinda on you.It is not sad at all given that we have been talking about 4 out of the 13 currently possible bloodlines. Hardly a majority. Do you consider it ridiculous that 2 out of the 13 currently possible bloodlines are geared toward melee?If I want to play a Sorcerer with magical power gained from dragons or demons, I have exactly one option for a mandatory focus spell, and nothing about the above concepts suggests to me that I should also have to build to be a melee combatant to use that focus spell. Dragons and demons have melee attacks, sure...so does just about everything else you can have in your bloodline. It's a little sad if your beautiful tapestry tells you that the best way to play a concept you liked is to ignore the primary flavor thing you're given or reflavor something else, isn't it...?Dragon Claws is not Elemental Toss. If you want Elemental Toss, I'd encourage you to play the elemental bloodline.
I agree, Glutton's Jaw is a harder sell.
I consider it ridiculous that 1 out of the 1* bloodlines (each) for playing a draconic or demonic Sorcerer are "melee".
*(We'll soon have Wymblessed, but...it has the same focus spells as Draconic.)
You're not listening...yes, they can pick something else. But that means a concept they liked (a draconic or demonic Sorcerer that plays like a caster), which is a relatively common and reasonable concept, is barred from them. Or that they ignore the primary flavor thing they're given. And that's kinda sad.
Anyway, you reply super fast and I don't want to turn this forum thread into IM. People at home, if you've made it this far for some reason, I still suggest you just make them spell attacks (because I'm pretty sure nothing will break) or homebrew/reflavor another initial focus spell. And I do hope Paizo offers alternatives or easier/more effective use someday.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In the argument of melee sorcerer being unviable, one might think about the inverse. A martial wanting to be a caster needs at the very least 4 feats, a skill up to legendary, and a high casting stat definitely helps, and they are going to be 3 points behind in spell attacks and dcs(just as a caster will be at least 3 points behind on their melee attacks). So I don't think it's unreasonable for people like Leo to theorize builds that use archetypes to be strong in melee.
If anything, a caster wanting to be in melee actually has a lot more ways to do it then a martial does to be a caster. It's pretty straightforward for a fighter to multiclass wizard or whatever else. But a caster has many different martial mcs (with varying levels of usefulness) and a ton of archetypes to look at as well. A caster also has multiple spells to supplement their melee prowess, whereas a martial trying to be a caster doesn't really have as many options (I might be wrong here) to be better at casting.
Yes please, show us the "cool" builds that actually contribute at apl+4 or vs a tpk difficulty horde and that actually use the schtick you keep insisting isn't awful.What do your full casters normally do in those situations?
The same things they've always done best. Buff, debuff and control. Certainly not stand in a position where they'll get encircled and dropped or triple tapped by the scary monster.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The same things they've always done best. Buff, debuff and control. Certainly not stand in a position where they'll get encircled and dropped or triple tapped by the scary monster.
Yes please, show us the "cool" builds that actually contribute at apl+4 or vs a tpk difficulty horde and that actually use the schtick you keep insisting isn't awful.What do your full casters normally do in those situations?
Probably what any one of my builds would do. Admittedly it also really depends on the rest of my crew. This build in particular, regularly (at 8th level) has an AC of 29. My crew for this build has 2 glimpse of redemptions (myself included).
Against an AP+4, it really depends on your team.
You're not listening...yes, they can pick something else. But that means a concept they liked (a draconic or demonic Sorcerer that plays like a caster), which is a relatively common and reasonable concept, is barred from them. Or that they ignore the primary flavor thing they're given. And that's kinda sad.
I am listening. As I pointed out earlier, I acknowledge that people have personal preference. I just don't consider it important.
My point is that when you choose Draconic you are signing up to be like a dragon. Now, I don't know about you...but when I have faced (and think about) dragons, they don't just stay away from people and cast spells. So...it is not surprise to me that the draconic bloodline is not built around staying in the back and casting spells. Buut...please tell me some more about flavor..
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That is hardly the best representation of an optimized, melee sorcerer.I mean, sure. But again, this assumes an inoptimal choice in weaponry by comparison, though, which feels disingenuous if the assumption is we are comparing an optimized Melee Sorcerer to an optimized Martial.Alright, so, congratulations, you actually beat out the Fighter (and by proxy, the Monk and Champion, too,) that purposefully gimped themselves of damage dice strictly for flavor purposes. Bravo. You want a medal?Yes! And, I appreciate you showing the math that reveals that a level 1 class ability of a full caster can out damage multiple martial classes.
EDIT: with a lower strength score at that!
It's also hardly the best representation of an optimized martial, either. "I'm gonna force myself to use an objectively worse weapon just so my Draconic Sorcerer friend doesn't feel so bad for using their Focus Spell" is equally disingenuous to saying a melee sorcerer isn't using spells to amplify their overall capability, which is irrelevant when making a strictly melee comparison.
|
|
It's also hardly the best representation of an optimized martial, either. "I'm gonna force myself to use an objectively worse weapon just so my Draconic Sorcerer friend doesn't feel so bad for using their Focus Spell" is equally disingenuous to saying a melee sorcerer isn't using spells to amplify their overall capability, which is irrelevant when making a strictly melee comparison.That is hardly the best representation of an optimized, melee sorcerer.I mean, sure. But again, this assumes an inoptimal choice in weaponry by comparison, though, which feels disingenuous if the assumption is we are comparing an optimized Melee Sorcerer to an optimized Martial.Alright, so, congratulations, you actually beat out the Fighter (and by proxy, the Monk and Champion, too,) that purposefully gimped themselves of damage dice strictly for flavor purposes. Bravo. You want a medal?Yes! And, I appreciate you showing the math that reveals that a level 1 class ability of a full caster can out damage multiple martial classes.
EDIT: with a lower strength score at that!
Or maybe they are wielding a d8 weapon because they are wielding a shield...? Is that weird..?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Or maybe they are wielding a d8 weapon because they are wielding a shield...?It's also hardly the best representation of an optimized martial, either. "I'm gonna force myself to use an objectively worse weapon just so my Draconic Sorcerer friend doesn't feel so bad for using their Focus Spell" is equally disingenuous to saying a melee sorcerer isn't using spells to amplify their overall capability, which is irrelevant when making a strictly melee comparison.That is hardly the best representation of an optimized, melee sorcerer.I mean, sure. But again, this assumes an inoptimal choice in weaponry by comparison, though, which feels disingenuous if the assumption is we are comparing an optimized Melee Sorcerer to an optimized Martial.Alright, so, congratulations, you actually beat out the Fighter (and by proxy, the Monk and Champion, too,) that purposefully gimped themselves of damage dice strictly for flavor purposes. Bravo. You want a medal?Yes! And, I appreciate you showing the math that reveals that a level 1 class ability of a full caster can out damage multiple martial classes.
EDIT: with a lower strength score at that!
Right, because the Martial built specifically for constant damage via weapon is the one that has to wield a shield and come down from their damage capability, just so the Draconic Sorcerer can feel included to be an equal in melee combat. While we're at it, let's force the Sorcerer to downgrade themselves to lower level cantrips and spell slots so the Martial who multiclassed doesn't feel like an inferior spellcaster.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Right, because the Martial built specifically for constant damage via weapon is the one that has to wield a shield and come down from their damage capability, just so the Draconic Sorcerer can feel included to be an equal in melee combat. While we're at it, let's force the Sorcerer to downgrade themselves to lower level cantrips and spell slots so the Martial who multiclassed doesn't feel like an inferior spellcaster.
How about this..? Pick a level. We'll compare a full turn of your most optimized martial actions. And I'll compare with my build. As melee involves both offense and defense, We'll compare with all actions attack bonus and damage and include AC as well. If you cannot think of one, I'd personally prefer level 11 or 12 to prove my point. Feel free to include any previous turns of preparation from your class only, and I will as well.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Then why give them a melee ability if they are not meant to be in melee? So you see the contradiction?
There is no contradiction. Caters don't get to be good at melee because they chose to be good at casting instead, period. Which means they are, indeed, not meant to be in melee.
But if they do find themselves in melee, sorcerors of the dragonic persuasion at least have a flavourful, not powerful, flavourful way of fighting. Allows them to show off their own 'dragonity'.
That's it. It is not and never was intended to be about making a caster good at melee. Just give them some ability in the flavour of their bloodline.
We are not talking about them suddenly being better than martial, but the fact that what they get does not work with the class.
It does work with the class. Just not the way you want it to.
We have asked multiple times to name a martial feat that requires that they multiple class for it to even be workable. But nothing has been presented. Meanwhile, there are at least 3 caster abilities that demand the caster be in melee.
False equivalency. Show me a martial spellcastig ability that requires no feats to work. Can't? Because there is no martial casting without feat investment into a casting class? Gee, I wonder why that is.
Martials don't get any casting whatsoever without paying a price of being less of a martial for it.
The casters on the other hand get to be in melee with zero investment. They just don't get to be good at it. And they can't reach the same level of competence as a martial class, even with feat investment, the same way a martial class, even with sacrificing a full half of their class feats, or even more, never get to the casting prowess of a real caster.
And I am talking both about the fact that they get no legendary casting and that they never will be able to max out their casting stat. Same way casters will always be one tier of proficiency behind a martial and not be able to max their to-hit stat.
Oh and just to make that absolutely clear: The baseline for martial prowess is Master. Anyone going 'but Fighter' is arguing in bad faith. Legendary weapons is what Fighter gets instead of such things as Rage or Hunt Prey.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Don't forget every spell with a Touch range!Meanwhile, there are at least 3 caster abilities that demand the caster be in melee.
Don't forget the 1st level feat Reach Spell!
It seems like some of the frustration here is because some people were hoping for focus spells for casters that were more fundamentally character defining, right out of the gate at level 1. Druids, bards and witches seem geared towards that, but the cost was a spell slot at every level.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Then why give them a melee ability if they are not meant to be in melee? So you see the contradiction?There is no contradiction. Caters don't get to be good at melee because they chose to be good at casting instead, period. Which means they are, indeed, not meant to be in melee.
But if they do find themselves in melee, sorcerors of the dragonic persuasion at least have a flavourful, not powerful, flavourful way of fighting. Allows them to show off their own 'dragonity'.
That's it. It is not and never was intended to be about making a caster good at melee. Just give them some ability in the flavour of their bloodline.
We are not talking about them suddenly being better than martial, but the fact that what they get does not work with the class.It does work with the class. Just not the way you want it to.
We have asked multiple times to name a martial feat that requires that they multiple class for it to even be workable. But nothing has been presented. Meanwhile, there are at least 3 caster abilities that demand the caster be in melee.False equivalency. Show me a martial spellcastig ability that requires no feats to work. Can't? Because there is no martial casting without feat investment into a casting class? Gee, I wonder why that is.
Martials don't get any casting whatsoever without paying a price of being less of a martial for it.
The casters on the other hand get to be in melee with zero investment. They just don't get to be good at it. And they can't reach the same level of competence as a martial class, even with feat investment, the same way a martial class, even with sacrificing a full half of their class feats, or even more, never get to the casting prowess of a real caster.
And I am talking both about the fact that they get no legendary casting and that they never will be able to max out their casting stat. Same way casters will always be one tier of...
You're forgetting that, in order for them to actually use the claws, they have to spend an action to activate them prior to being able to use the Strike action with them. The idea that "Claws only take an action" doesn't take into account that it takes two actions to actually strike with them in the same round. Unless you're pre-buffed or have literally nothing better to do in the combat, this is still a very poor use of actions compared to things like casting cantrips or actual spells, or using spell consumables like scrolls, wands, etc.
Plus, you can have flavorful options that are actually powerful in game, they aren't mutually exclusive. The other focus spells that are actually good, like Tempest Surge and Elemental Toss, are proof of this. All this argument is doing is promoting the Stormwind Fallacy.
Lay On Hands/Touch of Corruption says hi. Focus Spells are still spells, so it technically counts. There are plenty of in-class Focus spells that are pretty useful and can mimic some spellcasting abilities.
But really, it's not like the Spellcaster who wants to wade into melee couldn't decide to take things like Fighter Dedication into Power Attack and maybe Sudden Charge for action economy helpers, especially since MAP and reduced proficiency works against them to the point of spending multiple actions to strike is pretty bad in general. Some of their feats are pretty bad at certain levels, so it's not unreasonable to assume a possibility, similar to how Fighters have more feats than every other Martial, so can actually afford to dip in some Spellcasting. Heck, a Fighter with 2 or 3 spellcasting feats and a trained skill (certainly reasonable for Aid Another activities, at the least) can buff themselves with Blur, Haste, Mirror Images, and more, a couple times a day; that's not including Ancestry feats which may grant them some more castings of those spells, or other spells, depending on what they choose.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It seems like some of the frustration here is because some people were hoping for focus spells for casters that were more fundamentally character defining, right out of the gate at level 1. Druids, bards and witches seem geared towards that, but the cost was a spell slot at every level.
Personally, I'd just like for more than a handful of focus spells to be something worth casting or taking the required feats for. Especially with the feats, I don't think I've ever found the focus spell to be worth more than archetype spell slots or one for all.
Don't forget the 1st level feat Reach Spell!
I too enjoy that most every caster I see is some half-human whatever because of access to 1st level feats. That's a conversation for another thread though.
There are plenty of appropriate enemies that a caster can stand next to and not fear for their life.
This is true, but for the most part those creatures are also just fodder. When people say casters explode if they end their turn in melee, it's because any big threat or threatening group will actually cut them to ribbons in melee.
As for the martial vs caster thing in melee, the caster will eventually (7+) be able to fight in melee so long as the enemies they fight can't beat heightened invisibility. The moment they can, casters go back to being chew toys. This is aside from the fact that a caster can't reliably fight in melee all day since their viability is tied to improved invis.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As for the martial vs caster thing in melee, the caster will eventually (7+) be able to fight in melee so long as the enemies they fight can't beat heightened invisibility. The moment they can, casters go back to being chew toys.
Indeed! My dragon sorceress and I have been having great fun with heightened invisibility.
Just last week our team charged into a room full of bad guys and my invisible sorceress opened up on the biggest thing in the room (a huge armored dinosaur) with phantamal killer. Made it look like the other heroes killed it via their sudden entrance alone. She then whipped out her wand of ventriloquism and began to go all Vash the Stampede total slaughter on everyone along with the rest of the party.
It wasn't long before the surviving enemies surrendered.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
(stuff comparing fighters to sorcerers)I don't get it. If you want to play a melee dragon-type character, you have options. Like, dragon instinct barbarian, or fighter with a sorc dedication, or probably a bunch more - I'm right now thinking thief rogue could use those claws. And if you want to play a stand-off sorc who casts spells outside melee, you can do that. As a dragon sorc, even, since you know, they have spells besides this one. And if you want a sorc with a useful bloodline spell there are others you say do the job, so that's okay too. So the problem is what? That you specifically want to play PF2, specifically want to play a sorcerer, specifically want to play the dragon bloodline, specifically want to use the dragon claws, specifically don't want to multiclass, and... think the dragon claws are bad?
Okay, so what if you're right? What do you expect to happen here? Do you think you're going to spend hours arguing with random people on the internet who couldn't fix your problem even if they wanted to and something good is going to come of it?
Look, the solution is simple: if you're in a home game, talk to your gm and suggest a buff for the claws that makes them work better. If not, don't play dragon. But don't keep bringing up weird and not really accurate comparisons like that's going to achieve something.
EG: this is misleading, and I hope you know it:
Heck, a Fighter with 2 or 3 spellcasting feats and a trained skill (certainly reasonable for Aid Another activities, at the least) can buff themselves with Blur, Haste, Mirror Images, and more, a couple times a day;A non-caster with a three feat investment has dedication, basic spellcasting, and either breadth or an extra feat (which could be a focus spell). That means that from L8 onward (before which, they do not have Haste) they're either buffing themselves with exactly one haste, exactly one mirror image, zero blurs (because they used...
Your argument of "I'm right now thinking thief rogue could use those claws" is precisely the problem we're arguing with the focus spell. The fact that the Thief Rogue has better use for the claws than the Sorcerer itself, the class the focus spell was designed for, really demonstrates the problem with the focus spell in question. Literally every other focus spell (besides Glutton Jaw) available to Sorcerers do not have this issue. And again, it's not merely theorycraft. I've had one in one of my groups run into some of these same problems, needing to roll 15s or higher when our martials need to roll 10s or 11s.
The arguments aren't to "fix" the problem, merely to expose the problem for what it is: A bad focus spell that is a trap feature to the bloodline choice. Fixing the problem on the scale it needs to be fixed is well beyond my capacity. If I wanted to fix things for my own table, I'd do so, and I have done so before. But it's not about my table, it's about RAW and the game's math expectations, which is what these forums use to gauge the measure and value of options, and what I feel should be fixed. And I'm not alone in this sentiment.
|
|
Right, because the Martial built specifically for constant damage via weapon is the one that has to wield a shield and come down from their damage capability, just so the Draconic Sorcerer can feel included to be an equal in melee combat. While we're at it, let's force the Sorcerer to downgrade themselves to lower level cantrips and spell slots so the Martial who multiclassed doesn't feel like an inferior spellcaster.How about this..? Pick a level. We'll compare a full turn of your most optimized martial actions. And I'll compare with my build. As melee involves both offense and defense, We'll compare with all actions attack bonus and damage and include AC as well. If you cannot think of one, I'd personally prefer level 11 or 12 to prove my point. Feel free to include any previous turns of preparation from your class only, and I will as well.
You will not accept my challenge?
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The arguments aren't to "fix" the problem, merely to expose the problem for what it is: A bad focus spell that is a trap feature to the bloodline choice.Okay, but at what point do you go "it's a trap option" and then stop talking about it? Because right now it seems like the plan is... never?
What, is this costing you something? No one is making you read or participate in anything. If you disagree, then feel free to do so, but you don't get to be annoyed that people are talking about something you don't care about, that's not how the internet works.
Plus, my personal goal with all these sorts of threads is to argue to consensus. If we get a consensus then things can change for the better.
|
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
Plus, my personal goal with all these sorts of threads is to argue to consensus. If we get a consensus then things can change for the better.
You're not getting consensus. You're getting people on one side (those thinking there isn't a significant issue) getting tired and deciding to not post, just leaving the people on the other side posting.
Please don't mistake people being silent as agreeing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You're not getting consensus. You're getting people on one side (those thinking there isn't a significant issue) getting tired and deciding to not post, just leaving the people on the other side posting.
Please don't mistake people being silent as agreeing.
That cuts both ways. And in fact, it seems from overview that number of people who think there IS an issue that stopped posting is higher than other way around.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
The arguments aren't to "fix" the problem, merely to expose the problem for what it is: A bad focus spell that is a trap feature to the bloodline choice.Okay, but at what point do you go "it's a trap option" and then stop talking about it? Because right now it seems like the plan is... never?What, is this costing you something? No one is making you read or participate in anything. If you disagree, then feel free to do so, but you don't get to be annoyed that people are talking about something you don't care about, that's not how the internet works.
Plus, my personal goal with all these sorts of threads is to argue to consensus. If we get a consensus then things can change for the better.
Consensus on a forum consisting of a minority of vocal fans with differing views on design and balance ...... kiiiiiinda seems like a fool's errand.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Plus, my personal goal with all these sorts of threads is to argue to consensus. If we get a consensus then things can change for the better.
You're not getting consensus. You're getting people on one side (those thinking there isn't a significant issue) getting tired and deciding to not post, just leaving the people on the other side posting.
Please don't mistake people being silent as agreeing.
God, there is just so much wrong here that it's hard to pick where to start!
Firstly, I never said we had reached a consensus.
Secondly, it's not a voting system. Consensus requires participation, you don't "win" at consensus building, people also don't "lose" because they haven't engaged, all they opted to do is not way-in. It's not like the end result of this thread goes right to the top of the devs action board and they start making errata based on it.
Thirdly, the silent are silent. You can't know they don't agree with me either. So I'd ask that you likewise don't mistake the silence for disagreement.
Fourthly, you've built yourself quite the little closed-loop there. You don't need 100% buy-in to effect change.
Finally, it doesn't matter if you or others think the issue is "significant" or not. That will be subjective, and while I would like to change your mind on where you lie, ultimately there is an issue - even if you personally don't think its serious.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Minority vocal fans are the only ones who matter anyways.
.
.
.
;P
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't get it. If you want to play a melee dragon-type character, you have options. Like, dragon instinct barbarian, or fighter with a sorc dedication
Well, let me explain.
First edition pathfinder lived to the legacy of 3.5. Where you presented very broad variety of options. In particular you could be matrial-class with good spellcasting capabilities. As well as spellcaster who specialized in melee.And if it would be just at least "mirrored" in second edition, where fighters do only only fighting, and spellcasters do only fireballs hurling (in short utter boredom of D&D 4th edition, which we all hate with passion). But thing is, martial classes still get roughly 60% of spellcasting capability of spellcasting class, they multiclass into. But spellcaster get 0% improvement when they multiclass into martial.
And before you will start with "oh look how much more damage you can do if you pick this, this and that feat!". How would that matter if you JUST... CAN'T... HIT?
Get it now?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Saying you can't hit is hyperbolic. You can hit. You won't hit as often, but you're not far enough behind martials so as to be useless.
That's true enough, but players will miss often enough that they will certainly feel useless quite often. And that's not something that should be wholly ignored, as it still results in it being a trap option that is rarely used.
|
|
Looking at it as 1-3 points behind martials or having 60-90% of martial damage doesn't really show the entire story. Martials will only have about 50-60% hit rate...
50-60% hit rate against whom? There is a reason I didn't include the possible enemy stats, because they can vary wildly. It feels a little disingenuous to claim that lower hit rate as if against a +level enemy and attach it to a blanket statement.
As for the optimization comparison, I again encourage you to accept my challenge Darksol. Pick a level (again I'd prefer 11 or 12), show me a full turn of actions with an optimized martial build, and I'll show an optimized Draconic Sorcerer build in melee. Add in buffs you can get from your build.