Transformation spell plz?

[pauljathome]

Ravingdork wrote:

... 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.

A persons expectation IS hugely important. In fact, it may well be the crux of this entire disagreement.

With my druid, I'm fully aware that when Wild shaped I will be doing significantly less damage than the martials. Much less than in PF1 where my wild shaped druid would be doing MORE damage than all but the most highly optimized martials.

But I prefer the situation in PF2. NOT doing as much damage as the martials is just fine. I'm contributing to the group in a great many ways OTHER than doing damage. If my damage was even close to what a martial was doing then I'd feel overpowered.

So, the solution may well not be to change anything. The solution is to manage expectations. In fact, earlier in this thread somebody agreed that if Dragon Claws was just called Dragon Resiliance they'd be happy.

[Temperans]

Guntermench wrote:

Darksol the PainBringer wrote:

The melee sorcerer is anywhere from 60-80% of overall damage effectiveness of all melee characters, with anywhere from 75-95% of their accuracy.

Without any investment in martial classes they get closer to being a full martial than martials get to being a full spellcaster with 5 feats, yes.

So what are yoy suggesting that casters should have only trained proficiency in everything? Is that really what you are trying to say? Because that is what it sounds like you are trying to say.

"Casters are fine because they are not walking corpses with no AC or Saves."

Even in PF1 where casters only got half the BAB, at least they could hit with touch attacks. Now paizo removes touch attacks and doesn't compensate the accuracy loss, but casters are too good for you? The same casters who need to spend literally every single feats just to still fall behind martial stats.

I don't know what to say anymore it seems like some people just want to remove casting from the game for all the nerfs that they would like to get perpectuated. Maybe Paizo really should had just added a magic blight, that way at least people would know that Magic is no longer magical.

[wegrata]

Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich wrote:

Yeah, see, when I look at dragon claws I see an ability that I can use to conserve my spells so that I have a bunch for when I face more challenging stuff.

Also a valid opinion on it. Hopefully I didn't say what you see and like about it is wrong, just that it isn't satisfying for everyone.

I look at single target effects for boss fights so open up with a single target leveled spell slot and move to dragon claws. AoE for the fights against groups of low level enemies to conserve total party resources.

[wegrata]

pauljathome wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

... 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.

A persons expectation IS hugely important. In fact, it may well be the crux of this entire disagreement.

With my druid, I'm fully aware that when Wild shaped I will be doing significantly less damage than the martials. Much less than in PF1 where my wild shaped druid would be doing MORE damage than all but the most highly optimized martials.

But I prefer the situation in PF2. NOT doing as much damage as the martials is just fine. I'm contributing to the group in a great many ways OTHER than doing damage. If my damage was even close to what a martial was doing then I'd feel overpowered.

So, the solution may well not be to change anything. The solution is to manage expectations. In fact, earlier in this thread somebody agreed that if Dragon Claws was just called Dragon Resiliance they'd be happy.

For me I agree with this as well, just disagree with using accuracy as the balancing mechanic due to the all or nothing nature of it.

I'd rather spells like this be the same accuracy as a martial buy less damage per attack. So the average damage per round is still less than a martial but with less misses.

[Temperans]

Things that have a limited uses per encounter per day really ahould jave more damage than things that can be done all day. With even more damage if it had low accuracy.

Low damage with low accuracy is effectively worthless unless you absolutely have nothing else. Ex: Default non-monk narmed strikes.

[wegrata]

Temperans wrote:

Things that have a limited uses per encounter per day really ahould jave more damage than things that can be done all day. With even more damage if it had low accuracy.

Low damage with low accuracy is effectively worthless unless you absolutely have nothing else. Ex: Default non-monk narmed strikes.

While I do agree with you in general, focus spells can pretty much be used every combat and last for all of it.

I'd compare damage per focus point spent, so a dragon sorcerer over the course of a day should get as much out of their claws as a fire sorcerer does from elemental toss.

This will allow the basic concept while letting martials still have a place.

Edit: dragon claws lasts the entire fight not all focus spells do.

[Guntermench]

Temperans wrote:

Guntermench wrote:

Darksol the PainBringer wrote:

The melee sorcerer is anywhere from 60-80% of overall damage effectiveness of all melee characters, with anywhere from 75-95% of their accuracy.

Without any investment in martial classes they get closer to being a full martial than martials get to being a full spellcaster with 5 feats, yes.

So what are yoy suggesting that casters should have only trained proficiency in everything? Is that really what you are trying to say? Because that is what it sounds like you are trying to say.

...

Even in PF1 where casters only got half the BAB, at least they could hit with touch attacks. Now paizo removes touch attacks and doesn't compensate the accuracy loss, but casters are too good for you? The same casters who need to spend literally every single feats just to still fall behind martial stats.

No?

I'm saying they're already, other than levels 1-4, only a step down on accuracy from martials in playing whack a mole without a single feat invested. Martials need 4 feats to stay a step behind on accuracy in terms of casting. That's why spellcasters don't get an accuracy boost to bonking people with a stick, or clawing at them or biting them.

[thenobledrake]

Considering the damage dragon claws does is competitive despite it's lower accuracy, I'm sure the added damage it would have had if it didn't also have a defensive capability built in would have been enough to satisfy the "even more damage if it had low accuracy" clause for just about everybody.

But if an ability hits as hard as is being asked and still does something besides damage, that's not an improvement to balance relative to the current case; that's someone ignoring anything but damage when measuring options and/or not caring about balance in the first place, and neither of those approaches mesh with PF2.

[Guntermench]

Temperans wrote:

Things that have a limited uses per encounter per day really ahould jave more damage than things that can be done all day. With even more damage if it had low accuracy.

"Limited used per encounter" is irrelevant when you need to use it once and it lasts the whole encounter.

[Cyouni]

Guntermench wrote:

Temperans wrote:

Things that have a limited uses per encounter per day really ahould jave more damage than things that can be done all day. With even more damage if it had low accuracy.

"Limited used per encounter" is irrelevant when you need to use it once and it lasts the whole encounter.

But what if it gets dispelled? /s

[Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich]

wegrata wrote:

Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich wrote:

Yeah, see, when I look at dragon claws I see an ability that I can use to conserve my spells so that I have a bunch for when I face more challenging stuff.

Also a valid opinion on it. Hopefully I didn't say what you see and like about it is wrong, just that it isn't satisfying for everyone.

What I like and don't like are irrelevant, or...different than that way of looking at it. I like to use what exists in combination with other things that just are, to create a build. I do not look at how things are and wish they were otherwise.

If you want a focus spell like elemental toss, be an elemental sorcerer. The option is there. If there was no elemental toss and you wanted an elemental toss, then that would be reasonable.

Again, I get the complaint. "I want to play a draconic sorcerer. I want the focus spell to be more like elemental toss." I'm just saying that draconic claws is a fine focus spell. It serves a purpose mechanically. Just because you don't like that purpose or don't want to use it because of the purpose, doesn't make it somehow a bad focus spell.

I am not saying that your feelings are wrong. I just also saying that it is an expectations issue. With the 'the game should change for me' expectation, it seems built in that one would enjoy the game less because of clashing with how the game is built. I guess I'm curious why someone would knowingly embrace that mentality?

[wegrata]

Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich wrote:

wegrata wrote:

Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich wrote:

Yeah, see, when I look at dragon claws I see an ability that I can use to conserve my spells so that I have a bunch for when I face more challenging stuff.

Also a valid opinion on it. Hopefully I didn't say what you see and like about it is wrong, just that it isn't satisfying for everyone.

What I like and don't like are irrelevant, or...different than that way of looking at it. I like to use what exists in combination with other things that just are, to create a build. I do not look at how things are and wish they were otherwise.

If you want a focus spell like elemental toss, be an elemental sorcerer. The option is there. If there was no elemental toss and you wanted an elemental toss, then that would be reasonable.

Again, I get the complaint. "I want to play a draconic sorcerer. I want the focus spell to be more like elemental toss." I'm just saying that draconic claws is a fine focus spell. It serves a purpose mechanically. Just because you don't like that purpose or don't want to use it because of the purpose, doesn't make it somehow a bad focus spell.

I am not saying that your feelings are wrong. I just also saying that it is an expectations issue. With the 'the game should change for me' expectation, it seems built in that one would enjoy the game less because of clashing with how the game is built. I guess I'm curious why someone would knowingly embrace that mentality?

I also don't believe I ever said it was objectively bad, just unsatisfying for some people and talking about how it or other options it could be replaced with can be helpful for people and the game in general.

If the designers see things like this as big contentious design decisions that could positively impact future designs, including new bloodlines or class archtypes or feats that allow changing these things out or augmenting them to help fix those issues.

No hard feeling my dude, your builds, from what I've seen are very creative and we'll thought out. Full stop great job, but supporting multiple ways to play the game keeps it from getting boring over time and allows more creativity.

[Darksol the Painbringer]

Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich wrote:

Yeah, see, when I look at dragon claws I see an ability that I can use to conserve my spells so that I have a bunch for when I face more challenging stuff.

Two problems with this:

1. Focus spells are still spells. Yes, you regain them automatically after 10 minutes since you are a Sorcerer, but other classes don't have that luxury, and you might be in back-to-back or extended encounters where you wish you had that focus point for something else, assuming another option is present.

2. The manner of which you are describing the use of Dragon Claws for is the same manner and intent of what cantrips are supposed to fill, which is to contribute minorly without burning actual spell slots (or focus points). Focus spells are meant to be a step up from that expectation. The fact we are now treating a focus spell, Dragon Claws, as if it were a cantrip, fundamentally shows it isn't balanced in the way it's supposed to be.

So, not even factoring in "Melee too scary, not meant for spellcasters" arguments, there are fundamental problems with this focus spell.

[Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich]

Oh, my bad if I implied I did not welcome more options. I merely combat the idea that dragon claws is an objectively bad focus spell.

I appreciate your compliments of my builds. I do put a lot of effort into them.

[AnimatedPaper]

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

2. The manner of which you are describing the use of Dragon Claws for is the same manner and intent of what cantrips are supposed to fill, which is to contribute minorly without burning actual spell slots (or focus points). Focus spells are meant to be a step up from that expectation. The fact we are now treating a focus spell, Dragon Claws, as if it were a cantrip, fundamentally shows it isn't balanced in the way it's supposed to be.

Wouldn't the "1 action, lasts for 1 minute, can be augmented by handwraps"* factor indeed make this a step up from a 2 action cantrip?

I agree that focus spells, effectively encounter powers, should be a step up from cantrips. I think this is. I think they also should be a step down from slotted spells in the hands of a full caster, which I also see this as being.

Edit: The handwrap thing alone makes this an interesting mechancial spell to me, as one of the more frequent complaints are that spells mostly can't be augmented by items. This one can.

[Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich]

AnimatedPaper wrote:

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

2. The manner of which you are describing the use of Dragon Claws for is the same manner and intent of what cantrips are supposed to fill, which is to contribute minorly without burning actual spell slots (or focus points). Focus spells are meant to be a step up from that expectation. The fact we are now treating a focus spell, Dragon Claws, as if it were a cantrip, fundamentally shows it isn't balanced in the way it's supposed to be.

Wouldn't the "1 action, lasts for 1 minute, can be augmented by handwraps"* factor indeed make this a step up from a 2 action cantrip?

I agree that focus spells, effectively encounter powers, should be a step up from cantrips. I think this is. I think they also should be a step down from slotted spells in the hands of a full caster, which I also see this as being.

Edit: The handwrap thing alone makes this an interesting mechancial spell to me, as one of the more frequent complaints are that spells mostly can't be augmented by items. This one can.

Might it also be relevant that you can be attacking with the claws in addition to casting cantrips?

[Guntermench]

Claw/Jaw with Electric Arc is highly effective, provided the enemy is not one of the ones that have AoO. This kind of combo is going to be even better with SoM adding more cantrips, at least some of which should be saves.

[Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich]

For those math loving people out there, the turn would consist of (1d4+4 (basic reflex)) + (to hit of +6 for 1d4+1d6 damage); at level 1.

[wegrata]

Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich wrote:

For those math loving people out there, the turn would consist of (1d4+4 (basic reflex)) + (to hit of +6 for 1d4+1d6 damage); at level 1.

Right and that gap grows as you level up, due to being behind your attack attribute and lower proficiency. Once that kicks in it's more like 2 or 3 points behind which comes out to 10% worse chance to hit. Of your chance as a martial against an at level foe is 50% this becomes 40% so roughly 1/3 attacks hit, not including for MAP, which can be avoided with smart spell selection.

We really shouldn't be cherry picking levels based on when things line up for one PoV or the other. But average success rate and average damage/action to see if the issue is present as you level.

I expect anything built in and not able to be retrained to something else to scale and be useful for the entire career of the adventurer. For spells that deal damage I expect the average damage per action spent using that spell to scale appropriately.

[Darksol the Painbringer]

AnimatedPaper wrote:

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

2. The manner of which you are describing the use of Dragon Claws for is the same manner and intent of what cantrips are supposed to fill, which is to contribute minorly without burning actual spell slots (or focus points). Focus spells are meant to be a step up from that expectation. The fact we are now treating a focus spell, Dragon Claws, as if it were a cantrip, fundamentally shows it isn't balanced in the way it's supposed to be.

Wouldn't the "1 action, lasts for 1 minute, can be augmented by handwraps"* factor indeed make this a step up from a 2 action cantrip?

I agree that focus spells, effectively encounter powers, should be a step up from cantrips. I think this is. I think they also should be a step down from slotted spells in the hands of a full caster, which I also see this as being.

Edit: The handwrap thing alone makes this an interesting mechancial spell to me, as one of the more frequent complaints are that spells mostly can't be augmented by items. This one can.

To a point. It has an initial action cost before it can be used the way you describe, meaning unless it's pre-buffed, it can't be initially combined with cantrips. If you're running around with +1 Handwraps, it would make the to-hit modifier equal to a spell attack roll, but that's not available until 2nd level at the earliest, if not 3rd or 4th. If we want to say it can be bought, sure, but it does eat into a good chunk of WBL otherwise used for scrolls and other consumables spellcasters are expected to purchase.

This also isn't taking into consideration that you are in a very risky position to get eaten by the monster in question. At 1st level, the odds of being proficient or having heavy armor is pretty slim, meaning you're very easy to hit and crit, and have lower HP compared to other frontliners.

[Guntermench]

No one that's complaining about this should ever play a Warpriest.

[Ravingdork]

Guntermench wrote:

No one that's complaining about this should ever play a Warpriest.

Many don't.

[Lycar]

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

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.

You mean a caster type dabbling in martial things is worse at that then a dedicated martial class? Plus, the casting is a single action for a whole 1 minute duration. One could open combat with a spell and Dragon Claws and be ready to rumble in the subsequent rounds. Yes, you can't cast Shield on your first turn on top of that, but that is such a small price to pay that that argument comes off as pretty disengenious. :(

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

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.

Ah yes, 'Stormwind Fallacy', the last refuge of the Munchkin. The less said the better. If you think that the Draconic bloodline makes for a weak Sorceror, pick any other. Problem solved. After all, you don't have to gimp yourself by taking a weak bloodline, just to make a decent character...

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

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.

So pick those bloodlines instead? You do not actually have to take the Draconic bloodline to make a Dragon themed character.

Fluff is mutable.

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

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) Yes, a caster trying to ape a martial will still suck at melee. That is an intentional design element of PF2, learned from the painful lessons of D&D 3.X and PF1.

On the other hand, martials also don't get to be good at spells. Not that they ever did in any previous incarnation of the game, Eldritch Knights notwithstanding, but yay for keeping up the tradition I guess.

2) Last time I checked, martial classes get 1 +1 feat on every even level. Oh you mean the two floating feats Fighters get? Yeah, except that that (plus legendary proficiency) is what they get instead of Rage or Hunt Prey etc. Giving up class features is still giving up class features and yay for on picking on the one class that gets extra feats. Is this Sorceror vs. Fighter now instead of Sorceror vs. martials et al. ?

3) Yes, how dare martials sacrifice parts of their martial identity to buff themselves, thus stealing the bread and butter of the poor, maligned casters!

F: Hey buddy, I just got my own 3rd level spell slot. Now I can cast Haste on myself so you don't have to.

S: But... but.. I wanted to spend a whole turn casting one of my second highest level spells instead of one of my big ones.. :(

[Lycar]

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

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...

A martial class getting better use out of a martial option then a caster is not a problem. It is the solution to casters overshadowing martials in previous editions.

Dragon Claws do not make casters martials. They are not supposed to. You wanting that to be different doesn't change that.

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

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.

Yes, there are lots of people who want casters to be able to match martials at their own game. Again.

I have seen first hand what Natural Casting, Divine Metamagic and the thrice-accursed Nightsticks wrought.

Do not look here for sympathy.

[Cyouni]

Look, there's literally no way the designers are going to give you an caster option that makes you directly better than a martial character at martial things.

It can have a duration, allow you to continue casting spells, or be close to martial effectiveness. You can only get two of those. Polymorph spells (and wild shape) are 1 and 3. Elemental Toss, Tempest Touch, and similar things are 2 and 3. Dragon Claws gets to be 1 and 2, then.

[wegrata]

Cyouni wrote:

Look, there's literally no way the designers are going to give you an caster option that makes you directly better than a martial character at martial things.

It can have a duration, allow you to continue casting spells, or be close to martial effectiveness. You can only get two of those. Polymorph spells (and wild shape) are 1 and 3. Elemental Toss, Tempest Touch, and similar things are 2 and 3. Dragon Claws gets to be 1 and 2, then.

100% agree but there should be other options for a draconic sorcerer for their first level focus spell or dial the damage down of abilities like that and the accuracy up. I'd rather drop damage scaling from heightening, make the claws an advanced weapon and use heightening to increase accuracy

So level 1 you're trained
Level 5 you're expert
Level 9 you're master

With only this weapon while it's in use.

[Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich]

wegrata wrote:

Cyouni wrote:

Look, there's literally no way the designers are going to give you an caster option that makes you directly better than a martial character at martial things.

It can have a duration, allow you to continue casting spells, or be close to martial effectiveness. You can only get two of those. Polymorph spells (and wild shape) are 1 and 3. Elemental Toss, Tempest Touch, and similar things are 2 and 3. Dragon Claws gets to be 1 and 2, then.

100% agree but there should be other options for a draconic sorcerer for their first level focus spell or dial the damage down of abilities like that and the accuracy up. I'd rather drop damage scaling from heightening, make the claws an advanced weapon and use heightening to increase accuracy

So level 1 you're trained
Level 5 you're expert
Level 9 you're master

With only this weapon while it's in use.

Gotta disagree. Because then you are equal to martial and still have 3-4 spells of each spell level per day. That has to be a factor.

[Guntermench]

wegrata wrote:

Cyouni wrote:

Look, there's literally no way the designers are going to give you an caster option that makes you directly better than a martial character at martial things.

It can have a duration, allow you to continue casting spells, or be close to martial effectiveness. You can only get two of those. Polymorph spells (and wild shape) are 1 and 3. Elemental Toss, Tempest Touch, and similar things are 2 and 3. Dragon Claws gets to be 1 and 2, then.

100% agree but there should be other options for a draconic sorcerer for their first level focus spell or dial the damage down of abilities like that and the accuracy up. I'd rather drop damage scaling from heightening, make the claws an advanced weapon and use heightening to increase accuracy

So level 1 you're trained
Level 5 you're expert
Level 9 you're master

With only this weapon while it's in use.

The only way you're getting increased accuracy is losing casting, not damage.

Seriously though, situational spell is situational. Who knew?

If you want to optimize using it as a caster grab Martial Artist for Follow-up Strike and Grevious Blow. If you want to optimize using it as if you were a Fighter be a Fighter and grab Sorcerer.

Giving each of the...15?...Sorcerer bloodlines multiple choices for their focus spells would very likely have put them over their page count, and obviously they don't rate that as particularly necessary since it would have been easier to do when there were less of them. Not even Genie got it and they did get five options for granted spells for the different types.

[Cyouni]

wegrata wrote:

Cyouni wrote:

Look, there's literally no way the designers are going to give you an caster option that makes you directly better than a martial character at martial things.

It can have a duration, allow you to continue casting spells, or be close to martial effectiveness. You can only get two of those. Polymorph spells (and wild shape) are 1 and 3. Elemental Toss, Tempest Touch, and similar things are 2 and 3. Dragon Claws gets to be 1 and 2, then.

100% agree but there should be other options for a draconic sorcerer for their first level focus spell or dial the damage down of abilities like that and the accuracy up. I'd rather drop damage scaling from heightening, make the claws an advanced weapon and use heightening to increase accuracy

So level 1 you're trained
Level 5 you're expert
Level 9 you're master

With only this weapon while it's in use.

I think that's conceptually pretty workable...up until property runes come into play. At higher levels, you only lose 3 damage compared to a shortsword martial, and 1 accuracy half the time. Without property runes, mental math says that's relatively close to the original version in terms of output.

The other downside is that no martial multiclass would ever take that unless they were really dedicated to theme over function. It's dead in the water for 8 levels at a time; 5-8 and 13-16.

[Guntermench]

The problem with this is they're still a full spellcaster.while.using it.

If it was a dragon humanoid battleform maybe.

[Unicore]

A lot of people are not content with focus spells like glutton jaw and dragon claws, but they are mostly discontent for many different reasons and a lot of people are content with them as well, so it is a pretty mixed bag to begin with.

If you believe that the sorcerer class is not capable of surviving in melee, than the weapons could do D12, or have full fighter proficiency and some people would still call it a trap option because the very idea of a focus power calling sorcerers into melee is the trap option in their mind.

If your argument is that casters can't have any melee leaning options or else they are traps, then no option that includes something that pushes you into melee will be acceptable. And if all bloodline options forced into melee, on the frame they already have, that would be a big enough problem for me to join the ranks and say, "this needs Errata!"

But then there are the folks that say, "OK, but I want to be able to pick any thematic option, but still be supported in what ever play style I want." This would work fine in a less mechanically minded game all around. Pick your theme and apply this really broad basic mechanical template to it, or in a game that has 10 + years of options, but even then building "any mechanical playstyle" with any thematic character concept is probably going to be fine at a couple levels and probably fall apart terribly at higher levels or just completely make everything else irrelevant (as was the case with a whole lot of MC builds in 3.x/PF1)
But the first step that I have even heard of towards anything like this kind of flexibility is with this new dragon worshiping sorcerer that I haven't seen the mechanics for at all. It is interesting that the magical tradition is on the table for switching, so who knows if focus spells are too, but I have not heard developers talk at all about that yet, so I am still a skeptic that such a thing is likely, but I also have no problem with it happening. I do suspect people will be equally as disappointed in the the replacement options unless they surpass the the power level of what currently exists, and that is the road to power creep unending. If the power level of focus spells is going to go up, it needs to happen at the Core rulebook level and not be the mandatory splatbook.

Then there is my position, and many other folks who feel like all of the casters have some interesting options for certain play styles, and some very uninteresting options to us, and that we want more options to continue to be presented that do new and interesting things with the game, but that expectations need to be balanced around what is currently out there.

What makes the game playable for folks like me is that the difficulty and frustration level of encounters is entirely controlled on the GM level with very little work. A lot of GMs could have very happy players if they talked to them after frustrating sessions, figured out what is causing the frustration, and then adapted the encounters and adventures to allow the characters the players want to play to shine, or to talk to the players about how that character might just not be a great fit for this specific campaign.

[Lucy_Valentine]

Abyssalwyrm wrote:

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.

Okay. I'm sad about the lack of gishes too. 2/3 casters were my favourite, and I am profoundly unhappy that there are none in this edition.

Abyssalwyrm wrote:

But thing is, martial classes still get roughly 60% of spellcasting capability of spellcasting class, they multiclass into.

... but this is nonsense. And trying to get people on your side while saying things that are false is not helping this whole "consensus" thing.

At second level, multiclassing into wizard class means you have two cantrips. You can also use scrolls and wands.
At fourth level, it's one first-level spell, compared with five base, not counting wizard features.
At sixth, it's one first-level and one second level spell, compared with nine. So, 22% of casting power if we don't care about spell level and don't count wizard feats and features.
At eight, it's one third level, one second level, and maybe two first level spells if you spend a third feat. So 16% of casting power, again ignoring both spell level and wizard features.
At ten, yours haven't gone up. The wizard's have.
At twelve you can spend a fourth feat and get access to your first fourth level spell. At this stage you have a maximum of six spells per day, while a wizard has eighteen up to level six as base. So 33%, not 60%
At fourteen you get two extra spells, one at fifth level and one at third, total eight. The wizard has twenty-one.
At sixteen it's ten vs twenty-four.
At eighteen you get a seventh-level spell slot. Which means you now have twelve spells to the wizard's twenty-seven base. Still less than half.
At twentieth, you get an eight-level slot and now have fourteen slots... compared with the wizard's twenty-eight base (not counting feats and features). So half the slots in raw numbers, less than half once you add in wizard features, and missing the most powerful slots.

So no, martials with a casting dedication don't get "60% of casting power". Before level twelve a caster dedication is closer to being a first-ed one-third caster than a two-third one. It picks up a bit after that, but it never catches a PF1 2/3 caster in terms of numbers of spells.

Which is all a bit of a shame, because I really want a two-third caster.

Meanwhile:

Abyssalwyrm wrote:

How would that matter if you JUST... CAN'T... HIT?

So if you're using a secondary attribute instead of a primary attribute, you're 1 point behind. Except from 5-9 and 15-19, when you'd be on the same stat mod.

Meanwhile with proficiency, you'd start at trained, the same as everyone except a fighter, be 2 points behind from 5, same from 11, and 2 points behind from 13
So putting that together we get:
level 1-4 (-1), 5-9 (-2), 10 (-3), 11-12 (-1), 13-14 (-3), 15-19 (-2), 20 (-3)
Oh wait, I forgot magic items... except, casters can also get handwraps which apply to unarmed strikes, so those even out. But what about apex items? Well, looking at the WBL table, it seems like a dedicated martial would have one of those in their to-hit attribute at 17, while a caster wouldn't reasonably be able to grab one until 19.
level 1-4 (-1), 5-9 (-2), 10 (-3), 11-12 (-1), 13-14 (-3), 15-16 (-2), 17-18 (-3), 19 (-2), 20 (-3)

It's a bit of a janky relationship, but it's always between -1 and -3. So I guess if you "just can't hit", that also means by extension that Flurry rangers are a total waste of time, since their whole gimmick is making second attacks at -3?

So no, I don't really get it. This option is like a second attack on a martial who is specifically good at second attacks, with no feat investment beside what brought you here. And you want it buffing because... it ought to be as good as a martial character's primary attacks while also being on a full-casting chassis?

Maybe you should campaign for a sorcerer version of the magus using claws? That seems way more plausible.

[Guntermench]

The new sorcerer has new blood magic, granted spells, one skill swapped out and the spell list swapped out. The focus spells are the same.

[Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich]

wegrata wrote:

We really shouldn't be cherry picking levels based on when things line up for one PoV or the other. But average success rate and average damage/action to see if the issue is present as you level.

Sure, let's. So we compare the average damage of the very favored Elemental Toss which is one action, to the average damage of dragon claws if it is used for every action that it can be, thus 10 rounds of 3 actions each. 1 focus point should equal 1 focus point, right? The statistical likelihood of hitting/missing/critting should be factored in as well.

EDIT: -1 action for casting it, so only 29 attacks.

[egindar]

Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich wrote:

wegrata wrote:

We really shouldn't be cherry picking levels based on when things line up for one PoV or the other. But average success rate and average damage/action to see if the issue is present as you level.

Sure, let's. So we compare the average damage of the very favored Elemental Toss which is one action, to the average damage of dragon claws if it is used for every action that it can be, thus 10 rounds of 3 actions each. 1 focus point should equal 1 focus point, right? The statistical likelihood of hitting/missing/critting should be factored in as well.

EDIT: -1 action for casting it, so only 29 attacks.

That seems like an inaccurate/unfair comparison to be making - egregiously inaccurate/unfair, even. Combats only tend to last 3-5 rounds, for one. If you're going melee sorcerer, you should probably be factoring in needing to move to/between your targets as well. And then as previously mentioned, a melee sorcerer's survivability isn't great, and the utility of Dragon Claws is that you can conserve normal slots in combats against weaker enemies (something you yourself have said) - both an elemental sorcerer and a dragon sorcerer are presumably going to be casting at least a few slotted spells between using their focus spells. Even in the case we assume they aren't, an elemental sorcerer will still be able to fall back on cantrips and skill actions in the ensuing rounds after it casts Elemental Toss.

[Cyder]

Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich wrote:

wegrata wrote:

We really shouldn't be cherry picking levels based on when things line up for one PoV or the other. But average success rate and average damage/action to see if the issue is present as you level.

Sure, let's. So we compare the average damage of the very favored Elemental Toss which is one action, to the average damage of dragon claws if it is used for every action that it can be, thus 10 rounds of 3 actions each. 1 focus point should equal 1 focus point, right? The statistical likelihood of hitting/missing/critting should be factored in as well.

EDIT: -1 action for casting it, so only 29 attacks.

This is disengenuous. Combats are designed to last 3 to 4 rounds. So claws shouldn't be factored for a full minute. Also the comparisons should be:

1) Claw (cast) + 2 claw attacks with map in the first round + 3 claw attacks in the following rounds.

2) Claw (cast) + cantrip first round, cantrip + 1 claw attack for 3 subsequent rounds.

3) elemental toss + cantrip in first round + 3 rounds of cantrips.

I would suggest vs an on level foe (rather than boss).

All of these are quite generous to claws as they don't account for having to move to be in range or getting grabbed, knocked down or taking AoO or getting knocked to dying.

It is incredibly rare for a combat to last a full minute so claiming that is not an honest example of a normal situation.
3)

[Cyder]

To be honest I would rather claws were something from the Dragon Disciple archetype and Dragon sorcs got resistance + 1 item bonus to AC. Or a weaker fear effect - still super thematic for dragons.

Claws are not great, they can be made to work but they want the class to play in a way the core class chassis is not designed for which I feel isn't great design. Others opinions may vary.

Glutton's Jaws are worse - they would likely work a lot better as a one off spell attack that returned HP - a mini Blood Feast effect they would be a lot more exciting.

[thenobledrake]

Cyder wrote:

Combats are designed to last 3 to 4 rounds.

Some.

[Abyssalwyrm]

Guntermench wrote:

Overall, this isn't 1e or a 3.5 clone. It's not pretending to be or trying to be. Casters not being as effective with weapons and unarmed is intended, regardless of how you feel about it.

Oh i am for one glad it's not a clone. My immediate impression with 2nd edition was very high. And as i already mentioned earlier - i am glad devs focused on balancing. It's just they bit overdo it in some areas. No one asks after all make spellcaster be better than martials in melee. Just equal, and just temporary. Can be done multiple ways:

*Having spellcaster using his spell attack for melee attacks, as a 1 minute spell (the original idea of (Tenser's) Transformation reiteration). Again, you by no mean can out best fighter. Both pure fighter, and multiclassed fighter. In both cases fighter will have his attack bonus PERMANENTLY (which is important, when you suddenly run out of appropriate level of spell slots). And of course access to leve-12+ fighter feats, which quite potent in melee combat. Multiclass fighter in fact on top of that can gain access to Heroism spell. Where as arcane caster, who is trying multiclass into martial, will just have no room for that (assuming Transformation still stays as an arcane spell).

*Same as above, but giving instead circumstance bonus to attack rolls, during spell duration. Unfortunately game capped at +3 bonus max, so you still can't beat the fighter (and Barbarian) with their attack rolls. But i'll take +3. Something like +2 at 6th level of spell (presumably it will stay as level-6 originally), and +3 as heightened to level-9.

*For spellcasters who is clearly prompted to be involved into melee combat. Not as must have, but as clear theme-options. Giving them either +1/+3 circumstance bonus to attacks, when they use obviously melee spells. Or again just allow them use spell attack instead of melee attack. I am mainly talking here about just shoving Dragon Form to dragonblood sorcerer, as if it's gonna be good use to him/her.

Quote:

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.

But it is.

It's not like you can jump into melee, in... let say 10 round combat, hit twice for 40+ damage, and then cheerfully claim: "hey, guys, have you seen those two melee hits i landed?!"
Ranger: "Yeah, totally not like mine 30+ hits, for just poor 30+ damage each"
Fighter, monk, barbarian, rogue: "Or our consistent 1 hit per round, for 50+ damage. And we not gonna mention about those few critical hits, who cares about those right?"
Whole team: "Maybe you should focus on... i dunno, at least just Produce Flame or Electric Arc? We feel you just better at it".

At least that's how game IS right now. And i don't think that's how it should be.

[Guntermench]

That isn't how the game is right now at all. As I said, I've played a class that had this as it's primary focus. It's not nearly that bad.

Because of the focus on balance they can't be truly equal, ESPECIALLY not when they're still able to cast spells. Because THEY'RE STILL A FULL CASTER when they aren't using battleform spells, and THEY'RE STILL A FULL CASTER when using Dragon Claws, Glutton Jaws and Wild Morph for claws.

[WWHsmackdown]

All the caster in melee talk is making me want to make a divine sorc with champ dedication.

[Alyran]

Cyder wrote:

This is disengenuous. Combats are designed to last 3 to 4 rounds.

I don't have a horse in this race, but citation needed. My players are quite good at this game and our combats are regularly 7+ rounds unless they get real lucky on initiative, crits AND saves. Or if it's a steamroll combat to make them feel powerful, but that's a different thing entirely.

[Temperans]

WWHsmackdown wrote:

All the caster in melee talk is making me want to make a divine sorc with champ dedication.

This one is not so bad because it has you do what the game already wants you do as a Fivine Sorcerer: Heal and cast buffs, while just being around. Probably works best with reach weapon to help a bit with the whole "getting attacked" thing. While letting you use reactions.

Buts lets be real. Champion MC caster does the same thing better. Even if they don't get the highest level spells. The fact that you can hit and take some damage makes it much more tolerable.

Not to mention its the closest thing to a PF1 Warpriest in PF2.

[NemoNoName]

Temperans wrote:

WWHsmackdown wrote:

All the caster in melee talk is making me want to make a divine sorc with champ dedication.

This one is not so bad because it has you do what the game already wants you do as a Fivine Sorcerer: Heal and cast buffs, while just being around. Probably works best with reach weapon to help a bit with the whole "getting attacked" thing. While letting you use reactions.

Buts lets be real. Champion MC caster does the same thing better. Even if they don't get the highest level spells. The fact that you can hit and take some damage makes it much more tolerable.

Not to mention its the closest thing to a PF1 Warpriest in PF2.

Let's not forget just how ridiculously good Lay-on-Hands is. Guaranteed 6hp/spell level heal for 1 action (and a small AC buff!) repeatable near-infinite times per day is super value.

[Lucy_Valentine]

I think we could all get behind the idea of swapping bloodline spells out for other, similarly themed, spells. Right?

But also:

Abyssalwyrm wrote:

It's not like you can jump into melee, in... let say 10 round combat, hit twice for 40+ damage, and then cheerfully claim: "hey, guys, have you seen those two melee hits i landed?!"

Ranger: "Yeah, totally not like mine 30+ hits, for just poor 30+ damage each"

The pure sorc is somewhere between -1 and -3 to hit from the Ranger's first attack, and therefore at or better than the (flurry) ranger's second or subsequent attacks. If the flurry ranger is landing thirty hits in ten rounds then the target(s) must be pretty easy to hit on the ranger's third attack, which ought to be less accurate than the sorcerer's claws...

... unless of course the sorcerer has raised neither dex nor strength, and chose not to buy those handwraps to boost their accuracy?

Maybe if you're making up examples, make up one that has accurate numbers without the sorcerer player being incompetent.

Also, if the sorc player spent ten rounds in combat and didn't cast any spells besides this focus... why are they even playing a sorcerer?

"Oh no, I can't compete with martial characters for damage, in melee, using one first-level focus spell" is not a great argument for increasing the power of the focus spell.

Also, all these people complaining about this not being PF1... IDK if you remember, but claws were a dragon sorc thing there too. And required a specialised build to be more than a hilarious joke after about level 1. Of course, it would be nice not to repeat mistakes, but w/e, this game has any number of trap feats.

[Unicore]

I think Dragon claws are better than the wildmorph focus spell given to wild order druids as their default focus spell by a wide margin. Wild shape is more fun, but really only in a utility sense at both low levels and high levels, unless you sink feats into it.

Focus spells that create lasting effects are pretty tame on the "instant power" meter in PF2. That doesn't make them bad, but it is clear that a significant chunk of power budget is consumed by any focus spell that gives you things to do over multiple rounds of combat. It is that way across classes, and has been that way in playtest classes too. It really seems like changing that would be a very large shift in system balance and have to happen in a massive Errata of multiple classes and focus spells.

I think a feat that let you swap out your starting bloodline focus spell for a specific alternative might be possible, but at that point, why not just take a feat that grants you a new focus spell so you still have the extra focus point, and a little more versatility?

If you love lay on hands, you can pick it up as a sorcerer at level 2 with the Blessed One archetype AND get an extra focus point to boot. Continuing to get more new add on options takes care of the "Now I am stuck with this" aspect of this debate instantly.