Transformation spell plz?


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion

51 to 100 of 716 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

WatersLethe wrote:

Martials who multiclass get at most 8th level spells very late, at the cost of half their feats and one of their skill specializations, and their casting is still behind all other casters.

So the proposal is that a single spell should allow casters to get full martial effectiveness in melee?

Martial classes get master proficiency, usually at least for every martial weapon type.

Casters at best gets expert proficiency, often restricted to simple weapons only. Sorcerer ad wizard in particular in battleforms can't even benefit from their own attack bonus. Since they are just trained in unarmed attacks, even if they max out their strength attribute - it's still will be way too low.

The base idea is understandable. Casters should not be able 24/7 be as good with weapons as martial classes, they just focus on different aspects of training (magic in particular). But it was nice in earlier editions when player still could make a battle-mage type of character. With help of specific spells and/or prestige classes. While most mages keep specializing purely in magic, some prefer mix up magic and martial arts.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Claxon wrote:


That's basically only going to be a druid who focuses in transformation.

Funny enough bit too specialized.

Druids in D&D/Pathfinder history of lore never specialized neither on dragons nor giants. That's why in 1st edition you could at best polymorph into magic beast (i... kinda can agree with that), but not into giant or dragon. In second edition there is no giant form... it's kinda "replaced" with enlarge person (which can turn you up to huge form in heightened version). But there is still dragon form, and weirdly enough druids for some reason have access to it via wild shape.
Same time dragon-bloodline sorcerer simply gets dragon form spell as bonus... that's it. Not even with +2 status bonus to attack, while using that specific form, similarly to bonus that druids get. And getting Dragon Disciple as a dragon-bloodline sorcerer also hardly do you any good. You get puny claws... with which you still constantly gonna miss... so at best those just for good look. And alternatively accessing dragon form through that archetype again doesn't add any additional benefits at all. Yeah, you can change into dragon. But you wouldn't be able to do much with it.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Abyssalwyrm wrote:
Claxon wrote:


That's basically only going to be a druid who focuses in transformation.

Funny enough bit too specialized.

Druids in D&D/Pathfinder history of lore never specialized neither on dragons nor giants. That's why in 1st edition you could at best polymorph into magic beast (i... kinda can agree with that), but not into giant or dragon. In second edition there is no giant form... it's kinda "replaced" with enlarge person (which can turn you up to huge form in heightened version). But there is still dragon form, and weirdly enough druids for some reason have access to it via wild shape.
Same time dragon-bloodline sorcerer simply gets dragon form spell as bonus... that's it. Not even with +2 status bonus to attack, while using that specific form, similarly to bonus that druids get. And getting Dragon Disciple as a dragon-bloodline sorcerer also hardly do you any good. You get puny claws... with which you still constantly gonna miss... so at best those just for good look. And alternatively accessing dragon form through that archetype again doesn't add any additional benefits at all. Yeah, you can change into dragon. But you wouldn't be able to do much with it.

5th level Humanoid Form is how you turn into Giants.


Paradozen wrote:
5th level Humanoid Form is how you turn into Giants.

That would just give you more distinctive appearance of giant, if you would want to look like one (spying on them or something). But otherwise wouldn't give you any stats that giants normally would have. resistances, fast healing, etc. It's just enlarge spell. Plus it wouldn't even give an option for huge or gargantuan humanoid. And many giants are that big.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Decimus Drake wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:


Abyssalwyrm wrote:
It's just impossible to effectively compete in melee combat with classes like fighter, monk and barbarian. Those can easily both out-damage you in melee combat, and out-tank you.

\

They don't get to out-wizard you do they?

This^^

Being good at melee and tanking is what these classes are for. If you gave caster's a spell to temporarily do melee as well as a fighter, what do fighters get in return? A feat that let's them cast spells as effectively as a full caster?

Multiclass casting dedications say hi.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Decimus Drake wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:


Abyssalwyrm wrote:
It's just impossible to effectively compete in melee combat with classes like fighter, monk and barbarian. Those can easily both out-damage you in melee combat, and out-tank you.

\

They don't get to out-wizard you do they?

This^^

Being good at melee and tanking is what these classes are for. If you gave caster's a spell to temporarily do melee as well as a fighter, what do fighters get in return? A feat that let's them cast spells as effectively as a full caster?

Multiclass casting dedications say hi.

Multiclass caster do not get to cast better than casters. They never get legendary casting and the chances of having casting at 22 is nearly impossible. So yeah no


2 people marked this as a favorite.

General rant about martial vs caster:
Hmm let's see. The side discussion on martial vs casters has happened a lot. On that subject I have to say: Its super bothersome how the classes are asymetrical when it comes to proficiency. As stated, a martial character can get 8th level spells for utility and buffs and ignore proficiency, while maintaining full martial power. Combined with the fact that there aren't many fights per day and that buffs generally don't care about level and yeah Martials get a lot for those 3-5 feats.

Casters on the other hand get very little for getting 3-5 martial feats. Getting to expert proficiency with a martial weapon does not enable casters to actually use any combat feat effectively. Maybe they can use maneuver feats, but that requires being in melee which is a tough order when you cannot get above expert AC.

The end result? A caster spends 5 feats trying to become more martial to effectively waste 5 feats on things they might maybe use once every 10 fights. A martial expends 5 feats on getting straight up upgrades at no cost that they can use every fight. That is the problem with the asymmetry, a martial can get 80% of a caster's power with 5 feats, but a caster can't even hope to get 50% of a martial's power.

The thing about transformation spells is that their entire purpose is to make a character become another creature or change forms. But people are actively saying that those spells should be worse because they let you become another creature or change form. Do you notice what this means?

You have casters which have the worst stats in the game to get a limited pool of abilities with a limited usage time that are level locked and stop working after a certain level. But you want to nerf transformations because they do exactly what they are supposed to be doing. What if most martial class feats became 3 times per day? Then you would be at the same place casters are.

But would anyone suggest that seriously? Never. They want martials to get infinite uses of their abilities because "martials are supposed to do that." Even if what they do is already almost magical. But casters doing actual magic? "How dare they use magic to remove their weaknesses, they should always be weak even after using their best magic." A martial using magic to fix their weakness or improve is said to be fine and great. A caster using magic for the same is said to be broken and ruining the game.

That is how I keep seeing things from the side who keeps asking for magic to be nerfed or kept bad. Which really makes me think that Paizo should had just said that something happened to make all magic worse. Then at least we could at least have an in lore reason for it.


Temperans wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

The thing about transformation spells is that their entire purpose is to make a character become another creature or change forms. But people are actively saying that those spells should be worse because they let you become another creature or change form. Do you notice what this means?

You have casters which have the worst stats in the game to get a limited pool of abilities with a limited usage time that are level locked and stop working after a certain level. But you want to nerf transformations because they do exactly what they are supposed to be doing. What if most martial class feats became 3 times per day? Then you would be at the same place casters are.

But would anyone suggest that seriously? Never. They want martials to get infinite...

Ok, what I said was that no Multiclass casters don't get to cast as a good as a wizard. They don't it's a fact and they aren't meant to. Fighters also don't get the full versatility that a full caster does. And I think that's fine. Fighters are really good at basically playing whack a mole. Yes you're correct they can invest 5 feats and 3 skill increases and get decent casting and like you said use utility spells that don't worry about attacks or saves or 9th and 10th level spells. But that leaves out a lot of spells. You give some to get some. I could see a polymorph spell that increases your unarmed attack up to master but not more than that. Everyone has their niche. If a Multiclass caster can't get legendary casting and access to top 2 level spells why should it give legendary unarmed? I think that's a fair question


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Riddlyn wrote:
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Decimus Drake wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:


Abyssalwyrm wrote:
It's just impossible to effectively compete in melee combat with classes like fighter, monk and barbarian. Those can easily both out-damage you in melee combat, and out-tank you.

\

They don't get to out-wizard you do they?

This^^

Being good at melee and tanking is what these classes are for. If you gave caster's a spell to temporarily do melee as well as a fighter, what do fighters get in return? A feat that let's them cast spells as effectively as a full caster?

Multiclass casting dedications say hi.
Multiclass caster do not get to cast better than casters. They never get legendary casting and the chances of having casting at 22 is nearly impossible. So yeah no

And multiclass martials do not get to fight better than martials. Just like how casters with battle forms never get legendary or even master weapons, even with math factored in, nor do they get powerful feats and abilities which rival what martials are really capable of. Sounds to me like it's a very apt comparison, even if you don't seem to think so.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Riddlyn wrote:
Temperans wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

The thing about transformation spells is that their entire purpose is to make a character become another creature or change forms. But people are actively saying that those spells should be worse because they let you become another creature or change form. Do you notice what this means?

You have casters which have the worst stats in the game to get a limited pool of abilities with a limited usage time that are level locked and stop working after a certain level. But you want to nerf transformations because they do exactly what they are supposed to be doing. What if most martial class feats became 3 times per day? Then you would be at the same place casters are.

But would anyone suggest that seriously? Never. They want martials to get infinite...

Ok, what I said was that no Multiclass casters don't get to cast as a good as a wizard. They don't it's a fact and they aren't meant to. Fighters also don't get the full versatility that a full caster does. And I think that's fine. Fighters are really good at basically playing whack a mole. Yes you're correct they can invest 5 feats and 3 skill increases and get decent casting and like you said use utility spells that don't worry about attacks or saves or 9th and 10th level spells. But that leaves out a lot of spells. You give some to get some. I could see a polymorph spell that increases your unarmed attack up to master but not more than that. Everyone has their niche. If a Multiclass caster can't get legendary casting and access to top 2 level spells why should it give legendary unarmed? I think that's a fair question

A lot of spells missing? 60% of a caster's work is utility and buffs. Another 25% is debuffs, which people keep saying "its fine if they fail at least you did something". The last 15% is actual damage: Most of which is AoE cause single target spells are a joke that not even actual casters can use well. Martials get all of the utility of being a caster with 0 of the negatives. Oh you are missing 1 extra spell per level? Oh wait you don't need those spells because you already have full martial power at no cost.

What did the caster get for spending 5 feats on trying to get martial power? Lets see, assuming 4 in fighter and 1 in sentinel: Expert in martial weapons? Not really useful; 12 HP? Thats worse than Toughness; AoO? You can barely hit anyaway; Expert in ligh & medium armor? Do you really want to limit your already bad dex even more? Better get some really good runes for it to be worth it; Better saves? Did even touch them.

So 5 feats for 12 uses per day of straight buffs vs 5 feats for things that are usually sidegrades at best? Which one is better I wonder.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Riddlyn wrote:


Multiclass caster do not get to cast better than casters. They never get legendary casting and the chances of having casting at 22 is nearly impossible. So yeah no

They don't need legendary proficiency in DC. Hurling fireballs as a martial combatant would be an utter waist of magic potential.

They do however gets all kind of magical buffs for themselves, which they would normally rely to get from allies, or not get at all (in case spell works only on caster).

Once again, fighter multiclassing as a caster in this edition gets waaaaay stronger compared to Erdrich Knights from previous editions.
And yet for spellcasters we can't get something similar to Bladesinger or Raumathari Battlemage.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Abyssalwyrm wrote:


Let's take a look.
Dragonform, level-6 spell, which you can pick on been level 11 arcane or primal spellcaster. It provides you with attack bonus of +22.
Now what martial classes can do on the same level. Pretty much all of them will have master proficiency with their weapon on that level. And they should have at least 18 in their primary stats (str or dex), more importantly, unlike for user's of battleforms, they CAN apply item bonuses to their attacks. AT level-11 they pretty much should have +2 weapons. So, 11+4+6+2=23. Now lets look what we will have on level 14. just one level before we will be able to get heightened version of dragon form. As dragon form user you still normally get +22 to attack. If you try to use your own as a sorcerer, you will get at most +20, druid wildshape, using his special status bonus can get it to +24.
while martial classes, even with +2 weapons (even though there are chance for that to acquire +3 weapon at this level) will get - 14+6+4+2=26, That's already a very sizable gap.

Your numbers are way off.

Non-Fighter martials don't get Master attacks until level 13. Endeavoring to maintain their accuracy stat they should have a 20 in their relevant attack stat At level 10.

At level 11 the expected martial attack bonus is therefore 11+5(stat)+4(expert)+2(item)=22, matching Dragon Form.

At level 13 when mastery comes online Elemental Form heightens to level 7 granting a +25 attack modifier, just behind a martial's expected +26 bonus.

Weapon Potency (+3) runes are a level 16 item and should not be available for level 11 or 13 characters.

As your can see battleforms are carefully balanced to enable their users to participate effectively in melee combat while remaining less effective in that role than dedicated martial characters.


EKruze wrote:
Abyssalwyrm wrote:


Let's take a look.
Dragonform, level-6 spell, which you can pick on been level 11 arcane or primal spellcaster. It provides you with attack bonus of +22.
Now what martial classes can do on the same level. Pretty much all of them will have master proficiency with their weapon on that level. And they should have at least 18 in their primary stats (str or dex), more importantly, unlike for user's of battleforms, they CAN apply item bonuses to their attacks. AT level-11 they pretty much should have +2 weapons. So, 11+4+6+2=23. Now lets look what we will have on level 14. just one level before we will be able to get heightened version of dragon form. As dragon form user you still normally get +22 to attack. If you try to use your own as a sorcerer, you will get at most +20, druid wildshape, using his special status bonus can get it to +24.
while martial classes, even with +2 weapons (even though there are chance for that to acquire +3 weapon at this level) will get - 14+6+4+2=26, That's already a very sizable gap.

Your numbers are way off.

Non-Fighter martials don't get Master attacks until level 13. Endeavoring to maintain their accuracy stat they should have a 20 in their relevant attack stat At level 10.

At level 11 the expected martial attack bonus is therefore 11+5(stat)+4(expert)+2(item)=22, matching Dragon Form.

At level 13 when mastery comes online Elemental Form heightens to level 7 granting a +25 attack modifier, just behind a martial's expected +26 bonus.

Weapon Potency (+3) runes are a level 16 item and should not be available for level 11 or 13 characters.

As your can see battleforms are carefully balanced to enable their users to participate effectively in melee combat while remaining less effective in that role than dedicated martial characters.

They were talking about Dragonform which does give you 22 attack until you heighten it to 8th, which is level 15.

At level 15 a martial gets, d20+15+6+6+3+misc bonus, which is d20+30. While Dragon form gives d20+28, and never gets better afterwards. So a level 20 martial gets d20+20+6+7+3+misc = d20+36 vs d20+28 from dragon form.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Old_Man_Robot wrote:
Guntermench wrote:


Martials can archetype to get one below basically every full caster but Warpriest.

Casters don't need to archetype to get one below basically every martial but Fighter.

I fail to see a problem.

Because you aren't looking at the problem functionally. The numbers are the issue, not a symmetrical design idea.

Looking at the numbers, I'm not identifying the same problem. Comparing at level 12, the attack bonus of a caster focusing on melee is +22 (12 level + 4 expert + 4 attack stat + 2 item) vs the martial that focuses on spell's DC of 30 (12 level + 4 expert + 4 save stat + 10 base). A High AC at that level is 33, a Moderate Save is 22, and a High Save is 25. That gives the caster focused on attacking enemies a chance of hitting of 45% vs the martial focused on casting's 40% chance of a positive outcome if targeting a Moderate save, or 25% vs a High save. It's easier to boost the attack of the caster than the DC of the martial (and the enemies' save vs AC penalizing is very similar). This level shouldn't be biased towards either side (caster gets Expert at 11, martial at 12) as far as I can tell. The caster trying to use weapons has a greater chance of success in quite a real way (an easy flank means 55% chance of success vs the martial trying to cast spells being at best 40%) than the martial trying to cast spells. I think the real issue here lies in the fact that many of the spells the martial would want to be casting aren't offensive - which means it isn't really a numbers issue, as you can't tweak the success chances of casting a buff.


10 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Temperans wrote:


They were talking about Dragonform which does give you 22 attack until you heighten it to 8th, which is level 15.

At level 15 a martial gets, d20+15+6+6+3+misc bonus, which is...

So we're going to compare spells outside of their intended levels and use that as a basis of comparison?

At level 11 forms can be cast as 6th level spells and provide a +22 to hit.

At level 13 Dragon Form can no longer be Heightened to you max spell level but either of Elemental Form or Dinosaur Form can be and you have a difference of just 1 point.

At level 15 your numbers are wrong again. Apex items are level 17 and characters should not be expected to have them at this level. Weapon Potency (+3) runes are still one level away but it may be reasonable to consider a character with one. A martial's attack bonus at that level is thus 15(level)+5(stat)+6(master)+3=29. Comparable with the +28 granted by forms of this level.

Wayfinders

Ascalaphus wrote:
Right now, if your druid multiclassed into a martial class he could take various feats to get interesting stunts, as long as those don't try to do an end run around the raw numbers of the spell. Monk dedication to pick up flurry for example is legit.

I had thought of this, but presumably flurry only works for Wild Morph, not Wild Shape? Battle forms don't appear to get strikes; their unarmed attacks have their own actions and no other attacks (including strikes) are available.

Well, except Pest Form. Pest Form can flurry all it likes so long as you can convince your GM that you can punch as a rabbit.

This is less me trying to 'um actually' and more me hoping that I'm wrong and that druids CAN actually use cool multiclass abilities that specify strikes, but every battle form spell seems to tie itself in knots not to use the word 'strike' with the only slip-up being in the Trample entry of Primal Herd. The 'Polymorph' trait refers to strikes, but not in the Battle Form section.


As always, I think that the dreaded 5MWD call after using up all relevant level spell slots to usurp any martial spotlight time seems to be the greatest source of rage against "plausible"(*) transformation spells (and many types of spells not to be discussed here) returning.

You know, not all scenarios can be put under a ticking clock by the GM to prevent that accursed behavior...

(*) That is, the old "swap stat blocks entirely" type.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Temperans wrote:


At level 13 when mastery comes online Elemental Form heightens to level 7 granting a +25 attack modifier, just behind a martial's expected +26 bonus.

What if i don't want elemental form?

Might come to surprise, but RP element is important in RPG game. I'v talked about it earlier, if ppl who want to roleplay in dragon form also suffer, especially when will try to use it on lvl 18-20. But lets say a druid who want to keep using bear(animal) form on high levels will suffer so much more.


Nitro~Nina wrote:


I had thought of this, but presumably flurry only works for Wild Morph, not Wild Shape? Battle forms don't appear to get strikes; their unarmed attacks have their own actions and no other attacks (including strikes) are available.

I also thought about this, but rather would One-Inch Punch work in battleforms?

Would be nice to hear from developers what they think about it.


Abyssalwyrm wrote:
EKruze wrote:
At level 13 when mastery comes online Elemental Form heightens to level 7 granting a +25 attack modifier, just behind a martial's expected +26 bonus.

What if i don't want elemental form?

Might come to surprise, but RP element is important in RPG game. I'v talked about it earlier, if ppl who want to roleplay in dragon form also suffer, especially when will try to use it on lvl 18-20. But lets say a druid who want to keep using bear(animal) form on high levels will suffer so much more.

Fixed the quote.

And exactly. People want to transform into things for RP reasons. But they actively can't because the spells just don't have the stats for it.

Which btw, some people might be thinking that I want to copy stat blocks. Well sorry to tell you but no. All I want isnfor the numbers not to stagnate and actually keep up. If not that, then make them all buff spells and just add/remove stats from the target. Heck making it a buff would make martials multiclassed into a caster even stronger, if that's the worry.

Silver Crusade

Abyssalwyrm wrote:
Temperans wrote:


At level 13 when mastery comes online Elemental Form heightens to level 7 granting a +25 attack modifier, just behind a martial's expected +26 bonus.

What if i don't want elemental form?

Might come to surprise, but RP element is important in RPG game. I'v talked about it earlier, if ppl who want to roleplay in dragon form also suffer, especially when will try to use it on lvl 18-20. But lets say a druid who want to keep using bear(animal) form on high levels will suffer so much more.

Actually, a high level character in bear form doesn't suck too, too badly since their to hit and AC does scale with their level.

But yeah, somebody transforming into a dragon or a dinosaur is generally better than a bear. I have zero problem with that from a world point of view, from a flavor perspective, or from a balance in game perspective.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Abyssalwyrm wrote:
What if i don't want elemental form?

In a way, this is kind of like asking why you can't just heighten burning hands all the way up and match fireball by doing so.

It's just how the system works, across the board with only a few exceptions, that spells from one level don't actually get to compete with spells that are natively higher level even after you heighten them, whether that's animal form getting blown out of the water by monstrosity form, acid arrow not holding up to polar ray, or disappearance being a suped-up form of invisibility.


Pathfinder Pawns, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
thenobledrake wrote:
Abyssalwyrm wrote:
What if i don't want elemental form?

In a way, this is kind of like asking why you can't just heighten burning hands all the way up and match fireball by doing so.

It's just how the system works, across the board with only a few exceptions, that spells from one level don't actually get to compete with spells that are natively higher level even after you heighten them, whether that's animal form getting blown out of the water by monstrosity form, acid arrow not holding up to polar ray, or disappearance being a suped-up form of invisibility.

And that's a good thing.

It's those sorts of constraints that reduce the level of high end min/maxing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Abyssalwyrm wrote:


What if i don't want elemental form?
Might come to surprise, but RP element is important in RPG game. I'v talked about it earlier, if ppl who want to roleplay in dragon form also suffer, especially when will try to use it on lvl 18-20. But lets say a druid who want to keep using bear(animal) form on high levels will suffer so much more.

The reply I originally made was to your post making a specifically mechanical argument with numbers that were just unsound. It was not an RP argument. Why are you moving the goalposts?

If it is essential to your RP that your Druid, Wizard or Sorcerer be able to transform into a dragon in combat at level 13 you will find your options limited and underperforming. Since this is so important to your character vision, consider flavoring your 7th level Elemental Form transformation as that of an elemental dragon. I think you'll find many tables accommodating to this non-mechanical reflavoring and the math will continue to work effectively.


9 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

I find it weird that while focusing on the to hit piece everyone puts aside out that you also gain darkvision, imprecise scent, a 40 foot move speed, a 100 ft fly speed, 10 resistance, 10 ft reach, a breath weapon, and ability specific to your dragon type. That's not even including the bonus to AC, temp HP, and free Athletics.


9 people marked this as a favorite.
nephandys wrote:
I find it weird that while focusing on the to hit piece everyone puts aside out that you also gain darkvision, imprecise scent, a 40 foot move speed, a 100 ft fly speed, 10 resistance, 10 ft reach, a breath weapon, and ability specific to your dragon type. That's not even including the bonus to AC, temp HP, and free Athletics.

Eh... seems to be the standard operating procedure for some people to latch onto the attack roll modifiers not lining up perfectly and ignore all the other parts of the equation, even the basic conclusion that usually follows an attack roll; damage.

Since with dragon form it's not just +22 to hit vs. +22 to hit at 11th level when comparing to a non-fighter martial, it's also dragon form effectively wielding 3-4 different weapons at once since you can switch between jaws, claws, tail, and horns (if that type of dragon has them) without any interact actions or extra cost sunk into runes/doubling rings and some way to have extra limbs.

And you're comparing 2d12+4 piercing +2d6 acid (jaw), 3d10+4 slashing with agile (claw), 3d10+4 bludgeoning with reach (tail), and 3d8=4 piercing with reach (horns) to what... a champion's 2d12+7 with a two-handed weapon, 2d10+7 with reach, or 2d8+7 and 2d6+7 agile extra-expense combo?

6-40 for your first strike followed with 7-34 for your agile second strike is a lot better than 9-23 followed with 9-19 (it's nearly twice the damage potential).

But then you go up a little bit in level and the champion catches up overall, and somehow that means there's a problem even though the caster has the advantage of casting other stuff too and the advantage of starting out better off than the comparison point in the first place.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Ravingdork wrote:

And that's a good thing.

It's those sorts of constraints that reduce the level of high end min/maxing.

You have this one backwards. Having spell power vary so much from level to level and having heightening sometimes just break puts more emphasis on min/maxing at the cost of flavor, not less.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Decimus Drake wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:


Abyssalwyrm wrote:
It's just impossible to effectively compete in melee combat with classes like fighter, monk and barbarian. Those can easily both out-damage you in melee combat, and out-tank you.

\

They don't get to out-wizard you do they?

This^^

Being good at melee and tanking is what these classes are for. If you gave caster's a spell to temporarily do melee as well as a fighter, what do fighters get in return? A feat that let's them cast spells as effectively as a full caster?

Multiclass casting dedications say hi.

So you're saying multiple class feats is a fair equivalent to a spell? Also that isn't just a feature for martials like fighters as even spell casters can take caster dedications. So bye multiclass dedications.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Old_Man_Robot wrote:
Guntermench wrote:

The numbers are the issue. Why play anything but a caster if you can get full spellcasting benefits and full martial benefits?

A martial has to, as mentioned above, use half their class feats to still not get full spellcasting. It's not unreasonable for a full caster to just not ever get full martial capabilities.

If, like I (the person you are replying to) actually said, that martial upgrades work like an archetype which requires the same level of feat investment as a spellcasting archetype, would that be okay to you?
Mark Seifter wrote:
The-Magic-Sword wrote:
Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:

In general, I could imagine later in the edition (if they feel comfortable with this as a niche after seeing how the cookies crumble on their current coverage), the possibility of some class archetypes designed to enhance A magic user's martial ability at the expense of a little casting-- kinda like what flexible casting does, but instead of making the slots neo-vancian, it could raise weapon proficiency to a Master Progression instead of an expert one-- I could even see it coming at a similar cost of dropping a spell slot.

The new Magus sounds awesome, but its arcane specific, and I'm not seeing a grid fill solution as very likely with alternative Magus's, although I guess they could be class archetypes that change the spell list.

If you wanted to homebrew a class archetype that makes a class martial, you'd want to start with a first step of reducing to magus-style "wave casting" rather than just reducing by 1. Without a huge trade-off like that we're not going to intentionally put out something that gives martial weapon proficiency to spellcasters, yeah (that said, there's something upcoming that slipped past by accident that violates this rule hard and is on our very short "extreme caution" errata list like Heaven's Thunder and bone croupier and one or two more things, so keep that in mind if/when you see or hear about it. I'm just really stoked how short that list is after so many products, and it's because throughout...

Just found this which seems somewhat relevant to people wanting casters to have access to martial numbers, which is part of the discussion here.


I think their does probably need to be a shifter focuses archetype that would allow you to progress your unarmed attack/natural attack proficiency so that you are capable while in your base form.

It would need to progress more slowly than what martial characters get and would need to be class feats, but I think it is reasonable to give up to master proficiency with unarmed/natural attack for shape shifting focused people.

I do think it's legitimate that if you want to focus on this type of thing it would make sense to better support it for non-druids, and to allow you to do things like have claws in your base for that are usable to make attacks.


It seems that if something like that is made it's going to severely reduce spellcasting capabilities in return.


That info from Mark is disappointing, but I can see where they're coming from. The bummer is any martial archtype for casters is going to end up pretty lackluster, dune it will have a lot of trouble being effective, with their weapons, against on level enemies and the investment seems to steep to me too justify.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Claxon wrote:

I think their does probably need to be a shifter focuses archetype that would allow you to progress your unarmed attack/natural attack proficiency so that you are capable while in your base form.

It would need to progress more slowly than what martial characters get and would need to be class feats, but I think it is reasonable to give up to master proficiency with unarmed/natural attack for shape shifting focused people.

Sure, we can have a shapeshifter that gets master proficiency in unarmed strikes. As a martial character.


Not to totally change the thread, but this whole convo makes me think of summoner. It might be what a lot of people are looking for. It fixes a lot of issues people have with druid shape shifting; don't have to worry about battle form rules as much, it's available at level one and stays relevant all the way to 20, it gives martial proficiencies, it will (likely, we haven't seen much yet) give fun monstery actions to do like trample, and you still get some casting (even feats to make your eidolon cast if you want).

Just something to think about for some people here with issues.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Do you mean Synthesist? It didn't really keep up with martials in damage, the eidolon damage was balanced around the focus cantrip, which you couldn't use merged. You also couldn't use literally anything that you had but the eidolon did not, like say Flurry of Blows if you archetype monk.

I believe they said that would come "eventually" but not in SoM and would have additional adjustments.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The summoner and summon spells are a whole other can of worms. I am not expecting much from it. Like it sounds very much like they dropped most of what made the summoner a summoner.

Also idk about "wave casting" for the magus. The fighter still has the same legendary proficiency in martial weapons with easy access to master proficiency in casting. With minimal lost in power. But Magus? Unless they radically changend things will have considerably less casting for worse proficiency overall.


Arachnofiend wrote:
Claxon wrote:

I think their does probably need to be a shifter focuses archetype that would allow you to progress your unarmed attack/natural attack proficiency so that you are capable while in your base form.

It would need to progress more slowly than what martial characters get and would need to be class feats, but I think it is reasonable to give up to master proficiency with unarmed/natural attack for shape shifting focused people.

Sure, we can have a shapeshifter that gets master proficiency in unarmed strikes. As a martial character.

Even a martial character has to focus hard on their unarmed strikes to make them exceed the built in bonuses of the spell.

Aren't there examples of some archetypes that increase you to master proficiency for weapons under certain conditions? Or am I imagining that.

If I did imagine that, then perhaps you are correct to be so against it. Although you could be slightly less brusque.

Perhaps what is needed is an archetype (not druid) that gives focus spells only for shape shifting and would rely on base class proficiency.

That would enable you to be a shape shifter without the druid nature restrictions but also no spell casting.

I do think it is a problem that for example sorcerers get claws they can't reasonably use and that they should be able to use them more effectively. Perhaps the answer there was that the spells that provide them should have taken a page from the transformation spells which include a built in attack bonus.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

There's stuff that increase your proficiency past Expert if you get that proficiency in something else, but if your class only gets Expert as a class feature then there is no way to go past that.


Decimus Drake wrote:
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Decimus Drake wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:


Abyssalwyrm wrote:
It's just impossible to effectively compete in melee combat with classes like fighter, monk and barbarian. Those can easily both out-damage you in melee combat, and out-tank you.

\

They don't get to out-wizard you do they?

This^^

Being good at melee and tanking is what these classes are for. If you gave caster's a spell to temporarily do melee as well as a fighter, what do fighters get in return? A feat that let's them cast spells as effectively as a full caster?

Multiclass casting dedications say hi.
So you're saying multiple class feats is a fair equivalent to a spell? Also that isn't just a feature for martials like fighters as even spell casters can take caster dedications. So bye multiclass dedications.

It requires your highest level spell slots each day to maintain numbers relevance at the times you're expecting to, which is a spellcaster's most important thing they bring to the party: top-level spell slots.

That slot could have been used for Teleports, Weirds, and so on. But noooo, we gotta waste our best stuff for the versatility that we have our other party members for. And really, Feats are what make the martials all martial-y, so it's fair it takes feats to do the things Spellcasters can do.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Spell casters need to stay in their lane. The days of PF1 god-wizards are over.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Guntermench wrote:
There's stuff that increase your proficiency past Expert if you get that proficiency in something else, but if your class only gets Expert as a class feature then there is no way to go past that.

Yeah, that's a bit of a problem. It means all those martial type options are absolutely worthless on a caster chassis.

Seems like the best way to be a shifter is to play a fighter (or maybe barbarian) and multiclass into druid.

Barring some new archetype.

And perhaps that's just how it has to be, but I can understand that if you wanted to play a dragon sorcerer and turn into a dragon, that it'd be disappointing to be an ineffective dragon.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Well, a Transformation spell that brought the caster to an appropriate level of martial effectiveness (similar to where form spells can get you, though it would be more difficult to write that spell using equipment instead of built in attacks) would be totally appropriate. And having that general effect with a different flavor is good for supporting character concepts. It's only one bringing them to the level of a dedicated martial character for the duration of the fight that would be an unreasonable ask.


Claxon wrote:
Guntermench wrote:
There's stuff that increase your proficiency past Expert if you get that proficiency in something else, but if your class only gets Expert as a class feature then there is no way to go past that.

Yeah, that's a bit of a problem. It means all those martial type options are absolutely worthless on a caster chassis.

Seems like the best way to be a shifter is to play a fighter (or maybe barbarian) and multiclass into druid.

Barring some new archetype.

And perhaps that's just how it has to be, but I can understand that if you wanted to play a dragon sorcerer and turn into a dragon, that it'd be disappointing to be an ineffective dragon.

You still get a lot for turning into a dragon.

Best way is probably Barbarian with the form feat at 8, and sticking with one form. Or Dragon Barbarian if you want to be a dragon. If you do Fighter with Druid your AC is going to end up being pretty garbage.

Clearly they don't want casters to have the option of mixing it up in melee at equal effectiveness of martials and retain full spellcasting, outside of maybe like 3 levels when form spells tie (I don't know the exact math for every level of spell), even if they can't cast while doing it.

Dark Archive

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Given that statement from Mark, I think then marital classes getting as many spells as they do, with the bonus they do, should actually be considered way overpowered.

Honestly, being a martial class, especially a Fighter, is extremely powerful in this edition. Fighters having unfettered access to casting archetypes, especially given their ability to lessen the feat cost with their Flex feature (let alone free archetypes), really breaks the power-cost that Mark is setting up in that post.

Really, given the “spells cost a lot” design ethos that they are re-enforcing, caster archetypes are dramatically undercosted as they stand.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

They actually cost 5 feats, 3 skill increases and 1 skill to start.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Guntermench wrote:
They actually cost 5 feats, 3 skill increases and 1 skill to start.

Yeah, and that seems too cheap now. Especially for the Fighter.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Old_Man_Robot wrote:
Guntermench wrote:
They actually cost 5 feats, 3 skill increases and 1 skill to start.
Yeah, and that seems too cheap now. Especially for the Fighter.

Too cheap how? What you are asking for is a class feature you can take in the normal cost of leveling without giving up anything that puts you on par with an at level martial. While a fighter has to forgo 5 class feats, invest a skill plus 3 increases to still not get the top 2 level of spells. And only be decent with buffs and utility spells. And you think that's a fair trade off? It's not and it's unbalanced. Now if you want an archetype that does that I can see that.

51 to 100 of 716 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / Transformation spell plz? All Messageboards