| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Can you tell us what you mean by your players "Routinely fail as a result,"I mean that the first week PF2 came out we had a player maximize strength on his sorcerer, cast Glutton's Jaws, then proceed to miss a lot and go into dying a lot until he eventually decided that the best way to play his character was to just pretend he didn't have a focus spell and that strategy worked much better.
I've had trouble convincing him and his friends to even try PF2 again because it put them off so badly, because in his mind he was using the ability exactly as Paizo presented it and was punished for it and, in their words, they could just stick to PF1 if they wanted to have to dance around trap options. An extreme reaction, but a little bit understandable.
Glutton Jaws on the other hand is primarily an interesting reactionary 3rd action healing option for most demonic sorcerersI mean, it's more than that. It's an ability that requires significant investment in an attribute sorcerers normally don't value. It's also a forceful weapon, which suggests that you're intended to use it multiple times per round, not as an occasional third action. Now you and I both know that trying to do that doesn't work very well for sorcerers, but that [i]is/i] part of the ability's presentation, which is part of why it's problematic.
eldritch nails is a feat. You choose that because you want to cast hexes through your nails. It is a complicated build to make work, but you don't pick up the nails unless that is the build you are trying to make.Well yeah. The witch in question tried to make Nails the centerpiece of their build. Their character was an eldritch nails witch. It sucked.
This is why I think they should be spell attacks. It's a spell. It would reduce the reliance on off-stats and actually allow the sorcerer to do some chip damage with their third action.
You can't retrain bloodlines generally, so at best such characters are stuck with a class feature they never want to use.Okay, but that only matters in like, PFS or something. Squiggit is the GM, so they can decree that retraining is an option, or make it faster and cheaper, or pretend the character was never demon bloodline, or even make re-bloodlining a plot point.
That's not a PFS rule. It's a general rule in the Core Rulebook:
Core Rulebook pg. 481
A GM can house rule whatever they want, but that doesn't change the fact that you can't normally retrain something innate like a bloodline without ad hoc handwavium from the GM.
To be a spell attack roll, it would have to be a one time effect. Otherwise it would be incredibly more powerful if it gave you a one action repeatable spell attack for 1 minute than any thing like other focus spells.
Dragon Claws works as a backup weapon but Glutton's Jaws is pretty obviously a dud. As tight as the math is Paizo still makes some hilariously bad options sometimes. I half wonder if the Wizard and Sorcerer deliberately have worse focus spells than Druid and Bard since they don't need to cast one every combat to keep pace.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To be a spell attack roll, it would have to be a one time effect. Otherwise it would be incredibly more powerful if it gave you a one action repeatable spell attack for 1 minute than any thing like other focus spells.
I'd really like it if the weapon-attack focus spells functioned more like Draconic Barrage. A longer startup time, modest damage, better accuracy, limited but still significant number of attacks, and overall a decent option for 3rd actions if you have time to set it up.
There's little difference mathematically between the average result of 4d6 and 1d6+10, but the former tops out far higher and feels more fun.Between the average results, sure, but in practice, 4d6 is much more "swingy."
Yes. That’s why I phrased it the way I did.
I figure if multiple die are just a base part of a spell that starts at level 3 or 11, while level 2 spells get a scaling flat bonus that keeps up with the average but much lower top end damage, that serves the purpose of keeping the lower level spells relevant while leaving room for higher power higher level spells.
That such a damage bonus would fit into the Heighten +1: increase damage by 1 format is useful for saving space in the spell entry itself.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Casters using weapon only have a decent chance to hit on the first attack against equal level or so enemies. You don't want to focus on weapon attacks as a caster as you will far behind in attack rolls and damage. Much better to make some martial and then MC into another class if you want to use a caster-style weapon like dragon claws or eldritch nails.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Casters using weapon only have a decent chance to hit on the first attack against equal level or so enemies. You don't want to focus on weapon attacks as a caster as you will far behind in attack rolls and damage. Much better to make some martial and then MC into another class if you want to use a caster-style weapon like dragon claws or eldritch nails.
Caster attacks make sense:
a) early levels before the difference in your attack values get too muchb) if you burn a spell slot for True Strike or otherwise do a lot of set up
c) when you consider them a secondary attack because you have already cast a spell this round, and value them like an attack with a -5 MAP
d) if you have no other useful option - tip you should have several options.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Dragon claws and Glutton's Jaws are primarily trap options. You have to invest a significant amount of resources and stats into them for a still suboptimal choice of 3rd action. Sure I could stand in melee and use a 3rd action to strike with a fairly low chance to hit for slightly (and I mean very slightly) above simple weapon average damage exposing your low HP low AC no shield raised sorcerer to a counter attack and likely crit next round, more likely to dying at low levels. A better choice is almost always going to be cast shield or use your thied action to stride or step (if Attack of Opportunity is an issue, but then casting in that situation is almost universally bad) to get out of the way and get behind a martial or other blocker.
I guess I have a different definition of a viable 3rd action vs trap.
An option that requires significant resources to still produce a low accuracy chance of success to low damage, and exposes a character to significant risk is a trap.
If a whole party has to change tactics for something to work and its still suboptimal its a trap.
Something the seems to encourage a playstyle that doesn't work or is a bad idea in practice is bad and a terrible experience for new players, not all of which have experienced GMs to steer them away from it.
I am of a camp that thinks that transmutation spells should always work better for a full caster that casts them than a MCD caster. The caster has likely spent far more time studying the new form, more time casting the spell and being in that form (if you need an RP reason). Imagine a fighter feat that was better used by a caster than a fighter.
I don't think dragon claws or Glutton's Jaws would be over powered or take the spot-light or role from another class if they used spell attack. It still means to sorcerer needs to be exposed to danger and be in a position they don't want to be in. They would still need to invest a lot of gold into handwraps rather than staves, scrolls and wands. The opportunity cost still makes it not the best option or even overpowered but supports a playstyle rather than being a trap option.
I think transformation spells other than some higher level versions for the lower level transmutations are mostly fine. It would be nice if the transmutation focus spell buffed them, and maybe Paizo will add that ability on later when we finally get to Wizards unchained.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Because you still have full spellcasting. Also the "once per fight" is basically all of 90% of fights so I don't see how that's relevant, and it's easily available for every fight.Given its a 1/fight ability at best, at risk of exposing you to death. I still fail to see how it overshadows martials.Actually I'd rather up casting the focus spells improved accuracy rather than damage diceto keep up with ranger or champion but increased one level after martials and worked with fist wraps
That seems like it would solve some issues, not sure if it would be so much of a buff it made other characters feel over shadowed.
Um, still weaker than most cantrips in almost every way.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Um, still weaker than most cantrips in almost every way.Because you still have full spellcasting. Also the "once per fight" is basically all of 90% of fights so I don't see how that's relevant, and it's easily available for every fight.Given its a 1/fight ability at best, at risk of exposing you to death. I still fail to see how it overshadows martials.Actually I'd rather up casting the focus spells improved accuracy rather than damage diceto keep up with ranger or champion but increased one level after martials and worked with fist wraps
That seems like it would solve some issues, not sure if it would be so much of a buff it made other characters feel over shadowed.
By itself, sure...but it is not meant to be used by itself..quite obviously
How about this build that revolves around that focus spell?
Human (versatile) demonic sorcerer
str 16 (5th, 10th), dex 10, con 14 (5th, 10th), int 8, wis 10 (5th, 10th), cha 18 (5th, 10th)
ancestry
from versatile (armor proficiency)
1st general training (armor proficiency)
5th clever improviser
9th multitalented
general feats
3rd armor proficiency
7th toughness
class
2nd Blessed Blood (Zavgavizeb) (magic fang)
4th Bespell Weapon
6th Energetic Resonance
8th Safeguarded Spell
10th Quickened Casting
strategy
1st round - gluttonous jaws + magic fang
2nd round - q bless [or heroism] (bespell) + approach + strike
3rd round - fear [bespell) + strike
NOTE: whenever you cast fear, or enlarge, or another bloodline spell you get to activate your blood magic which can put a penalty on an enemy's AC. Thus making up for some of the lag in attack bonus. Add in self-buffs and your catching up even more.
This build can be pretty awesome when used with a team. The debuff opportunities are strong.
Is this character going to be attacking with their bite multiple times per round? Nope, but the temp HP it gets from the ability can't stack anyway. Also...YOU ARE A FULL CASTER CLASS! You get 3 or 4 per day OF EACH LEVEL! It is like trying to cut a paper with the hilt of a sword.
This just gets back to understanding how the system works. If you don't attempt to understand how the system works it will be no surprise that you character fails to perform.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think people might be talking past each other. Gluttonous jaw is a 1 minute duration D8 piercing weapon with forceful and it grants you D6 temp HP on a hit. I think all of us would say it can be one of the most difficult of the 1st level sorcerer focus spells to figure out how to use. Forceful is not very useful for a caster, especially without agile. D6 temp HP can be as little as 1 and it doesn’t stack so you don’t get much out of trying to land a second hit anyway.
But if it was a spell attack roll, then suddenly the sorcerer has a 1 action attack happening at a scale that will exceed martial accuracy. Yes it requires runes to upgrade it as weapon, but that pretty much makes it as good as a monk attack.
Maybe the forceful trait is a head scratcher, but getting2d6 temp hp every round on a 5th level character combined with healing and harm can get pretty nasty, especially if it were to get your spell casting attribute to attack and damage.
As is, the constant temp HP makes it an appealing option for a barbarian or a champion to pick up, since it lasts a minute. A sorcerer with a 14 str is only at most 2 behind a rogue or monk on accuracy at level level 1. If the sorcerer goes all in on STR it is 1 behind. Being 1 accuracy point behind is ok. There was a strategic issue in the game if the sorcerer was some how never hitting, but the martials in the party were.
And by level 6 you get a much better focus spell option.
Glutinous jaw is not a brokenly terrible option.
Yeah, I also theory crafted a fury barbarian that dedicated to get Gluttonous Jaw. Not bad..
Well that might be a build I'd like. Your Sorcerer build looks like a hoot but I can't say that I'd recommend it for survivability.
|
|
Yeah, I also theory crafted a fury barbarian that dedicated to get Gluttonous Jaw. Not bad..Well that might be a build I'd like. Your Sorcerer build looks like a hoot but I can't say that I'd recommend it for survivability.
Do note: it uses the divine spell list. So every round or every other round it can just 2 action heal itself + attack for temp HP (plus an added bespell because of casting heal). Also, the build grabs heavy armor, so the AC isn't terrible either.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do note: it uses the divine spell list. So every round or every other round it can just 2 action heal itself + attack for temp HP (plus an added bespell because of casting heal). Also, the build grabs heavy armor, so the AC isn't terrible either.Yeah, I also theory crafted a fury barbarian that dedicated to get Gluttonous Jaw. Not bad..Well that might be a build I'd like. Your Sorcerer build looks like a hoot but I can't say that I'd recommend it for survivability.
Heavy armor isn't better than Medium armor if you can't ever get it above Trained.
That could be managed with an archetype I suppose, but just the Armor Proficiency feat isn't going to cut it.
|
|
Do note: it uses the divine spell list. So every round or every other round it can just 2 action heal itself + attack for temp HP (plus an added bespell because of casting heal). Also, the build grabs heavy armor, so the AC isn't terrible either.Yeah, I also theory crafted a fury barbarian that dedicated to get Gluttonous Jaw. Not bad..Well that might be a build I'd like. Your Sorcerer build looks like a hoot but I can't say that I'd recommend it for survivability.Heavy armor isn't better than Medium armor if you can't ever get it above Trained.
That could be managed with an archetype I suppose, but just the Armor Proficiency feat isn't going to cut it.
Multitalented -> Champion...at 14th level...Diverse Armor Expert..
Also, trained heavy armor gives a better AC for a sorcerer than anything they could have even if they focused on Dex as a secondary stat until very high levels. It is a simple formula:
Prof + Dex + Item
2 + 0 + 6 = 8 <- this is with full plate
2 + 4 + 0 = 6 <- this is no armor and just using Mage armor and/or explorer's clothing
2 + 1 + 4 = 7 <- this is medium armor
2 + 2 + 3 = 7 <- this is also medium armor
Now...I admit to passing the most basic of maths...I do think that 8 is greater than 7 or 6...
]Heavy armor isn't better than Medium armor if you can't ever get it above Trained.
That could be managed with an archetype I suppose, but just the Armor Proficiency feat isn't going to cut it.
Multitalented -> Champion...at 12th level...Diverse Armor Expert..
Also, trained heavy armor gives a better AC for a sorcerer than anything they could have even if they focused on Dex as a secondary stat until very high levels. It is a simple formula:
Prof + Dex + Item
2 + 0 + 6 = 8 <- this is with full plate
2 + 4 + 0 = 6 <- this is no armor and just using Mage armor and/or explorer's clothing
2 + 1 + 4 = 7 <- this is medium armor
2 + 2 + 3 = 7 <- this is also medium armorNow...I admit to passing the most basic of maths...I do think that 8 is greater than 7 or 6...
Yep for a sorcerer or other such caster, its better by at least 1, for levels up to 12 which is really enough. At level 13 there are better options and its worse by at least 1 - though still the best if you still only have a Dex of 10. At level 14 with Diverse Armour Expert it becomes better by 1 again.
There are some ways of covering the level 13 gap eg Sentinel Dedication, but the cost is probably not worth it if you really want all the Champion goodies.| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
How many times per day can you pull off your still suboptimal combo that still leaves you in melee super squishy?
Looks fine on paper till you go.
Focus spell
Bless
Fear - can't cast fear and maintain bless and attack.
If I need to heal (2actions) I still have to maintain bless and can't attack.
If I need to move for reason I again cannot cast, maintain bless and attack.
In your strat I need 4 actions to squeeze in an attack until I get bless.
I have to be casting a bloodline spell eveey turn to debuff.
I need to have poor AC until I spend several additional feats on dedications or arkour proficiencies (can't get that and toufness easy).
For something which is a baseline class feature for demon sorc it needs the rest of your abilities (limited per day) + stat distribution + feats to still be subpar and borderline suicidal.
Also with spell attack instead of a melee strike it wouldn't benefit from runes so still scales worse than a martial. Won't get expert prof till 7th (2 levels behind a martial who will also have +1 or better runes). Won get master till 15 - martials have +2 runes by then. Its falls behind still.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There’s an argument to be made about runes applying to spell attacks in the case where it’s a spell attack using the weapon. The only example in the rules right now is Hand of the Apprentice.
Magical enhancements make this weapon strike true. Attack rolls with this weapon gain a +1 item bonus, and the weapon can be etched with one property rune.
These handwraps have weapon runes etched into them to give your unarmed attacks the benefits of those runes, making your unarmed attacks work like magic weapons. For example, +1 striking handwraps of mighty blows would give you a +1 item bonus to attack rolls with your unarmed attacks and increase the damage of your unarmed attacks from one weapon die to two (normally 2d4 instead of 1d4, but if your fists have a different weapon damage die or you have other unarmed attacks, use two of that die size instead).
Note that neither says “weapon attack roll”, just “attack roll”, and well, spell attack rolls are an attack roll, and you would be using the weapon to make an attack roll so….
IMO Dragon Claws/Glutton’s Jaws would be better served as a one and done, maybe with some lasting effect (resist from claws, hp from jaws). Just a simple, 1a melee spell attack that deals 1d8/spell level for jaws (+THP) and 1d4 slashing+1d4 element/spell level for claws (+resist for a minute). That way they’d be usable for sorc while not being randomly much better for martials MCing.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Bless is not a sustained spell, the action you can spend on it on subsequent turns is optional and only increases the radius.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean that the first week PF2 came out we had a player maximize strength on his sorcerer, cast Glutton's Jaws, then proceed to miss a lot and go into dying a lot until he eventually decided that the best way to play his character was to just pretend he didn't have a focus spell and that strategy worked much better.
That's the problem.
One thing if devs for some reason would decide that spellcaster should serve only as classic spell-artillery, and healers. Which would be bad on it's own.
Another thing when devs provides means for spellcasters to actually be involved in melee combat. But it's just too underwhelming.
I understand intention been careful, not to turn game into "munchkin paradise" again. But in some areas second edition is just way over-restricting.
Not all bad though, there is certainly room to improve it via new spells, feats and archetypes.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Again, people here seem to assume that proficiency, in form of the to-hit numbers, are what makes martials distinct from spellcasters. That misunderstands the game engine *so much*.
In fact, the to-hit numbers are the least part of it. The whole system is so skewed that if you don't have the on-level to-hit, you're not merely weaker, you are completely out. Having appropriate to-hit is a prerequisite for making ANYTHING work.
Furthermore, even if say sorcerer gets to-hit with their dragon claws equal to martials, this still leaves them extremely exposed because they have to get into close combat, somewhere where their low HP and questionable armour saves don't want them to be.
Even martials don't hit reliably with their to-hit numbers. Thus a sorcerer with similar to-hit number is being in melee trying to hit with an average weapon and overall subpar defences is not going to suddenly take martials special space.
What makes Martials truly distinct are their special abilities and feats, not pure numbers. Giving spellcasters a way to attack in melee with semi-decent weapons with similar to-hit values to martials won't make martials suddenly superflous. It will just make those spells useable (not even good, merely useable).
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Again, people here seem to assume that proficiency, in form of the to-hit numbers, are what makes martials distinct from spellcasters. That misunderstands the game engine *so much*.
In fact, the to-hit numbers are the least part of it. The whole system is so skewed that if you don't have the on-level to-hit, you're not merely weaker, you are completely out. Having appropriate to-hit is a prerequisite for making ANYTHING work.
Furthermore, even if say sorcerer gets to-hit with their dragon claws equal to martials, this still leaves them extremely exposed because they have to get into close combat, somewhere where their low HP and questionable armour saves don't want them to be.
Even martials don't hit reliably with their to-hit numbers. Thus a sorcerer with similar to-hit number is being in melee trying to hit with an average weapon and overall subpar defences is not going to suddenly take martials special space.
What makes Martials truly distinct are their special abilities and feats, not pure numbers. Giving spellcasters a way to attack in melee with semi-decent weapons with similar to-hit values to martials won't make martials suddenly superflous. It will just make those spells useable (not even good, merely useable).
I disagree. if I can hit with martial accuracy as a caster then I don't want to play a martial. I want to play the dude that can reliably hit AND cast spells. I'm gonna have a hard enough time playing anything that isn't magus after SOM. master martial AND legendary blasting would result in me never touching a pure martial again. it would be redundant.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Who said anything about hitting reliably? Martials (outside of Fighter) don't really hit reliably, they're hit-and-miss situation against on-level enemies. And as a caster, you'd still be hit way more often than a martial presumably - or if you could get comparable AC, you'd have way less HP. And provoke AoO way more often if you're going into CC.
But, note that people aren't asking for master proficiency, but instead to hit with spell attack mods. Meaning no runes, but eventually increased proficiency over martial (eventually is important here).
Bless is not a sustained spell, the action you can spend on it on subsequent turns is optional and only increases the radius.
True but its still suboptimal - increasing the radius to buff martials chance to hit/crit and do real damage is still a better use of an action to hit and do inferior damage
Who said anything about hitting reliably? Martials (outside of Fighter) don't really hit reliably, they're hit-and-miss situation against on-level enemies. And as a caster, you'd still be hit way more often than a martial presumably - or if you could get comparable AC, you'd have way less HP. And provoke AoO way more often if you're going into CC.
But, note that people aren't asking for master proficiency, but instead to hit with spell attack mods. Meaning no runes, but eventually increased proficiency over martial (eventually is important here).
I agree with spell attack. Hard to keep track of the flow of discussion but yeah, generally I'd want the focus spell of a full caster that prioritizes charisma to be a spell attack over a melee attack.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I could get behind giving people the option to choose something other than Glutton's Jaws or Dragons Claws. In fact, I'd prefer if all the Bloodlines had more options built in.
I could get behind giving people the option to choose something other than Glutton's Jaws or Dragons Claws. In fact, I'd prefer if all the Bloodlines had more options built in.
I agree that this is the most likely direction to go, but I am also not sure that just more new bloodlines doesn’t accomplish the same thing.
It also seems like a decision was made for 1st level focus spell to just be part of the specialization package for druids, wizards, and sorcerers, so it could be the case that the developers intended not to let casters just mix and match everything without dropping a feat on it.
Honestly, with how bad acid splash is, as it is currently written, it is the spell selection of the demonic sorcerer that is the most underwhelming feature of the bloodline, in conjunction with blood magic that mostly will disappear into the redundancy of the spells that trigger it. The focus spell is pretty much the most exciting aspect of the bloodline.
I think the thing GMs need to talk to players about when making characters is to make sure it is clear that you make your class choice based off of wether you want casting spells or attacking with weapons/unarmed attacks to be your characters primary thing. Even with the magus and summoner, if you want to cast spells every round, then full caster is the best choice for you and you should build around that expectation. You might have other stuff you can do when it makes sense, but the whole party will suffer if full casters are not casting or sustaining spells with 60 to 75% of their actions.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I still see no reason, thematically, why a caster would ever be better or equal at using any unarmed attack or weapon no matter how they got it than a martial character would/is. I say this as someone that enjoys and has played multiple Warpriests.
Though now that I think about it, Fighters can get legendary proficiency and item bonuses on spell attacks with Eldritch Archer.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I still see no reason, thematically, why a caster would ever be better or equal at using any unarmed attack or weapon no matter how they got it than a martial character would/is. I say this as someone that enjoys and has played multiple Warpriests.
Though now that I think about it, Fighters can get legendary proficiency and item bonuses on spell attacks with Eldritch Archer.
Which can be done once a round, sacrificing 3 actions, and is limited to cantrips or a spell many levels behind a full caster. It is apples and oranges away from giving casters a weapon attack for 1 minute that uses their spell casting proficiency.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Who said anything about hitting reliably? Martials (outside of Fighter) don't really hit reliably, they're hit-and-miss situation against on-level enemies. And as a caster, you'd still be hit way more often than a martial presumably - or if you could get comparable AC, you'd have way less HP. And provoke AoO way more often if you're going into CC.
But, note that people aren't asking for master proficiency, but instead to hit with spell attack mods. Meaning no runes, but eventually increased proficiency over martial (eventually is important here).
I think this is really the heart of the problem for some players. Some players just hate the accuracy model of PF2, with equal level enemies intended to be 50/50 fights, using your highest level resources. If you feel that way generally, creeping casters into more accuracy and capacity to do everything well is only breaking the game against martials when what you really want is encounter design built around facing lower level opposition, probably with more enemies if you want the overall challenge level the same. This will fix all of the “fails all the time” aspect s of the game without anyone having to rewrite all of the rules.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Which can be done once a round, sacrificing 3 actions, and is limited to cantrips or a spell many levels behind a full caster. It is apples and oranges away from giving casters a weapon attack for 1 minute that uses their spell casting proficiency.
I still see no reason, thematically, why a caster would ever be better or equal at using any unarmed attack or weapon no matter how they got it than a martial character would/is. I say this as someone that enjoys and has played multiple Warpriests.
Though now that I think about it, Fighters can get legendary proficiency and item bonuses on spell attacks with Eldritch Archer.
Yeah, but it means there is room to give someone proficiency in something outside their lane in a limited capacity.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Who said anything about hitting reliably? Martials (outside of Fighter) don't really hit reliably, they're hit-and-miss situation against on-level enemies. And as a caster, you'd still be hit way more often than a martial presumably - or if you could get comparable AC, you'd have way less HP. And provoke AoO way more often if you're going into CC.
But, note that people aren't asking for master proficiency, but instead to hit with spell attack mods. Meaning no runes, but eventually increased proficiency over martial (eventually is important here).
On-level encounters are intended to be difficult challenges. They are not intended to be pubstomps. Stop acting like "on-level" means "trivial" in this system.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well yeah, so is Magus. I linked a post from Seifter in here somewhere where he recommends giving a caster wave casting ala Magus if you're going to give them higher proficiency.
Magus isn't really gaining proficiency in a limited capacity it's gaining proficiency while being limited in other ways such as having fewer spells with worse proficiency.
Fighter isn't paying anything but opportunity cost in feats to have the option of limited spell attacks attached to legendary proficiency.
I do think the Seifter post is interesting though and I wonder if a homebrew variant Warpriest where it gains master proficiency in weapons with wave casting would fill the class fantasy of a battle cleric better than the current version.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
On-level encounters are intended to be difficult challenges. They are not intended to be pubstomps. Stop acting like "on-level" means "trivial" in this system.
Errr... What? This is such a non-sequitur from what I said that it's impressive.
For starters and according to rules, a single on-level monster is 40XP, which in turn is classified as "Trivial encounter".
However, that is neither here nor there. I did not talk about whole encounters, mere probability of hitting an on-level threat. Martials are about 50-50 to hit it and to be hit back, which is fine. But it means spellcasters are going to be hit more frequently, with less HP to absorb the hits. Their primary defence is not being next to it. Thus, a spell that requires them to be next to the monster isn't going to be good even if hitting is on par with martials, and it will be unusable if it's weaker than martials.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well yeah, so is Magus. I linked a post from Seifter in here somewhere where he recommends giving a caster wave casting ala Magus if you're going to give them higher proficiency.
If this is honestly and truly the thinking of the Paizo team, then we need a big errata to change or restrict caster archetypes, especially in the case of the Fighter.
They're simply too good / break this apparent dynamic. They even get master spellcasting earlier than a wavecaster would, in addition to almost twice as many spell slots.
Any "martial prof + wave casting" archetype for casters would either need to have a bunch of extra goodies to justify it or be 3 feats instead of 5.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well yeah, so is Magus. I linked a post from Seifter in here somewhere where he recommends giving a caster wave casting ala Magus if you're going to give them higher proficiency.If this is honestly and truly the thinking of the Paizo team, then we need a big errata to change or restrict caster archetypes, especially in the case of the Fighter.
They're simply too good / break this apparent dynamic. They even get master spellcasting earlier than a wavecaster would, in addition to almost twice as many spell slots.
Any "martial prof + wave casting" archetype for casters would either need to have a bunch of extra goodies to justify it or be 3 feats instead of 5.
Magus and Summoner are getting spellcasting proficiencies that mirror Champion/Monk, I believe. So multiclassing shouldn't get that any sooner.
Also, don't forget that the Magus (or whatever hypothetical wave caster) can staple on this spellcasting dedication as well as the Fighter can, trading the +2 to hit for some sort of powerful class feature, like Spellstriking or Act Together. Or they can stick with wave casting and have more class feats to spend on other archetypes or in-class.