It works fine with a repeating hand crossbow or a thrown build with quickdraw.
How many viable archers are necessary?
Offhand, I can think of five competitive builds for archery, each with a distinct play style. Six, I'd forgotten the Monk.
Whether they're competitive with melee martials is another question, and I'm thinking the Thaumaturge's bonus is meant for melee and would likely skew the power curve if applied to the best ranged weapon.
And a Thaumaturge can still wield a bow when necessary.
For range attack probably is better for thaumaturge use a wand rater than a crossbow. It's also 2-action but uses the key stat to hit and damage.
For bows as noticed by OP implements will create a problem. For crossbows the reload need both hands will also creates a problem. Even firearms you will probably have the same problems.
The class was designed to use a one handed melee weapon or wand.
But if you use the 1 handed weapon you have to be a single handed weapon melee without any source of circumstance AC like usually happen to one handed martials.
If you use a wand you are limited to 1 attack per round but can keep out the distance.
Who's said PF2 bows are OP?
Bows hold the top of the curve for ranged Strikes, but ranged Strikes aren't OP, not with so much mobility in PF2 and the 3-action/MAP paradigm. But being at range has advantages which is why ranged damage is lower.
The best ranged weapon damage is 1d8 + 1/2 stat vs. 1d12 + full stat for melee. The bonus from Implements helps a melee Thaumaturge do the equivalent of d12 w/ a 1d8 weapon. The price? They have to commit both hands to it just like the 2HW user does (though this still advantages the Thaumaturge because they can use that free hand or Implement between Strikes w/o regripping).
Allowing the Implement bonus to bows is like making them d12 ranged weapons w/ zero price. And d12 ranged weapons aren't thing; that'd be too powerful (relative to other ranged weapons that is). This is likely why the Thaumaturge entry mentions hand crossbows as a good weapon for them; they'll get 2-handed ranged weapon damage out of a 1-handed ranged weapon if again, they tie up that free hand w/ an Implement or gestures.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, a weird thing I feel about the Thaumaturge is that since this is the inheritor of the Occultist, every single martial Occultist in PF1 I saw was taking advantage that you didn't need your hands to cast psychic spells so they were wielding bows, polearms, sword and shield, etc.
So pressing the Thaumaturge to need a free hand feels wrong.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How many viable archers are necessary?
I feel like this is looking at the problem completely backwards. The better question is whether or not it serves the game to push the Thaumaturge into such a specific weapon fantasy.
I mean, a weird thing I feel about the Thaumaturge is that since this is the inheritor of the Occultist, every single martial Occultist in PF1 I saw was taking advantage that you didn't need your hands to cast psychic spells so they were wielding bows, polearms, sword and shield, etc.
So pressing the Thaumaturge to need a free hand feels wrong.
Given the rules about needing to present your implements for casting their schools, I was always careful to leave a hand free when building Occultists that didn't avoid the restrictions through archetypes or implement selection.
If we take implement empowerment as a patch to allow the thaumaturge to deal 2h damage with a 1h weapon so they can use implements without nerfing damage super hard, not being able to empower a bow isn't even a big deal; it's not like ranger bows are considered weak because they can use a d12 greatsword
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
If we take implement empowerment as a patch to allow the thaumaturge to deal 2h damage with a 1h weapon so they can use implements without nerfing damage super hard, not being able to empower a bow isn't even a big deal; it's not like ranger bows are considered weak because they can use a d12 greatsword
Yep. And people are overlooking that Esoteric Antethisis already gets something no other bow user gets: a constant damage bonus. Rangers and Investigators only get to apply their precision damage once a round, and rogues have to jump through hoops to keep an enemy flatfooted. Implement empowerment adding another boost on top of that might make the Thaumaturge the best archer in the game.
How many viable archers are necessary?I feel like this is looking at the problem completely backwards. The better question is whether or not it serves the game to push the Thaumaturge into such a specific weapon fantasy.
That was the (non-)problem introduced by the person I'd responded to.
If you wish to ask or answer your better question, feel free.
Bows don't mesh with the imagery I've seen put forward for the class. The class's gimmick theme seems to tie in better with mechanisms like the crossbow, or as others have suggested, the upcoming firearms.
As it stands, Thaumaturgists can use a bow fine, and get some extra damage via EA. That gives them a head start on some martials though Thaumaturgists lack any followup. Should the class supply more support or does the Archer Dedication (et al) seem more appropriate due to stepping out of the class's (yet to be codified) norms?
If we take implement empowerment as a patch to allow the thaumaturge to deal 2h damage with a 1h weapon so they can use implements without nerfing damage super hard, not being able to empower a bow isn't even a big deal; it's not like ranger bows are considered weak because they can use a d12 greatswordAnother issue the bow has is that you don't have a hand free for other things you'd like to do as a thaumaturge, and as an implement, you can't swap it for free with another implement and vice versa because RAW you have to be holding the implement in one hand.
The weirder issue is that it excludes the Thaum from using more crossbows than the hand crossbow, which is weirdly unthematic for this type of character.
According to the book; "You can hold a weapon with a 1+ entry in one hand, but the process of shooting it requires using a second to retrieve, nock, and loose an arrow."
A bow user is fine, it's only two hands when you shoot it
It's to avoid hot swapping into a two handed weapon, like a greatsword. My assumption is to avoid a meta where all thaums use a d10 reach weapon that they can hot swap for free to do their reaction
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It would be nice to have a class feat that let you get some of the implement empowerment benefit with bows and two handed weapons, just so that Thaumaturges could have more weapons options. Perhaps an class feat that let you use your weapon implement to empower itself for half of the damage bonus.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It would be nice to have a class feat that let you get some of the implement empowerment benefit with bows and two handed weapons, just so that Thaumaturges could have more weapons options. Perhaps an class feat that let you use your weapon implement to empower itself for half of the damage bonus.
Again, you say this like they don't have an inherent damage boost to bows already. Esoteric Antethisis is an excellent boost when you can attack with the frequency of a bow.
Implement Empowerment is a damage patch to make subpar weapons competitive, in much the same way sneak attack is. You don't need it on weapons which are already the best. Which means you don't need it on bows any more than d12 weapons.
At that point you're also investing wealth into multiple weapons, and the d10 reach weapon will still be doing less damage than the Gnome Flickmace, since it doesn't get the Implement Empowerment flat damage boost.And even if it were an upgrade, I guess it's fine? Unless the "meta" is particularly game-breaking, its fine to exist.
The metagamers are a rather small minority in a cooperative, narrative-driven game, and they'll always find something to break.
I don't disagree, though the flickmace does have a slight gate to accessibility (not everyone is a gnome or human).
Changing grips is a free action, so I'd argue that implement empowerment with a weapon implement works normally with weapons requiring 2 hands to attack with.
Changing grips is not a free action in PF2, though it had been in PF1.
Letting go with one hand is a free action (Release), but taking hold of the weapon again with the loosed hand is an action (Interact). Yes, that's a tad wonky relatively, but PF2 puts a high value on free hands.Plus Implement's Empowerment explicitly happens "when you Strike" and that your hand at that time is free or holding an Implement you're not striking with. It's obviously a balancing mechanism for a martial class meant to fill its hands with Implements, with Find Flaws being the class's damage mechanic (i.e. Rage/Sneak Attack/etc.).
ETA: Interestingly this also makes Thaumaturge's excellent Duelist's since they can do 2HW damage with a one-handed weapon while keeping a hand free. And IE's damage would stack with Duelist's Challenge.
I think a part of it is that a part of the flavor of the Occultist is that presenting their implement is a part of their schtick. Van Helsing driving off a Vampire by holding up a crucifix, Sam holding up the Phial of Galadriel, stuff like that.
You need to specifically have an empty hand while Striking for empowerment.
And while you Strike with a bow, you don't (as you quoted). You only have the free hand when you are just holding it.
Agreed. I was talking about its compatability with implement adept, not implement empowerment.
Implement Empowerment isn't meant to boost bows, it's meant to boost melee so you can do the same damage as a two hander.
It's okay for bows to do less damage; the big reason I main ranger weapons is how much freer my action economy is and how much more strategic options I have. It's well worth the trade if you dont mind not being the biggest hitter in the room.
The only thing I dont like is that we don't get the fast swap when we get our second implement, which leads to some weirdness with item juggling for a couple levels
As written, I thing it's indisputable that theu don't get empowerment, but work fine with implement adept's free action swap. And personally, I think thats absolutely fine. I would hardly that not being able to use empowerment makes the it unusable with the class
I was thinking here. A good alternative is MC with alchemist with Quick Bomber this would allow to attack with 1-action and hold implement at same time.
But this also creates a doubt. How ESOTERIC ANTITHESIS will work with persistent damage? Could we apply the "created" weakness for it just like happen to normal weakness? The rule just as written "Otherwise, you create a custom weakness with a value equal to 2 + half your level; this weakness applies only to your Strikes" so once the alchemic bomb's persistent damage come from a strike this would apply?
I have the same question with FLING MAGIC, once this isn't a strike could ESOTERIC ANTITHESIS custom weakness work with it? It's special only have "This activity has the trait corresponding to the damage type you selected." so it will work if the opponent have a cold, electricity, or fire weakness but not with custom weakness?
I was thinking here. A good alternative is MC with alchemist with Quick Bomber this would allow to attack with 1-action and hold implement at same time.
But this also creates a doubt. How ESOTERIC ANTITHESIS will work with persistent damage? Could we apply the "created" weakness for it just like happen to normal weakness? The rule just as written "Otherwise, you create a custom weakness with a value equal to 2 + half your level; this weakness applies only to your Strikes" so once the alchemic bomb's persistent damage come from a strike this would apply?
I have the same question with FLING MAGIC, once this isn't a strike could ESOTERIC ANTITHESIS custom weakness work with it? It's special only have "This activity has the trait corresponding to the damage type you selected." so it will work if the opponent have a cold, electricity, or fire weakness but not with custom weakness?
The language of EA is that the Strike applies the Weakness which is unfortunate because persistent damage would've been cool (and it's a condition, not part of the Strike action itself even if applied by a Strike). This also highlights how you're not really making a Weakness in any useful sense, just getting a damage bonus that has clunky mechanics on creatures w/ actual Weaknesses that you may or may not already be triggering.
I would much prefer you could make a Weakness on the target, much like the Rogue Vicious Debilitation can, one your allies (and your persistent damage) could make use of even if it'd have to be for much less and perhaps temporary. Hit w/ slashing, make the vulnerable to slashing. Hit with electricity, now they're vulnerable to that. And/or maybe grant others the triggering damage type.I think the point of the Wand later being able to do multiple energies is to capitalize on one if it's a Weakness. But to get to the good stuff you need to take it when it's just an average Cantrip w/o AoOs.
Yes I fought about that too. It's only usually able to be accessible after LvL 3 but returning weapons would work well with thaumaturge too. Isn't so fun as bombs but is very efficient!
Implement Empowerment is a damage patch to make subpar weapons competitive
It feels weird that people keep trying to categorize this as a 'patch'... it's a buff. Not a huge one, but a decent damage increase that makes one handed weapons as strong as their two-handed counterparts with none of the downsides.
Patch makes it sound like the game somehow breaks without it, which is just flatly untrue.
I think in general folks use "patch" due to in part alchemist math fixers and the whole surge that previous converation brought up.
Anyway my fav thrown weapon is probably a Throwing Knife. I want one with Wounding and Returning on it someday. That seems like a ton of fun.
but autoxbows are probably a bit easier to get going depending on GM.
When you throw the knife it loses the Wounding ability... :-/
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
LOL.
1d8+2 for the weapon has the same average as 1d12. That's the base for those weapons in those characters' hands, right? And at the expected times a person would get a Striking Rune, the +2 increases to match. That match seems obviously intentional, doesn't it?
That is the "actual math" of the weapon.
Now if you want to say the underlying class+weapon is so weak that it needs the better weapon, then maybe so, but that's a different issue IMO. That doesn't mean they wouldn't have a d12 equivalent bow (which RAW seems obvious they don't anyway), simply that they're worse with it.
(And yes, that'd be a problem IF Thaumaturgists were meant to fill the archer role well, which hasn't been established.)
And in making the deeper comparison, let's not plummet the Thaumaturge's stats so one's conclusion works. I mean c'mon, if the Thaumaturge chooses a bow they'll have a 16 Dex. A martial w/ a 14 attack stat? (Unless we're talking about a backup weapon in which case we shouldn't give archery feats to the Fighter later, nor have it be their Weapon Group at 5th!)
AND let's not use a class whose damage perk is in its attack bonus without using the Thaumaturgist's damage perk too. They'll usually be adding another +2 w/ FF/EA (and often higher depending on the monster.)
So that's Fighter +9, 1d8+1 (I agree, many will have 14 Str.)
And the Thaumaturge +6, 1d8+4
The average bonus damage of +3 to an attack roll is about 50% (according to Paizo) so we get 1.5(1d8+1) = 8.25 while 1d8+4 averages at 8.5. Because Deadly isn't factored into the equation I'll grant the Fighter the nod, yet note that the Thaumaturgist's damage will go up +1 at 2nd level, 4th level, etc., and any bonus to attack, like from a flat-footed or Frightened enemy, helps the Thaumaturgist more.
That should make up for the first Striking Rune helping the Fighter more. But...
The Fighter's advantage will drop at 5th to +2 (if bows are their WG) and they'll be significantly behind in damage. (And woe to the Champion archer...)
That IMO is a mediocre place for a Fighter dedicated to the bow to be, what with the Thaumaturgist doing all their thaumaturgy things on top of this.
And if the Thaumaturgist's bow is an Implement, they can do AoOs with it at 10' vs. their target enemy. Iffy, but it's all extra. As is all that extra utility the Thaumaturgy class offers.
So the weapon's superior. The weapon + class starts even enough, but then jolts in favor of the Thaumaturge at 5th. Soon after, the Thaumaturgist can pick up a Wand for non-MAP extra damage, swapping it in and out freely if both are Implements. And their higher Charisma might lead them to picking up some non-MAP Cantrips too.
Let's add feats then. Yep, finally the Fighter catches back up. Whew.
But give it time. If the Thaumaturgist wants to put as many feats into archery (or you're a Free Ded. table), they can go Archer Dedication and pick up the bread-n'-butter tricks too.
And that's not addressing existing Weaknesses which may be larger or how a Thaumaturgist is in a better position to adapt to poor situations for a bow.
So no "completely swamps" here. And thanks, I guess?, for being fine with what you guessed my likes are (incorrectly). I don't think anybody said a d12 would be an "incredible power level", silly. PF2 is robust enough that its stress tolerance can handle ripples like this. Yet note that a fellow wrote in another thread that at mid-high levels throwing his trident (similarly a d8 bumped to d8+2, yet with a shorter range) has been devastatingly powerful. It adds up.
So yeah, there doesn't seem enough justification re: lacking power to overrule RAW IMO.
Cheers