10th-Level Dark Archive Playtest


Thaumaturge Class


2 people marked this as a favorite.

10th-Level Dark Archive Playtest (Link)

This document includes feedback for both the Psychic and the Thaumaturge, so I posted it in both forums.

For the record, I did not write these results myself, but have received them from an anonymous source. However, this analysis resonated so much with me that I am posting it here.

Also note that this doc is a constantly-updated work in progress, and will be updated every Thursday night, close to midnight EDT.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I’ll read all of this later . I scanned and love the Dresden reference. And hopefully this resonates with Mark as I am sure he sighted him as an inspiration

Why not stack the esoteric weakness on top of the existing or add it as extra? This seems to make sense. Especially as from my experience parties don’t always tote around cold iron weapons and silver sheen but this would reward those that do

And something really needs to be done about those crazy recall DCs. It gets so bad when “unique” enemies are involved


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Part of the issue is that GMs just see "unique" and bump the DC without considering the caveats for Recall Knowledge.

A unique vampire does not have unique DC to know that they're undead, for instance. (Unless I suppose they have some special ability that makes that harder to notice?)

Rarity tags on creatures require consideration of the difference between a special case of a more common creature (e.g. some elemental infused thing, a named bad guy, etc) or a creature that's universally rarer.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Dubious Scholar wrote:

Part of the issue is that GMs just see "unique" and bump the DC without considering the caveats for Recall Knowledge.

A unique vampire does not have unique DC to know that they're undead, for instance. (Unless I suppose they have some special ability that makes that harder to notice?)

Rarity tags on creatures require consideration of the difference between a special case of a more common creature (e.g. some elemental infused thing, a named bad guy, etc) or a creature that's universally rarer.

It’s not even that - the unique creatures in APs have the DC bumped automatically. So if you play out of the book…


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lanathar wrote:
Dubious Scholar wrote:

Part of the issue is that GMs just see "unique" and bump the DC without considering the caveats for Recall Knowledge.

A unique vampire does not have unique DC to know that they're undead, for instance. (Unless I suppose they have some special ability that makes that harder to notice?)

Rarity tags on creatures require consideration of the difference between a special case of a more common creature (e.g. some elemental infused thing, a named bad guy, etc) or a creature that's universally rarer.

It’s not even that - the unique creatures in APs have the DC bumped automatically. So if you play out of the book…

Ugh, yikes. Yeah, they need to really take a look at Recall Knowledge and put out some guidelines and errata on it before making a class hinge on it entirely. As is, this is at best going to make the class vary wildly in effectiveness with different GMs.

The one big disagreement I have after skimming through that is dismissing wand as an implement, I think it's better than it's given credit for there, though I've also got my own concerns on it (mainly the burning needs to scale with level).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

from the other thread, my answer to why i think that the particula GM simply misplayed and played Thaugm plainly wrong:

Quote:

i find some flaws (lol) with the specific GMs rulings though:

specifically, he asks for an increase in the DC of the Find flaws "as per recall knowledge" but then fails to realise that if he rules that two different (vrocks in the example) creatures are basically "A creature" then by the same exact definition, a single "find flaws" should apply to ALL the vrocks.

basically the rule is:

Quote:

You determine a creature’s weaknesses, whether a literal

weakness or a metaphysical one. Recall Knowledge about a
creature
, using your Charisma modifier instead of the usual
ability modifier for the skill you’re using to Recall Knowledge.
The creature must be either one you can see or one you’re
specifically Investigating in advance during exploration. The
result depends on your Recall Knowledge check, which has
the following additional effects as well as the usual effects of
Recall Knowledge.

Success: You learn the creature’s highest weakness, if any. If
you would have learned it already from Recall Knowledge,
you learn different information instead. You can then use
Esoteric Antithesis without spending an additional action.
Failure: You couldn’t quite figure it out, so you decide to invoke
a wide range of superstitions and narrow it down from
there. You can use Esoteric Antithesis as your next action.

EA:
You search through your esoterica to find the right trinket that
will apply a weakness to your attacks against the creature
you Found Flaws in
.

basically:

you cannot simultaneously rule that "A creature" is both ALL the creatures and ONLY ONE creature.

So, if some GM wants to rule that the DC for the RK check increases when targeting a different, but same type, of creature, then by the same exact logic, the weakness found by Find Flaws stays the same and is usable for all of them, since all of them are the "A creature".

Basically:

the same restrictions that apply to RK as far as different targets go, the exact, 100%, restrictions apply to whomever you target with Esoteric Antithesis. If two different creatures are "the same RK check" then those two different creatures are "the same EA effect".

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Dark Archive Playtest / Thaumaturge Class / 10th-Level Dark Archive Playtest All Messageboards