| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm the resident Oracle apologist in our playgroups. I'm pretty much the only one who plays since everybody else is either afraid of its complexity or considers it weak. I've exclusively played the class, for the most part, since their release and have only recently taken a break to mostly dabble with the Summoner. Other than Ancestors and Flames, I've played every Oracle subclass and have done so multiple times.
There is that one game I GMd a full Oracle party campaign, played with close friends coaxed with food. It was a success in that a some of them have now tried out the class in several games without my friendly coercion. Since then, they've reminded me how I can tone down my persistent and biased shilling for the Oracle. And that really got me thinking how I should do an honest reflection on the class after playing so much of it for so long.
I'm a huge fan of the whole Oracle package, from the roleplay flavor to the curse mechanics. Coming from 5e just looking for some Sorcerous fun, this was the last thing I expected to happen. But now, no longer a full-shill for the class, I want share a few Oracle aspects that I reflected upon, not-so-flawless aspects I honestly think could be better.
Divine Access as a level 4 class feat
So Divine Access is one of the best aspects of the class imo. Being able to swipe spells from outside of the limited divine spell list is a great boon. And you can do it multiple times! It's a great feat for customization that doesn't feel forced for most builds. The glaring exceptions being Flames and Tempest, both of which have effects that bolster certain elemental spells accessible as early as level 1. But due to the nature of the divine spell list, elemental spells are naturally limited and even more absent early on. Divine Access is meant to alleviate that, albeit through a feat tax. It's one of the earliest and still common concern for players new to the class looking to do some blasting. Understandably, the focus is on the feat tax for the two elemental mysteries, but I think it wouldn't be as egregious if Divine Access was accessible even earlier, say as a level 2 feat.
For perspective, Divine Access's early iteration in the APG playtest was a feat named Divine Element. Exclusive to Flames, it granted three fire spells. Like a limited Divine Access with no deity choice and the spells chosen for you. It's a level 1 feat which shows there was a sense of urgency getting synergistic and thematic spells for certain mysteries that sadly didn't make it to the final product. Certainly not fully comparable with Divine Access as it is now. Still, I didn't realize how being a level 4 feat was such a huge limitation on certain builds and mysteries until I played Tempest a few times and watched Flames and Tempest players struggle with disappointment before 4th level.
After the full Oracle party campaign and a few other games, we also realized just how empty early level Oracle feat choices were. At level 2, the class feat of choice was always just Reach Spell. It is one of only six level class feat choices at that level, the smallest pool out of any class, and by quite a noticeable margin last I checked. Now imagine Divine access as a level 2 feat. Even if it became the universal feat choice, the nature of the feat creates diverse options players can choose from each different game for each different mystery early on. It helps both the limited class feat choice at level 2 and the Flames and Tempest issue. I'm trying this out for our next full Oracle party campaign and, if it goes well, highly considering it for every future game.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mitigating Oracle curses open-endedness
This is from Gortle's Pathfinder 2 Rule Problems
Mitigate Oracle Curses. The intent of Oracle curse rules is not totally clear. You can't mitigate, reduce, or remove the effects of your oracular curse is a bit open. I mean one of the curses provides you with a status penalty to AC. Technically you could argue putting armour on mitigates that penalty. There is some interpretation required here. Mitigate is a very broad term.
Not allowing any modification or reduction of the penalty is fine. But other modifiers in that area are allowed. You can’t get rid of the -2 status penalty to AC, but you can wear armour and apply other modifiers.
I do believe the word mitigate without further clarication is the main culprit here. "Mitigate" can easily apply to almost anything that opposes a curse effect. Lore under moderate curse has their initiative penalized and is flat-footed so anything that boosts their initiative and AC is mitigating the curse and thus cannot apply? Tempest under minor curse gets a weakness to electricity can't get a resistance it at all anymore? And yes, how about Battle referred to above with the AC penalty?
While those sound silly and vibes too-bad-to-be-true to even be considered, I have personally witnessed those very discussions in some of our games involving Oracles. The Battle mystery example actually got heated as the GM really pushed for even armor mitigating the curse but we got him to make an exemption for the base AC bonus in the end; DEX bonus still didn't apply and eventually discouraged the player to play something else. My regular playgroups thankfully have a more lenient mindset to it, letting numerical opposition like bonuses and penalties and weakness and resistance to just add up to normally add up as long as the curse isn't being directly reduced or ignored (reduce penalty/weakness by X, etc.). But then, that's just our interpretation and after witnessing the rampant ruling disparity, we're still not confident on it.
Also note that mitigating curse effects applies to, well, all effects. Both good and bad. This means that the curse benefits are also unmitigatable if ruled as extremely as the penalties. Several myseries sport status bonuses that would effectively make them immune to penalties for that statistic. A crazy interpretation would be Battle's fast healing making you immune to what, all persistent damage?
Still, the fact that this is more common than I ever expected between completely different groups makes me feel more clarification is needed for these. Flames has a couple specific examples that are noted and actually helps us interpret some interactions with other mysteries. However, I do wish we could have a few more different examples like those to really set a limit on just how far "mitigate" is supposed to be and to cover as much ground as realistically possible. I don't think we'd ever have a truly exhaustive list but for such an important, and apparently contentious, aspect to the class, I think this could use some more attention.
Life Link's heightened scaling
I realize this is totally petty so take it with a grain of salt because Life is my favorite mystery and I've spammed it more than anything else in 2e. I love its unique healer playstyle and the risk that comes along with it, most of which can be credited to the Life Link focus spell. I'm having a hard time not playing it now whenever a healer is good party candidate.
Anyway, its biggest limitation imo is its number of targets and how slow it scales up. It also scales a tad erratically. A 1st level spell, it heightens at 3rd, 6th and 9th with a line for each heightened level. You'd think it should just heighten every two levels after the first. The numbers end up the same at 9th except for the extra target which imo is mostly negligable at that level. Well, it's actually a holdover from the APG playtest where it was a 3rd level spell that heightened at 6th and 9th.
I think it'd be perfect if it heightened like this.
Heightened (+2) You can target 1 additional creature other than you. Increase the initial healing by 2d4 and the maximum damage reduced and Hit Points lost by 3.
It heightens at 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th. The can confidently say the earlier extra target at 5th level would be a godsend. The redirected hit point amount in particular scales more neatly, along with everything else. Shameless errata buff request? Absolutely. I'm just putting it out there. Do note it would save some bookspace while making the numbers more pleasant to the eyes.
I've played a kobold flame oracle and had a blast. Kobold breath with incendiary aura is nasty. I'm currently playing a battle oracle too. Oracle is probably my favorite caster. I agree the class could use some better early level feats. The feat list feels pretty generic for a caster.
I’m hoping to squeeze in Flames one of these days. Have you tried Whirling Flames yet? It looks fun on paper, especially with that scaling. I’m just crossing my fingers for a high level game.
We've got a life oracle in our Age of Ashes game. They ended up taking Champion Dedication at 2nd, but I could see them having been bummed they couldn't get a fire spell earlier if that heavier armor hadn't been factored into their decisions. They are going for a blessed of Sarenrae deal, so blasting is something they wanted to do early on.
To be fair, Life has many good options at level 2. Champion Dedication is a good one. Medic and Blessed One too. It’s the mystery I think I can tolerate delaying Divine Access the most because of it. It’s best Divine Acess spells are also conveniently higher level so it works out.
I’ve only played a cosmos oracle and never felt the need to get divine access. I was content on being laser focused on getting the second revelation spell Insterstellar void and felt peachy.
I’ve been there though, recognizing how it would be more problematic for the other subclasses. I remembered looking through the divine list for damaging air and water spells for the tempest mystery and not finding any until 5th level or so and abandoned the idea. I reconsidered it when SoM came out with all the new spells. I was disappointed divine access couldn’t access any of them but that’s more of a deity problem than an oracle one.
Sorry, I was on a no-internet streak.
@aobst
Good to hear about Whirling Flames! I was looking at Angradd specifically for Blistering Invective. Looks like a great spell for Flames.
@yarrchives
Cosmos is a really good intro Oracle mystery imo. One of the most straightforward combo of good benefits and manageable curse penalties.
It is a bit of a bummer the new spells aren’t immediately accessible until we get new deities that provide them. I am hoping for a good wave of deities with SoM spells sometime. SoM has so many fun and effective elemental spells perfect for Flames and Tempest!
@rnphillips
Yup. I really can’t complain about the Oracle offering interesting themes and mechanics. It’s the main reason why I can’t stop playing them.
I know when it comes to the APG classes, Witch has the most eyes on it for critique. I personally haven’t played it so I can’t say much on it. Ironic since it was the APG class that gave me the best first impression while Oracle gave me the worst.
Anyway, the Divine Access issue is only a low level problem. Nice that it’s alleviated with levels, but unfortunate in that it stacks with the universal caster problem of an uneventful and lackluster early game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's doubtful this will happen, but we are getting errata for APG soonish IIRC, so maybe the level will be changed there.
One would hope that it is not the only errata for the APG. But I'll save my opinions on that for other threads.
And I will agree that Divine Access is most useful at lower levels. Eventually the Divine spell list includes spells of all varieties. But getting access to things like direct damage spells is nice. But the earlier the access comes the better. Some Divine Witch acquaintances of mine have used Lesson of the Elements for that very purpose - which does come available at level 2. The spell levels of the spells granted will limit the power of the Divine Access feat itself.
Yeah, I'm not expecting much Oracle erratas with how soon the APG one is supposed to come out.
Out of anything, I have my fingers crossed for clarification/extra examples of curse mitigation. I think it's one of the most visible concern for the Oracle I've witnessed since it's release. It's almost always one of the first questions any player with interest has about the class, and they always come with specific interaction examples.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here's something I found browsing through the pregens and reminded me of this thread. This is in Korakai's curse description and its example is different from the APG description.
You can’t mitigate, reduce, or remove the effects of your oracular curse by any means other than Refocusing and resting for 8 hours. For example, resist energy can’t be used to reduce the weakness to electricity from your curse. Likewise, remove curse and similar spells don’t affect your curse at all.
I'd gather short examples like this distributed among the other subclasses would suffice for more clarity.
Frankly, I didn't think gaining resistance via resist energy would count as reducing the weakness from the curse. I thought it would simply be additive like bonuses and penalties yet here we are. I am unsure on its integrity as official ruling, however. It's an official character sheet but I remember a few of them having several mistakes fixed with errata.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do we have any dates on when to expect errata anyway? I'm playing a witch and oracle. Knowing Paizo it has probably been kept vague but a girl can hope.
Errata? For the APG?! Was there an official announcement for that sans dates? First time Im hearing about it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The second printing of the APG is done. It was stuck in international logistics for quite some time, but since the APG is back in stock here at paizo, I assume it has reached them by now.
Aaron said the Errata will be released when they start shipping. I guess the holidays have delayed shipping and the warehouse is closed for inventory next week. So I don't expect th Errata before January 10th. I still hope to be proven wrong by an earlier release, though.
As for their reason for holding the errata back when it was probably done 3-4 months ago (which I guess would have been the time the second priting went to the printer), I have no idea. I like to think there's some compelling reason to do so, but I can't think of one.
As for their reason for holding the errata back when it was probably done 3-4 months ago (which I guess would have been the time the second priting went to the printer), I have no idea. I like to think there's some compelling reason to do so, but I can't think of one.
Erratas are constant work in progress as there are always new errors found. As such if you want to release one errata and not one every months you have to wait for the new additions to run dry, which takes a bit of time.
But that's just my 2 cents (and the way I'd do it if I ever have to release an errata).| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Erratas are constant work in progress as there are always new errors found. As such if you want to release one errata and not one every months you have to wait for the new additions to run dry, which takes a bit of time.
But that's just my 2 cents (and the way I'd do it if I ever have to release an errata).
I get wanting to do a single errata. But if the second printing is already done, why not release the errata up to that point? It's not like they add tons of stuff to the errata after sending the book off to the printer.
My guess : unless you want a tsunami of nerdrage, your pdf has to be completely consistent with your printed book. And your errata has to be completely consistent with your pdf. So, you wait for the printed book before releasing the pdf and the errata.
I could see that. Except they probably also have a pdf of the second printing ready by the time they start printing it. So they could just update the pdf for everyone. The print edition was out of stock at paizo for a while already. And anyway, there's probably still thousands of books in stock across all other stores that won't magically get updated to second printing once the errata is released. So you can still get the "old" version if you're unlucky.
I just don't see holding the errata back making any real difference.
The second printing of the APG is done. It was stuck in international logistics for quite some time, but since the APG is back in stock here at paizo, I assume it has reached them by now.
Good to know! Appreciate it.
I love me some erratas despite that one time I was hit hard with the angelic halo nerf.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would 100% rather have once per month errata with some months serving as more of a "this how we play it" or "here's why we wrote rule x this way". It gives more clarity for resolving murky rules the "official" way and lets us see that some perceived mistakes were done on purpose.
I just think we live in an age where a system in still in print should be a living system.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would love to hear more of build and story choices that people have made with different types of Oracles.
★ ---- ★ ---- ★ ---- ★
I knew that I wanted to make an Ancestry Oracle for my elven duskwater, Tess. It has turned out to be a great fit for Tess. I've gotten extra ancestry feats so that I could have elven weapons, including a shortbow and an elven curve blade, and picked up the Willing Death duskwalker feat both at level one.
My focus spell, Ancestral Touch, imposes a small amount of damage and fear for a single action, and that usually sets off my curse so that my ancestors can fight over what I should do. I built Tess to be high Charisma and Dex so that she can happily fight and fling spells. If the skills ancestor comes up, I recall the heck out of knowledge. I feel like my curse is super thematic, but it also works because it is fun playing a generalist.
I also picked up Ghost Hunter feat via Ancestral Paragon at 3rd level, and so saved my money to make both my bow and my blade magical to make full use of it. Fortunately, that is easy to do in PFS. I did grab domain acumen, but only for Pharasma's spells, as Tess's mother is Tosof, a morrigna parole officer for mortals who break the rules about extending life, so Pharasma is very important to Tess.
Roleplaywise, I get to play Tess as the youngest 'elf' around, about 3 months old and fascinated by mortal delights like fluffy pillows or hot muffins. She constantly announces new discoveries to the parties she travels with.
"I discovered a new food in the marketplace today! It was amazing! Hot, liquid, and very filling. They called it, 'Soup.' Have you heard of it?"
I imagine it makes a difference to how the company is perceived. The more errata they release at different times, the more mistakes it looks like they have to correct for, and that can affect people's trust in the product. It's way easier to accept someone saying "oopse, I goofed up" once or twice than it is twelve times every year, and if they serve the same purpose in the end, fewer releases makes more sense.
But I'm not saying they should fix stuff every month - even though I'd personally welcome it.
I'm just saying they are (apparently) sitting on an errata they've already included in the second printing and they are not releasing it for some reason. Doing so now or later doesn't change the number of erratas or fixes.
I'm not even mad that they are holding it back. (Not much, anyway.) At this point I'd just love to know their reasoning for doing so since I have yet to come up with a good explanation.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would love to hear more of build and story choices that people have made with different types of Oracles.
I made a kitsune bones oracle recently for a negative healing party. It’s my first oracle too. So far, I’m pleasantly surprised how well it has handled.
Soul siphon has been the biggest highlight, mitigating the drained effect from the curse while dishing out some damage. The coolest thing I didn’t notice about it at first was that the temporary hp from it has no duration. I think barely anything does that so it’s a unique thing to play with.
With the errata in mind, I do hope its unlimited duration is an intended feature. I’ve been having a blast playing my character as an unsatiated glutton for extra life force. Begging and paying anyone to have their souls siphoned just to top of my hp and hunger outside encounters was not on my bucket list, but I’m all for it now.
I'm curious how many people have managed to play a high level oracle without a deity. I love the idea of being a divine caster without a deity, but there are very few high (like level 8, 9) spells that don't require a deity. Just curious if it was a pain or not really.
Designer
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I played a flames oracle blaster with sorcerer MC (for extra slots and dangerous sorcery) to level 20 with no deity, and never had any issues just upcasting lower-level blasts in place of deity-specific spells. That said, blaster casters are a divisive topic on here (and in fairness I think I was helped by my GM tending to prefer lots of minions for high-difficulty fights over like a PL+4 boss), so YMMV.
In my game (currently in hiatus) I play an elemental sorcerer and it's a great time. But yeah I was planning out a flames oracle and oof, high level options are pretty bare. But you're right, I think you should likely have all the tools you would need by upcasting lower level spells.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I imagine it makes a difference to how the company is perceived. The more errata they release at different times, the more mistakes it looks like they have to correct for, and that can affect people's trust in the product. It's way easier to accept someone saying "oopse, I goofed up" once or twice than it is twelve times every year, and if they serve the same purpose in the end, fewer releases makes more sense.But I'm not saying they should fix stuff every month - even though I'd personally welcome it.
I'm just saying they are (apparently) sitting on an errata they've already included in the second printing and they are not releasing it for some reason. Doing so now or later doesn't change the number of erratas or fixes.
I'm not even mad that they are holding it back. (Not much, anyway.) At this point I'd just love to know their reasoning for doing so since I have yet to come up with a good explanation.
I'm guessing the sitting on errata is for the sake of the LGS. If you had a choice between getting an up to date pdf or going to your LGS to get an out of date copy you may lean more heavily towards the digital. Holding the errata until it's available on shelves is more fair to the LGS.
Frankly, I didn't think gaining resistance via resist energy would count as reducing the weakness from the curse. I thought it would simply be additive like bonuses and penalties yet here we are. I am unsure on its integrity as official ruling, however. It's an official character sheet but I remember a few of them having several mistakes fixed with errata.
At first, I wasn't sure how to rule that but I leaned on being more lenient when one of my players speifically wanted to be a Stormtossed Tengu Tempest Oracle. The Tengu resistance would pretty much cancel out the Tempest weakness which felt very much textbook mitigation. But I figured it would also mean his heritage practically wouldn't have a benefit either so I let both effects stack as normal. Hasn't been a problem and his intentions turned out to be more aesthetic than trying to cheat the curse so I'm glad I allowed it.
Great find though. I didn't think to look at the iconic character sheet for clues like that.
My biggest issue with the Oracle is that it's a Divine Only class. Tempest and Fire should've been Primal list; Cosmos and Lore should've been Occult; Ancestry, Battle, Bones, and Life are fine as Divine (though an argument for Life being Primal could also be made). I know that gets into Sorcerer and Witch design spaces, but Divine Access could be limited to the Divine spell list mysteries and Sorcerer ends up with more flexibility without needing to manage a curse.
...
Or maybe make it so that Oracles can always choose the Divine spell list regardless of their mystery, but some mysteries (as listed above) can instead choose the Occult or Primal spell lists.
I've heard of that take several times before I even started to look closely at the Oracle class. It makes sense, and I really don't think it would step on the Sorcerer's shoes as much as it seems.
I do think it's too late for it though which is why I'm advocating for earlier Divine Access. Although, I do think this modular spell list idea could be a really good class archetype for the Oracle in the future. Even something along the lines of the archetype giving out free Divine Access feats at certain levels. The trade off I'd think would be less spell slots or something even more thematic like extra curse penalties or faster curse progression.
I'm curious how many people have managed to play a high level oracle without a deity. I love the idea of being a divine caster without a deity, but there are very few high (like level 8, 9) spells that don't require a deity. Just curious if it was a pain or not really.
I'm in the same boat as Cozzymandias but mostly because I keep gravitating toward the true neutral deities, which practically means the same thing for the deity reliant divine spells. The only thing I regretfully missed out on was Spiritual Weapon. But after the errata that made it not require a deity, it's no longer an issue.
Otherwise, I do think no deity Oracles are doable. Still, I wish there were no spells that required deities. I'd take it if the spells gave deity bonuses but to completely invalidate a spell on an already limited list just because of deity absence rubs me the wrong way, at least in context with the Oracle.
There is one spell that which gives me hope: Divine Armageddon. It still gates out casters with no deity but it's a step forward for true neutral deities.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I rule that worshipping a deity counts as Having a deity so that those are not masked Cleric-only spells.
Isn’t that how it works normally? If it didn’t, there’s a bunch of things that wouldn’t make any sense. For example, angelic sorcerer grants some spells that require a deity.
|
Designer
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Still, I wish there were no spells that required deities. I'd take it if the spells gave deity bonuses but to completely invalidate a spell on an already limited list just because of deity absence rubs me the wrong way, at least in context with the Oracle.
There is one spell that which gives me hope: Divine Armageddon. It still gates out casters with no deity but it's a step forward for true neutral deities.
I really wish there was a rule on a "generic version" of all the deity-based spells, for characters without a deity. It's possible to work around for sure, but there are still *so many* high-level divine spells that require a deity, and its a real issue for oracles and like, divine sorcs/witches/summoners. What I ended up doing when I played a diabolic sorcerer during the playtest was using the effects for Asmodeus since that was the source of my character's power despite not actually worshipping him, but it's an annoying workaround to have to deal with.
I really wish there was a rule on a "generic version" of all the deity-based spells, for characters without a deity. It's possible to work around for sure, but there are still *so many* high-level divine spells that require a deity, and its a real issue for oracles and like, divine sorcs/witches/summoners. What I ended up doing when I played a diabolic sorcerer during the playtest was using the effects for Asmodeus since that was the source of my character's power despite not actually worshipping him, but it's an annoying workaround to have to deal with.Still, I wish there were no spells that required deities. I'd take it if the spells gave deity bonuses but to completely invalidate a spell on an already limited list just because of deity absence rubs me the wrong way, at least in context with the Oracle.
There is one spell that which gives me hope: Divine Armageddon. It still gates out casters with no deity but it's a step forward for true neutral deities.
Yeah, this has been a common critique: spells that change based on choice of Deity. It causes problems when there are mismatches between the Deity that the character follows and attends services for, and the Deity that is the source of the divine magic power that the character uses.
|
Designer
|
It's honestly kind of a baffling gap in the system, which is I guess a holdover from a stricter divine magic paradigm in older editions where characters like angelic sorcerers or whatever were still arcane. But pf2 did away with a lot of the other weirdness tied to that dynamic so I don't really know why this specific thing is still there.
Honestly though the fact that the versions of those spells for true neutral deities tends to be significantly worse for no apparent reason is even more utterly baffling. I guess it's intended to balance being resilient to alignment damage, but monsters rarely do alignment damage because it's impossible to plan around what alignments a party member will have so that's not a great rationale tbh.
My tables pretty much all houserule alignment damage as positive/negative damage, which can be a little unbalanced with spells like searing light but it's not like divine blasters are a few extra d6s away from breaking the game open (esp. since most enemies you fight would be evil anyway)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I really wish there was a rule on a "generic version" of all the deity-based spells, for characters without a deity. It's possible to work around for sure, but there are still *so many* high-level divine spells that require a deity, and its a real issue for oracles and like, divine sorcs/witches/summoners. What I ended up doing when I played a diabolic sorcerer during the playtest was using the effects for Asmodeus since that was the source of my character's power despite not actually worshipping him, but it's an annoying workaround to have to deal with.Still, I wish there were no spells that required deities. I'd take it if the spells gave deity bonuses but to completely invalidate a spell on an already limited list just because of deity absence rubs me the wrong way, at least in context with the Oracle.
There is one spell that which gives me hope: Divine Armageddon. It still gates out casters with no deity but it's a step forward for true neutral deities.
I think the game was designed with the idea that most characters, divine casters or otherwise, will have a primary god they worship. That isn't how most player characters end up, in my experience.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My perspective on this has always been that you're allowed effects that would always function, you're not allowed effects that specifically cancel other effects.
Thankfully that’s the attitude most of us eventually landed on. At least in my experience, the use of the word mitigate does seem to be the main and common point of contention against that ruling.
Instead of making an advice thread, I was wondering if I could get some advice here for my bones oracle.
We just turned level 6 and I don't know if I should take the next revelation spell armor of bones. I don't know if it's worth the feat if Im already making good use of soul siphon for the temp hp.
Any other general advice is also welcome!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the game was designed with the idea that most characters, divine casters or otherwise, will have a primary god they worship. That isn't how most player characters end up, in my experience.I really wish there was a rule on a "generic version" of all the deity-based spells, for characters without a deity. It's possible to work around for sure, but there are still *so many* high-level divine spells that require a deity, and its a real issue for oracles and like, divine sorcs/witches/summoners. What I ended up doing when I played a diabolic sorcerer during the playtest was using the effects for Asmodeus since that was the source of my character's power despite not actually worshipping him, but it's an annoying workaround to have to deal with.Still, I wish there were no spells that required deities. I'd take it if the spells gave deity bonuses but to completely invalidate a spell on an already limited list just because of deity absence rubs me the wrong way, at least in context with the Oracle.
There is one spell that which gives me hope: Divine Armageddon. It still gates out casters with no deity but it's a step forward for true neutral deities.
How come they're all Rahadoumi ?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Instead of making an advice thread, I was wondering if I could get some advice here for my bones oracle.
We just turned level 6 and I don't know if I should take the next revelation spell armor of bones. I don't know if it's worth the feat if Im already making good use of soul siphon for the temp hp.
Any other general advice is also welcome!
Doing some quick math vs an on-level enemy with moderate saves, a Soul Siphon is worth about resisting 3 attacks with Armor of Bones. So depends on how much you expect yourself to get attacked.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How come they're all Rahadoumi ?
Haha. To be fair, being a divine caster without a deity is a neat option. I can understand why its concept is a big draw for some players.
And still, those true neutral deity worshipers are similarly swindled out of same spells.
Doing some quick math vs an on-level enemy with moderate saves, a Soul Siphon is worth about resisting 3 attacks with Armor of Bones. So depends on how much you expect yourself to get attacked.
Cool math. Didn’t even know that. Also imagine the huge chunk of temporary HP if your target gets drained 2 on a critical fail.
I’ve played with and without Armor of Bones. While Armor of Bones AND Soul Siphon together is great for tankiness, I found myself preferring to just refresh my temp HP when needed. Because of Soul Siphon’s permanent duration, there’s less pressure to get hit to get the most out of it unlike Armor of Bones. Personally, Armor of Bones feels like a luxury pick. Fun and effective but isn’t vital.
I’m with Onkonk though. It’s situationally useful dependent on how much you expect to get hit.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Instead of making an advice thread, I was wondering if I could get some advice here for my bones oracle.
I forgot to add, Cloudkill has a fun interaction with Bones's moderate curse and up. It gives you a high chance of taking minimal to no damage from your own Cloudkill. I've spent several encounters just standing inside my Cloudkill, confidently concealed and souped up with temp HP. It's also easier to maneuver the Cloudkill when you're already in it.
So yeah, when you get 5th level spells, I recommed Cloudkill from Nhimbaloth who also gives you Grim Tendrils and Entangle.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Instead of making an advice thread, I was wondering if I could get some advice here for my bones oracle.I forgot to add, Cloudkill has a fun interaction with Bones's moderate curse and up. It gives you a high chance of taking minimal to no damage from your own Cloudkill. I've spent several encounters just standing inside my Cloudkill, confidently concealed and souped up with temp HP.
I have done similar with Sanguine Mist. It has to be sustained though and it doesn't move. Not having it move can be somewhat of a benefit at times though.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the game was designed with the idea that most characters, divine casters or otherwise, will have a primary god they worship. That isn't how most player characters end up, in my experience.I really wish there was a rule on a "generic version" of all the deity-based spells, for characters without a deity. It's possible to work around for sure, but there are still *so many* high-level divine spells that require a deity, and its a real issue for oracles and like, divine sorcs/witches/summoners. What I ended up doing when I played a diabolic sorcerer during the playtest was using the effects for Asmodeus since that was the source of my character's power despite not actually worshipping him, but it's an annoying workaround to have to deal with.Still, I wish there were no spells that required deities. I'd take it if the spells gave deity bonuses but to completely invalidate a spell on an already limited list just because of deity absence rubs me the wrong way, at least in context with the Oracle.
There is one spell that which gives me hope: Divine Armageddon. It still gates out casters with no deity but it's a step forward for true neutral deities.
Its actually a little weird, the fantasy worlds we play in all utilize pantheons of deities, and it was generally implied that everyone pays respects to one god or another-- I remember everyone just kind of picking gods and alignment to stick on their sheet back in the early 2010s even if it didnt come up much. Its really changed a lot in the last ten years, I wonder if thats changing attitudes about religion, or a drop in consciousness about world lore vs. Character lore, or what.
That might actually be a side effect of moving to a homebrew setting, rather than pointing at the one in the book, to pick gods players would have to go out of their way to find out about them or ask me about them.
We were playing 4e at the time, which was actually designed in such a way that your homebrew setting was probably compatible with book lore because of the intentional ambiguity. Meaning you didnt have to explicitly break with the book to satisfy a desire to worldbuild.
I forgot to add, Cloudkill has a fun interaction with Bones's moderate curse and up. It gives you a high chance of taking minimal to no damage from your own Cloudkill. I've spent several encounters just standing inside my Cloudkill, confidently concealed and souped up with temp HP. It's also easier to maneuver the Cloudkill when you're already in it.
I did not consider taking advantage of the bonuses from the curse like that. I still think the situational curse bonuses is the worst part of the bones mystery but it’s so much better knowing ways to actively use it. I guess its good too if you have other party members casting poison, death, and disease area spells. I wouldn’t feel like I’m getting in the way of those!
I understand the divine access level issue more now. I still want to get and try armor of bones even if it might not be needed. It looks fun and the aesthetic is hard to pass up. However, if I do, I don’t know when I could fit in divine access now that the feat choices are becoming more interesting. I feel maybe at level 12 I could see taking divine access to get cloudkill but it feels a little late. It would’ve been perfect if I could take it instead of reach spell at level 2. Good feat but it’s generic enough that I don’t feel attached to it unlike the coming feats at 6th level and higher.
Lots to think about! Thanks for the advice!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have done similar with Sanguine Mist. It has to be sustained though and it doesn't move. Not having it move can be somewhat of a benefit at times though.
Cool thing about Sanguine Mist is it naturally doesn’t damage the caster. But if it is popular with your fellow casters like it was for one of my games, shrugging off the friendly fire is quite the boon.
I guess its good too if you have other party members casting poison, death, and disease area spells. I wouldn’t feel like I’m getting in the way of those!
Similarly, resisting the popular and conic Vampiric Exsanguination was a highlight in my experience, and that’s without going with negative healing for the day.
Bones is an interesting mystery that took me a while to be comfortable maneuvering. Death domain gives you great Divine Access spells. The curse penalties just aren’t as scary as they look on paper. The non-magical recovery penalty is a mostly post-combat issue that can be managed. The higher curse penalties were naturally manageable with your overall kit and corresponding curse benefits. Best lesson for me was to let those revelation spells rip and confidently stay major cursed most encounters with little worry.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I really like malignant sustenance for a bones Oracle too, fast healing along with temp HP and damage resistance is awesome.