| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've got no dog in this race one way or another, but I did want to point out that, depending on how such changes were implemented, optimized builds may totally utilize these items. That's the point of optimization; if it can give a character an edge, then it'll get used.Or you just specialize in "the right things". The things the game already lets you specialize with virtually no downsides. Full plate Fighter? Go Str/Cha/Con/Wis and have amazing damage, good defenses and saves, great utility and great social skills. Is that how balance is supposed to look like? To me this sounds way more unbalanced than other builds also having ways to shore up their downsides.
Sometimes it seems like people are completely unable to assimilate the fact that others might not think the current balance of the game is perfect. No, they have to want to break things, it can't possibly be anything else.
If I got a penny every time I got told I want things to go back to how they were in 1e, despite never having played 1e and hating 3.5 with my guts for how much of an unbalanced mess it is, I would be rich by now.
Yeah, same here. Why does there need to be personal attacks so frequently on these boards.
And on top of that completely missing the point as this whole discussion is about making non functional builds functional, optimized builds will not use it as they already maximize their save stats.
Of course optimized builds would use this kind of items. The thing is that none of the strong and optimized builds we have now would need them. At all.
If a new option allows new optimized concepts to exist without leaving obsolete or twisting beyond recognition older ones, I would call that option an absolute success.
It doesn't help that the example you chose (a dragon monk) is already pretty optimized and the end result of the suggested change is to make that dragon monk signficantly more powerful.
A bit of a tangent, but I would like to know whick Dragon monk builds are you refering to.
Unless you go Dragon Disciple or something similar you can't Afford to Boost STR/CON/WIS/CHA due to AC, and in that case, you are sacrificing your level 2 and 4 feats for a level 6 combo that in any way but mobility will be worse than any Fighter in full plate with a halberd and a bit of CHA.
|
It doesn't help that the example you chose (a dragon monk) is already pretty optimized and the end result of the suggested change is to make that dragon monk signficantly more powerful.A bit of a tangent, but I would like to know whick Dragon monk builds are you refering to.
Unless you go Dragon Disciple or something similar you can't Afford to Boost STR/CON/WIS/CHA due to AC, and in that case, you are sacrificing your level 2 and 4 feats for a level 6 combo that in any way but mobility will be worse than any Fighter in full plate with a halberd and a bit of CHA
Good question. It wasn't my example, it was SuperBidi's.
I've been assuming it was just a Monk with Dragon Stance who wanted to also use Dragon Roar.
And I'd claim that is at least functional with cha 10, intimidating Prowress, expert intimidation, intimidation boosting item.
And you can easily afford Cha of 12 or 14 by level 5 if you want it. Yeah, something has to give but nothing that makes the character non functional.
I'll note that intimidating prowess only works for demoralize checks specifically.
Well Coerce or Demoralize.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll note that intimidating prowess only works for demoralize checks specifically.It doesn't help that the example you chose (a dragon monk) is already pretty optimized and the end result of the suggested change is to make that dragon monk signficantly more powerful.A bit of a tangent, but I would like to know whick Dragon monk builds are you refering to.
Unless you go Dragon Disciple or something similar you can't Afford to Boost STR/CON/WIS/CHA due to AC, and in that case, you are sacrificing your level 2 and 4 feats for a level 6 combo that in any way but mobility will be worse than any Fighter in full plate with a halberd and a bit of CHA
Good question. It wasn't my example, it was SuperBidi's.
I've been assuming it was just a Monk with Dragon Stance who wanted to also use Dragon Roar.
And I'd claim that is at least functional with cha 10, intimidating Prowress, expert intimidation, intimidation boosting item.
And you can easily afford Cha of 12 or 14 by level 5 if you want it. Yeah, something has to give but nothing that makes the character non functional.
Absolutely correct. I'd missed that (my monk didn't use Dragon Style). That does make it harder to build specifically a dragon monk with decent Dragon Roar. I was wrong on that. That was a poor decision on Paizo's part.
I gotta go with Blave on this one.
All these discussions about "having" to have certain stats by certain levels. Where does this come from? Maybe from MMOs or something. Not to throw shade, but it would bog me down to sit there and math out every little thing.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The charisma dragon monk build I've put together in my head that utilizes dragon disciple for scales of the dragon to cap their dex at 16 could afford about 14 charisma before level 10. Without dragon disciple, your AC is gonna suffer at those high levels.
If you are going to start at level 4+ and you are going to use an ancestry with a penalty to INT, you can start with 18STR, 12DEX, 14CON, 12WIS, 8 INT and 14 CHA and upgrade it to 22(24)STR, 16DEX, 20CON, 16WIS, 8INT and 20CHA at 20 if you want to really pump that CHA stat.
These kind of builds, while may be optimized, are not strong in any capacity compared to what you can do with other classes. An item or effect like the ones we have been discussing would make this build better than it is now, for sure, but not better than anything that is already strong. Personally I see that as a good thing.
I gotta go with Blave on this one.
All these discussions about "having" to have certain stats by certain levels. Where does this come from? Maybe from MMOs or something. Not to throw shade, but it would bog me down to sit there and math out every little thing.
They come from actual play experience at mid to high levels with characters with low WIS or CON. It is not very cool to see a character being consistently CCed to the point of them not playing for a whole encounter. People usually like to be able to play the game they signed for and thus end up boosting their boring save stats as much as possible.
I don't think an ancestry exists to support that build. Leshies? My build is kobold for the prerequisite for dragon disciple. But yeah, you could delay those dex boosts. Probably works with just 14 dex. That's as much as you could do before they changed scales of the dragon in the APG errata.The charisma dragon monk build I've put together in my head that utilizes dragon disciple for scales of the dragon to cap their dex at 16 could afford about 14 charisma before level 10. Without dragon disciple, your AC is gonna suffer at those high levels.If you are going to start at level 4+ and you are going to use an ancestry with a penalty to INT, you can start with 18STR, 12DEX, 14CON, 12WIS, 8 INT and 14 CHA and upgrade it to 22(24)STR, 16DEX, 20CON, 16WIS, 8INT and 20CHA at 20 if you want to really push that CHA stat.
These kind of builds, while may be optimized, are not strong in any capacity compared to what you can do with other classes. An item or effect like the ones we have been discussing would make this build better than it is now, for sure, but not better than anything that is already strong.
I was thinking about Leshies, yes. It depends on GM fiat, though, due to DD access (remember, not a prerrequisite).
I think Lizardfolks can also get that stat spread.
Forgot about lizardfolk. Skeletons work too now. I don't know how scales of the dragon would work on someone without skin though.I don't think an ancestry exists to support that build. Leshies? My build is kobold for the prerequisite for dragon disciple. But yeah, you could delay those dex boosts. Probably works with just 14 dex. That's as much as you could do before they changed scales of the dragon in the APG errata.The charisma dragon monk build I've put together in my head that utilizes dragon disciple for scales of the dragon to cap their dex at 16 could afford about 14 charisma before level 10. Without dragon disciple, your AC is gonna suffer at those high levels.If you are going to start at level 4+ and you are going to use an ancestry with a penalty to INT, you can start with 18STR, 12DEX, 14CON, 12WIS, 8 INT and 14 CHA and upgrade it to 22(24)STR, 16DEX, 20CON, 16WIS, 8INT and 20CHA at 20 if you want to really push that CHA stat.
These kind of builds, while may be optimized, are not strong in any capacity compared to what you can do with other classes. An item or effect like the ones we have been discussing would make this build better than it is now, for sure, but not better than anything that is already strong.
I was thinking about Leshies, yes. It depends on GM fiat, though, due to DD access.
I think Lizardfolks can also get that stat spread.
They can have a fancy coat made of scales or something. Either that or glue some of them to their bones for that extra protection.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And that's precisely why Bulwark exists and these hypothetical effects don't; there's no diagetic capacity to it. If the idea is that these new effects are supposed to be comparable to Bulwark, then they need to be diagetic, otherwise it's not comparable.
I think there are a variety of interesting ways to do these effects diagetically - almost exclusively supernaturally, I admit, but I don't think that's necessarily an issue. These would mostly be higher level effects than Bulwark at level 2, but given the main issues with not increasing your Saving Throw ability scores are at 10+, that should be fine.
- A supernatural symbiotic infection that replaces your constitution/willpower with their own; this could be a magical item, could be an archetype that gets into tradeoffs of this, or could even be something out-there like a specific familiar ability.
- Taking something like necrografting from Starfinder - the replacement of parts of your body with a sturdy creature or construct for the Fort version, or perhaps a creature with a forceful will (or a mindless creature?) for the Will save version
- An ioun stone that you surgically insert into your body, and you can fall back on the stone's magic and let it take over entirely when faced with one of these effects.
- A circlet connected to your mind that lets you draw on the collective willpower of the local environment, surrendering your mind to this collective temporarily
- A belt that siphons your blood into a magically enchanted vial - it builds up a magical bulwark for your fortitude, undoing any magical protections you may otherwise have
- Gifts from supernatural creatures - a vampire partially turning you, a fey providing you with a partial connection to the first world, or an outsider answering a wish. These are less likely to be magical items instead of something like an archetype, but the gift could theoretically be tied to possession of a physical object.
I'm sure there are a wide variety of other possibilities, but my point is that there's a wide variety of interesting, diegetic explanations for these effects. I'd be very interesting in applying almost any of the above examples to some characters, personally!
I definitely support the existence of these sorts of effects. Even without the saving throw, I'd rate the effects of wisdom (initiative most of the time, perception, useful skills) and constitution (hit points) above at least strength (which really is primarily really good at ~levels 1-4, but increasingly less relevant as you level up) and intelligence, if not charisma. On top of that, you'd be trading this for a sub-par ability score equivalent. I do not think there would be power creep if one could trade having 18 CON/10 INT for 10 CON/18 INT on your fighter with a +2 con mod for fort saves only - you're functionally trading 4HP/level and +2 to fort saves for 4 trained skills + languages, and a +4 bonus on specific skills. This will open up new build possibilities, but I do not think it will provide meaningful power creep compared to already existing builds.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm cool with the idea of something that requires high CHA that gives you a big bonus to a bunch of different Will saves, and maybe something that requires high STR that helps you on a bunch of your Fort saves.
I kind of feel like Will should be CHA and Fort should be STR anyway.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
One thing I did notice that I found interesting is that out of Paizo's mouth themselves:
The classic ability scores aren't of equal value in the rules. Dexterity, Constitution, and Wisdom tend to be more important unless a character requires a particular ability score from among the other three for a specific purpose.
Yes, I do question the implementation of it myself (intelligence unchanged?) but I did found it interesting that they are at least aware of the asymmetrical importance of certain stats.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You might honestly see it that way but many of us don't.
It doesn't help that the example you chose (a dragon monk) is already pretty optimized and the end result of the suggested change is to make that dragon monk signficantly more powerful.
I can (and have) given you several ways to build a functional monk with high charisma. Functional, not completely optimal. Which makes me think that you have a blind spot with your motives. This does NOT seem to be about making a non functional build functional.
If I've missed an example of where this is necessary to make a non functional build functional (NOT optimal, functional) I apologize. Please post it again. But a Dragon Monk isn't that example.
Well, I don't know why people focus on the Dragon Monk when I've given a few other examples.
This item will mostly benefit characters who want to increase:
- Intelligence
- Dexterity and Strength simultaneously
Intelligence is considered the weakest attribute and having both high Dexterity and high Strength is redundant if you can grab a Full Plate (so only the Monk is in that case).
This item will thus benefit mostly Intelligence based classes and Monk. You can for example build an Interrogation Investigator with high Charisma or a Mutagenist who doesn't have to jump through hoops to be functional.
Neither Monk nor Intelligence-based classes are optimized as of now, so it won't be much of a power creep. It will not affect Bards, Rogues, Champions and Fighters as none of them require Intelligence nor high Strength and Dexterity simultaneously.
And I fail to see where the Dragon Monk is an optimized character. Last time I've checked, the optimized martials were Rogues, Fighters and Champions, not Monks. Allowing the Dragon Monk to take their level 6 feat and have decent use out of it seems like an asset, not an issue.
I've played a monk with decent charisma. Its quite playable. It DOES give up a little but its quite, quite functional.
Actually, you have first-hand experience. Was your character really strong, so strong that any improvement would have imbalanced the game?
To make it functional, did you jump through a few hoops? Did you manage to build a functional character mostly because of your system mastery or was it very easy and obvious to build?| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
You can for example build an Interrogation Investigator with high Charisma or a Mutagenist who doesn't have to jump through hoops to be functional.
This is basically where the appeal is to me too.
Right now, someone who wants to be good at Occultism and Deception is sacrificing some key basic combat stats in order to make that happen. Saves, Initiative, HP, some or all of the above.
But if I instead want to focus on, say, thievery, religion, and perception... I can get those enhancements "for free" while improving my core combat routine. Every time I buff my saves, I improve those skills too.
Are the benefits of Occultism and Deception so much better than the benefits of Thievery and Religion (etc.) that they warrant coming at the cost of some core combat feature? Is that specific combo of skills particularly gamebreaking? Because those characters are the ones who feel the problems with the status quo the most.
Are, as Themetricsystem suggests, Charisma pumping investigators, high-int monks, and rangers who want to play face such incredibly overpowered DPR munchkins that the system can only barely hold them in check as is?
I don't really agree with either of those premise personally, which is why I think more options in some form or another would be neat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
While no one cries for the bard it would be great to be able to lower my wisdom (losiing perception and those skills) for intelligence so one could focus on Occultism and Bardic Lore without destroying your defenses.
That would not try to be a "do-it-all" build as even without saving throws wisdom would be a generally more useful stat than intelligence in my opinion.
I've got no dog in this race one way or another, but I did want to point out that, depending on how such changes were implemented, optimized builds may totally utilize these items. That's the point of optimization; if it can give a character an edge, then it'll get used.Yeah, same here. Why does there need to be personal attacks so frequently on these boards.
And on top of that completely missing the point as this whole discussion is about making non functional builds functional, optimized builds will not use it as they already maximize their save stats.
Of course optimized builds would use this kind of items. The thing is that none of the strong and optimized builds we have now would need them. At all.
An item that just boosted saves in line with bulwark would be extremely strong, definitely pushing those optimized builds even further beyond by allowing them to focus more thoroughly on offense. Doesn't matter that they don't "need" them, having even higher saves is incredible because of Crit Successes/avoiding Crit Failures against higher-level DCs.
Unless this item had similar penalties and requirements to wearing full plate and/or only worked against damaging effects, this would be one of the best items in every build just like magic armor (which of course, already boosts saves as a cloak of resistance did).
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've got no dog in this race one way or another, but I did want to point out that, depending on how such changes were implemented, optimized builds may totally utilize these items. That's the point of optimization; if it can give a character an edge, then it'll get used.Yeah, same here. Why does there need to be personal attacks so frequently on these boards.
And on top of that completely missing the point as this whole discussion is about making non functional builds functional, optimized builds will not use it as they already maximize their save stats.
Of course optimized builds would use this kind of items. The thing is that none of the strong and optimized builds we have now would need them. At all.
An item that just boosted saves in line with bulwark would be extremely strong, definitely pushing those optimized builds even further beyond by allowing them to focus more thoroughly on offense. Doesn't matter that they don't "need" them, having even higher saves is incredible because of Crit Successes/avoiding Crit Failures against higher-level DCs.
Unless this item had similar penalties and requirements to wearing full plate and/or only worked against damaging effects, this would be one of the best items in every build just like magic armor (which of course, already boosts saves as a cloak of resistance did).
I'm yet to see posted here any build that is strong currently and would get "too good" with effects like that.
Let's take the same good 'ol polearm fighter I mentioned before. Now they boost STR, CON, WIS and CHA. Not having to boost WIS would mean they could afford to boost DEX, not for saves, because they are already covered by bulwark, but to be able to fight at distance. Badly.
They can also boost INT for... They can also boost INT!
Come on.
|
|
And I fail to see where the Dragon Monk is an optimized character. Last time I've checked, the optimized martials were Rogues, Fighters and Champions, not Monks. Allowing the Dragon Monk to take their level 6 feat and have decent use out of it seems like an asset, not an issue.
I think it is optimized for monks, which is where the comparison should be. Bringing in other classes to the comparison just muddies things. It essentially means that the ONLY martial classes we need discuss are the rogue and fighter (and maybe ranger).
But I missed a key factor in Dragon Roar. A monk taking advantage of Dragon Roar IS hard to build. The sacrifices to get intimidation up are pretty much going to have to come from somewhere unpleasant. I still think it is functional but its a lot closer than I thought and it would fall outside of some definitions of functional.
I've played a monk with decent charisma. Its quite playable. It DOES give up a little but its quite, quite functional.Actually, you have first-hand experience. Was your character really strong, so strong that any improvement would have imbalanced the game?
To make it functional, did you jump through a few hoops? Did you manage to build a functional character mostly because of your system mastery or was it very easy and obvious to build?
Not very many hoops really. It was NOT a Dragon Monk, it was a Dex based monk using intimidate and Intimidating Prowress at level 6. Starting characteristics (level 1) were (IIRC) Str 14, Dex 18, Con 12, Wis 12, Int 8, Cha 14. Frilled Lizardfolk. Slightly lower defences and damage than I'd like.
I guess that is sort of using some hoops and system mastery (Frilled Lizardfolk). Didn't feel that way though since I pretty much STARTED with the Frilled Lizardfolk character.
Also was for PFS so functional has to be taken in that context.
Of course optimized builds would use this kind of items. The thing is that none of the strong and optimized builds we have now would need them. At all.
An item that just boosted saves in line with bulwark would be extremely strong, definitely pushing those optimized builds even further beyond by allowing them to focus more thoroughly on offense. Doesn't matter that they don't "need" them, having even higher saves is incredible because of Crit Successes/avoiding Crit Failures against higher-level DCs.
Unless this item had similar penalties and requirements to wearing full plate and/or only worked against damaging effects, this would be one of the best items in every build just like magic armor (which of course, already boosts saves as a cloak of resistance did).
I'm yet to see posted here any build that is strong currently and would get "too good" with effects like that.
Let's take the same good 'ol polearm fighter I mentioned before. Now they boost STR, CON, WIS and CHA. Not having to boost WIS would mean they could afford to boost DEX, not for saves, because they are already covered by bulwark, but to be able to fight at distance. Badly.
They can also boost INT for... They can also boost INT!
Come on.
Boost Charisma even higher? Also thrown/bow ranged attacks with 18 Strength doesn't sound that bad if you swap Dexterity for Wisdom. Could also drop Con as well if it isn't needed for Fort saves.
Something like Str 18, Dex 16, Con 10, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 14 or swapping Dex with Cha, or leaving Dex and instead actually having a few trained skills with some Int like Str 18, Dex 10, Con 10, Int 14, Wis 10, Cha 16. Who cares about Dex/Con/Wis if you take a +3 on saves that matter?
But then, even without changing anything they could just have higher saves depending on how the hypothetical item works. And all it would cost is item diversity.
I think it is optimized for monks, which is where the comparison should be. Bringing in other classes to the comparison just muddies things. It essentially means that the ONLY martial classes we need discuss are the rogue and fighter (and maybe ranger).
No, it means that if an item improves a class that is not a leader of the pack, it can be considered a good thing. Both points of view are important, but at least it tells you why I consider it more of a good things than a bad one when taking balance into account.
Not very many hoops really. It was NOT a Dragon Monk, it was a Dex based monk using intimidate and Intimidating Prowress at level 6. Starting characteristics (level 1) were (IIRC) Str 14, Dex 18, Con 12, Wis 12, Int 8, Cha 14. Frilled Lizardfolk. Slightly lower defences and damage than I'd like.
I guess that is sort of using some hoops and system mastery (Frilled Lizardfolk). Didn't feel that way though since I pretty much STARTED with the Frilled Lizardfolk character.
Also was for PFS so functional has to be taken in that context.
Putting aside the comparison to your build, how do you feel about a Dragon Monk version with Dragon Roar and an item to slightly compensate its low Will saves? More straightforward to build, I think we can both agree on that. In terms of power, would it cause issues in a party or for the game balance?
And compared to other Monk builds, would it make the Dragon Monk too strong?
Something like Str 18, Dex 16, Con 10, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 14 or swapping Dex with Cha, or leaving Dex and instead actually having a few trained skills with some Int like Str 18, Dex 10, Con 10, Int 14, Wis 10, Cha 16. Who cares about Dex/Con/Wis if you take a +3 on saves that matter?
I fail to see what this builds are made for. They just seem bad. So it's nice if an item allows bad builds to be a bit less bad.
Also, it's not a +3, averaged over your career it's +1. It's hardly high.|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
how do you feel about a Dragon Monk version with Dragon Roar and an item to slightly compensate its low Will saves? More straightforward to build, I think we can both agree on that. In terms of power, would it cause issues in a party or for the game balance?
And compared to other Monk builds, would it make the Dragon Monk too strong?
I'm honestly don't know.
I've seen Dragon Style monks in play and I think they're definitely towards the top end of the power spectrum for monks (more damaging and slightly less AC than other monks seems like a decent trade). I don't think I've ever seen Dragon Roar in play which makes me strongly suspect that it just isn't particularly practical (or, at least, not seen as practical) to raise Cha to sufficient levels given that Dragon Style need Str and Dex.
I'd have little to no issue with a magic item that catered specifically to characters with Dragon Roar (not that I expect Paizo to ever publish something that specialized). At least not until I saw it in play.
But if I go back to my Intimidate monk for a second it would just seem a fairly cheap way to raise his will saves. I'm also currently playing a Magus/Monk (free archetype) in Ruby Phoenix and the item would shore up a weakness in THAT character (his will saves are a bit low) at essentially no cost. And I don't think that either of those characters really need the boost. They're fine as they are. Definitely significantly above the baseline of "functional". Oh, a boost to their will saves would certainly NOT make them overpowered but they just don't need it.
Also, it's not a +3, averaged over your career it's +1. It's hardly high.
It's +3 for your entire career if you never boost them over 10, which you can do for your choice of 2 of them. And with a built-in +3 for saves, why not just have Int/Cha to be more useful out of combat (or in combat with skills like Intimidation)?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, it's not a +3, averaged over your career it's +1. It's hardly high.It's +3 for your entire career if you never boost them over 10, which you can do for your choice of 2 of them. And with a built-in +3 for saves, why not just have Int/Cha to be more useful out of combat (or in combat with skills like Intimidation)?
I mean it's not like the other stats don't have strong uses. Perception/Medicine, HP. If anything Dexterity is the least useful stat of the bunch, outside of the AC/save bonuses it provides... and it's the one that already can be replaced in both fronts.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
From a 14 to a 16, which you can't do without lowering your CON to 12 unless your ancestry has convenient boosts and flaws. On average from 1 to 20, that's like a 0'7 CHA increase, completely gamebreaking.Boost Charisma even higher?
Also thrown/bow ranged attacks with 18 Strength doesn't sound that bad if you swap Dexterity for Wisdom.
It does sound mild at best when you see your chance of hitting. Less than a non-fighter martial with no damage boost and no way to easy the pain that is switching weapons.
Could also drop Con as well if it isn't needed for Fort saves.
Because HP does not matter at all.
Something like Str 18, Dex 16, Con 10, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 14 or swapping Dex with Cha, or leaving Dex and instead actually having a few trained skills with some Int like Str 18, Dex 10, Con 10, Int 14, Wis 10, Cha 16. Who cares about Dex/Con/Wis if you take a +3 on saves that matter?
Have you ever played a melee martial without CON? Just asking.
"If the item is badly implemented it is a bad item" is what you are basically saying. We were talking about something similar to Bulwark. What I proposed earlier was something that is between 1 and 2 behind of what most people have. I feel that most people who are opposing this idea either have not seen high level pathfinder second edition or are just contrarian by nature.But then, even without changing anything they could just have higher saves depending on how the hypothetical item works. And all it would cost is item diversity.
I mean it's not like the other stats don't have strong uses. Perception/Medicine, HP. If anything Dexterity is the least useful stat of the bunch, outside of the AC/save bonuses it provides... and it's the one that already can be replaced in both fronts.
Agree. I've been saying for years now that WIS is by far the most stacked stat in this edition.
For sure the most valuable of Dex/Con/Wis in a world where bulwark exists for Reflex/Will would still be Wisdom.
Con of 10 would be pretty bad on a melee martial now, but with a free +3 for Fort saves that's not nearly as bad. Take Toughness and wear full plate to match your Dex of 10 and you should be fine.
Damage boost for ranged = Strength on thrown, or half that if a bow. Seems pretty competent at a base Dex 16/Str 18, particularly with a fighter's proficiency.
Wouldn't it make more sense to have an item that helps make Dragon Roar better than have one that boosts saves? That allows you to make a previously non-viable build viable, but is much less likely to have knock-on unintended consequences.
An item like this would likely not impact meta builds much. You might be able to slightly optimize more with it, but more likely than not the other benefits of con and wis plus being able to dump the other stats to 8 for an additional boost will more than outweigh any fringe benefits using the item would bring.
It would, however bring more concepts up to baseline viability.
Personally I don't think I can condone the idea that you shouldn't consider extreme encounters because of their rarity. Rather, your every build decision should be made with the idea that you will eventually need to put down an extreme or tpk level encounter and doing otherwise is just a disservice to the people you're playing with. PF2 isn't like PF1 where you would never see the ceiling in an AP or PFS. At some point you have to know the upper bound of difficulty is going to show up and rock your party if you aren't prepared.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wouldn't it make more sense to have an item that helps make Dragon Roar better than have one that boosts saves? That allows you to make a previously non-viable build viable, but is much less likely to have knock-on unintended consequences.
Making dragon roar better improves the one specific dragon monk build but doesn't do anything to support every other build that might want to prioritize non-save stats... which is the whole point of the suggestion. Dragon Monk is just an example.
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I concur. When "optimizing", I will boost my Attack score to the max, and then my 3 save stats.
Unless I can go Full Plate / Bulwark to free the stat boosts I would put into DEX. This is usually for STR Martials with Heavy (or Medium +Sentinel) armor proficiency. Who can then raise INT or CHA.
If my attack score is one of the save stats, I can raise another stat.
In any other case, I'm stuck with boosting save stats.
So, once again, there are classes that have a wider variety of "optimized" builds just because their attack stat is a save stat.
This discrepancy brings nothing to the game.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I keep hoping for some int love. Not sure why they did it so dirty and stacked everything on Wis.They can also boost INT for... They can also boost INT!
Come on.
IMO you should get the Additional Lore feat for every Int boost, flavorful and far more useful long term than the trained skills (Wizards will love being able to identify all monster types on their best stat at zero extra investment).
Regarding the cloak of resistance suggestion, I wasn't really onboard at first but the more posts I read the more I agreed. I think I'd personally make it only for will saves and see how that goes; constitution doesn't have anything going for it other than defenses, while wisdom is very attractive for a lot of reasons even if we cut "invest or get mind controlled" from the list.
If I were going to try to go all in on Str and Cha for a character, I would either (in the case of an armor-wearing class) go for a way to avoid dex with heavy armor (I've taken Mighty Bulwark on a charismatic Barbarian), or in the case of something like the dragon monk I would probably try to split my stat ups 50/50 between say Wis and Con so I can go all in on Str/Dex/Cha then make up the rest with my class's save proficiencies.
The Monk can do just fine without investing much in one of Wis/Con/Dex. I believe during the Pathfinder playtest one of the Devs ran the whole thing through with a minimum AC monk who just hit and ran constantly and managed to survive.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Monk can do just fine without investing much in one of Wis/Con/Dex. I believe during the Pathfinder playtest one of the Devs ran the whole thing through with a minimum AC monk who just hit and ran constantly and managed to survive.
That character died, if I remember correctly.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I keep hoping for some int love. Not sure why they did it so dirty and stacked everything on Wis.They can also boost INT for... They can also boost INT!
Come on.
IMO you should get the Additional Lore feat for every Int boost, flavorful and far more useful long term than the trained skills (Wizards will love being able to identify all monster types on their best stat at zero extra investment).
Regarding the cloak of resistance suggestion, I wasn't really onboard at first but the more posts I read the more I agreed. I think I'd personally make it only for will saves and see how that goes; constitution doesn't have anything going for it other than defenses, while wisdom is very attractive for a lot of reasons even if we cut "invest or get mind controlled" from the list.
If you want to limit it a bit more, you can even make it so said item affects only Mental effects (When you attempt a Will save against an effect with the Mental Trait, you can treat your WIS score as if it were X).
With Psychic release in Dark Archive I could see an item working like that, a mental safeguard of sorts.
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
One thing I think that gets a little lost in the discussion surrounding the dragon monk is that it's all about enabling a specific build and, in fairness, you can jury rig something together that's fairly functional. Not top tier, probably, but it works.
But a lot of players I run into, especially newer players or players who don't think too heavily about mechanics, don't really make builds.
So we take a new player, someone who doesn't understand PF2 and is just putting together what sounds cool in their head. We give them these ideas for a dragon monk and help them figure out how to make it work.
Then they say "Oh I'm an Occult monk so I think it'd be pretty cool if I put skill increases in Occultism. I want to boost my Int because my character is kind of smart and I want to be better at that skill."
Realistically, I think a lot of people here would tell that player that that's a bad idea. That giving up a bit of Con or Wis for some Cha is workable, but giving up a lot of both for Int and Cha is going to be a big problem. That they should pick one or the other and forget about both, because it just isn't really going to be a pleasant experience trying to make that work.
Is that a good thing? Is Pathfinder better off for making that pairing de facto verboten?
This forum tends to be a bit more hardcore, which makes us a bit more optimization minded, which I think makes it easy to forget that a lot of players just want to do something because it sounds neat in their head.
I think it's kind of a bummer whenever someone shows up with an idea like that and gets told that they're making a bad decision and need to rethink their character.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
One thing I think that gets a little lost in the discussion surrounding the dragon monk is that it's all about enabling a specific build and, in fairness, you can jury rig something together that's fairly functional. Not top tier, probably, but it works.
But a lot of players I run into, especially newer players or players who don't think too heavily about mechanics, don't really make builds.
So we take a new player, someone who doesn't understand PF2 and is just putting together what sounds cool in their head. We give them these ideas for a dragon monk and help them figure out how to make it work.
Then they say "Oh I'm an Occult monk so I think it'd be pretty cool if I put skill increases in Occultism. I want to boost my Int because my character is kind of smart and I want to be better at that skill."
Realistically, I think a lot of people here would tell that player that that's a bad idea. That giving up a bit of Con or Wis for some Cha is workable, but giving up a lot of both for Int and Cha is going to be a big problem. That they should pick one or the other and forget about both, because it just isn't really going to be a pleasant experience trying to make that work.
Is that a good thing? Is Pathfinder better off for making that pairing de facto verboten?
This forum tends to be a bit more hardcore, which makes us a bit more optimization minded, which I think makes it easy to forget that a lot of players just want to do something because it sounds neat in their head.
I think it's kind of a bummer whenever someone shows up with an idea like that and gets told that they're making a bad decision and need to rethink their character.
Excellent point.
And even worse if they learn this lesson the hard way.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, having new players really want to make a specific character concept and having the fun drained out of it by MADness is not something uncommon in my experience.
I think Charisma is probably the best balanced ability score in the game as of now. If you invest in it, it rewards you, a lot, but you don't get passively punished for not having it. Investing in Charisma is more often than not a good choice, but it's always a choice. Compare that to Wisdom, which you might literally die for leaving low for too long, or at the very least have a high chance of getting insta-dunked out of a fight every time you get targeted by a Will ability/spell with a debilitating crit fail effect (spoiler: most of them).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
+1 for Will bulwark-like effects.
Selecting between Int ans Wis for my boost should be a meaningful choice without an obvious solution.
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
So we take a new player, someone who doesn't understand PF2 and is just putting together what sounds cool in their head. We give them these ideas for a dragon monk and help them figure out how to make it work.
Yup! This is why I'm in favor of a design that allows people to shore up their egregious weaknesses within the system. We can't go around calling PF2 newbie approachable and balanced and then pull the rug on players who unknowingly made early choices that are later making them unhappy. And you don't want a new player's first character experience to end with "yeah, it kind of sucked by the GM let me rebuild him, but at that point I didn't really care and wanted to make a new guy"
I think SuperBidi is definitely onto something with the idea of Bulwark-for-other-saves, and the pushback he's getting doesn't feel warranted. I feel there's plenty of design space to allow for feat/item/spell coverage of a Will/Con Bulwark type effect. Outright rejecting the idea without even talking about how to make it work seems knee-jerky.
Like, in my opinion, Canny Acumen is trying to do this but not quite doing enough, because it's not addressing stats just the proficiency. If there were a Canny Acumen that made you treat your ability score as higher for saves you're already really close to a solution.