Kineticist: What is awesome about them?


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 103 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

5 people marked this as a favorite.

So... I have a fair bit of confidence that when Paizo winds up making the Kineticist, they're going to do a pretty solid job of it. I expect a result more or less on par with the Magus - not the same as what came before, exactly, but a class with enough overall effectiveness that you can pick it without feeling that you've made a mistake, that's still pretty darned satisfying for the feel of the class (...in that case, the ability to wield both blade and magic, and feel like both were working together in a useful and synergistic way).

I've come to realize that part of the difficulty with Kineticist discussions is that the people who are eager for the Kineticist have wildly divergent ideas of what they want the feel of the class to be... and then we wrap that in implementation specifics, and then we argue about implementation specifics. Now, we have a thread that is looking at practicalities, and trying to find some interesting stuff on the implementation side, and that's cool, but I'd like to turn around and take it the exact opposite direction, and try to take it back as far as we can to the "what do you actually want" side.

Let us further, for the moment, assume that the designers are benevolent and highly capable, and that whatever comes out of the other side of this process won't be shafted just because we asked for the wrong thing. It will be balanced and satisfying, and the only question is what it is. It's certainly fair to say things like "I don't care about X,and I don't want to have to pay for it" but (for the purpose of this thought exercise) you don't have to worry that asking for the wrong things will wind up with a class that is broken or terrible. Just say the stuff that you actually want, and try to distill it down as far as you can.

For me?
- I don't care about daily resource pools (burn, etc). I don't want to have to think about them, and I don't want to have to pay for them. I accept that this means that I will never be as powerful as a caster who's going all-out in the fights where they're going all-out.
- I want to play around with what 4e would have called controller stuff - area effect, multitarget, terrain modification, debilitating conditions, and so forth. I'm not all that particular about which bits out of that bucket are allowed, as long as there's a decent number to choose from. I'd like at least a bit of round-to-round flexibility with this (say, buying options with feats). I am totally cool with having no additional encounter-to-encounter or day-to-day flexibility. I accept that this means that my direct single-target damage will be lower.
- I want to have a few cool/interesting at-will utility effects. I accept that this means that my overall combat ability will be somewhat lower.
- I want to be explicitly magical. I want to feel like I'm wielding supernatural powers. It turns out that I'm not necessarily fundamentally opposed to the idea of basing it all on a funky unarmed attack (this was a surprise to me - I only figured it out just now) but if it's going to be based on an unarmed attack, I want there to be something about the class that makes it feel magical and interesting and different in a way that "it's like a punch, but range 30, and fire damage" just doesn't. It would be nice to be able to target save DCs, at least some of the time.
- In general, I like having lots of interesting build choices to make. It would be nice (though not required) to have more choices than just "where do I spend my feats?"

...and that went on rather longer than I expected. I am maybe not so good at distillation. Still, I pass the question to you all. What, specifically, are the things that you are hoping for from the Kineticist? What are the specific bits that would give you the play experience that you want? (I suppose in part I'm hoping to get past the "I want the PF1 Kineticist" because as far as I can tell different people can mean very different things when they say that.)


7 people marked this as a favorite.

For me it wouldn't feel like a kinetesist if it didn't meet the following criteria

Have some utility element moving powers.

Be able to shoot a kinetic blast or whack something with a kinetic blade.

Apply some infusion control effects to those kinetic blast/blade

Be able to do some area of effect damage.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I want the ability to have very powerful effects, and do not want to pay focus point for it. They should cost HP just like the original.

I want a lot of utility options, not just 1-2, but every class feat if I can pick them. To me the utility powers make or break a kineticist and the dev should make sure that they work.

I want a lot of ways to modify the blast not. Not just change it to AoE or add a bit of damage, but being able to add many other abilities. Really should not cost any feats and just be part of level up (preferably 10 options).

I want the ability to mix and match elements. If the class can't do that, then its gonna feel bad.

I want kinetic blasts to be as strong as a two attacks from a ranger. I want composite blast to be as strong as two attacks from a fighter. A kinetic blast with the power of a cantrip is bad.

The elemental defense should be unique for each element and there should be utility talents that enhance that defense. The defense should not cost any burn, but spending burn on it should make it much better and spending burn for other abilities should make your defense temporarily stronger (1 round).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

What is awesome is Kineticist opens up tons of PC concepts (including many superheroes) that have splashy special effects, odd body types, energy-themed martials w/ AoEs, and non-weapon builds w/o martial arts (or weapon build that create their own weapon too). Plus all the PF1 variants tied to blood, spirit, void, etc. opening up abilities that break away from spell lists, can be spammed (which yes, requires balancing, but allows PCs to stay on theme the whole day), and can be reskinned to suit even more concepts.
So yeah, the mechanics seem secondary to that, though many of the PF1 ones (i.e. Burn & action usage) would be good frameworks for power caps and balancing in PF2. Coming from PF2, Cantrips and Stances (especially some of those Monk ones) also form good baselines, i.e. perhaps a Kineticist Stance adds damage to Cantrips which match up in energy type, much like being the Barbarian of Cantrips. (And yes, I think a Rage-like ability, but for their kinetic blasts, would be kinda cool, albeit as frosting, not cake.)


3 people marked this as a favorite.

As long as the kinetic blast is fairly chunky in damage and the class has some element-focused utility I'd be happy. I'm also in the camp of not minding that a potential kineticist may not do as much damage if it means they can be more flexible with how they do that damage, or have some non-combat utility on top of it.
I'd like their extra class feature to be a pool of effects to augment their blast from to make each element feel more unique, akin to how the inventor gets a few free picks to augment their innovation, or how summoner eidolons progress. To save page space I'd like if some of these picks could be selected by multiple elements, like in PF1E.

Apart from that I'd be fine with whatever. If the kineticist does more single target damage than a cantrip can--area damage I've got no idea--than a caster, but has a bit more utility than a typical martial, I'll be happy.

One small thing too. If burn comes back as a mechanic I'd like to see it operate as more of a binary state, like panache, only perhaps in reverse. Tracking a separate pool seems needlessly complicated, and there are focus points should that be necessary anyway.

And that's basically it; I'm fairly easy to please.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Count me in on the superhero boat. I've always been interested in DND, but my main love growing up was comics, anime and such. When I finally did read into ttrpgs, a lot of things didn't really grab me. It was (I'm over simplifying of course) either regular dude with magic items, or magical person who can do cool thing a certain number of times per day. Nothing that really got what I wanted quite right. Then I looked at pathfinders kineticist - a ton of at will powers, themed to a specific thing (also like limited power sets used creatively).

As I learned more about them I learned to love them more and more. Gameplay was varied, fun, and customized to however you built your character. Much like a superhero it wasnt reliant on items. It was the best of both worlds, sort of martial but also castery.

The main things I hope for in a kineticist are at will blasts that can be changed to have different effects on enemies and change the ways the blasts are used (damage an area, etc.), not needing damage runes and at will utility powers.

I'm wary of burn for a few reasons. One, I don't think it will mesh well with focus spells, being able to use 3 focus spells and then go through burn spells is a lot. Two, burn will dip into the power budget of the class I feel like, being able to nuke hard a few times would mean normal hits would have to be weaker. I would love for blasts to hit as hard as a martial, but having the flexibility of targeting an area or applying conditions, at the cost of not getting to attack as many times in a round (one big hit instead of a bunch of them).


4 people marked this as a favorite.

A very tough, self-damaging ranged class with at-will utility stronger than cantrips. Telekinesis as an option is a big part of the appeal to me.

In PF1, I particularly appreciated: being able to turn any object into a campfire, being able to suffocate someone at-will (even if it required burn to do it in an effective time span, just being able to use it to shut someone up was the stylish part), being able to telekinetically lug hundreds-to-thousands of pounds around, being able to manipulate sound across vast distances, and getting scaling DR.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

UNLIMITED POWER!

But Unlimited Power hurts, like a lot.

Eventually you pass out, so I guess there are limits... but your only limit is YOU.


To me, as long as the class is a more at will approach to elemental blasting, uses CON for real as its main stat, has some form of recoil mechanic due to use of excessive power and has some utility tied to the elements in it, I will see it as a faithful Kineticist.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I hope we will have them soon do that mention of Kineticist in ANY thread stops turning said thread into the newest "Kineticist and how best to build the class" discussion.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I want a war of attrition class, the "I can do this all day" character that just keeps launching volley after volley of pseudo-magical bombs at the enemy until they eventually die to chip damage (worst case scenario.)

I also want to be able to play elemental users like Shoto Todoroki and Katsuki Bakugo from Hero Aca, Iceman and Storm from X-Men, literally the whole non-normie cast of Fire Force, the slew of LoL characters like Annie, Zeri, Lissandra, Tahlia, ect. ect. And of course the ever-tropey AtlA, but that's ancillary to me at this point. I just want something that lets me be "dude with [fire/lightening/ice/some combination] powers who got them for reasons..." that isn't a re-re-re-re-painted Arcane or Primal slot caster.

Back to the original question of this thread. Kineticist are awesome because they fill a flavor hole that so many media love to use, that most ttrpgs that are not explicitly based on those pieces of media tend to fail to represent. They let you be "not quite magician who can yeet fireballs as good as the wizard, and do other stuff with fire he can't even dream of." They let you be the power house that walks up, summons a bolt of lightening on themselves before electrocuting everyone in a 50 foot radius. They let you be the nomad that wanders the tundra in a t-shirt and shorts and can summon the rage of the blizzard if you annoy them too much. THEY LET YOU BE A LOGIA USER FROM ONE PIECE! That's awesome, they're awesome, and I want them...

Shadow Lodge

Touch Ac.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I just want to at will pew pew with magic elemental damage stronger than a cantrip. Outside of that I want focus point utility/blast powers. Martial accuracy would be preferred. That's all I really want out of the kineticist. Anything else on top of that would be cream.

Grand Lodge

If there is any kind of HP attrition built in to the class, then CON as the main attribute and a d10 hp. If no Attrition, then d8 hp is fine.
I want a multi-action variant blast: 1, 2 and 3 action options.
I want infusions and talents.
I'd like Kineticist to be based on class DC, using it for any roll based on class abilities, and have it go up to master.


I'm not trying to be combative, but I am curious about why you'd want kineticist to be about attrition? It's not really what the class has been about, traditionally, it's been about blasting for the most part.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Gaulin wrote:
I'm not trying to be combative, but I am curious about why you'd want kineticist to be about attrition? It's not really what the class has been about, traditionally, it's been about blasting for the most part.

Some people REALLY, REALLY, REALLY love the Burn mechanic. A lot. Myself, I want the opposite. I don't really get the Burn love but to each there own.


If we can cater to both sides that would be great.

But it requires that paizo doesn't nerf everything because a person can get a bit more damage and utility at the cost of literally losing HP.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Kineticist is cool because it's a martial with a magical flavor and because there's a massive number of popular character types (blast-throwing superheroes, elemental benders from Avatar, bootleg Solarians) the class enables. Anything about specific mechanics is miles behind these two points, IMO.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Isn't attrition the opposite of burn? Like you want to outlast opponents, not hurt yourself to deal more damage.


Hmm... I'd wager there was a poorly chosen wording here. Sounds like what was meant by attrition is the same as what others have described as 'all day blasting' with emphasis on not having limited resources but time and health (presumably the resources undergoing attrition in this understanding).

In any case, yes the best of kineticist is saying "I want to shoot stuff out if my hands and control it with my mind but without getting into spells and the caster trappings". The mechanic of burning away stamina to strengthen ones powers us also really cool so I want to see some form of it, but I also would rather it be possible to go for a standard blaster that doesnt burn.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gaulin wrote:
Isn't attrition the opposite of burn? Like you want to outlast opponents, not hurt yourself to deal more damage.

Hmmm... Well it depends on if you're talking about attrition of your own hp or the attrition of your foes. I took it as hp but I can see you might be talking about nick1wasd post. If so, then yes, it'd be opposite.

As to why? There are plenty of characters that fall into the 'element bending' category that fit it and PF2 hasn't been exactly doing what I'd say it exact copies of what the PF1 classes where so just because the PF1 class wasn't like that doesn't mean it will be that way in PF2. In fact firestarter gets pointed to as an example of burn, but the main character, Charlene "Charlie" McGee the firestarter herself didn't have the limitations of nose bleeds, headaches, ect.


graystone wrote:
Gaulin wrote:
I'm not trying to be combative, but I am curious about why you'd want kineticist to be about attrition? It's not really what the class has been about, traditionally, it's been about blasting for the most part.
Some people REALLY, REALLY, REALLY love the Burn mechanic. A lot. Myself, I want the opposite. I don't really get the Burn love but to each there own.

Personally, what I really like is the idea of drawing too much power at once having consecuences. I like that a lot, but I couldn't care less if that is translated into another iteration of burn or into something completely new.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path Subscriber
keftiu wrote:
Kineticist is cool because it's a martial with a magical flavor

That’s just about the last thing I want and very different from how I felt playing a PF1 kineticist.

Or if they do go that route, then hopefully they’ll also create the all-day caster that I want to see.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
AnimatedPaper wrote:
keftiu wrote:
Kineticist is cool because it's a martial with a magical flavor

That’s just about the last thing I want and very different from how I felt playing a PF1 kineticist.

Or if they do go that route, then hopefully they’ll also create the all-day caster that I want to see.

If kineticist isn't as accurate as a martial, how many spell slots do they get to compensate? I always figured caster levels of to hit on something that could ONLY pew pew would feel kind of depressing.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I want the Kineticist as a D12 Con class, personally. The most HP I have ever had on a PC was on a Kineticist in PF1, you should be supernaturally durable since you basically do resistance training with every atom of your body.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I want the Kineticist as a D12 Con class, personally. The most HP I have ever had on a PC was on a Kineticist in PF1, you should be supernaturally durable since you basically do resistance training with every atom of your body.

LOL Kineticist hp in PF1 where an illusion: when you have to take 7 burn to get your bonuses, those hp drop at least 4xlevel and more likely 5xlevel. Even at low levels, from 3+ you're always under max hp. I'd rather just get the end result and skip the horse and pony show PF had to get there. For me, your Con bonus for the PF1 Kineticist reminds me of a Venture Brothers quote:

"Mexican University Administrator:
...your check, Dr. Venture. Muchas gracias.

Dr. Venture:
Super good! Very generous of y-oh, pesos. Great. These zeros are all meaningless."

Liberty's Edge

AnimatedPaper wrote:
keftiu wrote:
Kineticist is cool because it's a martial with a magical flavor

That’s just about the last thing I want and very different from how I felt playing a PF1 kineticist.

Or if they do go that route, then hopefully they’ll also create the all-day caster that I want to see.

I have the intuition that what you and Keftiu describe is very likely the same thing, or very close, but that the words used have different meanings for you and her.

Hence the apparent opposition.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path Subscriber
WWHsmackdown wrote:
If kineticist isn't as accurate as a martial, how many spell slots do they get to compensate?

None.

And that is kind of where my idea and the "magical martial" diverge. Casters don't need the higher accuracy because they use all 4 success states. Martials mostly don't, so they usually need to at least hit.

Further, I don't see why it should be assumed that kineticists will just do damage. Casters hand out status effects like candy, both to their enemies and allies; kineticists should as well through the use of their infusions and utility talents.

The closest thing I can get to what I'd like to see is the bomber alchemist, if the alchemist reagent ability worked on an encounter basis instead of as a daily pool, and you had a lot more flexibility in the exact effects your bombs had rather than being restricted to only a few types. Though in trade your weapon skills, probably armor, and in fact your ability to use permanent items to boost your prowess generally, would be much curtailed.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path Subscriber
The Raven Black wrote:
AnimatedPaper wrote:
keftiu wrote:
Kineticist is cool because it's a martial with a magical flavor

That’s just about the last thing I want and very different from how I felt playing a PF1 kineticist.

Or if they do go that route, then hopefully they’ll also create the all-day caster that I want to see.

I have the intuition that what you and Keftiu describe is very likely the same thing, or very close, but that the words used have different meanings for you and her.

Hence the apparent opposition.

I addressed, then deleted, but this really does need to be addressed.

No.

There's a fair amount of distance between what we'd like to see. As an illustrative example, she has previously argued that kineticists don't need a tradition at all. Which makes perfect sense from a flavor stand point if what you're looking for is a magically infused martial, since elements particularly are not tied to a single tradition, nor does any one tradition cover all of the PF1 elements. I'll go as far as to say that having Monks (currently probably the most generically magical of all martials) have a tradition is a point against them. I'd have MUCH rather they had the Thaum approach of just sticking to their class DC, with their feats allowing them to tap into all the traditions as needed. But from my stand point, having a tradition to inform the flavor and approach of what the class does is rather more fundamental to what I'd like to see.

Please note I am stating this in terms of what I'd like to see and from what I understand of her viewpoints; I am stating neither as an absolute "must have or it isn't a kineticist."


Kineticist is very much a caster with the trappings of a martial. All of the things they do is cast abilities, with the very basic ability being treated like a unique weapon for most purposes. But it is still something that is "cast".

While yes kineticist should have martial like power and ways to interact with ki, make weapons, and infuse weapons. That is not the default most generic kineticist. The most generic kineticist is a character that one turn throws a blast of energy dealing damage (targets AC), then the next they might make a character sickened (targets needs saves), then the next they can create an explosion (targets save), and the next they can start flying through the sky and bring down lightning.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Someone in another thread earlier brought up monks and their ties to occult and divine

Makes me think Kineticist should almost be the arcane and nature “monks”. That could well be something someone else has said

Then reverse them so that the primary is ranged rather than melee but there are options for that much like how mono gets ranged options.

Although this seems more geared towards the other thread that was alluded to in the OP. Although nearly everyone else ignored the “brief” in that OP and jumped into mechanical points (including, to be frank, some utterly ludicrous ones that will never be delivered on and therefore see some very very disappointed people)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lanathar wrote:

Someone in another thread earlier brought up monks and their ties to occult and divine

Makes me think Kineticist should almost be the arcane and nature “monks”. That could well be something someone else has said

Then reverse them so that the primary is ranged rather than melee but there are options for that much like how mono gets ranged options.

Although this seems more geared towards the other thread that was alluded to in the OP. Although nearly everyone else ignored the “brief” in that OP and jumped into mechanical points (including, to be frank, some utterly ludicrous ones that will never be delivered on and therefore see some very very disappointed people)

This would be my preferred design for kineticist, honestly.


WWHsmackdown wrote:
Lanathar wrote:

Someone in another thread earlier brought up monks and their ties to occult and divine

Makes me think Kineticist should almost be the arcane and nature “monks”. That could well be something someone else has said

Then reverse them so that the primary is ranged rather than melee but there are options for that much like how mono gets ranged options.

Although this seems more geared towards the other thread that was alluded to in the OP. Although nearly everyone else ignored the “brief” in that OP and jumped into mechanical points (including, to be frank, some utterly ludicrous ones that will never be delivered on and therefore see some very very disappointed people)

This would be my preferred design for kineticist, honestly.

It’s grown on me the more I think about it. “Stances” are one action to enter for monks so could be almost “infusion channels”.

Focus points for certain other things (I know some really don’t want them). But it does seem like something you’d except all Kineticists to have rather than being optional like the monk.

Monks also all get a standard attack special action - flurry. So that gives “design budget” for something there. They are also already pseudo magical with their mystic and metal strikes

10 HP is solid and likely the highest the class would ever have. The saves thing could be dialled back as monks have the best saves but the space gained in relaxing them opens up room for some kind of kinetic defence

Another thing about using the monk as inspiration is that there wouldn’t really be an avenue for burn to be put in. I thought it was something most agreed should be part but apparently not. The existing examples of how it could work in the 2E rules could well be rather punishing (it really doesn’t seem like it is going to be simple HP damage that you can just medicine back).


Agreed with the two posts above emphatically; the Monk is my ideal model from existing class structures in 2e, albeit one that’s hopefully doing more elementally-typed damage and with a greater reach/ranged focus. The note about Kineticists using the two traditions they don’t is a clever one.

And I’m desperate for more Stances! They’re so fun. A class that focused more on shifting between them mid-combat would be such a fun play experience; swapping from a Blast to a Blade to a tripping Whip as the fight demanded… I want this.


Lanathar wrote:
WWHsmackdown wrote:
Lanathar wrote:

Someone in another thread earlier brought up monks and their ties to occult and divine

Makes me think Kineticist should almost be the arcane and nature “monks”. That could well be something someone else has said

Then reverse them so that the primary is ranged rather than melee but there are options for that much like how mono gets ranged options.

Although this seems more geared towards the other thread that was alluded to in the OP. Although nearly everyone else ignored the “brief” in that OP and jumped into mechanical points (including, to be frank, some utterly ludicrous ones that will never be delivered on and therefore see some very very disappointed people)

This would be my preferred design for kineticist, honestly.

It’s grown on me the more I think about it. “Stances” are one action to enter for monks so could be almost “infusion channels”.

Focus points for certain other things (I know some really don’t want them). But it does seem like something you’d except all Kineticists to have rather than being optional like the monk.

Monks also all get a standard attack special action - flurry. So that gives “design budget” for something there. They are also already pseudo magical with their mystic and metal strikes

10 HP is solid and likely the highest the class would ever have. The saves thing could be dialled back as monks have the best saves but the space gained in relaxing them opens up room for some kind of kinetic defence

Another thing about using the monk as inspiration is that there wouldn’t really be an avenue for burn to be put in. I thought it was something most agreed should be part but apparently not. The existing examples of how it could work in the 2E rules could well be rather punishing (it really doesn’t seem like it is going to be simple HP damage that you can just medicine back).

...

So your idea for kineticist is to just make an elemental monk and call it a day. Yeah I hate that with a passion because that is the complete opposite of how a Kineticist should feel.

While I agree with the HP and maybe saves, I heavily disagree with everything else. Specially with your characterizarion of Burn as,

Quote:
HP damage that can just be healed with medicine

Burn is quite literally unhealable by anything and can only be removed 1/day after resting. The reason its so important is that its a direct measure of how much risk fo you want now or later. Suplanting it with focus points defeats the point because you are not supposed to have infinite uses of burn outside of gather power and burn reduction. Just like it would defeat the point of an alchemist having reagents and perpetual infusion if they could just use focus points to make an infinite amount. Or the point of Cleric having a pool of heal/inflict spells if they could just use focus points. It inherently cheapens the cost, which inevitably means Paizo just nerfs the whole thing.

Also paying an action for a kinetic infusion is just straight up bad when infusions are not stances but modifications you do to blasts.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I'm running Wrath of the Righteous and at level 7/Mythic 1, the Kineticist in my party is incredibly tough, since a Kineticist can add +2 Con at 3 points of Burn, it does ablate some of the issues with the non-lethal damage. On top of that, when a PC is knocked unconscious with a big pool of Non-Lethal Damage, most enemies either move on to another target, or attempt a Coup De Grace, which the Kineticist can have a suprisingly good chance of surviving with a successful Fortitude save.

Plus with the right use of actions the kineticists have these incredible alpha strikes that absolutely feel like pure anime bull****, but are extremely satisfying for the player and the GM because it always comes at a real cost if you're running a multiple encounter day.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Temperans wrote:
Lanathar wrote:
WWHsmackdown wrote:
Lanathar wrote:

Someone in another thread earlier brought up monks and their ties to occult and divine

Makes me think Kineticist should almost be the arcane and nature “monks”. That could well be something someone else has said

Then reverse them so that the primary is ranged rather than melee but there are options for that much like how mono gets ranged options.

Although this seems more geared towards the other thread that was alluded to in the OP. Although nearly everyone else ignored the “brief” in that OP and jumped into mechanical points (including, to be frank, some utterly ludicrous ones that will never be delivered on and therefore see some very very disappointed people)

This would be my preferred design for kineticist, honestly.

It’s grown on me the more I think about it. “Stances” are one action to enter for monks so could be almost “infusion channels”.

Focus points for certain other things (I know some really don’t want them). But it does seem like something you’d except all Kineticists to have rather than being optional like the monk.

Monks also all get a standard attack special action - flurry. So that gives “design budget” for something there. They are also already pseudo magical with their mystic and metal strikes

10 HP is solid and likely the highest the class would ever have. The saves thing could be dialled back as monks have the best saves but the space gained in relaxing them opens up room for some kind of kinetic defence

Another thing about using the monk as inspiration is that there wouldn’t really be an avenue for burn to be put in. I thought it was something most agreed should be part but apparently not. The existing examples of how it could work in the 2E rules could well be rather punishing (it really doesn’t seem like it is going to be simple HP damage that you can just medicine back).

...

So your idea for kineticist is to just make an elemental monk and call it a day....

Luckily, if the class is ever playtested these concepts and more can be put in the field to try out and be morphed by feedback. I might not get the exact kineticist I want but I will get one the majority wanted. I have to make peace with that as much as you do.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Temperans wrote:
Lanathar wrote:
WWHsmackdown wrote:
Lanathar wrote:

Someone in another thread earlier brought up monks and their ties to occult and divine

Makes me think Kineticist should almost be the arcane and nature “monks”. That could well be something someone else has said

Then reverse them so that the primary is ranged rather than melee but there are options for that much like how mono gets ranged options.

Although this seems more geared towards the other thread that was alluded to in the OP. Although nearly everyone else ignored the “brief” in that OP and jumped into mechanical points (including, to be frank, some utterly ludicrous ones that will never be delivered on and therefore see some very very disappointed people)

This would be my preferred design for kineticist, honestly.

It’s grown on me the more I think about it. “Stances” are one action to enter for monks so could be almost “infusion channels”.

Focus points for certain other things (I know some really don’t want them). But it does seem like something you’d except all Kineticists to have rather than being optional like the monk.

Monks also all get a standard attack special action - flurry. So that gives “design budget” for something there. They are also already pseudo magical with their mystic and metal strikes

10 HP is solid and likely the highest the class would ever have. The saves thing could be dialled back as monks have the best saves but the space gained in relaxing them opens up room for some kind of kinetic defence

Another thing about using the monk as inspiration is that there wouldn’t really be an avenue for burn to be put in. I thought it was something most agreed should be part but apparently not. The existing examples of how it could work in the 2E rules could well be rather punishing (it really doesn’t seem like it is going to be simple HP damage that you can just medicine back).

...

So your idea for kineticist is to just make an elemental monk and call it a day....

Ah. So what has happened is you have not read what I wrote and read what you wanted to read instead. And then created a whole new thread about it

Of course I didn’t mean elemental monks as they exist. I meant design principles and very high level theme

And as to “how they should feel” - there tend to be a wide range of responses to what that is. Yours is not the only answer. You are on one end and extremely unwilling to budge from it. That is fine. You do you. You risk being disappointed though.

(Mine is not even an answer as I have no fondness for the class but moved from my original position on it)

On a more simple point - my point on HP and burn was dismissing the idea of changing it to pure HP damage in 2E. I am well aware of how it worked in 1E but there is currently no mechanism for unhealable HP in 2E and they have deliberately tried to avoid fiddly things like that in the design. So I was saying Burn will likely not be HP damage in any form in 2E


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think I've said it in another thread but one reason I'm so interested in starfinder right now is the upcoming evolutionist class. The wait for kineticist is excruciating (and the final product might not be what I personally hope for anyway) and I realized that evolutionist has all the things I really loved about kineticist and a little more. It has a scaling, built in weapon. It can spend it's resource on various buffs (no daily limit except for a few things) from senses to movement to defenses. It's attack can also be modified to damage an area, have longer reach, different damage types, etc. And on top of all of that it's very very open flavor wise - you can throw fireballs, sure. But you could also be a skeleton that manifests bone claws/armor/etc. You could be a chimera of some kind that fires spikes out of their tail. Sky's the limit.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

You know what I think makes the Kineticist feel good. It feels like building a deck.

I had some time to kill yesterday and I built a 7th level telekineticist/chaokineticist VMC rogue.

He'll never be a big damage build, but he can pick a lock and disable a trap from 30 ft. Away, he can lift a 7,000 lb statue in the air through sheer force or will (put that in the way of a door for a very effective lock).

A telekineticist can be an effective skill monkey.

Silver Crusade Contributor

11 people marked this as a favorite.

Hmmmmm.

So I've been playing a PF1 kineticist in Reign of Winter for a while now (just hit 12th level), in addition to my original bona fides. I love the class in its 1e iteration. So what would I like to see come forward?

Thematically:
I love the feel of the class as a sort of wellspring/conduit for overwhelming power, not unlike the PF2 oracle. I am particularly fond of the feeling of pushing your limits, something most classes just didn't have. As a sorcerer, you either have spell slots left or you don't; there's no mechanic to squeeze out just one more spell, or to go all Tellah, convert your HP to MP, and unleash your ultimate power at great cost. Kineticist brought that feel and that flavor to the game.

Mechanically:
The go-all-day nature of the class is important, though it's less unique in a system with scaling cantrips. The gather power and infusion specialization elements of the original were integral to this, letting you feel like you were doing more than just a basic attack every round because you had to save your resources for the big fight; I'm not sure how the present system and its emphasis on limited resources will handle this, though. I'm also a huge fan of the burn mechanic, since it so perfectly supports the thematic elements mentioned above; so, speaking for myself, I'd like to see that element as a cornerstone of the class again.

The mix of utility and blasting is important too. My fire/water kineticist in RoW can not only blast with eruptions and ranged attacks, but can also heal via kinetic healer and even provide restoration effects via kinetic restoration and (the admittedly officially story-limited) purging flame. I'd really like to see that come forward in some way, though again, given the new edition's emphasis on limited resources, I'm not sure what form that'd take. (In this edition, perhaps something akin to the champion's Mercy feats would be appropriate?)

Anyway, just my random thoughts during my annual visit to the forums. ^_^

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Always wonderful to see you on the boards Kalindlara :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kalindlara wrote:

Hmmmmm.

So I've been playing a PF1 kineticist in Reign of Winter for a while now (just hit 12th level), in addition to my original bona fides. I love the class in its 1e iteration. So what would I like to see come forward?

Thematically:
I love the feel of the class as a sort of wellspring/conduit for overwhelming power, not unlike the PF2 oracle. I am particularly fond of the feeling of pushing your limits, something most classes just didn't have. As a sorcerer, you either have spell slots left or you don't; there's no mechanic to squeeze out just one more spell, or to go all Tellah, convert your HP to MP, and unleash your ultimate power at great cost. Kineticist brought that feel and that flavor to the game.

Mechanically:
The go-all-day nature of the class is important, though it's less unique in a system with scaling cantrips. The gather power and infusion specialization elements of the original were integral to this, letting you feel like you were doing more than just a basic attack every round because you had to save your resources for the big fight; I'm not sure how the present system and its emphasis on limited resources will handle this, though. I'm also a huge fan of the burn mechanic, since it so perfectly supports the thematic elements mentioned above; so, speaking for myself, I'd like to see that element as a cornerstone of the class again.

The mix of utility and blasting is important too. My fire/water kineticist in RoW can not only blast with eruptions and ranged attacks, but can also heal via kinetic healer and even provide restoration effects via kinetic restoration and (the admittedly officially story-limited) purging flame. I'd really like to see that come forward in some way, though again, given the new edition's emphasis on limited resources, I'm not sure what form that'd take. (In this edition, perhaps something akin to the...

1,000 thank you for the kinetic knight. Its such a great archetype and I whole heartedly agree that kineticist is built around pushing yourself just that bit more.

Its like when the hero is in a fight and they start struggling. So they push their power beyond the limit even if they get hurt because taking down the bad guy is just that important.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think "pushing yourself beyond your limits" should not be restricted to a class. An Archetype would be far better.

For example gaining or increasing Doomed to get one instance of something big.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Raven Black wrote:

I think "pushing yourself beyond your limits" should not be restricted to a class. An Archetype would be far better.

For example gaining or increasing Doomed to get one instance of something big.

A burn archetype works [and that would be my preference] but it'd be fine as a set of feats inside the class that's compartmentalized away from the main features: that way, any class could multiclass and pick them up.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

A kineticist should feel like they have a toolbox. Single target damage, aoe damage, status effects, battlefield control, defensive options, mobility, skill options. The right kineticist could have some or even all of these on a single character.

Furthermore, they should be able to do most of these things all day long, with the ability to push themselves into the danger zone for their flashiest, strongest effects.

A kineticist should feel just as good blending options as they are focusing on a single power source. A kineticist should not just be a primal caster.

...

The problem, of course, is that PF2 so far has been very cautious about all of these things. PF2 characters are generally anti-toolbox, getting a couple things they excel at and some serious blond spots. At-will AoE options are rare and often high level (see: devastating weaponry, whirlwind attack, impossible volley). Characters that do get capabilities like this are usually locked behind limited resources like spellcasting or focus points.

PF2 also is very narrow about class options. You get a class feat every even level... and that just doesn't feel like enough space for utility talents, infusions, other wild talents, and normal class feats.

I feel like in order to create the Kineticist, it would have to radically deviate from how Paizo normally designs classes... and therefore probably be in a fairly late book when Paizo is more willing to get experimental and/or have a Rare tag slapped on it.

Gaulin wrote:
I'm not trying to be combative, but I am curious about why you'd want kineticist to be about attrition? It's not really what the class has been about, traditionally, it's been about blasting for the most part.

"War of attrition" I think was used to illustrate that they wanted the Kineticist to be able to last. Contrast with a witch who can cast top level spells for three rounds before they're done with that.

AnimatedPaper wrote:
Casters don't need the higher accuracy because they use all 4 success states.

Spell attacks generally don't. They just kind of miss a lot and nobody likes using them without true strike.

Whenever someone talks about caster proficiencies I just get reminded of our wizard missing a polar ray on a 14.


graystone wrote:
The Raven Black wrote:

I think "pushing yourself beyond your limits" should not be restricted to a class. An Archetype would be far better.

For example gaining or increasing Doomed to get one instance of something big.

A burn archetype works [and that would be my preference] but it'd be fine as a set of feats inside the class that's compartmentalized away from the main features: that way, any class could multiclass and pick them up.

While I think that it should be the core of the class and not some minor aspect of it, specially not just a random archetype that anyone can get. If people want to get kinetic blast, infusion, and utility talents they should pay just as much as a kineticist has to pay to get abilities from those classes.

Even more so because compartmentalizing it creates a huge issue of what is mandatory/feat taxes. Lets not make Kineticist the new Alchemist.


Squiggit wrote:

A kineticist should feel like they have a toolbox. Single target damage, aoe damage, status effects, battlefield control, defensive options, mobility, skill options. The right kineticist could have some or even all of these on a single character.

Furthermore, they should be able to do most of these things all day long, with the ability to push themselves into the danger zone for their flashiest, strongest effects.

A kineticist should feel just as good blending options as they are focusing on a single power source. A kineticist should not just be a primal caster.

Ok, so far that sounds fine and nothing that would require more than focus and picking the right feats. I mean what you list can be done with a monk NOW so it seems possible with a new class.

Squiggit wrote:
The problem, of course, is that PF2 so far has been very cautious about all of these things. PF2 characters are generally anti-toolbox, getting a couple things they excel at and some serious blond spots. At-will AoE options are rare and often high level (see: devastating weaponry, whirlwind attack, impossible volley). Characters that do get capabilities like this are usually locked behind limited resources like spellcasting or focus points.

Depends what you mean by 'at will' really. If it's something that can be done every encounter, that not an issue and if you mean every round, then Scatter Scree and Gale Blast are examples of those. Now I'll agree we'll likely see undertuning like every post-core class but that'd be with or without burn.

Squiggit wrote:
PF2 also is very narrow about class options. You get a class feat every even level... and that just doesn't feel like enough space for utility talents, infusions, other wild talents, and normal class feats.

Well I don't expect that it'll be as expansive as before and that you'll have to narrow your focus [again with or without burn]. It also doesn't HAVE to follow the normal feat progression [rogues don't with skill feats] or some could use other feats like general.

Squiggit wrote:
I feel like in order to create the Kineticist, it would have to radically deviate from how Paizo normally designs classes... and therefore probably be in a fairly late book when Paizo is more willing to get experimental and/or have a Rare tag slapped on it.

Well it depends how tied they would be on the closeness to the PF1 version they are. The less they care about matching it, the less extra work they have to put into doing that. I mean, why should we expect it to cleave as close to PF1 after looking at what all an alchemist and summoner could do vs the PF2 versions.

1 to 50 of 103 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / Kineticist: What is awesome about them? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.