| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I really hope they don't do this. But that's because I find damage turrets INCREDIBLY BORING. I made one flurry ranger and never again. I fell asleep at the table twice.
I'd rather them have better attacks and retain map.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with Martialmasters in a different way. Making Elemental Blast MAPless would give us boringness.
IMO one of the most interesting concept of the currently Kineticist Class Playtest is the many available Impulse feats. This give us a myriad of possibilities without turning the class as a spellslot caster.
If becomes possible to use Elemental Blast without MAP this would solve the damage and hit problem but also will eclipse the others Impulse magics.
IMO the Kineticist could have some Con based damage boost and way less action economy restrictions to allow it to use different Impulses in same action just like a low level Druid can cast Tempest Surge/Eletric Arc and Strike with a weapon or a Summoner can cast Eletric Arc/Strike twice with Eidolon. The current Kineticist is preventing this happen between different Impulses. If use a Overflow Impulse you need to Gather Element in next action, if you are already ready you can Elemental Blast and then cast a 2-action Overflow Impulse but will have to Gather Element in next round. This all makes Kineticist works worse than hybrid classes like Magus/Summoner and even some full casters using cantrips, especially at low levels.
I mean, Melee Geokineticists would love this- they get forceful on their melee blasts.
Don't see it honestly, this feels like trying to reinvent the wheel to me.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like "Attacking multiple times invokes the multiple attack penalty" is a rule we don't want to break.
It's especially weird in this case since the Kineticist was a "one big attack" class in PF1 (which was rare back then) and then in PF2 where we have several viable "one big attack" classes, the Kineticist pivots the other direction.
Someone explain con to damage to me. Charisma, wisdom, intelligence, heck, dexterity. I get. But con?
And if they did add con to damage. That feels like a blunt hammer+bandaid to the perceived issues.
I still think con to ac is interesting because it opens up level 1 build diversity without having to pay a largely non scaling damage tax against other more interesting options we could potentially get later.
Con represent the impact of all that direct energy on the body. The reason it doesn't make as much sense now is because they are trying to remove the strain from channeling the blasts so con doesn't feel connected to the class what so ever.Someone explain con to damage to me. Charisma, wisdom, intelligence, heck, dexterity. I get. But con?
And if they did add con to damage. That feels like a blunt hammer+bandaid to the perceived issues.
I still think con to ac is interesting because it opens up level 1 build diversity without having to pay a largely non scaling damage tax against other more interesting options we could potentially get later.
So there is no real sensical link in 2e is what I'm gathering from this. Wich I'm fine with. I'm also still not getting what this helps other than make str kineticists a meme.
Con to hit makes dex kineticists a meme
I'm all for con doing more. But it needs to support both builds and right now with how the class functions I still view level 1 str kineticists as a meme begging to get crit killed.
I do like the look of 6/6/6
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Someone explain con to damage to me.
If a spellcaster's Mental score ties to the "power" of their magic(Cantrip damage & Spell DC), then why wouldn't a Kineticist's Constitution do something similar.
Constitution determines the power of your elemental control, hence it being used for Class DC. With higher Constitution, your Fire burns hotter, your Air has a higher wind speed, your Earth is larger/denser.