|
3 people marked this as a favorite.
|
So I was recently spurred on by both the main playtest and the fact that the General Survey doesn't give us the option to ask "Remove some features for a proficiency bump" to write an entire Reddit post appealing to Paizo and the community for Legendary Unarmed/Legendary Blasts, soon turning into asking what if we could make them more like Fighters. It has been...incredibly popular! Much more than I ever could imagine! If you would like to read it in full, I have the link ready:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/wm69ms/kineticist_as_the_fig hter_of_blasters_a_modest/
But to quickly go over the points for those that don't want to read it all:
A) Designing them around the ideas and structure of Fighter/Gunslinger will justify their lower damage output and wide applications in battle. They wouldn't need some assumed first turn action or even increasing the damage of their blast that take away from the action economy; the players can focus on blasting and leaving themselves open to use their Overflow feats if needed.
B) Feats could be designed closer to the Infusions of old: multi-action activities that apply a variety of effects or metamagics when the Kineticist lands attacks using their blasts, whether for single-target or AoE. Different Elements' Blasts would introduce their own effects, such as Earth allowing to knock people prone, Air to push people around, Water to slow, and Fire to burn. Alternative Blast options could be provided by feats, both for the basic elements or for possible combinations of them. More feats like Cyclical Blasts, Blast Barrage, or Fusion Blast, things that interact with and provide utility and power to blasts; less stuff like Usurp the Lunar Reigns or All Shall End in Flames (We can keep the kickass names, though).
C) Legendary Class DC, while sounding like it would be unique, wouldn't really help the power output of the class and just make them play more like Druids or other casters. We have evidence of such of the power issues: its called being a caster with Legendary Spell DC...
D) Maintaining a CON-Key Ability Score will keep them below Gunslinger and give them some wiggle room in the raw power budget for utility options like the Wall spells or Flinging Updraft: things that may not deal direct damage but have a lot of supportive utility.
E) To make CON more relevant of a stat, you can have an Elemental Charge system that is the fuel for Overflow feats, the amount of charges you can hold within is equal to your CON modifier. Charges can be gained through Gather Elements, Extract Elements, or getting Critical Hits with your Blasts. Holding a charge of any element will let you form it into your hand and let you wield your blasts, letting you maintain them after an Overflow if you still have a charge left. Overflow Feats can be designed around requiring different number of charges, whether a number of the same element, a number of elements in general, or a combination of elements (1 Fire, 2 Metal for example). This should let the designers add power or create unique Hybrid Blasts while keeping the novelty of a CON-based Key Ability Score, all without overcomplicating the class, giving it a resource it can't regain in battle and ruining the nigh-infinite sustain appeal, or relying on self-penalizing mechanics like Burn.
F) Kineticist should be the "single-target elemental blaster" class both because it is a niche that is just missing for so long despite it being so desired since launch; and that for as many elemental things a Kinet COULD do, they always been a more condensed around fighting by the elements. I want their in-combat fighting capabilities to be powerful, yet simple enough that they can work as a bridge for newer players to go into full martial or full caster classes.
G) We are already quite close, by things like the feat-swapping feats, the focus on unique weapons that others could acquire but Kinet does it best, and their unique Critical Specialization Effects with their blasts.
At the very least, I do feel like it would be fair for Paizo to go back and add the poll question of "Would you like us to decrease some options for more versatility?" to the surverys, especially so I don't have to do the rather embarrassing act of linking to a Reddit post in the Open Response sections~! I am hoping that Kineticist would be much stronger and more focused as a Legendary-Proficiency Switch-Hitting Elemental Fighter than they already are, and I hope you all would at least humor my dreams, if not fully rally behind them~.
like a fighter..so
do away with gates
you only get to legendary with one element until 19
you have next to zero AoE until high teens
do away with most support feats, replace pretty much them all with different things you can do with your blasts
More things you cab do with blasts is good, legendary with your blast is good.
But loosing utility is bad.
AoE as part of the things you can do with blasts is good.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
I don't think that Legendary with blast is inside of the concept of the Kineticist.
Legendary proficiency is... a legendery proficiency. Itself is a mechanic representing that is something thats requires talent and too training don't fit well in the Kineticist's flavor IMO. Also for balance and practical reasons a legendary blaster player won't do anything than just blast, because legendary is just too good to a char focus any other thing.
I really want that Kineticist to be the best ofensive blaster with a damage efficiency that makes those who takes it to blast things becomes satisfied that they are blasting the things. But not in this way.
My desire for Kineticist and I think the main desire for those who want it is that blaster fulfil the old role of blaster casters from PF1/3.5. A class that can just blast everything with powerful blasts and when nescessario can also do some area blasts too (IMO AoE blasts not needs to be main focus just an option to blasts some oponents that eventually are concentrated in a place, that's why I don't care if it uses focus points to do this, because I know that's eventual, usually in the first turn, when you have a perfect situation to do a good AoE. That's why until know I'm very receptive to use Focus Spells and Focus Cantrips in place of Impulses). It's more like a devastating blasts than precises and high treinend critial ones.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
YuriP wrote: I don't think that Legendary with blast is inside of the concept of the Kineticist.
Legendary proficiency is... a legendery proficiency. Itself is a mechanic representing that is something thats requires talent and too training don't fit well in the Kineticist's flavor IMO. Also for balance and practical reasons a legendary blaster player won't do anything than just blast, because legendary is just too good to a char focus any other thing.
I really want that Kineticist to be the best ofensive blaster with a damage efficiency that makes those who takes it to blast things becomes satisfied that they are blasting the things. But not in this way.
My desire for Kineticist and I think the main desire for those who want it is that blaster fulfil the old role of blaster casters from PF1/3.5. A class that can just blast everything with powerful blasts and when nescessario can also do some area blasts too (IMO AoE blasts not needs to be main focus just an option to blasts some oponents that eventually are concentrated in a place, that's why I don't care if it uses focus points to do this, because I know that's eventual, usually in the first turn, when you have a perfect situation to do a good AoE. That's why until know I'm very receptive to use Focus Spells and Focus Cantrips in place of Impulses). It's more like a devastating blasts than precises and high treinend critial ones.
It's strange how you say you don't want people to think they need to be only blasting, but then basically describe your desire as...only blasting...
Like, any AOE effect can just be like Chain Blast or Scorching Ray, a series of dice rolls against multiple foes with no MAP or the like. It doesn't always have to be a save spell with your middling DC proficiencies, you know?
While I agree with the idea that I want people to do more, the people that pick Kineticist are not interested in doing more, the same as someone that wants to be a Fighter. They want combat to be simple and let their teams handle more intense complexities. They may pick up one or two crowd control, but they know that they aren't trying to be a Wizard, they aren't trying to compete against Sorcerer, they do not want to be a Druid, they do not want to be another caster.
They want to play a blaster, so lets put their strength in the blasts.
...Also Kineticists are the only ones that can use Elemental Blasts! If they aren't super well trained in this unique weapon type that can absolutely be used precisely and devastatingly at the same time, who is?!
It's a little bit like the fighter and the monk in that the "subclasses" are designated almost entirely by the feats you choose. Currently there's not a lot that differentiates the different elements aside from the feats. That's got some merit to it but I hope they flesh out the elements to be more like subclasses instead of how fighters and monks work.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
aobst128 wrote: It's a little bit like the fighter and the monk in that the "subclasses" are designated almost entirely by the feats you choose. Currently there's not a lot that differentiates the different elements aside from the feats. That's got some merit to it but I hope they flesh out the elements to be more like subclasses instead of how fighters and monks work. 100% agreed.
aobst128 wrote: It's a little bit like the fighter and the monk in that the "subclasses" are designated almost entirely by the feats you choose. Currently there's not a lot that differentiates the different elements aside from the feats. That's got some merit to it but I hope they flesh out the elements to be more like subclasses instead of how fighters and monks work. Yeah, I can agree with that.
The lacking differences can work, especially if Universal Gate Kinet was the only Kineticist, but given we have the other two, I would believe it would make sense to provide stronger differences between elements, like I had suggested. They don't need to be full subclasses, but more strength in how they function would be nice.
|
8 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Where has it been offically decided that the thing people want out of a Kineticist is simplicity in design and purpose? I feel like the PF1 Kineticist was pretty far from simple, and capable of adding on a lot of complexity to what they can do.
Why is it wrong to envision a Kineticist who's connection to the elements makes them a capable battlefield controller and influencer of the world in big scale ways? Rising volcanos out of the ground, or summoning tidal waves isn't how you act like a laser beam to take out one target.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Yeah the issue is that Kineticist as a base is really simple: I see an enemy I fire magic at them for lots of damage. Then you add feats that can modify that blast and feats that grant some level of thematic utility.
This playtest has kineticist be all utility and standalone AoE with literally just one ability that js single target and its for a single type of kineticist. So yeah you have the abilities and some special AoE, but almost nothing interacts with your basic blast which is where all the fun and complexity of the original was.
Given that there is this lack of single target damage and customization, people are asking for more. While the people who don't want anyone with magic to do much better magic say "everything is fine" or reluctantly agree that "okay maybe they do need some damage if everyone keeps complaining". The people who are pkay because oh they are getting a lot of AoE, are fine because "They can just deal with the mooks".
But that's the thing. There are a sizeable amount of players that don't just want to be the martial class's clean up guy.
|
5 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Unicore wrote: Where has it been offically decided that the thing people want out of a Kineticist is simplicity in design and purpose? I feel like the PF1 Kineticist was pretty far from simple, and capable of adding on a lot of complexity to what they can do.
Why is it wrong to envision a Kineticist who's connection to the elements makes them a capable battlefield controller and influencer of the world in big scale ways? Rising volcanos out of the ground, or summoning tidal waves isn't how you act like a laser beam to take out one target.
Cause we have a Druid that can already do that...
And the closest we have to the "laser beam" idea is Magus, who still have to interact with spell slots and spells over being over to just blast someone with fire. Why not have an elemental class that can be good at laser beaming? Who else should be that class?
PF1e Kineticist was complex for the sake of complexity. It had a bunch of mechanics and ideas that just led it to being a high skill floor, low skill cap class with no clear focus in design or theming. Too out there to be appealing to people that just want to interact with the elements without understanding spell slots, too little options to be among the full casters in breaking the game.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
aobst128 wrote: It's a little bit like the fighter and the monk in that the "subclasses" are designated almost entirely by the feats you choose. Currently there's not a lot that differentiates the different elements aside from the feats. That's got some merit to it but I hope they flesh out the elements to be more like subclasses instead of how fighters and monks work. Considering fighters and monks are my favorite two classes in the game precisely for this open ended design.
I can't help but disagree.
KoriCongo wrote: Unicore wrote: Where has it been offically decided that the thing people want out of a Kineticist is simplicity in design and purpose? I feel like the PF1 Kineticist was pretty far from simple, and capable of adding on a lot of complexity to what they can do.
Why is it wrong to envision a Kineticist who's connection to the elements makes them a capable battlefield controller and influencer of the world in big scale ways? Rising volcanos out of the ground, or summoning tidal waves isn't how you act like a laser beam to take out one target.
Cause we have a Druid that can already do that...
And the closest we have to the "laser beam" idea is Magus, who still have to interact with spell slots and spells over being over to just blast someone with fire. Why not have an elemental class that can be good at laser beaming? Who else should be that class?
PF1e Kineticist was complex for the sake of complexity. It had a bunch of mechanics and ideas that just led it to being a high skill floor, low skill cap class with no clear focus in design or theming. Too out there to be appealing to people that just want to interact with the elements without understanding spell slots, too little options to be among the full casters in breaking the game. Sorry, this system already has magical pew pew.
If you don't like how a sorcerer or druid can blast. The system just isn't to your liking.
KoriCongo wrote: Unicore wrote: Where has it been offically decided that the thing people want out of a Kineticist is simplicity in design and purpose? I feel like the PF1 Kineticist was pretty far from simple, and capable of adding on a lot of complexity to what they can do.
Why is it wrong to envision a Kineticist who's connection to the elements makes them a capable battlefield controller and influencer of the world in big scale ways? Rising volcanos out of the ground, or summoning tidal waves isn't how you act like a laser beam to take out one target.
Cause we have a Druid that can already do that...
And the closest we have to the "laser beam" idea is Magus, who still have to interact with spell slots and spells over being over to just blast someone with fire. Why not have an elemental class that can be good at laser beaming? Who else should be that class?
PF1e Kineticist was complex for the sake of complexity. It had a bunch of mechanics and ideas that just led it to being a high skill floor, low skill cap class with no clear focus in design or theming. Too out there to be appealing to people that just want to interact with the elements without understanding spell slots, too little options to be among the full casters in breaking the game. I disagree on PF1 kineticist being high skill floor or that it had no focus/theming.
What people keep calling "high skill floor" is literally writing down is usually "oh no burn takes too much to calculate" and "oh no I have overflow that adds passives".
Burn quite literally just took a tiny bit of space to say "Burn damage: X" you could literally just put Burn spent: X" and treat it the exact same way people treat negative levels (also a decrease in max HP but much worse and much harder to remove without high level divine castee). The "oh lots of things interact with burn" is most just "reduce the burn cost by X" which doesn't take a math genius to do, or "gather power to reduce burn by X" which again doesn't take a genius. But people that dislike burn (usually because they dislike HP for power mechanics) just keep "oh its complicated and bad". Same thing with overflow where you literally just had to check a box saying "I now have X amount of burn and get Y" that's it, the most complicated part of that whole thing was remembering that you have passive bonuses. Unlike all the other fiddly bonuses caster could cast on themselves that changed by on caster level and which they could modify easily.
As for the theming. Its literally just classic psychic and elemental manipulation stuff. I strained too much and took damage, I lifted a giant boulder my sheer will and stamina, I consumed my life to create a giant fireball, I spent my life to heal my wounded teammate in worst shape, etc. It is all built around the theme of "power for a price" and controlling the elements directly, no magical training, no special bloodline, no creature giving you power, just you tapping directly into a bottomless pit of hurt.
*****************
So yeah the whole thing is just a bunch of people who dislike the mechanics for burn when there are worse offenders in PF1, and a group not wanting anyone to have access to "life = power" mechanics in any form.
The low skill cap is specially telling because the only real barrier of entry to the entire class was the willingness to spend HP at a comforable rate, and keeping track of one/two numbers.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Martialmasters wrote: KoriCongo wrote: Unicore wrote: Where has it been offically decided that the thing people want out of a Kineticist is simplicity in design and purpose? I feel like the PF1 Kineticist was pretty far from simple, and capable of adding on a lot of complexity to what they can do.
Why is it wrong to envision a Kineticist who's connection to the elements makes them a capable battlefield controller and influencer of the world in big scale ways? Rising volcanos out of the ground, or summoning tidal waves isn't how you act like a laser beam to take out one target.
Cause we have a Druid that can already do that...
And the closest we have to the "laser beam" idea is Magus, who still have to interact with spell slots and spells over being over to just blast someone with fire. Why not have an elemental class that can be good at laser beaming? Who else should be that class?
PF1e Kineticist was complex for the sake of complexity. It had a bunch of mechanics and ideas that just led it to being a high skill floor, low skill cap class with no clear focus in design or theming. Too out there to be appealing to people that just want to interact with the elements without understanding spell slots, too little options to be among the full casters in breaking the game. Sorry, this system already has magical pew pew.
If you don't like how a sorcerer or druid can blast. The system just isn't to your liking. Uh huh, so your you are allowed to have the classes you like. But others can't ask for classes that they like. And people ask why more people don't join certain games.
Oh look the verg long list of "literally blasters in stories that want to play as". Yeah can't have that, that would mean other people would have fun.../s.
Temperans wrote: Martialmasters wrote: KoriCongo wrote: Unicore wrote: Where has it been offically decided that the thing people want out of a Kineticist is simplicity in design and purpose? I feel like the PF1 Kineticist was pretty far from simple, and capable of adding on a lot of complexity to what they can do.
Why is it wrong to envision a Kineticist who's connection to the elements makes them a capable battlefield controller and influencer of the world in big scale ways? Rising volcanos out of the ground, or summoning tidal waves isn't how you act like a laser beam to take out one target.
Cause we have a Druid that can already do that...
And the closest we have to the "laser beam" idea is Magus, who still have to interact with spell slots and spells over being over to just blast someone with fire. Why not have an elemental class that can be good at laser beaming? Who else should be that class?
PF1e Kineticist was complex for the sake of complexity. It had a bunch of mechanics and ideas that just led it to being a high skill floor, low skill cap class with no clear focus in design or theming. Too out there to be appealing to people that just want to interact with the elements without understanding spell slots, too little options to be among the full casters in breaking the game. Sorry, this system already has magical pew pew.
If you don't like how a sorcerer or druid can blast. The system just isn't to your liking. Uh huh, so your you are allowed to have the classes you like. But others can't ask for classes that they like. And people ask why more people don't join certain games.
Oh look the verg long list of "literally blasters in stories that want to play as". Yeah can't have that, that would mean other people would have fun.../s. Considering blaster's on stories are firing teraforming nukes left and right. Yes. They can't have that.
Martialmasters wrote: Temperans wrote: Martialmasters wrote: KoriCongo wrote: Unicore wrote: Where has it been offically decided that the thing people want out of a Kineticist is simplicity in design and purpose? I feel like the PF1 Kineticist was pretty far from simple, and capable of adding on a lot of complexity to what they can do.
Why is it wrong to envision a Kineticist who's connection to the elements makes them a capable battlefield controller and influencer of the world in big scale ways? Rising volcanos out of the ground, or summoning tidal waves isn't how you act like a laser beam to take out one target.
Cause we have a Druid that can already do that...
And the closest we have to the "laser beam" idea is Magus, who still have to interact with spell slots and spells over being over to just blast someone with fire. Why not have an elemental class that can be good at laser beaming? Who else should be that class?
PF1e Kineticist was complex for the sake of complexity. It had a bunch of mechanics and ideas that just led it to being a high skill floor, low skill cap class with no clear focus in design or theming. Too out there to be appealing to people that just want to interact with the elements without understanding spell slots, too little options to be among the full casters in breaking the game. Sorry, this system already has magical pew pew.
If you don't like how a sorcerer or druid can blast. The system just isn't to your liking. Uh huh, so your you are allowed to have the classes you like. But others can't ask for classes that they like. And people ask why more people don't join certain games.
Oh look the verg long list of "literally blasters in stories that want to play as". Yeah can't have that, that would mean other people would have fun.../s. Considering blaster's on stories are firing teraforming nukes left and right. Yes. They can't have that. Right cause fighters in stories arent splitting planets and destroying a bunch of stuff. If you ar going to pull "specific blasters are OP in their setting" then you cannot ignore that "specific fighter are OP in their setting".
Or are you going to ignore literally 90% of super heroes are fighters? Or things like One-Punch Man casually destroying mountains?
By your definition Fighters should be banned from all tables because they are just way too OP, just look at how Superman is beating everyone with his fighter prowess.
I don't recall reading it seeing any stories where a fighter is doing that. Unless maybe we talking anime.
And I'm fully going to ignore super heroes and anime. One punch man is literally parody of the shonen genre. It's a joke. I don't think we need to design joke classes that are banned from society play personally
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Ah so its fine for you to dismiss blasters because there are some stories with OP blasters. But you will ignore all western comics with OP martial, all western super hero movies/TV, all western novels with OP martial all of wuxia, all of xianxia, all action Manwha, most webtoons, all shonen anime, most seinen anime, most action shojo/josei anime, and literally every greek story that feature a martial character, etc.
Good to know that only over powered magic can be used as reference to what should be banned in your opinion.
Might as well also erase all of the powerful mages from the world of Golarion. Can't possibly have powerful mage be powerful, that's a priviledge only for the martials.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
you are just being upset with the balance of the system at this point. im sorry its frustrating for you.
Martialmasters wrote: you are just being upset with the balance of the system at this point. im sorry its frustrating for you. Nah right now I am upset because you were being a hypocrite while saying "its all because of the system" as if the system didn't have people that could literally change everything with a single book or even just a handful of errata.
I don't agree with you regarding the kineticist being like the fighter or the gunslinger. I think maybe the kineticist should have the progression of a regular warrior class being expert with blasts at lvl 5, swapping it with critical element.
I also don't want the kineticist being like the one from pf1e, this class was super complicated to track in terms of burn and features that modified blasts and it also was boring playing with it, not to say the class almost every time ruined the campaign bacause it was so overpowered in 1 enemy encounters (targeting touch AC or direct damage with regular AC blasts).
I agree that the current iteration needs more damage and the Con key ability is underused, but I can't come up with a solution that won't break the game.
At some point I considered implementing burn as a mixture between panache and inventor's overdrive, something like make a Fort save (or a special skill only used by kineticists using Con) and on a critical failure you take damage and loose your gathered element, at a failure you only loose your gathered element, at a success you are at a state of burn and add Con to your blasts damage or a fixed amaunt like panache does, and at a critical success you are at a "super" burn state that lets you increase damage of blasts like a success but you are also quickened, and can use this action only as part of using a feat with the impulse and overdrive traits, loosing the burn state after using it.
But once again I think this breaks the game and needs a lot of tweeking.
Temperans wrote: Martialmasters wrote: you are just being upset with the balance of the system at this point. im sorry its frustrating for you. Nah right now I am upset because you were being a hypocrite while saying "its all because of the system" as if the system didn't have people that could literally change everything with a single book or even just a handful of errata. You are merely creating bad faith arguments at this point. Have a nice day.
|
5 people marked this as a favorite.
|
The 1e Kineticist was not a high single target damage dealer. To the contrary it actually need burn to not have fairly low damage compared to martials and casters. And it made up for this in having high utility and cool tricks.
Making it a fighter would be making it the reverse of what it was and boring. A master of manipulating primordial elements should be more than a guy that goes pew pew with lasers.
Not to mention legendary attacks with blasts and fighter style feats isn't particularly balanced. That's just something that is more accurate than a regular martial all the time and if it deals energy damage is superior to weapons because it bypasses the most common resistances, and half the game it's as accurate as the fighter because it catches up in attacking score in the gaps of 5-9 and 15-20. And Earth has an ability that gives +2 STR baked in so they can get Apex benefits in 2 scores.
So that's inherently a martial but better, especially if you have two element or the greater rune matching your elemental damage.
Kineticist trully were not the top damage dealers. But they really should have legendary on their saves at least because of how Paizo made DC balance.
|
3 people marked this as a favorite.
|
KoriCongo wrote: Unicore wrote: Where has it been offically decided that the thing people want out of a Kineticist is simplicity in design and purpose? I feel like the PF1 Kineticist was pretty far from simple, and capable of adding on a lot of complexity to what they can do.
Why is it wrong to envision a Kineticist who's connection to the elements makes them a capable battlefield controller and influencer of the world in big scale ways? Rising volcanos out of the ground, or summoning tidal waves isn't how you act like a laser beam to take out one target.
Cause we have a Druid that can already do that...
And the closest we have to the "laser beam" idea is Magus, who still have to interact with spell slots and spells over being over to just blast someone with fire. Why not have an elemental class that can be good at laser beaming? Who else should be that class?
PF1e Kineticist was complex for the sake of complexity. It had a bunch of mechanics and ideas that just led it to being a high skill floor, low skill cap class with no clear focus in design or theming. Too out there to be appealing to people that just want to interact with the elements without understanding spell slots, too little options to be among the full casters in breaking the game. We also already have classes that do tons of single target damage. They're called the Fighter, Barbarian, Ranger, Magus, and Gunslinger. We don't have an at-will caster and getting rid of their utility and AOE magic would just be incredibly boring. Slinging blasts all day wasn't even what PF1e kineticists did.
And I don't think the utility and AOE needs to be sacrificed to let them take feats to make more powerful single target blasts or DC save impulses.
kripdenn wrote: KoriCongo wrote: Unicore wrote: Where has it been offically decided that the thing people want out of a Kineticist is simplicity in design and purpose? I feel like the PF1 Kineticist was pretty far from simple, and capable of adding on a lot of complexity to what they can do.
Why is it wrong to envision a Kineticist who's connection to the elements makes them a capable battlefield controller and influencer of the world in big scale ways? Rising volcanos out of the ground, or summoning tidal waves isn't how you act like a laser beam to take out one target.
Cause we have a Druid that can already do that...
And the closest we have to the "laser beam" idea is Magus, who still have to interact with spell slots and spells over being over to just blast someone with fire. Why not have an elemental class that can be good at laser beaming? Who else should be that class?
PF1e Kineticist was complex for the sake of complexity. It had a bunch of mechanics and ideas that just led it to being a high skill floor, low skill cap class with no clear focus in design or theming. Too out there to be appealing to people that just want to interact with the elements without understanding spell slots, too little options to be among the full casters in breaking the game. We also already have classes that do tons of single target damage. They're called the Fighter, Barbarian, Ranger, Magus, and Gunslinger. We don't have an at-will caster and getting rid of their utility and AOE magic would just be incredibly boring. Slinging blasts all day wasn't even what PF1e kineticists did.
And I don't think the utility and AOE needs to be sacrificed to let them take feats to make more powerful single target blasts or DC save impulses. If I may ask: what even is the point of an at-will caster in 2e?
With Focus Points, scaling cantrips, and the variety of magical tools....
what do you need to be at-will, that you are willing to take a massive power/utility penalty for?
I'm genuinely curious, since it seems like the general opinion of the forum is that they want Kineticist to be an at-Will caster.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
KoriCongo wrote: kripdenn wrote: KoriCongo wrote: Unicore wrote: Where has it been offically decided that the thing people want out of a Kineticist is simplicity in design and purpose? I feel like the PF1 Kineticist was pretty far from simple, and capable of adding on a lot of complexity to what they can do.
Why is it wrong to envision a Kineticist who's connection to the elements makes them a capable battlefield controller and influencer of the world in big scale ways? Rising volcanos out of the ground, or summoning tidal waves isn't how you act like a laser beam to take out one target.
Cause we have a Druid that can already do that...
And the closest we have to the "laser beam" idea is Magus, who still have to interact with spell slots and spells over being over to just blast someone with fire. Why not have an elemental class that can be good at laser beaming? Who else should be that class?
PF1e Kineticist was complex for the sake of complexity. It had a bunch of mechanics and ideas that just led it to being a high skill floor, low skill cap class with no clear focus in design or theming. Too out there to be appealing to people that just want to interact with the elements without understanding spell slots, too little options to be among the full casters in breaking the game. We also already have classes that do tons of single target damage. They're called the Fighter, Barbarian, Ranger, Magus, and Gunslinger. We don't have an at-will caster and getting rid of their utility and AOE magic would just be incredibly boring. Slinging blasts all day wasn't even what PF1e kineticists did.
And I don't think the utility and AOE needs to be sacrificed to let them take feats to make more powerful single target blasts or DC save impulses. If I may ask: what even is the point of an at-will caster in 2e?
With Focus Points, scaling cantrips, and the variety of magical tools....
what do you need to be at-will, that you are willing to take a massive power/utility penalty for?
I'm... It's a novel niche for sure, but a worthwhile one to see through in my opinion. A lot of the utility and aura effects are as good as sloted spells. Just needs a boost to their offensive power for the appeal to be realized. They're at will but take more actions. That can have a place in the system.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
IMO Kineticist don't need to be full at-will caster. Including maybe very flavor to have some special abilities powerful abilities limited by focus points. But keeping the Kineticist with many at-will 2-actions casting abilities to provide utility and diversity.
The only thing I won't like is if it's turned into a caster with daily limited abilities like spellslots. I don't think that will be fun if the Kineticist was turned into another spellslots spellcaster and I don't think this meets it's concept.
aobst128 wrote: KoriCongo wrote: kripdenn wrote: KoriCongo wrote: Unicore wrote: Where has it been offically decided that the thing people want out of a Kineticist is simplicity in design and purpose? I feel like the PF1 Kineticist was pretty far from simple, and capable of adding on a lot of complexity to what they can do.
Why is it wrong to envision a Kineticist who's connection to the elements makes them a capable battlefield controller and influencer of the world in big scale ways? Rising volcanos out of the ground, or summoning tidal waves isn't how you act like a laser beam to take out one target.
Cause we have a Druid that can already do that...
And the closest we have to the "laser beam" idea is Magus, who still have to interact with spell slots and spells over being over to just blast someone with fire. Why not have an elemental class that can be good at laser beaming? Who else should be that class?
PF1e Kineticist was complex for the sake of complexity. It had a bunch of mechanics and ideas that just led it to being a high skill floor, low skill cap class with no clear focus in design or theming. Too out there to be appealing to people that just want to interact with the elements without understanding spell slots, too little options to be among the full casters in breaking the game. We also already have classes that do tons of single target damage. They're called the Fighter, Barbarian, Ranger, Magus, and Gunslinger. We don't have an at-will caster and getting rid of their utility and AOE magic would just be incredibly boring. Slinging blasts all day wasn't even what PF1e kineticists did.
And I don't think the utility and AOE needs to be sacrificed to let them take feats to make more powerful single target blasts or DC save impulses. If I may ask: what even is the point of an at-will caster in 2e?
With Focus Points, scaling cantrips, and the variety of magical tools....
what do you need to be at-will, that you are willing to take a massive ... To rephrase my question, in a way that expresses why this niche is something I don't think really needs such a followthrough...
What does our current selection of cantrips, focus spells, and skill feats lack; what can;t our casters do, that Kineticist can do if it were an at-will caster?
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
KoriCongo wrote: kripdenn wrote: KoriCongo wrote: Unicore wrote: Where has it been offically decided that the thing people want out of a Kineticist is simplicity in design and purpose? I feel like the PF1 Kineticist was pretty far from simple, and capable of adding on a lot of complexity to what they can do.
Why is it wrong to envision a Kineticist who's connection to the elements makes them a capable battlefield controller and influencer of the world in big scale ways? Rising volcanos out of the ground, or summoning tidal waves isn't how you act like a laser beam to take out one target.
Cause we have a Druid that can already do that...
And the closest we have to the "laser beam" idea is Magus, who still have to interact with spell slots and spells over being over to just blast someone with fire. Why not have an elemental class that can be good at laser beaming? Who else should be that class?
PF1e Kineticist was complex for the sake of complexity. It had a bunch of mechanics and ideas that just led it to being a high skill floor, low skill cap class with no clear focus in design or theming. Too out there to be appealing to people that just want to interact with the elements without understanding spell slots, too little options to be among the full casters in breaking the game. We also already have classes that do tons of single target damage. They're called the Fighter, Barbarian, Ranger, Magus, and Gunslinger. We don't have an at-will caster and getting rid of their utility and AOE magic would just be incredibly boring. Slinging blasts all day wasn't even what PF1e kineticists did.
And I don't think the utility and AOE needs to be sacrificed to let them take feats to make more powerful single target blasts or DC save impulses. If I may ask: what even is the point of an at-will caster in 2e?
With Focus Points, scaling cantrips, and the variety of magical tools....
what do you need to be at-will, that you are willing to take a massive power/utility penalty for?
I'm... A lot of the impulses, like tidal hands, have better damage, AOE, or other effects than cantrips. Some of the impulses, like flame eruption, are worse than cantrips but those can be buffed.
You get 1 to 3 focus spells and can refocus 1 to 3 of them depending on your feat investment. For many classes it's 4 feats to have 3 focus spells and to be able to refocus 3 points. And sometimes you don't have the time to refocus between combats to use those points again. It's easier to get more kinetic impulses with a variety of effects and kinetic impulses allow for effects that are relatively stronger than a cantrip but weaker than a focus spell like Burning Jet or Flinging Updraft. I think the overflow impulses should probably be buffed to be closer to focus spells and kineticists could probably use a legendary class DC or improvements to the action economy, but there are plenty of reasons to have an at-will caster.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Even if you get flight from a focus spell, casting it for general utility when you know you could be attacked in the near future is a risk that you won’t have it when you need it in combat. The air kineticist does not have to worry about that, or how many times they can throw an ally super far. The applies for the various other wall Ann’s movement utility powers. There are no cantrips anywhere near “summon an elemental” or wall, or sun that sheds daylight in 500ft and can be used to cause damage.
Fighters can be really, really good at jumping…and look like a chump next to an air kineticist. Maybe the utility has been dialed up too high in the play test even, but losing that to get feats that add more damage to single target striking, so that it more closely matched a fighter in both regards would be a big let down.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
I don't really get the argument here, I feel like the proposal's solution does solve the "at-will" problem very well.
Elemental Charges can be accumulated by spending actions, or using your blasts effectively/aiming for critical targets. These empower your Auras, and fuel your Overflows. Charge Maximum being keyed to CON makes it being Kineticist's Key Score feel a bit more rewarding, and presents an interesting decision, you can ignore it to focus on the physical stats, if you prefer Blasts to Overflows, or focus on it and your mental stats, with the Kinet's higher base proficiency acting as a buffer so that you don't get stuck with unworkable accuracy for it.
Elemental Blasts act as high-accuracy, at-will, targeted uses of elemental power. They have less direct damage than what a Fighter or Gunslinger can do, but they're more varied in what they can be used for, with feats allowing for adding additional or alternative on-hit effects, like the Infusion system of 1e Kineticist.
Overflows requiring a number of charges provides an useful balancing tool, a Kineticist that wants to go for them can spend their actions Gathering to get there quickly, while a more blast-heavy one might build them up while fighting, at a slower rate, and focus on Overflows that can be situationally useful, like healing, or emergency defenses, instead of "must casts". By depending on Charge count, Paizo can shift their action counts from the Activity into the accumulation, while still balancing them with the idea that they're a proper strategic investment.
With this system, you can have it all, enjoyable blasting, powerful "at-will" abilities that interact with your elemental choices, and as for utility... well, Adapt Element looks so far like there's some internal debate into how much Kineticist can use their powers for exploration purposes, and they've gone with "negligible for a third of the game, and no larger than the rough size of a waffle iron" so... who knows?
aobst128 wrote: It's a little bit like the fighter and the monk in that the "subclasses" are designated almost entirely by the feats you choose. Currently there's not a lot that differentiates the different elements aside from the feats. That's got some merit to it but I hope they flesh out the elements to be more like subclasses instead of how fighters and monks work. I vehemently disagree, I believe Fighter/Monk style "class diversification via feats" is the strongest point for 2e, and all classes would be better for having more of it. Kineticist itself could simply make the levels where you get an additional gate grant an extra class feat, that can be used for an "Extra Element" Feat or an additional Feat for your current elements of choice.
KoriCongo wrote: aobst128 wrote: KoriCongo wrote: kripdenn wrote: KoriCongo wrote: Unicore wrote: Where has it been offically decided that the thing people want out of a Kineticist is simplicity in design and purpose? I feel like the PF1 Kineticist was pretty far from simple, and capable of adding on a lot of complexity to what they can do.
Why is it wrong to envision a Kineticist who's connection to the elements makes them a capable battlefield controller and influencer of the world in big scale ways? Rising volcanos out of the ground, or summoning tidal waves isn't how you act like a laser beam to take out one target.
Cause we have a Druid that can already do that...
And the closest we have to the "laser beam" idea is Magus, who still have to interact with spell slots and spells over being over to just blast someone with fire. Why not have an elemental class that can be good at laser beaming? Who else should be that class?
PF1e Kineticist was complex for the sake of complexity. It had a bunch of mechanics and ideas that just led it to being a high skill floor, low skill cap class with no clear focus in design or theming. Too out there to be appealing to people that just want to interact with the elements without understanding spell slots, too little options to be among the full casters in breaking the game. We also already have classes that do tons of single target damage. They're called the Fighter, Barbarian, Ranger, Magus, and Gunslinger. We don't have an at-will caster and getting rid of their utility and AOE magic would just be incredibly boring. Slinging blasts all day wasn't even what PF1e kineticists did.
And I don't think the utility and AOE needs to be sacrificed to let them take feats to make more powerful single target blasts or DC save impulses. If I may ask: what even is the point of an at-will caster in 2e?
With Focus Points, scaling cantrips, and the variety of magical tools....
what do you need to be at-will, that you are willing ... I think that it's going to come down to consistency combined with the kineticists class chassis. Full casters with slots and focus points are all well and good but they're only ever at their best with their top 3 slots plus however many focus points they may have in a given encounter, so their power dwindles over the course of an adventuring day whereas a kineticist would be just as prepared in the last encounter as they were in the first. That combined with their martial chassis (hopefully expert moves to 5th), they have a lot of leeway with how they approach combat.
So what it sounds like you all kind of want an infinite resource, magical version of Alchemist? A supportive, utilitarian caster that never has to worry about running out of their abilities, but doesn't really have good abilities on their own for raw damage? Basically what Rogue is for the martials, but absolutely in no way can be called a Striker?
I...will admit, it IS an intriguing idea, and probably something I might, MIGHT rally for if there was a more dedicated blaster caster beyond Psychic (and then they struggle to get damage),and casters weren't already so support/utility-oriented this game. As for now, though, I just feel like you can't really say you are missing out on this idea outside of "I want infinite spell slots"...
KoriCongo wrote: So what it sounds like you all kind of want an infinite resource, magical version of Alchemist? A supportive, utilitarian caster that never has to worry about running out of their abilities, but doesn't really have good abilities on their own for raw damage? Basically what Rogue is for martials, but absolutely in no way can be called a Striker?
I...will admit, it IS an intriguing idea, and probably something I might, MIGHT rally for if there was a more dedicated blaster caster beyond Psychic (and then they struggle to get damage),and casters weren't already so support/utility-oriented this game. As for now, though, I just feel like you can't really say you are missing out on this idea outside of "I want infinite spell slots"...
That's one way to put it. Although, I don't think the damage will end up being all that bad. Better than it is currently that's for sure. Rogues are definitely strikers though. That's their main job. The skill boosts are second to their sneak attack feature and most of their class feats are attack oriented. Kineticist could end up as a good general use blaster/support user on a martial chassis. Occupying a similar role to summoners I think. (Not too big of a stretch right?) They have similar capabilities with their attacks and their casting, just with different tactics.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
aobst128 wrote: Occupying a similar role to summoners I think. (Not too big of a stretch right?) They have similar capabilities with their attacks and their casting, just with different tactics Summoner actually does incredibly good DPR though if you correctly utilize their essentially 4-action economy to weave save cantrips and Strikes.
dmerceless wrote: aobst128 wrote: Occupying a similar role to summoners I think. (Not too big of a stretch right?) They have similar capabilities with their attacks and their casting, just with different tactics Summoner actually does incredibly good DPR though if you correctly utilize their essentially 4-action economy to weave save cantrips and Strikes. I'm hoping damage will be easier to output in the final release but the comparison was mostly about being able to make attacks with full martial progression and have master spell progression. Wouldn't compare it to magus which is much more strictly a striker and doesn't use it's DC all that often.
Recent threads in Kineticist Class
|
