I know many people want Constitution to apply to everything the kineticist does. However, this creates a problem of invalidating other ability scores and reducing flexibility of class choice. (Suddenly all kineticists look the same.) It also makes the class good at everything (melee, range, blast, effects) which--as no other class gets that--is inherently unbalanced.
That being said, I do agree that something should be done about it. It seems odd that blasts are likely your primary go to attack, and yet you're never permitted to get an 18 to your attack stat. No other class has that issue.
Rather, another possible solution would be to make the class' ability score boost be the player's choice of Strength, Dexterity, or Constitution, depending on whether they wanted to focus on melee blasts, ranged blasts, or area blasts and effects.
This makes it a choice that allows players to specialize in their chosen tactics, keeps things relatively balanced, and allows the class to avoid the banality of cookie cutter clones.
What do you think? Does that seem like a reasonable compromise?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
It seems odd that blasts are likely your primary go to attack, and yet you're never permitted to get an 18 to your attack stat. No other class has that issue.
I mean, Inventor and Thaumaturge both have this as well. Not saying it's a good design decision, I think being at -1 to hit but only half the time is a very messy and kind of nonsensical design, but well, it's there.
As for your suggestion, I like it, but I think the game has hardcoded in the core rules that the stat you get a class boost to always is your key ability.
It seems odd that blasts are likely your primary go to attack, and yet you're never permitted to get an 18 to your attack stat. No other class has that issue.As for your suggestion, I like it, but I think the game has hardcoded in the core rules that the stat you get a class boost to always is your key ability.
I read it as Ravingdork suggesting the class gets to choose between Str, Dex and Con for key ability for Melee, Ranged, AoE builds respectively, the way other classes get to choose between Str and Dex for melee or ranged builds.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If CON was added to damage somewhere like Inventor, we would have a class that needs:
STR for damage and melee strikes
DEX for saves, AC and ranged strikes
CON for HP, saves, DC and damage
WIS for perception and saves
Don't see any problem with it, even when considering you only need STR or DEX for both ranged and melee due to flexible blast.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I read it as Ravingdork suggesting the class gets to choose between Str, Dex and Con for key ability for Melee, Ranged, AoE builds respectively, the way other classes get to choose between Str and Dex for melee or ranged builds.
If Str or Dex was their key, it means their class DC is now based on Str or Dex by default, so those builds would just be better at both things and Con would only have a little extra HP.
Unless they make the class DC explicitly separate from key stat, which... well, Spellshot did it so I guess it could be a thing, you're right.
I read it as Ravingdork suggesting the class gets to choose between Str, Dex and Con for key ability for Melee, Ranged, AoE builds respectively, the way other classes get to choose between Str and Dex for melee or ranged builds.It seems odd that blasts are likely your primary go to attack, and yet you're never permitted to get an 18 to your attack stat. No other class has that issue.As for your suggestion, I like it, but I think the game has hardcoded in the core rules that the stat you get a class boost to always is your key ability.
Throne has the right if it, though after reading dmerceless' comments, it's clear to me that I didn't think it all the way through.
Like the monk using Wisdom for their effects but having Strength or Dex as their key ability score, I think separating the boost from key stat/class DC is likely a good idea.
But as the system currently works if you were to select dex or str as your key ability that would also apply to your class proficiency (which is automatically based of your key ability score) and your class proficiency applies to your aoe dcs.
That's not universally true though. As I said, monk has plenty of abilities that don't work oof of their key ability.
So kineticist wouldn't even be setting much of a precedent.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the issue is that there's viable builds, that you're encouraged to at least consider, where your class ability boost does almost nothing for you. Like, it gives you HP and fort saves, but you aren't even necessarily someone who needs a lot of HP or cares much about their fort saves.
I have a funny thought about that.
high-level Kineticists are really, absurdly good at fort saves. Successe are crits, critfails are normal fails, and damage is halved even on failure. The only issue is that you might jut not run into all that many fort saves. So this is where you fit in burn, or at least one kind of burn. Have it be a boost to an elemental blast that causes you to take damage yourself (with a basic fort save). Possibly have that damage boost be con-based as well. You might not want to roll every turn or every attack, though, so have the burn accumulate - sort of a negative resource pool - and then have an action to purge/filter/process the burn, and lets you roll the fort save and take the result as damage. if something happens that renders you unable to keep control of the burn *before* you process, then you just take it all as damage. Adds a bit of a press your luck feature.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I believe that Constitution is the right score thematically. But one of the things they wanted in survey data was "do people prefer the Kineticist to go in a more martial direction, a more castery direction, or to stay where it is" so they didn't want to put their thumb on the scale.
I imagine that if the survey data indicates people prefer having a Con class, they will make sure it does more for the class much like how the Investigator, Inventor, and Thaumaturge all benefited much more from their KAS in the final version of the class than they did in the playtest.
Remember in the playtest the Investigator was better off with Wis>Int since you rolled so many perception checks and the Thaumaturge was better with Int>Cha since you rolled so many recall knowledge checks. At least the Kineticist has a clear incentive to boost Con because you can make your class DC matter (you can also make it not matter).
They probably have an actual idea about "what constitution does specifically for the kineticist" but they mostly wanted to survey aesthetic preferences so they didn't put it in the playtest.
But Con is the right KAS thematically since your level of power should hinge on how much control you have on your internal gate, and "opening an internal gate through which elemental energy flows, keep it open as long as you can and let as much energy flow out as possible" is a thing that does meaningfully benefit from endurance rather than smarts or skills or muscles.
Kinda like a variation the Inventor's Overdrive feature or the Oracle's Blaze of Revelation feat?
Hmm. If you were to roll a Fort Save against your Class DC for Overflow instead of having to regather, that might work better in practice. I'd be sad to lose the overflow cycling mechanic, but if it makes for a more enjoyable gameplay for others, then it makes sense to use the design we already know works.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You could also let the Kineticist gain something based on constitution when you gather, like a damage boost on their next impulse, or TempHP.
Since right now there isn't a huge incentive to do gather/overflow cycling, particularly if You're not impressed with your offensive impulses. One of the reasons Chain Blast appears popular is that it's a 2 action impulse that can hit multiple targets that doesn't have overflow.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, the cleanest solution just seems to add some sort of overdrive-esque damage boost based on Con. Two of the most consistent complaints about the class are a lack of DPR and a lack of value for Con.
It's easy and seems a lot more mechanically preferrable than having to roll saves every round or something.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Key ability score being different from attacking score changes the power budget its abilities can have. If it were statted like a regular martial it would have to have a regular amount of utility, which can't fit in things the playtest kineticist can do.
I would rather have lower accuracy sometimes and way more utility personally. Just tweak the numbers a little to bring it up to the proper balance for the class chassis it's in.
It gets some accuracy back in other places with some feats. Mind you those are multitarget. But Chain Blast pretty much gives you a +4 or +5 on your second attack and +8 to +10 on up to five attacks after that by removing the MAP on them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, the cleanest solution just seems to add some sort of overdrive-esque damage boost based on Con. Two of the most consistent complaints about the class are a lack of DPR and a lack of value for Con.
It's easy and seems a lot more mechanically preferrable than having to roll saves every round or something.
The "roll a save to keep your gathered element" thing seems appropriate for a reaction when you use an overflow impulse. Eating your reaction is a cost (you might want to use the water one), and you can choose when you do it, and you can stick a pain mechanic on crit failing to satisfy the people who love Burn.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Kinda like a variation the Inventor's Overdrive feature or the Oracle's Blaze of Revelation feat?Hmm. If you were to roll a Fort Save against your Class DC for Overflow instead of having to regather, that might work better in practice. I'd be sad to lose the overflow cycling mechanic, but if it makes for a more enjoyable gameplay for others, then it makes sense to use the design we already know works.
Fort save vs class DC starts getting weird when they're both based on Con.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fort save vs class DC starts getting weird when they're both based on Con.
I think the thing to do would be to roll a Fort Save against (for example) the hard DC for your level. That way you benefit from Con.
So at 10th level with 20 Con you would be rolling 5+6+10 vs. DC 29.
They'd need to add a feature that says their class DC is always based on CON to do this. RAW class DC is always based on the key ability score you choose, so if you chose STR or DEX your blasts would be more accurate and your impulses would key off of that stat as well so no one would ever choose CON.
Probably this will already happen to multiclass archetypes if the designer didn't put any kind of restriction. A Fighter will can use it's class DC for impulses too.
Some are thinking too much about the additional bonus of start 18 in Con but in practice (during playtest and some non-kas to Strike classes) this don't do a big difference.
My proposal to use Con for Elemental Blast is to solve other problemas, like lack of AC for melee Str based Kineticist, lack of a good stat for useful skills beyond athletics specially for ancestries with just 2 stats bonus like humans and is more flavorful than have to be to good in Str/Dex to be able to hit with Elemental Blast but for all other blasts you have to have a big Con to they land.
About easily change from range to melee. The same situation already happen to thiefs. They can easily swicth from melee and range just having to draw a melee weapon while hold the bow in another hand. It's way close to current Elemental Weapon mechanic to switch from range <> melee using Gather Element <> Elemental Weapon.
Oh, so Kineticist maybe turn into the worse and most complicated MC archetype.
Now I understand why most classes changes class DC to spellcaster DC.
Probably this will already happen to multiclass archetypes if the designer didn't put any kind of restriction. A Fighter will can use it's class DC for impulses too.No, he can't:
You become trained in barbarian class DC.
You become trained in ranger class DC.
You become trained in alchemist class DC.
You become trained in fighter class DC.
And so on.
'A basic Reflex save against your class DC' doesn't and can't mean 'any class DC', it means 'Kineticist class DC'.
I'm hoping you both have a more involved rules reference to support your claims.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm hoping you both have a more involved rules reference to support your claims.Probably this will already happen to multiclass archetypes if the designer didn't put any kind of restriction. A Fighter will can use it's class DC for impulses too.No, he can't:
You become trained in barbarian class DC.
You become trained in ranger class DC.
You become trained in alchemist class DC.
You become trained in fighter class DC.
And so on.
'A basic Reflex save against your class DC' doesn't and can't mean 'any class DC', it means 'Kineticist class DC'.
I've seen some abilities called out as using "Class DC" and others as using "(this class's) Class DC". I don't know of any rule that defaults to those two phrases being equivalent, so I'd say the former means your main Class DC. It's something I look for when hunting for cool feats from MCDing. I think it'd depend on how the Kineticist feats and/or MCD phrased it, though yeah, it'd be a really bad MCD if you were stuck at Trained for nearly all of its abilities; too bad to be true unless there was a way to scale up the Kineticist Class DC (like casting MCDs scale up spell proficiency).
Speaking of spells, while class abilities referring to slots default to only that class's slots, class abilities referring to spells generally effect all spells no matter their source (though whether they're a Focus Spell or Cantrip might matter at times).
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's not just dedications that specify you're trained in that class's DCs, the base class proficiencies themselves also specify "fighter class DC." The reason they don't reiterate your specific class every time they say "your class DC" is almost certainly due to word count, not because they want you to be able to apply your base class DC to an ability that you gained from another class through a multiclass archetype.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are non-class Archetypes with abilities that reference one's Class DC. Snarecrafters, for example, get:
Powerful Snares: Your snares are particularly difficult for enemies to avoid. When you set a snare, the saving throw DC for that snare is equal to its normal DC or your class DC, whichever is higher.
This is a level 10 feat which would be absolute garbage if you had to use your "Snarecrafter Class DC", which would be 10 + what key ability (?) since you're not even Trained. IMO that explicitly means there are examples of "Class DC" referencing your main class without making any mention of that being a special case.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, context seems relevant there, Castilliano.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Snarecrafter also doesn't specify it giving you a new class dc like multiclass dedications so
Anyway, yeah I don't think I would like kineticist being str/dex/con key stat since whole point of class dc is that its based on your key stat, so that would just make con kinda pointless again. I'm in the "give overdrive esque ability to add con to elemental blast damage" camp here, I don't mind elemental blast being somewhat inaccurate, but if it hits it should have similar damage boost other martials have and not be equivalent of caster attacking with weapons.
Snarecrafter also doesn't specify it giving you a new class dc like multiclass dedications so
Anyway, yeah I don't think I would like kineticist being str/dex/con key stat since whole point of class dc is that its based on your key stat, so that would just make con kinda pointless again. I'm in the "give overdrive esque ability to add con to elemental blast damage" camp here, I don't mind elemental blast being somewhat inaccurate, but if it hits it should have similar damage boost other martials have and not be equivalent of caster attacking with weapons.
does this mean that if a mage picks up snarecrafter there is an ability that calls for a dc that does not exist?
I mean, context seems relevant there, Castilliano.
Illuminate me.
It's an example of "Class DC" being used where it's obvious the term has to refer one's main class's DC (presumably it's one's best). There's no language to indicate this is abnormal. Is there an example of the opposite, where the term cannot be referring to that? Or where the opposite is proclaimed the norm? General usage seems rather open-ended to me.Or look at the Ranger version of the Powerful Snares feat. Both versions use the exact same language. Shouldn't the terms mean the same thing in each? I'd hope we'd all agree on that.
Or are we to think that if you take the feat via Snarecrafter then "Class DC" has a different meaning than if you take the feat via Ranger MCD? With one Archetype you get your main class's DC, yet with the other Archetype you're stuck with your Ranger Trained Class DC (with no way of improving that proficiency and as a 16th level feat at that). Seems too odd to me.
And as we're talking about Kineticist's here, it seems pretty necessary for their MCD to remain viable that either the PC uses their original class's Class DC or that the MCD have a way to improve Kineticist Class proficiency.
|
|
does this mean that if a mage picks up snarecrafter there is an ability that calls for a dc that does not exist?Snarecrafter also doesn't specify it giving you a new class dc like multiclass dedications so
Anyway, yeah I don't think I would like kineticist being str/dex/con key stat since whole point of class dc is that its based on your key stat, so that would just make con kinda pointless again. I'm in the "give overdrive esque ability to add con to elemental blast damage" camp here, I don't mind elemental blast being somewhat inaccurate, but if it hits it should have similar damage boost other martials have and not be equivalent of caster attacking with weapons.
Good question yeah if we go 100% by rules as written. Like it wouldn't be hard to substitute the spell dc for class dc, but usually its specified if you can do so. Was there a general rule that specifies you can always do that in some situations?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It seems odd that blasts are likely your primary go to attack, and yet you're never permitted to get an 18 to your attack stat. No other class has that issue.I mean, Inventor and Thaumaturge both have this as well.
...
And Alchemist.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, context seems relevant there, Castilliano.Illuminate me.
It's an example of "Class DC" being used where it's obvious the term has to refer one's main class's DC (presumably it's one's best). There's no language to indicate this is abnormal. Is there an example of the opposite, where the term cannot be referring to that? Or where the opposite is proclaimed the norm? General usage seems rather open-ended to me.Or look at the Ranger version of the Powerful Snares feat. Both versions use the exact same language. Shouldn't the terms mean the same thing in each? I'd hope we'd all agree on that.
Or are we to think that if you take the feat via Snarecrafter then "Class DC" has a different meaning than if you take the feat via Ranger MCD? With one Archetype you get your main class's DC, yet with the other Archetype you're stuck with your Ranger Trained Class DC (with no way of improving that proficiency and as a 16th level feat at that). Seems too odd to me.And as we're talking about Kineticist's here, it seems pretty necessary for their MCD to remain viable that either the PC uses their original class's Class DC or that the MCD have a way to improve Kineticist Class proficiency.
The various class tags would matter here because Class DC (page 29) says you use it for abilities granted by your class. Class tags tell you what class you got it from, and this why Additional Feats granted by Archetypes lose their class tag.
And Alchemist.It seems odd that blasts are likely your primary go to attack, and yet you're never permitted to get an 18 to your attack stat. No other class has that issue.I mean, Inventor and Thaumaturge both have this as well.
...
Also the Investigator, kind of.
Also the Investigator, kind of.And Alchemist.It seems odd that blasts are likely your primary go to attack, and yet you're never permitted to get an 18 to your attack stat. No other class has that issue.I mean, Inventor and Thaumaturge both have this as well.
...
yes but all of those can use their key stat to improve their accuracy or damage in some way, if a kineticist doesnt grab dc impulses (unlikely but plausible), their key stat litteraly does nothing
edit apparently alchemist is just bomber in my brain,
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
yes but all of those can use their key stat to improve their accuracy or damage in some way
I will note the Investigator did not have anything of the sort in the APG playtest.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The most common complaint about the Playtest investigator was "why isn't this a Wis class? I have skills coming out my ears already and roll perception constantly" Devise a Stratagem was added between the playtest and the release.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As glad as I am to see 1e Burn gone, I do think some sort of optional variant for this class would be an interesting way to keep the "Con key stat" idea, without requiring the class to kill itself to be useful.
I'm very much a fan of how much utility and aoe this class has, but I think having the option to take on burn (maybe inflicting self-Drained?) to buff yourself in some manner. This is not a hard-and-fast "we must have this" but a very vague thought.
Without it, however, I do think shifting the key stat would make more sense. Based on the description of the class, Con really doesn't even seem to fit into any of the lore in any appreciable way, a lot of the thematic descriptions of how things work seem like they'd be tied to Wis instead.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My own take on this that I posted a couple weeks ago was to simply give the Kineticist a CON-based resource. That way if nothing else they have a real reason to invest in CON and, since they have this limited resource, it can be used to add in a little extra power elsewhere compared to the current "low power but constant" method the class currently uses.