The kineticist is not about damage, but about being dynamic

[Dilvias]

Ravingdork wrote:

Kekkres wrote:

i wish my experiance mirrored yours unicore, from everything i have seen in my playtests, i have found kineticitst to just be doing everything badly, (two level 6 kineticists, one dual air fire dex man, the other dedicated earth str man) they do an awful lot of stuff badly, save for the one impulse they get off at the start of a fight before enemies can all run and get tangled into your front line. I know that the utility impulses do get very good later on, and i do like that part of the class, and my dual air fire guy would have benifited from picking up fair winds, but my players felt like they got to do "cool kineticst thing" once per fight and after that they where just sub par at everything

They were clearly doing it wrong.

jk ;P

You are joking, but it’s really easy to build a subpar kineticist. I’ve done 2 tests so far, one with a 10th level water kineticist, and a 1st level air kineticist. The 10th level water kineticist was amazing. The first level air kineticist… was not.

[Dubious Scholar]

Yeah, as an anecdote - I played a reasonably effective aerokineticist the other week (PFS, level 3). Aerial Boomerang works very well against big dumb enemies who eat the return hit every time (unsurprisingly), even if it's kind of... boring? having every turn be Gather>Boomerang. I tried using elemental weapon but really, a 1d6 strike with no bonuses can't compete with the 4d4 twice per turn of boomerang in optimal conditions (okay, the GM rolling crap for saves helps too).

This week I saw someone bring a dual gate earth/water and they were pretty unhappy with it, because they'd taken the cold damage aura and stone shield as initial impulses and were just trying to use strikes every time and ended up not being as effective as they liked. They only even used water like once? But they generally were very negative discussing the class. I was very sad to hear that they didn't have Tidal Hands, because that would have been a lot more impactful in several situations (delicious 30' cones with 3d6 damage)

[Captain Morgan]

Kekkres wrote:

evocation wizard, elemental sorcerer druid of any kind (elementalist is largely a downgrade) are all kind of.... bad at single target damage,

A level 3 or 4 elemental sorcerer can open with a 3d6 flaming sphere and a 2d8+1 elemental toss, for an average of 19 damage if both land. On subsequent rounds, they can use a cantrip + sustain to maintain that same output (actually 19.5) for the rest of the combat, or up it by 2 points with telekinetic projectile, or increase it to a whopping 38.5 by nova'ing with a Sudden Bolt.

That damage compares mighty favorably to ranged martials. A rogue with a shortbow needs to land 3 sneak attacks to eclipse that damage (or crit for the deadly). A precision ranger barely eclipses it with two short bow hits at 20.5, a whole one point higher, or 1 point lower with telekinetic projectile. It can crank that damage higher with gravity weapon and a bear, but that costs actions and the bear can get knocked out in melee.

This will vary at different levels, but Sustained spells more or less fix the limited slots issue (if you're fighting more than 3 bosses a day you need to chill) and you get additional tactical options even just considering single target blasts. Burn your slots for emergency novas, or use a magic missile to take out an enemy on its last legs.

Quote:

OW psychic is better in that regard but it is both the completely wrong asthetic for someone who wants to play a pure black mage,

How is the aesthetic of the psychic meaningfully different than the kineticist? They are both surrounded by swirling forms of magic and energy. Entropic Wheel is basically gather elements, visually. I guess I picture the kineticist as using more hand motions than the psychic strictly speaking needs to use, but there's nothing stopping your psychic from hitting some avatar style poses while they cast.

Quote:

and is very limited in what elemental options it has acess to

Fire and Cold is already twice as many elemental damage types as the kineticist gets out the gate. If you want to chuck rocks at people or buffet them with wind, Distant Grasp is right there.

[Onkonk]

Comparing raw damage numbers is not a fully meaningful thing to do when the accuracy differs. Otherwise a lot of classes are going to look very favourably compared to the fighter.

[Gaulin]

I really don't understand where this notion came from that kineticists were going to be the savior of blasting in 2e. They weren't better blasters than full casters in 1e, not by a long shot. Expecting them to be *the* blaster of 2e is something the community made up.

[Captain Morgan]

Onkonk wrote:

Comparing raw damage numbers is not a fully meaningful thing to do when the accuracy differs. Otherwise a lot of classes are going to look very favourably compared to the fighter.

True, but the caster is also targeting saves. The examples I used about target reflex which feels easier to hit than AC more often than not, and can switch to other spells. Barring those weird proficiency gaps at levels 5, 6, 13, and 14, you should usually wind up with better odds to hit. Especially once you get a Shadow Signet. And of course there's half damage on most saves. (Not Flaming Sphere, but Electric Arc does.)

Will this always be true? No, sometimes you'll wind up targeting a save with worse odds than striking+item bonuses. But sometimes you'll target a worse save or have a true Strike attack roll in the chamber. And you'll also likely do better with Resistance or Weakness comes into play.

The only way you'll get 100% parity across all scenarios is if you just take the same mechanics and reflavor them. As is, whether damaging spells or ranged weapons are better will vary based on the circumstances. I think this inferiority complex has a lot to do with comparing your damage to melee characters or using one and done spells and then being surprised when your sustained damage is lower across a long fight.

[Unicore]

Of course it is possible to build a sub optimal playtest character. That is why the survey asks for so many specific details about the character, to figure out if happiness with the play experience is tied to specific option choices that can be dialed in.

I think having access to too many elements at early levels will prove to be a detriment to many players experience. Especially with 2 more elements inbound. It will be much harder to discourage players from making choices that conflict with each other (like get away from me, but also stay close to me and attack me) the more different pools of feats they are pulling from.

[Kekkres]

Gaulin wrote:

I really don't understand where this notion came from that kineticists were going to be the savior of blasting in 2e. They weren't better blasters than full casters in 1e, not by a long shot. Expecting them to be *the* blaster of 2e is something the community made up.

because blasting was the core thing they did in pf1, they werent the best at it, but it was there thing, and that is a niche that pf2e is lacking. so in a more balanced game like pf2e, it makes sense to expect that to be the niche they fill and for them to be good at it.

[dmerceless]

Gaulin wrote:

I really don't understand where this notion came from that kineticists were going to be the savior of blasting in 2e. They weren't better blasters than full casters in 1e, not by a long shot. Expecting them to be *the* blaster of 2e is something the community made up.

It's called desperation and clinging to anything that's seemingly an opportunity. Blaster fans have got their desires neglected for 3 years continuously, and the Kineticist is a magic class that has the word "blast" in one of their core features and is not as versatile as casters are (see comments above from other people about the pushed narrative that casters can't be good at damage because they have a lot of utility).

I find this whole situation a little sad, honestly. I don't necessarily hate this Bender class Paizo wants to build, a master of the elements with a lot of utility, it's just... absolutely not what I want from Kineticist right now, and not what I think the game needs.

I legitimately believe if we didn't spend this entire time without a real dedicated blasting option, the discourse on this playtest would have gone in completely different ways. But in the end, things aren't designed in a vacuum.

[Kekkres]

Captain Morgan wrote:

Kekkres wrote:

evocation wizard, elemental sorcerer druid of any kind (elementalist is largely a downgrade) are all kind of.... bad at single target damage,

A level 3 or 4 elemental sorcerer can open with a 3d6 elemental blast and a 2d8+1 elemental toss, for an average of 19 damage if both land. On subsequent rounds, they can use a cantrip + sustain to maintain that same output (actually 19.5) for the rest of the combat, or up it by 2 points with telekinetic projectile, or increase it to a whopping 38.5 by nova'ing with a Sudden Bolt.

element blast comes online at level 10, I am legitimatly unsure what you are talking about with the sustained 3d6

[Sanityfaerie]

Gaulin wrote:

I really don't understand where this notion came from that kineticists were going to be the savior of blasting in 2e. They weren't better blasters than full casters in 1e, not by a long shot. Expecting them to be *the* blaster of 2e is something the community made up.

So, I myself am not so very into the blaster archetype. At the same time, when it's made pretty clear that the full casters aren't going to do it... well, you look out at the set of classes that we might reasonably expect in the future, and kineticist really stands out as the one that it's plausible for.

So in some ways it's not so much "should kineticist be a focused elemental blaster?", it's "should PF2 have a focused elemental blaster at all?" I don't think it's unreasonable for people to decide that the answer to that second question ought to be "yes".

The trick, of course, comes from the fact that there's a bunch of people (like me) who really like the basic utility-caster kineticist we have right now, and the fact that the kineticist cannot both be the all-day interesting utility caster with lots of tasty controller powers and PF2's answer to the focused elemental blaster at the same time. Balance doesn't work like that. That's why I keep trying to come up with reasonable ways to let the same class cover both without letting any one character take both roles... in the hopes of helping to come up with solutions that can leave everyone happy and also not break the game.

[Captain Morgan]

Kekkres wrote:

Captain Morgan wrote:

Kekkres wrote:

evocation wizard, elemental sorcerer druid of any kind (elementalist is largely a downgrade) are all kind of.... bad at single target damage,

A level 3 or 4 elemental sorcerer can open with a 3d6 elemental blast and a 2d8+1 elemental toss, for an average of 19 damage if both land. On subsequent rounds, they can use a cantrip + sustain to maintain that same output (actually 19.5) for the rest of the combat, or up it by 2 points with telekinetic projectile, or increase it to a whopping 38.5 by nova'ing with a Sudden Bolt.

element blast comes online at level 10, I am legitimatly unsure what you are talking about with the sustained 3d6

Bleh I meant flaming sphere.

[Ravingdork]

I would not be surprised if the base kineticist class turned out to be a utility support type that only excels at wearing down multiple enemies, rather than being a powerful single-target focus fire blaster.

I also would not be surprised if the blaster that many people desire arrives in the same book as an archetype, possibly with a balancing mechanic such as a reimagined burn.

[Squiggit]

I would not be surprised if the release kineticist comes with a minor damage bump and improvement to their core combat loop that makes them more competitive at striking like pretty much every single playtested martial has gotten so far.

[Kekkres]

Ravingdork wrote:

I would not be surprised if the base kineticist class turned out to be a utility support type that only excels at wearing down multiple enemies, rather than being a powerful single-target focus fire blaster.

I also would not be surprised if the blaster that many people desire arrives in the same book as an archetype, possibly with a balancing mechanic such as a reimagined burn.

Squiggit wrote:

I would not be surprised if the release kineticist comes with a minor damage bump and improvement to their core combat loop that makes them more competitive at striking like pretty much every single playtested martial has gotten so far.

i would not be surprised by either of these either but i REALLY hope this is not how the class goes

[Dubious Scholar]

As it stands, I think Kineticist needs the following:
1) Blast damage increase - some need it more than others, but most damaging blasts don't do enough for the action costs, especially compared to Tidal Hands or Aerial Boomerang.
2) More damage on Elemental Blast. My main concern here is the lack of any flat damage bonuses - Air sorely needs something from the class to be useful I feel, though all of them could do with a bit of help. A possible spot to make CON do something for the class, but just like, +1/die constantly would go a long ways.
3) Action economy on Overflow, or something. Overflow's current state is a major pain point for the class. I'd like to suggest that the "damage boost" could be Strike+Impulse rounds, but it's impossible under the current economy (and Magus gets to do that with a damage bonus on their strikes anyways already)

One thought - what if Overflow provided a bonus to your next elemental blast (of any element)? Like, just say that it adds +X of whatever damage type the blast did. So if I do Tidal Hands, then gather Fire and Blast, I get say +2 Bludgeoning to the damage. I'd still like some economy, but this ties together the idea of gathering and releasing power in a cycle.

Edit: Maybe make it last until the end of your next turn or something, which gives an advantage to agile blasts, and makes it work cleanly with the multi-attack feats?

Conceptually, I'd say it's that after an overflow you've suffused your surroundings with elemental matter, which gets drawn into your blasts and boosts them. You could have a feat that allows you to spend an action to Gather+Blast, but give up the damage bonus (must gather same element? Basically, gather that diffuse matter and immediately start chucking it), allowing you to pick between action economy or damage. And the same-element restriction inherently favors dedicated gate who don't care? Hmm.

[Ravingdork]

Kekkres wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

I would not be surprised if the base kineticist class turned out to be a utility support type that only excels at wearing down multiple enemies, rather than being a powerful single-target focus fire blaster.

I also would not be surprised if the blaster that many people desire arrives in the same book as an archetype, possibly with a balancing mechanic such as a reimagined burn.

Squiggit wrote:

I would not be surprised if the release kineticist comes with a minor damage bump and improvement to their core combat loop that makes them more competitive at striking like pretty much every single playtested martial has gotten so far.

i would not be surprised by either of these either but i REALLY hope this is not how the class goes

I hope we get both, as well as something more suited to your own tastes, Kekkres.

[Sanityfaerie]

I just... don't see why "turn Kineticists into blasters" would be an archetype. I mean, the whole point of archetypes is to give you ways to spend class feats that aren't directly attached to your class. "Be an elemental blaster" seems rather firmly attached to the kineticist class. I mean, no one else is going to be running around with an elemental blast power in the same way, right? So... why not just make it a set of kineticist class feats, and cut out the middleman?

[Unicore]

Sanityfaerie wrote:

I just... don't see why "turn Kineticists into blasters" would be an archetype. I mean, the whole point of archetypes is to give you ways to spend class feats that aren't directly attached to your class. "Be an elemental blaster" seems rather firmly attached to the kineticist class. I mean, no one else is going to be running around with an elemental blast power in the same way, right? So... why not just make it a set of kineticist class feats, and cut out the middleman?

I am not sure I agree that I want a whole lot of design space given to a sub option of one class, that can't really be effectively used by other classes. Especially when the kinds of feats people are asking for with the blasting would need to be present in every single element or else it is going to feel very stale and forced. Why do Kineticists need to be the only ones whom blast people with raw elements? Instead of masters of manipulating the elements in many different ways, with the ability to blast being one of the things they can do, but other classes looking to single target strike with blasts would still be able to pick it up as well?

[Sanityfaerie]

Unicore wrote:

I am not sure I agree that I want a whole lot of design space given to a sub option of one class, that can't really be effectively used by other classes. Especially when the kinds of feats people are asking for with the blasting would need to be present in every single element or else it is going to feel very stale and forced. Why do Kineticists need to be the only ones whom blast people with raw elements? Instead of masters of manipulating the elements in many different ways, with the ability to blast being one of the things they can do, but other classes looking to single target strike with blasts would still be able to pick it up as well?

Why would you need to have a large number of element-specific feats? You could have maybe one or two feats per element for interesting elemental riders and such, and aside from that you can have the rest apply to blast regardless of element. For that matter, how would divorcing it from the kineticist class somehow reduce the number of feats involved?

I feel like you're trying to defend against something, and I'm not quite sure what it is. What is it that concerns you about the idea of letting Kineticists have a set of class feats that will let them crank their elemental blast attacks specifically?

For me, I'm opposed to the idea of making it an archetype because I don't believe that that will actually let people do the thing they want to do. The major issue here is that we have a meaningful number of players who really, really want to have "blast the for with elemental power" be the thing that they're good at, and the thing that they do all day every day. Archetypes are great at letting you dip into interesting side bits. They're great at adding depth and nuance to your story, and including a way for that to mean something. They're really, really not great at becoming the thing that is core to your identity. They're almost inherently a side hustle. That's simply not going to be enough to satisfy, here.

[Squiggit]

I don't like the idea of feats to make blasts stronger because math-fixing feats in general feel kind of bad. The more resources you have to commit to just turning your build on the worse it feels, especially if the resources are just going toward making the math make sense and not giving you new stuff.

The closest analog to what's being suggested sounds like alchemist bomb feats and those... feel kind of crummy to take. I see those feats as more an early-in-development, alchemist being heavily modified close to release hiccup in the game's design, not a model to copy forward.

Again I feel like the best and most likely solution to kineticist damage being a bit bad is to just improve their damage, probably by giving them some sort of class-specific combat mechanic like everyone else has. Don't make people pay for it.

When I think more blast feats, what I want to see is more ways to change the way your blast works, rather than just make them work. A single or omni equivalent to fusion blast could also be cool.

[aobst128]

Squiggit wrote:

I don't like the idea of feats to make blasts stronger because math-fixing feats in general feel kind of bad. The more resources you have to commit to just turning your build on the worse it feels, especially if the resources are just going toward making the math make sense and not giving you new stuff.

The closest analog to what's being suggested sounds like alchemist bomb feats and those... feel kind of crummy to take. I see those feats as more an early-in-development, alchemist being heavily modified close to release hiccup in the game's design, not a model to copy forward.

Again I feel like the best and most likely solution to kineticist damage being a bit bad is to just improve their damage, probably by giving them some sort of class-specific combat mechanic like everyone else has. Don't make people pay for it.

When I think more blast feats, what I want to see is more ways to change the way your blast works, rather than just make them work. A single or omni equivalent to fusion blast could also be cool.

Yeah, the feats don't have to be super special. They should open up more options rather than be the only option.

[Sanityfaerie]

Squiggit wrote:

The closest analog to what's being suggested sounds like alchemist bomb feats and those... feel kind of crummy to take. I see those feats as more an early-in-development, alchemist being heavily modified close to release hiccup in the game's design, not a model to copy forward.

For what it's worth, I rather like them. Also, they're not just raw math. There are alchemist bomb feats that adjust the bomb-throwing experience in a variety of ways.

More to the point, there's a question of how many options your character has in a fight. If you insist that every class feat you spend must add options, and that none can ever be used to improve the options you have, then you're setting a pretty high floor on tactical complexity. Even past that, though, plenty of martials get feats that improve old options rather than granting new ones... and the whole point of this set of feats would be for the people who wanted to lean in on the martial aspects of the kineticist.