| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The recent release of the Psychic has been the biggest earthquake in PF2 class balance. Let me give you my analysis of all the changes.
The big winner: Magus.
The melee Magus was a solid pick before the Psychic, but it is also a very hard class to play due to its complex action economy. With the release of the Psychic and because of Imaginary Weapon, it becomes a beast. Still hard to play so I don't expect it to invade all our games but when players will get used to it I expect it to become a staple.
The Starlit Span Magus on the other hand was already causing balance issues before the Psychic. With the Psychic release, it outdamages Giant Barbarians and Greatsword Fighters hands down. I expect it to soon cause problems at most tables. Mainly, it changes the game dynamic with ranged characters becoming the main damage dealers and melee ones being tanks before damage dealers. The pill will be hard to swallow for Fighters and Barbarians.
The Eldritch Archer is also stronger. But as it lacks the wording the Magus has about spell range it will bear very different results if the GM allows Imaginary Weapon to work at range or not.
The unfortunate losers: other archers.
Archers have never been especially strong. But with the new Starlit Span Magus, they are buried deep.
Melee damage dealers with nothing on the side, like Fighter and Barbarian, have also lost a bit of ground as they are no more the best martial damage dealers in the game.
The small winners: Casters with available focus points.
The second biggest change the Psychic brings is Amp Guidance. Now, every Charisma or Intelligence-based caster can grab Bard level of buffing with a single level 2 feat as long as they don't need their Focus Points (and their reaction). Wizards, Sorcerers, Clerics and Summoners are the clear winners there. On top of it, multiple casters can take Amp Guidance without interfering with each other.
The big loser: Bard.
The Bard main schtick, buffing, is now available easily to everyone. It doesn't make the Bard worse, it just removes its unicity as best buffer/debuffer of the game. An Occult Sorcerer can now do just as good as a Bard. The class is still strong and stays very relevant, it's just no more the "bestest class". In my opinion, this is the best change in balance as it puts the Bard on par with other casters. I expect the Cleric to become the new Bard (I don't like Cleric much, especially at high level, but I know how it is loved by players already and considering how it's now easy to make a great buffer out of it I expect even more Cleric love).
As a conclusion, I'll say that Psychics were supposed to be rare in Golarion. But the Dedication is so strong I expect it to become common around tables with sometimes multiple Psychics at the same table. I also expect a lot of issues around the Starlit Span Magus. I plan on limiting Spellstrike to spells acquired through Magus Spellcasting, it should be a good deterrent to powergamers.
Don't hesitate to give your comments.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Can you provide a deeper explanation on why Imaginary Weapon is good for a melee magus? I don't get the issue.
And also on why/how the release of the Psychic turns the Starlit Span magus into the damage king?
Can you provide a deeper explanation on why Imaginary Weapon is good for a melee magus? I don't get the issue.
And also on why/how the release of the Psychic turns the Starlit Span magus into the damage king?
Imaginary Weapon is a spell attack cantrip that scales 1d8 a level instead of 1d4. That's a pretty sizable damage bump for spell strikes.
I'm not sure which cantrip is best with the starlit span but it is probably something similar.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
True struke spellstrike with amped imaginary weapon's 2d8 per level scaling is insane, essentially. Also adds your int mod and does your choice of physical damage. Helps that the base version is a good damage cantrip by itself. Every magus wants it and between the superior damage and damage type of imaginary weapon (fire ray magus runs into resist/immune more often) and the better utility of occult archetype spells, starlit psi magus has become the first build since the crb to be considered on par with the usual gang of fighter, thief, cleric and bard.
As for the rest, amp guidance is nice, but it doesn't begin to compete with bard. A reaction to give +1 to one roll (and only to fix failure, not to push for crit success) for one ally 2/fight isn't nearly as good as +1 for 3-4 turns for all allies for all such rolls. Add in bard's easy access to one for all or fake out and you have the complete buff package. That, and you eventually switch to dirge anyway, but that does make amp guidance valuable as a bard supplement if nobody is dropping 3 feats for lingering inspire off the bard archetype.
With that aside, psychic's dedication is indeed loaded. Amp guidance or shield is a good way to add a reaction to a character that wasn't regularly using it for 1 easy feat. It can also be used for a focus point short teleport with warp step, or, in the case of magus, to get amped TK projectile with distant grasp before retraining it to tangible dream for the best focus damage cantrip feats can buy.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
but... the basic bardic level of buffing was something that anybody could have grabbed with a few feats anyway. Does the psychic really make an equivalent level of buffing available that much cheaper/earlier?
...and, of course, there's also Marshall for further friend-buffing options, if you're up close in melee yourself, don't want to have to spend too many actions, and don't have another use for your stance.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
To get Imaginary Weapon on a Starlit Span Magus, you would need to spend a level 2 feat for the dedication and a level 6 feat to get Psi Development.
The basic (non Amp) version of Imaginary Weapon does on average one point per spell level more damage than Telekinetic Projectile that Magus gets access to automatically.
The Amp version of Imaginary Weapon does do almost broken amounts of damage scaling. But it also costs a focus point, for whatever that is worth. I would also note that using the Amp version of Imaginary Weapon on a Spellstrike would not allow multiple targets. Even Expansive Spellstrike would not change that since Imaginary Weapon does not have an area.
So two feats to get 1/level extra damage seems a bit lackluster to me. Two feats to get 1d6+1/level extra damage when spending a focus point seems pretty good, but not necessarily broken.
Just to be clear, Magus can spend two feats in order to get +1 damage per spell level on their 2-3 action attack when not using slots. That's good but probably not it. How about amped? Two targets doesn't do them any good
ah... it now heightens for 2d8. That's about +20 to attack-based focus spell damage over 20 levels, with the alternatives being two feats into Cleric/Oracle/Paladin for Fire Ray (2d6/level, burn on crit) and a very difficult to reach three-feat investment into Druid for late access to Stone Lance (2d6/level, reduce movement for a minute and lock down on a crit), which admittedly gets great synergy with ranged attacks.
I think this mostly translates to, "This is the first time we've gotten a touch-range attack focus spell", which is what Starlit Span wants most. The fact that Psychic means it's also a cantrip upgrade is a one-two punch.
Notably, you do trade out a free attack to do this, by not using your conflux spell, but it's still a good trade.
Edit: And looks like that was covered just above me.
Melee Magus + Psychic is nowhere near a problem. It is OK and gives melee magus some needed help (I will still make Arcane Cascade for melee magus a free action in my games). That said I agree that Starlit + IW is an issue. Not a game-breaking issue, hard encounters are still hard with this on the field, but it is definitely above what ranged martials should be able to do.
I don't get what are you saying about Bard, though. It is still by a very long shot the best buffer in the system. Amped Guidance is good, but it is no inspire Heroics (Does not help with crits and only targets 1 person for 1 attack), in the same way that regular Guidance is no Inspire Courage. I just see other classes being able to fill the same role to a certain degree as a positive thing.
The Amp version of Imaginary Weapon does do almost broken amounts of damage scaling. But it also costs a focus point, for whatever that is worth. I would also note that using the Amp version of Imaginary Weapon on a Spellstrike would not allow multiple targets. Even Expansive Spellstrike would not change that since Imaginary Weapon does not have an area.
Level 8 onwards you can pick Spell Swipe and use it with the amped version. It may not be usble every fight, but the amount of damage it deals is a bit unfair. Specially when you consider that Starlit magus also gets access to it by using a fist attack with their free hand.
Edit: And looks like that was covered just above me.
Yeah, we are definitely on the same wavelength on the analysis.
The other spells to look to for comparison is quite useful.
A True Striked Imaginary Weapon Ranged Spellstrike does 70% more average damage than a Greatsword Giant Barbarian making 2 attacks (what I consider a basic round for such a character). Starlit Span Magus was already problematic before the release of the Psychic when compared to other ranged combatants, but it's now eating the cake of melee strikers, too. It becomes very hard to compete with it in damage, especially when you add its access to a few high level Arcane spells for AoE damage (Whirlwind Attack is not competitive against Chain Lightning, even if it's free).
A reaction to give +1 to one roll (and only to fix failure, not to push for crit success) for one ally 2/fight isn't nearly as good as +1 for 3-4 turns for all allies for all such rolls.
Actually, it is.
First, +1 to attack when it is useful is equivalent to +1 to 20 checks (on average). And during the 3 rounds of Lingering Inspire Courage, you'll see roughly 20 attacks.It only affects failures, but it can buff saves (and turning a critical failure to a save to a failure is massive).
On top of it, it doesn't cost actions (only a reaction which is cheap on casters) when the Bard action economy is crippled during the first round because of the need to start their composition (and even sometimes more than the first round if the dice are not with you). Also, Amp Guidance can be used before you even get your turn if the GM allows reactions.
Once at level 11, it gives a +2 (you should take the extra Focus Point at 12 to be able to keep up with the pace) and becomes massive then.
We can argue about which one is better or not, but Amp Guidance is definitely a strong competitor.
And once you compare it's feat cost (a single level 2 feat instead of 3 feats), its availability (14 Charisma or Intelligence and level 2 instead of level 8), its low impact on your character routine (no action to activate it, you just give up on your reactions which is not very costly for a lot of casters) and its stackability (as it buffs attacks or saves and gives a +2 at level 11+ it stacks with everything unlike Inspire Courage) it becomes very easily available to every group without a Bard. The Bard stays a very relevant character (as I said, the Bard is not worse) but buffing being now much cheaper removes the Bard near monopoly on it. A Cleric with Amp Guidance is in my opinion a better support character than a Bard now.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with your basic premise that Pyschic is a step change for the Magus class. It is a clear damage increase. I'm less clear as to whether that is problematic.
You are comparing limited resources to unlimited resources. Amp costs a focus point. True Strike a spell slot.
Amped Guidance and Amped Imaginary weapon can be easily both taken in a multiclass. But how often do you get to use them?
Are you in a game which regularly has one short encounter per day, or a game with 6+ encounters per day. What level are you ? How many focus points can you regain between encounters. Are you mostly getting short rests?
It is only the single class Psychic that recovers 2 focus points at level 1, The Oracle is 2 at level 11 and every other class has to buy that with a feat at a higher level than that.
You are comparing limited resources to unlimited resources.
This has been the basic argument to defend the PF1 Wizard for a decade. Being able to wipe the floor when the party needs it is not balanced with the fact that you are letting the other characters deal with the trivial encounters. No one feels strong being a sidekick with at-will abilities.
Also, starting fights with your focus points is a basic assumption of the game. And True Strike is a level 1 spell. If you don't feel you have enough of it you can buy Wands or a Staff of Divination (cast True Strike, drop the Staff, Spellstrike). And then you can add Hero Points and Halfling Luck and Tattoos, etc... If you want to build a Starlit Span Magus who's True Striking like crazy, you'll manage to do it. These aren't really "limited resources" as you can have enough to last long adventuring days.
For Amp Guidance, you use as many Focus Points as the Bard using Lingering Performance for roughly the same effect. So nothing bad here.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A True Striked Imaginary Weapon Ranged Spellstrike does 70% more average damage than a Greatsword Giant Barbarian making 2 attacks (what I consider a basic round for such a character). Starlit Span Magus was already problematic before the release of the Psychic when compared to other ranged combatants, but it's now eating the cake of melee strikers, too. It becomes very hard to compete with it in damage, especially when you add its access to a few high level Arcane spells for AoE damage (Whirlwind Attack is not competitive against Chain Lightning, even if it's free).
It seems worth noting that the Magus can more or less only do this the first turn of combat. Every turn after that, they need to recharge their Spell Strike (using a wasted action instead of a focus spell, probably) so there's no room for True Strike, and getting two reliable points of focus is something for higher levels. Even more than "it uses limited resources", it goes from three actions to four after the first use, and none of the actions can be hasted before level 20.
I don't disagree about it being an issue, though. It's just the sort of mono-build I hated seeing in PF1 Magus.
I think how you're doing the comparison is unfair (with Barbarian getting no temporary resources or further optimization)... but I have to admit that's also realistic. The issue isn't really "How does an optimized Magus stack up against an optimized Barbarian", it's "How does an optimized ranged Magus stack up against the best melee character a new player could be reasonably expected to make". It's enough that I'd ask players to avoid this particular combo in most games, and I'd probably judge somebody showing up to the table with this exact combo.
First, +1 to attack when it is useful is equivalent to +1 to 20 checks (on average). And during the 3 rounds of Lingering Inspire Courage, you'll see roughly 20 attacks.
It only affects failures, but it can buff saves (and turning a critical failure to a save to a failure is massive).
+1 to attack when it is useful is equivalent to +1 to 10 checks on average- if not by default, at least with flanking to get things into crit range. I think that's a big part of what's making the reaction seem so good. Once it moves to +2, I think they're on more even footing, and it's obviously a better multiclass deal.
I'm glad to have Bard's monopoly broken up a bit, and I do think that Cleric with improved Guidance is a pretty flavorful combo.
I don't know what you mean by "stacks with everything", though. Guidance is a status bonus, and it goes to +2 at the same time Heroism, the main buff spell, does. It covers the same thing Heroism does.
+1 to attack when it is useful is equivalent to +1 to 10 checks on average
Amp Guidance is specific as it can't trigger a critical hit. So in its case, it's one every 20 checks.
Also, not all attacks can score a critical hit on anything but a natural 20 so it's not always 1 chance on 10.I don't know what you mean by "stacks with everything", though.
It improves both attacks and saves. And the only buff that improves both of these up to +2 is Heroism 6 which is a single target buff so you'll have hard time having it on all characters.
Obviously, the more Status bonuses you have and the less often you'll trigger Amp Guidance, so it can count for a negative interaction. But as you only pay a Focus Point and a Reaction if it is actually useful, it's not that much detrimental as you can use your Focus Points for something else during the fights where it isn't triggered much.Inspire Courage interacts negatively with tons of things: itself, Bless, Heroism for the most obvious ones (for example, if half of the party is under Heroism, Inspire Courage becomes half as good). And as you have to pay the action and focus point right at the beginning, you may end up not using it because the cost outweighs the gain (even if it could have been useful).
I think by the time Heroism becomes really common you can swap Inspire Courage to Dirge of Doom or Inspire Defense.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You are comparing limited resources to unlimited resources.This has been the basic argument to defend the PF1 Wizard for a decade. Being able to wipe the floor when the party needs it is not balanced with the fact that you are letting the other characters deal with the trivial encounters. No one feels strong being a sidekick with at-will abilities.
Also, starting fights with your focus points is a basic assumption of the game. And True Strike is a level 1 spell. If you don't feel you have enough of it you can buy Wands or a Staff of Divination (cast True Strike, drop the Staff, Spellstrike). And then you can add Hero Points and Halfling Luck and Tattoos, etc... If you want to build a Starlit Span Magus who's True Striking like crazy, you'll manage to do it. These aren't really "limited resources" as you can have enough to last long adventuring days.
For Amp Guidance, you use as many Focus Points as the Bard using Lingering Performance for roughly the same effect. So nothing bad here.
So this build of the magus, who is very much a burst damage class to begin with, does better burst damage with their first-round nova when spending all three actions than a Giant Barbarian gets on their average turn, spending two (presumably the third was used for movement). So... yes? I mean, I'd hope so?
After that first turn, your basic rotation is recharge/spellstrke, which works, and is effective, but you quickly run out of focus points to spend, and you don't have the actions to toss on another true strike without accepting a dead turn where you cannot spellstrike first. If you want to cast true strike from anything other than your own slots it gets even worse, because shuffling your wands/staves in and out is going to cost you even more actions.
Like, yeah, novas are great, and yeah, being able to focus power at the start of the fight and on the hardest fight of the day has value, but first, that doesn't invalidate the guy who's carrying you for all the fights where you're not burning through resources, and second, fights last more than one round.
Then, too, you're putting basically everything the magus gets on the table, and ignoring some of the stuff the barbarian has to offer. There are very few feats available to the magus that will boost the damage of the psychic starlit span beyond what you've said. Barbarian has at least a few, though, in things like Swipe, Attack of Opportunity, and Follow-up Assault, and that's before you do things like go to an archetype to get an upgrade on your basic strikes further (Mauler, say, for Knockdown and Brutal Finish).
...and, of course, you're ignoring the bit about how that beautiful attack pattern starts breaking down badly any time enemies manage to get into base-to-base with you.
I'm not saying that the psychic starlit magus isn't strong. It's pretty clearly pretty solid. I'm not saying that it isn't, perhaps, a bit too strong. I haven't run the kind of analysis that I'd need to run to make a declaration on that point one way or the other. I'm saying that you're kind of overselling it.
You are comparing limited resources to unlimited resources.This has been the basic argument to defend the PF1 Wizard for a decade.
That doesn't make the argument invalid though. The limits are real.
How much extra damage is the total? Is it 30% over the previous maximum for just that attack? You tell me. For PF2 standards yes that is big. It probably pushes the class up a ranking comparitively. Maybe now Magus is even a top tier class.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe now Magus is even a top tier class.
I'd not speak of the Magus as a unified class. The melee Magus clearly got an increase but it's a tough class to play so it limits how overpowered it can be. I still expect excellent players to do crazy things with it (or excellent groups as a Hasted Magus is definitely way stronger than a non Hasted one) but these will be outliers.
The Starlit Span Magus, on the other hand, is not exactly the most complex character to play. Archers spend most of their time standing and shooting so a 3-action sequence is not really tough to deliver.
How much extra damage is the total? Is it 30% over the previous maximum for just that attack? You tell me.
You know I've made tons of damage comparisons. The system is super solid. When a player comes with a "crazy stronk" build, I run the numbers. I rarely get 10% increase compared to a basic build with no feat. In PF2, you can really take a Giant Barbarian, put all your feats on fancy things, and still be a massive damage dealer competing with the best ones.
Sometimes, I've found what I consider very strong builds, like the Double Slice Thief Rogue or how Barbarian Dedication really increases the Fighter damage ouput at low level. These are in general around 10-15% damage increase.A character that can deliver 100% damage increase when compared to its actual competition (the Giant Barbarian is not the Starlit Span competition, bow Fighters and Rangers are), even if it's during one turn, nope, I've never seen anything like that. That's nowhere to be seen in the system.
That doesn't make the argument invalid though. The limits are real.
Not that much. If I continue the comparison, keeping the same Barbarian round over and over again and just making a Telekinetic Projectile Spellstrike with the Magus past the first round, it takes 3 rounds for the Barbarian to get back to the Magus damage. If I give a second Focus Point to the Magus, it's now 4 rounds. And if the Magus decides to use a Hero Point or Halfling Luck on this second Imaginary Weapon Spellstrike, the Barbarian catches up in 2023. And I'm still comparing a melee damage dealer to a ranged one, there shouldn't be a doubt about the Giant Barbarian ability to outdamage the Starlit Span Magus as there's no other archer that even get close to it.
I've started raising attention on the Starlit Span Magus when it was dealing 2d6 damage per level. Now that it does 2d8 of them, that it avoids the easily resisted Fire damage and that it gets its Focus Spell without having to raise Wisdom or Charisma, I think the issue is far too big. Around my table, it's a build I limit. And it's the very first time I limit anything on PF2.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I may have missed it, but how much of the math depends on True Strike? Is this another case where True Strike is actually the problem, perhaps?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why are we looking at a bow wielding magus for this comparison? If we are only looking at making 1 shot in the first round, and Eventually, possibly a second in round 2 if we assume we have hero points for the shot , shouldn’t this be a character that is using a firearm with a D12 fatal die? That seems like the max damage situation for this build.
At the same time, it is a build that does very well against a single enemy, but the chances of missing, even with true strike or a hero point are non-negligible with that first strike. Assuming you start combat in position to get your shot off without any kind of concealment or cover bonus for the enemy with ranged attacks is common misconception, and your accuracy is not so good that a level +3 dragon that has not yet been debuffed to you is a sure thing target. With limited once a combat attack rolls attacks there is more complexity to knowing when to take your shot than for a giant Barbarian with at-will options.
Just a spell like mirror image can nearly shut the starlit magus down because the magus is not going to be able to flurry enough attacks against a target to whittle that down.
+1 to attack when it is useful is equivalent to +1 to 10 checks on averageAmp Guidance is specific as it can't trigger a critical hit. So in its case, it's one every 20 checks.
Also, not all attacks can score a critical hit on anything but a natural 20 so it's not always 1 chance on 10.
Yeah, that's what I'm talking about. Bard's flat +1 will make a difference (miss to hit or hit to crit) every 10 attacks. So, a +1 to attack when it's useful is equivalent to +1 to ten attacks. The fact that Guidance only triggers every 20 attacks doesn't make it worth more. (And yes, against enemies that you miss on a 10 even with flanking, a flat bonus triggers less often, and Guidance increases in relative value, same for once you actually start making frequent saves.)
I don't know what you mean by "stacks with everything", though.It improves both attacks and saves. And the only buff that improves both of these up to +2 is Heroism 6 which is a single target buff so you'll have hard time having it on all characters.
Obviously, the more Status bonuses you have and the less often you'll trigger Amp Guidance, so it can count for a negative interaction. But as you only pay a Focus Point and a Reaction if it is actually useful, it's not that much detrimental as you can use your Focus Points for something else during the fights where it isn't triggered much.Inspire Courage interacts negatively with tons of things: itself, Bless, Heroism for the most obvious ones (for example, if half of the party is under Heroism, Inspire Courage becomes half as good). And as you have to pay the action and focus point right at the beginning, you may end up not using it because the cost outweighs the gain (even if it could have been useful).
Ah, so not "stacks", but "exceeds and can therefore still be relevant". Fair enough. I thought you were saying it wasn't a status bonus.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I note in the case of bard vs psychic, there's also some randomness in there. If the bard using lingering composition would come in handy 5 times, it triggers 5 times, and costs a focus point. If it would come in handy 0 times, it triggers 0 times, and costs a focus point. If the psychic would come in handy 0 times, you save that focus point... which would be nice except that you can't really take advantage of it if you're holding that focus point back for an Amp Guidance chance that never comes. If it would come in handy 5 times... then you run out of focus points, and you can't use it as many times as you'd really like to. Similarly, on the matter of reactions, even if you have nothing else consuming your reaction, you still can't amp guidance two different allies (or two different attacks from the same ally) in the same round.
Not that this means that it's bad or anything. Just saying that it's a comparative downside that should be taken into account along with everything else that gets taken into account.
Among other things, it means that if you've somehow find yourself in a party with three flurry rangers, then Bard has obvious advantages. If you're in a party that's throwing relatively few attacks every round (of whatever size) then amp guidance starts looking comparatively better... especially with how it can be used on things that are not just attacks.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hm. I wonder... if you interviewed a SEAL team, and asked them if they worried over who did the most damage in a firefight, what would they say?
Why are we looking at a bow wielding magus for this comparison? If we are only looking at making 1 shot in the first round, and Eventually, possibly a second in round 2 if we assume we have hero points for the shot , shouldn’t this be a character that is using a firearm with a D12 fatal die? That seems like the max damage situation for this build.
At the same time, it is a build that does very well against a single enemy, but the chances of missing, even with true strike or a hero point are non-negligible with that first strike. Assuming you start combat in position to get your shot off without any kind of concealment or cover bonus for the enemy with ranged attacks is common misconception, and your accuracy is not so good that a level +3 dragon that has not yet been debuffed to you is a sure thing target. With limited once a combat attack rolls attacks there is more complexity to knowing when to take your shot than for a giant Barbarian with at-will options.
Just a spell like mirror image can nearly shut the starlit magus down because the magus is not going to be able to flurry enough attacks against a target to whittle that down.
I vaguely recall the ideal magus attack pattern being:
True strike via staff, Release staff, spellstrikeRecharge, strike x2 or cast something
True strike via slot or scroll from independent familiar, spell strike
In which case firearms, as usual, serve no purpose. Now for accuracy, at 7, the party is giving you +2-+4 to hit between dirge and one for all, a +1 status somewhere and maybe a trip for flatfooted for a net +3-+7 on top of true strike's reroll. With a base 40% chance of hitting an extreme solo you have a very reasonable 80% chance of success with true strike assuming the minimum +3. A critical aid or trip brings it to 88% and both bring it to 94%. Lesser enemies have no real chance of avoiding it and most have no access to anything like concealment or mirror image. As levels progress crit aid becomes more reliable and the status bonus is also going to go up letting you blow through just about anything. Heck, you can even add rogue archetype for dread striker after getting imaginary weapon to guarentee flat-footed 99% of the time.
Of course, the same magus in a party without these tools isn't going to have the de/buffs needed to really go above and beyond consistently, but this is an optimization discussion, where we assume everyone involved has every intention of squeezing out every advantage they can.
For starting position, I'm not certain it matters. A horde of mooks is still probably going to be there at least partially on round 2 and a scary solo boss is also still going to be there. While yes, the big boom is generally best as an opener, it isn't required to be and we can pretty easily do it twice a fight later on anyway. So go ahead, spend turn 1 striding and casting true seeing or what have you.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hm. I wonder... if you interviewed a SEAL team, and asked them if they worried over who did the most damage in a firefight, what would they say?
Hm. I wonder... if you interviewed a SEAL team, and asked them if they felt like a live firefight was comparable to playing a tabletop RPG, what would they say?
Like, I get what you're going for, but when I'm playing melee, it actually is disappointing to have the biggest enemies get wiped before I even engage, or feeling like I can't rage/study/hunt/exploit because I need to get in the fight before it's annihilated from range. When it's just some lucky crits, that's chill and part of the fun and variance of the game. When it's a fortune effect plus focus spell plus weapon damage opener every combat? Yeah, I'm probably going to be having less fun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I know it doesn't solve the problem (because of PFS and stuff) but I'll just houserule it. Amped cantrips can already not be used with metamagic. I'd just add the restriction that they can't be used if the Cast a Spell activity is a subordinate action for anything. Might be an idea for a relatively easy fix/errata down the line.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I know it doesn't solve the problem (because of PFS and stuff) but I'll just houserule it. Amped cantrips can already not be used with metamagic. I'd just add the restriction that they can't be used if the Cast a Spell activity is a subordinate action for anything. Might be an idea for a relatively easy fix/errata down the line.
It's interesting that Spellstrike is noted as being typically incompatible with metamagic. If amps and metamagic are in the same balance tub, that restriction you proposed would make a whole lot of sense.
It might make sense... but, oddly, I don't think that that's the issue. Specifically, the issue seems to be that the starlit span magus is capable of using a ranged attack to deliver a touch-range spell. Then you combine that with the fact that the Starlit Span conflux spell isn't all that great, and suddenly Starlit Span magus is very interested in any sort of touch-range spell attack vs AC focus spells they can find.
I suspect that we'd get better futureproofing from a nerf that required Spellstrikes to meet range requirements for both the spell and the weapon attack components.
The Eldritch Archer is also stronger. But as it lacks the wording the Magus has about spell range it will bear very different results if the GM allows Imaginary Weapon to work at range or not.
I haven't seen a GM not allow short range or melee spell attacks with Eldritch Shot. The basic text there seems enough.
A character that can deliver 100% damage increase when compared to its actual competition (the Giant Barbarian is not the Starlit Span competition, bow Fighters and Rangers are), even if it's during one turn, nope, I've never seen anything like that. That's nowhere to be seen in the system.
What are you saying here? That the Imaginary Starlight Magus build is 100% stronger than the Fighter Archer or Ranger Archer?
What about the Imaginary Starlight Magus versus the Withering Grasp Starlight Magus? That was what I was asking.
Showing my working so you can object:
So at level 10 that would be
+2 str, d8 composite longbow, d8 striking, +2d6 runes, +2 weapon specialization
with either +2 arcane cascade, +5d12 Withering Grasp, with 1d4+4 persistent damage,
or +2 arcane cascade, +4 int + 9d8 Amped Imaginary Weapon, and a push
So 20 plus either 34.5 or 46.5 ignoring criticals, persistent damage, hit chance.
54.5 verus 66.5 for 22% better
At level 20
+3 str, d8 composite longbow, 3d8 striking, +3d6 runes, +6 weapon specialization
with either +3 arcane cascade, +10d12 Withering Grasp, with 1d4+9 persistent damage,
or +3 arcane cascade, +5 int + 19d8 Amped Imaginary Weapon, and a push
=>
37.5 plus either 65 or 93.5
102.5 versus 131 for 28% better
For completeness mentioning that the second target of Imaginary Weapon or extra damage of Unleash Psyche doesn't apply.
Yes it is simplistic but 22-28% seems to be a good range. This being a good improvement to what was already a good build.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why are we looking at a bow wielding magus for this comparison? If we are only looking at making 1 shot in the first round, and Eventually, possibly a second in round 2 if we assume we have hero points for the shot , shouldn’t this be a character that is using a firearm with a D12 fatal die? That seems like the max damage situation for this build.
At the same time, it is a build that does very well against a single enemy, but the chances of missing, even with true strike or a hero point are non-negligible with that first strike. Assuming you start combat in position to get your shot off without any kind of concealment or cover bonus for the enemy with ranged attacks is common misconception, and your accuracy is not so good that a level +3 dragon that has not yet been debuffed to you is a sure thing target. With limited once a combat attack rolls attacks there is more complexity to knowing when to take your shot than for a giant Barbarian with at-will options.
Just a spell like mirror image can nearly shut the starlit magus down because the magus is not going to be able to flurry enough attacks against a target to whittle that down.
I vaguely recall the ideal magus attack pattern being:
True strike via staff, Release staff, spellstrike
Recharge, strike x2 or cast something
True strike via slot or scroll from independent familiar, spell strikeIn which case firearms, as usual, serve no purpose. Now for accuracy, at 7, the party is giving you +2-+4 to hit between dirge and one for all, a +1 status somewhere and maybe a trip for flatfooted for a net +3-+7 on top of true strike's reroll. With a base 40% chance of hitting an extreme solo you have a very reasonable 80% chance of success with true strike assuming the minimum +3. A critical aid or trip brings it to 88% and both bring it to 94%. Lesser enemies have no real chance of avoiding it and most have no access to anything like concealment or mirror image. As levels progress crit aid becomes more reliable and the status...
. 80% is good for a hit like this, but it is not likely encounter ending. If you try to wait for your party to set you up, you might very well be looking at a creature like a dragon sitting on you by the time you get to go, in which case you will looking down an attack of opportunity with a decent chance of shutting down your big nova strike as well. There is very little chance the creature does anything but focus fire on you if you get your shot off in the first round. The odds of you just being allowed to turret up and fire as often as possible feels very, very white roomy to me. Especially if your devastating first shot lands.
And if it doesn’t then you’re probably back down below a fighter archer for damage for the rest of the encounter. It feels like a fire arm is a better choice here for both damage types and burst potential. It is not like this is a character boosting STR for propulsive damage.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's rare to see the traditional d20 rpg Youtube video clickbait "OMG MOST BROKENEST BUILD EVAR!!!" type of thing get translated to pure text, but here we are.
The Eldritch Archer is also stronger. But as it lacks the wording the Magus has about spell range it will bear very different results if the GM allows Imaginary Weapon to work at range or not.I haven't seen a GM not allow short range or melee spell attacks with Eldritch Shot. The basic text there seems enough.
This is how I read Eldritch Archer as well. It's 3 actions instead of two, so can't use True Strike with it.
It might make sense... but, oddly, I don't think that that's the issue. Specifically, the issue seems to be that the starlit span magus is capable of using a ranged attack to deliver a touch-range spell. Then you combine that with the fact that the Starlit Span conflux spell isn't all that great, and suddenly Starlit Span magus is very interested in any sort of touch-range spell attack vs AC focus spells they can find.
I suspect that we'd get better futureproofing from a nerf that required Spellstrikes to meet range requirements for both the spell and the weapon attack components.
That just hurts the Starlight Magus too much, and goes to its core being. You forget that this combo works in melee too. So I'm not seeing the point.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I love reading threads like these because they sound like a completely different game than I ever experienced. It's fascinating how people can approach things so differently!
I'd love an optimizer or two. Instead, I'm the GM with players like the sword and board fury barbarian that raged once during Fall of Plaguestone, or the swashbuckler who always went intentionally last in initiative to get panache, and always used their finishers as their third rapier attack in one turn... I would kill for a few more players that would read the books or even a cheese guide.
I love reading threads like these because they sound like a completely different game than I ever experienced. It's fascinating how people can approach things so differently!
I'd love an optimizer or two. Instead, I'm the GM with players like the sword and board fury barbarian that raged once during Fall of Plaguestone, or the swashbuckler who always went intentionally last in initiative to get panache, and always used their finishers as their third rapier attack in one turn... I would kill for a few more players that would read the books or even a cheese guide.
If you and they are having fun, then don't bother. Just keep up with those easy encounters. I am just one of those people who can't turn analysis off. Competitive is a common personality trait. Though I often detune my characters with purely fun options because I like how it sounds.
But if you want to nudge them introduce an optimised NPC to the party. It is not too hard to come up with a build that will be doing a lot more damage over a round that an unoptimised pure flavour build.
I love reading threads like these because they sound like a completely different game than I ever experienced. It's fascinating how people can approach things so differently!
I'd love an optimizer or two. Instead, I'm the GM with players like the sword and board fury barbarian that raged once during Fall of Plaguestone, or the swashbuckler who always went intentionally last in initiative to get panache, and always used their finishers as their third rapier attack in one turn... I would kill for a few more players that would read the books or even a cheese guide.
If you and they are having fun, then don't bother. Just keep up with those easy encounters. I am just one of those people who can't turn analysis off. Competitive is a common personality trait. Though I often detune my characters with purely fun options because I like how it sounds.
But if you want to nudge them introduce an optimised NPC to the party. It is not too hard to come up with a build that will be doing a lot more damage over a round that an unoptimised pure flavour build.
Yeah I don't expect to change their idea of RPG fun. They're all just a bit beer and pretzel, which is very fun during game day! I just wish they wanted to get involved more between sessions.
Funny thing is, I run a deadlier game on paper than most other GMs I've talked with online, but I also rarely kill a PC. I guess if they really optimized, it would just give me even more budget to spend on encounters!
Sorry for the rambling tangent.
I may have missed it, but how much of the math depends on True Strike? Is this another case where True Strike is actually the problem, perhaps?
It seems like the result of mixing 3 different (rather small) issues that feed on each other: TS being TS, Starlit Span Magus being able to cheat out range on spells for free and Imaginary Weapon scaling a bit too well. Together they are a bigger problem than they are on their own.
I love reading threads like these because they sound like a completely different game than I ever experienced. It's fascinating how people can approach things so differently!
I'd love an optimizer or two. Instead, I'm the GM with players like the sword and board fury barbarian that raged once during Fall of Plaguestone, or the swashbuckler who always went intentionally last in initiative to get panache, and always used their finishers as their third rapier attack in one turn... I would kill for a few more players that would read the books or even a cheese guide.
If you and they are having fun, then don't bother. Just keep up with those easy encounters. I am just one of those people who can't turn analysis off. Competitive is a common personality trait. Though I often detune my characters with purely fun options because I like how it sounds.
But if you want to nudge them introduce an optimised NPC to the party. It is not too hard to come up with a build that will be doing a lot more damage over a round that an unoptimised pure flavour build.
You would fit in well with my group.
No one has yet tried the Starlit Span Magus in my group. The psychic is new. One player is giving one a try. It seems like a really fun class so far. It seems to do decent caster damage, while having play aspects the player can see cinematically that are also effective.
No one has yet tried the Starlit Span Magus in my group. The psychic is new. One player is giving one a try. It seems like a really fun class so far. It seems to do decent caster damage, while having play aspects the player can see cinematically that are also effective.
The double focus spell regen early on makes it imo into the most fun caster to play early on, you can just cast stuff without worries. Hope your player enjoys it as much as I did.
I may have missed it, but how much of the math depends on True Strike? Is this another case where True Strike is actually the problem, perhaps?It seems like the result of mixing 3 different (rather small) issues that feed on each other: TS being TS, Starlit Span Magus being able to cheat out range on spells for free and Imaginary Weapon scaling a bit too well. Together they are a bigger problem than they are on their own.
True Strike is an important part of the balance for so many other things.
Starlight Span has the advantage that the damage reduction for ranged spells is basically nothing and so it looks good on a weapon user. It also has better action economy that a melee Magus.
Imaginary Weapon is the outlier here. Everything other spell or ability, outside of weapons, that is short range or melee range does not get a major increase in damage. It tends to be minor secondary things like a bit of persistent damage. Imaginary Weapon is 2d8 per level not 2d6. Compare it to the other real outlier at 3d6 per level which is Debilitating Dichotomy a saving throw with side effects.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Imaginary Weapon is the outlier here. Everything other spell or ability, outside of weapons, that is short range or melee range does not get a major increase in damage. It tends to be minor secondary things like a bit of persistent damage. Imaginary Weapon is 2d8 per level not 2d6. Compare it to the other real outlier at 3d6 per level which is Debilitating Dichotomy a saving throw with side effects.I may have missed it, but how much of the math depends on True Strike? Is this another case where True Strike is actually the problem, perhaps?It seems like the result of mixing 3 different (rather small) issues that feed on each other: TS being TS, Starlit Span Magus being able to cheat out range on spells for free and Imaginary Weapon scaling a bit too well. Together they are a bigger problem than they are on their own.
Not saying it is not an outlier damage-wise, but as it is is not a problem as a Psychic, as any other caster picking it through dedication or even as a melee Magus. I tried it out as a staff magus and to me at least it does not feel out of line. Melee magus needs to earn every good spellstrike hit, the spell just makes the reward for all the setup a bit bigger. Only when you mix those 3, the damage boosting of TS for big hits, the advantage of range starlit has and the damage of the spell, is when something problematic starts to happen, as the big damage you can deal becomes a bit too consistent with how easy to set up it is.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Imaginary Weapon is the outlier here
Don't really agree. Starlit Span has been a problem the whole time. True Strike has been a problem the whole time.
Meanwhile Imaginary Weapon is firmly in the "pretty neat" category for a psychic itself and for literally anyone else picking it up via archetype that isn't the Magus.
It's Starlit Span being already overpowered and getting to bypass the biggest downside of the spell (as well as the biggest downside of using a bow and the biggest downside of the magus class all at once) that's at issue here.
People were talking about Starlit Span long before Dark Archive came out.
Either way though, given how the Psychic and Kineticist are designed (notably to limit your ability to gather power out of class), I can imagine Paizo just errataing spellstrike to not work with focus spells, or to only work with spells that come from its own spellcasting feature.
I can imagine Paizo just errataing spellstrike to not work with focus spells, or to only work with spells that come from its own spellcasting feature.
I will suggest that I hope they don't do this, as this seems an overreaction to a few outliers. Especially given how focus-starved magi can get.
I think a better change would be to make starlit span magi have a maximum of 30 foot range on firing touch spells, perhaps? Maybe even just 20... allows for bending physics as is fun, but also keeps them vulnerable and engaged instead of too safe.
Or perhaps they adjust true strike so that when used with a leveled spell, it must be heightened within a couple levels of the spell being cast?
Not that I think they'd do either.
I will say in my opinion that individually, none of imaginary weapon, starlit span, or true strike are broken, but piled all together and I can see potential for bending the game too far for many tables.
Is multiclassing psychic for amped imaginary weapon really that much more powerful than multiclassing cleric for fire ray? Fire ray is is 2xd6 instead of a 2xd8, but if you're true striking here you're likely to crit and get the xd4 persistent damage.
People were talking about Starlit Span long before Dark Archive came out.
I can't say I agree that Starlit Span is a problem.