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.
I just did the numbers. It is a little over 20%, not counting persistent damage.
Xd4 persistent damage is a pretty big deal.
I also have yet to see any magi really make a crit fishing gunslinger look shoddy in comparison. Not moving, and counting on everyone else to debuff for you and that the powerful monster is not going to go first and possibly camp on you with an AoO, steal an action from you with slow or stunned debuff you into having a pretty high miss chance, or even just knock you prone is rare enough for the occasional incredible hit to be fine for the game. It could be that the GMs I play with almost always have encounters spill over on to each other and limit the number of 10 minute rests the party can take in a dungeon before enemies start responding, but there is just too many ways for this to end up working well maybe once or twice a day at the tables I play with for it to be too big a deal.
The 2d8 heightening is eventually in a slightly problematic place of letting a focus spell exceed the damage of shocking grasp which is really about as damaging as spell slot spells can, so I would say it is the amped heightening that is breaking the math of the game here if anything is, but even for starlit span magi, 3 action routines with no moving are difficult to make work effectively without sacrificing accuracy in major ways.
The funny thing is that Imaginary Weapon is really not good for the Psychic, since you're not really comfortable where you can touch dangerous things.
So "fixing it" because the Magus can do the most damage with this feels weird.
Imaginary Weapon is not broken. It's strong, but it's not broken.
True Strike is not broken. I know I read this a lot, I don't know why it has such great standing but it isn't part of any optimized routine. On the other hand, it's extremely important for spell attack roll spells to stay relevant: Disintegrate without True Strike is just a waste of a spell slot. Nerfing True Strike will have detrimental effects on the game balance.
Starlit Span, on the other hand...
The main issue of Starlit Span is that you roll only a single attack roll and combine the result of a 3-action sequence into it. So everything that modifies a single attack roll will actually modify your entire round. It's a bit like if One For All was boosting all your attacks of the round, True Strike was rerolling all your attacks and a Hero Point could be used to replay your round. There's the imbalance and what allows you, through heavy investment, to break the ceiling in terms of damage. And as of now, the investment needed to break the ceiling is not high enough, you can do it all on your own without external help (even if external help is always welcome).
As a side note, I've seen a few players speaking about Concealment: True Strike cancels Concealment. You only face cover with this build.
| 1 person 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.
It's not truly rare. It's just old school. Posts like that showed up with decent frequency on the old 4e CharOp boards... back when thsoe boards were a thing at all.
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.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.
How does it hurt the Starlight Magus so severely? It's not like they had particularly many before this to play with. As for the melee magus... well, yes. That's kid of the point. The melee magus is about right in terms of balance. It doesn't need the nerf. Melee spells are balanced for melee combat... which the melee magus is in. The unbalance comes from the ranged magus being able to throw around melee spell damage without the associated risk or associated need to spend actions maneuvering or compensating for that risk.
I think it's a very good option but it's only slightly better than what already existed?
If we take 2d6*level as the previous "best" (Withering is quite better than that on first strikes, but gets worse if you hit when the persistent is already there and also it is way harder to compare) it is +2 damage ahead per spell level when amped (I'm considering INT to damage as a d8 for simplicity reasons, even tho it is less than that for most level ranges). That's a lot of damage you get (almost a 30% increase on the spell part of the damage). That damage difference is also later amplified by TS, which makes the difference even more noticeable.
I also think IW is ok on a vacuum, it's just this specific interaction that seems problematic to me.
Imaginary Weapon is definitely the best spellstrike option un-amped, but it's a small increase.
Withering Grasp already existed with 1d12 negative on a hit, 1d4 persistent negative, and +1d12/1 persistent heightened, and that's pretty nasty.
Fire Ray was already noted, it's only slightly behind imaginary weapon (technically stronger at lower levels, since imaginary weapon doesn't gain damage from amping at 1).
I think it's a very good option but it's only slightly better than what already existed?
Edit: Also, if you're fighting undead, Sun Blade wins with conditionally going as high as 3d6 damage per spell level.
Withering is another good option, but part of what makes IW the best option is that you don't need to wait for persistent damage ticks. As-is, IW already beats fire ray crits unless fire ray ticks twice. Between the 30% recovery chance after the first tick and the possibility of your target dying before either the first or second ticks, the more frontloaded IW makes for a better choice. The same applies to withering grasp on regular strikes, but it's persistent damage not scaling as well on the critical puts it further behind there too.
I mean, amped Imaginary weapon is higher damage than spell slot spells that just do single target damage by mid game, making it clear the Psychic is supposed to be able to exceed all other casters damage wise with focus spells instead of spell slots. It is the blaster damage caster option and psychics get access to spectral hand too.
I think some players will see that as unfair, and others will say that casters were underperforming as blasters anyway so imaginary weapon was just fixing a wrong in the game. It is probably a bit of both and something to be careful about using as a new standard to build to. That is definitely the path to power creep and maybe it is worth surveying whether people think psychic multiclassing is pushing that on the spell side.
I don’t see a lot of people playing starlit span magi though. The only one I’ve seen is a player who wanted to do AoE spells from where their arrow hit, which is incredibly not an overpowered option. Even in the game I homebrew, where I often use maps that are 500ft across or more, my players seem to avoid ranged options like the plague and complain incessantly about cover penalties. I am playing in an Outlaws of Alkenstar campaign and we got most of the way through 2 books with only 1 in 4 characters using a gun. Then we had multiple player deaths against a viciously teleporting foe and now we have 2 gunslingers and everyone trained in guns. But it is a campaign where foes that keep their ranger out number those that don’t. Players really seem to dislike being the ranged character when enemies are always closing to melee and hitting with AoOs.
More than anything else, I think perception around this issue boils down to combat lengths. If your combats are lasting 3 to 4 rounds, the Imaginary Weapon magus looks really, really powerful. If your encounters move around the battlefield, involving cover and broken sight lines, and take 8 to 10 rounds on average, it really isn’t going to cause a lot of problems with overall game balance.
Amped imaginary weapon in its native form is a touch-range spell that provokes on a relatively fragile caster. There are some serious downsides to go with that kill-power.
Amped imaginary weapon in its native form is a touch-range spell that provokes on a relatively fragile caster. There are some serious downsides to go with that kill-power.
I agree, but it is a spell, which are not class locked, so it’s design has to be looked at more broadly. Spectral hand is also a spell easy to pick up as a psychic to set up your unleash as well.
But Even on a magus, It’s damage is not so over the top it is likely to drop a target with one hit, not even a level -2 enemy, although 2 likely will drop a lesser foe and can drop a higher level foe. So it is mostly going to shine in the one place in the game many players feel is the greatest challenging encounter: the level +3 foe. Although at higher levels these foes are hardly the terror they are when they jump the 5th/7th level gap. (Level 7 solo monsters against level 4 PCs is the absolute kill spot of PF2 encounter design). And the starlit span magus tricked out for single target slaying will struggle against a severe encounter vs mostly level -2 enemies, with the occasional on level enemy thrown in, which are much more challenging for parties than solo monsters by level 10+.
I don’t see a lot of people playing starlit span magi though.Pretty sure most people just find it boring compared to melee magus or other martials.
But Even on a magus, It’s damage is not so over the top it is likely to drop a target with one hit, not even a level -2 enemy.
The issue is not so big that it becames a game balance issue, I'd consider it more of a class balance issue. I don't think Starlit with IW is strong enough to significantly change how encounters are approached, it is just a "feel bad" thing seeing how other PC, by putting themselves in less risk, can deal noticeably more damage in a more consistent way than you.
Amped imaginary weapon in its native form is a touch-range spell that provokes on a relatively fragile caster. There are some serious downsides to go with that kill-power.I agree, but it is a spell, which are not class locked, so it’s design has to be looked at more broadly. Spectral hand is also a spell easy to pick up as a psychic to set up your unleash as well.
Spectral hand isn't necessarily that great. In particular, if you're worried about opportunity attacks, it dies to opportunity attacks pretty readily, and costs you a slot, a turn, and a bit of HP when it does.
...and while it's possible to grab it on more melee-capable characters, everyone who is not an arcane archer or a starlit span still has to get up close and personal, and the martials are going to struggle to get casting proficiency. I guess you could do it with monk? On a monk, though, it's competing with native spells like Ki Strike and Ki Blast.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think we really need to raise our threshold here for evidence that something is broken, right now I'm not really seeing anything that meaningfully outperforms other optimized builds and im not seeing any consequences to the meta, which is still preoccupied with the fighter.
I don’t see a lot of people playing starlit span magi though.Pretty sure most people just find it boring compared to melee magus or other martials.But Even on a magus, It’s damage is not so over the top it is likely to drop a target with one hit, not even a level -2 enemy.The issue is not so big that it becames a game balance issue, I'd consider it more of a class balance issue. I don't think Starlit with IW is strong enough to significantly change how encounters are approached, it is just a "feel bad" thing seeing how other PC, by putting themselves in less risk, can deal noticeably more damage in a more consistent way than you.
I was looking at the Starlit Span Magus after reading the combo on here, but I just couldn't pull the trigger. It is truly a one trick pony and looked super boring. Magus feats aren't exactly the most interesting either. They aren't witch level boring, but pretty boring.
I might try one some time, but the Starlit Span Magus with Psychic dedication locks you into a single attack sequences. Where if you play a druid, you can do a lot of different things and still crush in combat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The one thing about the Magus alpha strike is that you're still eventually going to run out of true strikes if you insist on doing this all the time, and I hate being the person who is the reason that you have to stop adventuring for the day.
Like you're going to roll to attack more than 20 times in an adventuring day aren't you?
It is truly a one trick pony and looked super boring.
Which is my main problem with ranged characters in general. Often they just stand still and shoot. Much less interesting than melee where placement is important or caster where spells change.
Your options need to be different and meaningful.
Gunslingers generally have pretty good options for giving themselves different things to do in a turn. Like you know you are going to shoot at least once, maybe twice, but you can have 3 different options for what you can do with your reload action and many of them interact pretty dynamically with the battlefield. It is a really well built class.
The different bows requiring no reload generally just push “spend every action firing.” I think a huge mistake of PF2 was not having ranged combat was turning taking your time to aim into a specialist class feat option instead of the default better way to use a ranged weapon, with class feat options for working that in to something else.
Like your average archer should not be trying to fire 3 arrows in 6 seconds if they are trying to be sure to hit a target.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Imaginary weapon on a starlit span is fun you just fire greatswords from your bow.
Or... now, hear me out... Plungers!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Imaginary weapon on a starlit span is fun you just fire greatswords from your bow.Or... now, hear me out... Plungers!
And boxing gloves.
Gunslingers generally have pretty good options for giving themselves different things to do in a turn. Like you know you are going to shoot at least once, maybe twice, but you can have 3 different options for what you can do with your reload action and many of them interact pretty dynamically with the battlefield. It is a really well built class.
The different bows requiring no reload generally just push “spend every action firing.” I think a huge mistake of PF2 was not having ranged combat was turning taking your time to aim into a specialist class feat option instead of the default better way to use a ranged weapon, with class feat options for working that in to something else.
Like your average archer should not be trying to fire 3 arrows in 6 seconds if they are trying to be sure to hit a target.
I played a bunch of ranged martials and I have to agree that gunslinger is probably the most fun I tried out. My Sniper Gunslinger took a while to get to the interesting stuff, tho. Before Vital Shot it was a bit dry.
I would also like an Aim system for ranged combat. I love how the Bullseye Rogue feat works, maybe a group of feats that work closer to that could be pretty cool, you expend 1 or 2 actions to modify your next strike activity, may that be a regular strike or not. Like strike metamagics. It would be more engaging, that's for sure.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The issue is not so big that it becames a game balance issue, I'd consider it more of a class balance issue. I don't think Starlit with IW is strong enough to significantly change how encounters are approached, it is just a "feel bad" thing seeing how other PC, by putting themselves in less risk, can deal noticeably more damage in a more consistent way than you.
I think that is the real question though, Is this such an obviously best option that it is going to appear enough to start sending out those vibes? Or is it a white room possibility that is difficult enough to actually execute in play that most parties will think “finally! That worked” while combat after combat goes by where the character struggles to make that supersized impact, especially because it is only happening once (and much later, twice?)
Unless the party builds to support it, I can see the starlit span magus often feeling left behind by fights that are moving outside of their sight lines
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Unicore, that's precisely why this combination is so appealing. The Starlit Span magus tends to be much more reliable than its melee counterparts because it tends to be a lot easier to pull off a 2 or 3 action combo when you have 60 feet of range instead of 5.
especially because it is only happening once (and much later, twice?)
Again, I think you're misunderstanding part of the appeal. Imaginary Weapon isn't just something that happens once, it's something that happens once per encounter.
That's very significant given that out of the box the Magus gets four slots per day. A focus attack spell can turn that into six or seven or eight or even more.
The combo is not the peak of damage potential, but it ultimately sacrifices not a lot of it to be significantly more consistent overall. So calling it a white-room only build feels really off base, when the whole point of the build is maximizing reliability and longevity.
You definintely shut one down as a GM if you want to, but only in the same way you'd shut down any ranged build and it's going to be more capable of adapting to those changes than some of its melee counterparts can.
Has anybody actually GMed a game where a starlit span magus or a magus multiclassing for a focus spell became a problem? The only magus I've seen as a GM was the staff kind whose name I forget, and it was more or less fine. The "absurd range staff poke" you get is fun, but not unbalancing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Twisting Tree.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Unicore, that's precisely why this combination is so appealing. The Starlit Span magus tends to be much more reliable than its melee counterparts because it tends to be a lot easier to pull off a 2 or 3 action combo when you have 60 feet of range instead of 5.
especially because it is only happening once (and much later, twice?)Again, I think you're misunderstanding part of the appeal. Imaginary Weapon isn't just something that happens once, it's something that happens once per encounter.
That's very significant given that out of the box the Magus gets four slots per day. A focus attack spell can turn that into six or seven or eight or even more.
The combo is not the peak of damage potential, but it ultimately sacrifices not a lot of it to be significantly more consistent overall. So calling it a white-room only build feels really off base, when the whole point of the build is maximizing reliability and longevity.
You definintely shut one down as a GM if you want to, but only in the same way you'd shut down any ranged build and it's going to be more capable of adapting to those changes than some of its melee counterparts can.
Squiggit, in my actual play experience, I find ranged characters often having the opposite experience than you are laying out here.
This starlit span magus is having to hold a staff in one hand and bow in the other. What happens when the shot isn’t available in round 1? Because someone else opened the door and the magi has no line of sight? They can’t fire a single arrow until they are ready to fire “the big shot” so either things are perfectly set up for the shot, or the magus can hope to delay until it is, or the round is a bust.
A whole party that plays to draw enemies into fire lines for the magus could make it work, but that has never happened in play I have seen. Someone opens the door, a melee character pushes into the room as fast as possible, sometimes that triggers a new encounter or draws the combat into a different location than the archer is set up for, and then the character is spending at least 1 full round moving to try to get into position, often greatly increasing the risk of an enemy getting around the front line and camping on the back line. Sometimes it works out where the party spots enemy guards outside a tent with great fire lines, but the boss is not usually out there, so the big shot is going to be wasted on a lesser target or held onto in hopes it can be delivered when needed.
Once a combat is great if you get 8 to 10 combats in a row separated by 10 minutes at least between them…that is an uncommon adventuring day in the games I play and GM, many of which are official APs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I find parties are generally willing to take breaks to refocus when it comes to "keeping HP out of critical levels" and much less so in contexts of "I need to reload the artillery."
So you might get to refocus when Hands need to be Laid, or Berries need to be Good, or when wounds need Treated but if there's only one party member who wants the break it probably doesn't happen.
Squiggit, in my actual play experience, I find ranged characters often having the opposite experience than you are laying out here.
I don't see how.
Again, the big difference between the starlit span and their melee counterparts here is range, so I don't see how any of the scenarios you've described favor a melee build instead.
Yes, if you stand around holding a staff doing nothing because you aren't in range of enemies, you're going to suck, but that has nothing to do with the build and more to do with a kind of strawman of bad play.
In fact, weirdly enough, if you stand there doing nothing every build in the game is going to underperform. Luckily a magus can do things like... move, cast spells, make normal spellstrikes, among other things.
Once a combat is great if you get 8 to 10 combats in a row separated by 10 minutes at least between them
Even if you only refocus twice in a day, that's still essentially 50% more 'full powered' spellstrikes per day.
Again, that makes the build less white room, not more, because you're a lot more reliable when you can try something an extra 2 or 3 or 4 times a day.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am not trying to say anything about a melee magus being better or easier to play. I am just saying that I think the potential damage output supremacy of the starlit span magi is stuck on a 3 action turn that might be a challenge to arrange more than once or twice a day, at which point, I don’t think it is bad for the game for it to exist. It should probably remain the absolute ceiling though and it’s predication on taking 3 actions and not really being repeatable the following round is a relevant balance factor.
Most other ranged builds can be pretty comfortable only getting one action to spend on the big shot. Archer rangers and monks get that 2 for one action, rogues and precision rangers can get a nice damage rider. Fighters are sad about only getting one action to shoot, but are at least accurate enough to get quite a bit of damage back for it, but it is still less than ideal. At least with 2 though they are usually pretty happy.
The starlit span magi is only losing any round they have to move, because they have nothing that combines a move into something else useful and it pretty much writes out recharging spell strike or true striking in a round they have to move. I think that is a big drawback to this build that helps make it not something that will make other players feel inadequate in actual play. And getting enough true strikes to make it work the way it is being sold as majorly shifting class balance pretty much requires having access to a staff of divination to start the combat. I am not saying the big shot will never happen, I am just saying that it will be rare enough that it is ok for it to really shine.
On the other hand, I find most parties go seeking melee combats enough that giant barbarians and maul fighters don’t usually spend 3 or more rounds a combat without doing their big damage routines, especially if they also have one or more attacks of opportunity built into it.
I'm getting the distinct feeling that Unicore's game style is just fundamentally different from that used by just about everyone else I've seen and spoken to about pf2e. Which, given what assumptions I can make about how he's described it, would necessitate a much different approach to deciding what is good or bad and how to handle things.
The spell winter bolt is also in contention for great magus focus spells. Either (1d8+1d12) per level or 1d8 per level and deny 1 or 2 enemy actions plus force provoke Attacks of Opportunity.
So has anyone seen this magus in play yet? I know one regular poster is playing one, but I don’t remember who. It seems like something to keep an eye on, but I wouldn’t ban the combination at my table, at least not yet. I wouldn’t even roll my eyes or think badly of a player wanting to try it out.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm getting the distinct feeling that Unicore's game style is just fundamentally different from that used by just about everyone else I've seen and spoken to about pf2e. Which, given what assumptions I can make about how he's described it, would necessitate a much different approach to deciding what is good or bad and how to handle things.
Which part? I would be surprised to hear there are many tables where the party doesn’t push themselves into melee combats pretty regularly, and many of the AP dungeon environments where you might get 8 to 10 encounters and chances to rest between them have pretty tight corridors with lots of doors and angles to them that limit ranged combat. I can believe that GMs that don’t make monsters wander and have encounters collapse onto each other might have shorter combats that only last 3 or 4 turns, so I can see that part of my experience being different but I’d be shocked if the “open the dungeon door, have no clear shot” part of the experience was that different.
I'm getting the distinct feeling that Unicore's game style is just fundamentally different from that used by just about everyone else I've seen and spoken to about pf2e. Which, given what assumptions I can make about how he's described it, would necessitate a much different approach to deciding what is good or bad and how to handle things.
Not really, no. At least, not in this case.
But then, I do tend to listen more to folks who assess how things will play and feel at a table rather than what the white room math states will happen.
White room is white room because it's inherently not representative of common or median gameplay. I'd suggest that anyone who can reliably pull off an "ideal turn" in combat is far into player minority territory. But again, in my circles of dozens of gamers, there's maybe one optimizer so perhaps that's coloring my impression of just how many are out there.
White room is white room because it's inherently not representative of common or median gameplay.
But, for like the third time, the main advantage of this build is that it's much easier to pull off its combat routine. You don't need 'optimal' conditions. You need something you can hit within 60 feet of you and two actions. If you can't do that, then most builds are going to fall flat (and the ones that aren't aren't putting out nearly as much damage anyways).
The reason the build is so great is because of its improved longevity and flexibility over many other builds, especially other Magi, in addition to doing generally great damage.
... This whole train of thought if we were talking about some hypothetical damage ceiling idea, like a greatsword magus in arcane cascade getting off a true strike acid arrow crit or something, but constantly trying to brush aside something as "white room only" when it's the absolute least white room and most practical Magus build is... absolutely baffling.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I thought the key comparison here was psychic archetype starlit magus using true strike and imaginary weapon vs giant Barbarian for damage potential
White room is white room because it's inherently not representative of common or median gameplay.But, for like the third time, the main advantage of this build is that it's much easier to pull off its combat routine. You don't need 'optimal' conditions. You need something you can hit within 60 feet of you and two actions. If you can't do that, then most builds are going to fall flat (and the ones that aren't aren't putting out nearly as much damage anyways).
The reason the build is so great is because of its improved longevity and flexibility over many other builds, especially other Magi, in addition to doing generally great damage.
... This whole train of thought if we were talking about some hypothetical damage ceiling idea, like a greatsword magus in arcane cascade getting off a true strike acid arrow crit or something, but constantly trying to brush aside something as "white room only" when it's the absolute least white room and most practical Magus build is... absolutely baffling.
Yeah, I think maybe we're discussing different things. Are you talking just the starlit span in general compared to other magi? If so, then you have plenty of point.
Maybe I just missed where the conversation moved on from the original discussion of the true strike, starlit span, psychic dedication impossible weapon combo. For which, achieving it once every or every other combat isn't out of the question. But it being anywhere near a reliable routine? That's the abstracted white room I was discussing.
Apologies if I missed the shift in topic, whoops!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Isn't the essence of the Magus that "periodically, but not reliably, you can land an absolutely enormous hit that outdamages basically everybody"?
I think the concern should be less about "how much does the Magus's damage potentially spike" and more about "how reliably they can do it."
I'm getting the distinct feeling that Unicore's game style is just fundamentally different from that used by just about everyone else I've seen and spoken to about pf2e. Which, given what assumptions I can make about how he's described it, would necessitate a much different approach to deciding what is good or bad and how to handle things.Which part? I would be surprised to hear there are many tables where the party doesn’t push themselves into melee combats pretty regularly, and many of the AP dungeon environments where you might get 8 to 10 encounters and chances to rest between them have pretty tight corridors with lots of doors and angles to them that limit ranged combat. I can believe that GMs that don’t make monsters wander and have encounters collapse onto each other might have shorter combats that only last 3 or 4 turns, so I can see that part of my experience being different but I’d be shocked if the “open the dungeon door, have no clear shot” part of the experience was that different.
The 500+ foot maps, frequent chained encounters and 2-3 rest restrictions are all pretty off from what I usually see people doing (and are definitely not what many of the AP people are doing).
The dungeon crawling stuff is pretty standard, I'm not particularly concerned with that part.
The general assumption just about everywhere that I've seen is that you're always at full hp between combats, to the point where it's not uncommon for GMs to houserule it so long as the party has a medicine bot and no immediate time pressure. By the same token, you refresh your focus points between combats.
This leads to the encounter chain thing because of how quickly it pushes combat ratings right past severe and because of how punishing it can be to parties not focused on clear speed as opposed to more defensive or control strategies. In other words, people are doing 8-10 encounters, with rests after every or every other encounter. You seem to be doing rests after every 3 or 4 and those encounters need to be cleared ASAP which does require certain considerations.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry to tell you that, Unicore, but you are building a giant strawman.
This build is super reliable. You'll unleash your one true combo once per fight, it's a given. The only question is will you unleash it twice (or thrice).
To answer the concerns that have been raised:
- "True Strike is a limited resource". You have 2 of them through the Magus class. You can take Psychic Spellcasting for 3 extra (after all, you already have the Dedication). Then as we speak of optimization you have Guiding Luck for 2-3 extra (a reroll is only consumed when you fail your attack and martials succeed at their first attack at least 50% of the time so it counts for more than 2 True Strikes). And then Hero Points. The Staff shenanigan is just there to add insult to injury as you have far enough True Strikes per day. And if you really want to be gross you can grab an Independent Manual Dexterity Familiar (first level Magus feat) to give you a Scroll every 2 rounds for unlimited True Strikes.
- "The Paladin opens the door and you don't see any enemy". Well, you can just position yourself, shoot and release your combo on the next round. Unleashing your combo on the first round is obviously major but unleashing it during the second is not that much of a problem. And that's without counting the fact that the Wizard also doesn't want to cross the door to get mauled. So, they can Haste you and we are back to square one. As a side note, this build is extremely easy to buff: Guidance and One For Alls will be for you before anyone else. And Haste certainly. So on top of being maybe the best damage dealer of the game you're the one who gets the most buffs because you are the easiest to improve.
- "And if the enemy casts Mirror Image". Then you do the same as anyone else you shoot to remove the images and only unleash the combo the next round. Or, if you want to be that guy, you recharge, position yourself and draw a scroll and wait for the other martials to remove the images for you. Unlike other martials you don't have to attack every round to be competitive, your damage is so loaded on your combo that you can have a round off without losing much damage.
- "8-10 encounters". I have hundreds of session and I don't remember of any "8-10 encounters" I've ever lived through. When there are so many encounters you can in general avoid some. And some are so trivial you don't even remember they were encounters. And sometimes the party goes for a long rest because of reasons. 8-10 encounters is a rarity, 3-5 encounters is what I experience the most.
The real question is: will you be able to unleash your one true combo twice per fight? With the Familiar shenanigan, it becomes quite easy as soon as you get to level 12 for a second Focus Point per fight. Even without it, if you have Guiding Luck or if you have a few Hero Points it should be quite easy to land. If you land your combo twice, your damage output is way beyond the moon.
Ho, I forgot the last point about reliability: You have a spell list of 4 spells per day. When unleashing your one true combo is not the best thing to do you have the luxury to be able to cast a Chain Lightning or a Wall of Force. Something that other martials have hard time pulling out.
No, this build is extremely reliable and abusively efficient.
About the only valid argument: Have you tried it?
I'm building a Rogue Eldritch Archer based on these premises. It will be online soon. It's not a low level build, so it takes time to build it and try it so I expect the first returns of experience to arrive with a delay.
On the other hand, I've seen archers playing a lot, so I think I can easily reach conclusions about how easy it is to play this build: Shooting three times is a common occurrence for an archer.
No feats involved but the ones to get the Imaginary Weapon on the Magus.
About the actual play experience question, one of my fellow players is playing Starlit. No damaging focus spell and it is already really strong. Pretty easy to extrapolate how it would fare with a damaging focus spell that competes in damage with attack roll spells from his highest slot.
Even with the low amounts of optimisation this character went through, it is our higher damage dealer martial by a really long margin except in very particular encounters (our other martials are a damage-oriented Thaum and a paladin). Unlike what Unicore said, his damage output and general performance is extremely consistent.
He usually loads his slots with 2 spellstrike spells, and either a buff or an AoE or 2 AoE spells. He TS his spell slot spellstrikes with the extra low level spells he gets and with a Ring of Wizardry. Works pretty well, but he has to do cantrip spellstrikes regularly.
We are happy if enemies AoO check him. Better him than me (Arcane Sorcerer) or our Witch. Even when enemies focus him up (which, as I already stated, is a bad strategy against our comp), he fares decently, as he just needs to delay his go off turn to next turn.
He barely uses his focus points. With spellstrike focus spell he would not need to ever slot damaging attack roll spells, leaving more space for AoE or buffs, and would make it so he would use less cantrips spellstrikes in general, if at all. IW deals equal or even more damage than slotted spells, so he would be at current peak performance for every combat he gets to refocus.
He is super easy to buff. Besides TS being TS, my One for All buffs his entire turn when he goes off. The Witch Shadow Projectile and Guidance do as well. The only buff we have that does not go on him is Enlarge, which I use on our Thaum. A good amount of our buffing is unlimited, so it would scale extremely well with the focus spell usage.
When he has gas he is extremely effective against both fewer and greater amounts of enemies due to having both good AoE and amazing single target focus. With the focus spell being his main source of spellstrike damage, he gets more AoE gas.
He would completely outshine the Thaum with IW in every aspect but creature identification, even on his most favorable encounters, and he already outshines the Paladin on everything but player defense (he is our party medic, and he does surprisingly a good job despite how busy the class is, pretty easy to fit Doctor Visitation during the set up turns). Of that, I'm certain.
1 - Give the fighter(s) baseline feats such as exacting strike to lessen 3 action map attacks. Give the melee power attack/furious focus (more damage for 2nd round routines).
2 - Drop AC to moderate since you're effectively nullifying the fighters crit potential from its accuracy boost which is where most of the damage comes from on the bow and will be a chunk of damage from the 1D12.
3 - Compute second round damage for each assuming a standard magus turn with a non-amped/non-true strike imaginary weapon, let the melee fighter get its third attack (its moved into range now with power attack/furious focus), have another option for fighter MC ranger so it gets off 4 shots on round 2 vs. hunted target. What is the damage difference in those situations? Is the magus always ahead or is there a damage differential that given round 2 damage would equate all parties by round 3, round 4, etc.?
4 - Double check that weapon runes are on these weapons, since that will benefit multiple attack routines vs. one big attack.
The Magus deals 14% more damage than the melee Fighter and 32% than the ranged one at level 20.
5 - Compare this to optimized meta which include the Giant instinct 1D12 barbarian, the fatal pick wielding double slice blenders of death, dips into rogue for 1D6 extra damage, melee fighter dip into barbarian, thaumaturge, dwarven telluric power at L13 and beyond, etc.
Sorry, but it takes time to do that. The builds I've put on are already quite optimized you'll hardly optimize them more (because if you Rage you lose one action on your Fighter for example). And anyway, the Magus will certainly win. Especially because we are considering a really bad Magus. At level 12 you can grab a second Focus Point for Amp Imaginary Weapon, that's just baseline. And Hero Points and Guiding Luck have so much efficiency on it that it should be nearly considered baseline, at least for the tough fights, to use one such point if you fail your second Spellstrike.
With just the extra Focus Point at level 12, this build now does 28% more damage than the melee Fighter and 48% more than the ranged one at level 20. 37% and 52% if I consider Guiding Luck or a Hero Point used every other failed second Spellstrike (a failed Spellstrike happens less than 50% of the time, so we are speaking of Guiding Luck or a Hero Point used every 5 fights, nothing crazy).
Sorry to tell you that, Unicore, but you are building a giant strawman.
This build is super reliable. You'll unleash your one true combo once per fight, it's a given. The only question is will you unleash it twice (or thrice).To answer the concerns that have been raised:
- "True Strike is a limited resource". You have 2 of them through the Magus class. You can take Psychic Spellcasting for 3 extra (after all, you already have the Dedication). Then as we speak of optimization you have Guiding Luck for 2-3 extra (a reroll is only consumed when you fail your attack and martials succeed at their first attack at least 50% of the time so it counts for more than 2 True Strikes). And then Hero Points. The Staff shenanigan is just there to add insult to injury as you have far enough True Strikes per day. And if you really want to be gross you can grab an Independent Manual Dexterity Familiar (first level Magus feat) to give you a Scroll every 2 rounds for unlimited True Strikes.
- "The Paladin opens the door and you don't see any enemy". Well, you can just position yourself, shoot and release your combo on the next round. Unleashing your combo on the first round is obviously major but unleashing it during the second is not that much of a problem. And that's without counting the fact that the Wizard also doesn't want to cross the door to get mauled. So, they can Haste you and we are back to square one. As a side note, this build is extremely easy to buff: Guidance and One For Alls will be for you before anyone else. And Haste certainly. So on top of being maybe the best damage dealer of the game you're the one who gets the most buffs because you are the easiest to improve.
- "And if the enemy casts Mirror Image". Then you do the same as anyone else you shoot to remove the images and only unleash the combo the next round. Or, if you want to be that guy, you recharge, position yourself and draw a scroll and wait for the other martials to remove the images for you. Unlike other martials you don't have to attack...
It will be interesting to hear more about your experience Superbidi, especially since you are testing out eldritch archer instead of Magus. I hope you have fun with the character!
It isn't clear from the second graph what changes you made since it still say AC high and doesn't have two damage rounds separated. Can you make 1 graph for the first nova round and one for subsequent rounds and include the 4 strike archer routine for that? Also can we put L10 fighter certain strike on the first round melee 2nd attack and send round 3rd strike?
I made everything you asked me but changing the titles of the graphs and monster. Also, I won't separate that in two rounds because I just can't with the tool I have.
If you want to play with it, I use citricking's tool.The point is you can't just compare an optimized nova round build to non-optimized other builds on that same round and hang your hat up.
As much as I agree with that, I disagree when you say that if it evens out by round 4 it's a wash. killing enemies quickly is the best way to win a fight. A party that drops an enemy at round 1 is performing better than a party that drops an enemy at round 3. And most builds need 3-4 rounds to get to the level of damage of the Magus which means that it's really better.
Also, you are considering the cons of the Magus but not its pros. For example, as it deals its damage in one single attack, it nearly ignores resistances. It also ignores Concealment when True Striking. And being a ranged character means that you don't suffer from Auras and a lot of impediments. Also, flying enemies (which are more common than enemies who kite the party, if you want my point of view).
And ultimately, you are optimizing more and more but this Magus can also be optimized. As I stated above, there's an easy way to get infinite True Strikes with a Familiar. So now you can make 2 novas per fights quite easily after level 12. You can even grab Inventor Dedication and Clockwork Celerity (level 14, it's late) for a free Stride per fight. That should be enough for your first combo.
This is a solid build and the damage is really too high. It actually competes with an Impossible Flurry, that was the highest damage 3-action sequence in the game. I'm pretty sure I'm not making much of a mistake by stating it's the highest martial damage dealer in the game. Which is not a problem per se, there must be a highest damage dealer. The problem is that it's a ranged build that outdamages melee builds. It is violating what looked like a main rule of the system.
It will be interesting to hear more about your experience Superbidi, especially since you are testing out eldritch archer instead of Magus. I hope you have fun with the character!
Thanks a lot. The build is slightly different (and definitely not as optimized) but I'm pretty sure I can get something decent out of it (I always have tons of Hero Points in PFS adventure, mostly because I'm glyphed so I get an extra one, so I can leverage the lack of True Strike with them).
I'll tell you as soon as I get enough data.
|
Anyone underestimating how much this tactic is going to sweep the Magus meta is seriously underestimating just how much of a difference tripling (if the party allows for refocusing at least once per day which is the most conservative amount I could estimate) the number of times they can use a first (or second if the positioning is a problem) round effective "best-in-slot" attacks that deal more damage than pretty much literally anything else in the entire system below level 7 spells. Let me be clear, the fact that this is a Focus Spell is the BIGGEST problem of all since it can be indefinitely spammed EVERY combat and with the use of True Strike, it will almost NEVER miss and will in fact be just about a coinflip if it will crit.
It may not seem like it's a huge deal but the fact that the damage die is so much larger, the Int Mod gets added, and the likelihood that most Magus are going to abuse True Strike (something we already see VERY commonly) it is going to make a big impact as they aren't just adding a couple of damage on average, they're doing so with Force damage (the least resisted type of damage hands down) and will be landing critical hits which further brings the damage up to an create a real outsize difference.
PFS is going to see a massive influx of these Characters and regular old "casual" games are also going to be impacted probably even moreso. Optimization is REALLY hard to come by in any stark terms with PF2 and this represents more than any other feature (other than perhaps those poorly thought-out Monk abilities that have been fixed already) the singular best way to grant what is essentially at LEAST a 50% buff to the amount of early round combat damage the Magus can pull off and I would place a bet that this is going to end up having to be fixed because with just HOW good it actually is, it's going to end up causing a significant drop in the diversity of how the Magus Class is played going forward if it is left as-is. Just like back in PF1 most players who knew what they were doing and rolled up a Spellcaster took the exact same Traits and Alternate Racial Abilities as most other Spellcasters I foresee that at every table with a Magus PC in the hands of anyone even remotely interested in optimization (or even a friend who is an optimizer that helps them build their PC) is going to end up with this.
Anyone who is planning on doing this should PROBABLY prepare themselves to see this nerfed with Errata, otherwise, this WILL become the Magus meta for good or ill. I've seen it happen in a system where you can optimize into dozens of different directions for pretty much any "top tier" Class in PF1 and 5e and in a system where TRUE optimization is extremely rare to actually pull off it's going to have a MUCH bigger impact.
Perhaps I'm wrong here but the fact that this combo stands head-and-shoulder above literally any other set of abilities in a system where the average "height difference" between PCs is a scant 3-4 inches it is going to stand out and end up being the go-to for folks who want to perform well with this Class.
Obligatory: This is just my 2 copper pieces but I've seen far FAR smaller advantages of becoming absolutely dogpiled on in a number of other games and when something like this surfaces in such a well-balanced game it is going to have an impact that is far more noticeable than the other options which generally offer something like +2 - +4 extra damage two or three times per day.