It just needs a fix up errata pass which I was hoping wouldn't wait until next year for the twice yearly errata periods to begin but it's sure feeling like it will
| 17 people marked this as a favorite. |
I saw the title of the topic and honestly thought this was going to go in another direction.
Yes, there is errata to be had on a few bits that are either unclear, incomplete, or just weird, and it should come at some point.
However if you remove MY Kineticist I will cut you.
|
| 19 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why, though? What, specifically, is wrong with it, to your mind? Last I knew, most posters say that it's a remarkably well-designed and fun class. What's your reasoning?magnetic pinions, for starters. So if there is only one enemy, if you want to use this ability you can only make one attack? Some people say yes and others say no, you can make 3 attacks to a single creature.
Errata is for addressing actual issues.
"I don't like this rule" isn't it.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Every class has features that people argue about. Kineticist has maybe a little more because of the size of the class, the newness/lack of errata/the time crunch in making it. It can be a little frustrating but this thread is sort of silly, no offense. There are already threads about things that may need errata or a handful of other rules questions.
In time I'm sure we'll get at least some questions answered, but in the meantime either stay away from impulses that might cause problems or be okay with the worst interpretation. A lot of us think the class is the coolest, even if there are some hijinks.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why, though? What, specifically, is wrong with it, to your mind? Last I knew, most posters say that it's a remarkably well-designed and fun class. What's your reasoning?magnetic pinions, for starters. So if there is only one enemy, if you want to use this ability you can only make one attack? Some people say yes and others say no, you can make 3 attacks to a single creature.
People that claim this are just wrong as the impulse is very clear on how it works. Make ranged impulse attack rolls against up to three creatures within 60 feet of you, you can't attack the same target more than once.
I agree there's stuff that's poorly worded, though this isn't one of them.
| 23 people marked this as a favorite. |
No, the kineticist should not be removed. Frankly, the idea is so ludicrous that I thought for sure this was some kind of joke thread I didn't understand.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not to add fuel to the fire, but I've always read "up to 3" as 0, 1, 2, or 3 targets, and never as the same target three times. I've interpreted "up to X" to mean that if I have less than X targets, I can still use the spell/feat. Compare this to "select X targets" specifically and then being prohibited from using the spell/feat because I can't target EXACTLY that many targets (or worse, having to include allies).
I know I've seen spells/feats that have called out ahead of time that the targets must be separate, but is there a spell/feat that says "up to X" that allows you to target the same creature? If we can find example to support "up to X" allowing you to target the same creature multiple times, then I'd say this argument has legs.
For example, Magic Missile allows you to target the same creature more than once, but:
1) it doesn't says "up to X."
2) has specific rules for if you target the same creature with more than one missile.
This would be an invalid example for this argument even though the intent and end result is what we're looking for.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Magnetic Pinions works the exact same way that Scorching Ray does. No amount of errata will fix wishful thinking.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not to add fuel to the fire, but I've always read "up to 3" as 0, 1, 2, or 3 targets, and never as the same target three times. I've interpreted "up to X" to mean that if I have less than X targets, I can still use the spell/feat. Compare this to "select X targets" specifically and then being prohibited from using the spell/feat because I can't target EXACTLY that many targets (or worse, having to include allies).
I know I've seen spells/feats that have called out ahead of time that the targets must be separate, but is there a spell/feat that says "up to X" that allows you to target the same creature? If we can find example to support "up to X" allowing you to target the same creature multiple times, then I'd say this argument has legs.
For example, Magic Missile allows you to target the same creature more than once, but:
1) it doesn't says "up to X."
2) has specific rules for if you target the same creature with more than one missile.
This would be an invalid example for this argument even though the intent and end result is what we're looking for.
Unfortunately, PF2e lacks the rules precision of MTG.
Just a note that there is a thread in the Rules forum for the 3 targets/attacks thing already.
Nice.
I still think there's some Turing-test-level mental gymnastics being performed, but I can appreciate the interpretation; my first 2e question was regarding Power Attack (when the MAP applies).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It just needs a fix up errata pass which I was hoping wouldn't wait until next year for the twice yearly errata periods to begin but it's sure feeling like it willis this a normal thing? New class has to get an errata?
Errata, yes.
Removed, pretty much never.
Overhaul, rarely.
Alchemist was given some fairly major changes a couple of times in errata.
Horse Animal Companion was given errata at least three times before it worked as intended.
Witch is being given major improvements in Remaster.
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
How, exactly, would it be "removed"?
Over my dead body that's how.
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dragonhearth, respectfully, you may need to calibrate your expectations around how a publishing business operates. They don't do a "recall" of an extremely successful class because of a few typos or confusing feats. They also can't continue making edits until the street date, print the books overnight, and instantly transport them to every store which will have it on the shelves. That just isn't how printed media works.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I actually prefer PDFs to books in this case now; errata gets pushed and I can download the updated version.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean easier than that would be something like Archive of Nethys that dont use PDFs.
But there buisness isnt purely digital and having physical books is realy nice. :)
I only have physical books for few Systems myself.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The kineticist has multiple features that flat don't work (Roiling Mudslide being the obvious thing that gets brought up but also for single element wood or metal the elemental transformation and apotheosis feats) so yeah I think it's reasonable for people to have an expectation that given the time we live in they would use their digital platform to put out some errata to explain how those things that don't work should work, like how dark archives got a quick digital errata post
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you don't like it, don't use it, remove it for yourself. It's that simple.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The kineticist has multiple features that flat don't work (Roiling Mudslide being the obvious thing that gets brought up but also for single element wood or metal the elemental transformation and apotheosis feats) so yeah I think it's reasonable for people to have an expectation that given the time we live in they would use their digital platform to put out some errata to explain how those things that don't work should work, like how dark archives got a quick digital errata post
OP didn't ask for quick errata, they asked for it to be removed from the game and go back to playtesting.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
How, exactly, would it be "removed"?Over my dead body that's how.
For the record, the only reason I am not responding with the same level of intensity as this man is that the proposal was absurd enough that I do not actually feel threatened by it.
Other than that? Yeah. This.
Dragonhearth, respectfully, you may need to calibrate your expectations around how a publishing business operates. They don't do a "recall" of an extremely successful class because of a few typos or confusing feats. They also can't continue making edits until the street date, print the books overnight, and instantly transport them to every store which will have it on the shelves. That just isn't how printed media works.
To be fair, Paizo has below-average editing and layouts compared to much of its competition. It is conceivable that WotC might recall a book if it had as many outright errors as some Paizo releases have.
What Dnd books are you looking at? almost all of their adventures have glaring problems, and spelljammer's ship systems just didn't work.Dragonhearth, respectfully, you may need to calibrate your expectations around how a publishing business operates. They don't do a "recall" of an extremely successful class because of a few typos or confusing feats. They also can't continue making edits until the street date, print the books overnight, and instantly transport them to every store which will have it on the shelves. That just isn't how printed media works.To be fair, Paizo has below-average editing and layouts compared to much of its competition. It is conceivable that WotC might recall a book if it had as many outright errors as some Paizo releases have.
I don't use their adventures and haven't picked up Spelljammer. Are any other examples as bad as the kineticist's release state?
EDIT: If I purchased those products from WotC with such defects I would ask for a refund.
| 16 people marked this as a favorite. |
Do you have some kind of vendetta against Paizo or something? The Kineticist is great.
Do you have some kind of vendetta against Paizo or something? The Kineticist is great.
Play it 100% RAW and tell me that.
| 21 people marked this as a favorite. |
Do you have some kind of vendetta against Paizo or something? The Kineticist is great.Play it 100% RAW and tell me that.
I currently am, and it's the most fun I've ever had at a table playing Pathfinder.
|
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Do you have some kind of vendetta against Paizo or something? The Kineticist is great.Play it 100% RAW and tell me that.
Play any class in any game 100% RAW and I promise you won't have a fun time.
These are human games, interpreted by human beings, for a creative medium of entertainment.
Even videogame adaptations of rules such as D&D and Pathfinder have had to houserule and adapt things.
In any case the kineticist is a very fun and functional class as written, and what ambiguities exist can be fixed with errata and some good old fashioned human interpretation of the rules.
I buy physical books mostly as collectors items nowadays, when I run games I'm usually running off the online prds, search functions are way quicker than consulting reference books.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've played all my classes in PFS RAW (including kineticist) and its been one of the best play experiences I've had in tabletop gaming!
Honestly the past year of releases has been probably some of the best books paizo has released in my opinion.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Same, actuallyI currently am, and it's the most fun I've ever had at a table playing Pathfinder.Do you have some kind of vendetta against Paizo or something? The Kineticist is great.Play it 100% RAW and tell me that.
Same
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know how to play anything 100% RAW. The rules are written in natural language, natural language requires interpretation, the way I (and the people I play with) have interpreted said natural language leads to probably the most fun class Paizo has ever designed.
Like the major issues with the Class are things like "what is the area of effect for roiling mudslide, one isn't specified" which are easy enough to fix with "the GM makes a call."
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I went from having a lot of issues with the way the class worked and the assorted abilities to now feeling like it's the only caster I have any interest in playing.
I've gone as far as to propose we get a 'themed caster chassis' system for people to use to build their own themed casters. If it's not profitable to spam out a pile of themed casters, then do it once extremely well; with a toolkit to "make your own" based around the kineticist's style of mechanics.
It's a great class that I feel, had it been in core; would have been the end of player complaints about casters.
Any problems can be solved with some errata. I suspect very minor errata, but I could be wrong.