Should the keneticist be removed?

[ElementalofCuteness]

May someone do me a huge favor and post the link to the actual Kineticist FAW/Errata needed thread please?

[Porridge]

Mark Seifter did a recent poll of people's favorite PF2 class, and the Kineticist was very popular (third favorite class overall):

Favorite Class Poll

It's unlikely that Paizo is going to remove one of their most popular classes.

[aobst128]

Kineticist good

[Dragonhearthx]

WatersLethe wrote:

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.

I thought I made it quite clear that it should be polished up more. I am confused how you don't understand.

[PossibleCabbage]

What, specifically, is your concern about the class?

[Ruzza]

I think there's a wide gap between "removed" (which, on its face, is a ridiculous concept for analog games like TTRPGs) and "could use more polish," which... also is a bit strange? Like, not to go back to Easl's post here, but it feels like the wrong approach to a collaborative storytelling game?

Getting "patches" or eratta passes is a rare and infrequent thing because unlike many video games and online games, the life cycle of the product isn't bolstered by an ever shifting meta that thousands of people participate in, but rather more content to iterate on the current group of players that you have and keep their experience fresh.

[Dragonhearthx]

Okay, to address some things that have been mentioned.

1. This is not a joke post, I am being serious. I love the class.

2. I know how publishing works.

3. If there are going to be so many erratas to make clear what each thing does to make it work as intended, do you think they should issue a statement saying to the effect of "hold off on playing for now." Also put a pause on printing books. Then bring it back to the workbench and fix the issues. (There's even the drastic option to recall the old books to prevent further confusion)
THEN BRING IT BACK when it is ready.

4. No I don't have an issue with Pizo. I love what they have done so far, and I want them to continue to do so.

I just want this game to grow and thrive, but I don't want Pizo to rush things and publish incomplete works (like wotc did in the last few years)

[BishopMcQ]

I think we just need to polish it up. Clearly the Kineticist's biggest issue is that it keeps moving around. The further it moves, the less energy it has. We can fix this with a little bit of polish and create the truly powerful, Potentialist.

The Potentialist doesn't need to worry about gates or composites. It has untold power, drawing that power from all that passes around it, even vast cosmic forces.

The Potentialist synergizes well with the Inventor, as the Inventor can truly exploit Mechanics to help the Potentialist spring into action. The Potentialist has truly explosive responses when combining with others. With a simple charge, the Potentialist can become electrifying to watch.

[Karneios]

Captain Morgan wrote:

Karneios wrote:

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.

I was more responding to Easl's post, when I was typing it up it was the post before, I didn't think to just quote it to make that clear, went and did things right after so didn't really notice that being unclear until now

[Easl]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

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."

Agree. And I expect the folks answering "I'm playing it RAW now" are just using "the table's best informed decision" to help address any questions/wrinkles. Like rolling mudslide. Which is totally fine and absolutely RAW, if you consider rule zero.

This is kinda what I was talking about when I said some folks seem to want to treat it as a videogame rpg, where zero GM/player interpretation - just pure mechanical implementation of the rules - is the expectation. That's never been a reasonable expectation for a ttrpg. They are too complex, and players are too clever/crazy/unique for the sandbox format of the game to be that mechanical [shakes fist at lawn].

[Eldritch Yodel]

BishopMcQ wrote:

I think we just need to polish it up. Clearly the Kineticist's biggest issue is that it keeps moving around. The further it moves, the less energy it has. We can fix this with a little bit of polish and create the truly powerful, Potentialist.

The Potentialist doesn't need to worry about gates or composites. It has untold power, drawing that power from all that passes around it, even vast cosmic forces.

The Potentialist synergizes well with the Inventor, as the Inventor can truly exploit Mechanics to help the Potentialist spring into action. The Potentialist has truly explosive responses when combining with others. With a simple charge, the Potentialist can become electrifying to watch.

Likewise, I feel the Alchemist should be renamed to the "Chemicalist" and the Ocilating Wave Psychic "Thermalist".

[Calliope5431]

Dragonhearthx wrote:

Okay, to address some things that have been mentioned.

1. This is not a joke post, I am being serious. I love the class.

2. I know how publishing works.

3. If there are going to be so many erratas to make clear what each thing does to make it work as intended, do you think they should issue a statement saying to the effect of "hold off on playing for now." Also put a pause on printing books. Then bring it back to the workbench and fix the issues. (There's even the drastic option to recall the old books to prevent further confusion)
THEN BRING IT BACK when it is ready.

4. No I don't have an issue with Pizo. I love what they have done so far, and I want them to continue to do so.

I just want this game to grow and thrive, but I don't want Pizo to rush things and publish incomplete works (like wotc did in the last few years)

I think that it needs some errata on like two or three impulses. Given there are over a hundred impulses and another dozen non-impulse feats, this doesn't seem like a huge deal.

And again, people don't recall books. Really ever. Unless their bindings are laced with arsenic or something I guess? Or if the content is so horribly offensive or slanderous that it would immolate the publisher's brand or result in a lawsuit.

Given that Rage of Elements doesn't have a safety defect (I cannot believe I'm typing this) and everyone loves kineticist, this isn't going to happen. It's just a bizarre ask.

[Ruzza]

Dragonhearthx wrote:

Okay, to address some things that have been mentioned.

1. This is not a joke post, I am being serious. I love the class.

2. I know how publishing works.

3. If there are going to be so many erratas to make clear what each thing does to make it work as intended, do you think they should issue a statement saying to the effect of "hold off on playing for now." Also put a pause on printing books. Then bring it back to the workbench and fix the issues. (There's even the drastic option to recall the old books to prevent further confusion)
THEN BRING IT BACK when it is ready.

4. No I don't have an issue with Pizo. I love what they have done so far, and I want them to continue to do so.

I just want this game to grow and thrive, but I don't want Pizo to rush things and publish incomplete works (like wotc did in the last few years)

1. Okay, but you have to see how it's a strange statement to make. You don't make product recalls unless something is actually hazardous and you can't recall what is essentially an idea that is already out there. And - like - of all the classes, kineticist is one that is beloved and people seem to be using as the gold standard moving forward. So it does come across as a joke.

2. You may, but are you aware of the costs associated with it? Paizo can't exactly afford to reprint new books for every minor fix, especially ones that aren't bringing new people into the hobby (like the Core Rulebook).

3. This is where I go back to 1 and 2 and cast a bit of doubt. The class works and works fine and there's a level of not knowing how the process works at all if you think they're going to "pause printing books." They're already printed. They had a print run. They don't have a machine in the back churning out new Rage of Elements. Recalling is just... do you know the costs associated with that? I don't understand at all what you seem to think is the desired outcome here.

4. I mean, cool, alright - but it sounds like you may be new to the hobby in general and you should temper your expectations. This is not a billion dollar AAA game developer. This is a niche hobby WITHIN a niche hobby. That WotC is doing their own thing has little bearing on Paizo (outside of the obvious OGL stuff).

[Easl]

Dragonhearthx wrote:

If there are going to be so many erratas to make clear what each thing does to make it work as intended, do you think they should issue a statement saying to the effect of "hold off on playing for now."

Nope. What purpose does doing so serve? I could see making some specific impulses off-limits for PFS if they require significant GM adjudication (like they did with 'That's Odd'). But if people are using the class and having fun, why would the company tell them to stop using it in their home games? Or ban the entire class from organized play?

Also, can you give us a hint about the erratas you're looking for? It's hard to gauge how big the problem is that you're seeing, when we've got a bunch of posters playing the class and not having trouble with it, while you and Karneios and 3-body aren't articulaing the in-play problems you've experienced playing it.

[Easl]

Eldritch Yodel wrote:

BishopMcQ wrote:

I think we just need to polish it up. Clearly the Kineticist's biggest issue is that it keeps moving around. The further it moves, the less energy it has. We can fix this with a little bit of polish and create the truly powerful, Potentialist.

The Potentialist doesn't need to worry about gates or composites. It has untold power, drawing that power from all that passes around it, even vast cosmic forces.

The Potentialist synergizes well with the Inventor, as the Inventor can truly exploit Mechanics to help the Potentialist spring into action. The Potentialist has truly explosive responses when combining with others. With a simple charge, the Potentialist can become electrifying to watch.

Likewise, I feel the Alchemist should be renamed to the "Chemicalist" and the Ocilating Wave Psychic "Thermalist".

I'm holding out for the Enthalpist. They always win the fight in the end, you know.

Always.

[Dragonhearthx]

Ruzza wrote:

3. This is where I go back to 1 and 2 and cast a bit of doubt. The class works and works fine and there's a level of not knowing how the process works at all if you think they're going to "pause printing books." They're already printed. They had a print run. They don't have a machine in the back churning out new Rage of Elements. Recalling is just... do you know the costs associated with that? I don't understand at all what you seem to think is the desired outcome here.

I am referring to when they have to order more books. They order in batches. So they pause ordering more books to be printed. And the recall was, as I said, a drastic option.

Ruzza wrote:

I mean, cool, alright - but it sounds like you may be new to the hobby in general and you should temper your expectations. This is not a billion dollar AAA game developer. This is a niche hobby WITHIN a niche hobby. That WotC is doing their own thing has little bearing on Paizo (outside of the obvious OGL stuff).

yes, and they went up in popularity and they wanted to ride the hype train so they kept pushing out more and more material. Lots of it unfinished or overpowered. I don't want to see that happen here. It's one of the reasons why I left dnd and mtg. Pizo just released a book and have announced that there's going to be another major book in about a year. On top of that they are redoing the older books. (For the ogl reasons). I just want pizo to take it easy and not to rush things. It's something I can see happen. Because I saw it with dnd.

[The title of this thread is just a simple attention getter. But it's probably the case that some only read the title and nothing else.]

[Ruzza]

You are still new to PF2, I get that - this not at all unusual. There's a big difference in how the two companies operate and how they approach the market.

EDIT: Also...

Dragonhearthx wrote:

[The title of this thread is just a simple attention getter. But it's probably the case that some only read the title and nothing else.]

Don't do this and be surprised when people engage with it. Not to mention that many of your follow-ups (original post included) tend to reference back to removing the class.

[Karneios]

Easl wrote:

Dragonhearthx wrote:

If there are going to be so many erratas to make clear what each thing does to make it work as intended, do you think they should issue a statement saying to the effect of "hold off on playing for now."

Nope. What purpose does doing so serve? I could see making some specific impulses off-limits for PFS if they require significant GM adjudication (like they did with 'That's Odd'). But if people are using the class and having fun, why would the company tell them to stop using it in their home games? Or ban the entire class from organized play?

Also, can you give us a hint about the erratas you're looking for? It's hard to gauge how big the problem is that you're seeing, when we've got a bunch of posters playing the class and not having trouble with it, while you and Karneios and 3-body aren't articulaing the in-play problems you've experienced playing it.

I said the problems I view it as having, the things that straight don't work, the book printed things that require wood or metal elemental form and then didn't print any information on that which causes them to be broken, roiling mudslide does not have an area which means it functionally does nothing at all, and there isn't really any guide to go for to adjudicate what they would be, things broken like this are the only problems I have had and I mentioned it's things that I imagine would be solved whenever RoE gets its errata pass (the elemental form might also be solved in player core 1 but as I said last time I really hope it's not multiple months away for things like this to get fixed)

[Calliope5431]

Dragonhearthx wrote:

yes, and they went up in popularity and they wanted to ride the hype train so they kept pushing out more and more material. Lots of it unfinished or overpowered. I don't want to see that happen here. It's one of the reasons why I left dnd and mtg. Pizo just released a book and have announced that there's going to be another major book in about a year. On top of that they are redoing the older books. (For the ogl reasons). I just want pizo to take it easy and not to rush things. It's something I can see happen. Because I saw it with dnd.

Ah, good old Tasha's.

Unlike D&D, a book per year is actually in line with the Pathfinder release schedule. Core was 2019, advanced player's guide 2020, secrets of magic 2021, dark archive 2022, rage of elements 2023. They're not doing anything new here, nor is there a lot of power creep between releases (see: the thread where people wonder if a core class, fighter, is overpowered)

This isn't D&D. Paizo has always published stuff at a much faster pace

PS: it's technically Paizo, not Pizo. Not being pedantic!

[PossibleCabbage]

Yeah, Paizo's never going to say "this thing isn't working right, we recommend not using it right now until we can fix it." For example, Pathfinder #158 released in August of 2020, in the backmatter was the Jalmeri Heavenseeker archetype. One of the feats was *immediately* flagged for "this needs errata, it does way too much damage". The fix (which reduced damage from +Level to +2*weapon dice) was in the November 2022 book. In the meantime the only guidance Paizo gave anybody was "too much" and "not legal in PFS." The worst thing that happened due to someone using the "too good" rules was "some monks did more damage than usual".

This is because Paizo largely trusts its audience to be mature and sensible enough to make rulings and interpretations when needed. We're playing with a human referee who can make calls in real time. If something is apparently nonfunctional, a GM can make it work. If something is too weak or too strong, a GM can change that. The strength of Pathfinder 2nd edition is how transparent and modular it is so that you can make changes like this without having to worry about problems cropping up that you didn't anticipate.

But meanwhile the Pathfinder Society has had a look at the Rage of Elements book and they made exactly four rulings/clarifications that affect the Kineticist class.
- The element Fearsome Familiar summons has the Summond Trait
- Flinging Updraft is forced movement
- The 5' cubes created by Igneogenesis have the same stats as Stone.
- If both you and your Crawling Fire get caught in an AoE effect, only roll one save, and do damage once.
- Tree of Duality creates both effects.

Other than that, play ball. The Kineticist is good to go for PFS play (and PFS is 100% more restricted than most people's home games.)

[Temperans]

Asking to remove a class is plainly laughable, no question about it. Asking for it to get some polish is usually fine, but you have to accept that once something hits print it will not change until errata gets released whenever that is.

Finally, this is a TTRPG not a video game. Don't treat it like a video game because you will get disappointed. Not to mention that not even video games are consistent about patching errors.

[Dancing Wind]

This.

PossibleCabbage wrote:

In the meantime the only guidance Paizo gave anybody was "too much" and "not legal in PFS."

[snip]
This is because Paizo largely trusts its audience to be mature and s The Kineticist is good to go for PFS play (and PFS is 100% more restricted than most people's home games.)

Using the PFS rules is almost always the best solution for someone GMing a home game who believes that something is broken. If you don't want to figure out a fix for your own table, default to how PFS has fixed it.

And remember the First Rule:

First Rule wrote:

This game is yours. ... If any other rule gets in the way of your fun, as long as your group agrees, you can alter or ignore it to fit your story.

The true goal of Pathfinder is for everyone to enjoy themselves.

Pathfinder is not designed around rules being perfect, or errata being issued. The rules are designed so a bunch of folks who want to play table-top role playing games can have fun when they get together to play.

[Perpdepog]

Calliope5431 wrote:

Dragonhearthx wrote:

yes, and they went up in popularity and they wanted to ride the hype train so they kept pushing out more and more material. Lots of it unfinished or overpowered. I don't want to see that happen here. It's one of the reasons why I left dnd and mtg. Pizo just released a book and have announced that there's going to be another major book in about a year. On top of that they are redoing the older books. (For the ogl reasons). I just want pizo to take it easy and not to rush things. It's something I can see happen. Because I saw it with dnd.

Ah, good old Tasha's.

Unlike D&D, a book per year is actually in line with the Pathfinder release schedule. Core was 2019, advanced player's guide 2020, secrets of magic 2021, dark archive 2022, rage of elements 2023. They're not doing anything new here, nor is there a lot of power creep between releases (see: the thread where people wonder if a core class, fighter, is overpowered)

This isn't D&D. Paizo has always published stuff at a much faster pace

PS: it's technically Paizo, not Pizo. Not being pedantic!

A small correction here, the release schedule is closer to something along the lines of two or three core rulebook releases each year. Don't forget things like the bestiaries, and now the new themed books around various kinds of creature that we are getting.

[magnuskn]

Dragonhearthx wrote:

I'm sure not the only one here, but I think the keneticist should go back to testing. Or rather back to the polishing table.

There are quite a few things that need to be addressed on how things work. This makes the current form seem a bit too rough for my liking.

I am new to pizo, so I am not sure this is the norm when it some to newly added classes.

<Mad Max voice>

That's bait.

[Easl]

Karneios wrote:

I said the problems I view it as having, the things that straight don't work, the book printed things that require wood or metal elemental form and then didn't print any information on that which causes them to be broken

It's on page 55. Albeit in a 'conversion' form which then references another book, so it's not self-contained. That's annoying. However Archive of Nethys has already incoporated RoE "conversions" into their database. So for example if you look up the elemental statistics under Element Embodied in AoN, it has wood and metal elemental statistics and unique attacks etc. listed.

Quote:

roiling mudslide does not have an area which means it functionally does nothing at all,

Agreed, they omitted some text here, and it should get errata'd. But if I were GMing and had a player interested in taking this, seems like a pretty easy fix to work with that player to pick an apporopriate Areas diagram from core p456. 'Without a specified area I'm going to rule that the impulse functionally does nothing at all' seems a bit of a giveupski to me.

Quote:

things broken like this are the only problems I have had and I mentioned it's things that I imagine would be solved whenever RoE gets its errata pass

Hopefully! I don't think anyone is opposed to the notion of errata. It's just the notion that the class is useless until those show up which, not to speak for anyone else but I think, many folks here find a head scratcher. The two specific things you mention are easy fixes. Which leads me to believe the any other problems you see but which you haven't specifically mentioned aren't any harder to deal with.

[Captain Morgan]

Dragonhearthx wrote:

Okay, to address some things that have been mentioned.

1. This is not a joke post, I am being serious. I love the class.

2. I know how publishing works.

3. If there are going to be so many erratas to make clear what each thing does to make it work as intended, do you think they should issue a statement saying to the effect of "hold off on playing for now." Also put a pause on printing books. Then bring it back to the workbench and fix the issues. (There's even the drastic option to recall the old books to prevent further confusion)
THEN BRING IT BACK when it is ready.

4. No I don't have an issue with Pizo. I love what they have done so far, and I want them to continue to do so.

I just want this game to grow and thrive, but I don't want Pizo to rush things and publish incomplete works (like wotc did in the last few years)

Point number 3 makes it clear that number 2 isn't true, I'm afraid. At the very least, you don't understand how it works for Paizo. Setting aside the ridiculous notion of a recall, it is unlikely they are printing more books in the immediate future. Printing is done in very large batches. They pretty much don't start a new printing until they are going to run out of books from the last one. And if they tell players not to use the book's main draw, it is never going to sell out for the next printing to start.

The core rulebook, I believe, has only had five reprintings in the last 4 years. And that likely sells more than RoE. Errata also used to tied to these reprintings, but they now have a new system which is supposed to be more frequent but we haven't really seen in action yet.

[Martialmasters]

Dragonhearthx wrote:

Karneios wrote:

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

is this a normal thing? New class has to get an errata?

This is normal for DND as well, and they have much less class features and feats to juggle

But yes they do need some errata

[Karneios]

Easl wrote:

Karneios wrote:

I said the problems I view it as having, the things that straight don't work, the book printed things that require wood or metal elemental form and then didn't print any information on that which causes them to be broken

It's on page 55. Albeit in a 'conversion' form which then references another book, so it's not self-contained. That's annoying. However Archive of Nethys has already incoporated RoE "conversions" into their database. So for example if you look up the elemental statistics under Element Embodied in AoN, it has wood and metal elemental statistics and unique attacks etc. listed.

Quote:

roiling mudslide does not have an area which means it functionally does nothing at all,

Agreed, they omitted some text here, and it should get errata'd. But if I were GMing and had a player interested in taking this, seems like a pretty easy fix to work with that player to pick an apporopriate Areas diagram from core p456. 'Without a specified area I'm going to rule that the impulse functionally does nothing at all' seems a bit of a giveupski to me.

Quote:

things broken like this are the only problems I have had and I mentioned it's things that I imagine would be solved whenever RoE gets its errata pass

Hopefully! I don't think anyone is opposed to the notion of errata. It's just the notion that the class is useless until those show up which, not to speak for anyone else but I think, many folks here find a head scratcher. The two specific things you mention are easy fixes. Which leads me to believe the any other problems you see but which you haven't specifically mentioned aren't any harder to deal with.

I missed elemental embodied but also while that can indeed be used for the speeds although given that it doesn't map 1:1 to elemental form's speeds that's still a guide, you can not really use it for the damage elemental form would do as an example air elemental form does 1d4 into 2d4 damage, air elemental embodied does reach 25 3d12

and I never claimed the class was useless, I do not know why I'm getting put into that when all I said is it does need some errata

[Crouza]

Dragonhearthx wrote:

Ruzza wrote:

3. This is where I go back to 1 and 2 and cast a bit of doubt. The class works and works fine and there's a level of not knowing how the process works at all if you think they're going to "pause printing books." They're already printed. They had a print run. They don't have a machine in the back churning out new Rage of Elements. Recalling is just... do you know the costs associated with that? I don't understand at all what you seem to think is the desired outcome here.

I am referring to when they have to order more books. They order in batches. So they pause ordering more books to be printed. And the recall was, as I said, a drastic option.

Ruzza wrote:

I mean, cool, alright - but it sounds like you may be new to the hobby in general and you should temper your expectations. This is not a billion dollar AAA game developer. This is a niche hobby WITHIN a niche hobby. That WotC is doing their own thing has little bearing on Paizo (outside of the obvious OGL stuff).

yes, and they went up in popularity and they wanted to ride the hype train so they kept pushing out more and more material. Lots of it unfinished or overpowered. I don't want to see that happen here. It's one of the reasons why I left dnd and mtg. Pizo just released a book and have announced that there's going to be another major book in about a year. On top of that they are redoing the older books. (For the ogl reasons). I just want pizo to take it easy and not to rush things. It's something I can see happen. Because I saw it with dnd.

[The title of this thread is just a simple attention getter. But it's probably the case that some only read the title and nothing else.]

I'm not gonna sugar coat it. If continuous releases of content is not what you want out of a system, Paizo is not the company to follow.

Their constant releases is why I actually came here. Because while WOTC glacially releases 1 splat book every couple years, Paizo releases one a year and it's badass.

Hell, in 2021 they released Secrets of Magic in September, and then Guns and Gears in October of that year, both of which brought 2 new classes each.

Are they gonna keep releasing new classes every year? No clue, but their frequent release and player support is a pretty massive cornerstone and if you consider 5e to have a too fast to quality control release schedule than man, Paizo is going to seem like a out of control assembly line of content to you.

[Easl]

Karneios wrote:

and I never claimed the class was useless, I do not know why I'm getting put into that when all I said is it does need some errata

My apologies! Probably I read multiple complaint posts and mixed them up. Though your comment about RM "functionally does nothing" I thought was a bit over the top. Does the info gap require a 30 second GM-player conversation to fix? Yes. Does the info gap render the entire block of text unable to be used at all? No.

[Karneios]

Easl wrote:

Karneios wrote:

and I never claimed the class was useless, I do not know why I'm getting put into that when all I said is it does need some errata

My apologies! Probably I read multiple complaint posts and mixed them up. Though your comment about RM "functionally does nothing" I thought was a bit over the top. Does the info gap require a 30 second GM-player conversation to fix? Yes. Does the info gap render the entire block of text unable to be used at all? No.

I don't want to make my DM do balancing for a game because they printed an area ability without an area, the strength of that impulse at various areas, especially since it could also be either a cone or an emanation based on the text (I could even see it being a line), is widely different, I think saying just a 30 second conversation is misrepresenting how important the area information is, especially with the pretty strict balancing PF2E has in general but also that functionally does nothing was explicitly about the as written text of the impulse because that's just factual

[Calliope5431]

Karneios wrote:

Easl wrote:

Karneios wrote:

and I never claimed the class was useless, I do not know why I'm getting put into that when all I said is it does need some errata

My apologies! Probably I read multiple complaint posts and mixed them up. Though your comment about RM "functionally does nothing" I thought was a bit over the top. Does the info gap require a 30 second GM-player conversation to fix? Yes. Does the info gap render the entire block of text unable to be used at all? No.

I don't want to make my DM do balancing for a game because they printed an area ability without an area, the strength of that impulse at various areas, especially since it could also be either a cone or an emanation based on the text (I could even see it being a line), is widely different, I think saying just a 30 second conversation is misrepresenting how important the area information is, especially with the pretty strict balancing PF2E has in general but also that functionally does nothing was explicitly about the as written text of the impulse because that's just factual

It's like 2 impulses that have this sort of problem. Both are composites (rain of rust and rolling mudslide) meaning they'll only be used by very specific builds.

It's just not the sort of thing that makes me think the sky is falling, given there are over a hundred other impulses to choose from.

So as you say - just errata those.

[Easl]

Karneios wrote:

I don't want to make my DM do balancing for a game because they printed an area ability without an area, the strength of that impulse at various areas, especially since it could also be either a cone or an emanation based on the text (I could even see it being a line), is widely different, I think saying just a 30 second conversation is misrepresenting how important the area information is, especially with the pretty strict balancing PF2E has in general but also that functionally does nothing was explicitly about the as written text of the impulse because that's just factual

Oh it's very important information! But important doesn't necessarily mean a protracted analysis.

[Player] "I was thinking 30' line", [GM] "Okay, let's try that" may be enough. Or maybe the reverse; [GM] "I don't want to start any stronger than 15' Cone" [Player] "Well that seems really weak to me. I was frankly hoping for bigger. But if we try that for a session or two, can we revisit it later?" [GM] "Yes I'd be willing to revisit that ruling after we see it in action a few times."

I guess it depends on how you and your GM interact. I have always played with friends, not strangers in organized play. So we typically decide fast and fix later as needed, if our initial decision turns out to be too pro-player or too pro-monster. There's not a lot of angst or worry spent on the possibility of getting it "wrong" (OP or underpowered). I guess if your GM is more a "make a rule once, then stick with it forever and ever amen" sort, or you're playing in organized play with strangers where the other players may consider it "unfair" to watch an impulse's attributes shift around as the GM tries to find the right balance point, then yeah I could see how "making my DM do balancing" for this could be much more of a big deal, and something you want to avoid.

Is this the case? Is Rolling Mudslide unworkable for you because your group and GM don't want to play with the possibilities, and thus any answer is a sort of high risk/high regret decision not to be taken lightly?

[The Raven Black]

Not having the area is really bothersome and an errata is sure to be issued once they have a little time.

Because it speaks about enemies, I would make it a cone. Based on Tidal Hands and Blazing Wave, I would propose a 30-foot cone.

[PossibleCabbage]

I think the "roiling mudslide does not specify an area" problem is easily solved by "whatever area the GM says it is". If it's an emanation in one game and a cone in another game, that's okay.

It would be nice if we could get a developer commentary for "this is what it's supposed to be" but I won't hold my breath.

In the meantime you can completely detour around the issue by not being an earth/water kineticist.

[Dancing Wind]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I think the "roiling mudslide does not specify an area" problem is easily solved by "whatever area the GM says it is". If it's an emanation in one game and a cone in another game, that's okay.

It would be nice if we could get a developer commentary for "this is what it's supposed to be" but I won't hold my breath.

In the meantime you can completely detour around the issue by not being an earth/water kineticist.

Or, you could be an earth/water kineticist who sits down at the table and says, "The rules on rolling mudslide are unclear. I've been playing it this way. [state your personal errata] Is that workable for you, GM?"

Fix it for your character and carry your fix with you.

[Temperans]

Dancing Wind wrote:

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I think the "roiling mudslide does not specify an area" problem is easily solved by "whatever area the GM says it is". If it's an emanation in one game and a cone in another game, that's okay.

It would be nice if we could get a developer commentary for "this is what it's supposed to be" but I won't hold my breath.

In the meantime you can completely detour around the issue by not being an earth/water kineticist.

Or, you could be an earth/water kineticist who sits down at the table and says, "The rules on rolling mudslide are unclear. I've been playing it this way. [state your personal errata] Is that workable for you, GM?"

Fix it for your character and carry your fix with you.

Or... Paizo just fixes the issue as they very well can and should do.

[Sanityfaerie]

Temperans wrote:

Or... Paizo just fixes the issue as they very well can and should do.

Aye. That would be nice.

Until then, though, it's not like it makes the kineticist as a whole unplayable.

[arcady]

There are very few issues with Kineticist.

Maybe it needs minor tweaks here or there. But if we dug around we'd probably find more problems with Rogue or Fighter. We certainly would find more problems with Alchemist and Witch - but those last 2 are actually getting redesigns.

I'm not seeing anything class breaking about Kineticist. Is it exactly 100% how I personally would have built it? No. But does it basically work and leave one able to handle most things with little head scratching? Yes.

Also...

It's a very bad idea to come in here and make direct "because WotC dropped the ball here, Paizo will too" analogies. They're different companies. They have shared a lot of staff over the years, but throughout that they've gone in very different paths.

There's certainly room for Paizo to make mistakes. There's a few things I'm not happy with. But they make different mistakes. :)

[Dragonhearthx]

arcady wrote:

There are very few issues with Kineticist.

Maybe it needs minor tweaks here or there. But if we dug around we'd probably find more problems with Rogue or Fighter. We certainly would find more problems with Alchemist and Witch - but those last 2 are actually getting redesigns.

I'm not seeing anything class breaking about Kineticist. Is it exactly 100% how I personally would have built it? No. But does it basically work and leave one able to handle most things with little head scratching? Yes.

Also...

It's a very bad idea to come in here and make direct "because WotC dropped the ball here, Paizo will too" analogies. They're different companies. They have shared a lot of staff over the years, but throughout that they've gone in very different paths.

There's certainly room for Paizo to make mistakes. There's a few things I'm not happy with. But they make different mistakes. :)

I started pathfinder earlier this year. Shortly before I made this account, in fact. So this, I would consider to be my first time witnessing a release of a pathfinder core book. And seeing all of the posts asking questions and reading the class (and having my own confusions). I had a fear that this was rushed. So I had asked this question in good faith.

I was just afraid for this game. Afraid that it was going to follow WOTC.

[Ruzza]

Well, it seems that you have your answers.

[PossibleCabbage]

There's really no chance the Kineticist got rushed, since it had the same development cycle as the other new classes added to the game- it even had the most focused playtest as it was the only class playtested at the time (the one going on now has two new classes, which is more or less the standard.)

But almost every Pathfinder book has some errors in it, there's an errata document here which will eventually have stuff for Rage of Elements.

But a major difference between Paizo and their primary competitor is that Paizo maintains a much faster publishing schedule, what with Paizo's roots being a magazine publisher for the other guys. In first edition, you'd get basically three books per month and occasionally things snuck through that shouldn't have, but second edition hasn't really had that problem so far, so I wouldn't worry that it started suddenly.

[Temperans]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

There's really no chance the Kineticist got rushed, since it had the same development cycle as the other new classes added to the game- it even had the most focused playtest as it was the only class playtested at the time (the one going on now has two new classes, which is more or less the standard.)

But almost every Pathfinder book has some errors in it, there's an errata document here which will eventually have stuff for Rage of Elements.

But a major difference between Paizo and their primary competitor is that Paizo maintains a much faster publishing schedule, what with Paizo's roots being a magazine publisher for the other guys. In first edition, you'd get basically three books per month and occasionally things snuck through that shouldn't have, but second edition hasn't really had that problem so far, so I wouldn't worry that it started suddenly.

It has had a few cases like alchemist and heavenseeker archetype. I think the biggest reason for less things sneaking by is the decrease in splat books.

[Gortle]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I think the "roiling mudslide does not specify an area" problem is easily solved by "whatever area the GM says it is". If it's an emanation in one game and a cone in another game, that's okay.

For the record Rolling Mudslide has been now errated to a 30ft cone.

[apeironitis]

"Hey guys, we're going to remove the Kineticist and take it back to the drawing board because this dragonwhatever user doesn't like it enough. We'll need everyone to refrain from playing kineticist. To enforce this, we'll send the Pinkerton to your home to make sure that you're not using the class. If you have the Rage of Elements book, please, rip off the pages containing the Kineticist. We'll tell you when it's ready".

Seriously, OP. Have you read what you're asking?

[Ruzza]

Oh! All of Dragonwhatever's recent flurry of posts make a lot more sense after realizing that they were the one who made this thread.

[The Ghost of Forum's Past]

apeironitis wrote:

"Hey guys, we're going to remove the Kineticist and take it back to the drawing board because this dragonwhatever user doesn't like it enough. We'll need everyone to refrain from playing kineticist. To enforce this, we'll send the Pinkerton to your home to make sure that you're not using the class. If you have the Rage of Elements book, please, rip off the pages containing the Kineticist. We'll tell you when it's ready".

Seriously, OP. Have you read what you're asking?

I know, I know, it's only last year's September. But still...

[thenobledrake]

3-Body Problem wrote:

To be fair, Paizo has below-average editing and layouts compared to much of its competition.

Even if we only determined the average by comparing Paizo and Wizards of the Coast products, this statement would still be inaccurate.

Quote:

It is conceivable that WotC might recall a book if it had as many outright errors as some Paizo releases have.

Recalls happen when the pages get bound upside or in the wrong order or some other accident happened with the printing and binding, not when some reader with unrealistic standards for editors gets grumpy about the words on the pages.

[thenobledrake]

Dragonhearthx wrote:

I was just afraid for this game. Afraid that it was going to follow WOTC.

The real amusing part about this is that the reason kineticist released in the rough state that it did is because of WOTC.

Their decision to try and screw over their competitors and contributors alike by proposing hostile changes to the OGL catalyzed Paizo's decision to abandon that license and ensure their own products would be outside of WOTC's reach should the company follow through with these (absolutely nonsensical level of greed inspired) kinds of changes in the future.

So they thought up the Remaster project, jammed it into their already busy schedule of releases while trying not to have to also say "oh, by the way everyone... all that stuff you got hyped about being upcoming and we'd already told you releases dates on? It's got to wait until we get the rest of this done.", and did slip a bit on quality as a result of a sudden massive increase in workload across the whole company, but not to a degree that looks even the slightest bit unreasonable.

[PossibleCabbage]

And with the errata for Rage of Elements, while there are some oversights with the Kineticist it was basically stuff like "we left off a trait", "this is unclear", "there's a typo in tremor", "we left off the area of effect for Roiling Mudslide" with exactly one ability impulse highlighted as too powerful and in need of changing.

So whatever problems the Kineticist had with being developed during a busy time at Paizo, the things they didn't actually mess up are basic things like "mechanics" and "balance" and "fun to play."