What do you mean about the precious materials? Black iron wood is a real thing. It's the densest wood IRL.The sidebar says 'ordinary materials of negligible value.' Is ironwood an ordinary material of negligible value in your campaign?
Keep in mind I would completely allow the 5 foot cube of any ordinary wood to act as a serviceable door block. I have no problem with the PC's passage-blocking tactic. But if the player tried to tell me that they can use massively dense black ironwood in this instance, then they may find themselves facing a massively dense black ironwood door the next time they want to bust a door down. Because hey, you the player just told me the GM that black ironwood is a common and negligible cost material, so of course the villains use it for their doors. Be careful what conditions you set for the campaign, you just might get them.. ;)
The whole entire point of that rule is so that people don't run around and say "and then I sell that block of adamantium on the open market for..." and demand that the GM just start handing them money because they can claim it via RAW.
If the players aren't pulling BS like that anyway (and it seems like this guy wasn't) then the GM can afford to be a lot more relaxed.
|
you are correct. I do not intend to sell anything. If it becomes a problem at your table. I would suggest a house rule that says anything made by kenisis can only exist within 100 ft of the creator, or anything made has no monetary value. Why? Even basic iron can ruin an economy.The whole entire point of that rule is so that people don't run around and say "and then I sell that block of adamantium on the open market for..." and demand that the GM just start handing them money because they can claim it via RAW.
If the players aren't pulling BS like that anyway (and it seems like this guy wasn't) then the GM can afford to be a lot more relaxed.
IIRC there is already a RAW saying items thus created have no monetary value.
|
|
What do you mean about the precious materials? Black iron wood is a real thing. It's the densest wood IRL.The sidebar says 'ordinary materials of negligible value.' Is ironwood an ordinary material of negligible value in your campaign?
Keep in mind I would completely allow the 5 foot cube of any ordinary wood to act as a serviceable door block. I have no problem with the PC's passage-blocking tactic. But if the player tried to tell me that they can use massively dense black ironwood in this instance, then they may find themselves facing a massively dense black ironwood door the next time they want to bust a door down. Because hey, you the player just told me the GM that black ironwood is a common and negligible cost material, so of course the villains use it for their doors. Be careful what conditions you set for the campaign, you just might get them.. ;)
and I wouldn't complain. In fact I think it would be awesome. Especially upon digging into the history, it turned out that door came from the block I had created.
I also have it flavored that I carry around wood samples in bullet belts. If that matters at all.
I would have no problem with the Kineticist creating a special wood for cosmetic purposes. However if the player expects to gain a special mechanical effect because of the wood being "special", they're going to be disappointed.
|
|
only for the sculpt ability. It doesn't say anything about the core ability "base kenisis" which is what I am referring to. RAW, one can "generate" iron then sell it.
IIRC there is already a RAW saying items thus created have no monetary value.
I believe the links provided above by RD show that many GMs will kill this, if only on the basis of Too Good To Be True.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I believe the links provided above by RD show that many GMs will kill this, if only on the basis of Too Good To Be True.that maybe so, but I was simply correcting you about RAW. Nothing in the base ability says the material created has no monetary value.
Maybe not no monetary value, but the Special Rules sidebar for Precious Materials does say that it will be of negligible value.
Elements you create (using Base Kinesis to generate an element, for example) must typically be ordinary materials of negligible value.
It is deliberately intended to not be a way of breaking character wealth limits.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Precious Materials: Elements you create (using Base Kinesis to generate an element, for example) must typically be ordinary materials of negligible value. You can't create precious or valuable materials like silver, gemstones, or duskwood unless otherwise noted.
Base kinesis is just an example, not the only hing the rule is referring to. And I would personally say that proliferating is still creating your element.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just want to point out a lizard folk champion with a shield can make everything adjacent for them difficult terrain, getting off guard on all enemies around them.
Smaller area and Off guard only to them, but less investment.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But unlike Breth I think as a GM I would consider more than just the money-making abuse potential when deciding what to do. There are plenty of ways 'matter creation' in these games can be abused than just making excess coin out of it.
Oh, I don't disagree with you on that. It says ordinary materials with negligible value.
So if the object has some special property such as being radioactive or excessively heavy or having some chemical reaction, then it isn't ordinary.
Similarly, if the value of the object is worth writing down on a character sheet, then it isn't negligible value.
Just want to point out a lizard folk champion with a shield can make everything adjacent for them difficult terrain, getting off guard on all enemies around them.
Smaller area and Off guard only to them, but less investment.
Divine Wall plus Terrain Advantage, I presume? That's a nice combination of feats. It does come later than Winter Sleet even for Multiclass, doesn't keep enemies from stepping away and doesn't have a chance to knock them prone. But also doesn't require an action to activate.
Would be quite powerful if the whole party is Iruxi with that ancestry feat, though at that point I'd no longer say it's less investment. Since it only works for the champion who is limited to a one-handed weapon and hardly a top damage dealer, I honestly think this combo is still nowhere nearly as disrupting as Winter Sleet.
I would suggest a house rule that says anything made by kenisis can only exist within 100 ft of the creator, or anything made has no monetary value. Why? Even basic iron can ruin an economy.
Free fire wood in the frozen wastes would be very valuable.
Your average battle map, maybe, but not necessarily Kingmaker's. In my experience most encounters take place in big outdoor maps and enemies have ranged attacks.Haven't read through the whole AP yet, but I've already seen a decent amount of tighter spaces. At least tight enough for it to really matter. And even in a big open white room, the aura can still make all melee enemies either deal with its effect or take a rather large detour to get where they want. I'm also not judging balance based just on Kingmaker, though it is of course part of the discussion in this case.
I think just looking at maps is a little misleading for Kingmaker because of how overtuned the random encounter chance is. Most of the encounters you have won't have designated maps and instead take place outdoors. And those outdoor enemies tend to be more dangerous at range anyway. There's a boss in particularly who is SO overspecced for range compared to melee, it is wild. If a feat is only relevant 1 in 5 encounters I'm not sure how broken it is.
I've only played up to level 4 (when this feat comes online) so maybe that's not always the case. But I'm not super touching on the larger theoretical balance conversation because your more immediate question is whether your player(s) can use the feat in Kingmaker.
Divine Wall plus Terrain Advantage, I presume? That's a nice combination of feats. It does come later than Winter Sleet even for Multiclass, doesn't keep enemies from stepping away and doesn't have a chance to knock them prone. But also doesn't require an action to activate.Would be quite powerful if the whole party is Iruxi with that ancestry feat, though at that point I'd no longer say it's less investment. Since it only works for the champion who is limited to a one-handed weapon and hardly a top damage dealer, I honestly think this combo is still nowhere nearly as disrupting as Winter Sleet.
Sure, but the OPs big concern was always on off guard. They also wanted other things to compare to.
As a side note, if you think this doesn't allow nice damage then perhaps think about dual weapon warrior with this. Paladin in the FotRP game I was in did this and put out some very nice damage while tanking and giving the party extra attacks.
|
|
I would suggest a house rule that says anything made by kenisis can only exist within 100 ft of the creator, or anything made has no monetary value. Why? Even basic iron can ruin an economy.Free fire wood in the frozen wastes would be very valuable.
Good call, well... then clearly your Kineticsist is unable to create wood that is capable of either being burned or used for building suitable shelter.
/s
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sure, but the OPs big concern was always on off guard. They also wanted other things to compare to.Divine Wall plus Terrain Advantage, I presume? That's a nice combination of feats. It does come later than Winter Sleet even for Multiclass, doesn't keep enemies from stepping away and doesn't have a chance to knock them prone. But also doesn't require an action to activate.
Would be quite powerful if the whole party is Iruxi with that ancestry feat, though at that point I'd no longer say it's less investment. Since it only works for the champion who is limited to a one-handed weapon and hardly a top damage dealer, I honestly think this combo is still nowhere nearly as disrupting as Winter Sleet.
I AM the OP. ;)
And while the off-guard effect is a concern, the main issue is that it comes with additional effects on top of that. Let's look at an ideal scenario:
Divine Wall + Terrain Advantage makes multiple enemies off-guard to the Champion and maybe makes them take an extra action to get where they want and maybe makes them trigger a Reactive strike or two.
Winter Sleet makes multiple or even all enemies Off-Guard to the whole party. It's more likely to cost them extra actions to move around because of the significantly larger area. And it can even outright deny and even cost them actions by knocking them prone, and cause them to guaranteed trigger Reactive Strikes if they want to move at all.
As a side note, if you think this doesn't allow nice damage then perhaps think about dual weapon warrior with this. Paladin in the FotRP game I was in did this and put out some very nice damage while tanking and giving the party extra attacks.
But even the best Champion will not be a top damage dealer. That's why it's ok for him to make all enemies off-guard to himself and maybe get a the occasional extra Reactive Strike from a level 12 class feat.
A Kineticist with Winter Sleet at that level makes all enemies in a seizable 20 ft emanation off-guard to the whole party, which benefits the rogue, barbarian, gunslinger, fighter and everyone else. Each and every one of them could even get the same thing going by level 10, albeit with a smaller radius (which most likely only matters for the Gunslinger). Divine Wall is impossible to get via Mlticlassing. The next best "guaranteed" flat-footed effect is probably Dirge of Doom + Dread Striker and while that is very powerful, it still requires constant casting of Dirge (or the use of Lingering Performance) and only benefits the few characters that can get Dread Striker. And that still doesn't create a large area of difficult terrain with a chance of knowkcing enemies prone.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you search for it here, or on reddit if you know my reddit handle, and maybe on a few other places to - you can find a lot of comments from me right as Rage of Elements came out that were freaking out about how "insanely over powered" the new class was.
I stopped making those posts not because I gave up, but because in between the people who just knee jerk yelled at me, some folks actually showed me what I was missing and I looked things through and came to see it as a decently well balanced class.
I'm not convinced there's anything in the list that is overtuned by itself. MAYBE Tree Sentinel but I expect to get over my impression of it with some time.
It's worth remembering that things like Winter Sleet take up an entire class feat, and come at a moderately high level. A level where a wizard is tossing out similar, a fighter is just starting to get crits on a roll of a 11+... and various other things are coming online.
To the original question of what to watch for:
- Track actions. Make sure Overflows are followed with opening the gate again. Remember that you get a free blast when opening a gate but that it's other the blast or the elemental manipulate ability - not other things.
Track healing if they have a heal. It's once per target every 10 minutes. You CAN spam it to an unlimited number of targets but the same target can only get a given heal once per 10 minutes. The player is likely going to want to always know when 10 minutes have passed since their last use of this.
Remember that the gate being open is a 10-foot effect that is highly visible...
(In our game's session write up for last session, I wrote it as my character gossiping to a food vendor in the local market - and she got carried away and opened her gate, so in my little write up I threw in a scene where guard comes over in a slight panic and tells you to "put that out Ma'am because from his perspective she's lit a 10-foot radius fire in the air around her. That was just a little gag I put in my writing, but it's worth noting that you're noticeable.)
The gate junctions you get for being single gate or can pick up later when the gate ability comes around - remember their triggers. You're not getting things like that die boost to fire impulses on a single action blast.
Decide now how you will handle Will-O-Wisps if you have an Air Kineticist that uses Extract Elements. This is a weird place in the rules because Extract Elements specifically states it makes things that are otherwise immune to your impulses susceptible to them - but if something is immune to your impulses can extract element itself be used?
(there's circular logic here...)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A Kineticist with Winter Sleet at that level makes all enemies in a seizable 20 ft emanation off-guard to the whole party, which benefits the rogue, barbarian, gunslinger, fighter and everyone else. Each and every one of them could even get the same thing going by level 10, albeit with a smaller radius (which most likely only matters for the Gunslinger). Divine Wall is impossible to get via Mlticlassing. The next best "guaranteed" flat-footed effect is probably Dirge of Doom + Dread Striker and while that is very powerful, it still requires constant casting of Dirge (or the use of Lingering Performance) and only benefits the few characters that can get Dread Striker. And that still doesn't create a large area of difficult terrain with a chance of knowkcing enemies prone.
A few thoughts here:
- Water is heavily built around overflows. If you use a two-action overflow, and you want your aura stance to be a thing on the enemy turn, you need to do your overflow and then regather, and that's your turn. If you're throwing around a three-action overflow, then your aura stance is down until your next turn regardless, at least until you hit very late levels. Some elements can handle this by just not using overflow powers. Water isn't one of them. Of course, you can go multi-element into something that's less overflow-hungry, but that has costs too.- A kineticist who's trying to maintain Winter Sleet isn't a top damage-dealer either. They're choked on overflow powers, as above, and their aura isn't giving them any damage help other than off-guard. Basically, Winter Sleet is quite good, especially if your party isn't able to easily generate off-guard in other ways, but that's because kineticist stances are a meaningful percentage of their overall power budget. It's one of the simplest and more straightforward ways to make your enemy off guard, but it's not the cheapest.
...A few thoughts here:
- Water is heavily built around overflows. If you use a two-action overflow, and you want your aura stance to be a thing on the enemy turn, you need to do your overflow and then regather, and that's your turn. If you're throwing around a three-action overflow, then your aura stance is down until your next turn regardless, at least until you hit very late levels. Some elements can handle this by just not using overflow powers. Water isn't one of them. Of course, you can go multi-element into something that's less overflow-hungry, but that has costs too.
- A kineticist who's trying to maintain Winter Sleet isn't a top damage-dealer either. They're choked on overflow powers, as above, and their aura isn't giving them any damage help other than off-guard. Basically, Winter Sleet is quite good, especially if your party isn't able to easily generate off-guard in other ways, but that's because kineticist stances are a meaningful percentage of their overall power budget. It's one of the simplest and more straightforward ways to make your enemy off guard, but it's not the cheapest.
I will say that there really seems to be an unfortunate, but "balanced imbalance" in a fair bit of of PF2E class design.
Basically the "amazing Feat/feature on a bad class" kind of deal, like the Alchemist being able to get Perpetual Skunk Bombs for one Feat. It's far and away one of the best 2-action "free" debuffs, "but it's on a bad class so it's okay" (no, no it's not)
.
IMO, this kind of design, while "balanced" from some perspectives, is still really no-bueno, especially in a system like PF2E with Archetypes and the like.
At best, it leaves all ___s with a streak of homogeneity, as it draws a huge majority into that one feature, and whatever specific play-style benefits that OP feature. (cough, Quick Bomber, cough)
.
This whole topic originally surfaced from this Winter Sleet ability comboing w/ an Elemental Barbarian, and that "raise the aura and forget" use-case shows why it's a very bad idea to have so much power in small pockets like that, even if it seems to be balanced enough in the narrow context of that class.
.
The main reason I still see Winter Sleet at well into the "that's a problem" range is how it provides it's effect to all enemies as an aura, **meaning the whole party is getting a massive benefit.**
Even if it was "balanced" by being on a bad class/subclass, the benefit is granted to all others. It doesn't just bring a sub-par up to par, but raises those already doing great go even further.
It is the party multiplier that also leaves the Perpetual Skunks in the "too good" group as well, IMO.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
IMO, this kind of design, while "balanced" from some perspectives, is still really no-bueno
Disagree. Classes having things that they can do that are really cool and effective is good. It's central to creating cool, fun, and evocative classes.
It would be pretty boring if everyone was just acceptably mediocre in every way. The classes that are the most acceptably mediocre are the ones that people don't talk about favorably. It's a death flag for the game to prioritize that kind of content.
... And the fact is that in play these abilities aren't really particularly broken anyways. It's just not much of an issue.
... That said, PF2 is also a very flexible game that encourages a lot of table variation, so if OP wants to ban a mechanic or class regardless of his powerful just because it feels right to them, they should. Sometimes trying to find a 'good reason' by jumping through hoops on a forum just makes things messier than they need to be.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can speak from some experience regarding Timber Sentinel, because I tested it (about 10 sessions or so) after thinking it might be pretty strong. It's a nice ability, but it also has some weaknesses that prevent it from becoming the default routine everywhere you go:
- It doesn't protect yourself, so might cause you to get focused down
- It requires some amount of coordination, more than comparable abilities like Heal (this is actually fun but has to be considered)
- It's useless against AoE, sometimes even actively detrimental because it can bait party members into huddling together
- It gets shredded easily by crits from cheap direct attacks (by mooks and/or MAP -5/-10)
- It can be circumvented by forced movementOverall, it's at its most effective against single, Strike-dependant melee bosses as another tool to steal one of their actions similar to Slow and Trip (and it stacks with both! great). Other constellations of enemies will typically have some more viable avenue of counterplay. I have not found it to be problematically crowding out other options.
It doesn't protect yourself?
A Medium tree suddenly grows in an unoccupied square within range. The tree has AC 10 and 10 Hit Points. Whenever an ally adjacent to the tree is hit by a Strike, the tree interposes its branches and takes the damage first. Any additional damage beyond what it takes to reduce the tree to 0 Hit Points is dealt to the original target. The tree isn't large enough to impede movement through its square.
I think I get where the confusion/ambiguity might arise, but it's pretty clear that the tree would consider the caster (or Kineticist) an ally.
The created tree is an actor, and that text is describing its behavior upon creation.
The entire text is about what the tree does, there's 0 "you" as the caster in that description to take the implied default away from being the tree, IMO.
.
Basically the quibble comes down to a missing [its] or [your].
If you do not consider the context of the specific spell, then the default "spells are written from the caster's perspective" seems correct.
IMO, that's pretty clearly not the case here.
.
No idea what / if there is already a community right answer common opinion on this, but considering how strange that ruling is, I'm guessing that "doesn't protect the Kineticist" is a meme that has spread pretty quick.
And likely due to early cries of OP, as this ability is very strong. +1 level scaling, 1 min duration, ect. A 30 HP block at L5 is wild.
Not as balance breaking as Winter Sleet by a longshot due to the 2-action cast every time.
Low AC also means smart enemies GMs will think to hit the tree when at MAP, and other details.
However, obviously misinterpreting the spell as a way to nerf it is not something I'm going let slide without a comment.
IMO, this kind of design, while "balanced" from some perspectives, is still really no-buenoDisagree. Classes having things that they can do that are really cool and effective is good. It's central to creating cool, fun, and evocative classes.
It would be pretty boring if everyone was just acceptably mediocre in every way. The classes that are the most acceptably mediocre are the ones that people don't talk about favorably. It's a death flag for the game to prioritize that kind of content.
... And the fact is that in play these abilities aren't really particularly broken anyways. It's just not much of an issue.
... That said, PF2 is also a very flexible game that encourages a lot of table variation, so if OP wants to ban a mechanic or class regardless of his powerful just because it feels right to them, they should. Sometimes trying to find a 'good reason' by jumping through hoops on a forum just makes things messier than they need to be.
That is not at all what I said, and this difference is kind of my whole point.
I have issue with large parts of a class' designed power budget being shoved into 1 or 2 Feats/ect, I have zero issue with a class being able to do cool/powerful things.
This enables someone to dip into the archetype and get an unreasonable amount of power, or the reverse, where a water kineticist ignores most of their class to rush Winter Sleet and gets a Fighter dedication or something.
.
In the case of the Alchemist, it's Quick Bomber and now Perpetual Skunks.
.
Quick Bomber turns a 2-action draw and strike into a 1-action strike.
In this Action Economy game, that's literally a 2x buff to the concept of throwing bombs. That's L20 capstone Feat kind of power.
If you are an Alchemist that does **not** make use of Quick Bomber, you are not making use of a huge amount of the class' power.
One of the fundamental problems / breaks in the Alch's design is that the other main boulder of the power budget is Quick Alchemy, making *any* alch item on the spot, which is completely incompatible w/ Quick Bomber.
So while most classes get to slowly build and interweave their class' features, Alch gets a crazy L1 steroid that (Bombers at least) leave behind as the slowly get the Quick Alch Feats online.
.
For the Winter Sleet example, the "better world" version would mean nerfing Winter Sleet and buffing other Water options.
Make it harder to dip and get a huge boost in power, ect.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
IMO, this kind of design, while "balanced" from some perspectives, is still really no-buenoDisagree. Classes having things that they can do that are really cool and effective is good. It's central to creating cool, fun, and evocative classes.
It would be pretty boring if everyone was just acceptably mediocre in every way. The classes that are the most acceptably mediocre are the ones that people don't talk about favorably. It's a death flag for the game to prioritize that kind of content.
... And the fact is that in play these abilities aren't really particularly broken anyways. It's just not much of an issue.
... That said, PF2 is also a very flexible game that encourages a lot of table variation, so if OP wants to ban a mechanic or class regardless of his powerful just because it feels right to them, they should. Sometimes trying to find a 'good reason' by jumping through hoops on a forum just makes things messier than they need to be.
That is not at all what I said, and this difference is kind of my whole point.
I have issue with large parts of a class' designed power budget being shoved into 1 or 2 Feats/ect, I have zero issue with a class being able to do cool/powerful things.
This enables someone to dip into the archetype and get an unreasonable amount of power, or the reverse, where a water kineticist ignores most of their class to rush Winter Sleet and gets a Fighter dedication or something.
.
In the case of the Alchemist, it's Quick Bomber and now Perpetual Skunks.
.
Quick Bomber turns a 2-action draw and strike into a 1-action strike.
In this Action Economy game, that's literally a 2x buff to the concept of throwing bombs. That's L20 capstone Feat kind of power.
In absolute abstract terms, I can see where you're coming from. It's literally making a character 2x as effective as something; sort of akin to many classes getting perma-quickened in some form that relates to their class identity.
However, I think this, any many other cases like it, fall apart on scrutiny.Sure, your Quick Bomber alchemist is easily the best bomber. But throwing bombs is typically such a poor combat option for a non-specialized character that alchemical bombs often end up as nothing more than sell-fodder for gold anyway. So an alchemist becoming the best bomber, really only brings them up to some level of competency.
It'd be like complaining that the Gunslinger abilities make them by far the best gun or crossbow user. Like yeah, that's true, but typically guns and crossbows are so unbelievably bad baseline that unless your whole character is dedicated to using them, as items they're worth only what you can sell them for.
In absolute abstract terms, I can see where you're coming from. It's literally making a character 2x as effective as something; sort of akin to many classes getting perma-quickened in some form that relates to their class identity.
However, I think this, any many other cases like it, fall apart on scrutiny.
Sure, your Quick Bomber alchemist is easily the best bomber. But throwing bombs is typically such a poor combat option for a non-specialized character that alchemical bombs often end up as nothing more than sell-fodder for gold anyway. So an alchemist becoming the best bomber, really only brings them up to some level of competency.
It'd be like complaining that the Gunslinger abilities make them by far the best gun or crossbow user. Like yeah, that's true, but typically guns and crossbows are so unbelievably bad baseline that unless your whole character is dedicated to using them, as items they're worth only what you can sell them for.
I am well aware how poorly bombs/Alch compares.
They are not even the best bomber, not really. Quick Draw is literally Quick Bomber, but better. With 6 Feats to improve the Quick Alch bombs, it still takes that extra action to brew. Meanwhile, a Rogue/Ranger (or any Duelist), will have better ways to enhance that bomb damage with all those actions, and the bombs can be bought or made w/ just Alch crafting..
As far as what I'm actually trying to say,
I don't know how to get more specific than this.
The issue is the imbalance between Feats. You have a full 2x enhancement as a L1 Feat, followed by a whole lot of nearly worthless junk Feats.
That's the problem, and what I am guessing is also affecting Winter Sleet.
One OP Feat is "balanced" because the others surrounding it are below par.
This form of balance breaks down when Class Feats can be swapped at will.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can speak from some experience regarding Timber Sentinel, because I tested it (about 10 sessions or so) after thinking it might be pretty strong. It's a nice ability, but it also has some weaknesses that prevent it from becoming the default routine everywhere you go:
- It doesn't protect yourself, so might cause you to get focused down
- It requires some amount of coordination, more than comparable abilities like Heal (this is actually fun but has to be considered)
- It's useless against AoE, sometimes even actively detrimental because it can bait party members into huddling together
- It gets shredded easily by crits from cheap direct attacks (by mooks and/or MAP -5/-10)
- It can be circumvented by forced movementOverall, it's at its most effective against single, Strike-dependant melee bosses as another tool to steal one of their actions similar to Slow and Trip (and it stacks with both! great). Other constellations of enemies will typically have some more viable avenue of counterplay. I have not found it to be problematically crowding out other options.
It doesn't protect yourself?
A Medium tree suddenly grows in an unoccupied square within range. The tree has AC 10 and 10 Hit Points. Whenever an ally adjacent to the tree is hit by a Strike, the tree interposes its branches and takes the damage first. Any additional damage beyond what it takes to reduce the tree to 0 Hit Points is dealt to the original target. The tree isn't large enough to impede movement through its square.I think I get where the confusion/ambiguity might arise, but it's pretty clear that the tree would consider the caster (or Kineticist) an ally.
The created tree is an actor, and that text is describing its behavior upon creation.
The entire text is about what the tree does, there's 0 "you" as the caster in that description to take the implied default away from being the tree, IMO.
.
Basically the quibble comes down to a missing [its] or [your].
If you do...
The caster is not their own ally. The tree has no allies.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The caster is not their own ally. The tree has no allies.
I don't understand how the spell can define a tree as an active agent with a size, AC, and HP, then when it's behavior is defined, "The tree has no allies"
This is a Jackie Chan wtf face moment for me.
If you don't think all the preceding sentences about the tree have it be the noun that ally is referencing, and instead think that injecting a missing [your] is somehow the more reasonable reading, I don't think I'll convince you.
.
I think every spell I've seen that excludes the caster explicitly states as such. It's not a minor detail to leave to implication, that kind of restriction is already rare, and it (should) be clearly labeled.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
or the reverse, where a water kineticist ignores most of their class to rush Winter Sleet and gets a Fighter dedication or something.
That sounds like a genuinely terrible character.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
At this point, I hope someone at Paizo jumps in and clarifies once and for all the ally conundrum with Protector Tree.
Can't we just talk about these things without ascribing motive to one another please? [...]
That was a very appropriate, and well worded call out, thank you.
Even with the context, I was still making an assumption, and there was no benefit of that to anyone. Even if the degree of a!+!@%% was considered small, a small a@@#~&$'s still an a*$&*#!, distracting from the point and stinking up the place.
---------------------
Wall of stone has HP and AC. Does that make it also have allies and enemies?
That leaves out the key part, that of being an active agent w/ recognition and decision making.
Let's make an equivalent comparison:
----------------
Climber's Wall
Cast [two-actions] somatic, verbal
Range 30 feet
Duration 10 minutes
A 1ft thick cobble wall raises from the ground. It is up to 20ft long, and 120ft high. If made flush to an existing wall or single contiguous barrier, half the potential height can be spent to raise the wall on both sides of the obstacle. Each section of wall has __ AC and ___ HP. Whenever an ally attempts to climb the wall, the wall shuffles and extend its stones to assist, granting them -10 DC to any Climb related checks.
If the tree is in soil wall has a good foundation and survives to the end of the spell's duration, it remains as an ordinary, non-magical wall, and continues to stand firm. The GM might determine that the wall disappears immediately in certain inhospitable situations.
(If I weren't trying to make a 1:1 substitute, I'd also have the wall throw a +10 DC at enemies)
------------------------------
The Protector Tree's whole job is to protect.
Textual reading aside, lets throw up a quick imagined gameplay scenario.
Party of 4 is confronted w/ a strange beast. Druid gets Nat 20 on initiative, first attempt at RK fails, but "it clearly looks hostile"
Druid casts Protector Tree.
Beast goes next. Unleashes a dreadful howl, 2/4 party fail the will, are Frightened.
Next, it can use it's Baleful Rush to gap-close and maul any of the afraid targets. Picks the Druid, hitting and adding +1 Frightened.
The tree just sits there, ready to react at a moment's notice to reach and block any attack that would harm the druid's allies, while the druid's getting shredded.
3rd action is another Strike on the druid, nat 20. Even though they were at full HP during their turn, they are now Dying 2.
The Tree watches. Ready and waiting to intervene to protect an ally.
A second beast abandons it hiding spot to pounce.
--------------------------------------
As with the Climber's Wall, the "but not the caster" ruling of the use of "ally" is a not just anti-fun, but kinda ruins the whole point of the spell's function. If the druid was hurt, they might have healed up. Might have raised a shield, ect. By choosing to make a defensive play instead of going for a CC or dmg spell, they doomed themself. Had the beast gone for the other target on the 50/50, the tree would have intervened to block a whole lot of dmg. That kind of arbitrary, "really useful or completely worthless" feels HORRIBLE for players.
Moreover, the Protector Tree represents a kind of proactive tactical play that this game *thrives* upon, enabling the caster to actually do something defensive without it feeling like a waste.
The tree knows not to protect enemies.
For it to arbitrarily exclude the caster from its defense seriously dings immersion, and honestly throws the entire decision to take the spell into question.
As an Alch, I can't get my allies to drink bloody anything. If I can't at the very least park my own butt under the tree to make sure at least *someone* is being protected, I honestly would have to chat w/ the party first before committing to that.
--------------------
Don't forget that Protector Tree is a spell first, and a Kineticist impulse second. Would it really be too OP if it protected the user? Upcasting a spell in a higher slot is not at all equivalent to getting free spell scaling, which is where the actual balance issue lies.
The Kineticist getting a auto-max spell, where the druid would need to burn their highest slot every time is why I wish I could have (lightly) smacked that designer's hand off the keyboard.
Cantrips are designed with the auto-max balancing in mind. Spells like Protector Tree, absolutely were not.
This whole topic originally surfaced from this Winter Sleet ability comboing w/ an Elemental Barbarian, and that "raise the aura and forget" use-case shows why it's a very bad idea to have so much power in small pockets like that, even if it seems to be balanced enough in the narrow context of that class.I would argue that this is not really much of a problem because the OP has not thought through exactly what sort of build choices are needed to get there. A Bar with the Kineticist Archetype cannot get Sleet until level 8, then Safe Elements at level 10, then Aura Shaping at level 20. The opportunity cost of "what else could I have used those for" is pretty high, and since off-guard doesn't stack with off-guard, if the party is already generally achieving off-guardedness (which they probably are by level 10), Sleet has the effect of just making the off-guard tactic easier, not giving the party a buff it didn't have before and thus not lowering target AC more than it was. Also, by the time the Bar picks up Winter Sleet, enemies are already at the "Acrobatics 15 checks are easy" stage.
As others have pointed out, the problem with kineticist use is that you're going to want to use overflow attacks and the two strategies don't mesh well together. It also doesn't mesh well with a ranged attacker role, which many (but certainly not all) kineticists will try and be. And it doesn't mesh well with the "push away" abilities that water impulses often give too.
Don't get me wrong, it's good. But like a lot of good powers, it requires tactical choices which give up other good tactical choices in order benefit from it. And that is why, IMO, it is not overpowered. You're seeing it as "fire, forget, then go do anything else you want," but it is really more like "make choices this round to keep it useful, or do something else I might like more." For example, any kineticst who could combo Winter Sleet with Safe Elements as an emanation, Hurricane as a 7d8 damage emanation instead. And Call doesn't require you allocate yet a third class feat at level 10 (or 20, for the Bar) in order to achieve 20' range.
The Barb had spotted another high-power point of Deflecting Wave, and does not need the range extension at all.
My own baseline for Feat power-level is screwed up from playing Alch, but a 2 Feat investment for the aura and safe elements, coming fully online at L10, sounds super great.
In fact, it's so powerful that said player posted here to ask if there was something wrong w/ it.
Even w/ a Reach weapon, the Barb would become able to get a perpetual off-guard to all enemies they chose to Strike after a 1-action stance up. That alone is worth 2 Feats, for sure. Instead, Winter Sleet does a whole lot more, from the "take a hit, roll the dice to not flop prone" to the "can't move w/o Balance." That's amazing.
The Hurricane thing is L8, so a L16 unlock for off-class, ends the aura stance (delayed, but that's another +1 action cost), and it's +1 action if you want to make it safe. Yes, the numbers sound good on paper, no I don't think that is appealing enough for a Barb to spend a L16 Feat on it.
Not sure why the 20' range is such an appealing point for you, as moving is 1-action.
Raw "this does dmg" options are the *most* competitive w/ each other, and while a Barb very well might find it worthwhile for the AoE, they very well might have enough invested into weapon Strikes to pass on that.
--------------
Heck, at L16 they may even go for Duelist Dedication. That would let them hold a consumable to chug, stance up, and they could even skip a 2-H grip via a Quick Draw Strike.
Saving at min 1-action every round 1? Sounds way better than a sometimes Hurricane in my book.
|
|
The caster is not their own ally. The tree has no allies.I don't understand how the spell can define a tree as an active agent with a size, AC, and HP, then when it's behavior is defined, "The tree has no allies"
This is a Jackie Chan wtf face moment for me.
If you don't think all the preceding sentences about the tree have it be the noun that ally is referencing, and instead think that injecting a missing [your] is somehow the more reasonable reading, I don't think I'll convince you.
.
I think every spell I've seen that excludes the caster explicitly states as such. It's not a minor detail to leave to implication, that kind of restriction is already rare, and it (should) be clearly labeled.
It is good that we have explicit RAW about the targets of effects : "Some effects target or require an ally, or otherwise refer to an ally. This must be someone on your side, often another PC, but it might be a bystander you are trying to protect. You are not your own ally."
It is good that we have explicit RAW about the targets of effects : "Some effects target or require an ally, or otherwise refer to an ally. This must be someone on your side, often another PC, but it might be a bystander you are trying to protect. You are not your own ally."
That was never being questioned, and it really feels like you are jumping to attack points that don't exist w/o taking enough time to read and get that.
------------------------------------
The contention is over a missing/implied [its] vs [your].
In my view, the tree is the subject actor. The tree is not it's own ally, which is why it does not (uselessly) interpose its branches to protect itself. The caster would be the tree's ally.
IMO, that "tree reaching out to protect itself" is exactly why "ally" was used, as it avoids the clumsy circumstance of the tree protecting itself w/o benefit.
|
|
It is good that we have explicit RAW about the targets of effects : "Some effects target or require an ally, or otherwise refer to an ally. This must be someone on your side, often another PC, but it might be a bystander you are trying to protect. You are not your own ally."That was never being questioned, and it really feels like you are jumping to attack points that don't exist w/o taking enough time to read and get that.
------------------------------------
The contention is over a missing/implied [its] vs [your].
In my view, the tree is the subject actor. The tree is not it's own ally, which is why it does not (uselessly) interpose its branches to protect itself. The caster would be the tree's ally.
IMO, that "tree reaching out to protect itself" is exactly why "ally" was used, as it avoids the clumsy circumstance of the tree protecting itself w/o benefit.
The spell/tree is an effect. So I quoted the RAW about effects and ally.
Ally is a specific game term.