I am no expert, but many have crunched the numbers and have largely found that the two are balanced as intended with one another within the context if the system.
That being said, there are quite a few things about wildshape and polymorph effects that could still use some clarity, and depending on what happens there, things might shift slightly one way or the other.
No published 2e Adventure Path or Adventure is good for Wild Order. The environments are too crowded and enclosed for the creatures places in them to encounter let alone a player attempting to use forms.
It's only viable for a self made campaign and world or one of the open world 1e adventure paths that have been converted.
No published 2e Adventure Path or Adventure is good for Wild Order. The environments are too crowded and enclosed for the creatures places in them to encounter let alone a player attempting to use forms.
It's only viable for a self made campaign and world or one of the open world 1e adventure paths that have been converted.
Extinction Curse is pretty good for a wild druid. That's the only one I've found consistently good for a wild druid.
Every other one maps are way too tight unless Paizo allows you to have the powerful stats while staying medium or large size. Huge is often not viable unfortunately, which greatly limits the wild druid.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The wild Druid in my fist of the Ruby Phoenix campaign has had no trouble with being big either.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah I did the math for most common options a while back. Shapes at top level are equal to a boring martial with a greatsword assuming you can benefit from property runes (flaming and frost and such) on hand wraps while shaped.
I can dig up the math later.
Do we have any rulings that indicate they can benefit from property runes on handwraps? I usually don't allow it.
Do we have any rulings that indicate they can benefit from property runes on handwraps? I usually don't allow it.Yeah I did the math for most common options a while back. Shapes at top level are equal to a boring martial with a greatsword assuming you can benefit from property runes (flaming and frost and such) on hand wraps while shaped.
I can dig up the math later.
Damage is specifically stated in the spell and cannot be modified. The only thing that is a grey area is if potency runes can apply to unarmed attack which can be used in lieu of stats not specified in the spell.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In my games, I've rule that property runes that are compatible with unarmed strikes work in battle form. Fundamental potency runes don't work by default in my games, unless you're substituting your total attack bonus. Fundamental striking runes never work.
In my games, I've rule that property runes that are compatible with unarmed strikes work in battle form. Fundamental potency runes don't work by default in my games, unless you're substituting your total attack bonus. Fundamental striking runes never work.
When I was looking at this the other day I believe the conclusion I came to was that it is raw that you do not add item bonuses unless you substitute your own attack bonus, which has the item bonus added in
In my games, I've rule that property runes that are compatible with unarmed strikes work in battle form. Fundamental potency runes don't work by default in my games, unless you're substituting your total attack bonus. Fundamental striking runes never work.When I was looking at this the other day I believe the conclusion I came to was that it is raw that you do not add item bonuses unless you substitute your own attack bonus, which has the item bonus added in
Sounds like we're of similar mind then.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In my games, I've rule that property runes that are compatible with unarmed strikes work in battle form. Fundamental potency runes don't work by default in my games, unless you're substituting your total attack bonus. Fundamental striking runes never work.When I was looking at this the other day I believe the conclusion I came to was that it is raw that you do not add item bonuses unless you substitute your own attack bonus, which has the item bonus added in
Agreed to both. The item technically works by the rules as the continuous abilitites of items function in battle forms.
The problem is does the additional damage from property runes like Flaming or Frost apply because of the special restrictions on modifiying the damage. Does additional damage add or not? Is it a modifier or a separate chunk of damage? There has never been a ruling.
I allow it because other property Runes like Crushing and Ghost Touch clearly do work.
Shapes at top level are equal to a boring martial with a greatsword assuming you can benefit from property runes (flaming and frost and such) on hand wraps while shaped.
The point being that the Druid is typically a point behind the martial every other level in attack value. Martials all have other things they can add. Most people don't play a boring martial they trick it up. If you build a tricked up wildshaping Druid and it seems to beat a bland martial its not a problem, because the same player won't be playing a simple martial they will trick it up as well.
The Martial will have better saves and hitpoints. So the aiming point for balance is somewhere around there, the Druid maybe just under a martial. The Druid has spells but then again can't use them.
|
The animist playtest introduced an interesting new mechanic.
Scaling status bonus to hit without having to jump through hoops.
Having to sustain Wild shape but
1) Being able to get a fair bit of movement from the sustain
2) Being able to change shape (within a spell) when sustaining.
I really loved it the few games I managed to play with the playtest. The flexibility REALLY hit my shapeshifting fanatasy.
I wait with bated breath to see how much of that makes it to the actual book
The animist playtest introduced an interesting new mechanic.
Scaling status bonus to hit without having to jump through hoops.
Having to sustain Wild shape but
1) Being able to get a fair bit of movement from the sustain
2) Being able to change shape (within a spell) when sustaining.I really loved it the few games I managed to play with the playtest. The flexibility REALLY hit my shapeshifting fanatasy.
I wait with bated breath to see how much of that makes it to the actual book
Doesn't help that the Druid is already set in Core 1. Honestly, it would just further drive a drift between the new classes (Kineticist, Animist, etc.) being both mechanically and playability better then the older cores.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So... Buff Wild Shape to be perfectly on par with a martial character in melee combat, reduce the casting time, allow all of the damage boosting runes. I'm surprised you don't also mention letting them cast all their full spellcaster level spells while shaped too. Just let them eat everyone else's lunch.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So... Buff Wild Shape to be perfectly on par with a martial character in melee combat, reduce the casting time, allow all of the damage boosting runes. I'm surprised you don't also mention letting them cast all their full spellcaster level spells while shaped too. Just let them eat everyone else's lunch.
100% agree with this. The developers clearly and intentionally decided to avoid the issues of one class being able to poach other class abilities or do their thing better then they can. For instance, the spell Knock in P1 gave you a check to open a lock with level +10 bonus. in P2, it's level +4, which is barely better than being trained in thievery.
The point of just setting the stats instead of "+X to Y stat" like in PF1 is to keep the Druid from being a better fighter than the fighter, but also to keep the fighter from being a better Druid than the Druid.
|
|
Druidic Wild shape is actually quite competitive to martials at a few carefully chosen levels.
My favourites are levels 10-12 with Plant Shape. Assuming that druids get the to hit benefit from their potency runes (nearly universally agreed) they're on par with a martial to hit for competitive damage with increased reach. And can even flurry at level 12.
And still have all their spells, of course, for when they don't feel like being Treebeard.
The windows are relatively narrow and come and go but they DO exist.
I'm not at all sure that druids need additional damage (rage, sneak attack, property runes, etc) to be competitive. I don't think the additional damage is going to break the game, but its also really not necessary.
You have less HP and lower saves, just because you might match a poorly built martial(not fighter) in damage now and again doesn't make you equal to them.
I played a wild druid with monk and the archetype boost to unarmed attacks to get legendary proficiency and I still didn't hold a candle to the katana wielding fighter in the group. The dragons fly speed made up for that as well as the Kaiju's overall better stats with limited use, being huge and whirling throw to the fighter was very fun.
Any other character trying to make use of battle forms is going to be much farther behind, with lower to hit, less feat support and depending on class even less health.
I don't usually allow property runes.
I do allow casting while using a battle form that has the ability to use manipulate and should be able to speak. I like balance, but I like verisimilitude more. I don't like that a shapechanger can change into a type of creature that can speak, but suddenly the can't for "reasons."
If a druid with Form Control or Perfect Form Control turns into a dragon or elemental to do infiltration or negotiation, then suddenly they can't speak that is just ridiculous.
They're a group of dragons standing drinking at some lake, suddenly the druid dragon shows up. The other dragons are talking. The druid dragon open its mouth and nothing comes out. The other dragons look at each other, "Shapechanged idiot dragon. Kill it."
That's the kind of balance in the rules I just don't enjoy. Write something in a balanced fashion, but don't make it ridiculously restrictive in the game world where it doesn't make sense.
As far as RAW or RAI, I don't allow property runes with battle form attacks. I make it the attacks exactly in the stat block.
I do allow the item bonus to unarmed attacks to apply. I go by the entire unarmed attack bonus when comparing. Nowhere does it say to not include unarmed attack item bonuses in this calculation, so I don't.
I do allow untyped damage to add to the unarmed attacks. Weapon specialization, rage damage, sneak attack, and something that works with the attacks as long it has the proper traits or the criteria for activation can be met.
It would be nice to have clearer battle form rules, but there aren't. So rewrote them some and am a lot looser with them than some. But I don't see the property runes working when the items are absorbed into the form.
Damage for battle forms is not bad for a caster. They probably do need some battle form class for players that want a primary shapechange martial type. To me battle forms are another tool in the caster arsenal, not something that should make them near as good as a martial in melee.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
If shifter is added to the game we'll get our character who can be on par with martials while also being a bear, raptor or rhino. Druids should not be allowed to be as good as a dedicated martial for the fact they get 10 ranks of spells
If shifter is added to the game we'll get our character who can be on par with martials while also being a bear, raptor or rhino. Druids should not be allowed to be as good as a dedicated martial for the fact they get 10 ranks of spellsYeah I agree. And they're not (not sure if this is your point, FYI, just pointing it out)
There is an easy way to prove this. See how many of your players would play a wild shape druid with no spells that benefits from property runes. Now see if they'd play a fighter.
I doubt many would go for the druid.
Yeah, I'm not sure how good fighter MDC into wild order druid is, but if I was gonna try to make this work, that is what I would try to do
If shifter is added to the game we'll get our character who can be on par with martials while also being a bear, raptor or rhino. Druids should not be allowed to be as good as a dedicated martial for the fact they get 10 ranks of spellsYeah I agree. And they're not (not sure if this is your point, FYI, just pointing it out)
There is an easy way to prove this. See how many of your players would play a wild shape druid with no spells that benefits from property runes. Now see if they'd play a fighter.
I doubt many would go for the druid.
Druid with spells I'd play over a fighter.
Druid with no spells with wild shape and even property runes, I'd go for the fighter.
|
|
I don't think that anyone is arguing that a spell less wild shifting druid is on par with a martial except maybe for a couple of carefully chosen levels in carefully chosen situations. Regardless of whether or not you allow extra damage (Sneak attack, rage, etc) and/or property runes and how you interpret some ambiguous rules.
I personally WOULD argue that
1) With the appropriate set of options (property runes, extra damage, etc) and rules interpretations you can probably build a VERY effective martial with a 2 feat dip into druid, at least on those occassions where there is room to grow. Not one who ALWAYS wild shapes but one who often wild shapes to significant advantage.
2) With the appropriate set of options and rules interpretations a druid is getting close to brokenly good (NOT there but close). They will NOT outperform a martial BUT they will significantly outperform many casters. Basically, they get to use spells when that is right and wild shape when spells aren't a great solution which leaves them a LOT of spells for the encounters where they want to use spells.
I've played wild shaping druids with the most conservative possible interpretation of the rules and they're very good characters (NOT brokenly good but clearly very much contributing and clearly in at least the top 1/2 of character builds). Not so much in raw power but in sheer flexibility. And flexibility IS power even if it is harder to define in DPS terms.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
So... Buff Wild Shape to be perfectly on par with a martial character in melee combat, reduce the casting time, allow all of the damage boosting runes. I'm surprised you don't also mention letting them cast all their full spellcaster level spells while shaped too. Just let them eat everyone else's lunch.
It is a flawed argument. They can't cast spells and wildshape at the same time. That is a good line the devs set and it should be largely kept. There are only a few long term spells they can cast and even martials pick up LongStrider/TailWind via items.
The problem is the devs over corrected and said can't speak. That was a terrible decision and should be reversed as it affects table interaction. They had another opportunity with getting rid of components but Paizo declined.
100% agree with this. The developers clearly and intentionally decided to avoid the issues of one class being able to poach other class abilities or do their thing better then they can. For instance, the spell Knock in P1 gave you a check to open a lock with level +10 bonus. in P2, it's level +4, which is barely better than being trained in thievery.
Again an over correction. Yes the thief shouldn't be completely replaceable by a spell so they needed to move in this direction. But again they overcorrected. No one takes Knock at all. They clearly went too far.
Though that is probably because you can often enough replace Thievery with Athletics and just bash things.
The point of just setting the stats instead of "+X to Y stat" like in PF1 is to keep the Druid from being a better fighter than the fighter, but also to keep the fighter from being a better Druid than the Druid.
Well they screwed that up to by making the Druid WildShape ability to get a +2 status bonus dependant on having a higher to hit chance than the battle form spell. So its 90% useless to Druids unless you are using weaker forms. But a martial prepared to lose some AC can abuse it by always having it.
We all have different expectations of what is fair for a wildshape specialist. Given the action cost for getting into it and the fact it is the main play style for the Untamed Order I think it should be effective. Getting close to but not as good as a reasonably built martial. But the comparison is too hard to do publically because...
Battle Forms are a rules hell hole Paizo have refused to fix. It took 3 lots errata before they fixed the battle forms can't grapple or escape problem. They have not made the core damage rules clear enough to be precise. They haven't defined the terms in the damage equation.
Battle Forms are in a really terrible state, and they keep ignoring it.
We are all just supposed to work it out however we want. Yes Paizo stated that. It is an appalling experience for analytical people.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No one takes Knock at all.
*ahem*
I've taken knock on at least two characters.
Now I'm curious - how many people have seen battle forms cast from slots?
And were they worth said slots when cast? Or lackluster?
My characters have cast battle forms from slots more than all the other sources combined.
Of course, when Untamed Form (Wild Shape) is available, I generally use that instead.
My most prominent experiences were with a dragon bloodline sorcerer using dragon form. I found it to be incredibly versatile and fun. I could not blast with the breath weapon quite as well as I could with top-rank spells, but it didn't use up any of my spell slots and I could do it over and over again. It was probably equivalent to my top-tier -1 rank spells. (I wasn't much of a blaster anyways, so it pulled double duty in my case.) The melee capabilities were not up to par with a martial; it too felt a level behind. But I could fill gaps in the melee line still landing some respectable blows (and even an occasional crit) while being sustained by my temporary hit points. It was not the waste of time some posters might lead you to believe. I could also skirmish quite effectively with the high fly speed and reach attacks. The Athletics modifier allowed me to swoop in and knock enemies from high places a number of times.
I was able to chase down fleeing enemies, scout from on high, set massive areas on fire, conserve other resources, and fill gaps in the party in a variety of ways.
I loved stacking it with other spells that I cast beforehand, such as repulsion or 4th-rank invisibility.
All in all, the spell did exactly as I expected. It really changed things around in roughly half the encounters in which it was used; the other half not so much, but that had a lot more to do with bad tactics on our part, or my getting slammed with lots of enemy debuffs early on, than it did with anything inherent to the spell itself.
It was not a magic bullet by any stretch of the imagination, but it sure made me feel like I was playing a sorcerer who felt like a dragon. By and large I've had similar experiences with other polymorph spells, though they can be a little less versatile if they're lower level than dragon form.
If you think you'd like shape changing magic, then I highly recommend the polymorph spells in general.
Your experience with dragon form basically matches that of the sorcerer in the long-term homebrew campaign I'm in (we're all 15th level now.) Man, does he love using dragon form when space permits. So much fun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Now I'm curious - how many people have seen battle forms cast from slots?
And were they worth said slots when cast? Or lackluster?
I have seen battle forms cast from slots. I've never done it myself, but at least one of my players has. Fits his concept.
Quite a few players do things to fit a character concept or do something different.
The battle forms offer things other than just damage. Dragon form as an example has an AoE every 1d4 rounds, reach, and incredible movement.
Air Elemental form is extremely good for kiting if you have enough room. You can move in and out of battle without triggering movement reactions at 80 feet per move. Not much can keep up with that.
The battle forms offer things other than just damage. Dragon form as an example has an AoE every 1d4 rounds, reach, and incredible movement.
Indeed! But the damage is also nice. In one encounter, I kept rolling 1s for my breath weapon's timer (four times in a row if memory serves). Absolutely kept wrecking everything around me with those repeated AoE's. Ultimately did far more damage than if I had used an equivalent rank blast spell, or even a +1 rank blast spell.
The battle forms offer things other than just damage. Dragon form as an example has an AoE every 1d4 rounds, reach, and incredible movement.Indeed! But the damage is also nice. In one encounter, I kept rolling 1s for my breath weapon's timer (four times in a row if memory serves). Absolutely kept wrecking everything around me with those repeated AoE's. Ultimately did far more damage than if I had used an equivalent rank blast spell, or even a +1 rank blast spell.Did you rule that rolling a 1 meant it essentially immediately recharged (so you could use it two rounds in a row)? Or every other round?
I've seen both and am just curious.
The GM, Unicore, allowed back to back rounds if I recall correctly, though I didn't take advantage of it every single round.
Yeah... I feel like as soon as someone says "No one takes [insert option Paizo stuck in the book] at all" we can just ignore whatever point they are trying to make.
You can take issue with the way a minor side issue was expressed if you like but it is a poor way to approach discussions. But just for you I'll correct what I said to "no one who primarily cares about efficiency" but you could have done that yourself. It seems kind of clear from the context.
I too have seen knock at the table.
So have I a couple of times and each player thought it was a total waste and never took it again.
I also played, and thrived as, a wild shape focused druid and literally the only reason i backed off of battle form being my go-to combat method was because free archetype giving fighter and mauler feats and a massive hammer and that eventually eclipsed what I could do with wild shape (except for when I got blinded so I turned into a bat to get around the debuff)
Oh so you understand there is a problem. Good.
All I'm really asking for here is clarity from the devs. Then I can adjust to taste as can you. It is just frustrating we don't know how it should work.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Knock is not bad for rogues.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Knock is not bad for rogues.That's very ironic, don't you think? :)
I don't - I think it's a great niche for the spell to have! If you have no-one invested in thievery, it'll give you a decent chance at making the check - a single spell slot to make your best Dex character Expert at the check is a good chance. But if you've got someone who has focused on the skill, they're not obsolete - they instead get a huge boost, effectively becoming Legendary instead of Expert, the highest they could be at that point. And it keeps up with investment nicely! I think it's a good example of a change in magic from PF1 to PF2 that facilitates the teamwork of the game well, and still allows casters to be useful without being dominant over all niches at once.
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
because you're clearly not interested in any actual discussion, you just want to have everyone either agree with your already-formed conclusion"
This is completely unfair to Gortle.
I have engaged in quite a few discussions with him when we disagree about something. We sometimes end up agreeing to disagree. But he ALWAYS discusses things, gives reasons for his views, listens to cogent arguments.
And here you completely left out the most important point of his post
.All I'm really asking for here is clarity from the devs. Then I can adjust to taste as can you. It is just frustrating we don't know how it should work