Swarmkeeper: how to make it work?

[simpetar]

First of all, I love the archetype's concept! I tried to devise few builds on paper and then got to try 2 of them (one based on flurry Ranger, another based on wood kineticist, both using FA) out in a short game.

And I hit a brick wall:

1. The action tax is insane. One action alone is needed to keep the swarm going, each and every round, and if you fail, it becomes unusable for a minute (usually rest of the fight). Another action to make the swarm actually do something offensive.

2. The swarm is very slow. Unless you are fighting a horde of zombies, the swarm will never catch up to enemies who decide to outrun it. If enemies want to move away, even Weaver's Web cannot stop them: they need to end their turn in the web, not start in it. In addition, allies are immune to the swarm's damage, but not effects; your friends will get webbed too.

3. Every offensive action except the basic Bite and Sting has Flourish trait. If you sustain the swam and have it do something fancy, you cannot use other compressed actions to make up for what you lost.

4. The swarm shares your health like an eidolon. However, if you want to capitalize on what it does best (dealing damage to multiple enemies at once) and drop a fireball, you get punished.

In conclusion: if you use the swarm's to its potential, you are precluded from most of your base class's abilities. If you use your strong class abilities, you will be either wasting actions on the archetype or not benefitting from it at all.

Can something be done to make the archetype work? Am I missing something here?

[Ravingdork]

As someone who made an awakened giant spider who weaponizes her babies, I agree that the archetype leaves a lot to be desired.

It can work, if your allies cooperate with you to limit an enemy's options. For example, sticking close to a trip fighter as he knocks enemies down works great. Your swarms can feast on the prone victims while shielding the fighter at the same time. Using walls, slow, tangling effects, and similar spells and abilities can really allow your swarm to keep up.

Talk to your GM about treating the swarm as a creature rather than an effect. If you can target it with spells, there might be ways to increase their speed or other attributes.

Always build swarm keeper as a secondary option, not your primary go-to tactic. Like mounted combat, it has potential in the right situation,
but isn't going to shine all the time (or even half the time). You may even want to consider not swarming out at all unless you're in a small area (such as a dungeon), or the enemy's mobility has alreasy been stymied.

Even then, under ideal circumstances, your damage output probably isn't worth the action cost compared to other options.

[Easl]

Ravingdork wrote:

Always build swarm keeper as a secondary option, not your primary go-to tactic.

I think this is very good advice for a lot of PF2E options. The devs seem very intent on having archetypes and new content add conditionally useful breadth, rather than create 'killer combo' builds. Old A + new B = different ways to approach encounters, instead of old A + new B = win every encounter.

[Sanityfaerie]

Part of the point is that it's a repeatable source of damage that targets Reflex vs Class DC (or targets Fortitude or will, with appropriate additional feats). If you're already running a caster, a kineticist, or someone else who has relatively easy access to good DC on area attacks vs save, it's almost certainly not worth it. If you're running a character who's pure single target vs AC, especially if they're also melee, there are a lot more situations where it comes in handy.

Much like many powers, a lot of it depends on the GM and/or campaign. Is this a GM/campaign where you wind up with a lot of melee-on-melee scrums? Then this might work out well. If you're dealing with a situation that has a lot of highly mobile enemies that like dancing in and out of melee, or keeping distance and running away when you get near, then it's likely to be frustrating.

[QuidEst]

- The archetype is best on melee characters, giving an option for dealing with out-of-range enemies, using class DC rather than a mental stat.
- The archetype has a few upgrades to it, so it benefits from having more feats dumped into it. Free archetype and a class that mostly relies on features gives you your best mileage.

I took it on my Thaumaturge, and it's been useful. Fights with it in play are slow, but it was able to get at some rooftop assassins, get sent past a sewer grate to attack enemies making ranged attacks, pin down a brute zombie with webs, and attack a zombie troop for AoE weakness while my character hid. I've played so many Thaumaturges that I don't care about their feats anymore, so I'm just dumping them into this. At 8th, we can finally start moving along with the swarm, and go for a concentrate/move, swarming bites, strike vs flat-footed routine.

And, don't forget- on the final round where you don't sustain it, you can spend all three actions on attacks.

It's basically an expensive and stylish replacement for a ranged cantrip.

[C_bastion]

I theory crafted a pretty cool combo with a tyrant champion FA. They've already got great defenses, so that makes your swarm very tough. If they attack you, they have to take damage or go prone, if they attack the swarm with a strike, they do reduced physical damage which is a loss.

Also if they're prone and they get immobilized by webbing, they're stuck now!

And while it is really slow, you could almost lean into that and once you get Carried With The Swarm you can double down on ac with a fortress shield and let them move you.

It's also really cool if you can pick up the swarm domain for flavor, really makes you the king of swarms.

[Sanityfaerie]

It may be helpful to think of the combination of (sustain+swarm attack) as being roughly equivalent to a cantrip. You're doing something vaguely resembling cantrip damage, and you're taking two actions to do it. Obviously there are a lot of ways in which the details are different, both for and against, but it might be a useful place to start from, mentally, for figuring out the value proposition.

[PossibleCabbage]

I am curious if the Animist still has the "Sustain+Move" activity for one action available at very low levels (it was 2 in the playtest.)

Since hypothetically you could have a loop of "sustain vessel spell + sustain swarm + attack with swarm" combined with two moves for yourself once you have both on the field.

[simpetar]

Sanityfaerie wrote:

It may be helpful to think of the combination of (sustain+swarm attack) as being roughly equivalent to a cantrip. You're doing something vaguely resembling cantrip damage, and you're taking two actions to do it. Obviously there are a lot of ways in which the details are different, both for and against, but it might be a useful place to start from, mentally, for figuring out the value proposition.

Thank you, that sums up really nicely where my frustration came from. I really do want to like it, the concept is cool, and want to make it work.

When you have to resort to spamming cantrips, you are usually desperately out of resources and scraping the bottom of the barrel. But even then you can choose to take a pause and do something else. Not so much with swarm, you cannot take a "round off", else the swarm will dissipate: 3 action abilities are completely off limits, and if you use a 2 action ability, the remaining action is wasted more often than not. You will be left with 1 action abilities. While those can be strong and impactful (some focus spells, battle medicine, heck even the most basic strike), are rarely as interesting as the other options.

In simpler words: 2 action cantrip (that you can cast whenever you feel like it) is different from 1 action useful swarm attack + 1 mandatory action you cannot forego, lest you loose it.

[Ravingdork]

Yeah, I hope they errata it to make it a little more action friendly.

[Sanityfaerie]

simpetar wrote:

Sanityfaerie wrote:

It may be helpful to think of the combination of (sustain+swarm attack) as being roughly equivalent to a cantrip. You're doing something vaguely resembling cantrip damage, and you're taking two actions to do it. Obviously there are a lot of ways in which the details are different, both for and against, but it might be a useful place to start from, mentally, for figuring out the value proposition.

Thank you, that sums up really nicely where my frustration came from. I really do want to like it, the concept is cool, and want to make it work.

When you have to resort to spamming cantrips, you are usually desperately out of resources and scraping the bottom of the barrel. But even then you can choose to take a pause and do something else. Not so much with swarm, you cannot take a "round off", else the swarm will dissipate: 3 action abilities are completely off limits, and if you use a 2 action ability, the remaining action is wasted more often than not. You will be left with 1 action abilities. While those can be strong and impactful (some focus spells, battle medicine, heck even the most basic strike), are rarely as interesting as the other options.

In simpler words: 2 action cantrip (that you can cast whenever you feel like it) is different from 1 action useful swarm attack + 1 mandatory action you cannot forego, lest you loose it.

This is fair... but you're also not seeing the upsides. Like...

- The damage is a little low (usually on a cantrip you'd get another d4), but party-friendly 2x2 is pretty nice as a targeting area for a cantrip goes.
- For a lot of martials (the target audience for this thing) one-action abilities are their bread and butter. Sure, they may have two-action abilities (if they buy them with feats), but their primary limitation of that variety is MAP, rather than the hard limit of only one two-action ability per turn.
- It scales without further investment, off of a stat you already care about. Class DC rises naturally by itself. If you're nonspell martial, Caster DCs don't. So it's a way to get those benefits (ie, being able to target multiple defenses, being able to spend two actions on a cantrip-equivalent followed by a MAPless strike) with a decent DC, and without investing heavily in a caster archetype and an otherwise potentially low-value stat.
- It is possible to sustain and then have your swarm attack twice. Cantrips won't offer things like that.
- If you are willing to spend more feats, there are upgrades as you go. You can have that sustain also move you. You can increase the size of the thing. You can expand the list of defenses it can attack and the kinds of debuffs it can cause. There are options. Cantrips don't generally get that.

Now... is it rich ground for exploitation? Not really. It's pretty niche. It's solidly viable in its niche, if you use it for what it's for, but even then it's not anything like a must-have... and the further you stray from the niche, the weaker it gets. On the other hand, this is literally the archetype about having a swarm of creatures living inside your body. It really shouldn't be so awesome that people are trying to come up with justifications for fitting it into their backstories.

Basically, if you really want to play a swarmkeeper, it's possible to make an entirely viable character who invests in swarmkeeper, isn't wrong to do so, and isn't making any clearly incorrect build choices anywhere else. It's not Oozemorph, is what I'm saying. At the same time, if you want to say "Aha! This will be my path to ultimate power!" then no. No it will not. If you have a random character, and three or four unassigned feats in your planned build, and you're asking "Is swarmkeeper right for me?" then... maybe. Maybe, but probably not.

[WWHsmackdown]

Sanityfaerie wrote:

simpetar wrote:

Sanityfaerie wrote:

It may be helpful to think of the combination of (sustain+swarm attack) as being roughly equivalent to a cantrip. You're doing something vaguely resembling cantrip damage, and you're taking two actions to do it. Obviously there are a lot of ways in which the details are different, both for and against, but it might be a useful place to start from, mentally, for figuring out the value proposition.

Thank you, that sums up really nicely where my frustration came from. I really do want to like it, the concept is cool, and want to make it work.

When you have to resort to spamming cantrips, you are usually desperately out of resources and scraping the bottom of the barrel. But even then you can choose to take a pause and do something else. Not so much with swarm, you cannot take a "round off", else the swarm will dissipate: 3 action abilities are completely off limits, and if you use a 2 action ability, the remaining action is wasted more often than not. You will be left with 1 action abilities. While those can be strong and impactful (some focus spells, battle medicine, heck even the most basic strike), are rarely as interesting as the other options.

In simpler words: 2 action cantrip (that you can cast whenever you feel like it) is different from 1 action useful swarm attack + 1 mandatory action you cannot forego, lest you loose it.

This is fair... but you're also not seeing the upsides. Like...

- The damage is a little low (usually on a cantrip you'd get another d4), but party-friendly 2x2 is pretty nice as a targeting area for a cantrip goes.
- For a lot of martials (the target audience for this thing) one-action abilities are their bread and butter. Sure, they may have two-action abilities (if they buy them with feats), but their primary limitation of that variety is MAP, rather than the hard limit of only one two-action ability per turn.
- It scales without further investment, off of a stat you already care about. Class...

I like this take the best. I'm looking at making a mosquito witch and this honestly slots in perfectly well.

[simpetar]

Sanityfaerie wrote:

simpetar wrote:

Sanityfaerie wrote:

It may be helpful to think of the combination of (sustain+swarm attack) as being roughly equivalent to a cantrip. You're doing something vaguely resembling cantrip damage, and you're taking two actions to do it. Obviously there are a lot of ways in which the details are different, both for and against, but it might be a useful place to start from, mentally, for figuring out the value proposition.

Thank you, that sums up really nicely where my frustration came from. I really do want to like it, the concept is cool, and want to make it work.

When you have to resort to spamming cantrips, you are usually desperately out of resources and scraping the bottom of the barrel. But even then you can choose to take a pause and do something else. Not so much with swarm, you cannot take a "round off", else the swarm will dissipate: 3 action abilities are completely off limits, and if you use a 2 action ability, the remaining action is wasted more often than not. You will be left with 1 action abilities. While those can be strong and impactful (some focus spells, battle medicine, heck even the most basic strike), are rarely as interesting as the other options.

In simpler words: 2 action cantrip (that you can cast whenever you feel like it) is different from 1 action useful swarm attack + 1 mandatory action you cannot forego, lest you loose it.

This is fair... but you're also not seeing the upsides. Like...

- The damage is a little low (usually on a cantrip you'd get another d4), but party-friendly 2x2 is pretty nice as a targeting area for a cantrip goes.
- For a lot of martials (the target audience for this thing) one-action abilities are their bread and butter. Sure, they may have two-action abilities (if they buy them with feats), but their primary limitation of that variety is MAP, rather than the hard limit of only one two-action ability per turn.
- It scales without further investment, off of a stat you already care about. Class...

Thank you, those are all great points, haven't thought of it that way.

[Rexif]

It almost reads as if a swarmkeeper's swarm was meant to act with the same rules as an animal companion.

For example, in the dedication feat: "if an ability allows you to have more than one animal companion (such as the beastmaster archetype), you can count your swarm as one", as in the swarm counts as an animal companion (I know it's most likely just specifying you can still take additional companions if you have the option for it).

Also, in the weaver's web feat: "When your swarm ends its turn, it fills all surfaces in its space with sticky webs that last for 1 minute. The webs are difficult terrain", suggesting the swarm should have its own turn in addition to the player.

If that were the case, sustaining the swarm would be similar to commanding the animal companion and your swarm would be able to use its own 2 actions for an additional move, one of the other optional feats, or an attack, like an animal companion. It may not be RAW, but that's probably how I would end up ruling it if any of my players wanted to take up the archetype.

[Squiggit]

Sanityfaerie really highlights one of my least favorite things about PF2 archetype design. The whole sense that an archetype being good or evocative is actually an undesirably outcome. You can begrudgingly extract value from it if it's really what you want, but the game is going to make you fight hard just to be kind of okay.
The whole mentality of "if you really want I guess you can make an okay character" like discouraging players is actually part of the design goal now. It's kind of sad.

[HeHateMe]

Swarmkeeper is a bad archetype mechanically, like most archetypes are. There's no getting around that. It can be situationally useful but it really can't be a character's "main thing".

The best case scenario is combining Swarmkeeper with a Flurry Ranger or Monk (or other class with action compression) and fighting enemies that stand there and trade blows with you. If enemies are mobile, they'll usually be able to outrun the swarm. In other words, usually it will suck.

[shroudb]

HeHateMe wrote:

Swarmkeeper is a bad archetype mechanically, like most archetypes are. There's no getting around that. It can be situationally useful but it really can't be a character's "main thing".

The best case scenario is combining Swarmkeeper with a Flurry Ranger or Monk (or other class with action compression) and fighting enemies that stand there and trade blows with you. If enemies are mobile, they'll usually be able to outrun the swarm. In other words, usually it will suck.

i thought so as well in the beginning, but Swarm attacks having Flourish really puts a dent into that since almost all (all?) action compression abilities also have Flourish.

[The Raven Black]

Is there any archetype out there that people would count as overpowered ?

[shroudb]

The Raven Black wrote:

Is there any archetype out there that people would count as overpowered ?

OVERpowered? I don't think so.

But equal or slightly stronger than quite a lot class feats, several imo.

[Unicore]

I am confused, I don’t have howl of the wild yet, so maybe I am missing how the ability works, but if an enemy is spending an action moving away from your swarm, especially if they would not otherwise move, then a one for one action trade feels like a fine trade off mechanically, even if that means doing no additional damage to them. It seems like the mistake might be trying the swarm be both a weapon and a control option every round, without expecting that to take at least 2 actions? Like if you can sustain the swarm to prevent enemies from moving where they want to go, then it doesn’t really matter if the swarm does any damage that round, right?

[Ravingdork]

Unicore wrote:

I am confused, I don’t have howl of the wild yet, so maybe I am missing how the ability works, but if an enemy is spending an action moving away from your swarm, especially if they would not otherwise move, then a one for one action trade feels like a fine trade off mechanically, even if that means doing no additional damage to them. It seems like the mistake might be trying the swarm be both a weapon and a control option every round, without expecting that to take at least 2 actions? Like if you can sustain the swarm to prevent enemies from moving where they want to go, then it doesn’t really matter if the swarm does any damage that round, right?

The thought had occurred to me, but it still feels bad when there are a plethora of other abilities in the game that have one or more of the following: they can do it better, with less restrictions, that don't lock in your actions, lock you out of other actions, and don't have a cool down timer.

[The Raven Black]

shroudb wrote:

The Raven Black wrote:

Is there any archetype out there that people would count as overpowered ?

OVERpowered? I don't think so.

But equal or slightly stronger than quite a lot class feats, several imo.

Which ones would be slightly stronger then ?

[PossibleCabbage]

Medic, Marshal and Sentinel are probably the strongest archetypes. But things like Archer and Dual-Weapon Warrior are pretty strong on a relevant character.

[pH unbalanced]

I've been extremely happy with what Shadowdancer brings to the table. Greater Darkvision + Rank 4 Darness is strong. But it's a higher level archetype, and you have to build towards it.

[Ravingdork]

I hear told that the multiclass archetypes are usually pretty powerful compared to other archetypes.

[shroudb]

The Raven Black wrote:

shroudb wrote:

The Raven Black wrote:

Is there any archetype out there that people would count as overpowered ?

OVERpowered? I don't think so.

But equal or slightly stronger than quite a lot class feats, several imo.

Which ones would be slightly stronger then ?

Apart from the already mentioned medics, marshals and sentinels, you have stuff like beast master, or acrobat giving you up to legendary in a skill with a single class feat, Blessed one giving you one of the strongest focus spells as a level 2 feat (instead of something like domain initiate as a level 1 feat), archer/martial artist/mauler/dual weapon for their respective playstyles when not covered by your class, Rogue multiclass, bastion, halcyon, heaven seeker, captivator, and etc

almost all of those, plus others, give unique and strong things, that at some levels are stronger than equivalent level class feats, or stuff that's outright outside of your base class chassis to round it up.

[Sanityfaerie]

So... looking at the ideal character for a swarmkeeper...

Type 1: backup weapon
A - Not able to easily attack more than one defense. By extension, is a noncaster class, and not a kineticist.
B - Not able to easily attack more than one for at a time. See above.
C - Able to soak some damage and be okay with that. Not afraid of the front lines. Seeing a pattern?
D - Not particularly strapped for feats, and also not necessarily intent on taking any other archetypes

This is the one that takes the dedication and nothing else. For the cost of two feats, they get an answer to situations that they otherwise might not have had an answer to. sustain/bite-and-sting/bite-and-sting will let them do decent (though not amazing) damage against... well, anyone who's ridiculously hard to hit in melee. It does piercing damage, too, so you probably have your primary as slashing or blunt. You don't use it often, but it comes in handy from time to time in weird niche cases, and for that, it's worth the cost of a single level 2 class feat.

Type 2: default rotation:
A - as A, above
B - as B, above
C - as C, above
D - able to shake a few feats loose from their class here and there
E - able to apply a fairly high percentage of their own effectiveness with only an action per turn (if that). So, for example, this isn't going to be someone with a shield that they intend to raise unless they have a stance that raises it for them. It's not going to be good for anyone who has any two action activities that they really care about. It's going to be more useful for people who make their reactions do a lot of work, or who have always-on auras, and things of like nature.

...and F is for flourishes, which are complicated. If you somehow have a single action activity that winds up being worth much of your value per turn all by itself, that works really well with swarmkeeper - like, say, a monk with Flurry of Blows. Staying within reach (or range) is going to be a bit of a trick, of course, but there are answers there. The issue is that those sorts of action are almost by definition going to all be flourishes... and every attack the swarm has that is not the core bite-and-sting is *also* a flourish.

So you have to figure out your build. Are you going to go for flourishes off your human body, or off of your swarm. It doesn't make a lot of sense to invest a lot in both.

So... what have we got?

- Inventors have non-AC attacks built right in.

- Rangers, thaums, and gunslingers all have action taxes that make them largely nonviable.

- Barbarians just like their standard attacks way too much. They've sacrificed defenses to get their attacks that good. Anything that isn't "smash for massive damage" is going to be a hard sell.

- Fighters are in some ways similar. They're just better at hitting people than anyone else is. Then you add on a mild fondness for two-action activities, the availability of Agile Grace, the availability of press actions... I'm not saying that it can't be done, but it doesn't seem like a particularly *strong* play.

- Rogue is... not amazing for this. They're not unworkable. Distracting Bites is a thing, and might be especially nice for a ranged rogue. They get a bunch of noncombat utility in their skills. At the same time, they don't get a lot out of their reactions, and, really, they often prefer to attack more than once.

- Monks are also not great for this. On paper, they'd be almost ideal for a build that wasn't taking the swarm flourishes... but they actually *do* have easy access to an autoscaling spell DC, and it's not like wisdom is a bad stat to keep up. If you decide you don't care about that, then I'd suggest seriously considering a Monastic Archer Stance build.

- Swashbucklers are wacky. In particular... finishers aren't flourish. So... if you somehow can come up with a way to consistently reacquire panache without spending actions, then suddenly they're amazing for it. Now, Panache Paragon is obviously ideal... and equally obviously only available at level 20. So... maybe not so much. Marshal has Topple Foe at level 10, which can let you take a trip as a reaction. There are various ways to gain or maintain panache when you reduce someone to 0 hp, you can start the fight with panache by giving up your place in line with After You, if you have a friendly Commander they can almost certainly hook you up... there are options. There just aren't a lot of them, or easy to find. Still, if you like the idea of seriously flexing your underutilized CharOp skills and building a "that really shouldn't work but it kind of does" character, then making a swashbuckler swarmkeeper who's regularly pulling off turns where they get to both (Bite and Sting) and get a finisher... well, that might be something fun to work out.

- Champions are potentially interesting. Take a paladin with a polearm, don't take a shield, and get stuck in. Your reactions have always been the thing that makes you special, so you might as well lean into that, and you never really had any flourishes to begin with. Only real issue is that low-level paladins with no shield seem to fall over a lot, and that means that you lose your swarm until next fight. So... maybe try to build them partway between type 1 and type 2. Build a pretty standard polearm paladin, leave some of your feats empty (not hard if you're skipping shield) and fill them in with swarmkeeper. Pull it out when it seems worthwhile and don't when it doesn't. Maybe expect to issue forth about half the time? Seems pretty solidly viable.

...or they *would* be potentially interesting except that they *also* already get scaling spell DC. So... *just* missed it.

- Investigators are surprisingly solid. Under adverse conditions, they have a particularly bad case of action tax, but if you can get free action Devise a Strategem off of pursuing a lead, then it suddenly starts looking very shiny indeed. Suspect of Opportunity makes this that much better... and there are *lots* of investigator feats for making that one attack per round really, really count, and the investigator also pours a lot of their build resources into out-of-combat stuff. Even better, on those rounds where your initial roll is terrible... you can just bite and sting a second time. Works best with a ranged weapon that doesn't require reload. So, it's a tricksy build, and requires a bit of finessing, but should be quite solid... and if you go all-in, you can largely let your dex and strength languish at whatever level you need for your armor, because you'll never be making undevised attacks anyway.

- Alchemists are a little finicky, but quite doable. For obvious reasons, the swarm really doesn't do well with any kind of quick alchemy, but if you're willing to leave that to one side, then there's some real possibilities here. In particular, it gives a bomber alch something worthwhile to do when *not* slinging bombs. Take quick bomber, load up the bomb bag as appropriate at the beginning of the day, and then only sling one bomb per turn. When the fight doesn't call for more bombs for whatever reason, you can just bite twice. Alchemists have often had problems figuring out what to do with themselves when not chucking bombs, and this is a pretty solid answer. Only trick is that you're going to need to be sure to pack along resistance for any bomb splashes you're likely to field so you don't chip damage yourself. Other than that? It's a pretty solid combo.

Unless I've missed on, that's the available set of noncaster matials.

So... in conclusion?

- Investigators: Works remarkably well with the right kind of build... if you can manage to have pursued leads often enough to make it pay off. Pretty big if, but potentially a very solid combo if you do.
- Alchemists: If you want a bomber, and don't like quick alchemy? There are some very real possibilities here.
- Swashbuckler: If you want to seriously flex your CharOp skills building something that the devs never intended? Here's an opportunity to do just that. Good luck. Otherwise... not a particularly strong contender.
- Champions/Monks: Well, if for whatever reason you'd rather have a pet swarm than a cantrip, or you strongly prefer not to push your wisdom or charisma... then I guess it could be cool? There's definitely something to work with here.

Everything else: not top-tier. Don't let that discourage you if you've got an idea that you love. "An idea that you love" is well worth spending a few class feats nonoptimally for, and it's not like it'll be worthless. It's just not squeezing as much as you possibly can out of the thing.

[QuidEst]

Hmm. With Guardian being melee primarily, having a big pool of HP, and getting delayed weapon proficiency... it might actually mesh well post-release.

[shroudb]

With Summoner it also is probably ok, it's not unusual for Summoners to use a lot of cantrips for their own actions, and Swarm is stronger than a cantrip when you can use the Flourish on them.

[Alchemic_Genius]

One thing to keep in mind is that the feat that lets you move with the swarm basically turns sustaining it into an action thats locked into moving rather than a tax, and that theres another feat that gives every ally and yourself lesser cover inside the swarm, which also turns it into functionally an AoE Parry.

As others have stated above, the damage of 2 actions is roughly analogous to a cantrip, but the additional upgrade feats also add on save targeting and/or status conditions or area control effects. Two actions to fling out nearly garanteed damage and another to do a MAPless strike or one action activity isn't the worst way to spend your turn, especially since you aren't spending resources to do it, and you are also supporting your team in the process.

[RPG-Geek]

My issue with archetypes like this are that they don't really work to enable new builds. They're afterthoughts that very narrowly fit with some specific builds. If you want to play a thematic build, like a Swarmkeeper Druid, that's not on that narrow band you are actively hurting yourself.

They also close the door to a better version, like a new class or class archetype that might be a better chance to bring that concept to life.

[Sanityfaerie]

RPG-Geek wrote:

My issue with archetypes like this are that they don't really work to enable new builds. They're afterthoughts that very narrowly fit with some specific builds. If you want to play a thematic build, like a Swarmkeeper Druid, that's not on that narrow band you are actively hurting yourself.

They also close the door to a better version, like a new class or class archetype that might be a better chance to bring that concept to life.

If they tried to "enable new builds" at the level you seem to want every time they brought out a new archetype, they'd rapidly break the power ceiling... and PF2 derives *real value* from its power ceiling.

If you want to play a swarmkeeper druid, and you want it to be cooler than this... then talk with your GM. Figure out what it would take to make it work for you, and see if they're willing to houserule that. Realistically, 3.x GMs had to houserule nerf and/or forbid things all the time. Having a game where some of the houserules might go the other way is honestly kind of refreshing.

...and if your GM is entirely unwilling to houserule, then... well, it's not like dropping a feat or three as a druid is going to break your build, and it's not like it'll never be useful. You can afford a bit of inefficiency, if that's the character you really want to play.

Summoner is... an interesting one. On the one side, they already do have cantrip access, which takes some of the bloom off of that rose. On the other side, while you won't get much use out of the flourish swarm actions, the fact that you can move, bite-and-sting twice, and still get that MAPless strike or maneuver in is potentially pretty shiny. There's some pretty cool thematic possibilities there, too. Swarm/Plant? Swarm/Demon? Swarm/Undead?

[The Ronyon]

The limited range, speed and damage types all conspire to make this Dedication even more niche and less interesting.

I would love to send a swarm of bugs to search a castle ,to have a swarm of ravens that could keep up with an Awakened Wolf,or a swarm of Fireflys that could actually start a fire.

Looking at Bonded Animal , I think it could work to aquire a swarm.
Swarm mind only negates mental effects, and Bonded Animal doesn't have that trait.

Concerning the feat that allows the swarm grant lesser Cover,the swarm is already Large sized,so it should grant normal Cover when positioned in front of (medium, small and tiny) character's.
Charging a feat to get lesser cover while sharing a space with the swarm seems really stingy.

[Ravingdork]

The Ronyon wrote:

The limited range, speed and damage types all conspire to make this Dedication even more niche and less interesting.

I would love to send a swarm of bugs to search a castle ,to have a swarm of ravens that could keep up with an Awakened Wolf,or a swarm of Fireflys that could actually start a fire.

There are ways of doing some of those things within the existing rules. For example, I took Thorough Search with my character above so as to represent Mother using her brood to aid in searching. They can get their little eyes into places she can't fit her big bulk, then relay their findings back to her.

[pH unbalanced]

Ravingdork wrote:

The Ronyon wrote:

The limited range, speed and damage types all conspire to make this Dedication even more niche and less interesting.

I would love to send a swarm of bugs to search a castle ,to have a swarm of ravens that could keep up with an Awakened Wolf,or a swarm of Fireflys that could actually start a fire.

There are ways of doing some of those things within the existing rules. For example, I took Thorough Search with my character above so as to represent Mother using her brood to aid in searching. They can get their little eyes into places she can't fit her big bulk, then relay their findings back to her.

There is also a Swarm domain. Swarmsense is a rank 1 focus spell. (Though it is sound only until higher ranks.)

[HeHateMe]

QuidEst wrote:

Hmm. With Guardian being melee primarily, having a big pool of HP, and getting delayed weapon proficiency... it might actually mesh well post-release.

Assuming the Guardian's delayed weapon proficiency stays unchanged, you may be right: Guardian might be the perfect class for this archetype.

[Ryangwy]

Sanityfaerie wrote:

Summoner is... an interesting one. On the one side, they already do have cantrip access, which takes some of the bloom off of that rose. On the other side, while you won't get much use out of the flourish swarm actions, the fact that you can move, bite-and-sting twice, and still get that MAPless strike or maneuver in is potentially pretty shiny. There's some pretty cool thematic possibilities there, too. Swarm/Plant? Swarm/Demon? Swarm/Undead?

Summoner cantrips have a big weakness actually! Because of how Act Together works, only one of you or the Eidolon gets to make a two action actions, and several Eidolons get very pretty 2 action actions. The one in my SoT game often goes boost eidolon -> beast charge -> oh no what do I do with that last action eh attack again maybe and having a 2 action attack that's split would do a lot to help.

[Arcaian]

RPG-Geek wrote:

My issue with archetypes like this are that they don't really work to enable new builds. They're afterthoughts that very narrowly fit with some specific builds. If you want to play a thematic build, like a Swarmkeeper Druid, that's not on that narrow band you are actively hurting yourself.

They also close the door to a better version, like a new class or class archetype that might be a better chance to bring that concept to life.

I don't think they really close the door on a better version - for instance, the Marshal archetype is a well-received one, and despite that they're still printing the Commander class, which has a great deal of thematic overlap between the two. Sentinel as an archetype overlaps with Guardian. Blessed One thematically overlaps with Exemplar. We have plenty of examples of Paizo releasing a more fleshed-out version of a theme explored previously in an archetype.

I also do think that archetypes enable builds - but they're very rarely something that you exclusively build around; your Class, by definition of how they work in PF2, controls what sort of options will be your most effective. You can't take an archetype that makes a Fighter not want to Strike at least once a turn, but you can take an archetype that provides alternative options for your remaining actions, or options for when your main choice isn't working (ranged options, for example), or out-of-combat options. Herbalist, for example, absolutely enables a different sort of Fighter build to exist - but it's not going to fundamentally change the way you play. That choice is reserved for classes, and by extension also class archetypes.

[Easl]

Sanityfaerie wrote:

RPG-Geek wrote:

My issue with archetypes like this are that they don't really work to enable new builds. They're afterthoughts that very narrowly fit with some specific builds. If you want to play a thematic build, like a Swarmkeeper Druid, that's not on that narrow band you are actively hurting yourself.

They also close the door to a better version, like a new class or class archetype that might be a better chance to bring that concept to life.

If they tried to "enable new builds" at the level you seem to want every time they brought out a new archetype, they'd rapidly break the power ceiling... and PF2 derives *real value* from its power ceiling.

Yes. At a fundamental level this is a debate over design philosophy: what should archetypes do? Should they force multiply class abilities, creating combos much more powerful than base class builds? Should they supplant class abilities, creating different but equally strong ways to play? Or should they support class abilities, meaning the PC functions basically the same way but with a few extra bells and whistles? Paizo's philosophy is clearly type 3. Types 1 and 2 are more 5e/PF1E. We hear RPG-Geek's comment a lot (and I'll admit I'm somewhat guilty of pushing for type 2 on occasion). There are pros and cons to each approach, but I think at this point the player base needs to accept that Paizo is going to stick with their current Type 3 design philosophy for all future archetypes. They don't want the designed power creep that comes with 1 or unintentional-but-difficult-to-avoid power creep/game balance difficulties that come with type 2. So if that's the sort of archetype you're looking for, your best bet is Pathfinder Infinite publications or homebrew modification of official material to buff up existing archetypes. Because if someone is waiting for the publication of an archetype which enables a "completely new" build i.e. one that no longer uses the core class abilities as their bread and butter, I think it's fairly safe to say that they are going to be waiting until 3E.

Paizo is not trying to give you that in an archetype and falling disappointingly short; they are simply not trying to give you that.

Now, to end on a high note, Paizo is giving the player base new ways to play...through new classes. We have guardian, commander, animist, and exemplar all coming out in the next year. Those are where players can look for new official content that gives them new ways to play. Though I could totally get into a thread which asks "which archetypes are so cool and different that they deserve to be 'graduated' to full class status?" Swarmkeeper would be a contender for that.

[The Ronyon]

As a long time optimizer I find the power constraints refreshing.
What I dislike is breadth restrictions.
If I'm going sacrifice class feats for a swarm, I want a swarm, and this doesnt scratch that itch.

As for getting that effect with other feats, classes features, etc,a PC with Animal Empathy could use feats like Glad Hand,Group Impression,Hobnobber,Eyes of the City, Entourage and Shameless Request on animals.
None of these will work on an animal with the Swarm Mind Ability.
They should work on a potintially unlimited number of individual animals.
A Charism caster with the Primal list could really run with this.
There is no other ability quite like Animal Empathy,but some come close.

[Squiggit]

Easl wrote:

Paizo is not trying to give you that in an archetype and falling disappointingly short; they are simply not trying to give you that.

I feel like this take is trying too hard to be big picture and missing the details. I've heard of missing the forest for the trees, but can you miss the trees for the forest too?

Yes, there are high minded design ideas at play, but the issue with Swarmkeeper isn't some fundamental misunderstanding of Paizo's design philosophy.

It's that it's just not very good. The things the archetype does are relatively straight forward, it just does them poorly.

The underlying design goals don't really matter to that point. It's not like Paizo refuses to print good archetypes on principle, because good archetypes exist.

... The discussion about 'types' of design also feels somewhat objectionable because Paizo are the ones who made Swarmkeeper the way they did.

[Sanityfaerie]

Squiggit wrote:

It's that it's just not very good. The things the archetype does are relatively straight forward, it just does them poorly.

Does it, though? I mean, we've been talking about just that. Personally, my conclusion is "niche, but viable" and I think I've laid it out pretty comprehensively. We've had testimonials from people who played the thing who clearly found it viable. Are you arguing that an archetype about having a swarm that infests you should be something other than niche?

Alternately, I may be misunderstanding what you're saying. What do you mean when you say that it does them poorly?

[OceanshieldwolPF 2.5]

Sanityfaerie wrote:

Are you arguing that an archetype about having a swarm that infests you should be something other than niche?

Does this mean you think it is a niche thematic concept or a niche mechanical option? I mean, having magic (or even divine-rain) blood or prehensile hair or casting arcane (or divine or occult or primal) spells or healing everyone in a burst are all pretty out there conceptually, no more or less than body-infesting swarms, and those aren’t even archetypes. Or am I missing something?

[Easl]

OceanshieldwolPF 2.5 wrote:

Or am I missing something?

Maybe this: a L2 spellcasting archetype dedication typically gives access to 2 cantrips which use an attribute/proficiency combo inferior to your class attack. So when people say this is like a cantrip with some extra bells and whistles, that seems exactly on par. No, it's not going to be your main attack (which I think is what many people are thinking when they say "enable new concept"). Archetype dedication feats are never really supposed to be able to replace your main attack (IMO).

While upthread there's a list of great archetypes, I think it would be a mistake to treat those as some 'new normal' and assume they are the standard Paizo will meet with new remaster archetypes. Rather, I think they will stay exceptional and new remaster archetypes will remain on par with more typical 'premaster' archetypes. I could be wrong though. PC2 should have a bunch of them, so that may be when we get a real good feel for how Paizo sees archetypes going in the future. But, judging by PC1, they aren't looking make them stronger than they were.

[Sanityfaerie]

OceanshieldwolPF 2.5 wrote:

Sanityfaerie wrote:

Are you arguing that an archetype about having a swarm that infests you should be something other than niche?

Does this mean you think it is a niche thematic concept or a niche mechanical option? I mean, having magic (or even divine-rain) blood or prehensile hair or casting arcane (or divine or occult or primal) spells or healing everyone in a burst are all pretty out there conceptually, no more or less than body-infesting swarms, and those aren’t even archetypes. Or am I missing something?

I think it's a niche thematic concept. I think for the genre we're dealing with, "casting spells" and "magical blood" are not niche thematic concepts. Divine-rain blood is a bit weird, but it's also generally going to be your Main Thing (ie, your class), and that class isn't exactly Common.

...and, in some ways, I feel like thematics and mechanics should follow one another. Specifically, if some mechanical option is too good, then it starts being something that a lot of people take because it's a really good mechanical option. You get class guides that encourage you to consider it, and a lot of meta built around exploiting it properly. Having a niche thematic option become a core strategic option means that it doesn't matter if it's supposed to be rare or unusual, you're going to start seeing it all over the place. That takes us to the world where 20% of the Pathfinder Society is infested with friendly swarms (or whatever) when thematically it's supposed to be this freaky thing that makes people look at you funny and be mildly horrified by the implications.

[Ravingdork]

I agree that the Dedication feat is pretty balanced, though I do wish the later feats, like the one that increases the swarms speed, gave better benefits.

20 feet is still painfully slow, with almost every enemy still capable of outrunning it.

Or Weaver's Web having no real effect on people who move through the area unless they end their turn in it. It would have been nice if it hit them upon entering as well as once per turn.

All in all, most of the options are rather "meh."

[PossibleCabbage]

The comedy premise of the merfolk swarmkeeper who rides their swarm around on land because 20' is significantly faster than they can normally move is pretty great though.

I am curious why spending one action to sustain the swarm doesn't give you 2 actions worth of stuff (like an animal companion) though.

[BotBrain]

Yeah I agree. Swarmkeeper is one of those archtypes that feels like its almost trying to be your class in a way. Since it was added to AoN i've been fiddling around and I can't find a satisfying class combo for it. Not on a narrative level, druid and ranger obviously come to mind, but on a mechanical level it's hard to find a class that wants to use what ends up being a lot of actions to do what isn't that much.

If Paizo ever want to throw some buffs I think upping the damage and/or speed might suffice because at present I really don't see why I'd want to go through the effort of manifesting and moving a swarm when I can just cast a cantrip for a similar effect.

I'm willing to admit I'm missing something, and I hope so, because this is a great concept I want to pull off one day.

[Ravingdork]

I've been trying to get a rogue swarmkeeper build to work in preparation for PFS play (still saving up the AcP for it, so I just keep tweaking the idea in the meantime). Not sure how well it will do yet.

Hoping to take advantage of its webs along with nets and bolas for effective battlefield control I guess.

Would have taken Distracting Bites too, but I can never seem to find justification for it over Gang Up.