| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, one of the secrets of PF2 is that no one in the party needs to exclusively do anything, and being able to effectively switch roles quickly is a huge advantage.
Our party is 2 Kineticists, an alchemist and a wizard. None of us are particularly squishy and none of us are the party anything. Everyone can AoE. Everyone can do single target damage. Everyone can take a couple of nasty hits and we spread damage mitigation and healing around pretty effectively.
Nobody needing to go be the tank means the first round we can stay back and do damage from range, so the enemy wastes rounds coming to us. If they get the jump on us and move first then maybe we spend round one setting up defenses if necessary, or hitting them with a slow spell or some other debuff to limit their offense for the next round or two. We will drop 90+ gold on consumables in a difficult severe or extreme encounter, but at level 7 (we just hit level 7, we leveled up, but haven’t got to rest so no rank 4 spells yet, and we probably won’t get to rest until we’ve defeated a couple more serious threats, luckily I had about 12 combat spell scrolls when we entered the dungeon) that is only like a third of that specific encounter’s expected loot drop. We try to drag encounters together often with this party because our AoE output is very effective, as is our ability to debuff. There have maybe been two Boss-like fights since we started the campaign where the main threat enemy didn’t spend half the fight or more with -2 status penalties and slowed, because we throw the sink (and stink) at our enemies.
So, one of the secrets of PF2 is that no one in the party needs to exclusively do anything, and being able to effectively switch roles quickly is a huge advantage.
Our party is 2 Kineticists, an alchemist and a wizard. None of us are particularly squishy and none of us are the party anything. Everyone can AoE. Everyone can do single target damage. Everyone can take a couple of nasty hits and we spread damage mitigation and healing around pretty effectively.
Nobody needing to go be the tank means the first round we can stay back and do damage from range, so the enemy wastes rounds coming to us. If they get the jump on us and move first then maybe we spend round one setting up defenses if necessary, or hitting them with a slow spell or some other debuff to limit their offense for the next round or two. We will drop 90+ gold on consumables in a difficult severe or extreme encounter, but at level 7 (we just hit level 7, we leveled up, but haven’t got to rest so no rank 4 spells yet, and we probably won’t get to rest until we’ve defeated a couple more serious threats, luckily I had about 12 combat spell scrolls when we entered the dungeon) that is only like a third of that specific encounter’s expected loot drop. We try to drag encounters together often with this party because our AoE output is very effective, as is our ability to debuff. There have maybe been two Boss-like fights since we started the campaign where the main threat enemy didn’t spend half the fight or more with -2 status penalties and slowed, because we throw the sink (and stink) at our enemies.
Depends on the table, but that group would die in campaigns I run.
Sure, a DM can make a campaign in PF2 where that group survives. Not my cup of tea, but it seems to fit what you like to do.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You might be surprised Derivin. We actively collapse encounters on to ourselves all the time, push way past expected resting points because narratively it doesn’t make sense and play very well together with delaying and combining turns to decimate enemies. You really don’t have to have a tank, or even a single “regular martial”in PF2 to be effective.
They are nice though.
This is a wizard advice thread. No wizard is going to have the STR to completely dump Dex for heavy armor. At the same time, I’ve had many wizards start with a 12 or 14 dex and be fine.You don't need the Strength to wear a heavy armor. I have some characters who just take the penalties.
Normally wizards choose to have some Dexterity, but I agree it is not absolutely required. Walk slowly but ride a horse or teleport when you need to. Strength is just a nice to have with heavy armour. It is not that unreasonable for a wizard to decide they want to invest in Charisma and not have Strength. You always have at least a 5ft speed.
There is a mermaid heavy armour build running around in the back of my mind...Dumping Dex is always a risky proposition. Mighty Bulwark only comes online at level 10. Which really does leave you open to things like trip.
4 casters would have a lot of work to do to cover saves, but a mix of irregular/hybrid classes keeps things pretty well covered.
You might be surprised Derivin. We actively collapse encounters on to ourselves all the time, push way past expected resting points because narratively it doesn’t make sense and play very well together with delaying and combining turns to decimate enemies. You really don’t have to have a tank, or even a single “regular martial”in PF2 to be effective.
We make the parties the way we make them because 10 hit point armored classes are required to survive the campaigns I run. I optimize enemies like I optimize PCs and I play very much with the idea the PCs can die and their enemies want to kill them.
That group composition lacks the ability to heal enough during combat to survive and I doubt they can survive the focus fire tactics I employ.
In our campaigns, the two-action heal is not desirable, it's a must. You might survive with soothe for the first few levels, but eventually the damage ramp incoming is going to reach a level too high to survive without the 2 action heal.
This is seemingly unique to how I run the game from what I see on here, so I can't say it is by the rules or common. I run a very hard game. I've become so used to it over the years that I tend to get too focused on how I do things and not understand that others play a style more entertaining to their group.
I run what would be a very deadly game for any group that did not build in an optimal manner from the point of party creation. Which is why my group doesn't even start without determining who will be the 10 hit point heavy armor guy or a barb and who will have the 2 action heal.
You don't need a dedicated healer, but someone has to have the two action heals and someone or two need to be able to survive the focus fire beating I will give them while they are getting tripped and smashed as well as make sure they can stand in the way because as soon as the enemy finds out who the healer is, killing them first becomes the priority.
It's a style issue. It's definitely not standard PF2. I'm not even going to pretend the way I design encounters and smash players is how it is supposed to be done. I have no problem attacking the PCs with a group of 10 monsters and having six of them all blow every action they have trying to smash one PC. More if they can. I expect my players to build optimally to survive the hammer blows I'm going to drop on them.
I can't see that party composition able to do it for an entire campaign.
Champion Dedication comes with moral compass baggage that I dislike.
I suppose most "medium armor" caster usually boost str to avoid the penalties?
Ive often thought that a Mount is most useful as a way to avoid heavy armor and sheild speed penalties.
More on topic, what about Sheilds for Wizards?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't like the way shields look on a wizard myself, but they are useful on any character. It's better than a shield spell in most situations where you aren't going to block for the same action cost.
I use them often on druids and clerics where they feel more appropriate. So no reason for a wizard to avoid them other than tradition.
You might be surprised Derivin. We actively collapse encounters on to ourselves all the time, push way past expected resting points because narratively it doesn’t make sense and play very well together with delaying and combining turns to decimate enemies. You really don’t have to have a tank, or even a single “regular martial”in PF2 to be effective.
4 casters would have a lot of work to do to cover saves, but a mix of irregular/hybrid classes keeps things pretty well covered.
I have played a lvl 10 one-shot adventure with some-friends with all 4 classic casters just for fun (A Wizard, A Cleric, A Bard and a Druid) and the this gone surprisedly well.
But I cannot say that we are out of "frontliners" once that Cleric was a Warpriest and he with the Druid goes to frontline pretty easily (with Druid summoning a Satyr to cast courageous anthem while shot some arrows and then entering into Battle Form with the support of Bard casting Rallying Anthem) while Bard and Wizard casts from a safer distance.
But what really made this party goes well was the fact that there was 3 healers (Druid + Cleric + Bard) what basically prevented the party enter into a bad condition because aftar someone take too much damage always had someone able to do strong heals.
Champion Dedication comes with moral compass baggage that I dislike.
Me too but it isn't a great problem at all. Anyway PC2 champions probably will be way more free.
I suppose most "medium armor" caster usually boost str to avoid the penalties?
Medium armor simply doesn't worth at all. PF2 medium armors usually are a low level temporary solution to get +5 AC bonus with less dexterity but in practice once that you have to invest at last a +1 in dex usually this means that's probably the optimal way is to continue to invest into your dex what goes to the point where you will change to light and even maybe no armor in the end game.
There's another old topic discussing that medium armors in PF2 are strange because they only work as a way to not invest in dex early.
That's why usually doesn't worth to get the proficiency with medium instead if you wish to improve your AC you usually try to go up to heavy.
Ive often thought that a Mount is most useful as a way to avoid heavy armor and sheild speed penalties.
Yes the main advantage of mounts is to get some extra speed but also is useful to get an extra free-action movement with independent at this point mounts from cavalier/beastmaster archetype are useful for caster to keep sustaining spells with their 3rd-action without becoming locked in place or not casting in some turns to be able to move.
In general I think that mounts are more useful for casters than for martials once that casters can easily becomes without actions due Sustain.
More on topic, what about Sheilds for Wizards?
Shields are pretty useful and cheap in terms of feats for a thing that greatly reduces the damage that you take. That said they useful to protect casters that are considerably more fragile than martials but expert casters probably have a better (and probably more offensive) usage for its 3rd-action with spells. That's why shields in general are more useful for martials once they have to deal with MAP frequently and make a 3rd Strike usually doesn't worth.
You might be surprised Derivin. We actively collapse encounters on to ourselves all the time, push way past expected resting points because narratively it doesn’t make sense and play very well together with delaying and combining turns to decimate enemies. You really don’t have to have a tank, or even a single “regular martial”in PF2 to be effective.Only killing 1 in 10 enemies seems really bad.
pretty good if its a team of 4 against 1000
You might be surprised Derivin. We actively collapse encounters on to ourselves all the time, push way past expected resting points because narratively it doesn’t make sense and play very well together with delaying and combining turns to decimate enemies. You really don’t have to have a tank, or even a single “regular martial”in PF2 to be effective.Only killing 1 in 10 enemies seems really bad.
I am not sure where the only killing one in 10 enemies came from or what it is in reference to. We handle extreme plus encounters of multiple rooms attacking us at once.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am not sure where the only killing one in 10 enemies came from or what it is in reference to. We handle extreme plus encounters of multiple rooms attacking us at once.You might be surprised Derivin. We actively collapse encounters on to ourselves all the time, push way past expected resting points because narratively it doesn’t make sense and play very well together with delaying and combining turns to decimate enemies. You really don’t have to have a tank, or even a single “regular martial”in PF2 to be effective.Only killing 1 in 10 enemies seems really bad.
The original meaning of decimate : kill one in 10.
It was a war punishment by Romans IIRC.
It's a pun.
|
|
This is a wizard advice thread. No wizard is going to have the STR to completely dump Dex for heavy armor. At the same time, I’ve had many wizards start with a 12 or 14 dex and be fine.You don't need the Strength to wear a heavy armor. I have some characters who just take the penalties.Normally wizards choose to have some Dexterity, but I agree it is not absolutely required. Walk slowly but ride a horse or teleport when you need to. Strength is just a nice to have with heavy armour. It is not that unreasonable for a wizard to decide they want to invest in Charisma and not have Strength. You always have at least a 5ft speed.
There is a mermaid heavy armour build running around in the back of my mind...Dumping Dex is always a risky proposition. Mighty Bulwark only comes online at level 10. Which really does leave you open to things like trip.
FWIW I never ever saw anyone trip a caster.
|
|
My experience playing a Reach Spell Bard (especially before getting Dirge of Doom) in PFS is that it is extremely easy to stay out of melee range with such a build, thereby lessening the need for CON and DEX.
It does not alleviate it completely but you can get by with CON and/or DEX a bit lower than usual.
Playing a Reach caster in Heavy Armor does sound tempting right now.
My experience playing a Reach Spell Bard (especially before getting Dirge of Doom) in PFS is that it is extremely easy to stay out of melee range with such a build, thereby lessening the need for CON and DEX.
It does not alleviate it completely but you can get by with CON and/or DEX a bit lower than usual.
Playing a Reach caster in Heavy Armor does sound tempting right now.
The efficacy of this seems very initiative, campaign, GM, enemy, and terrain dependent. There are always cases where intelligent or particularly vicious enemies can just rush you.
In a game with a lot more fights in open terrain, I can see this working fine. In a campaign where even a quarter of the fights are in small rooms, I could imagine this being a very dangerous choice.
No worries!
|
|
My experience playing a Reach Spell Bard (especially before getting Dirge of Doom) in PFS is that it is extremely easy to stay out of melee range with such a build, thereby lessening the need for CON and DEX.
It does not alleviate it completely but you can get by with CON and/or DEX a bit lower than usual.
Playing a Reach caster in Heavy Armor does sound tempting right now.
The efficacy of this seems very initiative, campaign, GM, enemy, and terrain dependent. There are always cases where intelligent or particularly vicious enemies can just rush you.
In a game with a lot more fights in open terrain, I can see this working fine. In a campaign where even a quarter of the fights are in small rooms, I could imagine this being a very dangerous choice.
PFS, as mentioned.