| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Arcane: One of two worthwhile effects. Encroaches on the wizard and other intelligent skill using classes a fair bit though.
Divine: Reposition with Religion is neat, but not worth a feat with the current limitations. Step option isnt worth being printed, as you could already do so as an action.
Occult: Fine as is.
Nature: Neat, but not worth a feat with the current limitations.
Why is this feat an action? It makes half the effects practically worthless. Surely it is a typo and was intended to trigger with Blood Magic or something similar.
Yeah, I thought I was going crazy reading the Step part of the Divine option. Triggering as a blood magic option would make it more interesting though.
Tap into blood is not a very good feat, even for arcane or primal sorcerers. They are second round actions (because you need active blood magic) doing first round things, that use non-standard skills to do those things, meaning you either maximize doing those things only with blood magic active, or you have to boost 2 or more skills to do the same thing. The value of recalling knowledge through this feat is being wildly exaggerated on these boards.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Arcane: One of two worthwhile effects. Encroaches on the wizard and other intelligent skill using classes a fair bit though.
It actually doesn't encroach on the Wizard.
It SHOULD be encroaching on the Wizard, but this wholly surpasses the Wizard's knowledge functionality.
Well it actually I dont really like abilities like this.
Its good when you need multiple PCs good at different skills to have moments when they are the ones best suited to figuring out what is known about a subject.
Sure the arcane sorcerer is at a +3 starting int at most but they get to RK on any subject with arcana at that value.
Just use ancestral memories to trigger imperious defense then RK. Take 10 min and get back the focus point.
At the same time I do like all of the other tradition effects.
They give a sorcerer that wants to invest in nature or religion an extra use for the skill.
That Arcane Tap into blood works very well for my multiclass wizard arcane sorcerer. I like the sorcerer for combat and the wizard archetype for changeable utility spells.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Arcane: One of two worthwhile effects. Encroaches on the wizard and other intelligent skill using classes a fair bit though.
Divine: Reposition with Religion is neat, but not worth a feat with the current limitations. Step option isnt worth being printed, as you could already do so as an action.
Occult: Fine as is.
Nature: Neat, but not worth a feat with the current limitations.
Why is this feat an action? It makes half the effects practically worthless. Surely it is a typo and was intended to trigger with Blood Magic or something similar.
Agreed.
I thought it should be a reaction or free action. It is purplexing as written. Divine and Primal options don't make much sense. The Arcane option just embarasses the Wizard. Occult option seems right.
The arcane option is weird because it is passably ok as one action after having cast a bloodline spell, but would be absurdly overpowered if it was a reaction or a free action.
Yeah, I thought I was going crazy reading the Step part of the Divine option. Triggering as a blood magic option would make it more interesting though.
I read that 'step' part three times, trying to figure out why it was there. I wonder if they copied the text from Propelling Sorcery (where it's a free action). Which brings up the confusing similarity between Tap into (Divine) Blood and Propelling Sorcery.
Tap into (Divine) Blood
- - 1 action
- - religion check
- - other blood magic effect still applies
- - could move once between casting a one-action spell that triggers blood magic and using Tap (you could do any other single action, too, but moving is the only reason this might be a benefit)
Propelling Sorcery
- free action
- - no check
- - instead of other blood magic effect
- - Happens immediately when blood magic comes into effect
Am I missing something? Having two feats in the same class be so similar seems odd to me. Usually this level of attention to what the differences are only comes up when cross-classing.
I've never played a pf2e sorc, so I'm not comparing anything to the premaster. Had my Angelic Sorc concept for the next game in mind for months and got very excited when our PC2 arrived early (I usually lurk but got impatient waiting for someone else to bring it up).
To really evaluate Tap into blood, you almost have to build the character and then imagine using the ability in an actual encounter situation.
the arcane benefit becomes really hard to match up with the imperial sorcerer at all. You barely have any bloodline spells at all that make sense to cast before using an action to tap into blood, and your bloodline magic effect ends at the start of your turn, before you can do anything with it. If your first turn, you use extend spell, then cast a bloodline spell, you can tap into blood at the start of your second turn, but you just spent one action pretty much to be able to spend an additional action next turn recalling knowledge. It works, but it isn't very pretty.
The dragon sorcerer has a bunch more bloodline spells to cast in the first round that make sense to set up a third action tap into blood, so it is probably the bloodline that makes the best use of this feat.
The primal one is tricky. It is kind of cool in theory, but how many sorcerers are just passing on the intimidate skill, and wanting to keep nature maximized instead? Again, like recalling knowledge, demoralize is much better to do at the start of your turn than at the end and you need to boost intimidation to get the feats that make it worth doing at higher levels.
The reposition with religion is actually the coolest of the abilities, in my opinion, as it is generally something worth doing at the end of a turn instead of the beginning of it, although stepping twice with 2 actions is undeniably an action economy boost.
What about Extend Blood Magic? Couldn't you tap into blood with Extend Blood Magic extending the effect for an additional round and use Arcane to RK a few times?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What about Extend Blood Magic? Couldn't you tap into blood with Extend Blood Magic extending the effect for an additional round and use Arcane to RK a few times?
Yes. But it is kind of annoying as a power. It is a focus spell that generates blood magic effect and a spellshape at the same time. That is really Odd. I strongly suspect it needs errata.
EXTEND BLOOD MAGIC �
FOCUS 3
UNCOMMON
CONCENTRATE
FOCUS
SPELLSHAPE
SORCERER
You call upon the arcane energy coursing through your blood to
extend the magic it grants. If your next action is to Cast a Spell
that grants you a blood magic effect that lasts for at least 1 round,
you or a target gain the blood magic effect for an additional round.
You can have only one extended blood magic effect at a time.
Just make it a free action.
What about Extend Blood Magic? Couldn't you tap into blood with Extend Blood Magic extending the effect for an additional round and use Arcane to RK a few times?
All of what Gortle said, plus think about it in practice:
Round 1: Cast Extend Blood Magic (1 action), and then probably Haste (2 actions).
Round 2: Tap into blood to recall knowledge (1 action)...then either do it again, probably three times total to take advantage of the blood magic, or cast a two action spell based off of what you learned.
In the end, casting force barrage once in round 1 and then tap into blood 2 times, or casting haste, then tap into blood on round 1 are probably more efficient use of actions than messing around with Extend blood magic, unless you are really anticipating the need for a +1 to AC or saving throws carrying over into round 2.
Basically Extend Blood Magic doesn't really work out to be about anything more than the bonus from blood magic itself, unless recalling knowledge 4 times was something you really needed to do, in which case, I guess, extend blood magic + force barrage gives you the most actions to do so.
What about Extend Blood Magic? Couldn't you tap into blood with Extend Blood Magic extending the effect for an additional round and use Arcane to RK a few times?All of what Gortle said, plus think about it in practice:
Round 1: Cast Extend Blood Magic (1 action), and then probably Haste (2 actions).
Round 2: Tap into blood to recall knowledge (1 action)...then either do it again, probably three times total to take advantage of the blood magic, or cast a two action spell based off of what you learned.
In the end, casting force barrage once in round 1 and then tap into blood 2 times, or casting haste, then tap into blood on round 1 are probably more efficient use of actions than messing around with Extend blood magic, unless you are really anticipating the need for a +1 to AC or saving throws carrying over into round 2.
Basically Extend Blood Magic doesn't really work out to be about anything more than the bonus from blood magic itself, unless recalling knowledge 4 times was something you really needed to do, in which case, I guess, extend blood magic + force barrage gives you the most actions to do so.
It does provide some flexibility with how you use it. That you can use Arcane for any RK check is nice that early in the game.
Arcane: One of two worthwhile effects. Encroaches on the wizard and other intelligent skill using classes a fair bit though.
It actually doesn't encroach on the Wizard.
It SHOULD be encroaching on the Wizard, but this wholly surpasses the Wizard's knowledge functionality.
I'd agree if the Sorcerer wasn't hard pressed to fit Int into their build. Sacrificing any of Cha, Dex, Wis, or Con is just losing too much. You could maybe argue that losing 2 points is fine, but anything past that is too much.
Wizard just needs to be buffed somehow.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Occult: Fine as is.
I disagree that Occult is fine. Because the usefulness of the 10ft Step is almost completely overridden by the fact you are casting a spell with the Manipulate trait directly beforehand. At that point you might as well just Stride because you've already taken the Reactive Strike.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Arcane option just embarasses the Wizard.
Embarrassing wizards seems like a favorite passtime for sorcerers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Like shooting fish in a barrel
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Arcane: One of two worthwhile effects. Encroaches on the wizard and other intelligent skill using classes a fair bit though.
It actually doesn't encroach on the Wizard.
It SHOULD be encroaching on the Wizard, but this wholly surpasses the Wizard's knowledge functionality.
I'd agree if the Sorcerer wasn't hard pressed to fit Int into their build. Sacrificing any of Cha, Dex, Wis, or Con is just losing too much. You could maybe argue that losing 2 points is fine, but anything past that is too much.
Wizard just needs to be buffed somehow.
Sorcerers don't need an Int investment to make it work. Not really.
The thing is that they aren't competing with an Int based class who has the same skill proficiency as them, rolling against the same creature. That is that Int classes strength afterall.
They are competing against the lack of skill proficiency that Int based class will have against everything that isn't in their wheelhouse.
Having a +7 from Int to a lore check is great, but its a hell of a lot less than the +28 the sorcerer may have because they get to use 1 skill for everything.
Not all Int classes are the same mind you, Investigators (and some Rogues) get a much better time out of this comparison.
Orientating to the Wizard in particular, at 20th the Wizard will have 3 skills at legendary and potentially more if they pick up serveral Additional Lore feats. However, even when attempting to optimise, the Wizard simply can't cover all the options that they may face in a 1-20 adventure (more so if you do one of those 1-11 paths and jump to a different 11+ path).
The Arcane version of Tap Into Blood removes that worry. Its a single investment which will always be useful against every enemy.
Arcane: One of two worthwhile effects. Encroaches on the wizard and other intelligent skill using classes a fair bit though.
It actually doesn't encroach on the Wizard.
It SHOULD be encroaching on the Wizard, but this wholly surpasses the Wizard's knowledge functionality.
I'd agree if the Sorcerer wasn't hard pressed to fit Int into their build. Sacrificing any of Cha, Dex, Wis, or Con is just losing too much. You could maybe argue that losing 2 points is fine, but anything past that is too much.
Wizard just needs to be buffed somehow.
Sorcerers don't need an Int investment to make it work. Not really.
The thing is that they aren't competing with an Int based class who has the same skill proficiency as them, rolling against the same creature. That is that Int classes strength afterall.
They are competing against the lack of skill proficiency that Int based class will have against everything that isn't in their wheelhouse.
Having a +7 from Int to a lore check is great, but its a hell of a lot less than the +28 the sorcerer may have because they get to use 1 skill for everything.
Not all Int classes are the same mind you, Investigators (and some Rogues) get a much better time out of this comparison.
Orientating to the Wizard in particular, at 20th the Wizard will have 3 skills at legendary and potentially more if they pick up serveral Additional Lore feats. However, even when attempting to optimise, the Wizard simply can't cover all the options that they may face in a 1-20 adventure (more so if you do one of those 1-11 paths and jump to a different 11+ path).
The Arcane version of Tap Into Blood removes that worry. Its a single investment which will always be useful against every enemy.
My point is that if the Wizard wants to, they can invest in enough skills to probably outdo this feature. It does require decent bit of investment, but it is possible and is not entirely unreasonable. Remember that the only levels this really matters in are levels 1-14, because of Unified Theory.
If the Sorcerer has zero or minimal Intelligence investment, then the Wizard only needs to be Trained to match their skill modifier (as long as it's an Intelligence skill).
But as a separate point, needing to invest in so many skills to be good at Recall Knowledge is a massive pain point of this system.
It's pretty crazy a sorcerer can build up Arcana and RK anything.
You can eventually cast Retrocognition to activate Blood magic, then RK with what you see for anything. That or scouting eye is a pretty nice combination for Tap the Blood.
I agree with Unicore that it is much harder to use than it seems. Everyone & especially the designers always seem to ignore how difficult it is to trigger bloodmagic.
My point is that if the Wizard wants to, they can invest in enough skills to probably outdo this feature. It does require decent bit of investment, but it is possible and is not entirely unreasonable. Remember that the only levels this really matters in are levels 1-14, because of Unified Theory.
If the Sorcerer has zero or minimal Intelligence investment, then the Wizard only needs to be Trained to match their skill modifier (as long as it's an Intelligence skill).
Now that is just plain wrong. Even a -1 INT Sorcerer now surpasses the apex-item-clutching Wizard with this ability.
Because the one thing that everyone but me seems not to have figured out yet, is that an arcane Sorcerer shouldn't use Arcana to Recall Knowledge on Nature or Religion or Society or whatever, but on Jungle Bird Lore or Zombie Shambler Lore or Varisian Pirates Lore or whatever you currently encounter.
Using this ability for highly specific Lore skills - instead of general knowledge skills - drops the DC by ~5 points! That's not something a Wizard's INT modifier can ever really make up for.
And the best thing about the arcane Tap Into Blood is that this isn't a bonus to the roll, but a drop of the DC, which means an arcane Sorcerer can just snag Assurance (Arcana) and auto succeed on every Recall Knowledge check henceforth, even with a -1 INT modifier!
This isn't surpassing the Wizard, this is surpassing the Bard!
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with Unicore that it is much harder to use than it seems. Everyone & especially the designers always seem to ignore how difficult it is to trigger bloodmagic.
My point is that if the Wizard wants to, they can invest in enough skills to probably outdo this feature. It does require decent bit of investment, but it is possible and is not entirely unreasonable. Remember that the only levels this really matters in are levels 1-14, because of Unified Theory.
If the Sorcerer has zero or minimal Intelligence investment, then the Wizard only needs to be Trained to match their skill modifier (as long as it's an Intelligence skill).
Now that is just plain wrong. Even a -1 INT Sorcerer now surpasses the apex-item-clutching Wizard with this ability.
Because the one thing that everyone but me seems not to have figured out yet, is that an arcane Sorcerer shouldn't use Arcana to Recall Knowledge on Nature or Religion or Society or whatever, but on Jungle Bird Lore or Zombie Shambler Lore or Varisian Pirates Lore or whatever you currently encounter.
Using this ability for highly specific Lore skills - instead of general knowledge skills - drops the DC by ~5 points! That's not something a Wizard's INT modifier can ever really make up for.
And the best thing about the arcane Tap Into Blood is that this isn't a bonus to the roll, but a drop of the DC, which means an arcane Sorcerer can just snag Assurance (Arcana) and auto succeed on every Recall Knowledge check henceforth, even with a -1 INT modifier!
This isn't surpassing the Wizard, this is surpassing the Bard!
That wouldnt fly at my table.
This is arcana being used it is as general as you can get.
Would be interesting to druid sorc archtype. Nature demoralize would be great.
Also I really don't think it's that hard to trigger blood magic. We all agree that out of combat it's a piece of cake. In combat you could take Hag's retributive spite blood magic effect when you cast ancestral memory in turn 1 (not a bad blood magic by the way), and be set for tap into blood for at least one turn. And that is just one example.
Hag is an occult caster, so no Recall Knowledge with Tap Into Blood.
And who cares about out of combat blood magic effects? Go Cleanse Cuisine as a Wood Sorcerer?
I agree with Unicore that it is much harder to use than it seems. Everyone & especially the designers always seem to ignore how difficult it is to trigger bloodmagic.
My point is that if the Wizard wants to, they can invest in enough skills to probably outdo this feature. It does require decent bit of investment, but it is possible and is not entirely unreasonable. Remember that the only levels this really matters in are levels 1-14, because of Unified Theory.
If the Sorcerer has zero or minimal Intelligence investment, then the Wizard only needs to be Trained to match their skill modifier (as long as it's an Intelligence skill).
Now that is just plain wrong. Even a -1 INT Sorcerer now surpasses the apex-item-clutching Wizard with this ability.
Because the one thing that everyone but me seems not to have figured out yet, is that an arcane Sorcerer shouldn't use Arcana to Recall Knowledge on Nature or Religion or Society or whatever, but on Jungle Bird Lore or Zombie Shambler Lore or Varisian Pirates Lore or whatever you currently encounter.
Using this ability for highly specific Lore skills - instead of general knowledge skills - drops the DC by ~5 points! That's not something a Wizard's INT modifier can ever really make up for.
And the best thing about the arcane Tap Into Blood is that this isn't a bonus to the roll, but a drop of the DC, which means an arcane Sorcerer can just snag Assurance (Arcana) and auto succeed on every Recall Knowledge check henceforth, even with a -1 INT modifier!
This isn't surpassing the Wizard, this is surpassing the Bard!
This is not a good faith reading of this feature. It says "Attempt to Recall Knowledge; you can use Arcana instead of the skill normally needed for that subject." You're making an Arcana check, not a Lore check.
I have to point out that Unified Theory doesn't allow you to recall knowledge on any topic. There are many RK checks that require you to use medicine, specific lores, crafting and society.
You're right, I missed that part of the feat.
On top of what others have said, Arcana is never a highly specific Lore skill.
Arcana, the other magical tradition skills, and Society are the baseline skills.
Something like Lore: Undead is specific.
Something like Lore: Vampire is highly specific.
This is not a good faith reading of this feature. It says "Attempt to Recall Knowledge; you can use Arcana instead of the skill normally needed for that subject." You're making an Arcana check, not a Lore check.
Insinuating that I do not read in good faith what is literally written in the ability is nonsensical rhetoric.
Yes, you're making an Arcana check, but you use Arcana instead of the other skill, and the other skill - which happens to be a specific Lore skill - has a low DC. Thus you make an Arcana check on a low DC.
It's impossible to use Arcana as a reference to set the DC to Recall Knowledge on (say) a fungus creature, because Arcana cannot be used to identify fungal creatures. Nature or Fungus Lore can identify fungal creatures, so we use Arcana instead of one of those skills, and the skill we choose to use Recall Knowledge with is the one that sets the DC.
We already established that Arcane is general for creatures. Old Man Robot meant for specific instances that recall for a particular type of Lore with a lower DC for something other than creature RK.
I'm thinking one of the best ways to use Tap into the blood during noncombat is use Extend Bloodmagic followed by a 1 action magic missile, then Tap the Blood across two rounds to make a bunch of RK checks. Would that work well?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would always set the DC based on the most general applicable RK skill because it is even more unbalanced an ability to do otherwise.
Why should I as a GM let a person using arcana ever get the only benefit of picking a specific lore?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would always set the DC based on the most general applicable RK skill because it is even more unbalanced an ability to do otherwise.
Why should I as a GM let a person using arcana ever get the only benefit of picking a specific lore?
Because the game is supposed to be fun and you want your players to get the information?
It does smell a bit of powergaming cheese and if you allow it for one guy, the other person at the table who invested into being good at his knowledge skill will feel as his investment has been lessened. I certainly wouldn't allow such a "hack" of the game (i.e. "using a lower DC for Derro Alchemists Lore" or something similiar overspecific) at my table.
Never give powergamers a hand, they'll try to take the whole arm next.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It does smell a bit of powergaming cheese and if you allow it for one guy, the other person at the table who invested into being good at his knowledge skill will feel as his investment has been lessened. I certainly wouldn't allow such a "hack" of the game (i.e. "using a lower DC for Derro Alchemists Lore" or something similiar overspecific) at my table.
Never give powergamers a hand, they'll try to take the whole arm next.
I prefer to just set expectations.
Unfortunately expections for RK have moved since the wizard was written. Look at what archetypes and other classes can do. They remastered the wizard and never brought it up to standard.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It does smell a bit of powergaming cheese and if you allow it for one guy, the other person at the table who invested into being good at his knowledge skill will feel as his investment has been lessened. I certainly wouldn't allow such a "hack" of the game (i.e. "using a lower DC for Derro Alchemists Lore" or something similiar overspecific) at my table.
Never give powergamers a hand, they'll try to take the whole arm next.
Power gamers generally don't care about RK checks. RK knowledge is usually something people do for fun. Power gamers don't like to waste actions on RK unless they have to. This is speaking as somewhat of a power gamer. Only time I'll make a RK check is if it is needed when I hit something and it doesn't work.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is not a good faith reading of this feature. It says "Attempt to Recall Knowledge; you can use Arcana instead of the skill normally needed for that subject." You're making an Arcana check, not a Lore check.Insinuating that I do not read in good faith what is literally written in the ability is nonsensical rhetoric.
Yes, you're making an Arcana check, but you use Arcana instead of the other skill, and the other skill - which happens to be a specific Lore skill - has a low DC. Thus you make an Arcana check on a low DC.
It's impossible to use Arcana as a reference to set the DC to Recall Knowledge on (say) a fungus creature, because Arcana cannot be used to identify fungal creatures. Nature or Fungus Lore can identify fungal creatures, so we use Arcana instead of one of those skills, and the skill we choose to use Recall Knowledge with is the one that sets the DC.
It is not good faith because it is "too good to be true". It is clearly outside the intention of this ability. Precedingly, the only abilities that allow you to RK on any topic with a Lore skill are either stunted in progression, or are considered a main feature of the class (Thaumaturge).
"The skill normally needed" is not the Lore skill, it is one of the normal (non Lore) Recall Knowledge skills. There are no checks within the game which only allow you to RK with Lore as far as I'm aware. No sane GM would allow you to do this, this ability is already quite powerful.
You aren't replacing the Lore skill, because Lore is meant to be specific, and Arcana is not a Lore skill. It makes the most sense to replace the skill closest to Arcana, which would be Nature in your example.
Because the game is supposed to be fun and you want your players to get the information?I would always set the DC based on the most general applicable RK skill because it is even more unbalanced an ability to do otherwise.
Why should I as a GM let a person using arcana ever get the only benefit of picking a specific lore?
Then we shouldn't be discussing whether Tap into Blood is overpowered or not. Because "the game is supposed to be fun and you want your players to get the information."
If you want players to get information, just tell them, don't hide it behind checks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Strongly agree that failing forward and allowing multiple avenues to discover critical information are good pieces of GMing advice, but they don't matter all that much to whether or not Tap into Blood is a strong ability. Those techniques apply to all knowledge-gathering methods equally, anyways.
Also strongly agree that Theaitetos's reading runs headlong into the "if it's too good to be true, you're probably reading the ability wrong" clause.
Because the game is supposed to be fun and you want your players to get the information?I would always set the DC based on the most general applicable RK skill because it is even more unbalanced an ability to do otherwise.
Why should I as a GM let a person using arcana ever get the only benefit of picking a specific lore?
No it would do the opposite at my table.
Every player that bothered to get a lore at all would not have much fun if the tap into blood character got to roll at the same DCs on their specialties as they did.
Actually I let my players roll Acrobatics to replace Basket Weaving Lore because it's supposed to be fun and I want them to succeed.
Actually I let my players roll Acrobatics to replace Basket Weaving Lore because it's supposed to be fun and I want them to succeed.
Players comming up with a creative way to use a skill is great.
using Tap into blood to get the numerical bonus of every specific lore is not the same thing.OK so there is actually surprising a lot to unpack in your comment.
Using acrobatics to weave a basket is fine. But normally this is a crafting check right? So acrobatics would be at a higher DC than just using crafting. If a player actually had basket weaving lore then they should probably have a lower DC at crafting baskets than someone using something general like crafting and certainly someone improvising using a skill like acrobatics.
Next layer to unpack is rolling for making baskets.
Is this something you can just give your player because it has no consequence on the game balance?
Is this being done as an earn income activity
is it done as downtime at all to have a basket on hand? Does quality matter in the game?
Is this being done as part of overcoming some challenge in exploration mode?
Your setting a DC for this activity based on what is being done then augmenting it depending on how specific or general the skill used to do it.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Because the game is supposed to be fun and you want your players to get the information?I would always set the DC based on the most general applicable RK skill because it is even more unbalanced an ability to do otherwise.
Why should I as a GM let a person using arcana ever get the only benefit of picking a specific lore?Then we shouldn't be discussing whether Tap into Blood is overpowered or not. Because "the game is supposed to be fun and you want your players to get the information."
If you want players to get information, just tell them, don't hide it behind checks.
Tap into Blood isn't overpowered. Only reason some are bringing it up is because we hear how good the wizard is at RK checks as to a reason why they don't need some upgrades, then Tap the Blood comes along and suddenly the sorcerer who is a charisma class suddenly gets this ability that let's them RK using Arcane for everything. We all have to ask why? Why wasn't this a wizard ability? The intelligence class who many including myself see as an academic who should have a deep knowledge of a variety of subjects.
Tap the Blood isn't about power, it's about encroaching even on the fun aspects of the wizard like RK checks which "Wizards are perfect as is" proponents often push as a reason intelligence is a good casting stat.
As a mostly power gamer myself, I could care less about Tap the Blood. It isn't powerful to me at all. The first thing I use to find out about monsters is hitting them. 99% of the time my "RK" attack tells me all I need to know.
I let other players that enjoy the RK RP use it, while I just kill the thing and then give them a superfluous "thank you" after I kill the monster.
"Thanks for telling me how to kill it. I'll remember that next time I face it", as I think if I even bother to remember.