Not quite. One table having a front line and a back line and another table running every encounter like a giant cuddle pile do indeed represent different styles of play; pointing out that the cuddle pile represents a significant positioning risk that the game punishes in various ways, or that most divine casters are not in a position to be at the center of these auras on the front line, is not a "different strokes for different folks" kind of deal however, it is bringing a much-needed dose of factual grounding to a discussion that has otherwise been largely founded on white rooms and hypotheticals. Similarly, pointing to the existence of spells on the same spell lists that can be used to achieve the same effects more easily is referring to facts, facts one can choose to ignore, but that one cannot dismiss out of hand in good faith as pure opinion.
The thing is, I'm not opposed to these aura spells; as mentioned several times already I love the theme of being at the center of a team-buffing aura, and believe that's a good fit on a divine class (though again, more the Champion than the Cloistered Cleric). That is in fact specifically why I would like these spells to be altered in ways that would make them easier to use and more competitive with higher-rank alternatives. The issue I'm pointing out is that these auras fall off compared to those alternatives, and right now have the issue of being excessively short-ranged for a backliner and excessively action-hungry for a frontliner (and again, the action cost of these spells appears to be yet another fact that seems to have been ignored in a discussion a few would have liked to center entirely around the potentiality of these auras). It's not an intractable problem, and there can be situations and level ranges where these new auras will be better than other spells, but there is also room for improvement. Dismissing that as purely subjective opinion and citing different play experiences as an excuse to avoid empathizing with others doesn't strike me as terribly helpful to constructive discussion.
If your clerics are more than 30 feet behind the front line, how are they healing the front line? If your combat casters are more than 30 feet away from the enemy, do they not lose out on more than half their offensive options?
There are two ways to engage with these questions: the first is to point to simple actions you could take such as Stepping/Striding or Reach Spell if you're hovering around 30 feet from the front line and an ally moves out of your range, which ought to answer the question neatly and directly with basic game elements that would normally be obvious with to anyone with a bit of play experience. The second is to call this out for not in fact properly reading what was said, where I maintained that my back line hovered around 30 feet from the front line, i.e. within heal range. This feels more like an attempt at playing gotcha than a sincere line of questioning, and the fact that the question is both incredibly easy to answer, yet was used to extrapolate such hyperbolic conclusions as the front line collapsing because the Cleric was 35 feet away, comes across as a little weird to me. Surely you've had encounters where this happened; how did it not occur to you that you could move?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
...how did it not occur to you that you could move?
It did. However, did you not indicate previously that spending an extra action in order to use a single ability was "inefficient" and therefore a weaker or wasted option? If moving and healing or moving and blasting (or using Reach Spell rather than moving) is okay, why isn't casting an aura and expanding it with an extra action not okay?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, that's great if you happen to have a bard in the party.
And these spells are great if you happen to have someone in your party who can cast them. In most Pathfinder games in which I have participated the players have a great deal of influence over the question of what classes they have in their party, and someone who wants to boost their allies, who is weighing the ability to cast some combination of Bane, Benediction, Bless, and Malediction against Bard songs can choose their class according to their conclusion.
It did. However, did you not indicate previously that spending an extra action in order to use a single ability was "inefficient" and therefore a weaker or wasted option?
It feels like I'm being made to keep repeating myself and restate what has already been said, which does not strike me as the mark of an honest conversation. Here is in fact what I've said:
If everyone's spending even just one action to get in range, that's five actions in a four-character party just to benefit from one aura, to say nothing of needing to move in range of an enemy for them to be affected by a subsequent harmful aura.
That's one action per person, which I'm sure you'll agree is different from one person spending their third action Striding as the battle lines shift. I would ask you at this point to please refrain from mischaracterizing my statements, not just because it is tiresome and unproductive, but because it is also ultimately pointless when I can simply pull the correct quote, link to the relevant comment, and demonstrate the false nature of your claim.
More to the point, the answer is itself unconvincing, and comes across as deflection more than anything else: if you had truly thought of Striding or using Reach Spell with your third action, why not at least bring up those options, even if you didn't find them efficient? Surely a little bit of inefficiency would be better than the front line "collapsing", as you put it? Again, this shouldn't be a hypothetical; having to spend a third action adapting to an encounter as a caster is one of the fundamental aspects of their playstyle.
If moving and healing or moving and blasting (or using Reach Spell rather than moving) is okay, why isn't casting an aura and expanding it with an extra action not okay?
Because these two modes of action expenditure have nothing to do with one another, and I would encourage you to try these out on a low-level Cloistered Cleric to see how they fare. If I move or use Reach Spell to heal or blast from a distance while maintaining my distance advantage, that's my divine Sorcerer spending their third action to save themselves from getting rushed by the enemy currently going up against my Fighter. If I wanted my divine caster to cast an aura, then expand it, that would only provide the aura's benefit to the front line on the second round (and given how much you value the utility of the back line, I'm sure you'll agree spending a whole turn doing nothing immediate is not a good thing), and my first round would be spent either doing nothing or serving my cloth caster on a silver platter for the enemy monster to take a nice big bite out of me.
As a matter of fact, let's perhaps ground this conversation in more specifics: please describe, in your own words, how you're expecting your divine Sorcerer or Witch, your Cloistered Cleric, or even your Battle Harbinger or Warpriest, to make the most of these auras as written. Describe the room, the enemies, the party, their builds, and so on. Because right now, the room's looking awfully white, and for all your talk of "potentially" stacking these effects, you've spent more time attacking the criticisms of others than describing any specifics of how this could benefit your own play experience.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not quite. One table having a front line and a back line and another table running every encounter like a giant cuddle pile do indeed represent different styles of play; pointing out that the cuddle pile represents a significant positioning risk that the game punishes in various ways, or that most divine casters are not in a position to be at the center of these auras on the front line, is not a "different strokes for different folks" kind of deal however, it is bringing a much-needed dose of factual grounding to a discussion that has otherwise been largely founded on white rooms and hypotheticals. Similarly, pointing to the existence of spells on the same spell lists that can be used to achieve the same effects more easily is referring to facts, facts one can choose to ignore, but that one cannot dismiss out of hand in good faith as pure opinion.
So much of this depends on party comp.
Things I've played with that lead to cuddle piles: Amulet Thaumaturge, Champion, Wood Kineticist (both Timber Sentinel and Pollen Aura), and Aura spells.
Things that lead indirectly to cuddle piles: Witches Familiar abilities having a 15ft range
So as a caster, if your party is going the cuddle pile route, you have various ways to mitigate that.
As previously mentioned, for a Cleric who needs to be close, I will run with Sanctuary. That's what it's for.
For my Occult Casters, I like to go with a retributive defense that punishes opponents who target me. Blood Vendetta. Mind of Menace. At higher levels Blinding Fury and Unexpected Transposition.
I play a lot of PFS, which means adapting to team comp and terrible tactics. My casters are all built expecting that at some point they are going to be in the scrum. Casters who hang back never get to do anything because the front line keeps moving.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
So Teridax, honest question:
Do most or all of the encounters in the games you play happen in areas that are larger than a 20' radius?
I myself play mostly PFS, which often has a lot of encounters inside dungeons or buildings, or Museums, and so don't give the party the luxury of spreading out.
Don't mistake me, there are also scenarios that primarily take place outdoors, one of which I played last night.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, that's great if you happen to have a bard in the party.And these spells are great if you happen to have someone in your party who can cast them. In most Pathfinder games in which I have participated the players have a great deal of influence over the question of what classes they have in their party, and someone who wants to boost their allies, who is weighing the ability to cast some combination of Bane, Benediction, Bless, and Malediction against Bard songs can choose their class according to their conclusion.
This is where the difference between PFS and non-PFS games really shows up.
I've been in PFS games with no casters. I've been in PFS games with no martials. I've been in PFS games with 3 wood kineticists and a rogue.
Sometimes you have to lock your spells in before you know what the party comp even is.
(On the other hand, the encounters are rarely too tough...but every once in a while they are *brutal*.)
You learn to build characters and loadouts who can roll with whatever and don't ever assume another party member will be bringing anything specific to the table. (Except Battle Medicine. "Battle Medicine" is to 2e PFS what "Wand of CLW" was to 1e PFS -- ie absent a good reason everyone has it as a matter of etiquette.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
(Except Battle Medicine. "Battle Medicine" is to 2e PFS what "Wand of CLW" was to 1e PFS -- ie absent a good reason everyone has it as a matter of etiquette.)
What!!??!!
Wand of CLW was a matter of etiquette as otherwise others were paying for your healing.
But Battle Medicine is very far from it, many characters don't have it and there's nothing wrong in not having it. Actually, if you don't raise Medicine, what would be the point in taking it?
Anyway, not the conversation, but we haven't been in the same groups for sure.
So much of this depends on party comp.
Things I've played with that lead to cuddle piles: Amulet Thaumaturge, Champion, Wood Kineticist (both Timber Sentinel and Pollen Aura), and Aura spells.
Do you mean Drifting Pollen? I sure hope you picked Safe Elements, then, unless you want your entire team in the cuddle pile dazzled and sickened.
Things that lead indirectly to cuddle piles: Witches Familiar abilities having a 15ft range
Are you seriously trying to advocate for a cuddle pile with a Witch, a 6 HP/level cloth caster, and so through their familiar, i.e. the thing known for being able to move and occupy a position entirely separate from yours?
So as a caster, if your party is going the cuddle pile route, you have various ways to mitigate that.
In other words, these spells only truly start to shine if your entire comp is built for it, which does not sound terribly well-suited for PFS, which you play a lot of.
I also feel you've somewhat missed the purpose of these abilities, which are often single-use per round and don't make up for the inherent squishiness of, say, a divine Witch or Sorcerer, or just any back liner. It's not that they're meant to encourage cuddle-pile tactics, because even if you have both a Champion and an Amulet Thaumaturge on your team, that's only two hits a round they can mitigate, and still no protection from a fireball or similar AoE. If your Champion and Thaum were to form the front line, they could certainly support one another with those reactions, but past that you're getting significantly diminishing returns with additional party members on the front line, and significantly higher risk. Taking 3 damage off of an enemy crit is still not going to be encouragement enough for a divine Summoner to move themselves and not just their eidolon into the front line, especially not if the Champion already used their reaction to protect the Thaumaturge and vice versa.
As previously mentioned, for a Cleric who needs to be close, I will run with Sanctuary. That's what it's for.
So the ideal spell for providing defense to allies you're near... is not benediction? Or are you telling me you're spending one round and a spell slot casting sanctuary, then another round and a spell slot casting benediction, all to provide a +1 to the AC of a couple allies when you could've spent the same number of actions and fewer spell slots casting forbidding ward? If you wanted something a bit more substantial, Reach Spell + protection would also be your friend here.
For my Occult Casters, I like to go with a retributive defense that punishes opponents who target me. Blood Vendetta. Mind of Menace. At higher levels Blinding Fury and Unexpected Transposition.
Oo, let's talk about higher levels! How about the one where scrolls of heroism become so cheap that you can just cast them on-tap to prebuff without relying on aura spells? What about when forbidding ward lets you output better AC protection than benediction without costing a spell slot? Or when fear lets you AoE debuff your enemies' Strike accuracy from the back line? I'll happily discuss these aura spells at higher levels, because that's when they fall off particularly hard compared to alternatives on both the divine and occult lists.
I play a lot of PFS, which means adapting to team comp and terrible tactics. My casters are all built expecting that at some point they are going to be in the scrum. Casters who hang back never get to do anything because the front line keeps moving.
Wasn't your entire point about these spells that they require a specific party composition to work effectively? You're right, you never know what you're going to get in PFS... which is why you should perhaps not pick the spells that rely on the perfect party comp to work, and don't provide their benefits if your party's disorganized and doesn't huddle inside your aura. Instead, you could pick spells that you could easily fire and forget from a variety of ranges, such as forbidding ward or fear. Surely that sounds like a better game plan?
So Teridax, honest question:
Do most or all of the encounters in the games you play happen in areas that are larger than a 20' radius?
Yes, and in fact the number of encounters in extremely cramped rooms at my table are in the minority. Players don't like them, they show up far too often in very early APs, and Paizo seems to have acknowledged this by having slightly larger encounter areas in subsequent APs, though I can't speak for anyone playing mostly PFS. Many of my games are homebrew campaigns, so I or the GM have the luxury of choosing where encounters take place, and both I and the GMs I play with tend to go with a mix of indoor and outdoor spaces (and while some of the indoor spaces are tight, that doesn't describe the majority of them either).
In my game I varied the battle maps so there are some in open terrain with different elevations and some in tight dark tunnels or a slums district with lots of low precarious buildings or throne halls with long tables and columns to either side of the room. Had one on ship in a heavy storm.
I also have 7 players though. That changes a lot of dynamics. It also means I have a larger xp budget for encounters.
|
|
(Except Battle Medicine. "Battle Medicine" is to 2e PFS what "Wand of CLW" was to 1e PFS -- ie absent a good reason everyone has it as a matter of etiquette.)What!!??!!
Wand of CLW was a matter of etiquette as otherwise others were paying for your healing.
But Battle Medicine is very far from it, many characters don't have it and there's nothing wrong in not having it. Actually, if you don't raise Medicine, what would be the point in taking it?Anyway, not the conversation, but we haven't been in the same groups for sure.
I'm sorry, "Battle Medicine is the new Wand of CLW" is a local meme/joke, but you are right that it does not reflect reality. It is super-ubiquitous, though.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Teridax, you said you didn't want White Room, you wanted actual experience. So I described situations I have actually encountered and things I actually do.
Your criticisms of my tactics are noted.
I'm not sure what you are trying to prove. What I was trying to prove was that Benediction had a use case.
Benediction seems more useful to me than Forbidding Ward or Protection. You can dismiss that as suboptimal if you like. I'm okay with that -- useful and optimal are not synonyms.
Teridax, you said you didn't want White Room, you wanted actual experience. So I described situations I have actually encountered and things I actually do.
Your criticisms of my tactics are noted.
I'm not sure what you are trying to prove.
I don't believe I criticized your tactics, unless you really think it's a good idea to cover your allies in a purely detrimental pollen aura. Part of the problem is that you did not actually cite specific play experiences or tactics here, you in fact reinforced the white-room nature of the discussion by pointing to an extremely specific party composition that requires a lot of buy-in from the whole table, which neither supports the point you are trying to make nor coheres with your primarily PFS-based experience. That you missed crucial aspects of this composition or the exceedingly particular elements you selected that would undermine the strategy you are advocating, and appear to have gotten one particular element flat-out wrong, i.e. Drifting Pollen, simply further undermines the point you are trying to make.
What I was trying to prove was that Benediction had a use case.
If that was the plan, surely it would've helped to cite a specific situation? Because so far, I'm sorry to say, what you've managed to show is if you want to play PFS, or a party composition that isn't begging to be fireballed at any given point in time, you are better off choosing alternatives.
More importantly, though: why do you need to prove anything? At the end of the day, it's clear you like the idea of casting benediction, and that is enough. You don't need the use of this spell to be objectively correct or superior to that of any other spell for your desire to cast this spell to be valid. Nobody is forcing you to prepare or learn a different spell, and now that this expansion is out, you can use this spell to your heart's content. Why does it matter to you then that this spell might be on the weaker side or that others don't like it as much as you do?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I also have 7 players though. That changes a lot of dynamics. It also means I have a larger xp budget for encounters.
That definitely changes a lot the value of buffing and debuffing. Between 4 and 7 players, these tactics are nearly twice more interesting. So I understand why you are interested in these new spells.
I'm sorry, "Battle Medicine is the new Wand of CLW" is a local meme/joke, but you are right that it does not reflect reality. It is super-ubiquitous, though.
I'm relieved. Yes, it's extremely common, on that I can only agree. It's hard to find a party without it on at least a member, even if I find that with the added content and the increase in the number of ways to grab a healing ability on a non healer it tends to decrease in popularity for other options.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My last PFS (level 1-2) party had no one Trained in Medicine and a single Soothe prepared by the Witch.
1st time it ever happened to me. Fun overall though. Thankfully, we could rest after an encounter so the Fighter went back to full HP thanks to the single Soothe and the HP rest recovery.
I got something similar yesterday: The party healer was a Psychic (still better than a Witch).
I think a lot of players were amazed by Medicine and healing in general when PF2 got released but it ended with too many players having it. But now it has calmed down, and with the classic randomness of PFS parties you can end up with no healing at all.
I still think your Witch should have Prepared more Soothes after seeing the line up.
|
|
This is where the difference between PFS and non-PFS games really shows up.
That's fair, and a really good point. Plus, even when I was more heavily involved in PFS, it was in a fairly consistent and limited group, so there was probably an uncommon level of party planning.
You learn to build characters and loadouts who can roll with whatever and don't ever assume another party member will be bringing anything specific to the table.
Yeah, but my point was that in comparing the "support" capabilities of Bard song versus these battle aura spells, the would-be support player doing the comparison can just choose which option they take. "That's great if you have a Bard" seems like a nonsensical statement, because you can just play a Bard.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That definitely changes a lot the value of buffing and debuffing. Between 4 and 7 players, these tactics are nearly twice more interesting. So I understand why you are interested in these new spells.
The action sink involved in casting multiple of these spells may not be quite as punishing with 7 PCs.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The action sink of these spells really can, in actual play situations, be mitigated by casting the spell before entering a suspect room. This is especially true at higher levels with cheap scrolls. Pre-buffing is harder in PF2 than PF1,but not impossible and still highly rewarding.
Bless cast before combat and expanded 2 times before triggering the encounter is much better action economy than courageous anthem.