|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm very excited for the Necromancer's interactions with Thralls and believe this is a great way to get the feel of a horde with the mechanical balance of PF2e.
I'll start off by listing my personal Pros/Cons on how I think this is implemented and will give more as I do real world playtests and hope others will add to the discussion as well.
Pros:
- Easy to deploy (love that I could send out 3 on turn one at level one if I want)
- Interactions with focus spells are awesome and very flavorful. I want my minions to be expendable
- Battlefield control is the Necromancer's vibe and these are a great way to do it.
- Bone Spear!
- Life Tap!
- I'm going to stop there...most of the feats look really fun
Cons:
- I really want to be able to move them for both flavor and mechanic. - Proposed Solution - Perhaps under "Create Thrall" add a line that gives you a choice to either create one or move an existing one with both options ending in said thrall making an attack
- There is no way to get rid of unwanted Thralls if you don't have the right focus spell and have already used the Consume Thrall ability in the last 10 minutes. - Potential Solution - Give the necromancer an action that is not on a cooldown and doesn't use a focus point that destroys a thrall for a minor benefit.
- What do I do with my thralls when I'm out of focus points?
- Would like a little more variety on the saves they can target, fortitude is often pretty problematic (mathematically speaking)
Questions:
- While I get that they always fail saves and are hit by attacks, I'd love some clarification on how checks against their DCs works. The big one is that Tumble Through is an untrained activity and so I'm wondering if it is the intension for enemies to auto-succeed on these, or if they have some form of DC. If their stats are simply listed as 0, then mechanically the DC would be 10 (10+modifier), but not sure if that is the intention.
- Dead Weight is a cool ability, but why would a creature try to "escape" when they can auto-succeed at attacking it and get rid of the condition?
I'm sure I'll have more as I get my hands on this class in a game!
I really want to be able to move them for both flavor and mechanic. - Proposed Solution - Perhaps under "Create Thrall" add a line that gives you a choice to either create one or move an existing one with both options ending in said thrall making an attack
IMO, change "When you cast the spell, you can have up to one thrall created by this spell make a melee unarmed Strike using your spell attack modifier for the attack roll." to 'When you cast the spell, you can have up to one thrall created by this spell make a melee unarmed Strike using your spell attack modifier for the attack roll or allow it to Stride [some speed].'
There is no way to get rid of unwanted Thralls if you don't have the right focus spell and have already used the Consume Thrall ability in the last 10 minutes. - Potential Solution - Give the necromancer an action that is not on a cooldown and doesn't use a focus point that destroys a thrall for a minor benefit.
Everything that creates a Thrall has a Duration of 1 minute so it's not really an issue unless you need it gone in less than that. Or you can just make an attack on them: carry a pocket full of shurikens since ANY attack destroys them so range increment and not having proficiency wouldn't matter.
What do I do with my thralls when I'm out of focus points?
I think you can cast create thrall again and have them attack.
Dead Weight is a cool ability, but why would a creature try to "escape" when they can auto-succeed at attacking it and get rid of the condition?
It's niche, but they may not want to make a hostile action like when invisible [assuming you don't rule escape isn't hostile].
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I kinda both like Grave Spells and dislike Grave Spells all at the same time. It feels weird that I need both a Thrall AND a focus point to use any of my truly exclusive Necromatic spells while the Reactions don't use a Focus Point. I feel like a Necromancer needs more then 1 focus point starting out like the Psychic or perhaps remove the Focus Point cost of Grave Spells seeing and instead have it consume a Thrall as the resourve and not double dip into the resources.
Invictus Fatum wrote:
What do I do with my thralls when I'm out of focus points?
Answer: Just flood the field with 1 action Thralls to attack the enemy with till they are surrounded!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Isn't the "you can accidentally fill up the space" potentially resolved by "thralls are incredibly easy to kill, and anybody can just attack them to make them go away"?
Like on an initial read of the class, I'm not sure that the Bone Shaper's thrall enhancement is actually all that beneficial since I don't want to have to roll stuff for my thralls.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Isn't the "you can accidentally fill up the space" potentially resolved by "thralls are incredibly easy to kill, and anybody can just attack them to make them go away"?
Like on an initial read of the class, I'm not sure that the Bone Shaper's thrall enhancement is actually all that beneficial since I don't want to have to roll stuff for my thralls.
Downside of this is the fact now you're eating into your team's action economy and giving them MAP, making them much weaker just to get into a position to fight the enemy but that's what, 8 turns of combat to fully surround a person?
Also nothing is stopping you from putting a Thrall in a square above the target.
I think that in practice you're not going to want to spend your turns spamming thralls all that often. I think a normal routine will be something like "create thrall, cast spell."
But with all the stuff you get about creating difficult terrain, it would be nice to be able to exempt your allies from it somehow.
I think that in practice you're not going to want to spend your turns spamming thralls all that often. I think a normal routine will be something like "create thrall, cast spell."
But with all the stuff you get about creating difficult terrain, it would be nice to be able to exempt your allies from it somehow.
I fully agree with that, it'd be a routine of "Create Thrall, Cast Spell" - Repeat unless you need to move. It's like my Fire Kineticist Routation, use all 3 actions to rain down damage upon the enemy.
Should "you can have up to one thrall created by this spell
make a melee unarmed Strike" be interpreted as referring to one thrall made by *this casting* of the cantrip, or can I have any thrall already on the board lash out as well? Technically, they were all created by that spell (except for the meatier ones you get later on).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
- I really want to be able to move them for both flavor and mechanic. - Proposed Solution - Perhaps under "Create Thrall" add a line that gives you a choice to either create one or move an existing one with both options ending in said thrall making an attack
As a GM, I really really don't want this. I'm already not liking the idea of having higher level Necromancer players popping out 3 or 4 tokens at a time whenever they bring thralls out.
Being able to reposition them all would just lead to delays and slow combats as people try to figure out how to reposition their thralls to hinder the NPCs (aka: me) as much as possible.
PF2 puts a lot of effort into not having minion spam slow the game down. Undoing that would be a big mistake.
- There is no way to get rid of unwanted Thralls if you don't have the right focus spell and have already used the Consume Thrall ability in the last 10 minutes. - Potential Solution - Give the necromancer an action that is not on a cooldown and doesn't use a focus point that destroys a thrall for a minor benefit.
Hit them. They go down from basically anything.
I also agree that they should have a listed AC and saves, even if every attack against them is a hit and every save they make is a fail. You mentioned Tumble Through, but there are other actions affected by this too. What if an enemy wants to Shove or Reposition a thrall? What do they compare their athletics check to? The spell DC of the necromancer? 10 because an unlisted DC might as well be 0? Clarification would be nice.
Easiest answer here is probably to treat those as auto-successes as well. They would need scaling stats and its more numbers to track otherwise, though you could use an Easy DC by level (since thats a table the GM is likely going to have quick access to anyway).
Should "you can have up to one thrall created by this spell
make a melee unarmed Strike" be interpreted as referring to one thrall made by *this casting* of the cantrip, or can I have any thrall already on the board lash out as well? Technically, they were all created by that spell (except for the meatier ones you get later on).
I'm reading it as any thrall created by the cantrip and not one specifically from that casting.
I mean if it is any thrall then there is no reason not to use this to jsut put random thralls on the battlefield. Also thralls have no defenses so having 1 or 100 of them doesn't change anything honestly especially if you can untrained action tumble through them with a DC10 which if the monster has decent DEX mod that will happen so like, they aren't even a road block really.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean if it is any thrall
Well not ANY thrall as some focus spells create special thrall like Living Graveyard.
if you can untrained action tumble through them with a DC10 which if the monster has decent DEX mod that will happen so like, they aren't even a road block really.
I'm HOPING it's vs your spell DC [or even class DC].
|
I mean if it is any thrall then there is no reason not to use this to jsut put random thralls on the battlefield. Also thralls have no defenses so having 1 or 100 of them doesn't change anything honestly especially if you can untrained action tumble through them with a DC10 which if the monster has decent DEX mod that will happen so like, they aren't even a road block really.
Give everyone flank while your first thrall pounds it's initial target...
You should put your thralls next to enemies in order to attack them, create flanking buddies, etc. But moving should be restricted to your "extra good thralls you create through grave spells" since those are much less spammable.
I would like to have the ability to have thralls perform basic manipulate actions, like opening doors, though.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Creating a thrall is almost always better than moving one to a new position in range (and if you allow thralls to move out of range, that's a noticeable buff). However, as soon as people start moving the token over the board, more cognitive processes engage and more people will start talking. I'm going to second Tridus- If Thralls start moving frequently, certain players are going to slow the game to a crawl, and I don't think, "Just don't let them play Necromancer" is a good solution.
I would like a Base Kinesis-like activity for thralls doing menail stuff out of combat, though.
|
|
Creating a thrall is almost always better than moving one to a new position in range (and if you allow thralls to move out of range, that's a noticeable buff). However, as soon as people start moving the token over the board, more cognitive processes engage and more people will start talking. I'm going to second Tridus- If Thralls start moving frequently, certain players are going to slow the game to a crawl, and I don't think, "Just don't let them play Necromancer" is a good solution.
I would like a Base Kinesis-like activity for thralls doing menail stuff out of combat, though.
Fair enough point, and something I didn't consider given the playerbase as a whole.
I think the big one for me was the flavor and a Base Kinesis style class feature for out of combat things would certainly scratch that itch.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
A free action to dismiss a thrall with no strings attached seems like it'd be a decent QoL, not valuable most of the time but a good way to address the occasional headache.
Similarly I'd kind of like to see an option to get the thrall attack from Create Thrall without summoning one. If for some reason you're in the edge case where you don't want to create more thralls, it'd be nice to be able to retain that basic functionality of ordering one to hit that's already fairly spammable.
Thralls are interesting but yeah ability to have them attack without making one would be nice.
Is it weird that I rather like the idea of "intentional jank" like the get rid of your thralls question? Open ended problems like that are imo, the lifeblood of creativity. Without some small amount of discomfort / agitation, there's little that can cause players to exert brainpower.
I think non power-critical areas of a kit, like this undesirable thrall edge-case, are good fits for places where players can theorize and test out their own solutions without it disrupting the class on the whole.
.
The first comparison that comes to mind is the Alchemist and dealing with their 2 hand limit. The class would loose a huge amount of nuance and "skill ceiling" if Alch was simply handed a "1 free Draw/Swap p turn" ability.
I think that giving such a free action delete to Necromancer might similarly smooth away some engaging conundrums in the name of jank removal.
.
Especially having not yet played Necromancer, I'm interested in seeing firstly how much of a "problem" this really is, and then sitting down at a table to think on solutions.
A few not yet mentioned possibilities are bombs and other splash damage, as well as AoE spells where you can add in the thrall you want gone.
Also worth mentioning that once you can summon >1 thrall per action, using the cantrip again to create some thralls will allow you to always-auto hit the old thrall while adding to the total count.
That can let you both "Step" a thrall 1 square at a time, while still growing the army. Even if you are at serious MAP from something like that Bone Spear focus spell, the auto-hit reliability of said thralls is really handy, because being able to both create and smack is action compression.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Have any of you noticed the problem with Create Trall states “ When you cast the spell, you can have up to one thrall created by this spell make a melee unarmed Strike” under thrall it states “They can’t take actions, but they can be used for various abilities”. This two statements directly contradicts each other. I think some wording need to be rethought
Wording might be a bit unclear. What it means is that Thralls don't get actions and can't do anything normally. An action you're taking can cause a thrall to do something, because that's your action making that happen.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, the basic thing is that thralls don't get turns. They still do things when your abilities make them do things, but they never do anything on their own.
I love deadweight in conjunction with flesh magician and bone burst.
Summon two thrall, have them flank, one latches on with deadweight.
If they failed their save they have to kill the thrall to move. This induces map. They are now in difficult terrain and can't 5 ft step meaning they have to make a second attack at the second thrall inducing further map to move without risking a reaction bone burst.
They could attack the thrall not latched and be forced to spend a second action on the second and be in difficult terrain for their first movement. Or if they succeed, suffer -10 speed and a constant risk that they may trigger the thralls reaction that's latched onto them.
It's simply great value vs single more powerful opponents.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I love deadweight in conjunction with flesh magician and bone burst.
Summon two thrall, have them flank, one latches on with deadweight.
If they failed their save they have to kill the thrall to move. This induces map. They are now in difficult terrain and can't 5 ft step meaning they have to make a second attack at the second thrall inducing further map to move without risking a reaction bone burst.
They could attack the thrall not latched and be forced to spend a second action on the second and be in difficult terrain for their first movement. Or if they succeed, suffer -10 speed and a constant risk that they may trigger the thralls reaction that's latched onto them.
It's simply great value vs single more powerful opponents.
If the enemy is IN difficult terrain, they can step without issue. You cannot step into difficult terrain but you can Step out of difficult terrain with 0 issue.
In fact, making the space an enemy is in difficult terrain won't really do much unless the enemy is Large or bigger. A medium or smaller creature will take no penalty, since only moving into difficult terrain is bad.
I love deadweight in conjunction with flesh magician and bone burst.
Summon two thrall, have them flank, one latches on with deadweight.
If they failed their save they have to kill the thrall to move. This induces map. They are now in difficult terrain and can't 5 ft step meaning they have to make a second attack at the second thrall inducing further map to move without risking a reaction bone burst.
They could attack the thrall not latched and be forced to spend a second action on the second and be in difficult terrain for their first movement. Or if they succeed, suffer -10 speed and a constant risk that they may trigger the thralls reaction that's latched onto them.
It's simply great value vs single more powerful opponents.
If the enemy is IN difficult terrain, they can step without issue. You cannot step into difficult terrain but you can Step out of difficult terrain with 0 issue.
In fact, making the space an enemy is in difficult terrain won't really do much unless the enemy is Large or bigger. A medium or smaller creature will take no penalty, since only moving into difficult terrain is bad.
Fair enough, still good imo though.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think some very good points about the cognitive load of Striding thralls, but I just can’t shake the non-mechanical urge that the horde needs to be able to move. As an alternate, and slightly addressing the too-many-bodies-on-the-field problem, what if Create Thrall allowed you to *either* summon a thrall in a space within range **or** allow a thrall within range to move to another space within range? That way there’s no movement Speed to track, it’s just take any thrall already within 30’ of you and put it somewhere else within 30’ where you could’ve summoned another one. I think it makes for an interesting tactical choice without getting into the minutia that makes minion tracking annoying
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think some very good points about the cognitive load of Striding thralls, but I just can’t shake the non-mechanical urge that the horde needs to be able to move. As an alternate, and slightly addressing the too-many-bodies-on-the-field problem, what if Create Thrall allowed you to *either* summon a thrall in a space within range **or** allow a thrall within range to move to another space within range? That way there’s no movement Speed to track, it’s just take any thrall already within 30’ of you and put it somewhere else within 30’ where you could’ve summoned another one. I think it makes for an interesting tactical choice without getting into the minutia that makes minion tracking annoying
but like.... why would you ever do that though? outside of using a thrall to eat a reactive strike that is straight up inferior to making a new thrall at the desired location and still having the old one at the prior location
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think some very good points about the cognitive load of Striding thralls, but I just can’t shake the non-mechanical urge that the horde needs to be able to move. As an alternate, and slightly addressing the too-many-bodies-on-the-field problem, what if Create Thrall allowed you to *either* summon a thrall in a space within range **or** allow a thrall within range to move to another space within range? That way there’s no movement Speed to track, it’s just take any thrall already within 30’ of you and put it somewhere else within 30’ where you could’ve summoned another one. I think it makes for an interesting tactical choice without getting into the minutia that makes minion tracking annoyingbut like.... why would you ever do that though? outside of using a thrall to eat a reactive strike that is straight up inferior to making a new thrall at the desired location and still having the old one at the prior location
Yeah, eating Reactive Strikes from non-strategic enemies, or clearing space in a chokepoint or next to an enemy. Lots of folks are concerned about over-filling the battlefield, which becomes more and more likely as you increase in level.
IMO the only real mechanical problem is when you are out of focus spells to destroy your thrall, specially at high level in small rooms you may risk to surround your enemies with them and becomes without space to create new ones to attack or to allies to get closer and hit to kill your own thralls is a very ugly solution IMO.
So I like the idea of a free-action to sacrifice a thrown and get a minor benefit as a free-action to clean some space when needed. Another solution is just to allow the create thrall cantrip to instead of create a new thrall allow to control an existing one to Strike this may solve the problem too.
Thematically I miss a bit the idea to move around with an army of undeads in exploration mode but I know as GM that start an encounter with 10 or more thrall in the battle field because the player was repeating the create thrall in exploration mode would be a logistic hell. So no I'm OK with thralls unable to move.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think some very good points about the cognitive load of Striding thralls, but I just can’t shake the non-mechanical urge that the horde needs to be able to move. As an alternate, and slightly addressing the too-many-bodies-on-the-field problem, what if Create Thrall allowed you to *either* summon a thrall in a space within range **or** allow a thrall within range to move to another space within range? That way there’s no movement Speed to track, it’s just take any thrall already within 30’ of you and put it somewhere else within 30’ where you could’ve summoned another one. I think it makes for an interesting tactical choice without getting into the minutia that makes minion tracking annoyingbut like.... why would you ever do that though? outside of using a thrall to eat a reactive strike that is straight up inferior to making a new thrall at the desired location and still having the old one at the prior location
One major consideration I think is space-conscious encounters.
Recalling Abomination Vaults, some of the worst rooms might have fewer than 10 total open squares during a combat. In such an environment, making more thralls could be actively detrimental, and an option to sustain thralls for damage or movement without summoning more would be extremely valuable.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think moving them doesn't have much point but a free action Dismiss would be great
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I personally would like a few more Grave Cantrips, gated behind feats of course. Maybe something like "Ghoulish Dismissal" You dismiss a thrall, which then wails or violently tears itself apart, or otherwise destroys itself in a disturbing way, allowing you to make an intimidation check against an adjacent enemy, without the -4 penalty for not sharing a language and you may chose, when you cast the cantrip, if it has the auditory or visual or both traits.
I agree that their default non-moving state is best.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I do still think a free action dismiss would be a "polishing away the nuance" type solution, and should be avoided.
.
+1 to the idea of another 1A Grave Cantrip that addresses this issue in its multi-function effects.
Something like "Manipulate Thralls"
the spell does not add any more, but can move X thralls, attack w 1 thrall, and pop/dismiss 1 thrall.
Oh, even better. That cantrip's thrall pop would be another optional spender, if you pop a thrall before or after the thralls move, you the Necromancer can take a Step.
A spender Step is kinda perfect for a class that looks like it's super duper going to have issues want/needing to move and do it's action-heavy class thing.
I do still think a free action dismiss would be a "polishing away the nuance" type solution, and should be avoided.
If you are expecting a variety of solutions to this particular problem, list some of them.
Currently, the only options that I am hearing in this thread is "wait the 1 minute for them to all expire on their own" and "attack them to destroy them yourself".
So for a player that is trying to play their necromancer as a friend to the undead and doesn't want to attack the thralls that they created, what other options are there?
Should "you can have up to one thrall created by this spell
make a melee unarmed Strike" be interpreted as referring to one thrall made by *this casting* of the cantrip, or can I have any thrall already on the board lash out as well? Technically, they were all created by that spell (except for the meatier ones you get later on).
Technically,any created by anyone with said spell, but not any created by Inevitable Return, making Inevitable Return Thralls harder to use.
I think the line should read"you can have up to one thrall created by ,your abilities
make a melee unarmed Strike"
I do still think a free action dismiss would be a "polishing away the nuance" type solution, and should be avoided.If you are expecting a variety of solutions to this particular problem, list some of them.
Currently, the only options that I am hearing in this thread is "wait the 1 minute for them to all expire on their own" and "attack them to destroy them yourself".
So for a player that is trying to play their necromancer as a friend to the undead and doesn't want to attack the thralls that they created, what other options are there?
Uhhh, firstly, such flavor / thematic concerns must always come after mechanical ones.
Secondly, that concern doesn't really make sense. Every Necro knows that creating a thrall condemns it to "die" very soon. There is 0 possible way to sustain and keep thralls. Any Necro that thinks creating thralls causes harm and wishes to minimize that harm, kinda means *creating* as few as possible. Putting some sort of sin onto ending unlife because it was your hands making the attack is plainly irrational.
The difference between the thrall being hit, rotting away after 1 min, or being popped by the necro for an ability, seems irrelevant to the narrative of the thrall's PoV.
Due to their immunity to mental, it's rather rock-solid canonical that thralls are mindless, so there's no suffering that's even possible.
My "nice Necro" PC would likely have flavor saying that all the spirit-shards used to make thralls have just enough agency to willingly return to the Necro each time, making their continual re use a consenting affair.
.
.
But back to the mechanical discussion, the idea is that you want to have the player genuinely use their brain by thinking how to squeeze the "I want to re/move that thrall from that square" issue into other actions.
This can only happen if there is some genuine mechanical friction they seek to overcome!
Every single thrall-spender ability, boosted Strike, etc, can clear away chaff thralls from squares.
There is no shortage of those as options.
However, as they are all feats, I do really like the idea of a Manipulate Thralls grave cantrip, especially at L1 when they will not have such feats to think around. While there is no shortage of outside-Necro tools for this, it would be a nice QoL for Necro to come bundled w/ such a little spell.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You are evading the question.
But back to the mechanical discussion, the idea is that you want to have the player genuinely use their brain by thinking how to squeeze the "I want to re/move that thrall from that square" issue into other actions.
Besides attacking the thrall (or using abilities that destroy them that often cost resources such as focus points), what other options are there?
You are trying to frame this as a puzzle that needs to be solved. There isn't. There is one solution - attack the thrall to remove it from that square.
If someone is unhappy with that one and only one solution - what do you suggest?
I just wish I didn't need Thralls and Focus Points to use my Focus Spells, it should really be an either or thing or perhaps similar to AMP'd Cantrips from Psychic, you can destroy a Thrall to increase the power of the spell, that would actually be pretty cool and not feel like you have a resource tax. Kinda like how the new Oracle has both Focus Spells and Cursebound Actions which give them negativies, why can't the Necromancer be the same way with Thralls?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like the idea to make it work like AMPs. Instead of focus spells uses a thrall and a focus point it could be a cantrip that use just uses a thrall as fuel AND can be improved by a focus point. This also address the problem of lack of good options to remove a thrall without get a MAP or waste a focus point.
You are evading the question.
But back to the mechanical discussion, the idea is that you want to have the player genuinely use their brain by thinking how to squeeze the "I want to re/move that thrall from that square" issue into other actions.Besides attacking the thrall (or using abilities that destroy them that often cost resources such as focus points), what other options are there?
You are trying to frame this as a puzzle that needs to be solved. There isn't. There is one solution - attack the thrall to remove it from that square.
If someone is unhappy with that one and only one solution - what do you suggest?
I most certainly am not dodging the question, lol. Didn't expect that accusation considering how bloated my posts get.
If the need is to remove the thrall, then the "puzzle" is to both remove the thrall and do your other thing, while minimizing the cost and maximizing the gain.
And as I stated before, every single "thrall spender" necro ability or spell has this function of clearing thralls off the map. They are all tools to use for this puzzle. These spenders all gain nuance if clearing thralls is not a 0A freebie thing.
When you have 3 thralls on the map, don't autopilot when burning a thrall to tHP up, think about which thrall you choose to clear away.
(and again, if you just get a free delete button, all that nuance is gone)
The only way that puzzle has real merit is if there is real cost involved. Imo, there are soooo many tools to add /relocate AoE, that I'm not at all worried about this being a real problem for the class.
Yes, a Necro that's already burned their "delete + gain 1 FP" button may downgrade from TkP and cast Electric Arc instead because they want to include a thrall. That choice only has meaning if it is a dmg / other downgrade in order to gain a thrall deletion.
Importantly, it was the existence of the puzzle/problem that motivated them to personally invent a strategy to help (getting a Jolt Coil), and this type of engagement is the kind of thing that imo is key to "satisfaction" with ttrpg agency & play.
.
And again, it is not reasonable for anyone to be super dug into any particular stance on this question so early. I certainly have not yet played/seen a Necro, nor have I heard a single player complaint that the square blocking is a genuine problem in play.
Creating a thrall is almost always better than moving one to a new position in range (and if you allow thralls to move out of range, that's a noticeable buff). However, as soon as people start moving the token over the board, more cognitive processes engage and more people will start talking. I'm going to second Tridus- If Thralls start moving frequently, certain players are going to slow the game to a crawl, and I don't think, "Just don't let them play Necromancer" is a good solution.
I would like a Base Kinesis-like activity for thralls doing menail stuff out of combat, though.
100% agree.
The Base Kinesis idea could work.Maybe unlimited free castings of Phantasmal Minion?
I would like an option to "stick" minions onto a willing target, so that they share their space and move with them.
This will allow useful movement without added decision points slowing down play.
As it stands, there are some good reasons to pick up and carry a Thrall, "sticky" thralls would just make things smoother.
A feat that lets you use Create Thrall to make "Sticky" thralls, plus gives you a Focus spell that grants an AC or Save bonus to any creature with a Thrall stuck to them.
If eliminating excess thralls needs to be addressed, I could see just adding another single action Grave Cantrip as a class feature that gives a thrall within 30 ft an optional attack (same as the Create Thrall one) and then destroys it with no other benefits.
To address concerns of a lackluster melee necro build, you could also modify the feats that enable that build so they let the Necromancer take the melee attack from this Destroy Thrall cantrip themselves, using the the melee weapon's dice and abilities instead of the listed spell attack dice but still counting as a spell attack to use the better progression.
I'm very excited for the Necromancer's interactions with Thralls and believe this is a great way to get the feel of a horde with the mechanical balance of PF2e.
I'll start off by listing my personal Pros/Cons on how I think this is implemented and will give more as I do real world playtests and hope others will add to the discussion as well.
Pros:
- Easy to deploy (love that I could send out 3 on turn one at level one if I want)- Interactions with focus spells are awesome and very flavorful. I want my minions to be expendable
- Battlefield control is the Necromancer's vibe and these are a great way to do it.
- Bone Spear!
- Life Tap!
- I'm going to stop there...most of the feats look really fun
Cons:
- I really want to be able to move them for both flavor and mechanic. - Proposed Solution - Perhaps under "Create Thrall" add a line that gives you a choice to either create one or move an existing one with both options ending in said thrall making an attack- There is no way to get rid of unwanted Thralls if you don't have the right focus spell and have already used the Consume Thrall ability in the last 10 minutes. - Potential Solution - Give the necromancer an action that is not on a cooldown and doesn't use a focus point that destroys a thrall for a minor benefit.
- What do I do with my thralls when I'm out of focus points?
- Would like a little more variety on the saves they can target, fortitude is often pretty problematic (mathematically speaking)
Questions:
- While I get that they always fail saves and are hit by attacks, I'd love some clarification on how checks against their DCs works. The big one is that Tumble Through is an untrained activity and so I'm wondering if it is the intension for enemies to auto-succeed on these, or if they have some form of DC. If their stats are simply listed as 0, then mechanically the DC would be 10 (10+modifier), but not sure if that is the intention.- Dead Weight is a cool ability, but why would a creature try to "escape"...
That is an excellent question about dead weight. The only reason I can think to try to escape is if you are using one of the later feat thralls like perfect thrall but that comes online so late it seems pointless.
Dead weight is not useless as it still likely costs them an action but given how trivial it is to smite the thrall off you just seems like it isn't doing what it seems to want to do.
I think the Tumble Through DC should be class DC.
I also think there is little reason to be concerned about dismissing Thralls.
They count as allies, so they do not imped the movement of PCs.
They do count as lesser cover, and that should be addressed, but otherwise, a battle field full of Thralls is the enemies problem, and only a boon to a Necromancer.
The image of a Necromancer and his cadre striding unimpeded through a wall of writhing undead should be pretty intimidating.
Thralls have Size, but do they have weight?
I ask , because dropping Thralls on the enemy is currently a possibility.
Stacking Thralls in order to overcome an obstacle seems doable.
Taking Cover behind a Thrall would be weird.
Does a Thrall body disappear by default?
Back to the lesser cover, Thrall bodies should offer no cover to anyone but allies.
I would like Spirit thralls to be unnoticed until they attack, but their isn't anyway to make that not broken.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I personally would like a few more Grave Cantrips, gated behind feats of course. Maybe something like "Ghoulish Dismissal" You dismiss a thrall, which then wails or violently tears itself apart, or otherwise destroys itself in a disturbing way, allowing you to make an intimidation check against an adjacent enemy, without the -4 penalty for not sharing a language and you may chose, when you cast the cantrip, if it has the auditory or visual or both traits.
I agree that their default non-moving state is best.
I also was hoping there would be some more grave cantrips. Some other boss a thrall around thing that does not eat a focus point. Could also be variant create thrall that is a two action cantrip that summons thralls + some kind of other effect or summons more thralls than the one action version and lets you attack with two thralls with MAP changing after the attacks.