|
Trip H. on the previous page advocated that you shouldn't be able to get rid of unwanted thralls, because (and I paraphrase a bit), having no means of turning off your own class features is interesting, and that players wouldn't use their brainpower without discomfort.There's a lot that can get lost in the shuffle, but yeah, I'm going to take a sec to tear down that strawman.
I am against the 0A free dismiss for thralls, yes, as that would remove all brainpower from that consideration. If there really is an instant delete button with no cost nor context, then your entire thought process around creating thralls is fundamentally changed, and imo for the worse.
I very much support the addition of more tools that include more ways to remove unwanted thralls than what is currently baseline.
My main agree/disagree "line" is that there must always be some real mechanical cost around the deletion, else you no longer care/think about it. So long as a badly placed thrall creates some "need to change my plan a bit" response, then the puzzle/mechanic is "punishing enough" to meet my goal.
.
One specific example of the "more tools, but not a "solve" button" push was when I proposed 2nd grave cantrip that's granted at L1:
Manipulate Thralls:
1A [tag][tag][tag]With a jerk of animating energies, you stir your thralls into action. When you cast this cantrip, you energize up to the same number of thralls that you could add via Create Thrall. These thralls Stride up to 20 feet, and one may make an attack as if freshly created.
Additionally, you may consume any thrall within 60 feet to energize yourself, enabling you to Step before or after your thralls act.
While the genesis of this cantrip was the thrall block question, the point is that it's a genuine multi-purpose tool that gives the whole class more depth. The ability to do a:
1A: [Step](Spender) + [Necro management](not builder!)
that includes deleting a thrall, is the missing spender...
Would being able to dismiss a Thrall with a reaction, possibly as many as one could normally create with 1A, be enough of a cost?
I haven't studied the Necromancer enough to know if they have any good, interesting uses for their reactions.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here's a thought. Perhaps thralls differ based on the type summoned and thus feel more mechanically useful and varied.
When you create thrall you get the initial choice of:
Skeleton - attacks when summoned
Flesh - attempts to grab when summoned
Ghost - attempts to intimidate when summoned
All would use your SA modifier and all would then be treated exactly the same after the initial roll. All of these things are things any PC can do from lvl 1 so I don't see it as OP, but it would make for some cool variety and make my thralls feel special.
If thos is too strong by some accounts, perhaps that is based on the initial Grim Facination you choose and then there are level 1 feats you can get to add the other choices.
Here's a thought. Perhaps thralls differ based on the type summoned and thus feel more mechanically useful and varied.
When you create thrall you get the initial choice of:
Skeleton - attacks when summoned
Flesh - attempts to grab when summoned
Ghost - attempts to intimidate when summonedAll would use your SA modifier and all would then be treated exactly the same after the initial roll. All of these things are things any PC can do from lvl 1 so I don't see it as OP, but it would make for some cool variety and make my thralls feel special.
If thos is too strong by some accounts, perhaps that is based on the initial Grim Facination you choose and then there are level 1 feats you can get to add the other choices.
with those I can see an issue with Ghost not interacting with MAP like the other two and, if using Demoralize rules, each creature targeted would then be immune for 10 mins
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
with those I can see an issue with Ghost not interacting with MAP like the other two and, if using Demoralize rules, each creature targeted would then be immune for 10 minsHere's a thought. Perhaps thralls differ based on the type summoned and thus feel more mechanically useful and varied.
When you create thrall you get the initial choice of:
Skeleton - attacks when summoned
Flesh - attempts to grab when summoned
Ghost - attempts to intimidate when summonedAll would use your SA modifier and all would then be treated exactly the same after the initial roll. All of these things are things any PC can do from lvl 1 so I don't see it as OP, but it would make for some cool variety and make my thralls feel special.
If thos is too strong by some accounts, perhaps that is based on the initial Grim Facination you choose and then there are level 1 feats you can get to add the other choices.
I dont see it not interacting with MAP as a problem as Demoralize is a legit 1 action tactics you or anybody can do anyway. Frankly I see it as action compression like so many other actions various classes get (thrall plus demoralize).
As to being immune for 10 minutes, that's an issue, but can be approached a few ways. If you rule it is the thrall (not Necromancer) making the Demoralize attempt, then a new thrall could do it just fine. This may be a bit too powerful though. If you rule it is the Necromancer making the Demoralize, then they would be immune, though it is similar to the Braggart Swashbucker and their Intimidation to gain Panache.
Considering that the thralls can also easily be used to box an enemy in and/or create major movement problems for NPCs, especially in a small room, it seems perfectly fair that the GM can turn around and use them to create problems for the PCs.
Indeed and I think that's a problem for everyone. Unlimited thralls, being able to summon 3 times a turn and having nearly no control over them afterward are all issues I think need to be changed.
I don't think producing stop signs/mini walls en mass makes for a good core class mechanic. In small rooms or hallways it can become choking and trivialize certain creatures while in large open spaces with creatures that fly and or have aoe abilities they can be nearly useless. I think that's a bit too much of a swing.Reigning in the frequency and amount but giving them more options like range or stacking on top of each other to act as full cover would make them much more interesting. Focus more on making them have options and unlocking new uses for them other then blowing them up.
I keep thinking of hallways, something rather common in APs four thralls a turn with two actions and a move means a regular enemy could never reach you, as they can only destroy 3 thralls every 2 turns. So even a ten foot wide corridor becomes simple to defend. Imagine two necromancer's in a group, easy to choke out even larger combats.
This mechanic also heavily favors ranged party members versus melee as you can completely block off space around enemies.
If they clarify that enemies can tumble through or just move through thralls somehow then they sort of just turn into clutter on the field. Just seems like a high risk of being an inconvenience to everyone instead of a fun and engaging mechanic.
Would being able to dismiss a Thrall with a reaction, possibly as many as one could normally create with 1A, be enough of a cost?
I haven't studied the Necromancer enough to know if they have any good, interesting uses for their reactions.
Absolutely. Reactions are super under utilized for casters (though Necro does have a feat for a pseudo-Reactive Strike!).
Reactions, and classes that don't get any good ones out of the box, are a big reason for a lot of balance hiccups in pf2, IMO.
Adding more Reaction options is something I can only see as a good idea.
In my "perfect world pf2" I'd give every class an evergreen decent Reaction at baseline, no feat spend required. It's honestly kinda ridiculous that you have such a significant chunk of power for every turn that so often goes unspent.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Casters get plenty of reactions via their lower level slots. Some of them are quite decent, too. That's baseline with no feat expenditure.
Casters get plenty of reactions via their lower level slots. Some of them are quite decent, too. That's baseline with no feat expenditure.
That's really not in the same ballpark as Reactive Strike, Deflecting Wave, etc. Even Shield Block is amazing with an on-level Sturdy Shield, though that's more involved action-wise and not really comparable.
.
While I do think Reaction spells are underrated, there really are only 2 I know of that I'd ever consider heightening, Brine Dragon Bile & Blood Vendetta.
All the others are "low R wonders" that still struggle to justify occupying a slot much of the time. They are all combat things, and slots have amazing utility potential (if you don't need gp for them). Free mounts, planetary communication, you still fill your low slots with neat-o things.
Reactions spells tend to have one of three major problems: good effects with rare triggers(Air Bubble), have common triggers but ugh effects (Loose the Path), or have dice rolls that demand high R slots (Blood Vendetta).
Honestly, they are kinda great as scrolls due to how well the flexibility of changing what you're holding helps address (2) of these issues, either opting into that rare reaction when the time is right, or burning though a stack of Interposing Earth scrolls to maximize your survival.
|
|
I like that we can summon Thralls without some limit, beyond the actions spent and the minute duration.
If you summon too many and it becomes a hinderance to your team, that is on you. Any Necormancer worth his weight in bones wouldn't do something that foolish.
That being said, I wouldn't be oppossed to or find it themetaicaly inappropriate for a Necromancer to have a way to dispatch his thralls, likely at teh cost of an action.
I could also see Create Thrall, or a seperate cantrip, being able to make a single existing thrawl move and or attack.
I just want something cool to do with them that doesn't require a focus point. Doesn't have to be that strong, just something reliable.
Consume Thrall ALMOST scratches that itch, but it is a 1 per 10 minute thing (rightfully so). Maybe just something like
Essence Transference
1 Action
Destroy one of your thralls to give you or one of your allies 2 Temporary Hit Points that last until the end of your next turn
Heighten +1: Increase the amount of Temporary HP gained by 1
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, once animated summoned created, when they get their appearing attack, can the thralls *do* anything on subsequent rounds? Apart from the necromancer using actions to turn them into bony spears or blowing them as bombs, or being dismissed to power your focus pool, or being dismissed to have your spell start from their position is there any ability that just lets the necromancer make another basic strike with them? Do they have AoO’s or do they just….be…there? I’m a little confused as to what they…do. I mean I can see that they…get in the way, but beyond that they seem very inert. Currently.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, onceanimatedsummonedcreated, when they get their appearing attack, can the thralls *do* anything on subsequent rounds? Apart from the necromancer using actions to turn them into bony spears or blowing them as bombs, or being dismissed to power your focus pool, or being dismissed to have your spell start from their position is there any ability that just lets the necromancer make another basic strike with them? Do they have AoO’s or do they just….be…there? I’m a little confused as to what they…do. I mean I can see that they…get in the way, but beyond that they seem very inert. Currently.
Presently thralls are more of a tactical resource than a horde of independent minions. This seems to be the intended balance for being able to pop out dozens of them in a few turns, both as a trade-off of power vs. having one strong minion, and as a solution for "Necromancer has to take 27 actions per turn" time drag.
To some, this means the Necromancer isn't even truly a Necromancer unless the thralls all act on their own. Others simply advocate for the ability to command thralls to move (in or out of combat) even if only for its roleplaying value rather than any combat utility (that is, it's been noted that commanding a thrall to move and attack is strictly weaker than spawning a new one in other than freeing up a space).
But yes, to summarize, thralls as written are an attack cantrip that fills a space and provides flanking and can be consumed for focus spells. They don't act on their own at all except arguably the attack they make when they emerge.
So, onceanimatedsummonedcreated, when they get their appearing attack, can the thralls *do* anything on subsequent rounds? Apart from the necromancer using actions to turn them into bony spears or blowing them as bombs, or being dismissed to power your focus pool, or being dismissed to have your spell start from their position is there any ability that just lets the necromancer make another basic strike with them? Do they have AoO’s or do they just….be…there? I’m a little confused as to what they…do. I mean I can see that they…get in the way, but beyond that they seem very inert. Currently.
Presently thralls are more of a tactical resource than a horde of independent minions. This seems to be the intended balance for being able to pop out dozens of them in a few turns, both as a trade-off of power vs. having one strong minion, and as a solution for "Necromancer has to take 27 actions per turn" time drag.
Yep, makes sense.
To some, this means the Necromancer isn't even truly a Necromancer unless the thralls all act on their own. Others simply advocate for the ability to command thralls to move (in or out of combat) even if only for its roleplaying value rather than any combat utility (that is, it's been noted that commanding a thrall to move and attack is strictly weaker than spawning a new one in other than freeing up a space).
Not being able to have them open doors, spring traps that require more than a modicum of interaction (as opposed, or perhaps as well as Interact) or apparently pour a nice….red…Absolom 4068 is, I have to admit, a bit odd. Makes thralls exactly an artifice for grid based RPG combat only. I guess there are other undead servitors to be achieved to perfectly coiff my wig. But to argue it isn’t a Necromancer is a bit silly.
But yes, to summarize, thralls as written are an attack cantrip that fills a space and provides flanking and can be consumed for focus spells. They don't act on their own at all except arguably the attack they make when they emerge.
Thanks! I’d have to say the flanking is still pretty useful, but it does seem a bit of a missed opportunity, regardless of how it might need to be balanced/rectified, that they don’t “threaten” or make any further basic attacks. Sure, explode, spearsnipe etc. But no further active threat is sadface.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
"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."
It says one thrall created by this spell, not one thrall created by this casting of the spell.
I think any of the Thralls created from any casting of Create Thrall can be the Thrall that "you can have up to one thrall make a melee unarmed Strike"
As it reads right now I think any necromancer casting Create Thrall could affect any Thrall created by the spell, even if that spell originated from another character entirely.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
[snip]
As it reads right now I think any necromancer casting Create Thrall could affect any Thrall created by the spell, even if that spell originated from another character entirely.
I agree with all except that last bit.
For spellcasters, there's a real rule catch around your spells and your spell slots.
Even when left unsaid by the class feats, all mention of things like "spell slots" are kinda auto-rewritten RaW into adding your Class into the text as a prefix. " ... your [Witch/etc] spell slots ..."
which matters because of possibilities like archetyping. Note that this auto-prefix doesn't always create incompatibilities, and it's only those abilities/feats that care about which slots they affect will call out "your Witch slots," etc.
It can be tricky to find those few spots in the text where those kind of "missing from text, but RaW implied" details are mentioned, but I'm guessing there's one about all references to cast spells having the same sort of "___ created by this spell" being technically "___ created by [your] spell" under the RaW hood.
And if such a [your] insertion is not RaW, it's most certainly RaI.
Casters interacting directly other casters' ongoing magics is absolutely the rare exception that is explicitly explained / instructed when it happens.
I think saying "act on their own" is vary ambiguous and perhaps even misleading. I think something similar to rangers pet being only able to stride toward your hunted target could be a baseline for making thrall movement simple. If you spend an action to move X thrall's instead of creating X thrall's then have them move toward the nearest enemy, could be a reasonable ability I think. Even if mechanically they teleport or self destroy by going back into the ground before popping back up elsewhere as if new. Seems like a small change to me that would help immersion a lot. Still doesn't fix potential clogging and blocking issues, but it's a start.
|
Here's a thought. Perhaps thralls differ based on the type summoned and thus feel more mechanically useful and varied.
When you create thrall you get the initial choice of:
Skeleton - attacks when summoned
Flesh - attempts to grab when summoned
Ghost - attempts to intimidate when summonedAll would use your SA modifier and all would then be treated exactly the same after the initial roll. All of these things are things any PC can do from lvl 1 so I don't see it as OP, but it would make for some cool variety and make my thralls feel special.
If thos is too strong by some accounts, perhaps that is based on the initial Grim Facination you choose and then there are level 1 feats you can get to add the other choices.
I like this suggestion.
with those I can see an issue with Ghost not interacting with MAP like the other two and, if using Demoralize rules, each creature targeted would then be immune for 10 minsHere's a thought. Perhaps thralls differ based on the type summoned and thus feel more mechanically useful and varied.
When you create thrall you get the initial choice of:
Skeleton - attacks when summoned
Flesh - attempts to grab when summoned
Ghost - attempts to intimidate when summonedAll would use your SA modifier and all would then be treated exactly the same after the initial roll. All of these things are things any PC can do from lvl 1 so I don't see it as OP, but it would make for some cool variety and make my thralls feel special.
If thos is too strong by some accounts, perhaps that is based on the initial Grim Facination you choose and then there are level 1 feats you can get to add the other choices.
I dont see it not interacting with MAP as a problem as Demoralize is a legit 1 action tactics you or anybody can do anyway. Frankly I see it as action compression like so many other actions various classes get (thrall plus demoralize).
As to being immune for 10 minutes, that's an issue, but can be approached a few ways. If you rule it is the thrall (not Necromancer) making the Demoralize attempt, then a new thrall could do it just fine. This may be a bit too powerful though. If you rule it is the Necromancer making the Demoralize, then they would be immune, though it is similar to the Braggart Swashbucker and their Intimidation to gain Panache.
Maybe making the Necromancer a little OP via this "new Thrall, no immunity" Demoralize would be a good thing?
It would play well with their fragility, the overwhelming horde trope and there would be plenty of immune or resistant targets.Allowing targets to immediately dismiss a level of Frightened condition by killing the Thrall could be a balancing mechanism.
Not having access to any helpful feats to improve the Demoralize action helps keep it from going too crazy.
If ghosts have this Demoralize action and we give skeletons a ranged attack instead of their weak reflex save, then only flesh thralls would need to close with their target to make an impact on gameplay.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would rather keep the subclass bonuses more in line with what they currently are, imo.
Right now they're interesting, but not overwhelming enough to radically dictate how you play, which is a nice balance when there's multiple layers to the subclasses including thematic ones.
I'd rather see more nuance added from feats, even if it's a feat with mutually exclusive options.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like if we wanted each thrall to have a unique trick it does, all Necormancers should be able to spawn any of the three thralls to perform that trick but gain a bonus to their own thrall specifically.
Like, I feel like no matter how useful demoralizing is in combat, it's not going to be so useful that the vitamancer will always have a use for demoralizing ever time they create a new thrall. It's just not as universally useful as a Strike to me.
As a plus, giving each thrall type its own, small mechanical niche would lend to the idea expressed in the playtest that Necromancers are not limited to their specialization (and also address the question of whether Necromancers in general can sidestep the aerial thrall question by choosing ghosts over skeletons for those particular summons).
It would be a couple things at once to balance out, but if the specialization bonus of each thrall was limited to roughly what it is now, it wouldn't have to mean calibrating the value of different thrall utility.