| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Every round, you can Trace 2 Runes and Invoke them for 4d6 damage per "rank". That's way beyond Disintegrate (2d10 per rank) and doesn't cost any resource (even if it is only usable at melee range).
Someone forgot to make their math homework. As is, the Runesmith has twice the Fighter damage output.
Oh wow.
It also looks like traced runes last until the end of your next turn, which means you only need half the actions to detonate.
At a quick glance, I can find no rule that prevents Tracing the same rune onto a foe multiple times, I don't think this triggers any of the system-wide redundant effects rules; should be valid in the same way it's fine to sustain multiples of the same spell name for damage.
If that's correct, then you can spend turn 1 using every available action to trace a damage rune, then just make sure that 1A of the next turn is the detonator action.
Edit: I do think the RaI is that you can only hurt a foe w/ 1 copy of each type of rune, and that the single rune spam version would not work.
But seeing that there are even runes that damage adjacent foes on detonation, not the rune-bearer, this seems to be a rather serious issue.
.
This issue is even made all the more tricky/sticky due to how the Runesmith gains Etched limit as the lvl up.
At L9 when they first get 4 etched runes, it's hard not to worry about them going all in on dmg and detonating all 4 of those "dmg adjacent" runes for a scaling 2d6 nukes.
Damn. Runesmith really looks like a mess after reading Necromancer...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh wow.
It also looks like traced runes last until the end of your next turn, which means you only need half the actions to detonate.
At a quick glance, I can find no rule that prevents Tracing the same rune onto a foe multiple times, I don't think this triggers any of the system-wide redundant effects rules; should be valid in the same way it's fine to sustain multiples of the same spell name for damage.
If that's correct, then you can spend turn 1 using every available action to trace a damage rune, then just make sure that 1A of the next turn is the detonator action.
You can trace the same rune multiple times, but youc an only suffer damage from a given rune once per invocation.
Invoke Rune: "You can invoke any number of runes with a single Invoke Rune action, but creatures that would be affected by multiple copies of the same specific rune are affected only once, as normal for duplicate effects."
You can trace a whetstone on yourself and a fire and a thunder on an enemy who is adjacent on round 1, then detonate them all in round 2 for 3 x 2d6 for four actions. You can only know one other rune at 1st level if you want to be able to do this.
That's basically three focus spells for the actions of two and no resources, but you're limited to melee (including manipulate), and being in melee isn't a super safe place for you to be. They can also get 35' away to make you burn an action to move into range to invoke.
It's also a Fort save, instead of reflex or spell attack, which is going to be painful against a lot of enemies.
You can trace the same rune multiple times, but youc an only suffer damage from a given rune once per invocation.
Invoke Rune: "You can invoke any number of runes with a single Invoke Rune action, but creatures that would be affected by multiple copies of the same specific rune are affected only once, as normal for duplicate effects."
You can trace a whetstone on yourself and a fire and a thunder on an enemy who is adjacent on round 1, then detonate them all in round 2 for 3 x 2d6 for four actions.
That's basically three focus spells for the actions of two and no resources, but you're limited to melee (including manipulate), and being in melee isn't a super safe place for you to be. They can also get 35' away to make you burn an action to move into range to invoke.
It's also a Fort save, instead of reflex or spell attack, which is going to be painful against a lot of enemies.
Got me quoted before the edit, ha ha.
Yeah, it definitely looks like detonating copies of the same is not supposed to stack damage. That said, it's not really a "valid" design tool to prevent this issue.
Not only are there a whole lot of damage invoke runes, but the goal of classes like this is to support future rune additions, like alch items.
If a PC elects to take the slashing, fire, & electric runes, that's still absurd in a 3:1 trace:boom routine. Plus issues with the pre-combat Etch dmg runes like that slashing one.
While you can only hurt a foe w 1 slash rune per Invoke, it looks RaW to still spend all your Etches preloading copies of that one rune onto yourself. You still get to load up the same total damage nuke, you just cannot blast it all in one action and have to spread it out across the Invokes. (and if there are multiple foes adjacent, you can detonate 1 per foe turn 1)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
action economy of trigger multiple rune with 1 invoke action seem too good to be true
does this means runesmith can apply 5 different damage rune then trigger all 5 in 2 turn
With tracing trance you can trace six runes (four in round 1, two in round 2) before invocation in round 2.
If you're facing multiple melee enemies then the three damaging runes we have (whetstone, fire, thunder) can be triply applied to two enemies. But if you're facing two enemies in melee with two rounds of manipulate actions and 8 HP and relatively weak saves you may have other issues.
It works, but as I said above I don't think it yields anywhere near 'twice the output' of a fighter - not even one just using two actions to strike.
Graph with tracing trance (half of what you'd deal in 2 turns)
So more than twice more damage actually. Even when considering high Fortitude save it's still twice the Fighter damage.
So, yeah, totally, utterly, completely broken.
"Saves: moderate."
Yes, I agree it will be rough on the high level creatures with weak fort saves, no resistances or immunities to fire and/or electricity, and no reactive strike to incentivize you to burn actions to do this from range instead.
I am not shocked that certain build options can excel in optimal circumstances vs the "almost always works against everything" option.
And because Runesmith Tracing is manipulate, that means using a ranged weapon in melee for the Remote Detonation (level 1!) feat looks pretty appealing.
The MAP 0 Strike may soon be out-scaled by the dmg runes, but getting to compress the Invoke into the Strike for your last action is pretty damn busted if you are Tracing for 1A in melee.
Thanks to the end of next turn detail, you never have to worry about the runes fading un-exploded, and can manually Invoke if you miss.
And because none of that compression is flourish, you can mix that with the melee Strike + Trace on hit feat as well, though you need to be more mindful about MAP, and it will create some odd routines.
.
Very bizarre that they think it's okay to have such powerful action compression options at L1 like that. Even if the rune boom damage was properly balanced in isolation, that compression is designed to basically be an entire extra rune of value.
Like a martial that gets to do a 2nd Strike of damage if they hit, with 0 other costs.
That kinda makes those feats too good to leave out of balancing, making them a feat tax.
Nah that's just chart naming. The name doesn't auto adjust with the changes you make. I can confirm that, assuming both high AC and high fort, but also not assuming any other buffs/debuffs, that trace strike+trace+invoke is doing some funny damage especially at higher levels.
I could try more later, but I'm assuming this doesn't actually scale as well as the usual stuff because fort doesn't have an equivalent of synesthesia.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not sure how often you're going to be able to trace runes on multiple opponents without having to move (or use the ranged trace, which is an extra action.)
It works, but as I said above I don't think it yields anywhere near 'twice the output' of a fighter - not even one just using two actions to strike.Graph with tracing trance (half of what you'd deal in 2 turns)
So more than twice more damage actually. Even when considering high Fortitude save it's still twice the Fighter damage.
So, yeah, totally, utterly, completely broken.
What are you comparing here? Typically a greats sword fighter at L20 can hit 120+ DPR per round on a CR=PL high AC monster (Strike, Exacting Strike, Certain Strike).
Not sure what you're doing to get ~60-70 DPR.
The things people are missing in these discussions are:
- single target damage only matters to a degree. If I overkill something by 30%... then my white room DPR doesn't really matter since I'm losing 1/3 of it. You get similar issues with true strike amped imaginary weapon starlit span magi that nuke something to death but the big difference is they can do that nearly every round for 3 rounds whereas the battlesmith trends towards a set up round + a nova round. You can try to average that across 2 rounds but it can be more greatly interrupted than classes that can nova in one round isolation.
- Some of the features like tracing trance set up nova turns, but no one assessing the rune loss potential of enemies dying too soon or runes fading before you can invocate.
- Really we're stuck to 2 damage runes for 2D6/spell rank as the slashing rune requires another action to invocate as it is on a different target.
- There is a real move/incovacate/trace action juggling going on. The stand and trade white room doesn't really account for the moves/killing early effects.We need some real turn by turn analysis to capture what is happening in more realistic encounter. I'll whip up some math later in the week when I have time to compare some turn rotations and see what...
Just wanted to note that the invoke rune action just activates the invocation effect of any number of runes within 30 feet. So you could invoke two runes that are on a single creature and one on yourself for one action. I think some people are (imo) exaggerating a bit, but the damage is too high I think.
If you include crit failing both 280 but what is the chance they crit fail both is as often as they crit succeed both, so like 0 damage is both crit succeed, 35 if 1 succeds and 1 crit succeds, 70 if both just succeed, 105 if one succeeds and 1 fails, 140 is both fail and you know 280 on average is both crit fail, it's high chip damage but my guy, have you seen what the heck happens when a magus crits? Magus crits with amped imaginary weapon, is also nutty.
This is at level 19, at level 1 it's 4d6 with an average of 14 damage if they don't succeed twice against your Class DC of 17 Rune and at higher levels Fort is common.
If anything, I think the damage is being overstated. This is without any buffing or debuffing against a +3 creature with high AC and high saves. Note that this also ignores the extra damage spike of detonating your own slashing rune, so take that into account.
It's good damage, don't me wrong, but the moment you add the usual buffing and debuffing runesmith falls way off as the chance for martial crits rises. Even just off guard does this.
Edit: The hell with it. I'm going to need to math out a proper 3 turn routine with this. Does anyone know if you can transpose a diacritic enhanced rune, or just the base version?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I think a rather big chunk of this issue is due to how abnormally liberal Paizo is w/ action compression feats here.
At L6, you have the feat option to decide to not detonate that turn, and just get a free extra action for Tracing.
That... is just nuts. Runes don't have MAP as a balance saftey net. That feat is just giving the PC a delayed scaling 2d6 boom, every turn you don't want to detonate. Feats like Regurgitate Mutagen are expected to be once per fight, and that's one of Alch's best.
Considering how stingy Paizo is about other cantrip like abilities, especially the 1A damage ones, I just don't see how to untangle this mess. Every action compression possibility can be traded into another boom of damage.
Honestly, the design space of "pure damage" runes may be an outright "Do Not Create" hazard zone.
Even the slashing rune has a lot more nuance that could help keep it balanced. But any "all my power budget is dedicated to Invoke damage and nothing else" type rune options are black holes that everything else consequently orbits around for comparison.
No flourish restrictions, no Trace limits, no max Traced runes, etc. The current Runesmith is just completely unfettered to convert every possible action into evergreen scaling damage.
It kinda looks like deleting the pure boom runes might be the best way to salvage the class as-is.
Adding a restriction to only allow the PC to Trace each type of rune once per round might also be a good idea. So that rule would prevent you from tracing 2 fire runes in the same turn, but not 1 fire 1 slashing, etc. It doesn't catch too many "uh oh" cases, but it doesn't really causes any problems with normal expected play.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If anything, I think the damage is being overstated. This is without any buffing or debuffing against a +3 creature with high AC and high saves. Note that this also ignores the extra damage spike of detonating your own slashing rune, so take that into account.
It's good damage, don't me wrong, but the moment you add the usual buffing and debuffing runesmith falls way off as the chance for martial crits rises. Even just off guard does this.
Edit: The hell with it. I'm going to need to math out a proper 3 turn routine with this. Does anyone know if you can transpose a diacritic enhanced rune, or just the base version?
As bosses don't die in a single round, you can add an extra rune for the Runesmith (4 runes first round with the Stance and then 2 during second round and Invoke) so it outdamages the Fighter by 50%.
Also, high AC is the base, high Fortitude isn't (on average, monsters are between moderate and high in Fortitude when they are slightly above high in AC).
As bosses don't die in a single round, you can add an extra rune for the Runesmith (4 runes first round with the Stance and then 2 during second round and Invoke) so it outdamages the Fighter by 50%.
Also, high AC is the base, high Fortitude isn't (on average, monsters are between moderate and high in Fortitude when they are slightly above high in AC).
I'm planning to look at a basic 3 round rotation of:
1) stride, transpose sun-fire from ally to enemy, engrave strike thunder with slash-enhanced weapon
2) invoke all runes, auto-reapply fire, trace slashing, engrave strike thunder
3) invoke all runes, trace slashing, engrave strike thunder
If you have anything you'd like me to consider instead, or that I'm missing, let me know.
In general, whenever the rune boom damage is higher than a Strike, I think it'll do more damage to use Remote Detonation over Engraving Strike. (and 1+ H weapons are kinda a perfect fit for Runesmith's hand worries)
It makes it way more complicated to plan though. When Engr Strike misses, you don't need to modify the rest of the plan, but if Remote Det does miss, you need to swap something to Invoke. (and Remote Det doesn't pop the slash rune, so you will still occasionally use Invoke raw to pop an Etched slashing rune)
And if we are talking about post L6 play, then you have the Tracing Trance feat (which also pushes more use of Engr Strike) to further complicate things.
Between the 3 of those compressors, you can get essentially get 3 bonus actions (meaning 3 bonus scaling d6 booms) per 2 turns.
Major yikes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm planning to look at a basic 3 round rotation of:
1) stride, transpose sun-fire from ally to enemy, engrave strike thunder with slash-enhanced weapon
2) invoke all runes, auto-reapply fire, trace slashing, engrave strike thunder
3) invoke all runes, trace slashing, engrave strike thunder
If you have anything you'd like me to consider instead, or that I'm missing, let me know.
That's weak.
You can have one weapon and spiked gauntlets for 2 Runes of Whetstone on you.So you go with:
1) Tracing Stance, Stride, Trace Thunder, Trace Fire, Trace Preservation on Fire.
2) Invoke, Trace Thunder, Invoke
That's 120d6+30 (450) damage at level 20, 60d6+15 (225) on average per round. Against your so called level +3 boss with high Fortitude it's 215 average damage, or 108 per round, nearly twice your Fighter damage.
Overstated damage?
Why would you use the same rune twice when they don't stack on someone? I think you need to wonder about much saves kick in. I been utterly shut down as a Sorcerer and a Kineticist because creatures either saved or crit saved against me multiple times reducing my damage to being pitiful. Also yeah damage seems high but like Starlit span magus Spell-striking every turn or a gleaming blade Barbarian.
Why would you use the same rune twice when they don't stack on someone?
I use runes only once during each Invoke.
Why would you use the same rune twice when they don't stack on someone?I use runes only once during each Invoke.
Makes sense!
Not only that but with manipulate Tracing a rune could end up hurting you badly
Why would you use the same rune twice when they don't stack on someone?I use runes only once during each Invoke.Makes sense!
Not only that but with manipulate Tracing a rune could end up hurting you badly
Especially against level 23+ foes, which basically all have Reactive Strike or something even better.
Trying this with a Hekatonkheires is essentially pushing a suicide button, but the others aren't sunshine and rainbows. The Jabberwock and Deneva Titan disrupt on hit, any of them can disrupt on Crit, etc.
Plus, creatures are not just saves and HP. At that level they will likely have movement, range, or reach far outstripping the Runesmith, so pulling this combo off is essentially impossible. The Solar, for example, has 100 foot fly speed, so as long as it has 1 action to put distance the whole thing falls apart.
And this is before we bring in spells and other abilities.
It is big damage for sure, but unless it's properly playtested against actual foes all the math is just math.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Anyone else get the feeling the damage scaling is supposed to be every 2 spell ranks, not levels? Like there was maybe some mixup when developing the class. Honestly each rune doing 10d6 at level 20 seems sort of okay, to me
I didn't even consider double invoke in one round and we can add even more as we get more engraved runes, like adding persistent 1d4 fire or int-to-damage to the slashing runes along with sending a pre etched sun-fire rune to squeeze in one more action somewhere.
Oh yes, this is quite beautiful. This thing, with absolutely 0 party support, and after squeezing in a little extra average damage from those extra runes, even exceeds our friend the imaginary weapon magus at full de/buffing.
What is the different in double invoking vs Tracing a Rune of Fire & Rune of Thunder?
What is the different in double invoking vs Tracing a Rune of Fire & Rune of Thunder?
The fire rune is auto-reapplied by persistent rune. So the second invoke is another set of slash+fire+lightning
Anyone else get the feeling the damage scaling is supposed to be every 2 spell ranks, not levels? Like there was maybe some mixup when developing the class. Honestly each rune doing 10d6 at level 20 seems sort of okay, to me
No. Compare a Oscillating Wave Psychic, who is doing amped Ignition. They do d10 plus 1 splash per range at 30 range, pretty close to your 2d6, but targets AC. (Their alternate Frostbite amp scales at 2d4 per rank and targtes fortitude, but has extra range and some other effects).
They have to spend focus points to do that, but they also can do it in two actions, and you will need three actions to do it at range. They can also boost that damage via unleashed psyche. And they have eventually 21 spell slots and 28 spells known up to 10th rank (plus other amped cantrip options), you only have up to 16 (without feats) runes known.
The 9th level "fireball" option with the diacritic that comes on line then is also not a big deal. Only 30' range, 15' radius, and three actions instead of two to apply it. Plus targeting fort instead of reflex, which is often a downside. Being able to spam this every round is probably not your best combat contribution. The sorrow rune and the "don't touch me" rune are going to be potentially doing a lot for you instead.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What is the different in double invoking vs Tracing a Rune of Fire & Rune of Thunder?The fire rune is auto-reapplied by persistent rune. So the second invoke is another set of slash+fire+lightning
I don't think the persistent rune is often helpful unless you are applying it in melee in round 1 and expect them to be at range in round 2.
Round 1: Apply fire plus persistent diacritic, invoke. Fire is auto reapplied.
Round 2: They've moved away, if you'd wanted to reapply fire normally it would take two actions now, for three total to get two uses across two rounds.
But having both fire and thunder available instead of fire plus the persistent rune is probably better, IMO. Maybe there's some interaction with the utility/support runes (apply shield rune to ally, who then moves away?) that make it more efficient. For max damage I don't see it being of much use.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What is the different in double invoking vs Tracing a Rune of Fire & Rune of Thunder?The fire rune is auto-reapplied by persistent rune. So the second invoke is another set of slash+fire+lightningI don't think the persistent rune is often helpful unless you are applying it in melee in round 1 and expect them to be at range in round 2.
Round 1: Apply fire plus persistent diacritic, invoke. Fire is auto reapplied.
Round 2: They've moved away, if you'd wanted to reapply fire normally it would take two actions now, for three total to get two uses across two rounds.But having both fire and thunder available instead of fire plus the persistent rune is probably better, IMO. Maybe there's some interaction with the utility/support runes (apply shield rune to ally, who then moves away?) that make it more efficient. For max damage I don't see it being of much use.
But they're both applied?
Turn 0: Bidi's opening setup starts you with two pre-engraved esvadir runes (slashin).
Turn 1: You use the quickened action from Tracing Trance to Stride, trace ranshu (thunder), atryl (fire) and sun (persistent).
Turn 2: invoke fire, thunder, slashing. Fire reapplies itself. Trace thunder. Invoke fire, thunder, slashing #2.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh wow, invoking first and third action and that making sense never occurred to me. Yep, that’s strong. And it avoids the “no more than one same rune per invocation per target” rule. Maybe invocation needs a once per round limit.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So earliest this example works is level 12.
Your using half your daily etchings on your weapons. The enemy has you let you do this what if they have a reaction it's going to hurt.
But even with all that, limiting invocation to once per round is probably a good call.
Beyond damage, it occurs to me you can do some funny support stuff if you plan to always start next to a shield fighter/barbarian with Sudden Charge.
Load him up with a whetstone for damage, illumination for a big daze debuff (this is the hard part, keeping the rest of the party out of it), one shield for defense/free (to him) raise, one shield for the "don't go anywhere," and an etched rune of homecoming to pull him back to you if he gets overly mobbed. That's 5 runes known required that you can do at level 3, with three actions to trace in round 1 and two etched runes on him to start combat.
At 6th level you can etch 3, learn another one (Sun- rune of preservation), and trace 4 in the first round. Lots of fuel for extra defense, making enemies stick, maybe getting a big dazzle off if you can do party/enemy separation, and a couple of whetstone blasts.
At 7th level you can finally pick up fire or thunder. You may never pick up the missing one, given your next comes on line with the better runes at 9th. But you probably train out of illumination at some point.
So earliest this example works is level 12.
Your using half your daily etchings on your weapons. The enemy has you let you do this what if they have a reaction it's going to hurt.
But even with all that, limiting invocation to once per round is probably a good call.
Strictly speaking, this starts at level 6: tracing trance. 2x etched runes (whetstone x2). whetstone, thunder, fire, persistent runes known. Here at level 6 the invokes alone deal 18d6 damage each and you even have extra known and etched rune slots to apply +int mod.
As you level up, this gets stronger as you can apply mods to both whetstone runes as well as pre-apply sun-fire and move it with transpose to even allow yourself an extra action to strike or something else on round one. You also get access to persistent fire damage at 9 that scales from 1d4 to 6d4.
As for the reaction, yeah, it's the magus problem. Your local bard has roaring applause or other anti-reaction tech and will be happy to supply it for this kind of damage.
So earliest this example works is level 12.
Your using half your daily etchings on your weapons. The enemy has you let you do this what if they have a reaction it's going to hurt.
But even with all that, limiting invocation to once per round is probably a good call.
Strictly speaking, this starts at level 6: tracing trance. 2x etched runes (whetstone x2). whetstone, thunder, fire, persistent runes known. Here at level 6 the invokes alone deal 18d6 damage each and you even have extra known and etched rune slots to apply +int mod.
As you level up, this gets stronger as you can apply mods to both whetstone runes as well as pre-apply sun-fire and move it with transpose to even allow yourself an extra action to strike or something else on round one. You also get access to persistent fire damage at 9 that scales from 1d4 to 6d4.
As for the reaction, yeah, it's the magus problem. Your local bard has roaring applause or other anti-reaction tech and will be happy to supply it for this kind of damage.
This assumes you start your turn next to an enemy and you are ok with ending your turn next to said enemy.
It smacks if extreme white room optimization.
But I also think it's a fair failsafe to looking invoking to once per round.
This assumes you start your turn next to an enemy and you are ok with ending your turn next to said enemy.
It smacks if extreme white room optimization.
But I also think it's a fair failsafe to looking invoking to once per round.
Only your second turn. We assume a stride in round 1 and you can even make 2 at higher levels if you need to. Typical speed optimization puts you at minimum 40ft per stride which is usually plenty.
Not that this doesn't have some flaws. Resist all does terrible things over this many instances of damage, for instance.
The real strength of this though, is how it is the least whiteroomy thing you can do. The only assumptions are that you can reach an opponent on round 1, and start next to an opponent on round 2. There's no buffing, or debuffing, or ally positioning of any kind. This is entirely self-contained to the runesmith themselves.
But even with all that, limiting invocation to once per round is probably a good call.
I don't think so. Invoke shouldn't trigger multiple Runes. Having such a variable action economy booster makes the class impossible to balance.
From my perception, they haven't tested the Runesmith much. Having at day 2 a playstyle that ignores weapons and deals so much damage while using the basic features of the class proves that the developers haven't put enough thoughts on how the Runesmith is supposed to be played.
Currently, I don't think small modifications will make the class balanced and playable. There's a need for an overhaul.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It would probably be fine if a creature could only be affected by one rune per invoke, period. The thing that blows it open is stacking tons of damage onto a single target.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It would probably be fine if a creature could only be affected by one rune per invoke, period. The thing that blows it open is stacking tons of damage onto a single target.
There are lots of things that I find problematic with the class:
- Current single target damage output.- The fact that you can ignore weapons and be actually stronger than if you use them (weapons have a cost, both in gold and attributes, it should be better to use them).
- The fact that you trigger Reflexive Strike by just doing your thing the way it is intended.
- Having Shield Block but needing a free hand.
- I think there's an issue with buffing runes with offensive invocations (Whetstone for example). As they can be engraved before the fight and as such allow one-action blasts. Buffing runes should have buffing/defensive invocations, not offensive ones.
- And overall there's an issue with your Tracing limit, too. Being able to trace 4 runes at round 1, even if it's just for their passive benefits, is in my opinion out of bounds.
That's why I think there's a need for an overhaul. As of now, the Runesmith optimal playstyle is a maelstrom of tracing/invocation with no Strikes. This doesn't look like a Runesmith and it doesn't look like PF2 (you don't stack tons of effects per round normally).
It would probably be fine if a creature could only be affected by one rune per invoke, period. The thing that blows it open is stacking tons of damage onto a single target.There are lots of things that I find problematic with the class:
- Current single target damage output.
- The fact that you can ignore weapons and be actually stronger than if you use them (weapons have a cost, both in gold and attributes, it should be better to use them).
- The fact that you trigger Reflexive Strike by just doing your thing the way it is intended.
- Having Shield Block but needing a free hand.
- I think there's an issue with buffing runes with offensive invocations (Whetstone for example). As they can be engraved before the fight and as such allow one-action blasts. Buffing runes should have buffing/defensive invocations, not offensive ones.
- And overall there's an issue with your Tracing limit, too. Being able to trace 4 runes at round 1, even if it's just for their passive benefits, is in my opinion out of bounds.That's why I think there's a need for an overhaul. As of now, the Runesmith optimal playstyle is a maelstrom of tracing/invocation with no Strikes. This doesn't look like a Runesmith and it doesn't look like PF2 (you don't stack tons of effects per round normally).
Let me be clear: I think the class is a mess and doesn't really have a clear identity right now, either. But I haven't really sorted my thoughts on Runesmith and its options yet, in the way I have (and continue to do) for Necromancer. So I wanted to stick to saying the one thing.