I think I'm going to try an animist in the next dual class game I play. Animist doesn't look very powerful as a single class. I'm thinking I can find a good dual class combo to use it with.
I conveniently listed a few posts ago some blasting abilities that make divine compétitive.
The stance thing I read differently, don't think the persistent part can double dip on the bonus as it's applied only once (to the spell's damage as a whole)
You're thinking of the Sorcerer's sorcerous potency feature, which reads as follows:
Because of the magical power inherent in your blood, your spells that hurt or cure are stronger than those of other spellcasters. When you Cast a Spell from your spell slots that either deals damage or restores Hit Points, you gain a status bonus to that spell's damage or healing equal to the spell's rank. This applies only to the initial damage or healing the spell deals when cast. An individual creature takes this damage or benefits from this healing only once per spell, even if the spell would damage or heal that creature multiple times.
So the rules text has a large section dedicated to limiting the bonus to just the initial damage or healing. By contrast, here's the rules text for Channeler's Stance:
You enter a stance that allows power to flow through you. While in this stance, whenever you cast or Sustain an apparition spell or vessel spell that deals energy damage, you gain a status bonus to the spell’s damage equal to the spell’s rank.
Each time you Cast a Spell that has the vitality or void traits and that restores Hit Points while in this stance, the spells’ targets gain a status bonus to the initial amount of healing received equal to the spell’s rank. This bonus healing does not apply to healing over time effects (such as fast healing or regeneration).
Notice how the status bonus to healing has the same limitation as sorcerous potency, but not the status bonus to damage. Thus, the status bonus applies to persistent damage, which earth's bile happens to have.
And this is really the sort of complexity that gets talked about IMO regarding the Animist. There's lots of little details like these that are easy to gloss over, and layers upon layers of optimization that force you to leverage all of the Animist's moving parts, but ultimately those give disproportionate returns when you do.
I think I'm going to try an animist in the next dual class game I play. Animist doesn't look very powerful as a single class. I'm thinking I can find a good dual class combo to use it with.
A dual class animist looks to really good. Some of the vessel spells are very useful for melee chars. The confusion, or the Miss chance would be nice when walking around in melee.
The other way would be to use for example monk to strengthen the animist to do more animist stuff, but that seems less effective.
Yeah I did that comparison to the sorcerer as well when you brought it up initially. I think the reason this damage phrase doesn't exist for the animist is that it would kill the damage bonus on your sustain turns, not because you're supposed to double dip it for singular instances of casting/sustaining.
If this were the case, then it would be specified. In cases where there's an unintended exploit, there's also usually a PFS ruling on it. There is, to date, no specification in the rules text nor a PFS ruling, so the status bonus works applies to persistent damage. You can houserule it differently if you want to, but making suppositions as to how the ability is meant to work when its RAW function is currently pretty clear is just arguing off of conjecture.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First and foremost, it applies to "the spell's damage". If your bonus is Y, and the spell's damage is X, and you somehow end up doing X+2Y total damage every time you cast or sustain, that does not seem consistent with text or intention to me. It would be a welcome buff to psychic, I suppose, double dipping on their unleash bonus using spells with multiple damage types.
'Paizo hasn't clarified it' doesn't personally sway me one way or the other, as that can have many plausible reasons other than 'Mostly everyone reads it as applying the bonus twice like we intended, so no action needed from us here'.
Ok, so without Channeler's Stance, what does the persistent damage belong to? Where is it generated from? Is it a separate instance of damage?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ok, so without Channeler's Stance, what does the persistent damage belong to? Where is it generated from? Is it a separate instance of damage?First and foremost, it applies to "the spell's damage". If your bonus is Y, and the spell's damage is X, and you somehow end up doing X+2Y total damage every time you cast or sustain, that does not seem consistent with text or intention to me. It would be a welcome buff to psychic, I suppose, double dipping on their unleash bonus using spells with multiple damage types.
'Paizo hasn't clarified it' doesn't personally sway me one way or the other, as that can have many plausible reasons other than 'Mostly everyone reads it as applying the bonus twice like we intended, so no action needed from us here'.
"Persistent damage" is a condition. If someone has persistent damage, they take damage as long as they have the condition. Persistent damage.
Teridax's interpretation would also mean that Courageous Anthem and other damage buffs would increase persistent damage. I don't think I've seen anyone else run things that way before, nor have I spotted it working that way in Foundry. I would certainly not assume it to be the case, and at the very least ask the GM how they want to run it. Doubling the persistent damage triggers and double-dipping the bonus triggers my "seems too good" flag the same as somebody trying to apply the damage bonus to both of the spell's damage types.
First and foremost, it applies to "the spell's damage". If your bonus is Y, and the spell's damage is X, and you somehow end up doing X+2Y total damage every time you cast or sustain, that does not seem consistent with text or intention to me. It would be a welcome buff to psychic, I suppose, double dipping on their unleash bonus using spells with multiple damage types.
Persistent damage is damage, and is listed as such in its own rules on page 445 of Player Core:
You are taking damage from an ongoing effect, such as from being lit on fire. This appears as “X persistent [type] damage,” where “X” is the amount of damage dealt and “[type]” is the damage type. Like normal damage, it can be doubled or halved based on the results of an attack roll or saving throw. Instead of taking persistent damage immediately, you take it at the end of each of your turns as long as you have the condition, rolling any damage dice anew each time. After you take persistent damage, roll a DC 15 flat check to see if you recover from the persistent damage. If you succeed, the condition ends.
The claim that a condition and damage are mutually exclusive is a pure invention by people on this website with no basis in the rules. In fact, this is contradicted by text around damage that refers to persistent damage as damage, such as Overwhelming Energy:
With a complex gesture, you call upon the primal power of your spell to overcome enemies’ resistances. If the next action you use is to Cast a Spell, the spell ignores an amount of the target’s resistance to acid, cold, electricity, fire, or sonic damage equal to your level. This applies to all damage the spell deals, including persistent damage and damage caused by an ongoing effect of the spell, such as the wall created by wall of fire. A creature’s immunities are unaffected.
Persistent damage is damage, which is also why it interacts with immunities, resistances, and weaknesses (themselves a flat bonus to damage) in the same way as regular damage. This is, by the way, a major benefit of Alchemists, who can trigger monster weaknesses constantly with persistent damage on their bombs. Don't go trusting what people say here without double-checking it in the rules first.
'Paizo hasn't clarified it' doesn't personally sway me one way or the other, as that can have many plausible reasons other than 'Mostly everyone reads it as applying the bonus twice like we intended, so no action needed from us here'.
They don't need to; they already have. Paizo are not mind readers, and presumably didn't feel the need to proof their rules around the possibility that certain people would decide that damage isn't damage, all because they want to house rule a nerf to a mechanic they consider too good to be true. If you think that status bonus to persistent damage is too good to be true, go on and house rule it if you want, but then you need to acknowledge how this also contaminates feedback of a class's power.
Hmm, I hadn't seen Overwhelming Energy reference persistent damage included in damage that the spell is dealing. So I guess Burn It! should be applying +1/4 item level and +1/2 spell level (minimum +1) to alchemical and spell persistent fire damage, and +1 to persistent fire damage from other sources, like flaming rune crits? In either interpretation, it'd have been nice to have the rules be a bit clearer, since the two feats at least sound like they're written from opposite interpretations.
|
|
Persistent damage is damage, which is also why it interacts with immunities, resistances, and weaknesses (themselves a flat bonus to damage) in the same way as regular damage. This is, by the way, a major benefit of Alchemists, who can trigger monster weaknesses constantly with persistent damage on their bombs.
Going a bit off rails here but would this mean that persistent damage from weapons triggers Personal Antitheses for a thaumaturge?
Don't go trusting what people say here without double-checking it in the rules first.
I did check by reading Channeler's Stance but I also didn't check to see if persistent damage was a condition because it never crossed my mind. And then I didn't think to check if extra damage from weaknesses is explicitly also a literal bonus, which it isn't. Nested rules are probably one of the biggest flaws in this system (more of a double-edged sword). Double-checking isn't always enough. Sometimes it requires quadruple-plus-checking. It'd probably help if they edited words in a way to indicate intentionally nested words, kinda like a hyperlink....they could use bold comic sans.
After all this, I'd personally rule the damage occurs once per cast/sustain, sticking as close to the feat's wording without trailing off too much into a rules layering fiasco but you do you. (Just saw the "layering" typo...was gonna edit it out but then realized "layering" was so fitting LOL)
Hmm, I hadn't seen Overwhelming Energy reference persistent damage included in damage that the spell is dealing. So I guess Burn It! should be applying +1/4 item level and +1/2 spell level (minimum +1) to alchemical and spell persistent fire damage, and +1 to persistent fire damage from other sources, like flaming rune crits? In either interpretation, it'd have been nice to have the rules be a bit clearer, since the two feats at least sound like they're written from opposite interpretations.
Yes, that would be my reading as well. Because goblins especially want to burn things through magic and alchemy, that's where your status bonus would be the largest, and if you manage to deal fire damage by any other means (such as "accidentally" throwing a lit torch near that crate of pretty fireworks, or setting people on fire with a crit on a weapon with a flaming rune), you'd still get a smaller bonus to that damage. Although this by itself is not a hard-set rule, the fact that the status bonus is so small (off the top of my head, I can't think of many combat effects that use half your spell's rank, or one-quarter of anything) to me suggests it's been specifically balanced around the notion of repeatedly dipping into this bonus with persistent damage, as well as splash damage too on alchemical bombs.
Going a bit off rails here but would this mean that persistent damage from weapons triggers Personal Antitheses for a thaumaturge?
This is where there is perhaps a little more ambiguity, as both Mortal Weakness and Personal Antithesis refer to your unarmed and weapon Strikes rather than their damage. I could be wrong on this, but in both cases I think the weakness applies specifically to the Strike itself, as specifically noted in Personal Antithesis especially, rather than the damage dealt by the Strike, so when you sprinkle some silver shavings onto your flaming sword and get a critical hit against a werewolf, your Strike will trigger that weakness and deal additional damage, but the persistent fire damage wouldn't, as it's not a Strike.
I did check by reading Channeler's Stance but I also didn't check to see if persistent damage was a condition because it never crossed my mind. And then I didn't think to check if extra damage from weaknesses is explicitly also a literal bonus, which it isn't. Nested rules are probably one of the biggest flaws in this system (more of a double-edged sword). Double-checking isn't always enough. Sometimes it requires quadruple-plus-checking. It'd probably help if they edited words in a way to indicate intentionally nested words, kinda like a hyperlink....they could use bold comic sans.
Yeah, I definitely agree that there are a lot of rules in Pathfinder that cover most, but not all cases, and despite this game being one of the best I've seen at presenting its many rules, it's not perfect. Nested rules are among the worst offenders, and I agree that sometimes there are edge cases that are difficult to cover.
And to be clear as well: when all's said and done, I'm actually very happy to house rule that Channeler's Stance doesn't boost the persistent damage on earth's bile, even though it does RAW. This isn't so much because that interaction is too good to be true, even though I think it is as well, so much that I personally don't believe the Animist needs to be the best blaster, gish, out-of-combat healer, and shapeshifter all in one. I think the Animist is grossly overpowered, and when I have one at the table I make sure to check in with the player to make sure they're picking a build that's not going to overshadow the other party members so much as complement them. Thankfully, they're great at doing that too, but I've found it all too easy for them to also leave other classes feeling like a third wheel as they pivot to the thing they've specialized, match or even exceed them at their specialty, and then pivot to a completely different set of specialties the next day, or even the next encounter. They're a good class for players who keep changing characters because they don't want to commit to a single build for too long, but that comes with quite a lot of added table considerations in my opinion.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...I've found it all too easy for them to also leave other classes feeling like a third wheel as they pivot to the thing they've specialized, match or even exceed them at their specialty, and then pivot to a completely different set of specialties the next day, or even the next encounter.
I've definitely experienced this. My animist runs with 2 other divine casters, an unholy cleric and an angelic sorcerer. The sorcerer is in no way overshadowed in her healing capabilities, but I feel like I'm running circles around the cleric (I almost feel like a dual class cleric/wizard by comparison). And then we have a summoner that, with their lacking the spellcasting of a full spellcaster and me having Grudge Strike with a deadly-d10 d10 weapon, I feel like I'm easily out-gishing them as well. The remaining party member is a earth/wood kineticist tank and yeah...they do their job well. I kinda get the impression, if your character isn't already a heavily specialized class or isn't at least leaning into your class's strengths, just about any animist could overshadow you.
|
me having Grudge Strike with a deadly-d10 d10 weapon, I feel like I'm easily out-gishing them as well.
I'm going examine this in some detail because its a perfect case (in my mind) of the Animist being not as good in practice as it appears on paper. The Animist is one of those classes that you REALLY have to play a fair bit to get a good feel for it. Grudge Strike is one of those things that I used for awhile and then decided that I just had better options.
If I'm in a Gish mode a considerable portion of the time I want to cast a 2 action spell and then make an attack. Can't do that with a Grudge Strike.
If I'm hasted, then I even MORE want to do that spell and an attack.
Now, I'm a gishing Animist. So maybe this battle I JUST want to attack. So, ok. I've presumably cast Embodiment of Battle. Lets assume I'm a L9+ Liturgist (optimal case). Now I get the sustain for free IF I want to move. Which I often do but certainly not always. But in this case I'd likely prefer a reach weapon than a D10/D10 weapon.
So if I want to spend the entire battle fighting with my d10/d10 weapon then I get an advantage from Grudge Strike. But its not that big. If you do the math a 2 action Grudge Strike is only a bit better than 2 1 action strikes most of the time. If I'm hasted a move, 2 action Grudge Strike and a 1 action normal strike IS considerable better than 4 1 action strikes (no move) or 3 1 action strikes (Need to move). That is the Grudge Strike Wins situation. But even then its not a HUGE win. Almost certainly not even a 50% improvement in damage
If I want to have both Earth's Bile up AND Embodiment of Battle then, after largely losing my first round, I CAN sustain Earth's Bile and use Grudge Strike in the same round. Quite cool as long as I can get 2 enemies in Earth's Bile (which I often can't).
Or, I decide the heck with it. Take a reach weapon, and use Enlightenment of Battle if I don't care about Saving Throw DCs. I can still Gish out nearly as well with OUT grudge strike and I use the feat for something like Roaring Heart instead. Which can be amazingly useful in the right circumstance, far better than a few extra HP done in damage.
Or, of course, I just decide that this battle I'll blast instead and spam Earths Bile with 2 action spells.
The Animist has LOTS of choices. But pretty often the difference between which is better is pretty marginal and pretty circumstantial.
I'd advise against using earth's bile and embodiment of battle at the same time, given how the latter imposes a pretty substantial penalty to your spell saves and DCs. I do agree reach weapons work really well with the spell though due to how it gives Reactive Strike.
I will add, however, that grudge strike grants incredibly high accuracy when stacked with embodiment of battle: at 7th level, for instance, the sum total of the status and circumstance bonuses to your attack rolls is +4, i.e. Fighter-grade accuracy given your relative baseline -2 to most martials, and the +2 bonus to damage rolls matches up to weapon specialization on martials too. Pick a deadly two-handed reach weapon like the fauchard, and your Grudge Strike can deal a massive amount of burst damage. Even better if you can get a haste and follow up with a second Strike. Of course, you could just make two Strikes while being exactly on par in damage and accuracy with a martial class, and that'll often be valid too. Consider taking Relinquish Control and Instinctive Maneuvers for that +2 to all of your Athletics maneuvers, too (just make sure to get close first before Relinquishing Control, though, as you'll only be able to Step as your movement on that turn).
If you get to high level, keep an eye out for Forest's Heart, a 16th-level stance that gives you unarmed attacks with 4d8 damage and reach 30 feet. Combined with embodiment of battle, this means you get to make Reactive Strikes from 30 feet away, and so at comparable accuracy to martial classes, while also being able to Grapple enemies from 30 feet away as well. I'd say that's not a marginal benefit at all; it's bonkers.
Oh, and for those lamenting the Animist's lack of Effortless Concentration: you actually do get a near-identical (and arguably superior) benefit, it's just slightly hidden. Specifically, look at the Cycle of Souls feat at 18th level, which lets you Step and enter a stance. Remember that the Liturgist practice automatically has you Sustain an apparition spell or vessel spell each time you Step. Thus, from 18th level onwards, you can just start your turn using Cycle of Souls each time to enter one of two or more stances, and that will also Sustain one of your vessel spells as a free action. This can be particularly useful for a spellcasting Animist who might want to switch between Channeler's Stance and Spiritual Spellshape Stance, or a gish Animist alternating between Forest's Heart and a Monk stance (which then lets you make extra Strikes even when not hasted, or use store time to gain another Reactive Strike reaction). Again, one of those instances of significant power that's hidden beneath a layer of complexity.
I think I'm going to try an animist in the next dual class game I play. Animist doesn't look very powerful as a single class. I'm thinking I can find a good dual class combo to use it with.A dual class animist looks to really good. Some of the vessel spells are very useful for melee chars. The confusion, or the Miss chance would be nice when walking around in melee.
The other way would be to use for example monk to strengthen the animist to do more animist stuff, but that seems less effective.
That's what I'm thinking too. Work great in combination with a fighter or monk, though the competing stance might be an issue on the monk. Maybe some type of rogue too could be cool. I'll see what I do.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You both make some good points. Forgot persistent damage is a condition. On top of that, considering the wording and the timing the wording dictates (when you cast or sustain), I'm more convinced it does NOT add to the persistent damage.
I don't think it adds to persistent damage either. Persistent is a condition. It occurs at the end of the affected creatures turn. How I see it is that it is not caused by the player doing the damage, but by the attack they used which applies the condition. Thus it doesn't add any of the players bonuses unless otherwise specified.
To put simply, I don't apply it to persistent damage unless it says apply it to persistent damage. Overwhelming Energy says to specifically apply it. That to me stands out as meaning if it doesn't say apply it to persistent damage, you don't.
I'd advise against using earth's bile and embodiment of battle at the same time, given how the latter imposes a pretty substantial penalty to your spell saves and DCs. I do agree reach weapons work really well with the spell though due to how it gives Reactive Strike.
I will add, however, that grudge strike grants incredibly high accuracy when stacked with embodiment of battle: at 7th level, for instance, the sum total of the status and circumstance bonuses to your attack rolls is +4, i.e. Fighter-grade accuracy given your relative baseline -2 to most martials, and the +2 bonus to damage rolls matches up to weapon specialization on martials too. Pick a deadly two-handed reach weapon like the fauchard, and your Grudge Strike can deal a massive amount of burst damage. Even better if you can get a haste and follow up with a second Strike. Of course, you could just make two Strikes while being exactly on par in damage and accuracy with a martial class, and that'll often be valid too. Consider taking Relinquish Control and Instinctive Maneuvers for that +2 to all of your Athletics maneuvers, too (just make sure to get close first before Relinquishing Control, though, as you'll only be able to Step as your movement on that turn).
If you get to high level, keep an eye out for Forest's Heart, a 16th-level stance that gives you unarmed attacks with 4d8 damage and reach 30 feet. Combined with embodiment of battle, this means you get to make Reactive Strikes from 30 feet away, and so at comparable accuracy to martial classes, while also being able to Grapple enemies from 30 feet away as well. I'd say that's not a marginal benefit at all; it's bonkers.
Oh, and for those lamenting the Animist's lack of Effortless Concentration: you actually do get a near-identical (and arguably superior) benefit, it's just slightly hidden. Specifically, look at the Cycle of Souls feat at 18th level, which lets you Step and enter a stance. Remember that the Liturgist practice automatically...
You get a level 18 feat that competes with other 18 feats that only works with the Liturgist requiring you to enter a stance which has the requirements. The stance feat says if you enter a stance and leave it which using a stance feat again would do, you can't do it again for 1 round. So you could use Cycle of Souls every other round to sustain something with the free action.
Hello! Question from a person who also plans to play an animist. What spirit combinations are good when playing at level 10 or less? If I want to try gish.
|
|
Hello! Question from a person who also plans to play an animist. What spirit combinations are good when playing at level 10 or less? If I want to try gish.
The 2 main spirits for a gish are Stalker in Darkened Boughs and Witness to Ancient Battles.
The 1st works at level 3+ , the latter from L1+ but you need to invest in Str. They can work together but not really until L9+ as a Liturgist as until then you’ll be spending too many actions sustaining.
Hello! Question from a person who also plans to play an animist. What spirit combinations are good when playing at level 10 or less? If I want to try gish.The 2 main spirits for a gish are Stalker in Darkened Boughs and Witness to Ancient Battles.
The 1st works at level 3+ , the latter from L1+ but you need to invest in Str. They can work together but not really until L9+ as a Liturgist as until then you’ll be spending too many actions sustaining.
Thank you. And what spirit would be best to complement each of them?
|
|
The 2 main spirits for a gish are Stalker in Darkened Boughs and Witness to Ancient Battles.
Imposter in Hidden Places and Lurker in Devouring Dark are also options. Imposter also grants access to Grudge Strike and has a vessel spell that only really works in melee range. Lurker grants an unarmed attack with traits that surpass what is acceptable for an advanced weapon. However, Lurker's vessel spell isn't optimal until 9th level when you can get a free strike on the cast/sustain.
I'm looking at the oracle versus the animist. I'm not sure which one is better. Oracle seems better if you want to cast a lot. It's curse abilities stack with other features of other classes. It's very front loaded.
The animist has a few standout abilities mixed in with a bunch of "meh."
If you took Medium's Awareness using the Animist Archetype on a rogue, ranger, or investigator, that would be pretty amazing Perception.
You get a level 18 feat that competes with other 18 feats that only works with the Liturgist requiring you to enter a stance which has the requirements. The stance feat says if you enter a stance and leave it which using a stance feat again would do, you can't do it again for 1 round. So you could use Cycle of Souls every other round to sustain something with the free action.
Okay, let's break this down:
Really, the impression I'm getting is less that you're genuinely curious about the Animist, and more that you're looking for excuses to dismiss the Animist and their power. Plenty of people who have played the Animist have listed examples of how strong they can be, and given how a lot of criticisms of the class are addressed by actually building them properly, I would encourage people to look beyond the superficial here and give them a proper try.
The claim is not that it's not damage, but that it's damage from a Condition imposed by an effect.
The RAW is pretty clear that it is a Condition, no refuting that.
I'm confused, as the post you're quoting answers what you're saying here exactly. Persistent damage may be a condition, but that is irrelevant to the fact that persistent damage is damage. It is referred to as such in both its own rules and mechanics that refer to it, and is therefore subject to the same rules for damage as any other kind of damage. This is how it's treated by Overwhelming Energy, and Burn It! is explicitly aimed at enhancing persistent fire damage. You're going to have to explain where in the rules it says that persistent damage being a condition somehow exempts it from those rules.
You are free to argue otherwise, but you are not supported by any rules yourself either.
This is a lie, as I have cited the rules text for both persistent damage and multiple other effects to support my point, as shown in the very post you quoted. You, by contrast, have done no such thing, so if you want to assert that damage from a condition is exempt from status bonuses, you're going to need to prove that first.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Plenty of people who have played the Animist have listed examples of how strong they can be, and given how a lot of criticisms of the class are addressed by actually building them properly, I would encourage people to look beyond the superficial here and give them a proper try.
I honestly don't even think you can build an animist improperly without serious effort (e.g. dumping wisdom) considering it's the least static class in the game so far.
This is true, and I agree it's important to note that while it's possible to hyper-optimize the Animist to such a degree that they can outperform numerous other classes, sometimes simultaneously, an unoptimized Animist is still going to be pretty good. You could choose to boost Charisma instead of Strength as your fourth attribute and would still be able to do pretty well purely thanks to the class's baseline power and flexibility, despite its complete lack of support for Charisma skills. You would likely not be able to use the gish apparitions as well, but you'd still have more flexibility than any other caster.
Plenty of people who have played the Animist have listed examples of how strong they can be, and given how a lot of criticisms of the class are addressed by actually building them properly, I would encourage people to look beyond the superficial here and give them a proper try.I honestly don't even think you can build an animist improperly without serious effort (e.g. dumping wisdom) considering it's the least static class in the game so far.
I can't tell what they can do well. They do a lot of different stuff ok. Their action economy doesn't look great.
You only get the vessel spell for the primary apparition. The vessel spell is a core class ability that requires a sustain action.
This makes only the Liturgist a build worth considering. The other practices have bad action economy due to the sustain action for the vessel spell, the most standout aspect of the animist.
It is so easy to see how anything with a major class ability requiring sustain action for most of its levels is extremely damaging to the class's action economy.
The only practice that allows you to make this a free action is the Liturgist at level 18, near the end of play.
I'm trying to build this animist. It's extremely limited with very clunky action economy.
me having Grudge Strike with a deadly-d10 d10 weapon, I feel like I'm easily out-gishing them as well.I'm going examine this in some detail because its a perfect case (in my mind) of the Animist being not as good in practice as it appears on paper. The Animist is one of those classes that you REALLY have to play a fair bit to get a good feel for it. Grudge Strike is one of those things that I used for awhile and then decided that I just had better options.
If I'm in a Gish mode a considerable portion of the time I want to cast a 2 action spell and then make an attack. Can't do that with a Grudge Strike.
If I'm hasted, then I even MORE want to do that spell and an attack.
Now, I'm a gishing Animist. So maybe this battle I JUST want to attack. So, ok. I've presumably cast Embodiment of Battle. Lets assume I'm a L9+ Liturgist (optimal case). Now I get the sustain for free IF I want to move. Which I often do but certainly not always. But in this case I'd likely prefer a reach weapon than a D10/D10 weapon.
So if I want to spend the entire battle fighting with my d10/d10 weapon then I get an advantage from Grudge Strike. But its not that big. If you do the math a 2 action Grudge Strike is only a bit better than 2 1 action strikes most of the time. If I'm hasted a move, 2 action Grudge Strike and a 1 action normal strike IS considerable better than 4 1 action strikes (no move) or 3 1 action strikes (Need to move). That is the Grudge Strike Wins situation. But even then its not a HUGE win. Almost certainly not even a 50% improvement in damage
If I want to have both Earth's Bile up AND Embodiment of Battle then, after largely losing my first round, I CAN sustain Earth's Bile and use Grudge Strike in the same round. Quite cool as long as I can get 2 enemies in Earth's Bile (which I often can't).
Or, I decide the heck with it. Take a reach weapon, and use Enlightenment of Battle if I don't care about Saving Throw DCs. I can still Gish out nearly as well with OUT grudge...
Grudge Strike is not a good feat. I wouldn't bother with it, especially if using a sustain spell like Embodiment of Battle to maximize Grudge Strike. Eat up all your actions in the same around.
You can't even haste yourself to guarantee the haste action.
I've found in fights with groups, you have very little time to do what you're going to do before stuff starts going down due to your allies taking it out.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You don't understand action economy and the problem with vessel spells.
I am more inclined to believe the play experience of those that seem to have played the animist and made it clear it performs ok, but isn't top tier like you tried to sell it.
You also seem to overlook that only the Liturgist is even in contention for competitive at all. When you have a class when there is only one viable build, that's not great. Not great at all.
What I'm looking for is posts from players that have played an animist and understand action economy, not players who don't even seem to have played classes they post about overselling their capabilities.
And that's about all the info I need from you on the animist.
I'm playing an animist. I'm pretty sure Teridax is playing an animist. Heck, I'm not even using liturgist because I think it's busted. I'm playing a shaman and still feel top tier. I'm not sure you've been reading these comments thoroughly if this is your takeaway.
You can't even get heal as an apparition spell. So if you want to cast heal, you have to slot it in one of your divine slots for the appropriate level.
I'm playing an animist. I'm pretty sure Teridax is playing an animist. Heck, I'm not even using liturgist because I think it's busted. I'm playing a shaman and still feel top tier. I'm not sure you've been reading these comments thoroughly if this is your takeaway.You don't understand action economy and the problem with vessel spells.
I am more inclined to believe the play experience of those that seem to have played the animist and made it clear it performs ok, but isn't top tier like you tried to sell it.
You also seem to overlook that only the Liturgist is even in contention for competitive at all. When you have a class when there is only one viable build, that's not great. Not great at all.
What I'm looking for is posts from players that have played an animist and understand action economy, not players who don't even seem to have played classes they post about overselling their capabilities.
And that's about all the info I need from you on the animist.
I have been. You and Teridax are the two main people selling the animist as top tier. I don't even know what you consider top tier. What do your damage numbers look like?
What do your rounds look like? I know you're in a very odd group.
Angel Sorc
Cleric
Summoner
What other classes do you have in the group? None of those classes are top tier. The cleric is great at healing, but not much else.
Angel Sorc is not a top tier sorc.
Summmoner is a sort of gish with highly limited casting.
What other classes are in your group for comparison?
That group has way too much divine casting. You basically have three divine casters. What type of summoner?
You gotta explain what you consider top tier and it's not best in a bad group, but performance compared to top tier casters like an Imperial Sorc, a well build Druid, fighter, rogue, barbarian with a good instinct like giant or dragon, a magus, classes that really bring the pain in fights.
You can't even get heal as an apparition spell. So if you want to cast heal, you have to slot it in one of your divine slots for the appropriate level......Embodiment of the Balance....
I see. A feat. So that is how you add it.
So Emobodiment of Balance let's you use all four of your spell slots for heal if necessary.
What does a round look like for an animist.
You roll initiative. You can choose your primary apparition using Circle of Souls with Liturgist. This sets your vessel spell for at least that round.
Then you can either change form or use weapons to get in a fight or blast.
Are you going to close faster than a fighter or barb with sudden charge and be more effective fighting than they are? But you can at least join in.
Each round one of your actions is used for sustain if you have a vessel spell going. This will be the case until you are level 18 and requires Liturgist practice. So you have to learn to operate with 2 actions per round without moving unless you don't bother to spend the focus point to use the Vessel Spell.
If you don't use or sustain the vessel spell, you've wasted that focus point.
How would that set up your tactics as to when to best use the vessel spell? That's a key tactical choice of the class.
I am having a hard time with this. I'm going over how the actions work in the game. I don't play in whacky groups with whacky class combinations and build options.
It's all rogues, barbs, sorcerers, fighters, magus, and every class that can hit hard and fast with no wasted feats taken or strange set ups. Hit hard, hit fast, blast, take down opponent fast.
Would I have time to set up a vessel spell, sustain it, while moving into position before the other party members could whack everyone out?
The best vessel spells seem to be Embodiment of Battle as it incorporates a modified heroism into the spell which is nice and earth's bile which is a 1 action blast.
Both costs focus points and require a sustain action after the initial casting. This is great for the initial round, but an action economy drag after that.
How would I make this competitive in a group of min-maxers? It's going to take some experimentation.
One thing I like about the oracle Foretell Harm, no additional actions once it lands. It just works. It stacks with everything.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not sure you've been reading these comments thoroughly if this is your takeaway.I have been.
But HAVE you? I already explained in one of my first comments in this thread multiple cool things I've been able to pull off with different apparitions AND I also already mentioned that the other party member was a earth/wood kineticist tank. You seem to be missing details, even ones you ask for after.
You gotta explain what you consider top tier.
To me, being able to be at least GOOD and often GREAT (even if never the best) in almost every role is top tier. I'd assume you are aware tiers aren't what they were in PF1. No class actually sucks in this system, so to me, if a class easily can meet bare minimum expectations in nearly every role in a single build, that's strong AF.
I am having a hard time with this. I'm going over how the actions work in the game. I don't play in whacky groups with whacky class combinations and build options.
It's all rogues, barbs, sorcerers, fighters, magus, and every class that can hit hard and fast with no wasted feats taken or strange set ups. Hit hard, hit fast, blast, take down opponent fast.
I mean, it almost sounds like your party doesn't even need you at that point if they are finishing combats so quickly....until they run into a problem they can't solve....
How would I make this competitive in a group of min-maxers?
....You wouldn't in the sense that I don't think this is really a system for min-maxers in the same way PF1 was. Again, if your party can take out encounters easily with or without you, maybe your GM needs to increase enemy numbers and add complications like special abilities and hazards to create a challenge that brute force can't solve.
Otherwise, just don't play animist. I don't know what to tell you. I'm not saying you're wrong if you don't like it but it's not a power issue. I don't think any class is bad due to lacking power. Some just seem lame to me due to gameplay....they're just boring...and animist is fun to me because it can do so many things at least good enough. But those are my opinions. You ask us to sell you on animist. You got legitimate experienced feedback. You're not sold? Move on. No one is going to harass you for not playing an animist. A lot of this conversation had already moved on to nit-picky rules lawyer bickering beyond that. Last advice I can give is read through this [shameless plug].....But don't complain if it didn't convince you because ultimately, nobody cares what you play and at this point, I don't think you will want to play it no matter what anyone tells you.
To me, being able to be at least GOOD and often GREAT (even if never the best) in almost every role is top tier. I'd assume you are aware tiers aren't what they were in PF1. No class actually sucks in this system, so to me, if a class easily can meet bare minimum expectations in nearly every role in a single build, that's strong AF.
This is not top tier. This is personal preference. You are in a weak party if that is your party composition and being good to great against a weak party build is not what I'm looking for.
I mean, it almost sounds like your party doesn't even need you at that point if they are finishing combats so quickly....until they run into a problem they can't solve....
They don't. Now you get it. They don't need me. I have to compete and standout all on my own, not because someone else is deficient. If you can't keep the pace and standout on your own, you will feel like you don't matter.
That means if you're sitting there casting buff spells or sustaining vessel spells while the sorc next to you is dropping heavy AOE and the barb is raging, sudden charging, then next round whirlwind attack clean up and you're making a single grudge strike satisfied with that, you won't hang in that group. You'll feel like you are unnecessary.
....You wouldn't in the sense that I don't think this is really a system for min-maxers in the same way PF1 was. Again, if your party can take out encounters easily with or without you, maybe your GM needs to increase enemy numbers and add complications like special abilities and hazards to create a challenge that brute force can't solve.
We already do all of this. I'm not sure why this keeps getting brought up. We already boost the numbers, don't use CR, and give special abilities to make the game tougher. The only CR we follow is the +4 and -4 because no xp out that window. But as far as challenge, we boost the numbers and use lots of elite templates to make the game harder. We don't give the monsters weak spell lists.
It doesn't matter. The game is built to end combats in 3 to 5 rounds. It's built that way on purpose. Monsters and PCs. It's not a slow a game unless you feel like playing slow.
Min-maxing still works very, very well in this edition.
Otherwise, just don't play animist. I don't know what to tell you. I'm not saying you're wrong if you don't like it but it's not a...
I'm leaning in that direction. It's not looking like the strong, overpowered class it was claimed to be.
For people that know how to min-max and push action economy and damage, this class looks slow. It has a single Practice that is even competitive. The other three practices wouldn't even compete with top tier builds due to the sustain actions necessary to make vessel spells work. You're slowing yourself just to make one of your key abilities work.
I'm not seeing a lot of min-maxers on this thread. Probably not seeing them because the class isn't very strong for min-max play. You're not a min-maxer. You're a guy who likes the class because you like being a GISH and play with oddly built groups.
That's not my situation. I play with min-maxers that only choose maximally effective abilities, spells, classes, and anything that isn't going to bring stuff down very fast with minimal set up is not chosen.
Thanks for the responses. Glad you enjoy the class.
You don't understand action economy and the problem with vessel spells.
On the contrary, I understand action economy and the action cost of vessel spells perfectly fine. I and others have shown you how the Animist has exceptionally good action economy for a caster, and gets two different forms of Effortless Concentration, including one seven levels earlier than the actual feat. Given how John R. has written that extensive guide they've shared, which they also partly constructed with input from other Animist players, it's clear they know their stuff too, and they've been readily answering your questions despite your protests. What's making this super weird is that you keep making false claims about the Animist that are immediately and easily disproven, but also pre-emptive value judgments of this class you've never tried. If you had your mind already made up on the Animist and won't change your opinion even when others show you why the class is really strong, why even create this thread?
What I'm saying is, my reading is that you can't double dip into a spell damage bonus just in virtue of doing different damage types in the same damage roll. It's the spell's damage as a whole that gets a bonus, not every individual energy damage type it does.
That's not what's being said, though. I'm not saying you deal twice the status bonus on the initial instance of damage, I'm saying that each time you take damage from persistent damage, which as we've established is its own instance of damage, the status bonus applies each time. This is how feats like Burn It! work; the status bonus to persistent damage applies each time the persistent damage is dealt. This works the same way as resistance and weakness, which modify the damage dealt with each instance of persistent damage.
And going back to the Animist: the fact that Channeler's Stance specifically includes a provision against applying the status bonus to healing more than once, but doesn't include that same provision for its status bonus to damage, to me is a clear sign that the status bonus to damage is intended to be multi-dipped. In general, the Animist is as close as 2e has gotten to a 1e-style class, in my opinion, in that they have a ton of hidden synergies and complexities that can make a big difference, like Cycle of Souls with the Liturgist practice or Forest Heart's with Embodiment of Battle. A lot of this sits in "too good to be true" territory, but in my opinion it often is too good and true. The status bonus applying to persistent damage would be by no means the only instance of the Animist deriving lots of power from what would normally be deemed an exploit, and I get the impression that's more a feature than a bug.
They don't. Now you get it. They don't need me. I have to compete and standout all on my own, not because someone else is deficient. If you can't keep the pace and standout on your own, you will feel like you don't matter.That means if you're sitting there casting buff spells or sustaining vessel spells while the sorc next to you is dropping heavy AOE and the barb is raging, sudden charging, then next round whirlwind attack clean up and you're making a single grudge strike satisfied with that, you won't hang in that group. You'll feel like you are unnecessary.
For people that know how to min-max and push action economy and damage, this class looks slow. It has a single Practice that is even competitive. The other three practices wouldn't even compete with top tier builds due to the sustain actions necessary to make vessel spells work. You're slowing yourself just to make one of your key abilities work.I'm not seeing a lot of min-maxers on this thread. Probably not seeing them because the class isn't very strong for min-max play. You're not a min-maxer. You're a guy who likes the class because you like being a GISH and play with oddly built groups.
That's not my situation. I play with min-maxers that only choose maximally effective abilities, spells, classes, and anything that isn't going to bring stuff down very fast with minimal set up is not chosen.
Well, that's the thing.
I only played Animist as a blaster/secondary healer so I cannot speak for its martial abilities. I used forms for exploration like you do on your druid (air elem if I needed to fly, earth elem if I needed to burrow, water elem if I needed to swim) but not for fighting.So, again, this is merely from a blasting perspective - and of course a liturgist perspective since there's little debate that it's vastly superior to other practices.
But in this perspective, Earth's Bile, Medium's Awareness, Apparition Quickening and Cardinal Guardians (along with liturgist) all helped output top-tier dps.
A) It's true that the liturgist 9th level feature is usally less powerful than effortless concentration but:
1) It comes online 5 levels earlier and doesn't need a high level feat. That's quite important if you're not playing a one-shot but are actually leveling your character throughout an AP. Waiting until lvl 14 to get effortless concentration is one hell of a wait, while the animist already got his version something like 6 months ago in real game time (and can use it 60% of the campaign instead of 35% of the time).
2) RAW, it can be abused to hell and back, because it SHOULD have been written: "whenever you sustain a spell, you can also take a step/tumble/leap". Or it SHOULD have said "once a round". But it doesn't. So for instance an elf using Elf Step can step twice and sustain two spells for one action - which is arguably much better than effortless concentration.
3) Through vessel spells, Animist simply has more ways to use his concentration than a regular caster.
B) It's been stressed a lot of times in this thread, but going first is a great advantage for any caster, and nobody is faster than the animist.
C) Don't forget Cardinal Guardians. At the time you're getting your effortless concentration, my opponents now might get -2 on their save to my biggest spells. Earth's Bile (either with or without moving) + Eclipse Burst is fun or, you know, Falling Stars into Quicken Mass Confusion.
From a min/max perspective, nobody can touch my dps against unholy opponents, which are most high level opponents in APs (and even more in some like Season of Ghosts). Divine + Earth's Bile shreds everything.
Against non-unholy opponents, a sorcerer using explosion of power will always deal more damage than an animist - or any other class for that matter. But the animist won't be far apart, and will be faster to act, and sturdier, and more flexible. And if you're not using explosion of power, then you're ahead if there are at least 2 targets in your Earth's Bile area.
There are some problems with the animist, though, and the biggest one is when you meet fire-resistant opponents, where your earth bile suddenly underperforms. Oh, and you're stuck with Avatar as your 10th level spell, which hurts.
I see what you mean. I think this interpretation also doesn't work, because rather than constantly you get the damage bonus only "whenever you cast or Sustain", which you aren't doing at the end of an opponent's turn.
You misunderstand; you are casting earth's bile or whichever other persistent damage spell, so that status bonus applies to the spell's damage... which, for persistent damage, means it triggers on every instance of damage. Your reading does not make much sense, as it would exempt persistent damage from a status bonus that otherwise very much applies to repeated instances of damage.
For Burn It!, it seems functionally indistinguishable and irrelevant whether you add the bonus onto the condition that you initially apply or each time damage is rolled.
It is absolutely relevant. If the status bonus only applied once, you'd deal 1 more damage on an instance of persistent damage and then no more. The fact that the status bonus applies to the persistent damage, i.e. the damage every time it is dealt, means that every instance of persistent damage deals +1 damage, just as every instance of persistent damage would trigger an enemy's fire weakness, not just the first. Again, your reading is inconsistent with how persistent damage interacts with other damage-modifying mechanics in the game.
|
|
I am more inclined to believe the play experience of those that seem to have played the animist and made it clear it performs ok, but isn't top tier like you tried to sell it.
To be clear, I definitely think an Animist is top tier. It is right up there with a druid (the closest class in my opinion since they both are very flexible).
What I do NOT think is that it is overpowered.
You're the only person I've ever met who thinks the Animist underpowered. Many think it overpowered.
Your tables obviously run very differently from most. Quite frankly, I have no clue how your players seem to be able to optimize so much more than others do. So I can't give you good advice on the Animist. But you seem to find the combination of utility, gishness and blasting that the Druid has very good. And that combination should be achievable by the Animist. Their strength is their versatility.
And it is quite playable before L9 (when Liturgist kicks in). The action economy is annoying but liveable. Often you're just losing your third action. If you don't need to move then Earths Bile sustain some 2 action spell is a pretty good round.
And, even non Liturgist, being able to switch your battle shape is often worth the action. For example, strike in a good damaging form sustain into a very mobile form move. Sure, a Liturgist would get to make a MAP -5 attack. But as a caster losing that second attack isn't the end of the world.
I haven't played it but theory crafting the Medium it also looks attractive. Not having to cycle to keep 2 apparitions useable gives some options.