Primal Caster

[TheOOB]

My group is starting a new PF2 campaign, playing through Kingmaker, and this is my first time playing as opposed to GMing PF2. We are using the Free Archtype rules, and our GM is willing to allow almost any uncommon/rare character options so long as it creates a fun build. We have 4 players, 1 player is playing a melee Goblin Ranger who will be taking the Champion archtype, and another player is playing a Sprite Gunslinger(we don't know what the other player will be playing yet.)

As I like casters, and the group needs some magic support, I decided I want to play a Primal caster, the list seems fun, does both healing and aoe damage/control, and I understand that exploration and fae are a part of Kingmaker.

I've been trying to pick between Druid and Fae Sorcerer. I want an animal companion, and I think storm order sounds fun, so druid seems like a great pick, but I also love the illusion magic and CHA focus of Sorcerer to play a benevolent trickster type character, and I can get an animal companion with the Beast Master Archtype.

So I would like to hear peoples thoughts, is it better to play a druid, and use my free archtype to get some social ability/trickery magic and a more fae theme, or play sorcerer and use my free archtype to get an animal companion and maybe shore up my out of combat healing ability or utility casting, or is there another direction I should be lookings(nature cleric, primal witch, summoner?)

Thanks in advance for any advice.

PS. I also keep jumping between elf, automaton, gnome, and kitsune for my ancestory, must be my ADHD.

[The Raven Black]

I would go Sorcerer. I prefer Spontaneous to Prepared and I feel one should go into Druid for either abilities exclusive to the class or for a character concept that hangs heavily on being a Druid. Not just for the Primal list.

This way you also get to be the party face that I think neither the Ranger nor the Gunslinger will be.

And Fae Sorcerer works well thematically in KM IMO.

[Teridax]

Tempest surge is easier to obtain via archetype than the reverse, so if you want as many of the benefits as possible, I'd recommend going for a Fey Sorcerer, then going Druid Dedication -> Order Explorer -> Order Magic for the focus spell. If you want an animal companion, the Beastmaster archetype should give you everything you want, and if you take Order Explorer a second time to pick the Animal Order for the Animal Companion feat, taking Beastmaster Dedication will give you a second companion too. If it's just the animal companion you want, you could even just skip the Druid archetype entirely and go for the Beastmaster first.

[Easl]

IMO both are solid. Sorc is probably a bit better if your fun comes from blasting and casting, while druid is probably better if you want 'caster plus'.

You might also want to consider WIS vs. CHA and what sort of character you want to play. Do you want to be the team's medic? It's an important skill and has some of the best skill feats in the game. Wisdom also increases your perception and initiative. OTOH, do you want to be the team's negotiator? Diplomacy, Deception, and Intimidation are really useful and demoralize makes for a decent third action in combat.

It's a shame you don't know what that third player is going to play. For the party, it's probably better to have one CHA and one WIS character rather than two characters good at the same things.

[Squiggit]

From what you're describing I'd pick Sorcerer. Beast Master is a very nice way to get an animal companion, while bending a druid into a social character with illusion magic is somewhat more difficult. Anecdotally I also find the bookkeeping of prepared casting can be kind of a pain for players who aren't as used to it, so spontaneous might be a nicer experience.

Druid with captivator or psychic to splash mind magic is an option, and generally comes with a sturdier chassis than the sorcerer does, but it feels like more of an uphill struggle to work really well and the double mental attributes will kind of take away from the druid's best features (having a strong chassis and such a powerful stat as their core attribute).

[Claxon]

It's worth noting that animal companions lack...staying power.

They're okay at early to moderate levels, but at higher levels their effectiveness wanes.

I've heard people complain and retrain out of their companion feats because they don't keep up.

One thing you may consider, depending on how much you like the idea of a companion....
A summoner (Eidolons remain good unlike animal companions) with the sorcerer dedication would be quite effective and completely Charisma based.

You could even do an Eidolon that would give you Occult spell list for access to illusion and mind stuff like you want, and use the sorcerer dedication for your other spell list.

[Dr. Frank Funkelstein]

One think to consider regarding Kingmaker: Using the default rules, the characters don't influence the kingdom at all.
I built a sorcerer focused on intrigue and diplomacy, and while there were situations i was able to use at least the latter, my intrigue focus got me the "you can roll for this kingdom action", no more.

Vance and Kerenshara's revamp recently got a 2nd edition where this is a bit changed, maybe you can suggest that to your GM if they don't already know it.

Other than that, i think both classes can be great in the AP, largely depends on what you like better, the strong versatility of the druid or the spontaneous casting and the charisma focus of a sorcerer.

[Claxon]

It's been a long time since I played PF1 Kingmaker, but I recall that your character's stat were able to influence the rolls that were made for the Kingdom (you used your character's attribute modifier for the associated role they filled). I guess for PF2 kingmaker rules it's not that way (I haven't played it).

It's definitely more balanced to not let character builds so substantially impact kingdom rule.

[Tridus]

Claxon wrote:

It's been a long time since I played PF1 Kingmaker, but I recall that your character's stat were able to influence the rolls that were made for the Kingdom (you used your character's attribute modifier for the associated role they filled). I guess for PF2 kingmaker rules it's not that way (I haven't played it).

It's definitely more balanced to not let character builds so substantially impact kingdom rule.

For certain definitions of "balance". I mean, leadership matters when running a government department, and someone who actually knows what they're doing should have some impact, right?

Like, in the Kingmaker game I was in, the Emissary was literally untrained in Diplomacy and Deception. Didn't matter in the slightest, they could somehow negotiate trade deals and treaties with absolutely no problem right up until it required the character to actually do something themselves... at which point they became totally incapable of it and needed the Magister (my Oracle) to take over.

The real reason why this was done was so that the kingdom rules would work in the 5e version of Kingmaker without modification. But a side effect of that is that it makes absolutely no difference whatsoever who does what in your Kingdom, so long as you have all four ability scores covered for the bonus.

The way the kingdom works in PF2 is that the Kingdom is effectively a character. It has ability scores and skills... except it doesn't have a party to lean on the way a normal character does. The Kingdom has to be good at everything and it doesn't get nearly enough ability score boosts or skill boosts to do that. So RAW after a few levels you wind up with a kingdom that gets worse at most things every time it levels up and there's really very little you can do about it except "rely on Supernatural Solution and use the Magic skill for literally everything."

Like, imagine a PF2 party where the Wizard is the only character allowed to make skill checks and must make all of them alone. That is how kingdom turns work.

Or play with house rules that change that. It's really not at all fun. Having your character provide the ability score for a given thing instead the Kingdom having its own would have definitely been an improvement.

[Tridus]

I will say that Druid is really thematic for the plot of Kingmaker and where it takes place. There's a LOT of natural environment, a lot of fey, and the Nature/Survival skills are extremely relevant (as the Players Guide mentions). This plays well to a WIS based class like Druid.

There's also lots of chances for social skills so CHA is good. There's lots of fey in those natural areas, so a Fey Sorcerer is also a very appropriate pick.

They're both great choices for this adventure, so it's really just about if you like the mechanics of one over the other. Both of them will get you where you want to go.

Sorcerer gives you more bang for your spellcasting buck since it has more spell slots than Druid and you can use free archetype to pick up the Druid stuff you want, so that might be a consideration (and get a companion via Beastmaster, then dip into Druid for some Order abilities). But really, both ways of approaching it will work well in this adventure.

[Gortle]

The Druid gets - better HP and starting armour proficiencies and shield, and more day to day flexibility. Wisdom is a better stat for perception, medicine and survival.
Do you like Tempest Surge and want to use Stormborn and Mist?
Do you need to be tough enough to handle a few attacks occasionally - probably not in your party.

Sorcerer gets more slots and more damage and more intraday flexibility. Charisma is a better stat for dioplomacy, deception or intimidation. Fae Sorcerer has some really good adds (Figment and Laughing Fit) to the primal list. The blood magic effect is useful though I'm not sure tactically the best way to use it since the remaster.

Animal companion is neither here nor there as they are easy enough to get via an archetype.

It is a difficult choice. The Druid is more balanced. The Sorcerer is the better caster.

[TheOOB]

I eventually settled on Summoner using the Sorcerer archtype. I figured since the companion was something I wanted so much, I'd focus on it. I think the last player is thinking bard, but I'm not sure yet.

I was talking with my DM, and I said I wanted to go Dragon Eidolon but with the primal spell list. He didn't seem to think there was a problem because dragons are with every tradition now in the remaster, is there any problems with doing that I can't forsee?

[Tridus]

Nothing obviously comes to mind. Summoner special abilities generally don't care about tradition, and the spell lists are much closer to each other power wise than they used to be. So it's probably fine.

[TheOOB]

And the last player ended up picking Storm Druid, so we're a very heavy primal focused party. Nothing wrong with having a theme I suppose.