On the Heels of the Advanced Class Guide Errata: Advanced Race Guide Errata

[Squirrel_Dude]

This one is a much shorter 3 pages of changes (page 4 is just game license jargon.

You can download it here. (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/resources)

Some changes I noticed:
- Wyroot got completely redone
- Scarred witch doctors no longer cast off constitution, and are back to intelligence like every other Witch.
- Paragon Surge FAQ answer was formally turned into Errata.
- Vanara had their climb speed reduced to 20 ft. for reasons I guess

[animewatcha]

Is it just the oracle's curse that got hit with the 1/2 to 1/6th thing or was it revelation as well?

[Squirrel_Dude]

Is it just the oracle's curse that got hit with the 1/2 to 1/6th thing or was it revelation as well?It was only the revelations. Elf, Aasimar, Ifrit and Sylph all got dropped down from 1/2 their level to 1/6 their level.

[Harmelyo]

Scarred Witch basically got a +2 int to every caster related and hexes effects... It is pretty brutal

The half-orc witches are going to be happy.
With this archetype they more or less got a +2 Int on top of their +2 to any char. Starting with up to an effective 22 int, what not to like about it?

[animewatcha]

"Don't mind us. We are just gonna make this Favored Class Bonus worthless now."

[Ilorin Lorati]

The half-orc witches are going to be happy.
With this archetype they more or less got a +2 Int on top of their +2 to any char. Starting with up to an effective 22 int, what not to like about it?

Nobody that took Scarred Witch Doctor did it because they wanted high int. Not even Half-Orc Witches.

[AbsolutGrndZer0]

While the errata document is okay, anyone else with the actual PDF notice the glaring issue they left? They only changed the starting age to 20, yet left the dice rolls alone!!!

Which MEANS... that a dhampir wizard is at LEAST 30 years old and can be up to 80 years old, making him venerable and quite possibly (especially if 71+) needing the GM to immediately make a roll to see if he's already dead.. This is based on the STARTING AGE TABLE.

Aasimar and Tiefling can be as high as 68, which at worst puts them 3 years from potential death.

They didn't fix the aging tables, they made them worse!

[Felyndiira]

Scarred Witch Doctor is mostly a full shift in the class's intent. The reason that people take it before is for the CON as a casting stat, making themselves a caster tank of sorts, which was different from the bog-standard witch. Now, it's just Witch with a bunch of scars and a +2 effective INT score.

I probably should have known that theu would do something like this already, but the Aasimar/Elf FCB nerf for oracles is one of the worst things in the Errata. I don't mind them nerfing it, per se, as long as they kept it to reasonably bounds. But did anyone in the entire Paizo team stop and think, "hey, is there any revelation that gives enough of a benefit that people will still actually have a reason to take this FCB now?" Not even using it on the Lunar Animal Companion is worthwhile with THAT much of a nerf. The nerf for bards is even more hilarious. They could have made them still worthwhile by changing it to a more reasonable number, like 1/3 or 1/4, but 1/6...

And yet, Paizo keeps the +1 Spell/Level FCB for Oracles and Sorcerers the same, because Paizo.

[Harmelyo]

Nobody that took Scarred Witch Doctor did it because they wanted high int. Not even Half-Orc Witches.

Not before, I agree but now it makes for quite a powerful option. It is more less turning half orc to a +4 int race with this archetype which is far from a little boost, even more if you took into account the issue with the Witch doctor Con not applying to all aspects of casting before.

Felyndiira is right in it being a 180 degrees shift in the use of the witch doctor.

I also agree that the 1/6 is utter rubbish. 1/3 would have made a great option into a real good option and 1/4 would have been a conservative nerf but manageable even good in some cases.
But 1/6 is bad, plain bad... It just turned an option a bit too powerful to another useless piece of garbage.

[Hrugner]

It looks like they only killed one character concept with this one, that's a relief.

[Shadowscale]

I thought only full orcs could take the witch doctor archetype?

[Mystral]

I thought only full orcs could take the witch doctor archetype?

Debatable, because half orcs have orc blood. But I'd say yes, and the +2 Int modifier is just there to offset the racial penality of pure orcs.

Also, in my games at least, Tieflings and Aasimars use the same aging table as sylphs and other elemental-blooded races. It just makes more sense that way. I do think the pathfinder guys somehow think the same, but messed up the tables.

[Milo v3]

Rather annoyed with the changes to Witch Doctor and planetouched/dhampir ages.


Debatable, because half orcs have orc blood.

Not debatable. (http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9qf9)

[Mystral]

Rather annoyed with the changes to Witch Doctor and planetouched/dhampir ages.



Not debatable. (http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9qf9)

Cool, level 1 character that casts with int 22. This is stupid.

[Squirrel_Dude]

Cool, level 1 character that casts with int 22. This is stupid.
I hadn't noticed this during the first read through.

Ugh.

[Kurald Galain]

- Wyroot got completely redone
Yes, but the effect appears to be exactly the same?

I note Risky Striker got nerfed to the same level as power attack, which strikes (heh) me as reasonable. Otherwise, what I'm seeing here isn't a big deal overall.

[Squirrel_Dude]

Also, in my games at least, Tieflings and Aasimars use the same aging table as sylphs and other elemental-blooded races. It just makes more sense that way. I do think the pathfinder guys somehow think the same, but messed up the tables.Dhampirs as well.

Hillariously, they didn't change the dice for starting ages, so now character can start ~5 years away from death if you roll for it. :smallbiggrin:

[Psyren]

Cool, level 1 character that casts with int 22. This is stupid.

And a level 1 casting with Con 20 wasn't? :smallconfused:

[Milo v3]

And a level 1 casting with Con 20 wasn't? :smallconfused:

It was Interesting Though. It was special and cool. Now it's just a "meh, who cares, boring" archetype.

[Psyren]

It was Interesting Though. It was special and cool. Now it's just a "meh, who cares, boring" archetype.

Don't get me wrong, I'd have preferred if Con was involved some way. I think they could have gotten away with tweaking its MAD - Int determines the highest spell you can cast, and Con determines bonus spells and save DC. That way you need 19 Int by the time you hit 17 to get all your spells, so you can't dump it entirely, but Con is still your main stat - and it fits the "power from pain" flavor of the scars.

But +2 Int for casting purposes isn't bad either. It makes that a strong archetype for half-orc witches (which it already was) and it's still competitive with the other archetypes.

[Vhaidara]

As a side note, if you want full cheese, the real number is 24. 18 base, 2 racial, 2 age, and 2 archetype.

[137beth]

The main thing that bugs me about this 'errata' is that the Scarred Shaman Prestige Class (http://paizo.com/products/btpy976n?Into-The-Breach-The-Witch) has been completely invalidated by the change to the scarred witch doctor.

Otherwise, I don't particularly care.

[Mystral]

Time for those grey haired half orcs to lace up their boots and go witching.

[skypse]

The main thing that bugs me about this 'errata' is that the Scarred Shaman Prestige Class (http://paizo.com/products/btpy976n?Into-The-Breach-The-Witch) has been completely invalidated by the change to the scarred witch doctor.

Otherwise, I don't particularly care.

3PP. Paizo don't care :D

[Ilorin Lorati]

3PP. Paizo don't care :D

Part of me wants to say "and they shouldn't," but at the same time Pathfinder exists because Paizo got fed up with WotC doing stupid stuff and waffling on 4e so they really should know better.

Also, they really shouldn't be changing abilities like that after release. Some number tuning is fine, but they just completely changed the nature of the archetype.

[Psyren]

The main thing that bugs me about this 'errata' is that the Scarred Shaman Prestige Class (http://paizo.com/products/btpy976n?Into-The-Breach-The-Witch) has been completely invalidated by the change to the scarred witch doctor.

Otherwise, I don't particularly care.

That looks like third-party, so it's up to that designer to make any updates (or even grandfather in the old version via a patch if he likes.)


As a side note, if you want full cheese, the real number is 24. 18 base, 2 racial, 2 age, and 2 archetype.

And while that sounds great on paper, the frailty you'd incur getting that would put you and your familiar in a lot of danger at low levels.

[NamelessNPC]

But +2 Int for casting purposes isn't bad either. It makes that a strong archetype for half-orc witches (which it already was) and it's still competitive with the other archetypes.

We had an archetype that was unique, interesting and not overpowered. Now we get the same old regular witch with a ridiculous and unnecessary bonus. Now it is way stronger AND duller.

Why on earth was this done? Was it banned in pfs?

[Psyren]

I'd argue that casting from Con is stronger because it makes them able to frontline easily. But I definitely agree with you that the old version was more interesting.

I liked it being Con-based and MAD, I simply think they didn't quite make it MAD enough. Highest spell level on Int instead of bonus spells makes more sense to me and guarantees a split focus.


Why on earth was this done? Was it banned in pfs?

Correct, it was illegal for play, along with everything else in the Orc chapter.

[Squirrel_Dude]

For how much of a rep the Paizo boards have for being biased towards seriously favoring everything put out by Paizo, it's been surprising how vitriolic things have gotten over there with the ARG and ACG errata releases. It's gotten pretty heated (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2soz5?Why-all-the-nerfs-Paizo) with people claiming that Paizo is making changes to old classes just to make the new ones look better.

Some posts have been more hyperbolic than others. (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2soz5&page=5?Why-all-the-nerfs-Paizo#204)

But, yeah. It's not exactly a great lead-in to Gencon.

[Shadowscale]

Orcs are banned from pfs? Why?

[grarrrg]

Orcs are banned from pfs? Why?

Because someone might actually play one?

But seriously, last I knew the majority of "not main 7" races were flat banned, with a few allowed as "perk rewards".
So it's not so much "no Orc" as it is "stick to the main 7".

[squiggit]

yeah PFS bans are a bit arbitrary.

Like right now the races that are open for play outside the CRB are kitsune, wayang and nagaji.

Lots of other non-balance bans, like ... every non-gunslinger gun wielding option (except for the picaroon and maybe one other I can't remember for some reason) being banned. A few other weird ones too.

[Milo v3]

Orcs are banned from pfs? Why?

You can't even play a tiefling or aasimar in PFS, no way you'd be able to play an orc.

[Dondasch]

Y'know, I think this has finally made me realize why I like 3.5 much better than PF--- WotC didn't feel the need to tweak every little thing. If it was too powerful or too weak, it was left as such, and you and your group could use it or not as you please.
Paizo, on the other hand, is adjusting everything to fit their idea of balance, often according to how things work in PFS (Crane Wing nerf sticks out-- still bitter). For one thing, this is tough on those who were using something that got nerfed (I am grateful I avoid PFS like the plague), and must either put up with a weaker version they might not have taken, make a new character, or (provided the change was small enough and the DM is nice) partially redesign their character. Why would I want to play a game where the rules can change anytime someone who isn't even playing decides?
Another reason is the Snowbluff Axiom-- 3.5 allows a wide range of power levels, while PF has two-- caster and mundane.

[Milo v3]

Another reason is the Snowbluff Axiom-- 3.5 allows a wide range of power levels, while PF has two-- caster and mundane.

Not directly true. There are things like slayers that are deemed good enough to be on par with spellcasters like alchemists and hunters.

[Snowbluff]

Not directly true. There are things like slayers that are deemed good enough to be on par with spellcasters like alchemists and hunters.

Milo, how is the Slayer good enough to be on par with the alchemist? Alchemists are dump trunks, especially if they go the Vivisectionist route. I'm just curious. Like, do they have some sick combos I missed? :smallconfused:

I am disappointed in the idea that Paizo might be nerfing the old classes. I'll have to use the word "shenanigans" correctly to appropriately describe that activity. :l

[squiggit]

A lot of the nerfs are just plain bizarre too even if you do ignore the fact that this is out of the blue years after the fact.

And I really don't like how the new scarred witch doctor is even worse for straight orcs but better than before for half-orcs playing normal witch. Which seems to defeat the whole point.

[Psyren]

They nerfed two strong caster options (Divine Protection and Scarred Witch Doctor) and are now being raked over the coals. Which I find pretty amusing personally considering that one of the main criticisms of PF is that it is called "caster edition" by some. Paragon Surge was also a caster thing, but we've had months with that particular nerf to get used to it so it isn't a big deal I think.


For how much of a rep the Paizo boards have for being biased towards seriously favoring everything put out by Paizo, it's been surprising how vitriolic things have gotten over there with the ARG and ACG errata releases. It's gotten pretty heated (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2soz5?Why-all-the-nerfs-Paizo) with people claiming that Paizo is making changes to old classes just to make the new ones look better.

Some posts have been more hyperbolic than others. (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2soz5&page=5?Why-all-the-nerfs-Paizo#204)

But, yeah. It's not exactly a great lead-in to Gencon.

As you saw there, they did post in (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2soz5&page=6?Why-all-the-nerfs-Paizo#267) that thread. (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2soz5&page=6?Why-all-the-nerfs-Paizo#279) The issue is less about the errata itself and more about the messaging around it, and they seem to be aware of that.

I plan on responding to the informal feedback questionnaire (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2soz5&page=7?Why-all-the-nerfs-Paizo#330) as well.

[Squirrel_Dude]

As you saw there, they did post in (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2soz5&page=6?Why-all-the-nerfs-Paizo#267) that thread. (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2soz5&page=6?Why-all-the-nerfs-Paizo#279) The issue is less about the errata itself and more about the messaging around it, and they seem to be aware of that.To be technical. It's the lack of messaging around it.


I plan on responding to the informal feedback questionnaire (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2soz5&page=7?Why-all-the-nerfs-Paizo#330) as well.I had already responded to it.

[Psyren]

Because someone might actually play one?

But seriously, last I knew the majority of "not main 7" races were flat banned, with a few allowed as "perk rewards".
So it's not so much "no Orc" as it is "stick to the main 7".

Note that Kitsune, Nagaji and Wayangs were made baseline legal as well, no boon needed. I'm not sure why.

[Snowbluff]

Note that Kitsune, Nagaji and Wayangs were made baseline legal as well, no boon needed. I'm not sure why.

I was under the impression that race bans were always a lore thing. For example, Tiefling aren't generally allowed with out a boon, but a season or two ago, they were allowed because of a blood war or something being the plot.

[Milo v3]

Note that Kitsune, Nagaji and Wayangs were made baseline legal as well, no boon needed. I'm not sure why.

They're probably going to give tian more focus with the PFS senario's this season.

[squiggit]

They nerfed two strong caster options (Divine Protection and Scarred Witch Doctor) and are now being raked over the coals. Which I find pretty amusing personally considering that one of the main criticisms of PF is that it is called "caster edition" by some.

Take your pick of

A) Nerfing something overpowered in a stupid way is still stupid.
or
B) The forums are not a hive mind.

and on top of that I'd say that the SWD was unequivocally buffed for standard witch play. Gishy orc witches are much worse after this change, but it was an inferior playstyle to begin with. And... referencing back to A and my last post even if post-change SWD was fine, I still question the merits of a change that makes it harder to swing with the race the archetype is attached to and better for a secondary race who happens to pick it up as well.

Ditto with Divine Protection. DP was a disgusting feat. New DP is also a disgusting feat, just for the exact opposite reason. That's still a failure in my book.

[Shadowscale]

So dumb half orcs, elves, and half elves are allowed, but not orcs.

[Kurald Galain]

But seriously, last I knew the majority of "not main 7" races were flat banned, with a few allowed as "perk rewards".
So it's not so much "no Orc" as it is "stick to the main 7".

Yeah, this.

Basically, they want a fantasy world with a few common races, and exotics being rare. The alternative would basically be that every adventuring party consists of e.g. a treant, a fire elemental, a not-evil-honestly drow, and a xuihutotli that nobody's ever heard of, and that every villager in the adventure treats this as normal.



Y'know, I think this has finally made me realize why I like 3.5 much better than PF--- WotC didn't feel the need to tweak every little thing. If it was too powerful or too weak, it was left as such, and you and your group could use it or not as you please.

Right, because 3E didn't have errata (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/errata) :smallamused:

[Dondasch]

Right, because 3E didn't have errata (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/errata) :smallamused:

The difference is that 3.5 errata tended to focus on typos, omissions, and Truenamer-broken things. "Balance" adjustments were relatively uncommon.

[Kurald Galain]

The difference is that 3.5 errata tended to focus on typos, omissions, and Truenamer-broken things. "Balance" adjustments were relatively uncommon.

I'll take your word for it. I haven't extensively paid attention to 3E/3.5 errata. I do recall that 3E's public campaign had a pretty large banlist though.

However, 4E did have extensive balance adjustments, ending up with 140 pages of errata total, based in a large part on what was or wasn't working in the LFR public campaign. Predictably, the WOTC forums were commonly angry about what was errata'ed and how.

[TiaC]

4e errata made the game all but unplayable from the books. Dozens of tiny changes to everything, with more changes coming all the time. I suppose it succeeded in their goal of getting subscribers, but only in the way that freemium games get subscribers.

[Kurald Galain]

4e errata made the game all but unplayable from the books. Dozens of tiny changes to everything, with more changes coming all the time. I suppose it succeeded in their goal of getting subscribers, but only in the way that freemium games get subscribers.

Meh, I think it mostly succeeded in making people ignore errata :smallbiggrin:

If the forums are any indication, subscriptions went way down when they switched from the classic thick content-heavy Dragon magzine to the thin mostly-fluff Dragon magazine.

[Psyren]

Nerfing something overpowered in a stupid way is still stupid.

Which is a communication issue, as I've said and they are aware of that and working on it. For bigger changes there needs to be a blog post explaining their thought process.


The forums are not a hive mind.

You realize that all this means is that every single change they make (and even no change at all in many cases) is going to piss off some vocal group of people. There is no win there, so they might as well make the changes that fit their original intent.



and on top of that I'd say that the SWD was unequivocally buffed for standard witch play. Gishy orc witches are much worse after this change, but it was an inferior playstyle to begin with.

Getting a Half-Orc with super-high Int and dying to poison or a volley of arrows doesn't seem particularly superior to me.

I have already said though that I would have wanted it to stay Con- and Int- MAD, just tweaked slightly.

[Squirrel_Dude]

Which is a communication issue, as I've said and they are aware of that and working on it. For bigger changes there needs to be a blog post explaining their thought process.And hopefully they follow through.



You realize that all this means is that every single change they make (and even no change at all in many cases) is going to piss off some vocal group of people. There is no win there, so they might as well make the changes that fit their original intent.This doesn't make any sense. "Welp, we know that those 10 people are going to hate it, so we'll just ignore the other 90 people's feedback."


Getting a Half-Orc with super-high Int and dying to poison or a volley of arrows doesn't seem particularly superior to me.Oh, come on. You know better than this. Getting 20 Int and still maintaining a decent constitution is not at all difficult for a Half Orc witch. Now with SWD you can either get to 20 more cheaply, or pay the same price to get to 22.

[Psyren]

This doesn't make any sense. "Welp, we know that those 10 people are going to hate it, so we'll just ignore the other 90 people's feedback."

If you can prove that 90 people also hate it then you have a case.



Oh, come on. You know better than this. Getting 20 Int and still maintaining a decent constitution is not at all difficult for a Half Orc witch. Now with SWD you can either get to 20 more cheaply, or pay the same price to get to 22.

And Dex and Wis? Are those not important too? How about encumbrance and carrying capacity?

[Kurald Galain]

This doesn't make any sense. "Welp, we know that those 10 people are going to hate it, so we'll just ignore the other 90 people's feedback."

The reality for a popular game (or show, or webcomic, or whatever) is that everything you do will offend some vocal minority on your forums. Point of fact, Rich Burlew has commented on this several times. And, listening to a vocal minority on the forum has little or no impact on customer satisfaction or sales.

[Kudaku]

They nerfed two strong caster options (Divine Protection and Scarred Witch Doctor) and are now being raked over the coals. Which I find pretty amusing personally considering that one of the main criticisms of PF is that it is called "caster edition" by some. Paragon Surge was also a caster thing, but we've had months with that particular nerf to get used to it so it isn't a big deal I think.

I agree that Divine Protection was a caster nerf, but there the complaint is that it went from being an option (if an incredibly controversial one) to a non-option. IE Paizo's proclivity to nerf things into the ground rather than trying to reach a happy medium.

In sheer power the scarred witch doctor was actually buffed rather than nerfed (half-orc scarred witch doctor can start with an effective INT of 22 for spells and hexes, or 25 if you have the PB to survive starting with Old Age), but in the process they also massacred a genuinely unique arcane caster type. The complaint here is that Paizo destroyed a unique gameplay element, not that they "nerfed a caster".

I also think you're severely underestimating the original response to the Paragon Surge change. When that FAQ was released it was near universally welcomed on the Paizo Boards.

[Ellowryn]

Well, how is that any different for a wizard? They also have sky high Int, while trying to maintain a decent Con/Dex/Wis, and then there is Bob the party fighter for all your packmule needs.

Witches, SWD or not, are not wizards, but CAN be played similarly and fill much the same roll. That doesn't mean that they MUST be that way or SHOULD be that way.

Personally, if/when i finally run a PF campaign i plan to ignore this change for my players, and will ask to use the unerratad version if i want to play a SWD in another persons campaign.

[Snowbluff]

4e errata made the game all but unplayable from the books. Dozens of tiny changes to everything, with more changes coming all the time. I suppose it succeeded in their goal of getting subscribers, but only in the way that freemium games get subscribers.


Meh, I think it mostly succeeded in making people ignore errata :smallbiggrin:

If the forums are any indication, subscriptions went way down when they switched from the classic thick content-heavy Dragon magzine to the thin mostly-fluff Dragon magazine.
Yeah, I feel that the errata pretty much made the game a whole less fun. A lot of the changes were balance changes or nerfs, because they wanted everyone in the same power level. Every time I looked up an interesting trick, no matter how powerful, I would find out it was removed in the errata.

So the first rule of 4e is to ignore the errata, and the second rule is to uphold the first rule via questionable methods.

I agree that Divine Protection was a caster nerf, but there the complaint is that it went from being an option (if an incredibly controversial one) to a non-option. IE Paizo's proclivity to nerf things into the ground rather than trying to reach a happy medium.

I concur with this. I don't know about you, but I feel like most developers have a tendency to overnerf things. Is there like a law or theorem describing this phenomenon?

[Psyren]

The reality for a popular game (or show, or webcomic, or whatever) is that everything you do will offend some vocal minority on your forums. Point of fact, Rich Burlew has commented on this several times. And, listening to a vocal minority on the forum has little or no impact on customer satisfaction or sales.

Indeed.

Now the main problem they have is that they are changing things without explaining their rationale - for a small company (or at least, a big one whose brand involves them continuing to act small and engage the players directly) this is a change that needs to be made immediately, before any more big errata releases.

Also for big changes like this they should be predetonated via FAQ with the "this will be updated in future errata" note. That would then open up a "comment period" with the playerbase to discuss the change before it gets into the next print run and allow them to tweak things further.


I agree that Divine Protection was a caster nerf, but there the complaint is that it went from being an option (if an incredibly controversial one) to a non-option. IE Paizo's proclivity to nerf things into the ground rather than trying to reach a happy medium.

In sheer power the scarred witch doctor was actually buffed rather than nerfed (half-orc scarred witch doctor can start with an effective INT of 22 for spells and hexes, or 25 if you have the PB to survive starting with Old Age), but in the process they also massacred a genuinely unique arcane caster type. The complaint here is that Paizo destroyed a unique gameplay element, not that they "nerfed a caster".

Fair enough, and like I've said repeatedly I wanted Con to be involved in some way, but the class should be MAD. The way they had it I think was Int for bonus spells and Con for everything else, which just led to people dumping Int anyway and going Con-SAD since the base spell layout was all they needed. Whereas I would have preferred Int to spell level and Con to everything else, which would have forced a split focus but still allowed the players to depend more on Con. Or if they really wanted to weaken it, Int to spell level and bonus spells, Con to everything else.


I also think you're severely underestimating the original response to the Paragon Surge change. When that FAQ was released it was near universally welcomed on the Paizo Boards.

Oh I was in favor of it too. Plenty of people here were griping about it though, and I wasn't really paying attention to the Paizo boards when that one came out.

Incidentally that spell is a great example of them nerfing something to still being useful rather than overpowered or useless.

[Kudaku]

Fair enough, and like I've said repeatedly I wanted Con to be involved in some way, but the class should be MAD. The way they had it I think was Int for bonus spells and Con for everything else, which just led to people dumping Int anyway and going Con-SAD since the base spell layout was all they needed. Whereas I would have preferred Int to spell level and Con to everything else, which would have forced a split focus but still allowed the players to depend more on Con. Or if they really wanted to weaken it, Int to spell level and bonus spells, Con to everything else.

I think that'd be interesting - most witch doctors would start with an INT of ~14 or so, matching how most witches will want a con of 14. It'd definitely be massively superior to just killing CON-casting outright.


Oh I was in favor of it too. Plenty of people here were griping about it though, and I wasn't really paying attention to the Paizo boards when that one came out.

In all fairness Winterbluff will gripe about everything Paizo does. :smalltongue:


Incidentally that spell is a great example of them nerfing something to still being useful rather than overpowered or useless.

It's particularly noteable that immediately after the FAQ was released, Mark spent a great deal of time discussing the ruling and actively encouraged posters to try and break it, or find things unrelated to Paragon Surge that were broken by it specifically so they could fix it. It was a great example that Paizo can do errata right. It'd be nice if they could meet that mark more frequently though. It's rough to read a 9-page errata section and realize the errata doesn't even agree with itself.

[mostholycerebus]

Wow, they really sucked the uniqueness out of the Scarred Witch Doctor. Anecdotal, but my optimized Elf Witch was waaaay more powerful than my optimized 1/2 Orc SWD. The SWD gave up too much and is too MAD, not really worth the tradeoff for a few more hit points. He still didnt have the BAB or HD to front line, he could just take a hit or two, which a smart Witch doesnt need to worry about anyway. Witches, like Wizards, have enough arcane defenses that they can eventually ignore hit points. Granted, I only played up to mid-level, but that IS where most gaming takes place.

Really, they took a unique archetype and made it even more powerful, but much more boring.

The only people dumping INT and going CON SAD were theoretical builders not starting at lvl1 and playing in arenas where skill points have no use.

[Kris Strife]

I agree that Divine Protection was a caster nerf, but there the complaint is that it went from being an option (if an incredibly controversial one) to a non-option. IE Paizo's proclivity to nerf things into the ground rather than trying to reach a happy medium.

In sheer power the scarred witch doctor was actually buffed rather than nerfed (half-orc scarred witch doctor can start with an effective INT of 22 for spells and hexes, or 25 if you have the PB to survive starting with Old Age), but in the process they also massacred a genuinely unique arcane caster type. The complaint here is that Paizo destroyed a unique gameplay element, not that they "nerfed a caster".

I also think you're severely underestimating the original response to the Paragon Surge change. When that FAQ was released it was near universally welcomed on the Paizo Boards.

From reading the Pathfinder forums, it seems that Kineticist will also use con for casting, and that Paizo tends to nerf older classes when releasing a new class with similar mechanics.

[Milo v3]

From reading the Pathfinder forums, it seems that Kineticist will also use con for casting, and that Paizo tends to nerf older classes when releasing a new class with similar mechanics.

Kineticist doesn't really have casting. It just can do stuff like apply constitution mod to it's eldritch blast and uses con to determine the DC's of it's blast effects.

[Squirrel_Dude]

If you can prove that 90 people also hate it then you have a case.

And Dex and Wis? Are those not important too? How about encumbrance and carrying capacity?Please stop being so obtuse.

[Psyren]

Please stop being so obtuse.

Lovely. Was there an actual discussion in there or are you just going to spout insults?

[Extra Anchovies]

Kineticist doesn't really have casting. It just can do stuff like apply constitution mod to it's eldritch blast and uses con to determine the DC's of it's blast effects.

Indeed. The first thing to remember about the Kineticist is that it is not a caster. Thinking it's a caster leads to the "omg it can cast fly at will, why aren't these abilities X/day" line of thinking, which I find just utterly bewildering. And kind of infuriating, too, because I haven't been able to squeeze out an actual answer from anyone just yet and giving the Kineticist only X/day abilities would completely destroy the class.

Is there anyone in this thread who thinks that Kineticist is overpowered or understands why someone else could think that, and is willing to explain it to me? Do they deal too much damage? Do they have too many options? Do they have access to too many of those options? Are those options individually too powerful? Are people really that scared of at-will abilities?

[Milo v3]

Not even at-will abilities. Quasi-At-Will Abilities, since you have to take non-lethal damage to use them.

[Dondasch]

Is there anyone in this thread who thinks that Kineticist is overpowered or understands why someone else could think that, and is willing to explain it to me? Do they deal too much damage? Do they have too many options? Do they have access to too many of those options? Are those options individually too powerful? Are people really that scared of at-will abilities?

But if they have at-will abilities, then... hmm, I got nothing. I can only assume it's the fact that they are castery and PF casters are all per-day.
So yes, I think people really are that scared.

[Vhaidara]

I mean, yeah, everyone knows fighters are totally overpowered. Full attacks should only be usable 1/day until like, level 18 (twice at that point).

The sad moment where I remember my phone hates color tags.

[Milo v3]

But if they have at-will abilities, then... hmm, I got nothing. I can only assume it's the fact that they are castery and PF casters are all per-day.
So yes, I think people really are that scared.

But they Aren't Caster-y.

[Kudaku]

Lovely. Was there an actual discussion in there or are you just going to spout insults?

Psyren, I respect you too much to not call you on this - Squirrel gave a legitimate answer to a poor argument. Using your logic they should never have reverted the monk flurry errata since that entailed going against their original intent. While the community opinion shouldn't dominate your decision process, feedback can and should be taken into account.

[squiggit]

Which is a communication issue, as I've said and they are aware of that and working on it. For bigger changes there needs to be a blog post explaining their thought process.
Agree completely



You realize that all this means is that every single change they make (and even no change at all in many cases) is going to piss off some vocal group of people. There is no win there, so they might as well make the changes that fit their original intent.

That's another argument in favor of good communication. Or just only listening to me since I'm pretty much always right.


Getting a Half-Orc with super-high Int and dying to poison or a volley of arrows doesn't seem particularly superior to me.

If you needed a con primary to not have that happen to you a lot of classes would be in serious trouble. A backline hex/bfc spamming witch simply doesn't need a huge pile of it.

The people who do are the gishy frontline/true orc SWDs that the archetype seemed to have been designed to support... and it seems all kinds of ass backwards to rebuild an archetype to make it much worse for its primary race but more functional for a secondary race that can steal the archetype with a racial feature.

So that's where I am on that.

[Draco_Lord]

But they Aren't Caster-y.

They throw energy blasts all day. That is Castery, in that it is like a caster without being a caster. Of course, everyone knows blasting is sub optimal, so doesn't matter.

[Psyren]

Psyren, I respect you too much to not call you on this - Squirrel gave a legitimate answer to a poor argument. Using your logic they should never have reverted the monk flurry errata since that entailed going against their original intent. While the community opinion shouldn't dominate your decision process, feedback can and should be taken into account.

I'm not saying they can't listen to feedback and change their minds. I'm saying that forum feedback should not be the primary driver of design, because the vocal minorities there do not necessarily speak for the playerbase at large.

The big downside to forum discourse is that the folks who are happy with a current status quo largely don't log on just to state that.

So by all means, listen to those players who speak up and take their feelings into account. But ultimately, to thine own self be true.

[Snowbluff]

Not even at-will abilities. Quasi-At-Will Abilities, since you have to take non-lethal damage to use them.
Wait, it's a Warlock? I thought vigilante was already doing that sort of thing.

Still, it sounds like an annoying cost. It was probably brought on because the devs were scared of what the forum might do if they actually had at-will abilities.


The sad moment where I remember my phone hates color tags.
What, like the buttons? Have you tried coding them manually?

[Extra Anchovies]

Wait, it's a Warlock? I thought vigilante was already doing that sort of thing.

It's a Warlock but without a lot of the cool options because it's limited to an elemental fluff. Warlock vigilante is a warlock only in name.


Still, it sounds like an annoying cost. It was probably brought on because the devs were scared of what the forum might do if they actually had at-will abilities.

There are some nice bonuses for taking a bit of burn, but they need to be able to take a lot more each day (if you have to take 4 burn in an encounter to be relevant, and you can only take 8 burn per day, you can only be relevant in two encounters) and it needs to affect them a lot less (only dealing nonlethal damage equal to half their level, for example).

[Elder_Basilisk]

Dhampirs as well.

Hillariously, they didn't change the dice for starting ages, so now character can start ~5 years away from death if you roll for it. :smallbiggrin:

What, you can't actually end up dead in character creation? Paizo wussed out.

[Kudaku]

What, you can't actually end up dead in character creation? Paizo wussed out.

I'm prrrretty sure you can, actually. Let me take a quick look at the math.

Edit: Yup! A Dhampir wizard starts off at age 20 + 10d6 for being a trained class. 10d6 maxes out at 60 years, putting you at 80 years of age at level 1. Humans die from old age at 70+2d20, so there's a decent chance of rolling 79 or lower.

[Turion]

Not even at-will abilities. Quasi-At-Will Abilities, since you have to take non-lethal damage to use them.

Just for the record, Kineticists have access to 80 utility talents. Only 8 of them require burn, usually only one point. Most of what requires burn is infusions and composite blasts, which is admittedly a problem.

[Snowbluff]

It's a Warlock but without a lot of the cool options because it's limited to an elemental fluff. I'm sorry for getting my hopes up, 'Chovies. D:


Warlock vigilante is a warlock only in name.
But the Vigilante Warlock at least has the pew pew lasers, right?



There are some nice bonuses for taking a bit of burn, but they need to be able to take a lot more each day (if you have to take 4 burn in an encounter to be relevant, and you can only take 8 burn per day, you can only be relevant in two encounters) and it needs to affect them a lot less (only dealing nonlethal damage equal to half their level, for example).

Wait, what's this about burn? I can't get around the costs with fast healing?

[Draco_Lord]

Just for the record, Kineticists have access to 80 utility talents. Only 8 of them require burn, usually only one point. Most of what requires burn is infusions and composite blasts, which is admittedly a problem.

I disagree. It gives Kineticists something, cause they are kind of lacking in the other areas.

[Vhaidara]

Wait, what's this about burn? I can't get around the costs with fast healing?

From Burn

"This damage can’t be healed by any means other than getting a full night’s rest, which removes all burn and associated nonlethal damage."

[Ellowryn]

From Burn

"This damage can’t be healed by any means other than getting a full night’s rest, which removes all burn and associated nonlethal damage."

Boy, these guys really hate Warlocks or Warlock like characters. Honestly what is so wrong with having at will, low power/utility abilities? Or if they are going to implement a burn mechanic at least let those abilities equal spells so you get a somewhat equivalent amount of uses.

[Draco_Lord]

Boy, these guys really hate Warlocks or Warlock like characters. Honestly what is so wrong with having at will, low power/utility abilities? Or if they are going to implement a burn mechanic at least let those abilities equal spells so you get a somewhat equivalent amount of uses.

Been reading through it, and I think you can avoid burn in a number of cases, at least at higher levels. It just costs you a full round action before you use them. As pointed out utility powers are almost all burn free, and even if they do have some burn just use the gather power ability.

[Divayth Fyr]

Boy, these guys really hate Warlocks or Warlock like characters. Honestly what is so wrong with having at will, low power/utility abilities? Or if they are going to implement a burn mechanic at least let those abilities equal spells so you get a somewhat equivalent amount of uses.
Hey, you can't give non-spell users anything even close to being equal to real spells. Didn't you get the memo? ;)

[Turion]

I disagree. It gives Kineticists something, cause they are kind of lacking in the other areas.

I'm not sure we actually disagree. To clarify: I'm perfectly okay with the lack of cost on the utility talents. I think the burn costs on infusion talents are the problem. Infusions (like all non-blast talents) are already level-gated, and multi-target form infusions already take a hit to damage. Burn on top of that feels a little insulting.

I do like the way the defense talents are handled: 0 burn baseline, but you can take burn to enhance their effects. Burn for the composite blasts also makes sense to me; it's like a less-painful Hellfire Warlock.

[Draco_Lord]

I'm not sure we actually disagree. To clarify: I'm perfectly okay with the lack of cost on the utility talents. I think the burn costs on infusion talents are the problem. Infusions (like all non-blast talents) are already level-gated, and multi-target form infusions already take a hit to damage. Burn on top of that feels a little insulting.

I do like the way the defense talents are handled: 0 burn baseline, but you can take burn to enhance their effects. Burn for the composite blasts also makes sense to me; it's like a less-painful Hellfire Warlock.

Ah. I misunderstood what you said. Thought you were saying they needed MORE burn, not that the burn that was there was a problem. Then we are on the same page.

[Beowulf DW]

I concur with this. I don't know about you, but I feel like most developers have a tendency to overnerf things. Is there like a law or theorem describing this phenomenon?

Ooooh! Finally, my chance to have a gaming theorem named after me!

*ahem*

Much like retrofitting old equipment, properly balancing existing broken options can be both difficult and time consuming, especially when a developer is still making new content. The quickest and easiest way to solve such an issue is to simply overnerf it. Once feedback regarding the nerf has been collected, it can then be buffed back to a more reasonable level, since both the weaknesses and strengths of that particular option have now been highlighted.

Author's note: the last sentence assumes a developer of a certain diligence.

[Vhaidara]

Boy, these guys really hate Warlocks or Warlock like characters. Honestly what is so wrong with having at will, low power/utility abilities? Or if they are going to implement a burn mechanic at least let those abilities equal spells so you get a somewhat equivalent amount of uses.

Well, a few notes
Burn isn't generated by basic blasts
Building up Burn gives you bonuses to hit and damage
As they level, they get up to 6 points of burn reduction on infusions (Blast Shape and Eldritch Essence)
They can spend a move action to reduce the Burn cost by 1. A full round gets them 2, and a full round + Move gets 3
Starting at 6 (increasing at 11 and 16) you can make a buffer. Basically, you spend burn into the buffer. It stay in there (you recover the burn normally when you rest) until used. You can use the buffer instead of burn (but no more than 1 point from your buffer in a single use).

So, for example, at level 11 (a spike point, since spec and buffer improve), you can have 2 points in your buffer. Your basic blasts are doing either 6d6+6+Con Mod (non-touch AC) or 6d6+1/2 Con Mod (touch AC). Let's say you're a Pyrokineticist who grabbed Expanded (Fire) at 7, because burning things is fun. You use a Blue Flame Composite Blast (2 Burn, but you deal 12d6+1/2 Con). Then you can also attach Explosion for 1 burn out of your Buffer (4 is reduced by 3 because of Specialization) to make it a 5, 10, 15, or 20ft radius spread at a 120ft range. Next turn, you use another Blue Flame Blast, this time with Snake to grab the guy behind cover. Snake is free, and you are getting +2 to hit and +4 to damage because of the 2 points of burn you took. And the turn after that, you're at +3/+6 (level 12 is when you get +4/+8), but you also have a +2 bonus to the physical ability score of your choice(so you can go Dex for accuracy or Con for damage)

As far as the out of combat, it was mentioned that only 8 of the 80 utility talents use burn. Let's see what they are.
Aerial Evasion: Take a point of burn, gain Evasion until you reset your burn. I'd say that's worth it.
Cold Snap: You lower the temperature of the area around you by 5 degrees/level (turn on or off as a swift). If it drops below 40, creatures within 5ft take a -4 to Dex. Flavorful, and potentially useful (you are aiming for Touch AC). Oh, and you're immune to it.
Flame Shield: While your elemental defense is up, anything hitting you in melee (non-reach) take half your level in damage. Also, warm fire shield protection from cold. (1 Burn)
From the Ashes: If you would die, you turn to ash as if disintegrated. Next turn, is the ash isn't destroyed (note destroyed, not scattered or anything like that) you respawn, having healed 5hp/level. 2 Burn.
Heat Wave: Reverse of Cold Snap, if you pass 90 degrees, all attacks within 5ft of you have a 20% miss chance (you're immune)
Jagged Flesh: 1d6 damage to everyone hitting you with natural attacks and unarmed strikes. Does damage weapons (though it mentions hardness will likely block all damage)
Kinetic Form: go to Large and back as a standard, no ability score changes. At 16 it becomes Huge
Kinetic Healer: Heal with Kinetic Blast. And the target can be a nice guy and take the burn for you.
Shimmering Mirage: While your Elemental Defense is active (water), you get a 20% miss chance
Tidal Wave: You cast this (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/t/tsunami)

Notice how the only one you need to activate more than 1/day is emulating a ninth level spell.The rest are utility, and last all day. Further, they help you build up your base reserve of burn that powers up your blasts and ability scores.

I actually quite like the kineticist.

[Extra Anchovies]

But the Vigilante Warlock at least has the pew pew lasers, right?

Round 2 of the playtest nerfed it from 1d6 +1/level to 1d6 +1/4 levels, which means it isn't an effective combat option anymore. I was pretty disappointed by that, because TWF with mystic bolt and another weapon would have been really cool.


So, for example, at level 11 (a spike point, since spec and buffer improve), you can have 2 points in your buffer. Your basic blasts are doing either 6d6+6+Con Mod (non-touch AC) or 6d6+1/2 Con Mod (touch AC). Let's say you're a Pyrokineticist who grabbed Expanded (Fire) at 7, because burning things is fun. You use a Blue Flame Composite Blast (2 Burn, but you deal 12d6+1/2 Con). Then you can also attach Explosion for 1 burn out of your Buffer (4 is reduced by 3 because of Specialization) to make it a 5, 10, 15, or 20ft radius spread at a 120ft range. Next turn, you use another Blue Flame Blast, this time with Snake to grab the guy behind cover. Snake is free, and you are getting +2 to hit and +4 to damage because of the 2 points of burn you took. And the turn after that, you're at +3/+6 (level 12 is when you get +4/+8), but you also have a +2 bonus to the physical ability score of your choice(so you can go Dex for accuracy or Con for damage)

I'm curious: how much burn does this costs for these two rounds, assuming you can gather power as a move action on both turns but don't get any full-rounds to gather power? The fact that you have to take burn for it doesn't make it a bad combo, but you are limited to 3+Con burn per day, plus whatever's in the buffer, so this might not be something you can use frequently.


I actually quite like the kineticist.

I do too, don't get me wrong. I just think its implementation has a few major flaws that need to be fixed. I've been mulling over what they should get over in the OcA discussion thread.

[Vhaidara]

I'm curious: how much burn does this costs for these two rounds, assuming you can gather power as a move action on both turns but don't get any full-rounds to gather power? The fact that you have to take burn for it doesn't make it a bad combo, but you are limited to 3+Con burn per day, plus whatever's in the buffer, so this might not be something you can use frequently.

If you gather as a move? 3, assuming you don't use the Buffer as well. Using the Buffer on both lowers it to 1
The first round costs you 3 normally (2 for the composite blast, 1 for the infusion (it would be 4, but Infusion Specialist lowers it by 3 at this point))
The second round costs you 2 normally (2 for composite, 0 for the infusion (you actually could put a 1 burn substance infusion onto it as well, since you're 1 point over).

EDIT: It is worth noting that if you reduce the burn you gain, you also delay getting your buffs on normal blasts. That's one of the things I like: if you're burned out, then you still have access to you basic blasts, and they're getting buffed up because you have a bunch of Elemental Overflow buffs.

[Snowbluff]

Round 2 of the playtest nerfed it from 1d6 +1/level to 1d6 +1/4 levels, which means it isn't an effective combat option anymore. I was pretty disappointed by that, because TWF with mystic bolt and another weapon would have been really cool.

Well, I'll say it again, the Vigilante is a scam. :l

[Extra Anchovies]

I did some math (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?431285-Kinetic-Blast-and-Feat-Combinatons&p=19611067&viewfull=1#post19611067), and it turns out that Elemental Annihilator has some surprisingly nice damage. I put the archetype at T4 because it fights darn well and has a few other combat options, but is about as useful as a fighter when not in combat. Stock kineticist is T5 because it has some things to do out of combat but can't contribute sustainable damage after more than two encounters. (Note: I also think that the CRB Rogue is mid-high T5. If you disagree about that then we also probably disagree about the kineticist.)

My new (and probably final) suggested fix to the Kineticist is to give them Devastating Infusion, Blast Training, and Flurry of Devastation all free of charge, and then also let them choose a bonus combat feat in place of an infusion or utility wild talent.


If you gather as a move? 3, assuming you don't use the Buffer as well. Using the Buffer on both lowers it to 1
The first round costs you 3 normally (2 for the composite blast, 1 for the infusion (it would be 4, but Infusion Specialist lowers it by 3 at this point))
The second round costs you 2 normally (2 for composite, 0 for the infusion (you actually could put a 1 burn substance infusion onto it as well, since you're 1 point over).

So that's five burn. Basically 2/day, unless you have 34 Con or higher (possible but unlikely, since you'll want Dex to be able to hit stuff in the first place).


EDIT: It is worth noting that if you reduce the burn you gain, you also delay getting your buffs on normal blasts. That's one of the things I like: if you're burned out, then you still have access to you basic blasts, and they're getting buffed up because you have a bunch of Elemental Overflow buffs.

Yeah, that is a pretty cool aspect of the class.

[Larkas]

(Crane Wing nerf sticks out-- still bitter)

Hindsight is 20/20, but seeing what they did regarding ACG and Opportune Parry and Riposte, I guess it's clear why they nerfed that feat to the ground.

[Milo v3]

They throw energy blasts all day. That is Castery, in that it is like a caster without being a caster. Of course, everyone knows blasting is sub optimal, so doesn't matter.
Except those energy blasts are as powerful as an expert using a bow.... It "looks" caster-y, but it isn't one.


Been reading through it, and I think you can avoid burn in a number of cases, at least at higher levels. It just costs you a full round action before you use them. As pointed out utility powers are almost all burn free, and even if they do have some burn just use the gather power ability.
You can't use gather power or the reducers from the class on utility wild talents.

[Extra Anchovies]

You can't use gather power or the reducers from the class on utility wild talents.

you what


Gathering power in this way allows the kineticist to reduce the total burn cost of a blast wild talent she uses in the same round by 1 point.

Huh. Utility talents that require burn:
-Cold Snap (lasts until burn is removed)
-Flame Shield (lasts until burn is removed)
-From the Ashes (panic button)
-Heat Wave (lasts until burn is removed)
-Jagged Flesh (lasts until burn is removed)
-Kinetic Form (lasts until burn is removed)
-Kinetic Healer (would be at-will healing without the cost, and you can hand the burn off to the target)
-Shimmering Mirage (lasts until burn is removed)
-Tidal Wave (replicates a ninth-level spell)

So I guess that's fair.

[Milo v3]

you what

So I guess that's fair.

It's basically just so people don't go crazy and complain about infinite healing... as if every party didn't have tonnes of healing wands.

[Psyren]

It's basically just so people don't go crazy and complain about infinite healing... as if every party didn't have tonnes of healing wands.

"Every party" doesn't - Magic-Mart doesn't have a franchise in every single campaign. And even the GMs that are okay with healing wands may not have the magic shop stockpile 20 of them for you to buy, or give you the downtime to make more than 1-3.

[Milo v3]

Note: This is the internet. People exaggerate to get to their points faster, and to facilitate more efficient communication.

[Psyren]

Pointing that out is relevant though - they're not designing for the groups where infinite healing and wand proliferation aren't a big deal, they're designing for the groups where they are. They even have guidelines for how many consumables players should be allowed, and those have to encompass every consumable, not just healing.

So yes, I know you were exaggerating a little for efficiency, but I wanted to point out that 'tons of healing wands' is indeed not an assumption they're designing for. Even multiple healing wands may be a stretch.

[Milo v3]

Pointing that out is relevant though - they're not designing for the groups where infinite healing and wand proliferation aren't a big deal, they're designing for the groups where they are. They even have guidelines for how many consumables players should be allowed, and those have to encompass every consumable, not just healing.

So yes, I know you were exaggerating a little for efficiency, but I wanted to point out that 'tons of healing wands' is indeed not an assumption they're designing for. Even multiple healing wands may be a stretch.

Well, infinite healing came up a hell of a lot during the playtest (because of a typo that was immediately detected and mentioned at the start of it's playtest thread) and iirc many people talked about how it would be fine anyway since most parties have resources to get back to full heal without expending large amounts of resources already through consumables like wands.

[Draco_Lord]

Except those energy blasts are as powerful as an expert using a bow.... It "looks" caster-y, but it isn't one.

Yeah, exactly my point. It looks castery. But it is not a caster.

[NightbringerGGZ]

I concur with this. I don't know about you, but I feel like most developers have a tendency to overnerf things. Is there like a law or theorem describing this phenomenon?

Not one that is generally accepted, but I refer to it as Pendulum Balancing. This is a problem I noted back when I played MMOs, and it largely stems from game devs having very limited time and a lot on their plates. Often the decision to nerf or buff abilities happens weeks, months or even years prior to that change being made public. Rarely are decisions revisited after they're made as well, unless sufficient player outcry (aka "feedback") demands it.

Off Topic:
Also to clarify the Burn mechanic, it exists as a way of limiting the number of times you use your most powerful at-will utility options and a way of limiting the power of the bonuses you add onto a Blast. It is possible to play carefully and rarely accept any Burn at all, but the devs added a risk/reward system where you gain all-day buffs at the cost of accepting Burn and lowering your max HP.

For instance, a Level 6 Geokineticist with 20 Con could be expected to have 63 HP. If you accept 2 Burn you suffer 12 points of non-lethal damage that can't be healed, but gain a +2 to Attack, +4 to Damage and DR 5/Adamantine. If you wanted to play a little riskier, you could take 3 Burn total, for a +2 bonus to two physical ability scores of your choice and a 15% chance to negate crits and sneak attacks. Oh, and if you've taken the Elf or Half Elf FCB then you have another +1 to that damage bonus.

[AbsolutGrndZer0]

Dhampirs as well.

Hillariously, they didn't change the dice for starting ages, so now character can start ~5 years away from death if you roll for it. :smallbiggrin:

Dhampirs are actually worse... if you roll for starting age you can actually ALREADY BE DEAD.

Really, the change to aasimar/tieflings was correct and expected as it's always been the case in Golarion that they aged as humans. That in the AGE actually was an error. However, the mistake in the Dhampir's case was they should be identical to elves, as that's what every past description of them said.

So, in my games at least, I use the errata as written for aasimar/tieflings (the intended errata, not what the actual PDF says now) however I have decided that my dhampir will age as half-elves. :P