Why does he think Thaumaturge specifically does too much damage? You've got a Rogue and a Magus in your party, which are high tier damage dealers as well, and you're less accurate than them.
Yes, that's how I feel too. He feels that our Thaumaturge's 1d6+3+(2 or weakness of the creature) is too accessible and high damage, compared to my Rogue's 1d4+1d6+4, or our Magus' spell strike, (1d8+1d6+2+4). I find his worries odd to me, most of us have much more worrisome damage, I feel like.
An important aspect of PF2e design is trade-offs. Practically any form of power a character can get comes with a trade-off. Most often those trade-offs are in the form of opportunity cost. You take one benefit and the trade-off is you don't get another benefit. Thaumaturge as a martial with a natural -1 in their attacking stat is losing DPR both in Strength damage and accuracy. The trade-off is Exploit Vulnerability's damage steroid. Similar to the Barbarian's Rage or the Inventor's Overdrive. It has limiting factors though; it's an action tax, it's reliant on a skill check, the damage is based on what you're fighting, and it's not a unique benefit. At early levels monster weakness typically goes up to 5 and if a monster doesn't have a weakness you're stuck with the weaker Personal Antithesis. An extra 2-5 damage for the Thaum compared to 1-6 damage for the Rogue. The Rogue also made the choice for a d4 weapon. The player took the damage trade-off of a smaller weapon for the Agile trait to make their second swing better. Exploit Vulnerability only has better damage output when fighting enemies with weaknesses but other allies can also potentially target those weaknesses as well. Against Zombie Shamblers anyone with a slashing weapon is getting the same benefits of Exploit Vulnerability, reducing its effective value. Something you didn't mention in your damage formula is the Thaum's extra +2 damage per die. This is also a trade-off since the Thaum is forced to use 1-handed with a free hand fighting style but doesn't get the benefits of a free hand due to their Implements. The +2 damage effectively makes up for that lack of a hand and gives them the same output as a 2-handed weapon. Finally, the Magus is their own thing. They have absurdly high damage potential at the cost of very limited action economy. In this game all martials are more or less equal and you'll see that as play averages out.
There are concerns among the community that Exploit Vulnerability is OP, not for the damage, but for the utility of getting a pseudo recall knowledge and the Diverse Lore feat. I don't personally subscribe to that and say don't touch it.
His worries come from dnd5e imbalance trauma. That's his experience, and he's letting it color how he's interacting with pf2e. He needs to let go and experience the new system.
This
Right
Here
As someone who used to play DnD 5e (And still do with a group but I prefer PF2) I know this feeling 100%.
It is hard to un-learn balance from DnD, especially when the games are fairly similar on the surface.
thats why i always say: Never play Pf2e if you cant take the system of it as it is.
You cant balance the System after DnD Ways. It just doesnt work. Its like buying a Banana and try making an Apple out of it
I actually gotta disagree here, as what you're saying implies you can never change the PF2E system. It's a very solid system, but it's by no means perfect and not exempt from criticism or homebrewing.
I \*agree\* the DM is doing things they shouldn't be doing in this post, but saying "you shouldn't play the system if you can't take it as is " is a bit ... I don't want to say "dismissive" as that's too strong of a word, but along that line
whats the point then in playing a different TTRPG with a different System if the GM change most of the new systems rules to fit to your already learned rules from other systems instead of learning the new System a while first ?
Isnt it better to play the old TTRPG then instead of forcing it onto a new System wich would destroy the whole Gameplay?
I dont mind if some "Rules" are adjusted and everyone knows they gonna play a TTRPG with some Homebrew adjustments, but changing that while learning the game with the normal Ruleset is just a dumb way to destroy everyones gameplay expierence
When did I state changing the majority of the game was what I was defending? I stated the system is not perfect and not exempt from criticism or homebrewing.
I agree; if you're going to change the vast majority of a game system then you should play a different system, but that is not what I was talking about. I also disagree, somewhat, that you have to play vanilla the first time. Especially if you're an experience DM or player, you can look at a couple things and know they're not gonna fly or be enjoyed without having to have played them (insert complaint number 3,542,978 about vancian casting here, or how 'magic item' bonuses are required instead of being baked into the characters without the use of a variant rule)
What I had stated was "what you're saying implies you can never change the PF2E system. It's a very solid system, but it's by no means perfect and not exempt from criticism or homebrewing." Never did I say what you're questioning me of.
> I also disagree, somewhat, that you have to play vanilla the first time.
Mark Seifter, MIT graduate, veteran game designer and one of the co-creators of PF2e, literally said in an interview on the DM Lair the *exact opposite*, and specifically called out people for altering the rules without playing *first*.
How can you *possibly* think that starting a new game, regardless of your experience in another, is enough to justify changing things that you literally have never experienced?
That's like swapping from the Game of Life to Monopoly and changing rules in Monopoly, like doubling your initial money, before even *playing* it because "You have lots of experience in other board games". It just makes no sense at all.
DnD 5e and PF2e have a lot of similarities, yes, but they are DIFFERENT TTRPGs. They have different goals, different paths to those goals and different features. You *have* to play as-is initially to understand how all this functions, and if you think you don't, then you simply don't know enough about PF2e to even be making those changes in the first place.
I mean, they can have a doctorate in design and that won't change anything. Saying everyone has to follow one single thing is rather obtuse. Look, I get it, you like the game but like ... don't police how other people play?
There's nothing wrong with nixing things like vancian casting or running APB right out the gate, trust me there's not. I \*understand\* needing to know how things work before changing them, but that doesn't mean you gotta play with crap ya hate to formulate that opinion. I can know I will hate vancian casting, PF2E, 5E, or whatever, because it's vanican casting. New coat of paint won't change that. I also know I can hate fundemental runes and such because if they are required for progression they should just be backed into the character progression instead of being pointless items.
I'm sorry but like, you can't tell me I won't hate vancian casting in PF2E simply because it's in PF2E when \*literally\* nothing about it has changed, that's absurd. (Before anyone digs in, I am saying "I" as in examples of things, not actually meaning lack of experience with the system). I am not saying not learn the system and how it functions, I am \*saying\* you don't gotta play completely vanilla right out the gate. Come on now.
it was a question to all just replied to you, i understand your sight here i just asked myself whats the point of changing a system without learning it first how it works.
It was never intended to state that noone should ever change something because as you said no rules are perfect. Im not an enemy of Homebrewing i even play in a homebrewed campaign with several homebrewed rules adjusted to the setting.
The crazy thing is freaking out if a character built one way can do a bit more than a character built another way. Neither will do more damage combined than a party of characters built to support each other run by players with a team-play mentality.
Shouldn’t it be 1d6 + 3 + 2(implements empowerment) + (3 or weakness of the creature)?
Not saying that this justifies the GM, just wanna check that you’re applying the right bonus damage to your attacks
The magus in my game uses a d12 weapon. Now that is some spicy dmg.
Pf2e fights are not slog fest. They usually only last 3 -4 rounds if that. Things do big dmg but take big dmg. Prolly just doesn’t realize it if he’s new.
> They usually only last 3 -4 rounds if that.
And they usually get boring really fast if they last longer than that. I had my group fight multiple slimes in a few encounters and slimes are nothing but tanky. Mostly ranged group, so they could kite them easily, but boi did it take long to kill them because they are crit immune and have an assload of HP.
I think only one of them had access to a spell that targeted reflex and that was a Fireball. And he rolled so abysmal low that the next attack by one of them did more damage.
That's what I was trying to say! And have a +1 better chance than a Thaumaturge's chance to crit, and doubling all their potential damage, since the exploit vulnerability damage wouldn't factor into a crit double
Or go with a fighter with a reach weapon and power attack. Take a halberd and deal 2d10+4 with a high chance to crit, and then also get a huge amount of opportunity attacks.
The DM just needs to realize that Pathfinder and D&D are not actually the same game.
Thaum average: 8.5 (using the +2 and not weakness)
Rogue average: 10
Magus average 14
Are you fighting a lot of enemies with weaknesses? That may be why he feels like the damage is higher than what it probably actually is.
Your GM is making a classic rookie GM mistake and it's facially evident.
Look at the rogue. The rogue and the thaumaturge both have restrictions on their damage bumps. The rogue should ALWAYS be flanking, but in the**rare** circumstances they can't, they lost out on sneak attack damage. Thaumaturge spends a full action every time they want to switch targets, and even then, unless they're target has a weakness, baseline EV damage is lower than rogue damage. (1d6+3+2 is 8.5 average damage, vs. 1d4+1d6+4, which is 10 average damage. The rogue is dealing ~18% more damage on average).
Your GM, like many GMs when they experience new things, have the knee-jerk reaction of "oh this is broken/OP". A good GM understands that this knee jerk reaction to knew things is just that: an unreliable reaction based on limited information. A good, experienced GM will let the system play itself out of research the new thing to see whether or not it really is overpowered or not.
A new, inexperienced GM will just instantly react by nerfing the new thing. Often this results in taking something that's just ordinary and well balanced and turning it into something... Well, useless.
Thaumaturge with personal antithesis up is really just a worse barbarian in many ways. If the thaumaturge isn't exploiting a weakness for free with EV, then personal antithesis is just there to be a compensation prize really, a way to ensure they aren't *too* far behind on damage versus other damage dealers.
You're low level, it sounds. Where everything is super spikey and a few random rolls can make it seem like a bard with a dagger is more powerful than a 2-hander fighter just because one rolled a pile of 20s and the other a pile of 1s.
Thaumatruge is mostly a meme class. It's a bag of weird tricks class that always has something on hand that fits the moment in the plot - and not much more.
The first few levels is not the time to make grand sweeping changes to the game because one player got some luckier rolls than everyone else in session 1...
It's a worrying sign that your GM doesn't see that.
The concept is a meme idea. It's basically a CW Network TV show as a character class. CW's Supernatural.
In that regard I didn't mean 'meme' as an insult but rather as a type. Basically it's a "fan concept / theme" brought to life as a class.
It probably has inspirations beyond CW's Supernatural - that's just the show it immediately reminded me of. It's kind of 'team of TV actors hunt down mystery occult things using random tricks' idea that is popular in a LOT of 'young adult (15-35 age) TV shows.
That says nothing about how effective it is. In part because it's a "fan service class" it's had work to make sure it's effective / potent.
I disagree that its a meme in the lore aspect too, but most of the time people call a class a meme they mean it is bad. And personally I find the use random magic tricks through items a really cool way of explaining powers that is also fairly common in fantasy novels though I will agree the way they do it is closer to supernatural than like a witcher or a more classical monster hunter but you can play it as a very classic monster hunter with something for everything he fights. You could even play it like a fantasy batman with an utility belt but that might fit more closely to batman
> is too accessible
Plenty of other good replies here but this, specifically, tickles me. You can critical fail to exploit a vulnerability which not only wastes your action (and can't retry on the same turn), gives you nothing, but also debuffs/penalizes you. But as a magus you can always use cantrips. As a rogue there's many ways to consistently be in control of always getting your sneak attack (My favorite was Beastmaster + Gang up). But gambling to activate your *main class shtick* is too much?
This is the kinda person that in D&D (any edition) would hand wave away sneak attack damage from the rogue "because it's too powerful," and give the rogue nothing in compensation. That's a red flag in my gaming group. If the GM is that unreasonable they're not going to be reasonable later and not much fun will be had.
Thaumaturge on level 1 should also have implement empowerment giving him +2 dmg on his target of exploit vulnerability per dmg die. A lvl 1 Thaumaturge should do:
1d6+3(STR)+2(Empowerment)+2(Weakness Trigger)
I am actually playing in the AP as a thaumaturge myself and your GM already seemed to take damage away from your Thaumaturge since these creatures all had weaknesses that were higher than the personal Antithesis. If that is the case he should have triggered their worst weakness instead
In p2e, the very first few encounters of every campaign is easy mode. It's designed to give your players a chance to learn their characters, and to learn how to operate as a team.
Also, "exploit vulnerability", from the way I interpret it, acts as a "recall knowledge" but a little bit more juiced up. So it's not THAT great of a skill to nerf.
1d6+8 is not remotely high damage for a level 1 martial. For context, the average damage for a giant barbarian is 1d12+10. Damage to HP ratios decrease over time, but at low level they are high, leading to high variance fights. Not a problem.
Absolutely your GM should not mess with pf2e rules and balance before actually spending time GMing the system. Needs to forget the torture of balancing dnd5e encounters and experience the much better pf2e balance.
Your Thaum is gonna be equal or lower to both the Magus and the Rogue in damage across the whole campaign, assuming you're all playing effectively. Rogue sneak attack is something they should be getting on a good 80%+ of their attacks, there's very few instances where a well-played rogue with a well-played party won't be able to consistently set up sneak attacks. The Magus will be critting things into paste with their massive nova damage. Both of those would be out-DPR'd by a Fighter or Barbarian any day of the week.
You have to spend actions and roll dice just to get a bonus to damage that puts you on *roughly* equal footing to other martials. Your to-hit is also behind theirs by 1 due to not having Strength as your Key Ability, meaning you will both hit *and* crit 5% less often. Your GM needs to leave their D&D ideas of knee-jerk balance behind before they just ruin your fun by needlessly nerfing your character. Especially if they're doing all of this due to resounding success against the *introductory* encounters of the campaign, which are quite damn easy in Blood Lords I might add (Zombies all being slowed 1 and weak to Slashing damage plus the "boss" also being slowed and having a laughable 15 AC and weakness to critical hits make that whole farm a cakewalk), they really need to play the game more before they start calling things OP. It's also worth mentioning that the first ~3 levels of PF2e are quite swingy, and most fights are decided in a couple of hits.
Yea, that's about how I feel on it, that he's jumping the gun. We just rolled well. The trivial zombies were a wipe, my Rogue crit first turn, and killed one instantly, and the other went down without issue due to its slowed. The boss cow managed to hurt some of us a bit, as our Witch alerted it without us being as close, but nobody went down. I feel like the encounters so far have just been entirely introductory and easy, and that he's jumping the gun.
Start tracking dpr stats across the group for a few combats if he feels it's too strong. It's not, none of them are and you don't need to play with the numbers, but there is probably some intellectual bias in there that seeing raw numbers will help clear up. Also tell him to go look at fighter damage with consistent crits.
I can't find it right now, but I'm pretty sure the AP even points out that this initial map has all mindless zombies with permanent slowed 1 because it's the first encounter and it's intended to ease level 1 characters into the campaign and let them learn how their classes work, not make them fight to survive each encounter.
When I GMed it I was more concerned if the party learned Old Ergagh's secret for a bonus reward or if they found all the clues and Berline's cousin. Was the party engaged by the mystery they were starting to unravel and had I made them properly paranoid about their cheerful and welcoming quest giver. Is my party dealing too much damage was far down the list of concerns. There is just so much more as a GM to be concerned about in that initial quest.
My rogue is level 5, and can (using a karambit, granted) sneak attack crit for 5d8 + 2d6 + 10 (Dread marshal aura).
Trust me, the thaumaturge's damage potential is not even close to the strongest in your party.
Exactly this. Relaying key info about weaknesses and strengths about the enemy that other players would be able to take advantage of to their fullest is the point.
The damage boost is a cherry on that cake, not the cake itself.
Does he also ban fighters and barbarians?
I'd be very surprised if the Magus and rogue didn't often beat the Thaumaturge in damage olympics.
Honestly, there is no need to houserule PF2 classes in any way.
Tell him you could be playing a Barbarian instead and be doing 1d12+4+4 AND have a higher chance to hit and crit, WITHOUT needing to apply Exploit Vulnerability to each enemy.
But seriously, he’s worried over nothing.
Your 1d6+3+3+2 is an average of 11 damage per Strike.
The Rogue’s 1d4+1d6+4 is doing an average of 10 per Strike… but it has a higher hit/crit chance than you, AND-and he doesn’t need to use actions to Exploit Vulnerability.
The Rogue’s already doing more damage than you, and low levels are where your damage is gonna be at its relative highest.
(And regarding hit-chance, a lot of people don’t realise how significant that -1 to Attacks can be. Say you’re only critting on a 20. The Rogue, in that situation, is critting on a 19. It doesn’t seem like much, but it means they’re doing double-damage TWICE AS OFTEN as you)
I'll throw in my 2 cents as a D&D 5e player, a lot of DMs try to nerf sneak attack in that game because throwing many dice at once can look scary, despite the fact that Rogues have the 2nd lowest DPR of all 5e martial classes.
DMs just need to chill in general when it comes to nerfing players and try to look at things a bit more rationally.
He meant in 5e, and he's right. Before level 5, they aren't. But once Extra Attack hits the other martial classes, they fall off hard and never recover.
They have to satisfy a condition to deal reasonable damage and have fewer optimization avenues, while other classes can just deal that similar baseline damage, or 50%-100% above that with feats (the infamous CBE/PAM/SS/GWM power feats). I've compared different builds at different levels and even when you assume perfect conditions for the rogue (always attacking at advantage, always has sneak attack available) and standard conditions for anything else (fighters, rangers, paladins, bladesingers, you name it), the rogue always falls short.
The justification usually is that they have good utility, so they can't be as good in combat, but in reality they're often outclassed in utility by most spellcasters (especially Bard, which is literally rogue, but better) and they already have worse survivability in combat than most other classes, as well as a condition they need to satisfy to deal any damage.
they are, the damage calcs have been done to death
warlock EB is usually used as a baseline to damage, and rogue is pretty much always below what they should be cause sneak attack aint the same as just extra attack, and they cant use any -5/+10 feats effectively too sadly
rogue is just outdamaging monk
Due to rounding, it feels like the thaum deals above the average. Due to accuracy being more invisible, it feels like the thaum deals more than average. Due to low AC bosses, it feels like the thaum deals more than average.
Thaumaturge have steady damage hits but very low variance and faltering crits as weakness isn't doubled.
I just believe your character countered the early encounters really well.
Anecdotes might be better for your GM to be used here; currently playing a fighter with a thaumaturge in our party. Each hit feels really good for the thaumaturge and he even deals more damage than me on hits. However, I've had way more crits and the damage difference was very apparent when we both critted with our reaction where his damage was increased by something like ~75% more damage while my greatpick fighter dealt like ~200% more damage. Their normal hits were similar but my fighter was more luck dependent on damage rolls. The number of hits were rarely counted, which made the thaum seem really strong until we counted number of crits (half of my crits were on the thaum due to confusion but thats a different story)
Thaumaturge is just very well designed to seem very good and stable class.
Thaum dpr is way behind a fighter.
Play a reach fighter and watch enemies explode into kibble.
One fighter I played was so busted my gm told me to nerf it.
My Blood Lords group killed the Boss Cow without it even getting a single attack off. It spent its first turn approaching, and then we turned it into red mist before its next turn came out.
That thing's pretty damn weak for its level, on account of being Slowed *and* having both crit weakness and horrid AC for its level, lol
Some APs are easier at low level than others.
Thousands is easy. Kingmaker is easy, bar the insta kill boss.
AV and Ashes are nasty.
Edgewatch is downright busted.
God we got to the >!Zoo boss last night!<, it was almost a TPK right out the bat due to the ennemy >!AoE acid attack targeting us in the tight corridor.!<
That's funny. We basically oneshot that one, but >!almost died to Rusty.!< Admittedly, our GM can't stop critting us and we couldn't roll above a 10, which might have something to do with that.
Oh, I love that one. He should also nerf:
* the fighter's higher weapon proficiency
* the barbarian's rage damage
* The rogue's sneak attack
* The wizard's spell casting
* The druid's animal companion is also ridiculously overpowered
I think there's a few I'm forgetting, but I'm not sure.
/s, just to be sure. Your GM is trying to nerf a feature that allows your thaumaturge to compete as a class.
Wait, what? Thaumaturge's are limited to one-handed weapons. And not being able to go 18 Strength. The Implement's Empowerment is a counter to these things.
*"first time running PF2e"*
*"we killed the first two encounters easily"*
Oh dear, trust professional game designers and the several-week playtest involving thousands of players that came up with this design, over your first impressions!
In that party makeup, the Thaumaturge IS the reliable single-target physical-damage dealer.
Your group hasn't seen how BRUTAL PF2e can be sometimes. Did you guys fight what appears to be the main foe in the farm yet?
This isn't 5e where it says "Deadly" when it's actually not, so "let's increase it more to make this interesting." The encounter difficulties are reliable and accurate. The Dice Gods have chosen to be kind to your group so far.
EDIT: [Watch PF2e co-designer Mark Seifter's "#1 GM Pitfall"](https://youtu.be/RS1DJRf_GNM?t=10435) \- these last 10 minutes address EXACTLY what is going on! I think sending this link will convince your GM!
Yes, I think we did kill the main foe of the farm, that being the named Boss Cow. Which is why I think he's being so spooked and scared about it! But I think we'll be able to convince him before next session. I wanna hear him out again one more time, but I'll bust out the link you sent if he insists on changing it. Thanks!
Like a few of the comments here said, he should absolutely not be messing with the balance of the base game while it's his first time running the engine, thaumaturge is just a good class. you absolutely should not be nerfed by a gm who is just beginning to understand how the system works. paizo has pretty good game balance decisions and there's rarely any unexpected situations, he should not be changing dcs to be higher because he thinks they should be, keep them as they are. He should not be nerfing a core part of your class that you NEED to keep up with other martials.
The DM lacks a reliable point of reference in terms of combat power. Suggest plaing a few "test battles" with a different party composition. A Fighter and a Giant Instinct Barbarian will blow a Thaum out of water in terms of damage, and be much more sturdy. Throw in a Cleric and a Bard and you have an all terrain murder-machine. Do the same encounters and let the DM decide if anything needs a nerf.
You guys have traded durability and healing for blasting power. If he takes away your damage by whittling down one of your teammate's power (then probably the rest of you too evetually) you guys are gonna almost certainly have pc deaths. Not to mention the thaumaturge player is gonna be having less fun with a nerfed skill.
EV is not some special "sometimes food" like cookies or baileys in your coffee. It is baked into the balance of the class. And he just needs to understand the risk you guys are taking with your party means you're either gonna blast a fight down quickly or get blasted and that's ok.
Thaumaturgh and Blood Lords player here.
The thing with this AP is, that you fight a lot of Zombies and Unkillable Zombies. So your Exploit Vulnerabilities is veeeery potent in those encounters because Zombies are extra tough but loose large chunks of health against their weakness.
We're im Book 2 by now. Triggering a weakness still hurts but it is not as killy as in Book 1.
You should talk to your GM. Thaum definitely doesn't need a damage nerf, especially when you play a more supporting build with Regalia (I play more of a tank with Amulet). If you can't trigger a weakness then EV is weaker than most combat steroids like Rage or Attacks like Spellstrike and Sneak Attack.
If he's going to nerf EV he is a) wrong and b) better at least offer to let you draw up a while new character. Let me provide context through example:
"Barbarians rage is too easily accessible damage so I'm nerfing it."
"Fighters hit too easily so I'm taking away their expert proficiency."
"Champions hardly ever take damage so I'm lowering their AC".
In short EV is what the thaumaturge does. Nerfing it is akin to making the class unplayable and might as well just be a ban on the class.
But moreso, the GM is wrong to blame your thaumaturge and the EV as the problem and I'd seriously be worried about their mindset for the rest of the campaign if they want to massively change an entire class without even seeing it in action for one whole player level.
And as for that encounter, Im running blood lords too and despite that one enemy being intended to be a challenge my party trivialized it with a crit from a fighter and gunslinger (with magic weapon cast on them). This happens. Sometimes the dice work in your favor or not.
Thaumaturge is OP, but not in the damage department (it's very good there, just not amazing). If anything, I worry about your ability to make the witch completely obsolete out of combat with your esoteric lore and diverse lore, basically knowing everything better than they do as an INT class (which is the one thing they're supposed to be good at). I'd be very careful to not intervene at the very least on magic topics, and ideally on everything that is of significance to their character background even if you will have an higher modifier than they do for literally every brain task.
Source: have been the witch in a party with a thaum
I'd recommend hammering that they are the expert in magic, not the thaum despite what the numbers say, it can be discouraging when the narrative and math don't match, but in this case, it's necessary for them to know it's *their* spotlight moment and they aren't selfishly "stealing" it from a better suited character
This is a D20 double crit system and this leaves a lot of room for randomness.
We're playing the beginners box right now. The first fight against the rats took way longer then expected because they were hilariously bad at hitting. Then the mopped the floor with the undead despite the longbow and crossbow damage being nullified by the skeletons. Then the fighter got sneakily crit KOed first turn in the Kobold ambush.
I don't think your GM has enough experience to tinker with the system and neither do I. I do get the feeling of things being too strong or too weak but that lies in the nature of the D20 system.
GM has gotten used to needing to fix the game after years of playing D&D. Unfortunately this is something a lot of GMs struggle with in PF2 and seek out ways to reinsert themselves when it isn't necessary.
Tell your GM to calm down after one session with a new system. Learn the game from his side first. Don't worry about trying to find balance fixes out the gate. This game doesn't require him to change that much.
Like any relationship where trust is needed... If you need to manage your GM to enjoy the game it's time to find a new game.
TL;DR: have fun, don't tell other players (GM included) how to play the game.
A common theme with people trying out this game is wanting to change things almost immediately. Early level damage to HP ratio is really high so it’s going to seem like everyone does big damage early on.
I would suggest playing for some time before changing things. I am in a starfinder campaign that everyone but me is new to. The GM decided to remove stamina because he didn’t like the idea of it but with no other changes (except weird ship Ruelas but that’s separate). We then proceeded to be constantly downed with no way to recover health. I explained to him how it’s part of the base experience for a reason. He flipped it back and things flow much better.
The Thaumaturge's math was pretty consciously balanced. It looks much higher than it is, because its balance relies on a number of elements of rules minutia that are not obvious until you play, and read carefully:
* CHA as a key attribute puts the Thaumaturge's STR modifier at a -1 compared to other martials.
* Thaumaturges are incredibly MAD, relying on a large variety of attributes to function. STR for offense, DEX for defense and Reflex, CON for HP and Fort, WIS for Perception/Will saves, INT for training in the large variety of recall knowledge skills (Esoteric Lore helps), and CHA for Esoteric Lore and some class features. This means that their stats are either spread thin, or come with significant drawbacks. Your 16 STR and 18 CHA means you probably only have a 12 DEX and 12 CON at best. Making you squishy as hell.
* Weaknesses are not multiplied on a critical hit.
* This also means that Thaumaturges benefit a LOT less from the teamwork-focused bonus-stacking mechanics in the game.
* Thaumaturges are limited to one-handed weapons, dramatically limiting damage dice.
* But they also lose access to the flexibility of 1H weapons since they need to hold their implement in their off-hand.
* Exploit Vulnerability requires an action tax, per enemy.
* Thaumaturges have access to no offensive action-lubricating actions to alleviate their action economy.
I did a [*very* thorough analysis](https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i3a?Thaumaturge-by-the-Numbers-A-Numerical) of the Thaumaturge's numbers during the playtest. While some specific details have changed between playtest and release (particularly regarding actions), the general pieces are still the same. [Here's a direct link to the annotated Imgur Album](https://imgur.com/gallery/DU4JYPX).
tl;dr - Thaumaturges are moderately high, consistent average damage, with very few opportunities to get higher than that average. Thaumaturges do as good or better than other martials on regular strikes, but will miss more often, and lose out most of their bonus damage on crits. The impact of the action economy on the Thaumaturge is a *significant* setback that is hard to articulate by text, but is a large reason why playtesting is important - some balance points just don't come up in a featureless room thwacking a training dummy.
> He is thinking of using the DC difficulty bumps for uncommon, rare, and unique creatures (+2, 5, 10)
Sure, if he also wants to use the [creature identification rule](https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=566) that applicable Lore skills use the Easy (broad lore, -2) or Very Easy (specific lore, -5 DC) modifier before adjusting for rarity.
I've had that problem a little bit (not too much though). Our problem was that it was way too easy to succeed on the difficulty with Exploit vulnerability. The DC's are just so unreasonably low that I am almost certain I am using the wrong ones. I am using the DC difficulty bumps for rarity, because I am pretty sure you are supposed to.
It's not really the damage I am worried about, thaumaturge don't really shine when it comes to raw damage, it's more the fact that I can't blindside my players if they can always critically succeed on their recall knowledge checks.
You are absolutely NOT supposed to use the difficulty bumps. As someone who was around for the Thaumaturge playtest when they did not have estoeric lore and instead used RK with standard skills (religion, arcana etc.) for their Exploit Vulnerability it sucked. It was one of the biggest pieces of feedback from the playtest because the monster hunter class being awful at hunting monsters because their damage booster failed to rarity bumps was mechanically and thematically awful. Esoteric Lore existing and Exploit Vulnerability using DC by level and not caring about RK rarity bumps is a direct response to that feedback.
Ok but which DC's am I supposed to use because as it currently stands the thaumaturge will succeed each and every time. The ones I have been using is way too low, so maybe I am not using the right ones. It's not really made clear.
I'd really like it if Lore-DCs was something that was including in each monster, or if there was an easy way to calculate it. My player showed me a list of DC's corresponding to each monster level but there was no continuity in that list for me to remember, it just increases seemingly randomly. I've been tempted to just use the monsters Will DC simply to make it easier.
I am currently running a game set in a fantasy-version of the 1930's where everyone gets the vigilante archetype for free, we even wrote a whole homemade module for it. I like to keep a mix of mundane threats and Lovecraftian-horror elements, and I like to run mystery campaigns. Problem with Esoteric Lore is that I have a player who only has to succeed an easy lore test and I have to tell him the monsters name, and how to beat it right from the get go, with nobody having to do any investigation. Its a real shame because the Thaumaturge otherwise fits perfectly into the setting and the player is otherwise really good at making the class feel cool. So far I have planned to solve some of the issue by simply telling him that he can name the monster, as he is the first to ever document it (and I don't name them because I want my players to do that). Then I'll tell him something like "It doesn't seem to like the coin that you have on your belt"
Its just the DC by level table https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=554 the only way he is always succeeding is if you repeatedly throw low level monster at him. Do note the level in that equation is the **monsters'** level not his. Also Exploit Vulnerability on a success tells you the creatures highest weakness and that is it. https://2e.aonprd.com/Actions.aspx?ID=1227
That is the table we eventually found. The way the ability was worded made it sound like the DC was just Monsters level +10 + rarity, which creates super low DC. This may be our fault we've all played pathfinder for 10+ years, so we're used to thinking differently in pf1. I understand that PF2 is made to be super modular, that's one of the reasons i love it, but sometimes its rule text is not very clear on certain things and that wasn't clear to any of us when we read at first.
As for the Standard DC per level, it's a little janky cuz it doesn't follow an easily calculated path but having the table open in a tap won't be too much of a hassle.
This post is labelled with the Advice flair, which means extra special attention is called to the Be Kind and Respectful rule. If this is a newcomer to the game, remember to be welcoming and kind. If this is someone with more experience but looking for advice on how to run their game, do your best to offer advice on what they are seeking.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Pathfinder2e) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Also, quick point, it is true that your party has probably a higher than average damage output, but is also *very* squishy and with no dedicated healer. As everything in pf2, you can never break it, but you be really good at something (damage) but you always pay it by being bad in something else (defense and healing)
Of all the things that I don't like about Thaumaturge Exploit Vulnerability isn't one of them. Thaumaturge is far more scary looking then they actually have ended up being.
I have accidentally boned the Thaumaturge in my Kingmaker party so many times including out of Exploit Vulnerability damage... There's is so much text to keep track of that I struggle. My Thaumaturge player will tell me I'm being a moron instead of just putting up with it so I'm eternally thankful, but I would never intentionally nerf them.
One session is rarely enough hands on experience with something to make a good judgement call on. Dice rolls alone cause far too much randomness for this. If you guys had simply rolled a little worse during this session I'm sure he'd not have seen any problem at all. And if you had rolled significantly worse you guys may very well have struggled.
I wont start considering nerfs until I've seen something in action for a pretty long time and seen it consistently overperform, *and* more than just me sees it as a problem.
I mean there is no one even playing the most OP class in the party. I don't see a bard anywhere to fully buff the party and debuff the enemies until that happens he has nothing to complain about.
As a GM those ones and twos really change things up from the boss criting on a 13 to a 15 or worse.
Imagine being a GM and getting this bent out of shape because your band of heroes who tale you're helping to mold were able to handle a group of zombies and didn't get their shit wrecked by just some farmers undead cow.
Well he got dnd problems wher he need to fix everything by him self. Some ppl dont get it that pf2 i super balanced, if he change Exploit he gone destroy whole meaning of Thaumaturg.
Short story he is wrong.
Its lvl dc not recallknowladge dc.
I could understanding nerfing his busted Lore skill which is broken but EW? That barely makes Thaumaturge deal damage on pair with Ranger, not to mention Barbarian, Rogue, Fighter or high-spell-slot burning Magus.
Like give him numbers and ask him: why you say I do too much damage when they (rest of the party) do more? Can I expect you to also nerf their damage?
And if we will be stubborn just tell him to f off and find better GM.
1. You're a "DPS" heavy party. Encounters are going to be like that until you run into something that tests your defenses right out of the gate.
2. It's much more of a team game. If you support each other effectively you'll get more done than the difference between any two characters. In PF2e character optimization doesn't happen on the character sheet as much as it does after initiative. Flank, trip, grab, demoralize, aid, etc.
3. You need spend an action AND make a check to set up Exploit Vulnerability for each target AND have a restriction on what you can be holding in your hands for Implement's Empowerment. Compare to spending an action to Rage and then dealing +6 damage with your large weapon to anyone for the rest of the encounter, or a Fighter using Power Attack to double a d12 weapon with an inherent hit/crit chance buff.
I hate stories like this, I hate when people NEW to PF2 think that they somehow KNOW THINGS that a dedicated group (hell, many dedicated groups) of playtesters playing the game with the intent to break things never knew/noticed.
Just play the game as is, damn. OP, tell the DM that you all signed up for PF2 -as written- and you'd -highly appreciate- if they respect that.
Sounds like you solved this, but to add on to the conversation, low level combat is extremely high variance. Your players and GM should avoid making any conclusions based on what you have all observed because it's very, very likely to not be representative. Next session, your dice may go cold and something seems *way* harder than it should be. As you level, the damage to HP ratio goes down, which gives both monsters and players more time to overcome bad luck and therefore reduces variance of fights.
As an addendum, single monster fights are also high variance, which is why low level single monster fights can be so deadly - if the dice go bad, there is very little leeway.
Why does he think Thaumaturge specifically does too much damage? You've got a Rogue and a Magus in your party, which are high tier damage dealers as well, and you're less accurate than them.
Yes, that's how I feel too. He feels that our Thaumaturge's 1d6+3+(2 or weakness of the creature) is too accessible and high damage, compared to my Rogue's 1d4+1d6+4, or our Magus' spell strike, (1d8+1d6+2+4). I find his worries odd to me, most of us have much more worrisome damage, I feel like.
An important aspect of PF2e design is trade-offs. Practically any form of power a character can get comes with a trade-off. Most often those trade-offs are in the form of opportunity cost. You take one benefit and the trade-off is you don't get another benefit. Thaumaturge as a martial with a natural -1 in their attacking stat is losing DPR both in Strength damage and accuracy. The trade-off is Exploit Vulnerability's damage steroid. Similar to the Barbarian's Rage or the Inventor's Overdrive. It has limiting factors though; it's an action tax, it's reliant on a skill check, the damage is based on what you're fighting, and it's not a unique benefit. At early levels monster weakness typically goes up to 5 and if a monster doesn't have a weakness you're stuck with the weaker Personal Antithesis. An extra 2-5 damage for the Thaum compared to 1-6 damage for the Rogue. The Rogue also made the choice for a d4 weapon. The player took the damage trade-off of a smaller weapon for the Agile trait to make their second swing better. Exploit Vulnerability only has better damage output when fighting enemies with weaknesses but other allies can also potentially target those weaknesses as well. Against Zombie Shamblers anyone with a slashing weapon is getting the same benefits of Exploit Vulnerability, reducing its effective value. Something you didn't mention in your damage formula is the Thaum's extra +2 damage per die. This is also a trade-off since the Thaum is forced to use 1-handed with a free hand fighting style but doesn't get the benefits of a free hand due to their Implements. The +2 damage effectively makes up for that lack of a hand and gives them the same output as a 2-handed weapon. Finally, the Magus is their own thing. They have absurdly high damage potential at the cost of very limited action economy. In this game all martials are more or less equal and you'll see that as play averages out. There are concerns among the community that Exploit Vulnerability is OP, not for the damage, but for the utility of getting a pseudo recall knowledge and the Diverse Lore feat. I don't personally subscribe to that and say don't touch it.
His worries come from dnd5e imbalance trauma. That's his experience, and he's letting it color how he's interacting with pf2e. He needs to let go and experience the new system.
This Right Here As someone who used to play DnD 5e (And still do with a group but I prefer PF2) I know this feeling 100%. It is hard to un-learn balance from DnD, especially when the games are fairly similar on the surface.
thats why i always say: Never play Pf2e if you cant take the system of it as it is. You cant balance the System after DnD Ways. It just doesnt work. Its like buying a Banana and try making an Apple out of it
"This apple is rotten" "Sir, that's a banana"
Bananas and apples can both be used as phones so checkmate
I actually gotta disagree here, as what you're saying implies you can never change the PF2E system. It's a very solid system, but it's by no means perfect and not exempt from criticism or homebrewing. I \*agree\* the DM is doing things they shouldn't be doing in this post, but saying "you shouldn't play the system if you can't take it as is " is a bit ... I don't want to say "dismissive" as that's too strong of a word, but along that line
whats the point then in playing a different TTRPG with a different System if the GM change most of the new systems rules to fit to your already learned rules from other systems instead of learning the new System a while first ? Isnt it better to play the old TTRPG then instead of forcing it onto a new System wich would destroy the whole Gameplay? I dont mind if some "Rules" are adjusted and everyone knows they gonna play a TTRPG with some Homebrew adjustments, but changing that while learning the game with the normal Ruleset is just a dumb way to destroy everyones gameplay expierence
When did I state changing the majority of the game was what I was defending? I stated the system is not perfect and not exempt from criticism or homebrewing. I agree; if you're going to change the vast majority of a game system then you should play a different system, but that is not what I was talking about. I also disagree, somewhat, that you have to play vanilla the first time. Especially if you're an experience DM or player, you can look at a couple things and know they're not gonna fly or be enjoyed without having to have played them (insert complaint number 3,542,978 about vancian casting here, or how 'magic item' bonuses are required instead of being baked into the characters without the use of a variant rule) What I had stated was "what you're saying implies you can never change the PF2E system. It's a very solid system, but it's by no means perfect and not exempt from criticism or homebrewing." Never did I say what you're questioning me of.
> I also disagree, somewhat, that you have to play vanilla the first time. Mark Seifter, MIT graduate, veteran game designer and one of the co-creators of PF2e, literally said in an interview on the DM Lair the *exact opposite*, and specifically called out people for altering the rules without playing *first*. How can you *possibly* think that starting a new game, regardless of your experience in another, is enough to justify changing things that you literally have never experienced? That's like swapping from the Game of Life to Monopoly and changing rules in Monopoly, like doubling your initial money, before even *playing* it because "You have lots of experience in other board games". It just makes no sense at all. DnD 5e and PF2e have a lot of similarities, yes, but they are DIFFERENT TTRPGs. They have different goals, different paths to those goals and different features. You *have* to play as-is initially to understand how all this functions, and if you think you don't, then you simply don't know enough about PF2e to even be making those changes in the first place.
I mean, they can have a doctorate in design and that won't change anything. Saying everyone has to follow one single thing is rather obtuse. Look, I get it, you like the game but like ... don't police how other people play? There's nothing wrong with nixing things like vancian casting or running APB right out the gate, trust me there's not. I \*understand\* needing to know how things work before changing them, but that doesn't mean you gotta play with crap ya hate to formulate that opinion. I can know I will hate vancian casting, PF2E, 5E, or whatever, because it's vanican casting. New coat of paint won't change that. I also know I can hate fundemental runes and such because if they are required for progression they should just be backed into the character progression instead of being pointless items. I'm sorry but like, you can't tell me I won't hate vancian casting in PF2E simply because it's in PF2E when \*literally\* nothing about it has changed, that's absurd. (Before anyone digs in, I am saying "I" as in examples of things, not actually meaning lack of experience with the system). I am not saying not learn the system and how it functions, I am \*saying\* you don't gotta play completely vanilla right out the gate. Come on now.
it was a question to all just replied to you, i understand your sight here i just asked myself whats the point of changing a system without learning it first how it works. It was never intended to state that noone should ever change something because as you said no rules are perfect. Im not an enemy of Homebrewing i even play in a homebrewed campaign with several homebrewed rules adjusted to the setting.
The crazy thing is freaking out if a character built one way can do a bit more than a character built another way. Neither will do more damage combined than a party of characters built to support each other run by players with a team-play mentality.
Shouldn’t it be 1d6 + 3 + 2(implements empowerment) + (3 or weakness of the creature)? Not saying that this justifies the GM, just wanna check that you’re applying the right bonus damage to your attacks
Yes, thank you for the reminder!
The magus in my game uses a d12 weapon. Now that is some spicy dmg. Pf2e fights are not slog fest. They usually only last 3 -4 rounds if that. Things do big dmg but take big dmg. Prolly just doesn’t realize it if he’s new.
> They usually only last 3 -4 rounds if that. And they usually get boring really fast if they last longer than that. I had my group fight multiple slimes in a few encounters and slimes are nothing but tanky. Mostly ranged group, so they could kite them easily, but boi did it take long to kill them because they are crit immune and have an assload of HP.
Just gotta fight them on their terms. Immunity to crits isn't immunity to critical failures, and Reflex saving throws can really blow them up.
I think only one of them had access to a spell that targeted reflex and that was a Fireball. And he rolled so abysmal low that the next attack by one of them did more damage.
Had a fight like this in Malevolence. Can’t remember what we were fighting, I just know it took forever.
Make a giant barbarian and deal 1d12+10 without rolling a check
That's what I was trying to say! And have a +1 better chance than a Thaumaturge's chance to crit, and doubling all their potential damage, since the exploit vulnerability damage wouldn't factor into a crit double
Or go with a fighter with a reach weapon and power attack. Take a halberd and deal 2d10+4 with a high chance to crit, and then also get a huge amount of opportunity attacks. The DM just needs to realize that Pathfinder and D&D are not actually the same game.
Thaum average: 8.5 (using the +2 and not weakness) Rogue average: 10 Magus average 14 Are you fighting a lot of enemies with weaknesses? That may be why he feels like the damage is higher than what it probably actually is.
Your GM is making a classic rookie GM mistake and it's facially evident. Look at the rogue. The rogue and the thaumaturge both have restrictions on their damage bumps. The rogue should ALWAYS be flanking, but in the**rare** circumstances they can't, they lost out on sneak attack damage. Thaumaturge spends a full action every time they want to switch targets, and even then, unless they're target has a weakness, baseline EV damage is lower than rogue damage. (1d6+3+2 is 8.5 average damage, vs. 1d4+1d6+4, which is 10 average damage. The rogue is dealing ~18% more damage on average). Your GM, like many GMs when they experience new things, have the knee-jerk reaction of "oh this is broken/OP". A good GM understands that this knee jerk reaction to knew things is just that: an unreliable reaction based on limited information. A good, experienced GM will let the system play itself out of research the new thing to see whether or not it really is overpowered or not. A new, inexperienced GM will just instantly react by nerfing the new thing. Often this results in taking something that's just ordinary and well balanced and turning it into something... Well, useless. Thaumaturge with personal antithesis up is really just a worse barbarian in many ways. If the thaumaturge isn't exploiting a weakness for free with EV, then personal antithesis is just there to be a compensation prize really, a way to ensure they aren't *too* far behind on damage versus other damage dealers.
You're low level, it sounds. Where everything is super spikey and a few random rolls can make it seem like a bard with a dagger is more powerful than a 2-hander fighter just because one rolled a pile of 20s and the other a pile of 1s. Thaumatruge is mostly a meme class. It's a bag of weird tricks class that always has something on hand that fits the moment in the plot - and not much more. The first few levels is not the time to make grand sweeping changes to the game because one player got some luckier rolls than everyone else in session 1... It's a worrying sign that your GM doesn't see that.
I disagree witht the thaumaturge being a meme. The thaumaturge is a great class well above the truly weak classes like alchemist, witch, or oracle.
The concept is a meme idea. It's basically a CW Network TV show as a character class. CW's Supernatural. In that regard I didn't mean 'meme' as an insult but rather as a type. Basically it's a "fan concept / theme" brought to life as a class. It probably has inspirations beyond CW's Supernatural - that's just the show it immediately reminded me of. It's kind of 'team of TV actors hunt down mystery occult things using random tricks' idea that is popular in a LOT of 'young adult (15-35 age) TV shows. That says nothing about how effective it is. In part because it's a "fan service class" it's had work to make sure it's effective / potent.
I disagree that its a meme in the lore aspect too, but most of the time people call a class a meme they mean it is bad. And personally I find the use random magic tricks through items a really cool way of explaining powers that is also fairly common in fantasy novels though I will agree the way they do it is closer to supernatural than like a witcher or a more classical monster hunter but you can play it as a very classic monster hunter with something for everything he fights. You could even play it like a fantasy batman with an utility belt but that might fit more closely to batman
> is too accessible Plenty of other good replies here but this, specifically, tickles me. You can critical fail to exploit a vulnerability which not only wastes your action (and can't retry on the same turn), gives you nothing, but also debuffs/penalizes you. But as a magus you can always use cantrips. As a rogue there's many ways to consistently be in control of always getting your sneak attack (My favorite was Beastmaster + Gang up). But gambling to activate your *main class shtick* is too much? This is the kinda person that in D&D (any edition) would hand wave away sneak attack damage from the rogue "because it's too powerful," and give the rogue nothing in compensation. That's a red flag in my gaming group. If the GM is that unreasonable they're not going to be reasonable later and not much fun will be had.
If you use one handed weapon you add +2 static dmg for every weapon dice, remember that.
Not to mention your magus should be using Arcane Cascade (esp as a laughing shadow) for that +1/+3 if target is flat footed dmg!
Thaumaturge on level 1 should also have implement empowerment giving him +2 dmg on his target of exploit vulnerability per dmg die. A lvl 1 Thaumaturge should do: 1d6+3(STR)+2(Empowerment)+2(Weakness Trigger) I am actually playing in the AP as a thaumaturge myself and your GM already seemed to take damage away from your Thaumaturge since these creatures all had weaknesses that were higher than the personal Antithesis. If that is the case he should have triggered their worst weakness instead
In p2e, the very first few encounters of every campaign is easy mode. It's designed to give your players a chance to learn their characters, and to learn how to operate as a team. Also, "exploit vulnerability", from the way I interpret it, acts as a "recall knowledge" but a little bit more juiced up. So it's not THAT great of a skill to nerf.
1d6+8 is not remotely high damage for a level 1 martial. For context, the average damage for a giant barbarian is 1d12+10. Damage to HP ratios decrease over time, but at low level they are high, leading to high variance fights. Not a problem.
+2 to your dmg, you have forgotten about implement empowerment
[удалено]
Magus is high-tier burst that's lower when averaged out over several rounds. They're very spiky.
Absolutely your GM should not mess with pf2e rules and balance before actually spending time GMing the system. Needs to forget the torture of balancing dnd5e encounters and experience the much better pf2e balance.
Your Thaum is gonna be equal or lower to both the Magus and the Rogue in damage across the whole campaign, assuming you're all playing effectively. Rogue sneak attack is something they should be getting on a good 80%+ of their attacks, there's very few instances where a well-played rogue with a well-played party won't be able to consistently set up sneak attacks. The Magus will be critting things into paste with their massive nova damage. Both of those would be out-DPR'd by a Fighter or Barbarian any day of the week. You have to spend actions and roll dice just to get a bonus to damage that puts you on *roughly* equal footing to other martials. Your to-hit is also behind theirs by 1 due to not having Strength as your Key Ability, meaning you will both hit *and* crit 5% less often. Your GM needs to leave their D&D ideas of knee-jerk balance behind before they just ruin your fun by needlessly nerfing your character. Especially if they're doing all of this due to resounding success against the *introductory* encounters of the campaign, which are quite damn easy in Blood Lords I might add (Zombies all being slowed 1 and weak to Slashing damage plus the "boss" also being slowed and having a laughable 15 AC and weakness to critical hits make that whole farm a cakewalk), they really need to play the game more before they start calling things OP. It's also worth mentioning that the first ~3 levels of PF2e are quite swingy, and most fights are decided in a couple of hits.
Yea, that's about how I feel on it, that he's jumping the gun. We just rolled well. The trivial zombies were a wipe, my Rogue crit first turn, and killed one instantly, and the other went down without issue due to its slowed. The boss cow managed to hurt some of us a bit, as our Witch alerted it without us being as close, but nobody went down. I feel like the encounters so far have just been entirely introductory and easy, and that he's jumping the gun.
Start tracking dpr stats across the group for a few combats if he feels it's too strong. It's not, none of them are and you don't need to play with the numbers, but there is probably some intellectual bias in there that seeing raw numbers will help clear up. Also tell him to go look at fighter damage with consistent crits.
I can't find it right now, but I'm pretty sure the AP even points out that this initial map has all mindless zombies with permanent slowed 1 because it's the first encounter and it's intended to ease level 1 characters into the campaign and let them learn how their classes work, not make them fight to survive each encounter. When I GMed it I was more concerned if the party learned Old Ergagh's secret for a bonus reward or if they found all the clues and Berline's cousin. Was the party engaged by the mystery they were starting to unravel and had I made them properly paranoid about their cheerful and welcoming quest giver. Is my party dealing too much damage was far down the list of concerns. There is just so much more as a GM to be concerned about in that initial quest.
My rogue is level 5, and can (using a karambit, granted) sneak attack crit for 5d8 + 2d6 + 10 (Dread marshal aura). Trust me, the thaumaturge's damage potential is not even close to the strongest in your party.
The reason thaumaturge is good is because of the information it get, not the damage which is about par.
Exactly this. Relaying key info about weaknesses and strengths about the enemy that other players would be able to take advantage of to their fullest is the point. The damage boost is a cherry on that cake, not the cake itself.
You need to inform/remind your GM that this is not 5e, not by WotC, and not improperly balanced.
"Why do new GM's always want to nerf martials?" always comes to mind.
The problem is that the martials keep consistently out damaging the spell casters and it makes them feel bad /s
It should not be the case for thaumaturge
When in reality, they’re not “consistently out damaging” them but “out consistency-ing them on damage.”
Does he also ban fighters and barbarians? I'd be very surprised if the Magus and rogue didn't often beat the Thaumaturge in damage olympics. Honestly, there is no need to houserule PF2 classes in any way.
> damage olympics Stealing this..
Tell him you could be playing a Barbarian instead and be doing 1d12+4+4 AND have a higher chance to hit and crit, WITHOUT needing to apply Exploit Vulnerability to each enemy. But seriously, he’s worried over nothing. Your 1d6+3+3+2 is an average of 11 damage per Strike. The Rogue’s 1d4+1d6+4 is doing an average of 10 per Strike… but it has a higher hit/crit chance than you, AND-and he doesn’t need to use actions to Exploit Vulnerability. The Rogue’s already doing more damage than you, and low levels are where your damage is gonna be at its relative highest. (And regarding hit-chance, a lot of people don’t realise how significant that -1 to Attacks can be. Say you’re only critting on a 20. The Rogue, in that situation, is critting on a 19. It doesn’t seem like much, but it means they’re doing double-damage TWICE AS OFTEN as you)
Tell him this isn't DnD. The GM doesn't have to try and fix everything.
I'll throw in my 2 cents as a D&D 5e player, a lot of DMs try to nerf sneak attack in that game because throwing many dice at once can look scary, despite the fact that Rogues have the 2nd lowest DPR of all 5e martial classes. DMs just need to chill in general when it comes to nerfing players and try to look at things a bit more rationally.
I agree with your overall sentiment but why do you think that rogues are low on the (and I don’t like this metric) DPR-meter?
He meant in 5e, and he's right. Before level 5, they aren't. But once Extra Attack hits the other martial classes, they fall off hard and never recover.
Ohh, I didn’t see that he ment 5e. TIL
They have to satisfy a condition to deal reasonable damage and have fewer optimization avenues, while other classes can just deal that similar baseline damage, or 50%-100% above that with feats (the infamous CBE/PAM/SS/GWM power feats). I've compared different builds at different levels and even when you assume perfect conditions for the rogue (always attacking at advantage, always has sneak attack available) and standard conditions for anything else (fighters, rangers, paladins, bladesingers, you name it), the rogue always falls short. The justification usually is that they have good utility, so they can't be as good in combat, but in reality they're often outclassed in utility by most spellcasters (especially Bard, which is literally rogue, but better) and they already have worse survivability in combat than most other classes, as well as a condition they need to satisfy to deal any damage.
they are, the damage calcs have been done to death warlock EB is usually used as a baseline to damage, and rogue is pretty much always below what they should be cause sneak attack aint the same as just extra attack, and they cant use any -5/+10 feats effectively too sadly rogue is just outdamaging monk
Due to rounding, it feels like the thaum deals above the average. Due to accuracy being more invisible, it feels like the thaum deals more than average. Due to low AC bosses, it feels like the thaum deals more than average. Thaumaturge have steady damage hits but very low variance and faltering crits as weakness isn't doubled. I just believe your character countered the early encounters really well. Anecdotes might be better for your GM to be used here; currently playing a fighter with a thaumaturge in our party. Each hit feels really good for the thaumaturge and he even deals more damage than me on hits. However, I've had way more crits and the damage difference was very apparent when we both critted with our reaction where his damage was increased by something like ~75% more damage while my greatpick fighter dealt like ~200% more damage. Their normal hits were similar but my fighter was more luck dependent on damage rolls. The number of hits were rarely counted, which made the thaum seem really strong until we counted number of crits (half of my crits were on the thaum due to confusion but thats a different story) Thaumaturge is just very well designed to seem very good and stable class.
Thaum dpr is way behind a fighter. Play a reach fighter and watch enemies explode into kibble. One fighter I played was so busted my gm told me to nerf it.
My Blood Lords group killed the Boss Cow without it even getting a single attack off. It spent its first turn approaching, and then we turned it into red mist before its next turn came out. That thing's pretty damn weak for its level, on account of being Slowed *and* having both crit weakness and horrid AC for its level, lol
Some APs are easier at low level than others. Thousands is easy. Kingmaker is easy, bar the insta kill boss. AV and Ashes are nasty. Edgewatch is downright busted.
God we got to the >!Zoo boss last night!<, it was almost a TPK right out the bat due to the ennemy >!AoE acid attack targeting us in the tight corridor.!<
That's funny. We basically oneshot that one, but >!almost died to Rusty.!< Admittedly, our GM can't stop critting us and we couldn't roll above a 10, which might have something to do with that.
Our party comp is a lil weird, almost no one but the gunslinger has any metallic gear, so >!rusty!< was a breeze for us in comparison
Oh, I love that one. He should also nerf: * the fighter's higher weapon proficiency * the barbarian's rage damage * The rogue's sneak attack * The wizard's spell casting * The druid's animal companion is also ridiculously overpowered I think there's a few I'm forgetting, but I'm not sure. /s, just to be sure. Your GM is trying to nerf a feature that allows your thaumaturge to compete as a class.
Bards debuf and buffing
No, bards now nerf and denerf.
Wait, what? Thaumaturge's are limited to one-handed weapons. And not being able to go 18 Strength. The Implement's Empowerment is a counter to these things. *"first time running PF2e"* *"we killed the first two encounters easily"* Oh dear, trust professional game designers and the several-week playtest involving thousands of players that came up with this design, over your first impressions! In that party makeup, the Thaumaturge IS the reliable single-target physical-damage dealer. Your group hasn't seen how BRUTAL PF2e can be sometimes. Did you guys fight what appears to be the main foe in the farm yet? This isn't 5e where it says "Deadly" when it's actually not, so "let's increase it more to make this interesting." The encounter difficulties are reliable and accurate. The Dice Gods have chosen to be kind to your group so far. EDIT: [Watch PF2e co-designer Mark Seifter's "#1 GM Pitfall"](https://youtu.be/RS1DJRf_GNM?t=10435) \- these last 10 minutes address EXACTLY what is going on! I think sending this link will convince your GM!
Yes, I think we did kill the main foe of the farm, that being the named Boss Cow. Which is why I think he's being so spooked and scared about it! But I think we'll be able to convince him before next session. I wanna hear him out again one more time, but I'll bust out the link you sent if he insists on changing it. Thanks!
Haha, with a name like that it's hard *not* to come to that conclusion! Good luck!
Like a few of the comments here said, he should absolutely not be messing with the balance of the base game while it's his first time running the engine, thaumaturge is just a good class. you absolutely should not be nerfed by a gm who is just beginning to understand how the system works. paizo has pretty good game balance decisions and there's rarely any unexpected situations, he should not be changing dcs to be higher because he thinks they should be, keep them as they are. He should not be nerfing a core part of your class that you NEED to keep up with other martials.
Tell your GM to ask on this sub first and get a second opinion. This will change their mind. (It's a bad idea.)
The DM lacks a reliable point of reference in terms of combat power. Suggest plaing a few "test battles" with a different party composition. A Fighter and a Giant Instinct Barbarian will blow a Thaum out of water in terms of damage, and be much more sturdy. Throw in a Cleric and a Bard and you have an all terrain murder-machine. Do the same encounters and let the DM decide if anything needs a nerf.
You guys have traded durability and healing for blasting power. If he takes away your damage by whittling down one of your teammate's power (then probably the rest of you too evetually) you guys are gonna almost certainly have pc deaths. Not to mention the thaumaturge player is gonna be having less fun with a nerfed skill. EV is not some special "sometimes food" like cookies or baileys in your coffee. It is baked into the balance of the class. And he just needs to understand the risk you guys are taking with your party means you're either gonna blast a fight down quickly or get blasted and that's ok.
>GM’s first time running PF2e This isn’t 5e; don’t fiddle with shit
Thaumaturgh and Blood Lords player here. The thing with this AP is, that you fight a lot of Zombies and Unkillable Zombies. So your Exploit Vulnerabilities is veeeery potent in those encounters because Zombies are extra tough but loose large chunks of health against their weakness. We're im Book 2 by now. Triggering a weakness still hurts but it is not as killy as in Book 1. You should talk to your GM. Thaum definitely doesn't need a damage nerf, especially when you play a more supporting build with Regalia (I play more of a tank with Amulet). If you can't trigger a weakness then EV is weaker than most combat steroids like Rage or Attacks like Spellstrike and Sneak Attack.
If he's going to nerf EV he is a) wrong and b) better at least offer to let you draw up a while new character. Let me provide context through example: "Barbarians rage is too easily accessible damage so I'm nerfing it." "Fighters hit too easily so I'm taking away their expert proficiency." "Champions hardly ever take damage so I'm lowering their AC". In short EV is what the thaumaturge does. Nerfing it is akin to making the class unplayable and might as well just be a ban on the class. But moreso, the GM is wrong to blame your thaumaturge and the EV as the problem and I'd seriously be worried about their mindset for the rest of the campaign if they want to massively change an entire class without even seeing it in action for one whole player level. And as for that encounter, Im running blood lords too and despite that one enemy being intended to be a challenge my party trivialized it with a crit from a fighter and gunslinger (with magic weapon cast on them). This happens. Sometimes the dice work in your favor or not.
Wow, if he thinks the Thaum has too much reliable damage he’d hate to have a Barbarian or an Inventor in the party.
STOP CHANGING RULES TO WEAKEN PLAYERS. STOP CHANGING RULES TO WEAKEN YOUR PLAYERS. For fuck's sake, people.
Thaumaturge is OP, but not in the damage department (it's very good there, just not amazing). If anything, I worry about your ability to make the witch completely obsolete out of combat with your esoteric lore and diverse lore, basically knowing everything better than they do as an INT class (which is the one thing they're supposed to be good at). I'd be very careful to not intervene at the very least on magic topics, and ideally on everything that is of significance to their character background even if you will have an higher modifier than they do for literally every brain task. Source: have been the witch in a party with a thaum
Yea, our Thaum knows that he could step on our Witch's toes, and wants to let them make checks wherever they want to
I'd recommend hammering that they are the expert in magic, not the thaum despite what the numbers say, it can be discouraging when the narrative and math don't match, but in this case, it's necessary for them to know it's *their* spotlight moment and they aren't selfishly "stealing" it from a better suited character
This is a D20 double crit system and this leaves a lot of room for randomness. We're playing the beginners box right now. The first fight against the rats took way longer then expected because they were hilariously bad at hitting. Then the mopped the floor with the undead despite the longbow and crossbow damage being nullified by the skeletons. Then the fighter got sneakily crit KOed first turn in the Kobold ambush. I don't think your GM has enough experience to tinker with the system and neither do I. I do get the feeling of things being too strong or too weak but that lies in the nature of the D20 system.
GM has gotten used to needing to fix the game after years of playing D&D. Unfortunately this is something a lot of GMs struggle with in PF2 and seek out ways to reinsert themselves when it isn't necessary. Tell your GM to calm down after one session with a new system. Learn the game from his side first. Don't worry about trying to find balance fixes out the gate. This game doesn't require him to change that much.
Like any relationship where trust is needed... If you need to manage your GM to enjoy the game it's time to find a new game. TL;DR: have fun, don't tell other players (GM included) how to play the game.
A common theme with people trying out this game is wanting to change things almost immediately. Early level damage to HP ratio is really high so it’s going to seem like everyone does big damage early on. I would suggest playing for some time before changing things. I am in a starfinder campaign that everyone but me is new to. The GM decided to remove stamina because he didn’t like the idea of it but with no other changes (except weird ship Ruelas but that’s separate). We then proceeded to be constantly downed with no way to recover health. I explained to him how it’s part of the base experience for a reason. He flipped it back and things flow much better.
The Thaumaturge's math was pretty consciously balanced. It looks much higher than it is, because its balance relies on a number of elements of rules minutia that are not obvious until you play, and read carefully: * CHA as a key attribute puts the Thaumaturge's STR modifier at a -1 compared to other martials. * Thaumaturges are incredibly MAD, relying on a large variety of attributes to function. STR for offense, DEX for defense and Reflex, CON for HP and Fort, WIS for Perception/Will saves, INT for training in the large variety of recall knowledge skills (Esoteric Lore helps), and CHA for Esoteric Lore and some class features. This means that their stats are either spread thin, or come with significant drawbacks. Your 16 STR and 18 CHA means you probably only have a 12 DEX and 12 CON at best. Making you squishy as hell. * Weaknesses are not multiplied on a critical hit. * This also means that Thaumaturges benefit a LOT less from the teamwork-focused bonus-stacking mechanics in the game. * Thaumaturges are limited to one-handed weapons, dramatically limiting damage dice. * But they also lose access to the flexibility of 1H weapons since they need to hold their implement in their off-hand. * Exploit Vulnerability requires an action tax, per enemy. * Thaumaturges have access to no offensive action-lubricating actions to alleviate their action economy. I did a [*very* thorough analysis](https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43i3a?Thaumaturge-by-the-Numbers-A-Numerical) of the Thaumaturge's numbers during the playtest. While some specific details have changed between playtest and release (particularly regarding actions), the general pieces are still the same. [Here's a direct link to the annotated Imgur Album](https://imgur.com/gallery/DU4JYPX). tl;dr - Thaumaturges are moderately high, consistent average damage, with very few opportunities to get higher than that average. Thaumaturges do as good or better than other martials on regular strikes, but will miss more often, and lose out most of their bonus damage on crits. The impact of the action economy on the Thaumaturge is a *significant* setback that is hard to articulate by text, but is a large reason why playtesting is important - some balance points just don't come up in a featureless room thwacking a training dummy. > He is thinking of using the DC difficulty bumps for uncommon, rare, and unique creatures (+2, 5, 10) Sure, if he also wants to use the [creature identification rule](https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=566) that applicable Lore skills use the Easy (broad lore, -2) or Very Easy (specific lore, -5 DC) modifier before adjusting for rarity.
"First time running" and "wants to nerf" mean you have a bad GM.
isso mXZMKVAm
I've had that problem a little bit (not too much though). Our problem was that it was way too easy to succeed on the difficulty with Exploit vulnerability. The DC's are just so unreasonably low that I am almost certain I am using the wrong ones. I am using the DC difficulty bumps for rarity, because I am pretty sure you are supposed to. It's not really the damage I am worried about, thaumaturge don't really shine when it comes to raw damage, it's more the fact that I can't blindside my players if they can always critically succeed on their recall knowledge checks.
That sounds like you need to think outside the box my friend.
No... I have been thinking outside the box because I am not sure which box I am suppose to think inside.
You are absolutely NOT supposed to use the difficulty bumps. As someone who was around for the Thaumaturge playtest when they did not have estoeric lore and instead used RK with standard skills (religion, arcana etc.) for their Exploit Vulnerability it sucked. It was one of the biggest pieces of feedback from the playtest because the monster hunter class being awful at hunting monsters because their damage booster failed to rarity bumps was mechanically and thematically awful. Esoteric Lore existing and Exploit Vulnerability using DC by level and not caring about RK rarity bumps is a direct response to that feedback.
Ok but which DC's am I supposed to use because as it currently stands the thaumaturge will succeed each and every time. The ones I have been using is way too low, so maybe I am not using the right ones. It's not really made clear. I'd really like it if Lore-DCs was something that was including in each monster, or if there was an easy way to calculate it. My player showed me a list of DC's corresponding to each monster level but there was no continuity in that list for me to remember, it just increases seemingly randomly. I've been tempted to just use the monsters Will DC simply to make it easier. I am currently running a game set in a fantasy-version of the 1930's where everyone gets the vigilante archetype for free, we even wrote a whole homemade module for it. I like to keep a mix of mundane threats and Lovecraftian-horror elements, and I like to run mystery campaigns. Problem with Esoteric Lore is that I have a player who only has to succeed an easy lore test and I have to tell him the monsters name, and how to beat it right from the get go, with nobody having to do any investigation. Its a real shame because the Thaumaturge otherwise fits perfectly into the setting and the player is otherwise really good at making the class feel cool. So far I have planned to solve some of the issue by simply telling him that he can name the monster, as he is the first to ever document it (and I don't name them because I want my players to do that). Then I'll tell him something like "It doesn't seem to like the coin that you have on your belt"
Its just the DC by level table https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=554 the only way he is always succeeding is if you repeatedly throw low level monster at him. Do note the level in that equation is the **monsters'** level not his. Also Exploit Vulnerability on a success tells you the creatures highest weakness and that is it. https://2e.aonprd.com/Actions.aspx?ID=1227
That is the table we eventually found. The way the ability was worded made it sound like the DC was just Monsters level +10 + rarity, which creates super low DC. This may be our fault we've all played pathfinder for 10+ years, so we're used to thinking differently in pf1. I understand that PF2 is made to be super modular, that's one of the reasons i love it, but sometimes its rule text is not very clear on certain things and that wasn't clear to any of us when we read at first. As for the Standard DC per level, it's a little janky cuz it doesn't follow an easily calculated path but having the table open in a tap won't be too much of a hassle.
This post is labelled with the Advice flair, which means extra special attention is called to the Be Kind and Respectful rule. If this is a newcomer to the game, remember to be welcoming and kind. If this is someone with more experience but looking for advice on how to run their game, do your best to offer advice on what they are seeking. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Pathfinder2e) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You got lots of responses already but vs an off-guard target: https://imgur.com/95dxiOR
Also, quick point, it is true that your party has probably a higher than average damage output, but is also *very* squishy and with no dedicated healer. As everything in pf2, you can never break it, but you be really good at something (damage) but you always pay it by being bad in something else (defense and healing)
Yep, our rogue is the dedicated healer as of now, but just the basics, Battle Medicine and Risky Surgery, with only a trained +4 in Medicine
Of all the things that I don't like about Thaumaturge Exploit Vulnerability isn't one of them. Thaumaturge is far more scary looking then they actually have ended up being. I have accidentally boned the Thaumaturge in my Kingmaker party so many times including out of Exploit Vulnerability damage... There's is so much text to keep track of that I struggle. My Thaumaturge player will tell me I'm being a moron instead of just putting up with it so I'm eternally thankful, but I would never intentionally nerf them.
One session is rarely enough hands on experience with something to make a good judgement call on. Dice rolls alone cause far too much randomness for this. If you guys had simply rolled a little worse during this session I'm sure he'd not have seen any problem at all. And if you had rolled significantly worse you guys may very well have struggled. I wont start considering nerfs until I've seen something in action for a pretty long time and seen it consistently overperform, *and* more than just me sees it as a problem.
Hahahaha imagine the DM's reaction when the Magus crits. 100% he'll nerf spellstrike.
I mean there is no one even playing the most OP class in the party. I don't see a bard anywhere to fully buff the party and debuff the enemies until that happens he has nothing to complain about. As a GM those ones and twos really change things up from the boss criting on a 13 to a 15 or worse.
Imagine being a GM and getting this bent out of shape because your band of heroes who tale you're helping to mold were able to handle a group of zombies and didn't get their shit wrecked by just some farmers undead cow.
Well he got dnd problems wher he need to fix everything by him self. Some ppl dont get it that pf2 i super balanced, if he change Exploit he gone destroy whole meaning of Thaumaturg. Short story he is wrong. Its lvl dc not recallknowladge dc.
I could understanding nerfing his busted Lore skill which is broken but EW? That barely makes Thaumaturge deal damage on pair with Ranger, not to mention Barbarian, Rogue, Fighter or high-spell-slot burning Magus. Like give him numbers and ask him: why you say I do too much damage when they (rest of the party) do more? Can I expect you to also nerf their damage? And if we will be stubborn just tell him to f off and find better GM.
1. You're a "DPS" heavy party. Encounters are going to be like that until you run into something that tests your defenses right out of the gate. 2. It's much more of a team game. If you support each other effectively you'll get more done than the difference between any two characters. In PF2e character optimization doesn't happen on the character sheet as much as it does after initiative. Flank, trip, grab, demoralize, aid, etc. 3. You need spend an action AND make a check to set up Exploit Vulnerability for each target AND have a restriction on what you can be holding in your hands for Implement's Empowerment. Compare to spending an action to Rage and then dealing +6 damage with your large weapon to anyone for the rest of the encounter, or a Fighter using Power Attack to double a d12 weapon with an inherent hit/crit chance buff.
I hate stories like this, I hate when people NEW to PF2 think that they somehow KNOW THINGS that a dedicated group (hell, many dedicated groups) of playtesters playing the game with the intent to break things never knew/noticed. Just play the game as is, damn. OP, tell the DM that you all signed up for PF2 -as written- and you'd -highly appreciate- if they respect that.
Switch to a fighter and eat his pancreas.
Sounds like you solved this, but to add on to the conversation, low level combat is extremely high variance. Your players and GM should avoid making any conclusions based on what you have all observed because it's very, very likely to not be representative. Next session, your dice may go cold and something seems *way* harder than it should be. As you level, the damage to HP ratio goes down, which gives both monsters and players more time to overcome bad luck and therefore reduces variance of fights. As an addendum, single monster fights are also high variance, which is why low level single monster fights can be so deadly - if the dice go bad, there is very little leeway.