Magic we wish for


Pathfinder Playtest

1 to 50 of 66 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

We all know that several classic spells return (Fireball, Magic Missle, Scorching Ray, most likely charm)

But there is also the opportunity for new spells and some doubt about what spells will also return.

So I start with a wish for a spell I have seen in dnd5e and really think with the new cantrips should be a thing here:

Vicious Mockery

I never played dnd5e up to now and so had never the opportunity to use it but heard more then enough hilarious stories about it to know that I really want it.

And while we are at it:
Do you agree? And what spells do you wish for? Feel free to make some up too, maybe someone at paizo feels inspired :P


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I wish for an equivalent to Blistering Invective in PF2. Mechanically it does a lot of nice things without being broken, thematically it is a lot of fun. Curse so hard it burns the ears.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Vicious Mockery is a great one, as would be Sacred Flame and Toll the Dead.
Really, anything that lets casters stick to casting if they want would be cool.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Since you started the whole DnD 5e thing, here is my desire: Clone (5e). With this single spell I (a wizard) can make my whole party young AND immortal. Best. Spell. Ever.

Not being able to provide eternal youth for my martial friends would be a deal breaker with PF2. (I loathe the idea of spending eternity alone!)


I'd like a Body Double spell. Sort of a self-only minor simulacrum to leave in your place. It'd be nice if it could still use cantrips, just to fake a bit of everyday magic as needed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd like the less-populated schools of magic to get beefed up with more spells, and for every school to have some good offensive options. Divination in particular needs help, and to a lesser extent Illusion and the like.

I liked and still like the flavor of some of the Clairsentience powers in this regard. Parting the veil of time for a target to subject them to memories or premonitions of wounds at another point on their timeline, etc.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like the idea of traditional not so versatile schools to branch out in other directions. Still it remains to be seen if there is enough reason to focus so much on a single school that it validates that a single school touches the purpose of another. If every caster is an "okay" blaster with evocation spells and nearly zero investment there is no reason to give for example divination damaging spells.


Despite my reservations about teleport, I do want it to be in the game. However, it should be limited in such a way that it is for high level (15+), and not useful in combat.

So, some limitations I can think of:
-It could be 1 minute cast per person being teleported.
-There is a clear visible effect at the destination end.
-It is easily dispelable at the destination end.
-It can only be cast to locations the caster has been before.


My hope is that spell descriptions encourage creativity on the caster's part and have less focus on dice and numbers.

Spells shouldn't just be about numerical effects.

Let the GM & players decide, maybe let the dice decide.

Either way when I read a spell description and see a +1 to (fill in the blank here) it really does suck the imaginative idea out of spells.

Honestly, most people have their own ideas of how spells should work, so let the RPG groups decide. Sure, groups will be different, and so what is wrong with that? Nothing, unless you are doing tournaments. Paizo could sell tournament guides for those that need numbers for nuances.


Desferous wrote:

My hope is that spell descriptions encourage creativity on the caster's part and have less focus on dice and numbers.

Spells shouldn't just be about numerical effects.

Let the GM & players decide, maybe let the dice decide.

Either way when I read a spell description and see a +1 to (fill in the blank here) it really does suck the imaginative idea out of spells.

Honestly, most people have their own ideas of how spells should work, so let the RPG groups decide. Sure, groups will be different, and so what is wrong with that? Nothing, unless you are doing tournaments. Paizo could sell tournament guides for those that need numbers for nuances.

You might like the idea of playing a more storytelling oriented system like the White Wolf games? Or Scion perhaps.

At its very core is Pathfinder a dungeon crawler and as such will always be number/math heavy. Sure you can play it like you want, but every possible interpretation of how to play can't be covered.


I think a better question would be "which ones should not be there". Assume you have to kill half of the spells currently in the game (probably more), because many of them come from extra books and do not fit into the CRB.

Which ones do you cut down?


Nah, stay with what we wish, Paizo probably knows pretty good what the easiest to get rid of is - and I want to focus on the positiver part (whats awesome and possibly new) instead of the negative (what we probably lose)


gustavo iglesias wrote:

I think a better question would be "which ones should not be there". Assume you have to kill half of the spells currently in the game (probably more), because many of them come from extra books and do not fit into the CRB.

Which ones do you cut down?

I'd assume they just put in all the spells of the first Edition CRB? Mhm thinking about it I hope they add in some spells to test out actions in combat, like Emergency Force Sphere. Also depending on the length of the adventurous day I wonder if in-fight cantrips provide enough variance to be interesting. After all the design idea was to make them more interesting as an filler action.

New spells? Puh, maybe during the playtest its hard to come up with something if you dont know what will be within.


Wermut wrote:


I'd assume they just put in all the spells of the first Edition CRB?

I don't think so. They are adding new ones (Litanies for example) and book is not going to grow. Also other new stuff (like alchemy) need space, so some things have to go. There are lot of spells in CRB which just clutter space, IMHO. Let's see what happens.


gustavo iglesias wrote:
Wermut wrote:


I'd assume they just put in all the spells of the first Edition CRB?
I don't think so. They are adding new ones (Litanies for example) and book is not going to grow. Also other new stuff (like alchemy) need space, so some things have to go. There are lot of spells in CRB which just clutter space, IMHO. Let's see what happens.

You could probably get rid of all the ability spells (fold them into one). Also "Mass" spells will also be part of heightened spells. The detect alignment spells have been confirmed, so I assume the protect and circles as well. Maybe fold them together as well.

Mhm, summon monster/natures ally will probably also be heightened, as well as all the heal/harm spells.

I'd assumae they cut the prestige classes and exchange them for archetypes. That should also save space. I can't think of any spell I would deem "removable" but that might be nostalgia.


Yeah, even if they keep every spell in the PF1 CRB it would still take a lot less space due to a lot of them being turned into heighten chains. And hopefully their formatting will be more condensed and efficient this time anyway, and they won't need to keep restating stuff explained elsewhere in the rules.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I hope the remove portection spells from being alinged. A chaotic good cleric should be able to get portection from a Promethean with out causing alingment changing issues.


l really like Grasping Corpse. It is a fun and thematic and efficient low level Necromancy Spell.


SteelGuts wrote:
l really like Grasping Corpse. It is a fun and thematic and efficient low level Necromancy Spell.

That would actually make a good cantrip. :D

Flavorful, supportive, battlefield control, could easily scale with level. Worth the action and so on, it doesn't become overpowered through the restriction of need a corpse. Mhm... how often are cantrips expected to cast per day?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

And here I thought this was going to be a discussion about the Wish spell. In any case, Wish is confirmed as a 10th level spell at this point so there's no point wishing (one way or the other) about it.

In terms of spells not yet confirmed, however, Animate Dead is the big one. Being able to turn a corpse - any corpse - into a mindless undead minion is frankly one of the coolest spell effects in all of Pathfinder. I also feel that its standard action casting time is a widely under-appreciated facet of the spell; there's nothing quite like an animate dead going off in the middle of a combat encounter and all the fallen enemies rising again.

On a similar note, I hope the Create Undead spell line is better this time around. It just didn't create level-appropriate monsters, so the CR 14 Lich was creating... CR 2 ghasts. It just wasn't able to produce level-appropriate minions for necromancer antagonists. Plus being free-willed is actually a pretty big downside, as opposed to the delightfully obedient mindless minions created by Animate Dead.

On a non-necromancy note, I have a special place in my heart for Cloudkill and Dominate Person; spells whose very existence deligitimizes the "evil" spell descriptor. Because if chemical warfare and mind rape aren't evil, what is!? Okay, enough snark; they are very cool spells in their own right and I want to see them return.


We also need a few spells or spell like effects as reaction like in 5E or later splat books in PF1. Shield maybe or Mage Armor. A shot range teleport could be nice too like the Arcanist trick or the Misty Step of D&D.

A blast Spell with a random element in it. Like Color Soray but with damages. Roll a dice and see the flavor of the month.

Strong Walls spells.

I really like to play a caster in 5E and I think this is going to be even more true in PF2. But damn the martial caster disparity is going to hurt even more I am afraid.


Malthraz wrote:

Despite my reservations about teleport, I do want it to be in the game. However, it should be limited in such a way that it is for high level (15+), and not useful in combat.

So, some limitations I can think of:
-It could be 1 minute cast per person being teleported.
-There is a clear visible effect at the destination end.
-It is easily dispelable at the destination end.
-It can only be cast to locations the caster has been before.

I think they should take inspiration from 5th and make a bunch of things RITUALS - teleport, clone, ....


I'd like an infight teleport spell for more than the caster himself. Like teleport, for escaping stuff. :) also works well as a scroll for lower level use.


PF lacks a decent vine-whip cantrip. something they should port in from 5e.

Silver Crusade

Wermut wrote:
I'd like an infight teleport spell for more than the caster himself.

That's Pf1e Bard's Escape, which really is more about attacking than escaping (teleport the party into flanking positions around the BBEG).


pad300 wrote:
Malthraz wrote:

Despite my reservations about teleport, I do want it to be in the game. However, it should be limited in such a way that it is for high level (15+), and not useful in combat.

So, some limitations I can think of:
-It could be 1 minute cast per person being teleported.
-There is a clear visible effect at the destination end.
-It is easily dispelable at the destination end.
-It can only be cast to locations the caster has been before.

I think they should take inspiration from 5th and make a bunch of things RITUALS - teleport, clone, ....

Off-topic: if only Teleport and Clone were rituals in 5e... it would make book Warlocks at least somewhat viable.

(Pact of the Blade is the go to option from what I have seen.)


It would also be nice, if Simulacrum in PF2.0 didn't make the GM argue with players about what abilities a half HD creature has and has not.
(Increase the spell level, make it level 10 if you have to, just do away with this silly limitation.)


I just want to see all arcane spellcasters be able to cast some offensive spell, an unlimited number of times per day, doing less than a martial, but still being effective (in both ability to hit and damage). For example, to hit (BAB + prime stat bonus), damage (1D6 + prime stat bonus) to start.

I think this is especially important given that it seems casters have a reduced number of spells per day.

In PF 1, many casters were left shooting crossbows, or had limited (3+int) abilities that did subpar damage at low levels. These abilities didn't scale, making those abilities completely useless at high levels. I'm hoping that's fixed with how cantrips now scale, I hope there's enough variety in cantrips to handle all arcane casting tropes.

I want Ezren to be effective out of the box.


Wild Spirit wrote:
pad300 wrote:
Malthraz wrote:

Despite my reservations about teleport, I do want it to be in the game. However, it should be limited in such a way that it is for high level (15+), and not useful in combat.

So, some limitations I can think of:
-It could be 1 minute cast per person being teleported.
-There is a clear visible effect at the destination end.
-It is easily dispelable at the destination end.
-It can only be cast to locations the caster has been before.

I think they should take inspiration from 5th and make a bunch of things RITUALS - teleport, clone, ....

Off-topic: if only Teleport and Clone were rituals in 5e... it would make book Warlocks at least somewhat viable.

(Pact of the Blade is the go to option from what I have seen.)

Really? Because I've always gotten the impression Tomelocks were way better than Bladelocks. At least they were pre Hexblade, and even now there's an argument that a Hexblade is stronger without a blade.


I hope that there's more support for water-based spells. Hydraulic Push always seemed pretty underwhelming to me, considering it was one of the few spells that used water offensively, yet all it did was bull rush people around, so its usefulness is pretty situational. There are no water spells that I can think of off the top of my head that actually cause damage, especially since not all water is cold - the best I can think of is a metamagic feat that allows fire spells to be used underwater.


The post above inspired me this; I'd like to see air/water/earth elemental types be its own thing completely separate from lightning/cold/acid, respectively, AND no longer deal bludgeoning damage but their own damage type.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I am hoping that there is some time magic of some sort, as I need to make my first character be the time mage that my pf1 character is the son/father of.

His name will be Lemtwist Bratham Mallentwine Flannelfoot Smith Olgen Jeebs Nathers Binghem. Uh... He is a gnome.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jason S wrote:

I just want to see all arcane spellcasters be able to cast some offensive spell, an unlimited number of times per day, doing less than a martial, but still being effective (in both ability to hit and damage). For example, to hit (BAB + prime stat bonus), damage (1D6 + prime stat bonus) to start.

I think this is especially important given that it seems casters have a reduced number of spells per day.

In PF 1, many casters were left shooting crossbows, or had limited (3+int) abilities that did subpar damage at low levels. These abilities didn't scale, making those abilities completely useless at high levels. I'm hoping that's fixed with how cantrips now scale, I hope there's enough variety in cantrips to handle all arcane casting tropes.

I want Ezren to be effective out of the box.

Telekinetic Projectile resolves against full AC, does 1d10 damage to start (scaling in some fashion), and uses spell proficiency to attack (general rule for spells). I don’t think they’re going to add stat-to-damage on cantrips, but I could be wrong.

It seems like that’s better than a crossbow, but still makes you jealous of anything loading as a free action (if that still exists).


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion Subscriber

Well since spells don't improve based on caster level anymore and you have to cast them as higher level spells to improve them. Would it really matter if they gave us a lot more lower spell slots.


Dragon78 wrote:
Well since spells don't improve based on caster level anymore and you have to cast them as higher level spells to improve them. Would it really matter if they gave us a lot more lower spell slots.

Maybe? It sounded like Hold Person at least was reasonably unpleasant even if you don’t scale it, and it gets full DC. I’d love more low-level slots too, but I can’t say it wouldn’t matter.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion Subscriber

Maybe something like this...

Level- # of spell slots(20th level)
1st- 10
2nd- 9
3rd- 8
4th- 7
5th- 6
6th- 5
7th- 4
8th- 3
9th- 2
10th- 1


Dragon78 wrote:

Maybe something like this...

Level- # of spell slots(20th level)
1st- 10
2nd- 9
3rd- 8
4th- 7
5th- 6
6th- 5
7th- 4
8th- 3
9th- 2
10th- 1

That makes players do as much prep work for just 1st level spells (the least important) as for 10th, 9th, 8th, and 7th level spells.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion Subscriber

It works for spontaneous casters:)

I wonder if feats can grant extra spell slots.


Dragon78 wrote:

It works for spontaneous casters:)

I wonder if feats can grant extra spell slots.

Yeah. It’d be kind of a shift to make Wizard a much better blaster, though.

I’m definitely hoping for a feat to expand those low-level slots, though!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Desferous wrote:


Honestly, most people have their own ideas of how spells should work, so let the RPG groups decide. Sure, groups will be different, and so what is wrong with that? Nothing, unless you are doing tournaments. Paizo could sell tournament guides for those that need numbers for nuances.

You really do want to see the forums burnt to the ground in the resulting flame wars.

Ambiguity in the rules is a bad. EVERYBODY will be convinced their interpretation is the correct one, with nothing to resolve the arguments.

Add in organized play, where players have an expectation of consistency from table to table, and you'll have riots in the streets and tables being flipped at conventions.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Volkard Abendroth wrote:
Desferous wrote:


Honestly, most people have their own ideas of how spells should work, so let the RPG groups decide. Sure, groups will be different, and so what is wrong with that? Nothing, unless you are doing tournaments. Paizo could sell tournament guides for those that need numbers for nuances.

You really do want to see the forums burnt to the ground in the resulting flame wars.

Ambiguity in the rules is a bad. EVERYBODY will be convinced their interpretation is the correct one, with nothing to resolve the arguments.

Add in organized play, where players have an expectation of consistency from table to table, and you'll have riots in the streets and tables being flipped at conventions.

Lol, no I honestly don't, but it seems like there is quite a strong anti-magic sentiment on the boards, like the grass is greener. I am starting to notice some patterns as a few particular spells are mentioned repeatedly, but can't really speak to the anger yet.

That aside, why can't Paizo put up 2 or 3 options for how to handle magic? The groups could decide.

Someone on the boards commented that Pathfinder was for dungeon crawling, and I thought really? Because the only ones who get to keep crawling are the martial / melee characters. Do they forget how to use weapons after a fight? Nope. Anyway crawling in cloth with a dagger really is crawling or hiding in the back and watching.

Either or, I've never had a problem with the exploits people are naming. We always had casters who were out of spells and lame-ducks as the warriors and rogues carried the game.

I do see the out of combat utility issue, but again, everyone should have more options. Ah, the anti-caster movement just really bothers me because it doesn't make sense.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion Subscriber

They also don't get tired even if they are swinging those heavy swords, axes, hammers, etc. all day long. Maybe for balance we need stamina points to give non-casters a reason to rest as well.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dragon78 wrote:
Well since spells don't improve based on caster level anymore and you have to cast them as higher level spells to improve them. Would it really matter if they gave us a lot more lower spell slots.

Cantrips do improve based on your level. So, tick!

The DC also improves based on your level, so put those disables in low spell slots and damage spells in high spell slots.

Dragon78 wrote:
They also don't get tired even if they are swinging those heavy swords, axes, hammers, etc. all day long. Maybe for balance we need stamina points to give non-casters a reason to rest as well.

I think the vast majority of classes get spell points to spend on abilities. So, tick!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Desferous wrote:

That aside, why can't Paizo put up 2 or 3 options for how to handle magic? The groups could decide.

Between optional magic systems and houserules, why can't groups do that already? One, consistent, across the board way of handling magic would make writing adventures and running organized play easier, and these are both things that Paizo does.

We'll eventually get different subsystems and optional rules, but for the purpose of core, I'd rather they focus on one vision for how magic works and stick with it.

Desferous wrote:

Someone on the boards commented that Pathfinder was for dungeon crawling, and I thought really? Because the only ones who get to keep crawling are the martial / melee characters. Do they forget how to use weapons after a fight? Nope. Anyway crawling in cloth with a dagger really is crawling or hiding in the back and watching.

Managing resources is part of any endevour, including dungeon crawling.

This message brought to you by AnimatedPaper, Logistics Professional
Malthraz wrote:
Dragon78 wrote:
They also don't get tired even if they are swinging those heavy swords, axes, hammers, etc. all day long. Maybe for balance we need stamina points to give non-casters a reason to rest as well.

I think the vast majority of classes get spell points to spend on abilities. So, tick!

I could definitely stand it if Fighers wound up with Panache, Grit, Stamina, or Luck as part of their core abilities. They COULD get spell-points, but then what's the difference between them and Rangers (almost said the class that must not be named, close one)?

Dark Archive

Bard - Summon Instrument. Ideally increased duration from 1 min/level to 1 hour/level, or at least 10 min/level


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Forgot, but I'd also like an AOE cantrip. Not a lot of damage, but something that spits out a 15' cone or 30' line at will (I'd be okay with this being two separate spells)

Since I want to convert old classes to this system, a spell like this would make cranking out a Dragonfire Adept fairly easy.

Also it would be an interesting spell for a heavily armored caster, or a fighter that somehow got a hold of a cantrip.


Depending on how many cantrips a caster is supposed to cast in a day, diversity will be important. Even if the cantrip does "average" damage just spamming one spell isnt fun. Different cantrips with different mechsnics could help with that. Of course it all depends on how often casting a damaging cantrip is the best/only option.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion Subscriber

Would love a spell that creates rainbow bridges, slides, stairs, etc. made of multi-colored force.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Dragon78 wrote:
Would love a spell that creates rainbow bridges, slides, stairs, etc. made of multi-colored force.

Well now I'm imagining my old Soulknife to be wielding small blades made of rainbow, so there's that in my head now.

BRB, need to write a paladin archetype.


Utility spells. Because spellcasters as operatives with toolkits interest me a lot more than spellcasters as TacSim battlefield controllers.

And yes, the rogue will still have their niche. They have oodles of skills, are better at them, and don't deplete them with use. That, and sneak attack if you must think in TacSim optimization terms.

1 to 50 of 66 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Magic we wish for All Messageboards