All About Spells

Monday, April 16, 2018

Spells are magical formulas with esoteric components, including words of power, gestures, and unusual ingredients, that when taken together create extraordinary magical effects. Spells have always been a crucial part of Pathfinder and the fantasy genre as a whole. But what's new about spells in the playtest? Let's take a look!

Action!

You cast spells by using some combination of the Verbal Casting, Somatic Casting, and Material Casting actions (the most common combination is Verbal and Somatic Casting actions for 2 total actions). Not every class interfaces with those actions in the same way. For instance, clerics can use a divine focus to satisfy the Material Casting action, sorcerers use their magical blood, and bards can use instruments that change up several aspects (for instance, even if you're gagged or otherwise unable to speak, you can play your violin to provide the Verbal Casting portion).

Heightened Spells

In the playtest, you'll be able to heighten your favorite spells in order to gain greater effects than ever before. Heightening a spell works much like it did previously, where you prepare a spell in a higher-level slot (or cast it using a higher-level slot if you're a spontaneous caster), except now all spellcasters can do it, and you gain much more interesting benefits. Want to fire 15 missiles with magic missile or turn into a Huge animal with animal form? Just heighten those spells to the appropriate level! There's no longer any need to learn long chains of spells that are incrementally different and each require you to refer back to the previous spell.

Incidentally, the idea of using a spell's level to determine its power has led to some really interesting interplay between spells. For example, how many times have you run into a situation where your high-level illusionist is foiled by a simple detect magic spell or a similar effect? Now, illusions of a higher spell level than a detect magic cantrip can foil detection! Similarly, dispel magic has a harder time dispelling spells of much higher spell levels, while it can crush lower-level spells with ease. This extends to many other similar interactions; while in Pathfinder First Edition, a creature with some basic spell effect that's constantly active might be flat-out immune to your character's spells, now you can heighten your spells and overcome that obstacle!

Illustration by Wayne Reynolds

Cantrips

In the playtest, cantrips are spells you can cast at will, but they are no longer level 0. Instead, they automatically heighten to the highest spell level you can currently cast. That means if you're 5th level, your ray of frost is 3rd level and deals more damage, and your light cantrip is better at counteracting magical darkness.

Domain Powers and Beyond

Pathfinder has always had domain powers, school powers, bloodline powers, and other special class-based spell-like abilities that you can use a certain number of times per day rather than using your daily spell slots on them. In the playtest, we've expanded this idea, allowing even more classes to gain these kinds of powers and standardizing the way we talk about the powers and their daily uses. The powers are now treated as a special kind of spell, and they are all cast using Spell Points. There is power in naming something; while you don't really count them differently than if you had a pool of uses per day, this allowed us to create new and interesting abilities that cost multiple Spell Points or that you could add extra features to at the cost of more Spell Points, in a way that works across classes more smoothly.

10th-Level Spells

So what's the deal with 10th-level spells? Jason mentioned these all the way at the beginning, and many of you have given excellent guesses for what they will be. They start with a class of spells that used to be 9th level+, by which I mean, they were 9th level, but even for that level they were usually balanced by expensive material costs. Spells like wish and miracle. In the playtest, these spells are free to cast but are 10th level. Then we added some brand-new and amazing spells, like fabricated truth and nature incarnate. I'm guessing you guys will quickly figure out what these spells do, but here's a hint: one of them had a critical failure effect previewed in the Critical Hits and Critical Failures blog!

Rituals

Ever since we introduced them in Pathfinder RPG Occult Adventures, rituals have been a favorite both among fans and the adventure developers here at Paizo. If you haven't checked them out yet, they're story-rich spells with a long casting time that anyone skilled enough could conceivably try to perform as long as they have the hidden knowledge. Typically they involve some number of secondary casters, which can get the whole party involved or make a nice set-piece encounter with an evil cult.

Even in the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook, there were spells that sort of followed that mold already—the 8th-level spell binding is a perfect example. In the playtest, these sorts of spells have been made into rituals. This means that these downtime spells don't take up your spell slots, and that martial characters who manage to attain a high enough proficiency rank in magic-related skills like Arcana can cast them! This is particularly great when, for instance, the cleric dies but the monk can perform a resurrection ritual. (Don't worry, there is still also the non-ritual spell raise dead in case you need someone back in action faster, though a group that wants death to be more uncertain can easily omit that spell for an instant shift in the tone of the campaign.) Rituals also have delightful potential failure effects. For instance, if you critically fail planar binding, you call something dark and horrible that isn't bound by your wards, and it immediately attempts to destroy you!

Magical Traditions

Magical traditions, such as arcane and divine, have always been a part of Pathfinder spells. But the playtest gives us an opportunity to really explore what they mean, what makes them different, and how they metaphysically interconnect in a way that enriches the game's story. Magic taps into various essences in the cosmos. For example, arcane magic blends material essence (the fundamental building blocks of all physical things) and mental essence (the building block of rational thoughts, logic, and memories). This means that arcane traditions share a lot in common with science, as arcane spellcasters tend to use logic and rational methods to categorize the magic inherent in the physical world around them. Divine magic is the exact opposite; it blends spiritual essence (the otherworldly building block of the immortal self) and vital essence (the universal life force that gives us instincts and intuition). This means that divine traditions are steeped in faith, the unseen, and belief in a power source from beyond the Material Plane. These ideas have led to some exciting new additions of spells into each tradition's repertoire.

Example Spells

Let's put everything we've talked about into perspective by taking a look at a spell that can be heightened and that uses actions in an interesting way: heal. (By the way, notice the new spell school!)

Heal Spell 1

Healing, Necromancy, Positive
Casting Somatic Casting or more
Range touch, Range 30 feet, or Area 30-foot aura (see text); Target one willing living creature or one undead creature

You channel positive energy to heal the living or damage the undead. You restore Hit Points equal to 1d8 + your spellcasting modifier to a willing living target, or deal that amount of positive damage to an undead target. The number of actions you spend when Casting this Spell determines its targets, range, area, and other parameters.

  • Somatic Casting The spell has a range of touch. You must succeed at a melee touch attack to damage an undead target.
  • Somatic Casting, Verbal Casting The spell has a range of 30 feet and doesn't require a touch attack when targeting an undead creature. An undead target must attempt a Fortitude save, taking half damage on a success, no damage on a critical success, or double damage on a critical failure.
  • Material Casting, Somatic Casting, Verbal Casting You disperse positive energy in a 30-foot aura. This has the same effect as the two-action version of the spell, but it targets all living and undead creatures in the burst and reduces the amount of healing or damage to your spellcasting ability modifier.

Heightened (+1) Increase the amount of healing or damage by 1d8, or by 2d8 if you're using the one- or two-action version to heal the living.

So you can cast heal with 1 action and restore quite a few Hit Points to a touched target, especially for a single action. This is particularly useful if you cast heal several times in one turn on someone who needs emergency assistance after a critical hit! For 2 actions, you can cast safely from the back lines, and for 3 actions, you can change the area to a burst and heal living creatures while harming undead at the same time. It restores fewer hit points to each target that way, but if you have multiple allies in need of healing, it can be really efficient. This one spell, using heightened effects, combines the effects of all the cure wounds spells in one place.

At the bottom of the stat block, you see what one type of heightened entry looks like. This one gets better proportionally for each spell level above 1st. So a 2nd-level heal spell heals one target for 3d8 + your spellcasting ability modifier, a 3rd-level one heals one target 5d8 + your spellcasting ability modifier, and so on.

But heal is a classic spell chain that you already knew and loved in Pathfinder First Edition and that has already been revealed in tidbits through podcasts. How about its big sister regenerate?

Regenerate Spell 7

Healing, Necromancy
Casting Somatic Casting, Verbal Casting
Range touch; Target one willing living creature
Duration 1 minute

The target temporarily gains regeneration 15, which restores 15 Hit Points to it at the start of each of its turns. While it has regeneration, the target can't die from damage and its dying value can't exceed 3. If the target takes acid or fire damage, its regeneration deactivates until after the end of its next turn.

Each time the creature regains Hit Points from regeneration, it also regrows one damaged or ruined organ (if any). During the spell's duration, the creature can also reattach severed body parts by spending an Interact action to hold the body part to the stump.

Heightened (9th) The regeneration increases to 20.

Regenerate was always necessary to restore lost limbs or organs (a rare situation to come up in the game), but the way it worked made it fairly ineffective for use in combat. This version is much more attractive during a fight, particularly if your foe lacks access to acid and fire!

This spell doesn't increase in power incrementally as its level increases (except for being harder to dispel); instead, it has a specific heightened benefit at 9th level.

But what about something you've never seen before? Let's take a look at vampiric exsanguination!

Vampiric Exsanguination Spell 6

Death, Necromancy, Negative
Casting Somatic Casting, Verbal Casting
Area 30-foot cone

You draw life force from creatures and send it into your outstretched arms. You deal 10d6 negative damage to all living creatures in the area. As long as at least one creature in the area takes damage, you also gain half that many temporary Hit Points. You lose any remaining temporary Hit Points after 1 minute.

  • Success Half damage.
  • Critical Success No damage.
  • Failure Full damage.
  • Critical Failure Double damage.

Heightened (+2) Increase the damage by 3d6.

So we're dealing some reasonable damage in a cone; cone of cold isn't going to be jealous. But the trick here is that if you can get at least one foe (or minion) to critically fail its save against the spell, you gain a huge number of temporary Hit Points! If you're a wizard with a Constitution score of 12, that hapless creature might just provide you nearly 50% more Hit Points (incidentally, if you deal a lot of damage, you could kill a minion who critically fails the save, so use it responsibly). And since you're drawing in life force, guess who gains access to this spell? (Urgathoans rejoice!)

More New Spells

I'm going to close out by giving just the names of a smattering of new spells. What might they do? I'll leave it up to you guys to see what you think!

  • Alter reality
  • Collective transposition
  • Crusade
  • Disappearance
  • Divine inspiration
  • Duplicate foe
  • Energy aegis
  • Mariner's curse
  • Moment of renewal
  • Moon frenzy
  • Nature's enmity
  • Primal phenomenon
  • Punishing winds
  • Revival
  • Soothe
  • Spellwrack
  • Spiritual epidemic
  • Spiritual guardian
  • Tangling creepers
  • Unfathomable song

Mark Seifter
Designer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Pathfinder Playtest Wayne Reynolds
851 to 900 of 931 << first < prev | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Stone Dog wrote:
They can't be Orders. Druids have Orders. You'll have Storm Order Druids casting nth Order spells.

We already have 10th level characters who are 7th level druids casting 3rd level spells that function at 8th level. Redundant redundancy is already a thing.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
John Lynch 106 wrote:


Tangent101 wrote:
Oh, and pieces of paper never improved the hack-and-slash player who was in my AD&D and D&D 3.0-3.5 campaigns. She never learned her abilities.
I don't know what to say to that. To be honest it sounds like you let your player(s) get away with not knowing how to play their characters. I have never had that same experience and I've played in 3 differnet organised play...

I have two players, a wife of one that is playing to just be a part, she does not know her character very well at all, and needs help calculating bonuses, etc. The other is a daughter (21 year old) of another player and she also does not know the rules well. Both would never ever play in organized play (I also avoid it as much as possible). But they enjoy the social aspect of gaming and the story.

I am surprised you have never encountered anyone like this. But if you play mostly organized play then that may be the reason.


You know, that's another thing. I might belong to the Pathfinder Society (in theory). But I've never played a game. I suffer social anxiety that's only gotten worse over the years so a quiet game with close friends in a comfortable setting is to me a far more enjoyable setting. I also have encountered bad GMs before and have an aversion to allowing someone else I don't personally know run a game I'm in (and the only person I trust to doesn't have time to or want to run a game).

Yet I'm the rules lawyer and do all the GMing.

My player with the math problems? She belongs to the Pathfinder Society as well and while she's not played a lot of organized games, she's the one who with her husband goes to gaming conventions and actually plays those games. In fact, her husband also knows the rules fairly well and I don't think he belongs to the Society. He prefers playing tabletop wargames like 40K or Warmachine instead.

Knowledge of the rules and math skills does not mean you're going to be a regular at organized play. A lack of math skills and minimal knowledge of the rules does not mean you're NOT going to be in organized play... and it doesn't mean you'll "eventually learn" in any event.

It also suggests something untoward if new people who haven't a clue aren't always showing up at events. Are they being chased off by veteran players who are dismissive of someone who just can't do math and doesn't know the rules? These are potential customers for Paizo after all.

This is why the new rules are so important, and why changes to the magic system are needed. These rules need to be intuitive and easy to grasp. Problems like Renchard's example of Redundancy in the use of the word Level and how it can get confusing are the very reason why it has to change. And it's a minor change!

"We already have 10th level characters who are 7th level druids casting 3rd Tier spells." There's no "functions at" anymore because a 3rd Tier spell always acts as a 3rd Tier spell. One level of complexity has been removed. The second is you can see the two uses of "Level" are for the same thing - this is a character who is multiclassed. The two "levels" are about overall level and the level of the caster class.

This is a change that helps lessen confusion. In doing so it will help newer players learn the game. Further, it will help older players who are tired from working much of the day not have to pause and try to figure out what level is what - it's a spell TIER after all, so once they hear "tier" they know what that's for.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

I'll actually find it more confusing if they rename spell levels to something else. Even after running the entirety of Wrath of the Righteous, I still can't remember off hand if mythic characters have ranks or tiers. I think mythic monsters have the other one? I need to look it up. If they had just been mythic levels I'd be fine.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Seeing Mythic is mostly going away except for certain small elements, I don't think that'll be a problem, Ryric.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Oh, nice, that's clever.

Heal adds the material component last, and Cleric can use their holy symbol for material components. So "channel energy" requires a holy symbol, like before.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

Tangent101 wrote:
Seeing Mythic is mostly going away except for certain small elements, I don't think that'll be a problem, Ryric.

I was simply using mythic of an example of a mechanic that has level renamed to something else being more confusing because of it.


Renchard wrote:
Stone Dog wrote:
They can't be Orders. Druids have Orders. You'll have Storm Order Druids casting nth Order spells.
We already have 10th level characters who are 7th level druids casting 3rd level spells that function at 8th level. Redundant redundancy is already a thing.

Yeah, but if people really want to remove redundancy then just replacing it with a different flavor isn't going to help.

I'm fine with everything being a level or a feat with a descriptor, but if people want to break out the thesaurus we need a game glossary to consult first.

Lantern Lodge Customer Service & Community Manager

7 people marked this as a favorite.

Thank you to those who moved on from the derail. Much appreciated.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Stone Dog wrote:
I'm fine with everything being a level or a feat with a descriptor, but if people want to break out the thesaurus we need a game glossary to consult first.

I feel this is a good point. If we're comfortable with Class Feat, Ancestry Feat, General Feat, and Skill Feat (which we should be, being comfortable with Combat Feat, Teamwork Feat, Style Feat, and Metamagic Feat already) then we shouldn't have trouble differentiating between Character Level, Class Level, Spell Level, and Dungeon Level.

Adjectives are useful.


So if a cleric can use a divine focus on place of material components, dies that mean he didn't need to use an action to cast Heal in a burst?


Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber
TheGoofyGE3K wrote:
So if a cleric can use a divine focus on place of material components, dies that mean he didn't need to use an action to cast Heal in a burst?

That depends -- does the divine focus eliminate or replace the material component action? If you still have to take a "divine focus action", you have saved on expendables but not on actions.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
TheGoofyGE3K wrote:
So if a cleric can use a divine focus on place of material components, dies that mean he didn't need to use an action to cast Heal in a burst?

No, your divine focus fulfills the material component aspect, but you must still take the material casting action, you just present a holy symbol instead of say, a strawberry.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
MusicAddict wrote:
TheGoofyGE3K wrote:
So if a cleric can use a divine focus on place of material components, dies that mean he didn't need to use an action to cast Heal in a burst?
No, your divine focus fulfills the material component aspect, but you must still take the material casting action, you just present a holy symbol instead of say, a strawberry.

What if your holy symbol *is* a strawberry...? :-P

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
tivadar27 wrote:
MusicAddict wrote:
TheGoofyGE3K wrote:
So if a cleric can use a divine focus on place of material components, dies that mean he didn't need to use an action to cast Heal in a burst?
No, your divine focus fulfills the material component aspect, but you must still take the material casting action, you just present a holy symbol instead of say, a strawberry.
What if your holy symbol *is* a strawberry...? :-P

Then religion is yummy.

Designer

21 people marked this as a favorite.
QuidEst wrote:

Oh, nice, that's clever.

Heal adds the material component last, and Cleric can use their holy symbol for material components. So "channel energy" requires a holy symbol, like before.

That is correct. We've made a lot of effort to put in fun flourishes like that, where even though the new system processes things in its own way, it leads to small classic outcomes like that one that you've come to expect and envision.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
QuidEst wrote:

Oh, nice, that's clever.

Heal adds the material component last, and Cleric can use their holy symbol for material components. So "channel energy" requires a holy symbol, like before.

That is correct. We've made a lot of effort to put in fun flourishes like that, where even though the new system processes things in its own way, it leads to small classic outcomes like that one that you've come to expect and envision.

I look forward to trying to spot those, then!

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.

NEW INFORMATION about 10th Level spells. From this (long) interview with Jason in Game Informer:

Jason wrote:

You don’t get tenth-level spells automatically. You have to take a feat just to get them. That’s where spells like Wish live now. Let’s be honest, it’s one of those spells that can do anything. We have some guidelines built into the spell, but it really is there to be the make-or-unmake-reality spell. You shouldn’t use it to wreck your campaign, since it always comes with the chance that the DM will mess with you and corrupt your wish, so you have to be careful.

But this also gave us the opportunity to write other cool tenth-level spells. There’s one for druids that can wreck an entire environment by invoking a devastation on an area. Don’t make a high-level Druid angry because they will ruin your town! I think we’ve got another spell floating around there that allows you to turn into Godzilla or something akin to it. There are some crazy things floating around with the high-level spells of the game, but that’s appropriate for that level. At that point in time, characters are able to do amazing, almost god-like things when you’re up at the nineteenth-level or something. You know, the magic system is really exciting. 

Reading through the rest of the interview to see what's there. I think Jason mentioned in his last Know Direction interview that he talked about archetypes in this interview ...

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

The most disappointed part of the interview is the mention of keeping Vancian Casting. It seems that the balance tricks is going to be tied to how Spells are Heightened and what Sorcerers can do with their spells.

I wonder how the Familiar is being done. Is it discarded for more versatility for casting spells, like PF1 Bonded Object? Are they a part of what wizard can do with casting certain schools of spells instead? Or are they removing them completely, saving page counts by not having to have Familiar interactions?

How do Bloodlines work now? Are they regulated to just being Feat trees? Can Sorcerers get Magus Bloodline where they gain Fighter Feats? Do the Wizard and Sorcerer share a good portion of feats for their class abilities?

With Vancian casting still hanging on by the thinnest of threads, I wonder what measures are being used to mitigate the severe disadvantage the Wizard/Cleric/Druid/any other core caster not the Sorcerer has. Hopefully, it is better than the "buy a lot of scrolls to cast" version we have now.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Tangent101 wrote:


This is why the new rules are so important, and why changes to the magic system are needed. These rules need to be intuitive and easy to grasp. Problems like Renchard's example of Redundancy in the use of the word Level and how it can get confusing are the very reason why it has to change. And it's a minor change!

This times a 1,000. I've never met a new player who doesn't find it baffling the first time they play a spellcaster who levels up to second level but then can't pick second level spells. The game needs any other synonym in the English language for spell levels to reduce confusion.

I have a similar concern to the upcoming "spell points". If they're not directly tied to spell casting name them something else like "power points" or "mystic points" if there only function is to fuel bloodline powers and the like. Terminology can make a big difference when teaching the game; and if its too complicated to learn people then some people aren't going care enough to keep playing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

To me the most promising thing on the list is the spell "Primal phenomenon." Primal has long been Pathfinder's pseudonym for the Wild Magic found AD&D 2nd Edition Tome of Magic which to me is the all time greatest most fun RPG list ever created. (Prior to that the Bag of Beans and Wand of Wonder were my two favorite things about AD&D1). I love Pathfinder's core design and books a lot but the absence of wild/chaos magic is severely notable and the few attempts Pathfinder has made to mimic it have come across half-hearted at best (see Inner Sea Magic and the recent highly disappointing Wasteland book that promised primal magic and ended up being mostly guns). While I haven't played D&D5 (since we have been enjoying Pathfinder and only bought our Beginner Box two months before that came out) I've seen 5th edition's beautiful new wild/chaos magic list they made as one of the two primary sorcerer types in their starter book with nothing but envy that it isn't in this system. H

Hopefully this spell being listed here so early in the preview means Pathfinder will finally give us some full on wild and crazy fun chaos magic chart effects. Maybe even a primal/chaos sorcerer who has a version of the old Chromatic Orb spell as his initial bloodline attack along with a frequent ability to roll on some random chaos chart.


Needs More Chaos Magic wrote:

To me the most promising thing on the list is the spell "Primal phenomenon." Primal has long been Pathfinder's pseudonym for the Wild Magic found AD&D 2nd Edition Tome of Magic which to me is the all time greatest most fun RPG list ever created. (Prior to that the Bag of Beans and Wand of Wonder were my two favorite things about AD&D1). I love Pathfinder's core design and books a lot but the absence of wild/chaos magic is severely notable and the few attempts Pathfinder has made to mimic it have come across half-hearted at best (see Inner Sea Magic and the recent highly disappointing Wasteland book that promised primal magic and ended up being mostly guns). While I haven't played D&D5 (since we have been enjoying Pathfinder and only bought our Beginner Box two months before that came out) I've seen 5th edition's beautiful new wild/chaos magic list they made as one of the two primary sorcerer types in their starter book with nothing but envy that it isn't in this system. H

Hopefully this spell being listed here so early in the preview means Pathfinder will finally give us some full on wild and crazy fun chaos magic chart effects. Maybe even a primal/chaos sorcerer who has a version of the old Chromatic Orb spell as his initial bloodline attack along with a frequent ability to roll on some random chaos chart.

I love wild magic effects, and so does my group. I gave them a reskinned "wand of wonder" with an expanded effect list (1000 effects) in the last campaign, and they kept using it all the way until the end of the campaign at high levels. One of the players wanted to do a Wild "Mage" even in my current Starfinder game. I'd love my precious WoW and wild magic tables to be in PF2 :)


Joe M. wrote:

NEW INFORMATION about 10th Level spells. From this (long) interview with Jason in Game Informer:

{. . .}

Meant to say this before, but kept getting sidetracked by all the other things, but then this transcript reminded me that spells won't scale with caster level, only with spell level (including the auto-scaling of Cantrips). This seems really harsh to blasters (mainly Evokers and the Sorcerous equivalents) -- blasting was already generally sub-optimal even in D&D 3.x/PF1 unless you put bad condition riders on top of it or did something really specialized, or exploited a spell that the designers forgot to put a cap on (like Battering Blast). In D&D 3.x/PF1 you get scaling of many spells for approximately 5 levels, and then they become capped, although you can use the Intensified Spell feat to extend the cap upwards. Nothing wrong with combining Heighten Spell and Intensified Spell and letting you extend the cap further in exchanging for additional levels of heigntening, but having the cap be immediate unless you heighten seems kind of harsh. Having a few levels of scaling with caster level even makes thematic sense: When you first learn to use a spell, you probably won't be able to make the most efficient use of it, and as you get better at it, you manage to squeeze more effect out of the same amount of magical energy. Eventually, you are squeezing out all you can, and to get more effect, you have to put more in. D&D 3.x/PF1 actually reflects this, although inconsistently and incompletely. Rather than throwing this away, I'd like to see it made more complete and consistent.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
thaX wrote:


With Vancian casting still hanging on by the thinnest of threads, I wonder what measures are being used to mitigate the severe disadvantage the Wizard/Cleric/Druid/any other core caster not the Sorcerer has. Hopefully, it is better than the "buy a lot of scrolls to cast" version we have now.

Think there‘s a chance of convincing Paizo to abandon Vancian casting in favor of something like 5e‘s «prepared» casting? I‘d totally be in favor of that. It‘s what‘s keeping me from playing Wizards in PF1.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Catharsis wrote:
thaX wrote:


With Vancian casting still hanging on by the thinnest of threads, I wonder what measures are being used to mitigate the severe disadvantage the Wizard/Cleric/Druid/any other core caster not the Sorcerer has. Hopefully, it is better than the "buy a lot of scrolls to cast" version we have now.
Think there‘s a chance of convincing Paizo to abandon Vancian casting in favor of something like 5e‘s «prepared» casting? I‘d totally be in favor of that. It‘s what‘s keeping me from playing Wizards in PF1.

I'm still hoping for Arcanist casting for prepared casters. It solves most of my problems with traditional Vancian casting.

Then since that steps on the sorcerer's territory, the sorcerer gets more spells known than a wizard can ever prepare. And/or, the sorcerer becomes the king/queen of metamagic and can more freely tweak their spells on the fly. And/or, the sorcerer becomes the king/queen of cantrips, knowing way more than anyone else and getting more effects / damage out of them.


What do you think of a simple system that teaches players and masters to create spells? like a base of damage or things like that? I think it would be a very interesting and innovative tool.

Scarab Sages

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yes, Arcanist casting is the same principle as 5e Wizard casting.

I would certainly advocate reducing the Sorcerer’s focus on actual spells and turn them into an at-will blasting machine akin to the Kineticist. Maybe have some limited spellcasting instead of the Kineticist’s utility powers...


I'm definitely feeling them boosting cantrips for sorcerers. They could simply add a sub-entry to every cantrip,

Class Boost: Description goes here.

And do leave it as "Class" rather than specifically saying "Sorcerer." That way, you can put it on divine etc cantrips as well, and it would work with archetypes that also get it... or even with the Sorcerer, if they either have Advanced Learning to dip other spell lists or if their base spell list is determined by their bloodline (Divine for a Celestial bloodline etc).

This way, you can specify boosted effects for the non-damaging cantrips as well and sometimes do more unique boosts for blasting cantrips, rather than just saying "Sorcerers raise the damage die of damaging cantrips by one step." Maybe when the Sorcerer casts the Detect Magic cantrip, they get all information immediately instead of having to wait 3 rounds, making it more useful in combat. Maybe when the Sorcerer casts the Shield cantrip, they get one free reaction for the Shield to block for them instead of having to use their own reaction. Etc.

Shadow Lodge

David knott 242 wrote:

I wonder whether the Curse mechanic might be pulled out and made into a handicapping option for characters of all classes? It might be designed to open up access to additional feats that are not necessarily tied to the Oracle class.

Do you think they'd actually be Curses this time around instead of 'trivial annoyance with really, really good benefits' like they are in PF1?


Dragonborn3 wrote:
David knott 242 wrote:

I wonder whether the Curse mechanic might be pulled out and made into a handicapping option for characters of all classes? It might be designed to open up access to additional feats that are not necessarily tied to the Oracle class.

Do you think they'd actually be Curses this time around instead of 'trivial annoyance with really, really good benefits' like they are in PF1?

I hope not. ;)


@UnArcaneElection - There's a difference this time around. You have, say, a First Tier Magic Missile spell. You can, any time you memorize and cast Magic Missile, fire off between one and three missiles. This is true for a first level wizard and a 20th level wizard.

However, at 3rd level, a Wizard can cast a Second Tier Magic Missile spell that does a greater amount of damage or perhaps more missiles - starting with two missiles for a single Action casting, up to six for a three-action casting.

At 5th level, the wizard can cast a Third Tier Magic Missile that does maybe three missiles for a single Action, up to nine for a three-action casting. And on down the line.

You are using a higher level spell to cast the spell, yes. But if Spell Resistance is a thing, the spell works more effectively against it. A Fifth Tier Magic Missile penetrates Globe of Invulnerability (while doing upward of 15 missiles for a three-action casting).

Likewise with Fireball. A Third Tier Fireball is 5d6 always. Now, that can be handy when finishing off a foe that is badly hurt. But for something that is tougher, that 9th level Wizard might want to cast a Fifth Tier Fireball that does 9d6 damage all the time and is harder to dodge. Hell, the Seventh Tier Fireball would be doing 13d6 damage which is more than any 3rd level casting in Pathfinder 1 would have unless you had Empowered Spell (which makes it a 5th level Pathfinder 1 spell in any event)... while still being tougher to resist.

So maybe you won't have a 15th level wizard casting a 15d6 3rd level Fireball using an Enhanced Spell Megamagic Rod... but you could be casting a Seventh Tier Fireball that is significantly tougher to resist or dodge than that Third Tier spell was. And no doubt there will be alternative spells as well so it's not just Fireballs all the way up. It might allow for more diversity in spells for that matter.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I feel like my only real complaint is that the magic system is going to become even more incomprehensible to newer players than it already is.


So I just heard the replay of Mark talking on Twitch, and when the question of "spell lists" came up, he referenced the 4 essences and said he wanted to leave things there.

At this point, I doubt he's being intentionally misleading... Pretty sure we're going to have 4 lists based around those essences! Yay!


@Tangent101: I know what you mean -- I just don't want to throw out scaling with level completely. I'd rather have something in between -- D&D 3.x/PF1 actually do have something in between, but don't do it consistently with respect to application or fleshing out.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
UnArcaneElection wrote:
Joe M. wrote:

NEW INFORMATION about 10th Level spells. From this (long) interview with Jason in Game Informer:

{. . .}

Meant to say this before, but kept getting sidetracked by all the other things, but then this transcript reminded me that spells won't scale with caster level, only with spell level (including the auto-scaling of Cantrips). This seems really harsh to blasters (mainly Evokers and the Sorcerous equivalents) -- blasting was already generally sub-optimal even in D&D 3.x/PF1 unless you put bad condition riders on top of it or did something really specialized, or exploited a spell that the designers forgot to put a cap on (like Battering Blast). In D&D 3.x/PF1 you get scaling of many spells for approximately 5 levels, and then they become capped, although you can use the Intensified Spell feat to extend the cap upwards. Nothing wrong with combining Heighten Spell and Intensified Spell and letting you extend the cap further in exchanging for additional levels of heigntening, but having the cap be immediate unless you heighten seems kind of harsh. Having a few levels of scaling with caster level even makes thematic sense: When you first learn to use a spell, you probably won't be able to make the most efficient use of it, and as you get better at it, you manage to squeeze more effect out of the same amount of magical energy. Eventually, you are squeezing out all you can, and to get more effect, you have to put more in. D&D 3.x/PF1 actually reflects this, although inconsistently and incompletely. Rather than throwing this away, I'd like to see it made more complete and consistent.

That brings up another question. New evocation spells scale by heightening, right? If metamagic exists and still uses the +level mechanic as its cost, that causes some weird interactions with blasting.

For instance, at this time Fireball deals 5d6 base and +2d6 per +1 spell level increase with no cap to how high you can scale it (19d6 as a Level 10 spell potentially). However, if Empower Spell still exists and functions as it did in PF1 (+2 Spell Level for *1.5 to spell variables), it wouldn't actually outpace Heightening the spell normally until you could cast Level 8 spells (Level 8 Fireball deals 15d6, and an Empowered Level 6 Fireball (in a Level 8 spell slot) deals 16d6. Up until Level 7 spells, Heightening it normally actually gets you more damage than Empower! Furthermore, Intensify as it existed would be effectively worthless since blasts don't automatically scale with CL anymore.

Assuming the devs are professionals and already know that, we could then assume they're either currently working on a fix or already have one in mind. Here's a couple I thought up on the spot:

1) Metamagic feats function the same as in PF1 in that they trade a spell level increase for a bonus, but said increase may be adjusted to reflect the new scaling mechanic. For instance, if Empower cost a +1 increase it would break even on damage immediately and start dealing more when casting as an Empowered Level 4 Fireball (Level 5 slot, deals 10d6 vs 9d6 normal scaling).
2) Metamagic feats use a different cost than a spell level increase, such as a use of Resonance or Spell Points for example. This would allow them to make Metamagic really strong but also limited in daily applications.
3) Metamagic feats raise spell level as a cost for their use, but you can also spend a limited resource to decrease or negate the spell level increase. This would need fine tuning to make it work in a balanced manner.

This is all based on the text for the new Fireball, so of course take it with a grain of salt. Needless to say I'm very interested in how it turns out.

PS: What if there was an ability or metamagic feat that toyed with the Heightened scaling somehow? Like an X/Day ability that allowed a character to cast a Heightened spell without raising the level, or a metamagic that adds another dice to the damage scaling of a spell (so Fireball scales at 3d6 per +1 level for a maximum of 26d6 as a Level 10 spell)? You know what, a capstone that allowed you to treat spells as Heightened without increasing their level (or giving you X free Heighten levels per spell so as to not utterly break Level 1 Heal or Level 3 Fireball) would be pretty rad.


Shadrayl of the Mountain wrote:
LuniasM wrote:

Wait wait wait

Clerics get spell points they can use on Heal, right? I assume that auto-Heightens to their highest spell level too, right? That sounds amazing!

I was thinking it might cost multiple spell points, but that would be WAY better.

Wow, this was far back in the thread. Jeez!

Anyway, I don't think it'll cost multiple points to use since that would end up being very complicated. PF1 Clerics got a number of uses of Channel Energy per day that automatically scaled by level - the new Heal spell and Spell Points replace this for PF2 Clerics. If Heal requires multiple spell points to heighten it then they'd need to give you a ton in order to get back to the same channel energy power as their predecessors, and I don't think that's what's happening here. Both because Channel Energy is the last thing that needs a nerf and because they're trying to make the game easier to run - having to manage a huge pool of spell points runs counter to that goal.

Instead, if they auto-scale with a single use per point, you'd immediately have comparable power to the PF1 Cleric while also giving them the option to spend a channel use for a good single-target heal. That's not strictly more powerful than the old version, but it is more versatile!


LuniasM wrote:
2) Metamagic feats use a different cost than a spell level increase, such as a use of Resonance or Spell Points for example. This would allow them to make Metamagic really strong but also limited in daily applications.

I feel like this is both the most likely and most desirable outcome :)

Scarab Sages

As for free healing with Spell Points, I suspect that is not a Cleric thing but rather a Healing domain thing (Sarenrae). This is going to make the Healing domain very relevant indeed.


That is what we need next is a good cleric preview.

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Vidmaster7 wrote:
That is what we need next is a good cleric preview.

Evil cleric and Neutral cleric previews would also be acceptable. ;)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
UnArcaneElection wrote:
The Raven Black wrote:

{. . .}

On another note, I dislike that Necromancy (literally magic of death) is used for healing people freely. But it seems I'm in the minority here

It doesn't have to be necessarily just magic of death causation. It can also be magic of death prevention or even rollback.

I have no issue with the Necromancy school expanding to encompass healing and life magic. Putting the life and death magic in a single school make cohesive sense.

However in that case, the school really needs a different name since Necro- is literally the Greek Language root for death in words.

Perhaps Physiomancy could work as a magic school name. The death and debilitation spells would still be Necromancy subschool spells. Also, with a name like Physiomancy, the Polymorph spells could be relocated here too.


avatarless wrote:
UnArcaneElection wrote:
The Raven Black wrote:

{. . .}

On another note, I dislike that Necromancy (literally magic of death) is used for healing people freely. But it seems I'm in the minority here

It doesn't have to be necessarily just magic of death causation. It can also be magic of death prevention or even rollback.

I have no issue with the Necromancy school expanding to encompass healing and life magic. Putting the life and death magic in a single school make cohesive sense.

However in that case, the school really needs a different name since Necro- is literally the Greek Language root for death in words.

Perhaps Physiomancy could work as a magic school name. The death and debilitation spells would still be Necromancy subschool spells. Also, with a name like Physiomancy, the Polymorph spells could be relocated here too.

I've already suggested vivimancy, though that was a ways up. Either way, I'm guessing this is going to be one of those "well, this is what everyone knows already, so let's just keep the name..." I do agree with you in general though.


avatarless wrote:
UnArcaneElection wrote:
The Raven Black wrote:

{. . .}

On another note, I dislike that Necromancy (literally magic of death) is used for healing people freely. But it seems I'm in the minority here

It doesn't have to be necessarily just magic of death causation. It can also be magic of death prevention or even rollback.

I have no issue with the Necromancy school expanding to encompass healing and life magic. Putting the life and death magic in a single school make cohesive sense.

However in that case, the school really needs a different name since Necro- is literally the Greek Language root for death in words.

Perhaps Physiomancy could work as a magic school name. The death and debilitation spells would still be Necromancy subschool spells. Also, with a name like Physiomancy, the Polymorph spells could be relocated here too.

Problem with Physiomancy is that now it can also basically include everything that was once Transmutation into the mix based on Polymorph applications, which is all kinds of overpowered and unfitting flavor.

Necromancers manipulate life as well as death, and Death in numerous fictional writeups has been known to provide revivications to mortals with no strings attached, and is still largely a bad entity whose existence is necessary for the flow and balance of souls, so Necromancy is still aptly named.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
avatarless wrote:
UnArcaneElection wrote:
The Raven Black wrote:

{. . .}

On another note, I dislike that Necromancy (literally magic of death) is used for healing people freely. But it seems I'm in the minority here

It doesn't have to be necessarily just magic of death causation. It can also be magic of death prevention or even rollback.

I have no issue with the Necromancy school expanding to encompass healing and life magic. Putting the life and death magic in a single school make cohesive sense.

However in that case, the school really needs a different name since Necro- is literally the Greek Language root for death in words.

Perhaps Physiomancy could work as a magic school name. The death and debilitation spells would still be Necromancy subschool spells. Also, with a name like Physiomancy, the Polymorph spells could be relocated here too.

I see that as unnecessary as the "-Mancy" suffix has already expanded well beyond what it means. Necromancy, traditionally, is merely just communicating with the dead. Pyromancy, similarly, was an oracular/divination tradition using fire.

The words have already changed, and I don't think it is a stretch to expand it a small step further.


Albatoonoe wrote:
avatarless wrote:
UnArcaneElection wrote:
The Raven Black wrote:

{. . .}

On another note, I dislike that Necromancy (literally magic of death) is used for healing people freely. But it seems I'm in the minority here

It doesn't have to be necessarily just magic of death causation. It can also be magic of death prevention or even rollback.

I have no issue with the Necromancy school expanding to encompass healing and life magic. Putting the life and death magic in a single school make cohesive sense.

However in that case, the school really needs a different name since Necro- is literally the Greek Language root for death in words.

Perhaps Physiomancy could work as a magic school name. The death and debilitation spells would still be Necromancy subschool spells. Also, with a name like Physiomancy, the Polymorph spells could be relocated here too.

I see that as unnecessary as the "-Mancy" suffix has already expanded well beyond what it means. Necromancy, traditionally, is merely just communicating with the dead. Pyromancy, similarly, was an oracular/divination tradition using fire.

The words have already changed, and I don't think it is a stretch to expand it a small step further.

Mantids are the best diviners


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Albatoonoe wrote:

]I see that as unnecessary as the "-Mancy" suffix has already expanded well beyond what it means. Necromancy, traditionally, is merely just communicating with the dead. Pyromancy, similarly, was an oracular/divination tradition using fire.

The words have already changed, and I don't think it is a stretch to expand it a small step further.

Tyromancy is the best -mancy. It's divination using cheese. And while it doesn't follow that -mancy naming convetion, there is rumpology (butt reading. Much like palm reading, except with your butt) apparently popularized by Sylvester Stallone's mom who tries to pass it off as ancient.

In pathfinder though, it's hard to beat the troll augers who read their own entrails. That's just awesome. It's a job that obviously takes a lot of guts. ;)


I will join to the playtest for sure, I am a big fan of the d20 system so, i guess i could give some feedback. The thing is that I wish a mature version of the game, meaning no more than one spellcaster class, different stat values (as in D&D2E) and more significance for every stat instead of roling with a flat 8 on half the stat.

I love the idea of classes giving aditional 2 stat points, also, background should give one aditional stat point.

For Spellcaster I wish there were only one spellcasting class, and forget about cleric (being cleric a background or such), so you, as a caster decide wich path you´ll chose with a little help of your background.

Cleric. Wizard amd Druid as a Background or even Archetypes for the class. Much like the Vigilante class did but focussed exclusively on spellcasting classes.

Scarab Sages

Mark Seifter wrote:
Catharsis wrote:

Hmmm, I'm wondering how much of the actual text is missing from those spell entries. For example, there is no mention of these four essences in them — which spells belong to which essence?

Also, the texts don't sound foolproofed yet. For instance, Mark's comment implies that critting with the Exsanguination will also double the temporary hitpoints, which the spell description does not mention at all. So I assume this is all still work in progress...

As long as you damage something, it gives you temporary Hit Points per creature you damaged equal to half that damage (these packets won't stack as usual, which the temporary HP rules will handle), so if you deal twice as much damage, it logically follows you will get twice as many temporary HP, without needing to be explicitly stated.

This seems confusing to me now. So if you hit ten creatures with the spell and each one takes 30 damage, you've dealt 300 points of damage. Since at least one of them took damage, you'd get 150 temporary hp?

Or would you would actually only be getting 15 hp because the temporary hp packet thing is counting each creature as a different target?

Assuming I am misunderstanding and it's per spell, not per creature, what would prevent someone from, say, tossing out a bag of a hundred rats in front of themselves right before casting this spell to net a huge amount of temporary hp?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

the comment about packets not stacking implies that it would be 15 temp HP. Which is why having someone crit-fail is so great, because it means that that one packet, instead of being 1/2 of 30, is 1/2 of 60 which nets you 30 temp HP instead.

Liberty's Edge

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:


Necromancers manipulate life as well as death, and Death in numerous fictional writeups has been known to provide revivications to mortals with no strings attached, and is still largely a bad entity whose existence is necessary for the flow and balance of souls, so Necromancy is still aptly named.

I would be greatly interested in such examples. Curiosity is my sin

851 to 900 of 931 << first < prev | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Paizo Blog: All About Spells All Messageboards