Player Core Preview: The Wizard, Remastered

You cleave to the status quo in your games? Well, to each their own.

Well, of course not.

But I'm giving examples of how settings can become utterly incoherent if you have too many adventures in them in succession.

Hence why I'm happy Paizo is developing unexplored regions of Golarion rather than setting the next ten years of APs in Varisia.

One man's incoherence is another's richly developed. *shrugs*

One man's incoherence is another's richly developed. *shrugs*

Oh yeah, I'm not judging.

I just dislike having to remember if the goddess of magic is dead on Tuesdays and if not what her name is this week.

But we've gone rather far afield from wizards in the remaster. So this might deserve its own thread.

Errenor wrote:

Calliope5431 wrote:

The magical apex of Golarion was Thassilon eleven millennia in the past. No modern wizard has achived that level of power. No wizard in the past two thousand years has equaled the Runelords, Nex, Geb, Jatembe, or Tar-Baphon.

In my opinion, this implies something about the setting.

I can even say what: that Sin magic is not something fundamental and the best or even 'true' model of magic. Can't you see it yourself? Of these examples 4 aren't practitioners.

Well.

Tar-Baphon's power is directly based on his plundering of Zutha's Cenotaph. That's canon lore. He's presumably integrated some of that ancient knowledge into his own necromancy.

The larger point I was making, which has been, I admit, thoroughly lost in this discussion...is that Sorshen is not a blithering idiot. And that it seems somewhat presumptuous to call a level 27 archwizard who no one except Xanderghul has EVER surpassed in magical learning, power, or understanding a sad has-been who just doesn't understand how magic really works.

I'd defend Jatembe just as strongly, for the record. Golarion as a setting is MASSIVELY biased towards "ancient wizards with powers unseen in the modern age". Calling any of the people on that list outmoded seems kinda silly.

From what I read, it didn't really seem like anyone was making the accusation that Sorshen is a blithering idiot. This was set off by a comment about how young apprentices are going to roll their eyes at her definitive list of what is and is not Enchantment magic, when from their perspective Enchantment isn't a set category with specific spells objectively in or out of it. Some illusions might be enchantment magic to them, and heroism might not. The implication there, at least to me, is that they're just different ways of looking at the world, not that Sorshen is incorrect.

Sorshen undoubtedly made a tremendous amount of breakthroughs in the fields in which she has specialised her study. If she does maintain the old Enchantment school as definitive (which she might not - Rune magic seems well suited to being new schools of magic), it would be because it is an equally-correct lens through which to view magic and she finds it useful. She can be one of the greatest experts of all time in arcane magic, she can have made a thousand breakthroughs in her speciality rune magic, and she can still use a lens that differs from (but is not inherently better or worse than) the lens used by modern-day wizards.

I assume rune magic will just be 7 new schools yeah. Probably no need for the archetypes or opposition schools anymore since that was a 3.5 thing

I do kind of like that they can build a school around different ideas now. Schools based on type of magic was a bit limiting. Now they can build schools around something like Sin or Summoning and build appropriate focus spells and spells.

A summoning wizard would focus on summoning creatures, but also buffing them up to be more effective. That type of magic may not be limited only to the conjuration school. As they flesh this new curriculum mechanic out, they should be able to make it more interesting mechanically than the old method.

There is sort of a summoning school - the boundary.
It get a fairly ordinary augment summoning focus spell which is probably useful if you want to grapple, but its advanced spell is the very good fear aura.

Errenor wrote:

Calliope5431 wrote:

The magical apex of Golarion was Thassilon eleven millennia in the past. No modern wizard has achived that level of power. No wizard in the past two thousand years has equaled the Runelords, Nex, Geb, Jatembe, or Tar-Baphon.

In my opinion, this implies something about the setting.

I can even say what: that Sin magic is not something fundamental and the best or even 'true' model of magic. Can't you see it yourself? Of these examples 4 aren't practitioners.

Well.

Tar-Baphon's power is directly based on his plundering of Zutha's Cenotaph. That's canon lore. He's presumably integrated some of that ancient knowledge into his own necromancy.

The larger point I was making, which has been, I admit, thoroughly lost in this discussion...is that Sorshen is not a blithering idiot. And that it seems somewhat presumptuous to call a level 27 archwizard who no one except Xanderghul has EVER surpassed in magical learning, power, or understanding a sad has-been who just doesn't understand how magic really works.

I'd defend Jatembe just as strongly, for the record. Golarion as a setting is MASSIVELY biased towards "ancient wizards with powers unseen in the modern age". Calling any of the people on that list outmoded seems kinda silly.

The origin of the setting lies in books and games where the Wizards (and especially BBEG Wizards) reigned above others in their magical power.

PF2 crushed this monopoly of one class/concept.

But the powerhouses of yore we know about are still pegged as Wizards. Indeed best not to build them as PCs.

I have good hopes that further exploration of the setting will show that other classes were just as powerful as Wizards, just in other places further from the Inner Sea.

Calliope5431 wrote:

Errenor wrote:

Calliope5431 wrote:

The magical apex of Golarion was Thassilon eleven millennia in the past. No modern wizard has achived that level of power. No wizard in the past two thousand years has equaled the Runelords, Nex, Geb, Jatembe, or Tar-Baphon.

In my opinion, this implies something about the setting.

I can even say what: that Sin magic is not something fundamental and the best or even 'true' model of magic. Can't you see it yourself? Of these examples 4 aren't practitioners.

Well.

Tar-Baphon's power is directly based on his plundering of Zutha's Cenotaph. That's canon lore. He's presumably integrated some of that ancient knowledge into his own necromancy.

The larger point I was making, which has been, I admit, thoroughly lost in this discussion...is that Sorshen is not a blithering idiot. And that it seems somewhat presumptuous to call a level 27 archwizard who no one except Xanderghul has EVER surpassed in magical learning, power, or understanding a sad has-been who just doesn't understand how magic really works.

I'd defend Jatembe just as strongly, for the record. Golarion as a setting is MASSIVELY biased towards "ancient wizards with powers unseen in the modern age". Calling any of the people on that list outmoded seems kinda silly.

From what I read, it didn't really seem like anyone was making the accusation that Sorshen is a blithering idiot. This was set off by a comment about how young apprentices are going to roll their eyes at her definitive list of what is and is not Enchantment magic, when from their perspective Enchantment isn't a set category with specific spells objectively in or out of it. Some illusions might be enchantment magic to them, and heroism might not. The implication there, at least to me, is that they're just different ways of looking at the world, not that Sorshen is incorrect.

Sorshen undoubtedly made a tremendous amount of breakthroughs in the fields in which she has specialised her...

I see it as similar to how innovations spread.

Someone (or several someones) make a true breakthrough and once it proves viable, everyone tries to imitate them in the hope of reaping what the innovator sowed. But you cannot beat the game's inventor at their own game.

Only a new innovator with markedly different ideas will go further.

And it always happen.

The larger point I was making, which has been, I admit, thoroughly lost in this discussion...is that Sorshen is not a blithering idiot. And that it seems somewhat presumptuous to call a level 27 archwizard who no one except Xanderghul has EVER surpassed in magical learning, power, or understanding a sad has-been who just doesn't understand how magic really works.

I'd defend Jatembe just as strongly, for the record. Golarion as a setting is MASSIVELY biased towards "ancient wizards with powers unseen in the modern age". Calling any of the people on that list outmoded seems kinda silly.

What GameDesignerDM said. Also, again, you say it yourself: Jatembe. I don't know all the lore, but of all your previous examples for me only he seems like a really setting-defining figure. All others are just magical rulers and tyrants and don't hit the mark. There will be others, however powerful these look. I don't know much about Jatembe either, but his merging of arcane and primal magic looks more fundamental than anything I know about others.

I'm firmly convinced that the only reason Old Man Jatembe isn't more potent than he is is because he keeps getting sidetracked having to stop some random ancient evil or other from messing everyone up, and when he's not he is rightly finding the time to just vibe and have some self-care days.

I also suspect it's just he doesn't do things like starting wars, governance and tyranny and so not in spotlight so much and that's why we just mostly don't know how powerful he really is.

Yea, jetembe seems fairly warm and mild mannered like Superman so you're really not gonna see him popping off that much despite his ability

It's also worth noting that even in the much more seemingly-objectively defined PF1, Old Man Jatembe was discovering that the categorization systems weren't quite fitting all the available data. He's arguably the most learned wizard in the setting, and one of his big discoveries was breaking down the barrier between Arcane and Divine/Primal (Divine in pf1 terms, Primal in pf2 terms). The setting has been suggesting that the existing categorization systems aren't quite objectively correct for a long while now.

Yea, jetembe seems fairly warm and mild mannered like Superman so you're really not gonna see him popping off that much despite his ability

Though if he just did something more once in a while, it would be interesting. What is his last appearance and how long ago was it? It seems like a long time ago.

WWHsmackdown wrote:

Yea, jetembe seems fairly warm and mild mannered like Superman so you're really not gonna see him popping off that much despite his ability

Though if he just did something more once in a while, it would be interesting. What is his last appearance and how long ago was it? It seems like a long time ago.

If he somehow reconciled Geb and Nex and fixed Mana Wastes that would be impressive for example. This would kind of break the setting and game logic (that important things are mostly done by PCs) though. But at least something...
Otherwise I sound a bit like people that explain their all-good all-powerful omniscient inactive god.

Spoilering since the info is from a recent-ish campaign.

The origin of the setting lies in books and games where the Wizards (and especially BBEG Wizards) reigned above others in their magical power.

PF2 crushed this monopoly of one class/concept.

But the powerhouses of yore we know about are still pegged as Wizards. Indeed best not to build them as PCs.

I have good hopes that further exploration of the setting will show that other classes were just as powerful as Wizards, just in other places further from the Inner Sea.

Figures like Hao Jin, for example, who I believe canonically is a sorcerer?

Isn't one of the Old Mage's ongoing tasks to keep an eye on Baba Yaga who is more powerful and less benevolent than he is, but nonetheless they have regular appointments for tea and a chat?

Calliope5431 wrote:

The larger point I was making, which has been, I admit, thoroughly lost in this discussion...is that Sorshen is not a blithering idiot. And that it seems somewhat presumptuous to call a level 27 archwizard who no one except Xanderghul has EVER surpassed in magical learning, power, or understanding a sad has-been who just doesn't understand how magic really works.

I'd defend Jatembe just as strongly, for the record. Golarion as a setting is MASSIVELY biased towards "ancient wizards with powers unseen in the modern age". Calling any of the people on that list outmoded seems kinda silly.

What GameDesignerDM said. Also, again, you say it yourself: Jatembe. I don't know all the lore, but of all your previous examples for me only he seems like a really setting-defining figure. All others are just magical rulers and tyrants and don't hit the mark. There will be others, however powerful these look. I don't know much about Jatembe either, but his merging of arcane and primal magic looks more fundamental than anything I know about others.

Perpdepog wrote:

I'm firmly convinced that the only reason Old Man Jatembe isn't more potent than he is is because he keeps getting sidetracked having to stop some random ancient evil or other from messing everyone up, and when he's not he is rightly finding the time to just vibe and have some self-care days.

I also suspect it's just he doesn't do things like starting wars, governance and tyranny and so not in spotlight so much and that's why we just mostly don't know how powerful he really is.

Jatembe is both theoretically less knowledgeable than the runelords (based on 1e he's only cr 24, so weaker than Xanderghul and Sorshen and equal to Alaznist) and we have no idea what sort of casting he uses at this point. But he doesn't have 2e stats, so who knows.

But yes Jatembe is your classic "big good". He conveniently runs off whenever the plot requires it so that he doesn't hog the spotlight from the PCs.

Which of course has the unfortunate side effect of making him look like a jerk and confronts him with the issue of theodicy ("really, old man? You were busy during EVERY SINGLE adventure path except for the one in your own backyard? I don't know about that..."). At least he's not completely omniscient and omnipotent...

But it's a well-known issue with high level NPCs to ask them where they were during various crises. The excuses generally get less and less plausible the more world-shattering the crisis and the more high level NPCs running around.

The extreme version of this is comic book "apocalypse roulette", where the world faces annihilation every Wednesday but it's always headed off just in the nick of time by a plucky farm boy (ancient archmages like Jatembe conveniently hiding behind a rock every time, of course). It's also why my version of Avistan is a war zone between Tar-Baphon, the returned Runelords, and Deskari, because the PCs got somewhat sick of saving the world and decided to throw in with the villains for a change.

I am just starting to process the new books, but I think it is just going to take some time and some lore writing before the new system for wizard schools feels like it makes sense to the game. None of the big wizards of yore really fit the lore yet, although it won't take much re-writing to get there. Personally, I think Civic Wizardry should be the school of Wizardry started by Aroden himself, with ancient ties to all the human empires connected to him. Boundary is not really a great fit for, chelish devil calling, Gebian necromancy, or the whispering Tyrant. Ar Gramatica is actually really awesome now that I am looking at it closely, but it something so different from any previous school that players don't know what to do with it (it is the spycraft/abjuration/divination school/grammar police). Battle wizardry is generic enough to fit in anywhere, but also not really represent anything in the current lore specifically. Mentalism probably is the best school to represent Sorshen, but doesn't have that history well established in the core rule book. Primordial form could be a Magaambya school that would make a lot sense, but it is not Jatembe, who would have to be a universalist+.

What the wizard class desperately needs now is new lore that talks about how these schools have always existed in different places of Golarion with famous examples of each.

Jatembe doesn't hide behind rocks. He's constantly running off to deal with universe-shattering perils far beyond what the PCs could imagine, much less handle. You don't hear about them because he does such a good job and is far too modest to brag.

I am just starting to process the new books, but I think it is just going to take some time and some lore writing before the new system for wizard schools feels like it makes sense to the game. None of the big wizards of yore really fit the lore yet, although it won't take much re-writing to get there. Personally, I think Civic Wizardry should be the school of Wizardry started by Aroden himself, with ancient ties to all the human empires connected to him. Boundary is not really a great fit for, chelish devil calling, Gebian necromancy, or the whispering Tyrant. Ar Gramatica is actually really awesome now that I am looking at it closely, but it something so different from any previous school that players don't know what to do with it (it is the spycraft/abjuration/divination school/grammar police). Battle wizardry is generic enough to fit in anywhere, but also not really represent anything in the current lore specifically. Mentalism probably is the best school to represent Sorshen, but doesn't have that history well established in the core rule book. Primordial form could be a Magaambya school that would make a lot sense, but it is not Jatembe, who would have to be a universalist+.

What the wizard class desperately needs now is new lore that talks about how these schools have always existed in different places of Golarion with famous examples of each.

Looking forward to seeing more of your thoughts on the Remaster.

So, I've had a few days to look things over, and I've been considering how the Remaster is going to change my Wizard. Overall, I think it's quite positive.

Some background: my Wizard is from my forever GM's long-running homebrew campaign. Started off in D&D 3.5; moved to Pathfinder 2e when every character was 12th level.

My guy was a Rogue/Wizard (Diviner)/Unseen Seer, so he became a Wizard, specializing in Divination, with Rogue Dedication and a couple of other Rogue Archetype Feats.

I went Metamagical Experimentation for his thesis, and it's worked out pretty well. There are a number of times when we needed to go sneaky, and he took Conceal Spell so that he could grab Silent Spell when needed. The other times he mostly took Widen Spell each day.

Another thing we made a lot of use of was Vigilant Eye. Long term magical surveillance was fantastic.

So, because of that, I'm looking at Ars Grammatica for his new school. I definitely like Protective Wards better than Diviner's Sight. While I will miss filling my lower level Divination slots with True Strike, I think the curriculum spells are decent. I used to prepare Detect Magic in my Divination Cantrip slot; now it'll be Message, which I've used before for the sneaky.

I find the curriculum spells an interesting mix. I like that Dispel Magic is in there; if in doubt, it's hard to go wrong with filling your highest level curriculum slot with Dispel Magic. And you can use the lower level slots as well; why bother spend your R8 Dispel Magic on a R2 effect? Garth is about to grab Unified Theory; he's going to be really, really good at identifying spells. (Right now he's only really good. :) )

On the Experimental Spellshaping side, it's all good. The new Conceal Spell is simply superior to the old Conceal Spell/Silent Spell combo. And, since I don't have to worry about knowing the pre-req for the thesis ability now, it frees up a L6 Class Feat. (I took Rogue Dedication and Basic Trickery at L2/L4.) I'm having a hard time deciding between Irresistible Magic and Split Slot. I'm leaning towards Split Slot. Also, I needed reminding that there are options besides Widen Spell for the non-sneaky days. Nonlethal Spell & Energy Ablation are interesting options (Garth isn't primarily a Blaster, but he does Blast when the occasion calls for it.)

On the more general Remaster side, Material Components are gone, and with them, Eschew Materials. I took that Feat due to roleplay reasons: my guy was deprived of his spell component pouch one time for an extended period. I basically swore "Never again!" So, that's a L1 Feat I have back again. (Garth is Human Ancestry with the stereotypical Natural Ambition.) I'm thinking of grabbing Counterspell again.

I like the removal of the Crafting requirement for Scroll Savant/Scroll Adept. I've gotten a lot of use out of that Feat, but not so much out of Crafting as a whole.

I'm considering swapping out Superior Bond for Secondary Detonation Array, which just looks fun. Not sure if I have Garth Blast enough to make it worth it though (the Draconic Bloodline Sorcerer in the party is the real Blaster. Garth tends to go utility and buffs/debuffs.)

Overall, I think there will be a few things I'll miss about the old way of doing things, but the Remaster is introducing some fun things as well. I think it'll turn out ok overall.

I am just starting to process the new books, but I think it is just going to take some time and some lore writing before the new system for wizard schools feels like it makes sense to the game. None of the big wizards of yore really fit the lore yet, although it won't take much re-writing to get there. Personally, I think Civic Wizardry should be the school of Wizardry started by Aroden himself, with ancient ties to all the human empires connected to him. Boundary is not really a great fit for, chelish devil calling, Gebian necromancy, or the whispering Tyrant. Ar Gramatica is actually really awesome now that I am looking at it closely, but it something so different from any previous school that players don't know what to do with it (it is the spycraft/abjuration/divination school/grammar police). Battle wizardry is generic enough to fit in anywhere, but also not really represent anything in the current lore specifically. Mentalism probably is the best school to represent Sorshen, but doesn't have that history well established in the core rule book. Primordial form could be a Magaambya school that would make a lot sense, but it is not Jatembe, who would have to be a universalist+.

What the wizard class desperately needs now is new lore that talks about how these schools have always existed in different places of Golarion with famous examples of each.

All of them except battle magic and universal theory do have an named school as an example of where they are taught (I personally find the idea that each school is directly tied to an in universe school kind of silly because they feel more like university majors, so each school having 2-3 options makes more sense to me).

All of them except battle magic and universal theory do have an named school as an example of where they are taught (I personally find the idea that each school is directly tied to an in universe school kind of silly because they feel more like university majors, so each school having 2-3 options makes more sense to me).

Having finally had a chance to read more into the schools, I think the issue is that only the protean form school and maybe Ars Grammatica connecting to academies or schools that players will likely have heard of, or have yet encountered in PF2 adventures. This really leaves the current schools of the Core 1 book feel forced over Golarion Lore, rather than rooted deeply in it. I think exploring the lore of Wizard schools in Golarion, and talking about how these core schools have colleges in many of the larger academies will really help sell them.

From a mechanical perspective, I'm frustrated that schools are really limited scope wise and no consideration was done for letting them have usable level 1 and 2 spells, which is going to make 1-5 play even more of a pain. No, I don't care they let the GM add more spells, the RAW schools should be usable and good out of the box. That's like saying Swashbucklers are fixed because technically the GM can give them panche whenever.

From a flavour perspective, I'm unhappy the schools are a permanent fixed decision from chargen. That was OK in the original when each school was sweeping and huge and could take your entire life to explore but new schools are, like, tiny. Do you need to commit your entire life to figure out how to shapeshift yourself and nothing else?

For solutions, I have two ideas. The safe one is to imitate Druid orders: level 2 feat to add a new school worth of spells to your school slot list, level 4 to grab the focus spell. The risky one is to let wizards add new spells to their school list in-game via Learn a Spell or similar, perhaps mandating the new spell shares a trait with a spell on the list already (excluding purely mechanical traits like incapacitation and attack)

From a mechanical perspective, I'm frustrated that schools are really limited scope wise and no consideration was done for letting them have usable level 1 and 2 spells, which is going to make 1-5 play even more of a pain. No, I don't care they let the GM add more spells, the RAW schools should be usable and good out of the box. That's like saying Swashbucklers are fixed because technically the GM can give them panche whenever.

The "new schools" seem like a half-baked, rushed out solution to make sure they could not be sued by Hasbro, instead of an actual well-thought replacement for a system which had been in place forever.

Just overall a nerf to the teeth in terms of flexibility (which was supposed to be what the wizard was all about, after they got nerfed in all other areas).

"Wait and see!" said the same posters, over and over again.

I waited, I saw, and I was disappointed, just like I expected to be.

RAW the concept is awful. And telling me that "Your DM can come up with new schools!" is absolute hogwash. My DM can also tell me to suck it up.

As GM if a player takes a curriculum and ask to edit it I will just answer "If you don't like these templates take the universalist or choose another class". Because I already a lot of things to do as GM so I don't need Paizo adding more work for me making me judge if some specific spell of the curriculum that a player want to trade makes sense or not specially when this comes from their own design flaw.

I understand that Paizo had little time to work on the wizard and therefore chose a simple mechanic based on what she already used for other things like bloodlines. But that won't change the fact that it was bad and poorly finished and didn't solve any of the problems the wizard already had, it only made it worse.

Now we just have to wait for maybe some Wizard Unleashed in the future to see if it solves the wizard. Fortunately, there are several other better spellcasting classes to play.

From a flavour perspective, I'm unhappy the schools are a permanent fixed decision from chargen. That was OK in the original when each school was sweeping and huge and could take your entire life to explore but new schools are, like, tiny. Do you need to commit your entire life to figure out how to shapeshift yourself and nothing else?

TBT I have had this problem with PF2 multiclassing from the start. If you start as a Fighter, even if you spend the rest of your life poring over dusty tomes of eldtitch power, you will always be a Fighter.

Same for starting Wizard and spending the rest of your life practicing weapon techniques.

It is not completely new to Remaster.

It's perfectly possible to promote change without snark, or demonizing others for having differing viewpoints.

Don't do that. It's rude.

Given the popularity of the class, and the massive amount of problems it currently has, had "fixing the wizard" been a priority, then the new school system would not be the end result. What this tells me is that either the wizard is deemed "ok" (despite abundant evidence to the contrary), or just not a priority.

I would have been fine having the wizard in the second core, instead of putting it in the first core in its current state.

The Remaster changes notwithstanding, what was it about the Wizard class that you saw as being "massively problematic?"

Rather than continuing to think unkind thoughts about Paizo staff and the competence of all NPC wizards throughout history, I have come up with IC explanations for why the battle magic school has those spells:

1) (for APs) They're worried that students are going to move to the boonies and not have good access to new spells. Thus, it is more important to have good high-level spells.

2) (for PFS) You have great access to new spells, and some of your fellow PCs know and use the pre-remaster schools! However, you trained at the Arcanamirium, whose new management has an agenda ...

But my main complain still in the mechanics. Its just worse. The spell old style every spell was obligatorily classified into one of the schools auto-incrementing the number of spells available to them whatever the was added.

That's part of what I don't like about them. The world is too weird to have everything fall neatly into boxes like that – particularly poorly designed boxes like the OG magic schools.

It's the same reason I have issues with neat cosmologies like the Great Wheel (and that includes the Slightly Smaller Wheel of Pathfinder). The Multiverse should be weird and wonderful, like those old Hulk comics where he gets punted to some kind of pathway in between dimensions and wanders them aimlessly and pops into all sorts of places.

Ravingdork wrote:

It's perfectly possible to promote change without snark, or demonizing others for having differing viewpoints.

Don't do that. It's rude.

I think sticking one's head in the sand about the issues wizards have been having since pf2e was released, pretending they are fine, and constant gaslighting is indeed not rude, you are right.

Just deeply disingenuous and unhelpful.

Given the popularity of the class, and the massive amount of problems it currently has, had "fixing the wizard" been a priority, then the new school system would not be the end result. What this tells me is that either the wizard is deemed "ok" (despite abundant evidence to the contrary), or just not a priority.

I would have been fine having the wizard in the second core, instead of putting it in the first core in its current state.

I don't like the wizard. However, I don't think it has a massive amount of problems. I think it was made to do something I don't enjoy: cast and manipulate a lot of spells within the PF2E balance point for magic. I've learned not to equate my preferences to objective facts about quality. The wizard thesis mechanic + middling focus spells are it's extra mechanics on top of four slots. If the wizard has that in addition to cool, repeatable class mechanics in the vein of the remaster witch it suddenly shoots above 3 slot casters, so im assuming that was never on the table. The devs were comfortable to remaster it with minimal change so mechanically it's still working the way they want it to. It wasn't held off for PC2, which leads me to believe these wizard mechanics have a sizeable audience of satisfied players (it's not being held off like the alchemist who was postponed for purely mechanical reasons). I just have my fingers crossed that PF3 (if and when that happens) doesn't have any four slot casters bc it seems like four slots eats a lot of budget.

Amusingly, the new change has the effect of boosting elementalist wizard quite a bit.

I'm not sure elementalist is GOOD, but by comparison it's better than before.

Yeah, elementalist has some of the strongest damage focus spells in the game (Updraft, my beloved!) and quite broad, flexible, and strong specialist spell options at all spell ranks (maybe not for fire), but does have pretty sharp limits on what it can do with its other three slots. Plenty of damage, debuff, and utility options, but there’s some very specialized options (e.g. slow, invisibility) you do lose out on.

If you don’t want to have spell blending and we’re planning to MC witch for occult access anyway then elementalist has a strong starting base, although you can’t get MC until 4th.

It wasn't held off for PC2, which leads me to believe these wizard mechanics have a sizeable audience of satisfied players (it's not being held off like the alchemist who was postponed for purely mechanical reasons). I just have my fingers crossed that PF3 (if and when that happens) doesn't have any four slot casters bc it seems like four slots eats a lot of budget.

I'm pretty sure it wasn't held off for a later book because it's one of the four classic main classes.

And I refuse to believe that there is any class that wouldn't greatly benefit from more development time.

The consistent popularity of the wizard as a class (as reported to us by Michael Sayre) in PF2 would seem to imply that the "issues wizards have been having since pf2e was released" might not be as massive, or as shared as some players are imagining them to be.

I am not saying that people don't have a right to not like the class, or to collaborate with others to homebrew solutions to issues that those players have with the class, and if they are popular enough, they would probably gain traction...but using incredibly hostile language to repeated denigrate people who just disagree with you, and are having fun with the class as it is, is not fostering a positive, friendly community.

It is ok to take a moment before responding to a post that makes you upset and considering whether it is breaking the rules of community engagement, and should be flagged, or if there are points that you feel like you want to come back and discuss constructively after letting the initial anger and hostility settle.

The consistent popularity of the wizard as a class (as reported to us by Michael Sayre) in PF2 would seem to imply that the "issues wizards have been having since pf2e was released" might not be as massive, or as shared as some players are imagining them to be.

I am not saying that people don't have a right to not like the class, or to collaborate with others to homebrew solutions to issues that those players have with the class, and if they are popular enough, they would probably gain traction...but using incredibly hostile language to repeated denigrate people who just disagree with you, and are having fun with the class as it is, is not fostering a positive, friendly community.

It is ok to take a moment before responding to a post that makes you upset and considering whether it is breaking the rules of community engagement, and should be flagged, or if there are points that you feel like you want to come back and discuss constructively after letting the initial anger and hostility settle.

While I agree with what you say about the language used, the rest of your post doesn't ring true to me.

I don't like the remastered wizard. That's hardly a surprise to anyone here, I assume. But I like the Wizard. I even have fun playing a Wizard.

None of that changes the fact that the wizard is the only class (so far) that took a significant mechanical hit to one of its main features. And no, the very minor improvements to weapon proficiency and feats are nowhere close enough to balance this, and they do nothing to improve the class overall.

I think sticking one's head in the sand about the issues wizards have been having since pf2e was released, pretending they are fine, and constant gaslighting is indeed not rude, you are right.

I mean if we're going to be critiquing language. Replying like this because someone online is less concerned that the wizard is kind of mid makes the whole position look melodramatic and unserious.

You're actively undermining people who want to see Wizards get better with this kind of attitude.

As GM if a player takes a curriculum and ask to edit it I will just answer "If you don't like these templates take the universalist or choose another class". Because I already a lot of things to do as GM so I don't need Paizo adding more work for me making me judge if some specific spell of the curriculum that a player want to trade makes sense or not specially when this comes from their own design flaw.

So the way this should work is:

If that case made by the player makes any sense at all, you say yes. Like if a player thinks "As a Civic Wizard, I should be able to prepare Shape Stone in my school slot, because there are lots of uses for that spell in a crisis in a city- to make a bridge, to put a hole in a wall, to fix a leaking dam, etc."

The point of a lot of things in this game is to make people think of their character as a person in the setting. So if players want to put in the work to think about what they learned at Wizard school and what other spells would apply to that, then they're just going to get extra school spells. The only work I have to do is "listen to my players."

The consistent popularity of the wizard as a class (as reported to us by Michael Sayre) in PF2 would seem to imply that the "issues wizards have been having since pf2e was released" might not be as massive, or as shared as some players are imagining them to be.

I am not saying that people don't have a right to not like the class, or to collaborate with others to homebrew solutions to issues that those players have with the class, and if they are popular enough, they would probably gain traction...but using incredibly hostile language to repeated denigrate people who just disagree with you, and are having fun with the class as it is, is not fostering a positive, friendly community.

It is ok to take a moment before responding to a post that makes you upset and considering whether it is breaking the rules of community engagement, and should be flagged, or if there are points that you feel like you want to come back and discuss constructively after letting the initial anger and hostility settle.

The wizard's popularity IMO comes way more from its name than from its mechanics.

In general those who plays with wizards in PF2 plays with it because of the image of the wizard either because they want a character representing the image of a person who studied to master magic, or because they simply don't know/don't care about the mechanics and just want to be a wizard.

It's similar to those players who don't play with ancestries like halflings, goblins and other small or strange ancestries because they "don't want to play with a small stature character or with a 'strange' anatomy" and ends choosing humans or elves instead (this still pretty common even today with many games stories and animations representing the most different characters archetypes, it still common that many players just want to look cool).

So I ever consider the wizard class popularity a bit tainted as representation that the class is OK. Sum this with the fact that PF2e is pretty well balance to a point that we don't have a real bad class just some of the that have some subpar mechanics and many people that are less-geek players feels little the classes problems than those who focus in optimization or heavy studied the rules.

YuriP wrote:

As GM if a player takes a curriculum and ask to edit it I will just answer "If you don't like these templates take the universalist or choose another class". Because I already a lot of things to do as GM so I don't need Paizo adding more work for me making me judge if some specific spell of the curriculum that a player want to trade makes sense or not specially when this comes from their own design flaw.

So the way this should work is:

Player: Can I prepare [spell] in my school slots.
GM- You're [school] right? That's not on the list, but why does [spell] sound like something related to what the school is about.
Player- [makes a case].

If that case made by the player makes any sense at all, you say yes. Like if a player thinks "As a Civic Wizard, I should be able to prepare Shape Stone in my school slot, because there are lots of uses for that spell in a crisis in a city- to make a bridge, to put a hole in a wall, to fix a leaking dam, etc."

The point of a lot of things in this game is to make people think of their character as a person in the setting. So if players want to put in the work to think about what they learned at Wizard school and what other spells would apply to that, then they're just going to get extra school spells. The only work I have to do is "listen to my players."

I understand yet it still one more little thing to do in the middle of many other things I need to pay attention. Now I need also to listen and agree or not with a player that if one or more of its spells that he/she want to trade makes sense into the curriculum.

I probably will be occupied by other gameplay/preparation things and will just say "please, if you don't like with the spell selection of you curriculum just choose to be universalist or choose another class".

From a mechanical perspective, I'm frustrated that schools are really limited scope wise and no consideration was done for letting them have usable level 1 and 2 spells, which is going to make 1-5 play even more of a pain. No, I don't care they let the GM add more spells, the RAW schools should be usable and good out of the box. That's like saying Swashbucklers are fixed because technically the GM can give them panche whenever.

From a flavour perspective, I'm unhappy the schools are a permanent fixed decision from chargen. That was OK in the original when each school was sweeping and huge and could take your entire life to explore but new schools are, like, tiny. Do you need to commit your entire life to figure out how to shapeshift yourself and nothing else?

For solutions, I have two ideas. The safe one is to imitate Druid orders: level 2 feat to add a new school worth of spells to your school slot list, level 4 to grab the focus spell. The risky one is to let wizards add new spells to their school list in-game via Learn a Spell or similar, perhaps mandating the new spell shares a trait with a spell on the list already (excluding purely mechanical traits like incapacitation and attack)

I am here for the School Explorer (Transfer Student?) feat.

As a passionate wizard player, I am fine with the remaster wizard.

While the school spells are limited, such limitations only really affect pfs. If your GM won't make spell allowances to your school, that is a GM problem, not a system problem. Though, also it is still not pfs and, as such, the GM can just allow the previous schools and that stuff. So, no major problem.

Simple weapon proficiency is awesome. I may be very biased because this greatly benefits one of my characters. This is also coupled with the awesomeness of the Weapon Proficiency feat now scaling at 11, with their class weapon proficiency progression.

There are some neat new class feats. The greatest one (in my eyes) is Spellbook Prodigy. (Also because of the changes made to Magical Shorthand.)

I'm a little disappointed that the wizard's save proficiencies weren't improved even a little bit. (Their 1st master save proficiency at 17? That still seems a little rough)

Also, the overall change to spell attack and DC proficiency, I think, is great for wizards. Spell Substitution and Spell Blending still do not specify only interacting with wizard spells. Staff Nexus can also benefit from other caster class archetypes, given prereqs for activation. Also, Drain Bonded Item, similarly doesn't specify wizard spells only.

All-in-all, I'm very content with the changes. They are not all awesome beyond all conception, but it certainly doesn't seem to fit into any category of "bad" changes.

Spell protection Array at level 4 seems like it will be pretty powerful, depending upon what the monster core looks like and how traits get applied to monster abilities. If almost nothing except spells end up counting as a magic, then it might not be that great in campaigns where you are mostly fighting non-casting monsters, but I am hoping that obviously magical abilities from creatures would also get some kind of magical trait associated with them, but we will have to wait and see on that. Rage of Elements didn't have a whole lot but there were several with "Primal" attacks and such so if that carries over it should still be pretty decent.

There are very few feat levels for the wizard without obviously good options for a wizard, which is almost a shame because the wizard benefits absurdly from casting MC options.

I don't see a big issue with schools. They put in the game the unified magical theory school which gives you one less spell per day but more flexibility and an extra feat. And if you don't like that option, you can always take spell blending and blend away all your school slots.

I also like some of the new feats like explosive arrival and secondary detonation array. The biggest thing the developers could have done for the wizard is improve the wizard focus spells to the same power as the better focus spells in the game. I think that was a missed opportunity.

I still think the remastered wizard is a class I would play; where the old wizard would have been much lower on my list of classes to play.

To be honest, the new schools are garbage, both mechanically and as themes. To the point where the Universalist, who got a slight buff, is now basically always the better option.

Sure people can argue with their GM to allow certain curriculum changes to their schools. Or they could simply take whatever spell they want and role play any school without the slot limits (as in focus on certain spells in game). And if players already have to beg the GM to make their concept work, well they might as well just ask if they might replace the focus spells of Unified Magical Theory with those from another school.

The new school concept could have worked, if each of them had a lot more spells, especially for the lower ranks and instead of limiting the extra slot to those spells, give players a reason to want to cast those spells.
Like a couple of feats that either interact with school spells or give a bonus to for them. How about at Levels 1, 6 and 12, the one on Level 1 is free, the others have to be picked up and the Universalist doesn't have access to them. The school then would specify what those feats do for their school, similar how they specify the focus spells already.

Then a level 2 feat (again not allowed for Universalist) to pick another, additional school and gain it' level 1 feat and access to the corresponding level 6 and 12 feats as well as their lists as "school spells".

As a little compensation I'd give the Universal Magical Theory school the level 1 feat "Spellbook Prodigy" for free. Other than that from my experience being allowed to recast each spell rank once makes up for a missing spell slot, even if it looks worse on paper. Sure overall it's one spell slot less, but the flexibility of getting to choose the second casting on demand instead of preparing in the morning makes up for it. If people disagree on that, Universalists could always have a third available focus spell feat.