Player Core Preview: The Wizard, Remastered

D&D 2e's alternate schools systems was one of the neatest things done. It was also dabbled in D&D 3rd edition. I'm surprised Paizo never did for Pathfinder. Tossing out the "Traditional 8" didn't need to be done to explore alternate schools/categorizations of magic.

It's nice to see you exploring it finally though.

(Replying to myself since it'd be multiple others otherwise.)

Yes, I'm aware of the de-OGLification and stuff. The 8 schools aren't really copyrightable anyway, but that's besides the point.

My main point is: I'm really surprised Paizo didn't explore this during Pathfinder 1e [the game I still play and prefer]. I really wish they had, and have no idea why they didn't.

Since theoretically the redesign is not complete, here are my two coppers.

Don't remove Int modifier to damage. Casters already play second fiddle to martials in this edition. Damage output is not on par.

Have *many, many more* 1 action spell options. Giving players 3 actions, but requiring two actions for 95% of the spells isn't giving players 3 actions. It just isn't.

Get rid of monster saving throws; give them ACs to hit so casters can use hero points to "reroll" just like martials get. Otherwise saving throw inducing characters are second class citizens, and have reduced player agency.

When PF2 came out I felt a leaping of joy in my heart for wizards, my favorite 3.5 class; then I've watched them played and shook my head in sadness.

When I heard wizards are getting remastered, and saw the proposed changes are actually nerfing them by removing Int mod to damage, I shook my head in sadness again.

Please do this right, Paizo, I know you can, you've done many other things right.

Pretty sure the redesign is complete.

Since theoretically the redesign is not complete, here are my two coppers.

Way, way, waaaaayyyy too late for this. The book is definitely off to the printers. Probably either being printed now or finishing and getting ready to ship back to the US.

Also I think cantrips have changed to be more swingy, take needle darts for example. It's been built with the new paradigm and doesn't have ability modifier, but instead an extra 2d4 compared to most cantrips. Which at level one is effectively like having a two variable ability modifier bonuses. Effectively you can have a +2 to a +8 on damage, which help balance how much weaker attack cantrips are to save. We'll likely see 2d4 for single target save based cantrips.

Pretty sure the redesign is complete.

This part most certainly. It's already printed, they couldn't edit it now if they wanted. The classes and features of Player Core 2 may not be finalized, but that shouldn't contravene general spell directions from PC1.

Cantrips are being brought in line with the damage numbers always intended for them as the blog clearly explains. casters don't compete with materials at their best thing because casters aren't single target damage specialists.

I've yet to see evidence that cantrips are going to be worse on the whole. Ignition is straight buffed for melee use (and it's primary user will likely be the magus), Needle Darts is higher average damage than the base 1d4+4, and we have seen a significant buff to Acid Splash from today's preview.

What I think is likely is that the former undisputed best cantrips, electric arc, will probably take a nerf to 2d4 like other multitarget cantrips from Rage of Elements. Meanwhile every other option has had at least a situational buff. And that's generally a good design direction to go in.

Would we be able to use the first core book’s wizard schools in combination with updated base wizard… like say we want to play an illusion focused wizard who entertains people or a divination wizard who divines and is a fortune teller type?

And will future books after remastered core give us even more schools to play with? Or will the wizard class not get any more schools after core?

Also, there won’t be “access” for specific locations for certain schools right? We can be free to come up with our own origins for how our character learned magic, and won’t be shoehorned into being from a certain location on Golarion like a specific school in Absalom or Mwangi? I’m worried that the wizard “schools” being based on actual school locations in the world of Golarion will mean “access” for them, meaning for example in PFS you have to have a character from the region near a specific school in order to use the wizard school… not to mention this doesn’t work for non-golarion settings

1) Flavor is free, and with background you could always have mechanics that said your illusion wizard was an entertainer or your divination wizard was a fortune teller.

2) the blog post makes it pretty clear the design goals with the new schools is to open it up for future options, so I assume yes there will be new schools

3) It's already been mentioned the schools will give lore examples but won't require you to be from anywhere. I can see future schools that are rare that might say you studied from a specific place. which is fine those are the domains of rare options, and for non-goalrion settings things will need to be adjusted anyways.

the feat is waaay too situational for a 14th level feat. and honestly the damage is middling at best for a 14th level caster, considering the unlikelihood of it actually going off to any real effect. I expect 95+% of the players will bypass this one.

I don't understand this new design philosophy where so very little is impactful in any part of this game. It's all so underwhelming, and frankly for the amount of money we are expected to fork over for rules, modules and accessories, the game should be epic. But every step forward seems a step away from epic.

the feat is waaay too situational for a 14th level feat. and honestly the damage is middling at best for a 14th level caster, considering the unlikelihood of it actually going off to any real effect. I expect 95+% of the players will bypass this one.

I don't understand this new design philosophy where so very little is impactful in any part of this game. It's all so underwhelming, and frankly for the amount of money we are expected to fork over for rules, modules and accessories, the game should be epic. But every step forward seems a step away from epic.

The entire mechanical game - and some lore - is free on Archives of Nethys.

/Really/ not a fan of the "school" and "curriculum slot" changes, but we'll see how it turns out. I am highly irked that I'm being forced into a pseudo-Sorcerer by having some slots hyper-restricted.

the feat is waaay too situational for a 14th level feat. and honestly the damage is middling at best for a 14th level caster, considering the unlikelihood of it actually going off to any real effect. I expect 95+% of the players will bypass this one.

It is situational. If you have a party that uses athletics - then it is worthwhile. It is quite a nice damage boost. If you don't, then you probably have other things you will want more.

The way we play that might be a useful ability. You hit someone with an AoE on the opening round, then have your martials close engaging where the rune circle is and the monster is too preoccupied to move.

It's also not a status bonus so still works with Dangerous Sorcery.

So it goes boom for some extra damage for one action of a damage type few things are resistant or immune to.

If you're DM is having the monsters move off it all the time, then it might suck. That seems like DM metagaming unless the monsters see it explode.

The way we play that might be a useful ability. You hit someone with an AoE on the opening round, then have your martials close engaging where the rune circle is and the monster is too preoccupied to move.

It's also not a status bonus so still works with Dangerous Sorcery.

So it goes boom for some extra damage for one action of a damage type few things are resistant or immune to.

If you're DM is having the monsters move off it all the time, then it might suck. That seems like DM metagaming unless the monsters see it explode.

Moving is still costing the enemy actions, though, and can be prevented or punished by your allies in various ways. You can also trigger weakness damage again with it.

If you're DM is having the monsters move off it all the time, then it might suck. That seems like DM metagaming unless the monsters see it explode.

Pretty sure the normal response to "the enemy put glowing runes under me" is "move off them at whatever cost".

Deriven Firelion wrote:

If you're DM is having the monsters move off it all the time, then it might suck. That seems like DM metagaming unless the monsters see it explode.

Pretty sure the normal response to "the enemy put glowing runes under me" is "move off them at whatever cost".

But as Captain Morgan notes, 'move or else' is still a pretty good buff. If the feat said "on the next round, every opponent in the burst area takes [rank]d6 or loses an action", is that a better feat? Because that's kinda what it's doing.

1 action to either do more damage or force enemy movement is tactically interesting and good

Just wish it was level 8

I kind of get why it's level 14. Lower level area damage spells like fireball scale with 2d6 per rank. Adding 1d6 per rank would be a potential damage increase of 50% which is quite a lot.

Just wish it was level 8

Or 6, either would be great for it. In any case 14 is a little high to really shine.

I kind of get why it's level 14. Lower level area damage spells like fireball scale with 2d6 per rank. Adding 1d6 per rank would be a potential damage increase of 50% which is quite a lot.

Well that ratio will always hold true, regardless of the level.

Blave wrote:

I kind of get why it's level 14. Lower level area damage spells like fireball scale with 2d6 per rank. Adding 1d6 per rank would be a potential damage increase of 50% which is quite a lot.

Well that ratio will always hold true, regardless of the level.

Not really? Chain lightning is a rank 6 spell and deals 8d12, which is close to 16d6. Cone of Cold is rank 5 and deals 12d6.

Those are pre-master numbers of course and might change.

Old_Man_Robot wrote:

Blave wrote:

I kind of get why it's level 14. Lower level area damage spells like fireball scale with 2d6 per rank. Adding 1d6 per rank would be a potential damage increase of 50% which is quite a lot.

Well that ratio will always hold true, regardless of the level.

Not really? Chain lightning is a rank 6 spell and deals 8d12, which is close to 16d6. Cone of Cold is rank 5 and deals 12d6.

Those are pre-master numbers of course and might change.

Yup. To be fair Cone of Cold's replacement is lowered to 10d6 but gained difficult terrain and a variable range/shape/action cost:

"Freezing winds extend from your hands, pushing away from
you with great force. If you Cast this Spell with 2 actions, it
has an area of a 60-foot cone; if you Cast this Spell with 3
actions, it has a range of 500 feet and an area of a 30-foot
burst. Each creature in the area takes 10d6 cold damage with
a basic Reflex save. Snowdrifts and icy gales fill the area until
the start of your next turn, making the area difficult terrain"

I don't think we've seen whatever the new standard for "pure" damage will be, but given the game's underlying math isn't changing it is safe to assume similar principles of HP to damage scaling apply. Meteor Swarm's replacement deals the same damage amount (with varying types) and it is 6d10+14d6 at rank 9. That's over 23d6.

I mean, just looking at Tree of the Four Seasons, that can deal 24d6 damage in one round at rank 6 if you work with your allies.

Old_Man_Robot wrote:

Blave wrote:

I kind of get why it's level 14. Lower level area damage spells like fireball scale with 2d6 per rank. Adding 1d6 per rank would be a potential damage increase of 50% which is quite a lot.

Well that ratio will always hold true, regardless of the level.

Not really? Chain lightning is a rank 6 spell and deals 8d12, which is close to 16d6. Cone of Cold is rank 5 and deals 12d6.

Those are pre-master numbers of course and might change.

I meant in the case of fireball, as that's what you used in the example. The point was that in the case of the 2d6 scaling of the spell, it doesn't matter where you added the additional 1d6 scaler, it would always be 50% of the 2d6.

So 1st, 8th, 14th, 20th level, it would still scale that way.

thaX wrote:

Why was there two arcane casters who were basically doing the same thing with different mechanics? Why not just use the new mecanic overall in the system instead of keeping the old with the new?

Because it is wrong to exclude people with different preferences when you can easily accomodate both.

Different people like each one. That is Ok isn't it?

The overall feel I get is that those playing the brand that PF2 Remastered is moving away from in it's current (soon to be NeRfEd) iteration love that the same mechanic is used throughout, and that the wizard chooses what spell he has in his memory to cast each time instead of forgetting said spell after casting.

OfCourse, the brand has other issues that have nothing to do with magic use, but that is another discussion I don't want to delve into.

The point is that there was two distinct ways to do magic mechanics, and one had to be nerfed to keep the other. Not a great start.

thaX wrote:

So...

I have mixed feelings about this change, but need to clarify my overall preference since D&D 3.0.

Why was there two arcane casters who were basically doing the same thing with different mechanics? Why not just use the new mecanic overall in the system instead of keeping the old with the new?

I talk, of course, of the difference between the Wizard (Vacian Caster) vs. the Sorcerer (Spontaneous Caster).

That being said, removing the schools will give the arcane casters overall a better fit into the setting and will set the PF2/PF3 Pathfinder setting in a better position overall. The room to have the wizard grow will likely make the class separate itself from the Sorcerer that much more, and hopefully have ways to recall a spell in place of Memorized ones more than once.

Be interesting to see how the changes will be overall in the caster realm with the rest of the classes from here.

This feels like a strange complaint to air when the PF2 sorcerer isn't actually an arcane caster anymore, but a pick-a-lister. The wizard doesn't really need to differentiate itself from the sorcerer because the sorcerer already did it for them.

The broader point about whether we still need both spontaneous and prepared casting styles is fine, I guess. But it stopped being a wizards vs sorcerer thing five years ago.

It was my initial impression of the two classes in 3.0. I actually like a lot of the workings of the casters in PF2, and the movement of the spell rank acquisition to be the same across the board is welcome in PF2. (the nerf now being less spells and having signature spells to heighten) Choosing from the four basic traditions does give the sorcerer some differences that make it more than just the Wizzard alternative.

I like the PF2 changes, just wish Paizo would have went all the way with spontaneous casting throughout. Something that could have also been done with the remaster as well, but I believe it would be bit more than an "errata" at that point.

I like the PF2 changes, just wish Paizo would have went all the way with spontaneous casting throughout. Something that could have also been done with the remaster as well, but I believe it would be bit more...

I can understand why you would want one consistent style of casting throughout, but personally I like having the split it allows for different styles of magic. Prepared casting allows someone to know and have access to tons of spells, whereas spontaneous limits you (some might feel heavily) to a handful of options. Some people truly enjoy prepared casting.

Unless you're talking about 5e's semi-prepared/semi-spontaneous casting, which tends to favor the prepared casters for power and versatility over the spontaneous and would require even more changes or number of spell slot disparity for casters.

Blave wrote:

Old_Man_Robot wrote:

Blave wrote:

I kind of get why it's level 14. Lower level area damage spells like fireball scale with 2d6 per rank. Adding 1d6 per rank would be a potential damage increase of 50% which is quite a lot.

Well that ratio will always hold true, regardless of the level.

Not really? Chain lightning is a rank 6 spell and deals 8d12, which is close to 16d6. Cone of Cold is rank 5 and deals 12d6.

Those are pre-master numbers of course and might change.

I meant in the case of fireball, as that's what you used in the example. The point was that in the case of the 2d6 scaling of the spell, it doesn't matter where you added the additional 1d6 scaler, it would always be 50% of the 2d6.

So 1st, 8th, 14th, 20th level, it would still scale that way.

Yes, but you shouldn't be using fireball at 14th level. You should be using chain lightning or whatever the new remastered meta blast is. The feat would enhance damage an awful lot for an at will ability that you can trigger on cantrips. Seriously. It's a 50% damage buff on fireball, and more than doubles the damage of Caustic Ray. Do people really think Steady Spellcasting or Bond Conservation can compete with that?

Granted, I hope the lower level spells get buffed to more interesting, but not THAT much. I'd look at the Animist playtest for a more reasonable set of expectations, like Channel's Stance or Overwhelming Energy. They effectively give you a 1 or 2 points per tank damage buff, respectively, at levels 2 and 10. Expecting a 1d6 buff at level 8 was never realistic.

What I think is likely is that the former undisputed best cantrips, electric arc, will probably take a nerf to 2d4 like other multitarget cantrips from Rage of Elements. Meanwhile every other option has had at least a situational buff. And that's generally a good design direction to go in.

It's noteworthy that the other two target cantrip in RoE, Slashing Gust, requires two hands free in order to actually have two targets. Electric Arc is presumably going to have some similar or identical limitation if it even exists anymore.

So it goes boom for some extra damage for one action of a damage type few things are resistant or immune to.

No, it will never do force damage unless the original spell already did force damage or it did typeless damage, which I don't think any AOE spells do. Even Disintegrate may stop doing that in the remaster.

dealing 1d6 force damage per rank of the spell to all creatures within the circle, with a basic Reflex save against your spell DC. If the spell dealt a different type of damage, the circle deals this type of damage instead (or one type of your choice if the spell could deal multiple types of damage).

There at least a couple force AoE spells. Inner Radiance Torrent, and I want to say Repelling Pulse. Not sure if any are Arcane though.

Captain Morgan wrote:

What I think is likely is that the former undisputed best cantrips, electric arc, will probably take a nerf to 2d4 like other multitarget cantrips from Rage of Elements. Meanwhile every other option has had at least a situational buff. And that's generally a good design direction to go in.

It's noteworthy that the other two target cantrip in RoE, Slashing Gust, requires two hands free in order to actually have two targets. Electric Arc is presumably going to have some similar or identical limitation if it even exists anymore.

Slashing Gust also deals 1d4 bleed on a crit and has a 60 foot range, so I'd expect Electric Arc to get something to compensate for the loss of KAS mod. I also don't think it is going to disappear-- it is a PF2 original, right?

There at least a couple force AoE spells. Inner Radiance Torrent, and I want to say Repelling Pulse. Not sure if any are Arcane though.

Xenocrat wrote:

Captain Morgan wrote:

What I think is likely is that the former undisputed best cantrips, electric arc, will probably take a nerf to 2d4 like other multitarget cantrips from Rage of Elements. Meanwhile every other option has had at least a situational buff. And that's generally a good design direction to go in.

It's noteworthy that the other two target cantrip in RoE, Slashing Gust, requires two hands free in order to actually have two targets. Electric Arc is presumably going to have some similar or identical limitation if it even exists anymore.

Slashing Gust also deals 1d4 bleed on a crit and has a 60 foot range, so I'd expect Electric Arc to get something to compensate for the loss of KAS mod. I also don't think it is going to disappear-- it is a PF2 original, right?

Electric Arc losing KAS mod should be enough to make it balanced with other cantrips. Awesome win IMO.

Is there any word about whether Wizards will still be requiring Material Component Pouches?

Is there any word about whether Wizards will still be requiring Material Component Pouches?

None that I've heard, and considering that material components used all the same traits a somatic (ie manipulate), unless something else changes about spell descriptions there may not even be a way to differentiate spells that tale materials and spells that only need gestures. So far we have at least one spell where a material is implied (the needle cantrip alludes to a piece of metal used to form the needles).

It is an unknown to us yet, and an interesting one to me because the component substitutions the mention above were pretty common with material (iirc at least Druid, Cleric, Bard and Sorcerer)

moosher12 wrote:

Is there any word about whether Wizards will still be requiring Material Component Pouches?

None that I've heard, and considering that material components used all the same traits a somatic (ie manipulate), unless something else changes about spell descriptions there may not even be a way to differentiate spells that tale materials and spells that only need gestures. So far we have at least one spell where a material is implied (the needle cantrip alludes to a piece of metal used to form the needles).

It is an unknown to us yet, and an interesting one to me because the component substitutions the mention above were pretty common with material (iirc at least Druid, Cleric, Bard and Sorcerer)

Magus and Summoner too, and Psychic of course.

Interestingly, the description of the playtest Animist's spellcasting doe not mention material at all, not even to replace it. It mentions incantations and gestures. Way it is written, those seem to be the usual spell components for any Remastered caster.

Interestingly, the description of the playtest Animist's spellcasting doe not mention material at all, not even to replace it. It mentions incantations and gestures. Way it is written, those seem to be the usual spell components for any Remastered caster.

I was reading the document specifically to infer whether such item components would be kept. Unfortunately, classes that don't replace material components with another component won't even mention needing such a material, like a wizard won't mention needing a material component pouch. This makes it hard to infer from the animist whether these will be kept or not.

Guess I'll have to wait for the Remaster book to see. But I am curious whether items such as material component pouches, religious symbols, and instruments will no longer be an essential part of spellcasting, (Personally, I think with the direction of the remaster, I rather like the idea of such items no longer being necessary, and doing something like playing an instrument or presenting a symbol could just be a prop to add to the characterization, but no longer actually necessary. I just wish I had an indication of whether that's where they are going with it or not).

Yes, but you shouldn't be using fireball at 14th level. You should be using chain lightning or whatever the new remastered meta blast is. The feat would enhance damage an awful lot for an at will ability that you can trigger on cantrips. Seriously. It's a 50% damage buff on fireball, and more than doubles the damage of Caustic Ray. Do people really think Steady Spellcasting or Bond Conservation can compete with that?

Granted, I hope the lower level spells get buffed to more interesting, but not THAT much. I'd look at the Animist playtest for a more reasonable set of expectations, like Channel's Stance or Overwhelming Energy. They effectively give you a 1 or 2 points per tank damage buff, respectively, at levels 2 and 10. Expecting a 1d6 buff at level 8 was never realistic.

Its a possible 50% damage buff for a 50% increase in actions and a tactic circumstance the enemy either doesn't want to/or can't move out of, also assumes enemy is not dead before your next turn. It costs a feat.

Also doesn't work with chain lightning so not sure why they keeps getting brought up. Fireball is the perfect example. Its pure damage AoE with no debuff. It makes no difference overall whether its 50% at level 6 or 50% at level 14 its the same ratio increase with the same limitations. Bringing it online earlier means more interesting tactical play for low level wizards which is something they desperately need.

It's really going to depend on what other level 14 feats are available. Feats compete against each other whether optimizing for damage or choosing a feat that suits from RP or thematic purpose.

When I read this level 14 feat, it seems attractive to me absent seeing anything else. It's something I can do over and over again for 1 action for extra damage at range. Do I wish it went off at the same time? Sure, but that would be too powerful, make every other bonus damage feat look terrible. So it goes off the next round making it more situational, but still powerful.

You have to think of it in base form: it's a 1 action feat usable as often as you feel like that adds extra damage to your evocation spells. That's pretty cool for a blaster wizard. I'd take that on an evoker and use it a bunch. Even if it lands 50% of the time, it's extra damage for 1 action and a feat that I can use so often it's bound to show its value.

It doesn't even require a focus point. It requires 1 action and an AoE spell. It seems like a very high value feat based on a low resource cost and high value return throughout an adventuring day.

For maximum coolness, I wish they could have kept the old schools (including their Thassilonian cousins) by filing off the serial numbers. Many of the school names precede Wizards of the Coast and TSR by more time than that company lineage has existed, and thus would not be subject to copyright. Then superimpose the new schools on them.

1 action to either do more damage or force enemy movement is tactically interesting and good

Just wish it was level 8

At 8 it competes with bond conservation, and 10 competes with scroll savant, 14 it competes with superior bond. It's in a tight spot

For maximum coolness, I wish they could have kept the old schools (including their Thassilonian cousins) by filing off the serial numbers. Many of the school names precede Wizards of the Coast and TSR by more time than that company lineage has existed, and thus would not be subject to copyright. Then superimpose the new schools on them.

There is a difference between 'actually legally actionable' and 'not truly legally actionable but could still be the subject of a long and expensive court battle'. I'm pretty sure WotC does have the IP for spell schools but even if they didn't, they might still decide that it's worth the money to knock one of their biggest competitors down a peg. WotC's control of the market share is larger by an order of magnitude. Using that kind of disparity to bully smaller companies is a time honored corporate tactic.

UnArcaneElection wrote:

For maximum coolness, I wish they could have kept the old schools (including their Thassilonian cousins) by filing off the serial numbers. Many of the school names precede Wizards of the Coast and TSR by more time than that company lineage has existed, and thus would not be subject to copyright. Then superimpose the new schools on them.

There is a difference between 'actually legally actionable' and 'not truly legally actionable but could still be the subject of a long and expensive court battle'. I'm pretty sure WotC does have the IP for spell schools but even if they didn't, they might still decide that it's worth the money to knock one of their biggest competitors down a peg. WotC's control of the market share is larger by an order of magnitude. Using that kind of disparity to bully smaller companies is a time honored corporate tactic.

And sometimes also to buy them and thereby kill the competition.

For maximum coolness, I wish they could have kept the old schools (including their Thassilonian cousins) by filing off the serial numbers. Many of the school names precede Wizards of the Coast and TSR by more time than that company lineage has existed, and thus would not be subject to copyright. Then superimpose the new schools on them.

I think we will some day have the Thassilonian schools. Just like we will one day get redone Chromatic and Metallic dragons.

The schools will likely go by their Sin/Virtue name though.

They've already confirmed that we will have Thassilonian Sin schools. And that they were actually one of the inspirations for the change as a whole.

They've already confirmed that we will have Thassilonian Sin schools. And that they were actually one of the inspirations for the change as a whole.

This isn't quite what was said. Yes it was part of the inspiration of the new schools. They haven't confirmed that we are going to get them just that they would make them if they became needed.

When the time is right, we'll produce remastered information from a rules AND lore perspective for runelords, both the PC option and the in-world villains. That time is not in any of the Player Core or GM Core books, and is thus not going to be a "day 1" update. We'll get there eventually, but in the meantime, if you build a runelord using the pre-remastered rules, they'll still play fine side by side in your home game with any remastered content. It's still 2nd Edition Pathfinder. (That said, if you want your runelord PC to prepare remastered spells, you as the player and your GM will have to make some judgement calls as to what spells are in what schools in the short term.)

Not to harp on Paizo but they have said they would get to many things over the years eventually that we are still waiting on.

I am hopeful but I also won't cross my fingers.

Cori Marie wrote:

They've already confirmed that we will have Thassilonian Sin schools. And that they were actually one of the inspirations for the change as a whole.

This isn't quite what was said. Yes it was part of the inspiration of the new schools. They haven't confirmed that we are going to get them just that they would make them if they became needed.

James Jacobs wrote:

When the time is right, we'll produce remastered information from a rules AND lore perspective for runelords, both the PC option and the in-world villains. That time is not in any of the Player Core or GM Core books, and is thus not going to be a "day 1" update. We'll get there eventually, but in the meantime, if you build a runelord using the pre-remastered rules, they'll still play fine side by side in your home game with any remastered content. It's still 2nd Edition Pathfinder. (That said, if you want your runelord PC to prepare remastered spells, you as the player and your GM will have to make some judgement calls as to what spells are in what schools in the short term.)

Not to harp on Paizo but they have said they would get to many things over the years eventually that we are still waiting on.

I am hopeful but I also won't cross my fingers.

Knowing Xanderghul will one day be back in the stories, and seeing how PC option and in-world villains are mentioned side by side, I have good hope for this eventually.

More than for the Synthesist Summoner.

It's really going to depend on what other level 14 feats are available. Feats compete against each other whether optimizing for damage or choosing a feat that suits from RP or thematic purpose.

When I read this level 14 feat, it seems attractive to me absent seeing anything else. It's something I can do over and over again for 1 action for extra damage at range. Do I wish it went off at the same time? Sure, but that would be too powerful, make every other bonus damage feat look terrible. So it goes off the next round making it more situational, but still powerful.

You have to think of it in base form: it's a 1 action feat usable as often as you feel like that adds extra damage to your evocation spells. That's pretty cool for a blaster wizard. I'd take that on an evoker and use it a bunch. Even if it lands 50% of the time, it's extra damage for 1 action and a feat that I can use so often it's bound to show its value.

It doesn't even require a focus point. It requires 1 action and an AoE spell. It seems like a very high value feat based on a low resource cost and high value return throughout an adventuring day.

The extra damage is right around a two action single target cantrip; shaving off an action in exchange for giving the target the option to move out of the way seems pretty fair to me; especially since unlike a focus spell that does similar damage, like elemental toss, it doesn't cost resources at all. I have a hard time imagining when forcing an enemy to either take damage or move (and possibly even procing a reactive strike) wouldn't be a fun way to use my filler action. Plus if metamagic mastery gets converted into something like spellshape specialist or w/e; it's straight up a nearly 50% circumstantial damage boost to most bread and butter blasting spells

It would be good if they fix some Focus spells to be worth and adding more thesis with levels instead getting only one at first.

Will wizards be limited to their spell choice based on their curriculum or will they be able to dabble in other areas?

Will wizards be limited to their spell choice based on their curriculum or will they be able to dabble in other areas?

Only the extra spell slot per rank you get from your school are limited by your curriculum. The regular spell slots work as they always did and can hold any spell on the arcane spell list you know.