AestheticDialectic's page

By that line of thought you might need to have strength and constitution to really use heavy armor and shields. Shields are exhausting to use as they are meant to be used and would require cardio and strength.

and bows of any significant poundage to actually deal damage, particularly to armored targets, would requires a whole hell of a lot of strength... Lol

Riddlyn wrote:

NorrKnekten wrote:

I believe paizo did state that they had plans for Secrets of Magic and Dark Archive remasters. Similar to how Guns and Gears were remastered.

Dark Archives might be able to get a G&G style remaster, I think that'd be a very tough job for Secrets of Magic. Way to much has changed in the remaster getting away from the OGL.

It's also notable that we've seen stuff taken from SoM and put into other remaster books. Elementalist showed up in Rage of Elements. Runelord in Rival Academies.

Hard to imagine they're planning to reprint the book normally after stripping away some of its features.

I could see Magus and Summoner reprinted in the book the Rune Smith and Necromancer are in, but I don't remember why I thought this originally

I just straight up don't like jailbreaking spells being relegated to a level 4 feat. I do think it should be in the chassis and upgrade-able with feats. I'm on board with it just applying two spellshapes, but it competing with other level 4 feats, and not being a guarantee when it was the whole reason the class was cool just seems to miss the mark imo. I don't think it's particularly interesting to take a class with a unique feature that was core to it, in order to make it into a class that buffs items and gets to swap spells which is just unfortunately really boring when it's actually laid out like this

Yeah, I personally think jailbreak spell is the coolest thing the class does, but I also agree that jailbreaks should maybe just be spellshapes and the feature allow you to mix and match two spellshapes

Idk about letting class DC scale to legendary, maybe master is fine enough, but I would say this also means DPS++ will still struggle to do anything with it's gun benefit later on and I don't think we can justify buffing their ability to hit with guns much at all

I also remember talking with you and talking about overclock becoming a focus spell, and probably same with download cache. The class starting with 2(or 3?) focus points. Jailbreak then still costs 1 extra action and a focus point to set up in order to apply to spellshapes to one spell, and does come at the cost of download cache and their subclass focus spell, whatever it ends up being. Not sure if it should remain a spellshape or become a tech focused spell

In some ways I think we should have two spells per rank of cache spells, but it's not a huge deal I don't think

The main thing though I think would help is still that I think they should get class specific feats for the computers skill to enhance their ability to interface with tech while not fighting for space with the other really cool class feats

It's funny that we have two dinosaur avatars discussing evolution, and hairless ones splitting hairs.

I do plan to go back to school for either paleontology, evolutionary biology or simply to do paleoart, but suffice to say, I love animals alive and dead, and most especially dinosaurs(birds included) :)

But I like your additions which help bring clarity to what I wanted to communicate

Golarion clearly seems to have actual evolution at play, and magic just complicates the narrative but things clearly have all the mechanisms necessary, genes, genetic mutation, and environmental pressures

I don't know how the people in charge of lore wanna square the circle but I have always been a proponent of making humanoid fantasy races all human in the phylogenetic sense and this sharing a common ancestor. Orcs, Dwarves, Halfings, Gnomes, Elves, and probably even Goblins, are all clearly kinds of human. They're more like us than we are like chimps/bonobos. There can be wrinkles, gnomes are influenced by the first world, maybe a god liked humans so much they made their own kind, whatever, but to my mind, they're all taxonomically/phylogenetically human

I also just don't think our modern minds can conceive of animals existing without the process of evolution when we try and think about it hard enough. So it is bound to show up in fantasy these days

Gonna split hairs here, I apologize...

Intelligent Design is an alternative explanation to the Evolution of Species via Natural Selection, and Evolution(which is what I'll shorten this to) is not dependent on abiogenesis(life emerging entirely from natural processes with no supernatural influence)

So, basically gods, or God, can create the universe, and even go as far as planting the first seeds of life, and Evolution is not impacted by this. Intelligent Design specifically would be stating that each species is create from whole cloth as it is now and there is no process of mutation, genetic drift, environmental pressures causing drastic enough changes for species to change. Hence the terminology "created kinds" within creationism and intelligent design

I'll be clear, proponents of Intelligent Design for the most part seemingly do not know that Evolution is not predictated on abiogenesis and so their argumentation against Evolution lumps these in together

I'd personally lean in favor of giving the Technomancer a full deck of magic hacks, i.e. focus spells, at level 1: Download Spell? Make that a single-action focus spell instead of a free action every 10 minutes. Overclock Gear? Make that another single-action focus spell that you can activate on its own, instead of this thing tied to casting a slot spell. And with that, you'd get to give the Technomancer much more to do without dipping into their spell slots, and so without affecting their existing mechanics by all that much. The added benefit is that it would also let you choose how much of each aspect you want to lean into: want to just overclock? You can do that. Want to fully lean into the spellshape? You can do that. Want to just switch to your cached spells? Can do. Want to do one of each every encounter? That's something you can do too!

If overclock becomes a focus spell, I think it should be able to affect more than one thing and not just on your person. I also think it and overclocking after casting a slotted spell should exist simultaneously because I do think you shouldn't be stuck only able to do one jailbreak per focus point. Unless that gets overhauled.

I could see a technomancer at level one with 3 focus spells for download cache, overclock and jailbreak, you getting to choose between the three abilities each combat. This technomancer would not have other kinds of focus spells and that would be replaced by feats that enhance these focus spells, and finally like I mentioned before, technomancer specific skill feats for the computers skill in order to do stuff like combat hack at range etc

It's pretty obvious that the Spell Cache/Download Spell options are inspired by or codeveloped with the recently released new version Runelord archetype for PF2.

But the Runelord has a universal list of spells that all Runelords can swap to replace a prepared spell plus a rune specific list. It might be a good idea to give all Technomancers a shared list of utility/generic tech spells (e.g. delete and discharge) as part of their Spell Cache and then add on programming language specific stuff. That would allow them to be better than other arcane casters at flexibly overcoming tech problems with spells.

I'm alright with this. Frankly I wish they had four different traditions in Starfinder that matched the setting, and then had a conversion guide which said "if playing this class in Pathfinder replace the tech magic tradition with the arcane" or whatever, but we're well beyond that point

Being able to use Computers actions from a distance, and potentially also on multiple devices at once, sounds like a no-brainer feat or series of feats on this class.

I was thinking about this sorta thing specifically at work today. I don't know if there is any precedent outside of archetypes, but what if technomancer got technomancer specific skill feats for this? One of my issues is that a lot of feats on the class look really good already and choosing some glorified skill actions for flavor at the expense of some of the cool feats the class already has is quite difficult, but maybe if they take up a skill feat then we might be cooking

I do think that the technomancer is treating magic like technology more than treating technology like magic. Which I prefer, but I also, idk. You can do a lot of what is being asked for with already existing spells and with skills. Frankly with how the class should/would play as written, it seems clear to me overclocking is a ribbon feature that is the action tax to do your class ability of hacking spells. I see the flavor as the spells being programs themselves and you're hacking spell programs. No divide between magic and tech exists here imo

This is why I asked op what they wanted in specific. I'd like to know what we are replacing to do what and what the benefit is. Already I think it is clear that the class is going to have minimal hardware focused tech abilities because of the mechanic. So this is my assumption. I also find it interesting people are pointing to the original class which has the same criticism of "being a wizard in space" with little tech actually involved

If I designed the class we'd have focus spells that summoned turrets and guns, robots etc. but admittedly that's what the mechanic does

AestheticDialectic wrote:

I like that this class is a techno wizard and not a techno druid/animist. I like it being an intelligence caster who is exploiting the barriers and synergies between magic and technology, and who is "hacking reality".

I'm really struggling to hear how this isn't just the Witchwarper.

The witch warper explicitly deals in different dimensions and timelines, and the technomancer doesn't. Seems pretty different to me

This is true, though making it a focus spell also means it cuts down on the number of frequency-gated stuff you get, as right now it's essentially a pseudo-focus spell you'll be able to use alongside everything else you'd get, including at 3 FP. Giving it an action cost as a tradeoff to put it on par with others means you could theoretically get the option to switch to 3 cached spells in an encounter (effectively all of your spells at level 2), but at the cost of overclocking or spellshaping, so it'd be like a deck of limited hacks per encounter to layer on top of your spells and gear.

Yeah, and this is what I meant by opportunity cost. Right now it is a free action, but as an action focus spell you may well be right and I think this is a worthwhile idea for paizo to play test and stress test because it seems really cool

I've just read over it quickly so far, and my opinion may shift, but I'm in full agreement with the OP as it stands.

Technomancer right now looks like a Spellhacker, and very much NOT the "druid/animist of technology" that I would like to see. Everything is hyper focused on modifying spells, which is only a portion of the fantasy of a Technomancer.

There should be things like Voice of Nature (Animal Empathy but for computers/AI/programs/robots/drones) and Wildsong (Secret machine language known only by technomancers and some tech entities), or things in that vein.

Focus spells being only for modifying actual spells is also a missed opportunity. Focus spells were added to the game specifically to let players engage in a specific class fantasy more frequently and reliably. Using them for metamagic is one flavor (though that fantasy would 1000% be shared by something like an Arcanist from 1e or an Experimental Spellshaping Wizard, there's a lot of toe stepping going on if we're all-in on metamagic as Technomancers' *thing*), but the other flavor is "doing things with tech objects and programs in-world in a way that other characters can't".

Imagine a focus spell that let you augment all AI processes in the vicinity, or one that lets you physically enter a computer/tablet/comm unit, or one that lets you be treated as a Construct, or create semi-real objects from a video game, or or or

There should also be more feats for utility and interacting with the world outside of spells.

I'll say that I don't like the idea of the technomancer being about communing with technology and computers, the idea of machine spirits, or anything druid-y. I like that this class is a techno wizard and not a techno druid/animist. I like it being an intelligence caster who is exploiting the barriers and synergies between magic and technology, and who is "hacking reality". I think there is a place in the game for this tech priest/techno-animist in the game, but I don't think it is the technomancer. I also think the mechanic getting a class archetype like spellshot but with technomancer dedication instead of wizard to bridge that gap would be cool

On paper I like the direction of this class very much, as I liked necromancer. I frankly just want the kinks ironed out. So I am very into this class as presented with only concerns for levels 1-4 in a game play experience sense, and not a thematic one. Which I think this class is extremely on point with, personally

AestheticDialectic wrote:

Doesn't overclock have the same issue as spellshapes?

Not if they increase the amount of times your character is engaging with pieces of technology.

Something that alters technology, is innately more technological then "I extend the range of my spell".

Quote:

same with ammo infector and root virus.

Those two aability does the type of stuff I want because it has you actually hack technology. Not just flavour, it does the thing in a way that alters how the gameplay. If someone reflavoured it to be plant based for some reason, that wouldn't change that it is directly engaging with technological things. They'd still be hacking robots mid-fight and taking them over, which is technological stuff.

Quote:

]Is it just that the spellshapes don't explicitly reference technology?

I want mechanically represented stuff. There is nothing that makes "My spells range longer" feel technological to me. While something that causes enemy armour to explode or for you to be able to commune with an enemies weapon to try and get them to leap out of their hands to disarm them or something, that'd be something you can point at and see directly that it is doing something technological in the world.

You said yourself that overclocking could just be enchanting, and I am saying you could just have a plant that sends out electrical spores that does the effects as Root Virus. To some extent I think you just want the mechanic to be called a technomancer. The mechanic is really really cool, and does a lot of what you're asking for. To some extent we can call them a "technology kineticist"

Again, modifying spells is not tech-y to me anymore then it'd be gardening-y to me if they decided to flavour the class around plant-named things if it was a PF class and called Botanomancer.

As for specific examples for things that can enrich the fantasy, provide more options for overclocking style stuff than just the one you get from your subclass, have many more feats that tie into technology such as Ammo Infector and Root Virus rather than them being rare. Have spellshapes that leverage and engage with technology better then "I can spend an action to make an area spells use the worse radius of a grenade".

Especially at level 1 & 2 it'd be good to have some, as earliest you can get a tech tied feat is 4th level from what I can see, and that's a good amount of sessions not getting to actually fulfil the fantasy advertised anymore then playing a wizard/sorcerer/witchwarper/etc would.

Doesn't overclock have the same issue as spellshapes? I could flavor it as a plant thing too, same with ammo infector and root virus. Root is even in the name. Is it just that the spellshapes don't explicitly reference technology?

AestheticDialectic wrote:

What if the technomancer has their spellshape focus spell from their subclass and a focus spell that simply overclocks something that is just given as a baseline part of the chassis (2 focus point to start). And nothing else is changed, no loss in power or abilities. Does this solve the issue?

Further clarification you can overclock normally with a slotted spell, or by using said focus spell. Both work

I support this as well. 2 Focus Points at level 1 is relatively strong, but I do think there's room for it on the Technomancer's chassis, and it would preserve both the spell-hacking component and enhance the tech overclocking aspect. If you wanted to push it, I'd even support dropping the class to cloth caster proficiency to make Download Spell a focus spell too with an action cost, so the class would have the unique feature of starting with 3 Focus Points (which tbf the Psychic could benefit from too with their much stronger amps).

The idea of starting with 3 is interesting, but somehow feels like we are pushing our luck lol. But I do think download spell could be slightly improved by either making the feat that lets you add to the cache lower or giving each subclass two spells per rank. It's especially easy to argue for this if the feature costs a focus point. Though the unintented side effect is you can hypothetically change 3 spells every combat. It does have an opportunity cost, but paizo could also just put a phrase like "use this only once per ten minutes" or something similar if the opportunity cost isn't high enough

Have stuff relating to technology. Actual technology.

What I'm trying to get at is what you want here. What tech things do you want them to do in specific. Stuff not already covered by computers and crafting skills.

You said spellshapes don't feel like hacking because other classes can do it, and wizards get the thesis, but crucially the thesis doesn't have anything like jailbreaks which enhance and expand spellshapes. Frankly the thesis barely does anything. I'm not sure what we expect a fullcaster who is technology themed to do besides cast technologically themed spells and modify them like code. This is why I am asking specifically what you want in concrete terms. I don't want to misinterpret what your desires actually are. I am getting the sense that retheming the mechanic to be using magic with their tech is more what you want, but I am not certain and that's why I am asking

Also... I know the blurb off-handedly mentions "machine spirits" but that feels occult and not technomancer-y to me at all, frankly. Too 40k coded for my tastes. But that is neither here nor there.

I do think the issue isn't so much that the Technomancer is a 3-slot caster, but more that the Mystic and Witchwarper were 4-slot casters with a meaty base chassis on top. That was a majorly complained-about element of the playtest, and it looks to me like the Starfriends have tuned down the balancing to match Pathfinder's more closely, with the Technomancer being one of the results.

What I will say, however, is that being a 3-slot caster might be a problem still for the Technomancer, not so much because the class is weak (some of their mechanics look super-strong, especially Download Spell), but because their rank 1 and 3 focus spells are all spellshapes, meaning that once they run out of spell slots, their only fallback options will be cantrips, which at levels 3-4 especially would be quite a sharp drop. As much as I like the fantasy of hacking into magic and want that preserved, I do think this ought to be the opportunity to move the gear overclocking to focus spells, rather than a class feature that requires you to spend a spell slot first, so that you can then get a free-action spellshape in the fight (which, again, piles on a resource cost). Not only would this make the class less resource-hungry, it'd also put their techno aspect more to the forefront, as that's been one of the more immediate criticisms of the class right now.

What if the technomancer has their spellshape focus spell from their subclass and a focus spell that simply overclocks something that is just given as a baseline part of the chassis (2 focus point to start). And nothing else is changed, no loss in power or abilities. Does this solve the issue?

Further clarification you can overclock normally with a slotted spell, or by using said focus spell. Both work

I suppose all I can say is that if my player wanted to play a technomancer and came to me for direction, I probably wouldn't specifically direct them to the technomancer because it's not any better at providing that flavour then any other casting class in PF2e/SF2e.

To me, having metamagic != feeling techy. So I would like to see more support for playing a techno-mancer. Maybe take inspiration from the introduction section of the class and let them talk with computer spirits and stuff.

Isn't talking with computer spirits more, idk psychic/medium, occult feeling thematically? What exactly do you want the class to do? Why do you feel like changing the parameters and effects of spells isn't like hacking?

I do think there's value in versatility; if we were all specialists we wouldn't have the arcane list to begin with, and Pathfinder Society play I think would be a lot less stable given how you don't know who you're going to land with.

To give an example of a skill setup: in addition to Arcana and Computers, your Technomancer could also pick Nature, Occultism, and Religion to cover their creature RK bases, then choose from a combination of Acrobatics, Athletics, Medicine, Piloting, and Thievery to make sure you can handle a variety of basic rolls competently. You won't really need Untrained Improvisation, but that's only because the feat covers the key benefit of Intelligence as an attribute, not the other way round.

Well, the versatility of spells is often considered poor game design, but I'm not going to get into the weeds of that because it's obviously nuanced, and complicated. Regardless I think there is a difference between versatility and being a generalist. Rogues end up as generalists in skills even though they really could just be taking the dex skills plus a couple skills important for the character concept, and likewise I don't think we *need* medicine and thievery on most or all technomancer, nor religion and nature. I do understand your point about wanting to be able to fill gaps in PFS specifically, but I don't know if that is solvable without giving everyone their level to all skill checks. I do wanna clarify, I meant 8th skills for a wizard not a techno. I agree more that techno should get 2+int or 3+int because of the additional two skills. Piloting feels mandatory for every character to have and I almost wish it was treated like perception

AestheticDialectic wrote:

The metamagic is the tech. You're treating spells like software, like a program. The overclock thing is kind of tertiary imo. I think it just exists to jailbreak, but the fact the class has such a modular design to the gameplay is very tech-y. I know you and others said it's "just flavor" but so is enchanting robes as you mentioned. If I had to make a stab here it's that you, like myself, wanted more hardware focused stuff

So if the class was exactly the same, but used gardening words as the names for the metamagic then it'd fulfil the fantasy of being a botany-mancer fine despite having no real connection to botany or plants? At this point, mystical witchwarper would be an equally valid technomancer if you just said "oh they do their magic by hacking their magic".

Mystics have mechanics that represent them being connected to things beyond just how they flavour their casting. Witchwarpers are able to warp reality beyond just how they flavour their casting. Why can't technomancers have something to do with tech aside with their actual class features.

Xenocrat wrote:

Don Draper yelling "That's what the money is for!" voice: That's what the prepared arcane spells are for!

So witches & wizards fit the bill just as much and would be valid technomancers for you without modification?

If witchwarper was prepared, would it be a technomancer?

Well, only if we try to make spellshapes and jailbreaks into some grafting metaphor could we maybe get there, but you're saying something true of game design on the whole for these things. You can hypothetically reflavor anything as damn near anything. Spellshapes and jailbreaks specifically feel tech-y and like hacking because you're changing the function of spells on the fly and making them more modular. Which is a better mechanic to flavor as tech-y than the Witchwatper's or Mystic's, but I do think you could brute force those two into having technomancer flavor as you could with nearly anything, but it wouldn't feel as tech-y as what the technomancer has now

Starfinder classes certainly felt to me as being wildly overtuned...

I mean, you say this, but the Mechanic from the same playtest gets 8 starting trained skills, as do the Alchemist, the Commander, the Inventor, the Psychic with an Int subconscious mind, and the Witch (not counting the Investigator, who gets 10 but is meant to be a skill monkey). Because two of these classes are spellcasters, including even one that can be a prepared arcane spellcaster, casting spells clearly does not force you to have fewer trained skills. Similarly, having more trained skills via Int is not used as an excuse for these classes to have fewer trained skills, so you could very well pick some more useful skills like Medicine or Athletics, neither of which need to be boosted via skill increases to have some worthwhile uses, on top of useful knowledge skills like Nature and Religion (again, which don't need to be boosted to be useful in many circumstances).

With this in mind, it's not so much an obsession with symmetry, as it is a rejection of this underlying convention where dedicated prepared arcane casters, who also happen to be Int-based (though many Magi won't boost their Int by much), have less than the otherwise minimal number of starting trained skills. This convention does not need to exist, is the point, and the fact that it is maintained I think just makes the balancing around these classes feel pettier than intended. Certainly not a hill to die on, it's just a minor annoyance that need not exist, particular as all the arguments about how this would devalue certain feats or whatever are nonsense given all the other class who do just fine with that amount of trained skills.

Truthfully I'm not a fan of the amount of skills any of those classes get either. It's for me more than it feels soup-y, but I also don't like the concept of "skill monkey" classes. To me it seems to incentivize being too much of a generalist in a team game where we all pick our lane to cover weaknesses. But it is neither here nor there, I'm just not sure what we are picking for that 8th skill

I think the magic hacks are a problem in the way they deny the technomancer the primary benefit of what focus spells are are supposed to be: a replenishable source of combat ammunition that is stronger than a cantrip but weaker than a slot and doesn't require spending a slot. Almost all of them (weakly) enhance a slotted spell or provide a utility benefit, which you may not have (at 3 slots/level) or want to spend.

Admittedly 1 action to teleport or an energy shield are good focus spells comparable to options that psychics and other casters have had before. But they didn't make you cast a slotted spell first, and there's zero offensive options. (The "change energy type" one doesn't really count.)

The first Viper one is kind of sneaky good as a way to double the use of spell gems via replenishable focus spells, letting you "buy" extra slotted spells at half price, but it's still not sustainable.

If you could apply some of them, or some of the benefits to cantrips, that might solve the issue. Right now the limiter is the overclock which requires a slotted spell, but jailbreaks themselves and the spellshapes can be applied to cantrips. At levels 1 and 2 it's simply an unreasonable ask that the technomancer cast a slotted spell every combat, at levels 3 and 4 it is a big ask but doable, and finally at 5 we can start to cast at least one spell a combat in a given day, and as you go up you'll eventually just be able to chain them as you want. Hypothetically. So whatever solution is necessary needs to be for levels 1 and 2 imo, and that can just be allowing you to overclock with cantrips, but maybe have a bonus if the spell is slotted

I don't want to much homogeneity where every caster has focus spells that do what you said as you said and I appreciate that these are more like what the psychic does with amps, but more versatile

3 slots AND 6hp is pretty brutal. As far as I'm concerned a class should follow the wizard/sorc paradigm or "the rest" paradigm for caster proficiencies in regards to their number of slots (witch and physic being outliers). If mystic and ww lose a slot, then they should keep the 8hp and armor. Otherwise they can keep the 4 slots and lose health/armor

I think their class abilities and feats would get stronger and more impactful for the trade off and 6hp makes compatibility with pathfinder better. I suggested that the meta be accounted for by equipment and not class chassis, and I'm hoping they did this and so 6hp will be mitigated this way, but wishful thinking until we see the core book. I think they will all retain light armor though

They don't do much software-y stuff though? If you had a metamagic focused wizard who also sometimes enchants his robes to defend him, most would not call that a tech class.

The metamagic is the tech. You're treating spells like software, like a program. The overclock thing is kind of tertiary imo. I think it just exists to jailbreak, but the fact the class has such a modular design to the gameplay is very tech-y. I know you and others said it's "just flavor" but so is enchanting robes as you mentioned. If I had to make a stab here it's that you, like myself, wanted more hardware focused stuff

AestheticDialectic wrote:

I personally only think they should have Arcana, Computers and 2+Int because Starfinder has two extra skills, computers being one, and that transferring the class to Pathfinder is Arcana 2+Int this way, instead of Arcana 1+Int. I can image a lot of players wanting to play this but calling it a wizard

This is also true, you could easily port the class over to Pathfinder by replacing the Computers proficiency with another trained skill. I guess part of this is also me wanting the Wizard and Magus to have one extra trained skill, as I do think 4 trained skills in total ought to be the bare minimum before factoring in Int, but if we're going to stick purely to the Technomancer, the argument applies to them as well.

I don't care enough to say it shouldn't happen, but I don't know why anyone cares this much. I certainly think skills and spells compete for your attention, and that there is something lost when too many skills get filled in. Wizards start with 7 trained skills. After we run down the list of all the int skills, Arcana, Society, Occult, Crafting, we maybe grab something generally useful like acrobatics, and then maybe two flavor skills, we hit 7, what are we grabbing with 8 that is so important? I'm not a mind reader but it feels more like an obsession with mathematical symmetry than with play design. 7 skills is already a lot and typically only 3 will be legendary. This also devalues the untrained improvisation style feats, and as you level you'll already get 2 more trained skills. I'm always just picking "idk, something ig" when picking those, so I don't know what people want that one extra skill for. I think this argument is maybe stronger for the magus who often has +2 int instead of +4, but for a wizard, idk. We aren't even talking about skills given by backgrounds either

On one hand, I applaud the Starfriends for taking on board feedback from the initial phase of the playtest and tuning their balancing to match that of PF2e more closely. With perhaps one or two exceptions, I think the new playtest doc really shows that the devs aren't just using the top end of numbers each time now, and I'd feel much more comfortable having these new classes play alongside PF2e classes, despite how these two feel almost like direct upgrades to the Inventor and Wizard.

On the other hand, I also think prepared Intelligence arcane casters having less than the normal minimum of base skills in 2e is a silly convention that doesn't need to be carried over to the Technomancer. Yes, you get more trained skills from Intelligence, and the class is really flexible already by virtue of being prepared and arcane, but prepared arcane spellcasting I think is already balanced via a spellbook mechanic (or in the Technomancer's case, a spell cache), and other Intelligence classes don't get saddled with this same limitation. Giving the now-three prepared arcane casters in 2e an extra trained skill at 1st level I think is unlikely to overpower them, and would eliminate a long-standing annoyance players have had with this specific subset of classes.

I personally only think they should have Arcana, Computers and 2+Int because Starfinder has two extra skills, computers being one, and that transferring the class to Pathfinder is Arcana 2+Int this way, instead of Arcana 1+Int. I can image a lot of players wanting to play this but calling it a wizard

I thought about it for a while, and I think that what I wanted where the technomancer was conjuring artillery and magically constructing machines, walls, turrets, and guns, steps on the toes of the mechanic and that's why they have a split between hardware(mechanic) and software(technomancer). Hacking is definitionally tech, and they are absolutely treating magic like technology and like a code. So I see no issue outside the fact I was hoping for something hardware/mechanical focused, but I understand why I didn't get that

I was someone that complained about WW and Mystic being 4 slot, so I'm personally really happy to see a 3 slot caster and am hopeful those classes will be toned down at release like they should be. That said, the adjustment doesn't treat Technomancer very nicely and I think they'll struggle quite bad unless we get staves (or equivalent) in SF2

I suspect both are 3/level now, and 6hp instead of 8, but that's speculation on my part

I do think that the question of what a Wizard is or should be could become much easier to answer in a game system where thematic casters were much more common, or even the norm. PF2e isn't a game that accommodates thematic casters super-well for the most part, and when people expect one, many will turn to the Wizard despite the Wizard being arguably the least specialized caster in the game. Part of that I think comes from the Wizard in past editions being able to spec into a specific school of magic, and part of it I think is that the Wizard is such a nebulous term outside of the TTRPG space that most fictional mages get lumped in as Wizards. In a game that had a dedicated illusionist, a dedicated necromancer (which we're getting!), and perhaps a few more casters that broach a theme normally covered by the Wizard, the Wizard could stand out specifically as the kind of class that can cover multiple basis at some tradeoff. I don't think this necessarily means making a brand-new class for every OGL school of magic, as I don't personally think there's that much narrative meat to a dedicated evoker or abjurer class besides a runelord, but it could certainly help the Wizard if they didn't try to carve lots of niches at once, nor were expected to satisfy a playerbase's desire for both extreme specialization and extreme versatility.

My ideal solution is that we get classes like Necromancer, Illusionist/Mesmer, Warmage whatever, and those are all specific classes with bespoke feats, but they are all under a "super class" of "wizard" which would be a list of feats across all of these thematic specialized wizards. Wizard itself would not be a class, and you couldn't take multiclass dedications of other wizard classes except by variant rule. These classes can have different baseline abilities, not have to reprint feats such as quicken spell and effortless concentration in a book saving space, and they could use different tradition's spell lists if that makes sense for them

I do think the point stands. In Tolkien's works, the five wizards are all servants of great angelic figures and their magic comes from their own divine nature, as well as their training. In the world of Earthsea, wizards are born with magical ability that they then train later, and similarly the wizard Merlin derives his own powers from his demon father. What counts as a wizard varies immensely from fiction to fiction, to the point where the similarities are often entirely aesthetic (i.e. pointy hat, magic, and a staff). Thus, there will inevitably be at least some players who won't find the exact Wizard they want, and that shouldn't be an obstacle to dig into the identity Paizo chose for their class, which is that of an arcane spellcaster whose magic derives entirely from study. That in and of itself is a rich identity to draw from, and part of the issue the Wizard has right now isn't so much that their core identity is lacking, but that their options only draw from an extremely limited facet of their identity, as opposed to a greater totality.

and more to the point sorcery is almost always associated with learned magic in fantasy media EXCEPT d20 fantasy. Which really just consists of two games. Dark Souls sorcerers are intelligence based studious practitioners of magic, Diablo same deal, Rune Quest has editions where sorcery is the learned magic and so on. It's extremely rare that the word "sorcery" refers to innate magic

Deriven Firelion wrote:

R3st8 wrote:

I wonder why its so hard to get this one class right but others are relatively ok some even great, what is so special about the wizard?

In fantasy, Merlin, Gandalf, Raistlin, Saruman, Morgana Le Fay, Bayaz, Circe, and the list of fantasy wizards could go on.

Gandalf, Saruman, and the Istari from LotR are really more Clerics than Wizards in d20 terms, and aren't the best example, in fairness.

I've seen this contested. Frankly they still count. If they're not wizards, then they are angels or something equivalent. They're certainly not clerics

But I disagree with the thrust of Deriven's point. "wizard" is a catch all, even in fantasy, and has no discernable difference between itself and sorcerer, warlock, mage, whatever. The game could easily lose the wizard class and lose nothing

Unicore wrote:

One thing that is probably too late to do much about, but could still be implemented going forward is that there are way too many common spells of every tradition. New books having common spells was a mistake in my opinion because the just gave it all away to druids and clerics when more uncommon spells would have had every class interact more with the learning spells mechanic.

I feel this is solid grounds for imposing a spellbook mechanic on all prepared casters. I don’t think rarity tags should be used just to make spells less accessible (rarity usually indicates the spell isn’t appropriate for every campaign), but I do very much agree that prepared casters like the Cleric and Druid have benefited from a huge amount of option creep, one of many kinds of power creep. Although 2e won’t last literally forever, every common spell it adds to the divine and primal lists gives those classes more tools and 2e-caliber silver bullets, so at this rate those traditions will inevitably equal the versatility of the on-release arcane tradition, if it hasn’t happened already. Not only that, but unrestricted spell preparation erases a lot of the differentiation among those classes when they can switch to each other’s spell loadouts overnight, which is why so many Druids in particular feel like they play the same. Limiting all spell prep to a a subset of spells in the tradition’s list would level the playing field, cap option creep, enable more differentiation, and make spell learning more universally valuable. It wouldn’t directly benefit the Wizard, necessarily, but they’d feel less limited by comparison, and this could be one more opportunity to let them shine by letting them do much more with their own spellbook than other prepared casters with their respective spell repositories.

I would argue that clerics and druid perhaps shouldn't be prepared at all. Thematically I'm not sure it makes sense

AestheticDialectic wrote:

I think the focus spells are meh, yeah. I also don't think that's where I want the power budget to go. Other classes already have good focus spells, or are even focused on focus spells(no pun intended). I like that the focus spells at least are mostly 1 action and can be combined with regular spellcasting. If they're to have focus spells, I think they should stay one action. Which does mean they must necessarily be weaker

I agree with the one action cost as wizard focus spells should supplement their casting. I would like them to fit with the spells like Augment Summoning should be a free action that augments the summon spell when it is cast and has some heightening to boost summons.

Power budget has to go into class features and focus spells now because casting is pretty much all the same across the board for every class.

The cost of PF2 balance is this modular design for all martials and casters. You could say even the spell traditions are very balanced against each other with arcane having more blasting and utility and every other list having more healing and condition removal, but really they are all very balanced against each other. Now that divine spirit damage hits almost everything, even divine is good at blasting now at the higher levels on top of the divine casters having feats to add key blasting spells.

If I could I would give wizards OG metamagic where you apply it when you prepare a spell and I would make this a unique set of feats to them and only them. That's one place I would give them niche protection. Particularly I think it would help accentuate their theme and role

I think the focus spells are meh, yeah. I also don't think that's where I want the power budget to go. Other classes already have good focus spells, or are even focused on focus spells(no pun intended). I like that the focus spells at least are mostly 1 action and can be combined with regular spellcasting. If they're to have focus spells, I think they should stay one action. Which does mean they must necessarily be weaker

Unless a Class Archetype fixes Wizard it is very much playable just boring till you get to the levels where you get stuff like secondary detonation which is a super powerful feat exclusive for wizards but comes online far to late for most people to use it. They just need some help rather it is better focus spells, hyper unique focus cantrips via feats (Which be cool), Spell Subsection as base class feature. Just something to make them go, "Hello, I am the master of the arcane arts and everyone else is just a copycat."

I do also agree that far too many feats for the wizard are upshifted too high. Knowledge is Power should be a level 1 feat or feature but is a level 8 feat

You're focused on the prepared casting because it's all you have to argue for the wizard. Which should tell you something about the class when it is so lacking in class features comparatively to other caster classes that you can't even tout good builds compared to other prepared casters.

I could breakdown great builds for the druid, cleric, and magus using prepared casting. I can't do that much with the wizard.

I'd be quite satisfied with the wizard as a prepared caster if their feats and class features better supported the versatility so often attributed to them and their feats made for some fun builds.

Cleric is a complicated one because it is the best class in the game. Divine list is stacked, it has a great chassis, divine font and good feats only lacking wr2 focus spells for some domains. I don't think it should be our measure because it over performs compared to everything... But I this isn't important really. I was going to go on a tangent about how I think the druid is actually insanely boring and not very good, but you and I don't disagree that giving the wizard a few things would be welcomed. The disagreement is that you want to make them more like other classes, but I see their issue as having too low of a skill floor, and not too low of skill ceiling. The skill ceiling of the wizard I would only put barely below the best casters in the system, but I would put the floor even lower because it requires system mastery wr2 prepared casting. This is why my recommendations have been about raising the floor and steering players in the right direction. The wizard has sneaky power hidden in otherwise very unglamorous feats and features. I would also welcome a change that gives those feats and features more aesthetic appeal to emphasize them more, but I don't agree with positions such as making spell substitution too good(which defeats the point, purpose and fun of prepared casting) nor that they should have more and stronger focus spells. Of all the casters I think the wizard in specific should be the one designed without focus spells in mind and if they didn't already have them I would like to see experimentation with the wizard class and designing them without any at all. It's the one class that I think should be build around those daily preparations primarily and exclusively. So my push back will always and primarily be against removing this identity from the class as it is to my mind the central thing

We both want the class to have more toys, but I specifically do not like when suggestions seek to homogenize casters too much. They're already too homogeneous

You claim I'm wrong while not providing any evidence than a theory video. I play all these classes. I have listed multiple feats, spells, class features, and the like proving what I am stating is true. You ignore all of it because you seem to play one caster and no others so you don't even have knowledge of the other casters to compare.

If you have been playing so much, please provide multiple examples where constantly changing out your spell load allowed you to perform at superior level in combat?

I've already stated that a Spell Substitution wizard with a well built spellbook can shine in non-combat situations where time allows them to load out problem solving spells.

Problem is will they perform better than a rogue using skills or a group coming up with a plan using their pooled resources? Is it more fun for the group to wait for the wizard to solve the non-combat problem with spells or do so as a group?

When you call someone wrong, please provide more evidence as I have provided sufficient evidence to the contrary where a statement "Deriven is wrong" with no evidence to prove why as an extremely weak counterargument.

Mainly because I'm not interested in rehashing any arguments, nor am I particularly invested in convincing you in specific. You have shown in the details of how you play that you simply don't interact with the tools prepared casting gives you in order to maximize its potential, and because spontaneous is actually very good in this edition you simply think prepared sucks because it isn't always better and not leaps and bounds better. They're simply both viable options and I don't need you writing the same walls of text about the same class features and feats again and again. I don't agree with your assessment, I think the way you play is not suited to prepared casting, but also that this is fine. There is simply a large personality difference between us here. For example you see it as an inconsistency that I mention both substitution and blending as things which provide a lot of power and potential to wizards because they cannot be taken simultaneously, but to me it's an open ended question. These are abilities which push the power and capacities of the class in different powerful directions

I don't know if it is worth my time to argue with someone who is convinced the same handful of spells are the only good ones, that top levels slots beyond 3-4 are not worthwhile, nor really sees the power and potential in the modularity and flexibility of changing your entire load out day-to-day, and I mean this sincerely. I do think frequently getting the most out of prepared casting is in practical terms going to mean you swap well over half your spells according to the situation and team composition. You don't play in a way or with people where this would be necessary or facilitated well. We simply will not see eye to eye on this. It won't happen

Oh, and the video is not a theory video. It's instructional, just need to clarify that point

You can change your spellbook day to day, but why would you if you already have most useful spells in your repertoire ?

Cuz Deriven is simply wrong that the best way to play any spellcaster is to simply have and use the assumed power house spells. Generally prepared casters do best in sandbox adventures and anything with this degree of freedom where you can use your time to learn what you'll deal with each day. If you only prepare your fears, slows, haste and such, you will be worse than a spontaneous caster, but that's absolutely not how a prepared casters should be played at all. I'll just link video that's good on the subject

This stuff has already been answered:

1. 2 more top slots spell blending equates to one extra fight per day if you have a lot of fights. At high level it is extremely rare you run out of slots at all.

The sorcerer who builds to blast or with some useful focus spell, can use a top level focus spell in place of a spell as long as they can refocus.

Why do those arguing for more top level slots with the Spell Blending thesis keep overlooking focus spells?

2 more top level spell slots, even make it four if you blend for a two more one level lower spell slots, can often be matched by a quality blasting or utility focus spell.

If you even manage to go through enough encounters for the top level slots to matter.

2. Changing out spells: A wizard has 27 normal slots and 9 school slots and one use of Arcane Bond, maybe another if they take the feat 2 levels slot.

This will give them 36 total slots per day with 9 limited to a school spell and one spontaneous casting of a spell they already cast.

Whereas a sorcerer with Arcane Evolution knows 36 spells know, 9 of them bloodline spells limited to the type of bloodline, Then one additional spell from their spellbook that is either an additional signature spell or an additional spell know of the highest level.

This gives them a total 37 spells known.

Then if they take Greater Mental Evolution at level 16, they know another 9 spells, maybe 10 if the DM is particularly generous with allowing them to know another level 10 spell.

Then if they take Greater Crossblooded Evolution. They know 3 more spells from another bloodline heightened to maximum level.

This gives them 48 spells know plus one flexible spell known from a spellbook for a total of 49 spells known.

So a level 18 sorcerer with signature spells will have up to

Bloodline Spell
4 Spells Known
3 spells from another bloodline
1 Flexible spell from Arcane Evolution
And 8 lower level signature spells.

So with their 4 maxi level slots, a sorcerer at level 18 has 17 total...

That's cool, spontaneous casters have their advantages. As it should be. Spontaneous still can't completely change their repitiore day-to-day. As a prepared casters I can just decide to be a whole different guy tomorrow and it rocks. Spontaneous casters have encounter to encounter flexibility but are rigid otherwise. That encounter to encounter flexibility is very good and cool, it's not always better though. There is also something disingenuous about framing it as 45 spells known. Wizards can and will be able to fill each of their slots with a different spell. 4x9+1 is already 37, and 43 with cantrips, 44 with their starting focus spell even if their starting focus spell isn't fantastic. Split slot at 6 can bring us to 45 even, and scroll adept brings it to 47. You can get the second focus spell going to 48. Need I go on? It's clearly not a meaningful way to talk about either class and involves framing that doesn't really get at the core strengths or weaknesses

AestheticDialectic wrote:

Ryangwy wrote:

Given the Prescient line, I wonder if there could be a feat or line of feats where you can leave any number (maybe just one) of your non-highest rank slots open, then when you recall knowledge on a creature and learn of it's lowest save, weakness, or bypassable resistance, you can fill that slot with one spell from your spellbook that targets that save or has the trait of the weakness/bypass.

That emulates how the wizard is prepared without actually needing the player and GM to actually go through the motions.

this sort of already exists

There is also some lower level feats that lets you put two spells in one slot and chose between one or the other when you cast. This is considered a pretty high premium by paizo

*Edit:
Said feat

Unnecessarily high given spontaneous caster sig spells allow this as a core class feature.

And not one rank lower.

It's a high premium because it circumvents the downside of prepared casting. Spontaneous casters also have to spends time retaining if they want to change their spells, prepared casters can literally just put on a whole new persona day-to-day if they want. Showing up with a new caster build as they choose. Mitigating the downside of this ability too much wouldn't make the wizard more interesting

Given the Prescient line, I wonder if there could be a feat or line of feats where you can leave any number (maybe just one) of your non-highest rank slots open, then when you recall knowledge on a creature and learn of it's lowest save, weakness, or bypassable resistance, you can fill that slot with one spell from your spellbook that targets that save or has the trait of the weakness/bypass.

That emulates how the wizard is prepared without actually needing the player and GM to actually go through the motions.

this sort of already exists

There is also some lower level feats that lets you put two spells in one slot and chose between one or the other when you cast. This is considered a pretty high premium by paizo

*Edit:
Said feat

I don't really agree the wizard should be a RK beast though. That it should have tools to make it easier? Totally. That it should be part of the chassis of the class? IMO no. The wizard is highly associated with Intelligence, but the wizard isn't a monster hunter like a thaumaturge that knows everything about their enemies. In fact, I don't recall a single wizard from media that plays the "I know everything about this foe" kind of deal. However, I would like schools giving you an auto-scaling lore and a trained skill (someone pointed out earlier wizards have less trained skills than most classes. I think this would be the perfect way to compensate that). Wizards are IMO more of an expert in their field of knowledge rather than an overall knows-it-all, so this makes more sense to me.

For me it's more about the fact that "monster hunter" is a redundant classification for all adventurers, including wizards. It's just that in that they cast spells and have to prepare the ahead of time they should have class features to raise the floor for players and direct them to utilizing this to their best advantage. I don't think wizards should be able to recall knowledge about everything easily, but they should be able to easily ascertain what kind of spells would be most effective against certain enemies. Especially because arcane is the most "offensive" spell list. It's the spell list with the most orientation towards spells that affects enemies rather than affecting allies. No healing, few buffs, but a lot of debuffs, crowd control and damage

So I think it logically follows:
1. Wizards are intelligence based
2. Wizards use the arcane list which is most about controlling the battlefield by negatively affecting enemies
3. Wizards must prepare their spells in advance

With the three premises I think we can conclude that the role and play style of the wizard is learning about enemies and their weaknesses(general term), what kinds of enemies and hazards they will face in a given day and preparing the right tools for the job as best they can with the information they can acquire

So my suggestion for what the wizard needs is perhaps a class feature that lets you pick between a divination ritual that gives vague hints about what you might need to prepare, or spell substitution if your DM allows you to get information via downtime activities and roleplay. Then the wizards should have some way to use arcana or some kind of lore skill to learn stats relevant to what kind of spells will be most effective. Spell immunities if any, worst save, weaknesses etc. then lastly to incentivize this kind of play some kind of mechanical bonus(es) for targeting the lowest save or an enemy weakness to help push players in the right direction

Basically what the wizard needs to raise the skill floor is stuff that accentuates their modularity and modality and pushes players in that direction

*Edit to clarify a point:
The class feature is a choice between two options, and that is either you get spell substitution or you get a divination ritual that lets you get vague hints and information from the DM about the upcoming day. Both abilities raise the skill floor, but can be kind of redundant. The ritual is especially useless if you have a co-operative DM who does what they're supposed to and let you gather information that will help you choose what spells to prepare for the day. Spell substitution then is a fall back tool for when you run into situations you didn't or couldn't get info on before hand

The knowledge thing is tricky.

Thematically I sort of like general knowledge being de-emphasized. It feels a little weird to some extent to have someone who's meant to be hyperfocused on magical study to suddenly be a know-it-all. Smart, yes, but part of the conceit of being a specialist (as in, someone devoted to studying a specific topic) is not also being a generalist. It can feel a little goofy in PF1 when the guy who spent all of his formative years cooped up in a tower learning how to cast burning hands is also the expert on dungeons and world religions and engineering and geography and history and social customs...

But also, interacting with a monster's strengths and weaknesses is explicitly a core design feature of the Wizard, they're built to be worried about that kind of thing in a way that Rangers and Thaumaturges (since they also have some knowledge stuff) aren't. So it would make a lot of sense to have some internal nod to that in their mechanics.

It might also be instructive for GMs. Foreknowledge is arguably the biggest difference between an overwhelmingly strong wizard and a frustratingly weak one, but it's also a concept space not really addressed in the class. Having something that recognizes that dynamic could be both nice mechanically and kind of help guide newer players and GMs into understanding the way a Wizard should be approaching scenes a bit better too.

For the most part I agree that wizards shouldn't be knowledgeable about everything and their study of magic would, realistically, make them more narrowly focused, but I also agree that the game mechanically requires prepared spellcasters to be generalists in terms of knowledge of monsters and what spells are prepared. I also think it does make sense that an adventurer wizard is less of an academic, and is a boots on the ground individual who's primary concern is magical aiding their fellow adventurers and knowing about monsters is key to this. I think we can kill several birds with one stone here by having wizards rewarded for hitting weaker saves, having some kind of class ability that helps them identify enemy saves and lastly some inbuilt feature that lets who gain *some knowledge* about the upcoming adventuring day to aid spell preparation that gets around lazy and obtuse GMs who are uncompromising wr2 gathering information

Some class feature that lets you do some kind of divination ritual before preparing your spells for the day to get some vague hints as to what is in-store for you over the next day is enough to prepare spells in a way to perform better than a spontaneous caster most of the time, and it being a feature of the class should raise that floor for a good number of players. So it has to be some combination of monster lore, benefits for exploiting weaknesses and an ability to gain information about the day ahead of you

Teridax wrote:

as I understand this is one of the reasons why the Wizard and the Magus have a below-average number of baseline trained skills.

Nah. It's bad design driven by legacy assumptions, which, for some reason, didn't merit correction in the remaster. These are the only classes without an effective 4+Int trained skills at base.

The Wizard and the Wizard alone is the only Int class that Paizo felt the need to "control" for Int.

Every other Int based class has 4 skills, either directly or given for use via a class feature to bring it up to 4.

I run out of skills I want to use on a wizard before I finish filling them out. Tf you need more skills for

A wizard starts with 9 total skills, 9 of 17 base skills. That's roughly 53%. You really only need the int skills plus a few flavor skills, and you'll really only be progressing three skills. So, sincerely, the hell do you need more skills for? Most classes are gonna start with something like 3-4, maybe 5, skills and that's it. Which is plenty

AestheticDialectic wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

They also remind me a bit of the Sontarans from Dr. Who.

Oh so that's how Golarion got fire arms

no, Golarion got fire arms from humanoid fire elementals

Unfortunately I have to explain the joke

They also remind me a bit of the Sontarans from Dr. Who.

Oh so that's how Golarion got fire arms

The way I see it is there would be bespoke ones with specific spells they have prepared that can't be changed and aren't limited to occult, but the class itself wouldn't cast many spells

I was more so thinking these would be closer to how the spontaneous spells for the animist work, but weaker, necro goes bounded casting etc. these would be always active thralls, rather than summoned in combat, and it would be a feat for around level 8-10-ish and basically be how you get limited lower level slots. If they're skulls like a demilich they'd just float around you, or act like a familiar, but actually, do any of the undead you can summon with summon undead have spells? I haven't checked but it kinda reminds me of how you might summon a unicorn for the heal spell, could just use the already existing summon undead spell