Senkon's page

Texas Snyper wrote:

The point is that for EVERY scenario where you don't have a hard 10 min cap or are in combat, the lvl 4+ wizard can "spontaneously" prep for the scenario in front of them. Spell rarity helps, but that mostly doesn't apply until spell level 6+. Wizards can still spontaneously heighten their entire spell book better than a sorcerer can. Everybody knows prepared > spontaneous 80+% of the time, but the ability for wizards to spend 10 mins to heighten any and all of their spells at any time puts the wizard MILES ahead of the sorcerer.

Spontaneous casting was nerfed into the ground because of "choice paralysis" yet prepared casting has MANY more choices and wasn't touched at all.

Most scenarios aren't going to require a certain spell, unless PF2 really drop the ball. In PF 1 many times you had spells that would be perfect, and other spells that were good enough.

Players often choose to use the "good enough" spell instead of waiting, even if they had open spell slots or an ability that allowed them to swap spells.

For the sake of argument let's say you must have spell X because something got past editing, and there was no other way to bypass that encounter/problem, would you prefer the party have to rest just to get one spell?

The reason you wouldn't will an empty slot with a better spell is because and open slot is a valuable resource. You can run out of empty slots. This mechanic is as many times a day as you want so long as you have a spell left.

shroudb wrote:

that's not the point.

the point is that the wizard loses nothing for the flexibility of having utility spells in his spellbook and preparing them only when needed.

the whole premise of "prepared casters have to juggle what to prepare" is gone with a simple level 4 feat without any requirements, costs, or anything.

the main issue remains: he loses NOTHING for gaining immense versatility and flexibility, something that's suppossed to be sorc's thing, and sorc loses everything for it.

give it a suitable cost, like needing a spellslot 2+ levels higher, or spellpoints equal to the swapped spell, and you'll see most of the arguments against the feat disappear.

The thing is that the Wizard should be the guy with the UTILITY spells when he NEEDS THEM, which he NEVER WAS, due to the fact that preparing the right spells is basically almost impossible unless you know EXACTLY what you need in advance. And as we all know Players and GM's alike make mistakes in planning, as well as in their assumptions.

The Sorcerer on the other hand is the guy who's flexible within his chosen field/spells. That can give him a LOT of focus or a general approach to a lot of problems... depending what spells got picked.

Again, Quick Preparation is not overpowered. It is well placed among the other candidates of the level 4 Wizard feats. It's up against the Cantrip Expansion (very powerful) and the Enhanced Familiar (also good), which are also strong contenders for a level 4 pick.

If you go for a Wizard/Fighter there is Magical Striker, which would IMMEDIATELY beat out the other options without even trying. Doubly so with a Universalist Wizard, go Familiar and way, way later Superior Focus and you'll have LOTS and LOTS of Magical Striker opportunities. :)

No he should have the amount of utility he takes when he prepares. Spontaneous casters should have answers all the time because that's how they work. There is one feat that makes the wizard always have the answer. That means that the default wizard does not have the answers all the time and it should stay that way.

Page 305 says "Striking multiple times has diminishing returns. The multiple attack penalty applies to attacks after the first, whether those attacks are Strikes, special attacks like the grapple use of the Athletics skill, or attacks from spells."
Page 306 refers to attacks of opportunity and tells you "Because an Attack of Opportunity is a quick and opportunistic Strike, you take a -2 penalty when using it, and even though it is an attack action, it doesn’t incur a multiple attack penalty to the attack roll."
As far as I can understand we only know it's an attack action because it tells you to make a melee strike against the target, same as with flurry. So yeah it probably takes the penalty same as everything else.

So using an attack action just means using something that involves something with the attack trait like a strike does. The action itself does not seem to need the attack trait just whatever it involves.

Did anyone READ the damn feat in question?

Yes/No/Maybe?

It clearly states:
Spend 10 minutes to empty ONE of your prepared spell slots and prepare a different spell from your spellbook in its place.

That's 10 minutes for just changing ONE freaking spell.
You want to change more. Sure, go ahead.
That's another run... ANOTHER 10 minutes.

It's not a magical solution for wizards to change up their whole loadout for the day.

A level 20 Wizard trying to change all his spells in go would need 270 minutes. Just 4 hours and 30 minutes. And that's just an universalist.
A level 20 Specialist Wizard would take 90 minutes more. Straight up 6 hours. So yeah, not happening. That's a lot of time that's better spent.
BTW, Cantrips not included.

What it ACTUALLY does:
It allows a Wizard to be a bit more flexible in case he chose a spell or two that he can't use at all on that day OR needs RIGHT NOW. If he has 10 minutes, he can kick that sucker out and kick in one that he needs.

Since there are no longer bonus spell slots this is potentially a very GOOD thing... if picked. Because it allows basically the elimination of spell slot waste, a problem that spontaneous casters shouldn't EVER encounter, unlike their prepared brethren.

WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED?
READING COMPREHENSION MATTERS!

Quick Preparation is fine.
It's good but nothing special.
People should have actually read the text before being keyboardwarriors.

We already know this you... Changing out a few spells a day is the problem. You even say that prepared casters should experience spell slot waste. But this feat will remove that aspect of the game which in turn man just read the thread.

Quick Preparation is what you get for the Wizard not having the ability to leave slots open, fewer slots, and strict Vancian casting rather than the Arcanist casting of 5e that many were hoping for.

It's not even a "must have" feat at that level. Cantrip Expansion lets you cover all of your elemental bases in combat, Conceal Spell lets you attempt to cast sneaky stuff in social situations, Empowering Focus provides the only DC booster in the game, and Magical Striker is pretty great for a gish build that uses True Strike or the Diviner's Sight school power. All of these are legitimate contenders, and while I wouldn't take Enhanced Familiar or Steady Spellcaster they're not wastes of space, either.

Being able to leave slots open is just as bad. Not sure why you think wiz needs to be able to do thing he could do in 2e. Even if the other feats are better (doubt it) that's still not the only problem. I won't be able to properly challenge a party if wizard can just swap out to the best spell he has available for the situation. How do I get the party to go hunting for keys in the castle while sneaking around if the wizard can just swap in as many knocks as he has spell slots?

So, under the crafting rules, you must spend at least 4 days crafting an item of your level, with a day less for every level you exceed the item's level.

IF you want to finish the item right away after those days, you need to spend the remaining half of the item's market price; making crafting it cost the SAME as buying it! (which kinda makes this option suck)

OR you can spend additional days crafting, reducing the remaining price by an SP value equal to what a character of your level and proficiency can do in a day. BUT... That means you're reducing a cost frequently measured in GP by SP, you know, 1/10th the value you're trying to reduce. Mind you that consumables don't quite have this issue, since they're usually priced in SP anyway.

BUT... If you're crafting pretty much anything over 100gp and you're level 15 or less, you'll be working on it for a while. Making it really undesirable to do this.

Particularly in the case of most of the formerly "Wondrous Items" which cost 1000s of gp, you've basically retired that character. What started as a simple crafting project has now become a doctorate degree level life's work (if you're trying to actually save any money by crafting).

Again, I feel the need to point out that many of these formerly "Wondrous Items" need a high LV to even be able to craft them, but aren't particularly useful by that point, let alone enticing to wait that long for them.

Yes, a 15th level character can make a 4000gp item in a month or less (if their craft proficiency is high), but does a 15th level character even need what they made by then? Meanwhile a 7th level character spends nearly a whole year making even a 1000gp item! And forget about doing anything so ambitious before lv7.

Again, you could just spend the remaining money to finish right away, but that really completely ruins the whole point of crafting if you're just going to end up paying market price anyway.

Is 1000gp project appropriate for a lvl 7 character though? Also the point of paying the same for an item to craft is to get an item not found at the marketplace. All seems to be in order to me.

At no point did I imply the adventure should require a wizard.

but if you, the wizard, have the wrong spell, no one else can cover that weakness. You're just boned.

However, I did imply that a sane wizard would not go into combat with monsters with only charm person and comprehend languages prepared. If there's a wizard in your party, it's idiotic to take a wizard into a situation he's not prepared for if you can avoid it. You're basically down a party member.

But you shouldn't have. No one is talking about playing the wizard like trash. We are talking about a wizard preparing a normal spell list for the day and then having to deal with it...

The weakness wherein wizard doesn't always have the optimal spell isn't negated by waiting a day, since you will almost always be running on imperfect information and making some guesses and compromises at spell prep anyways. You are preparing spells that are 60-80% likely to be useful in most slots, and maybe preparing and one or two 20-30% spells. You're playing the odds and might get burned -- that's the right way to see the risk, imo.

...like this. This is exactly what I want. Made impossible with quick preparation because if faced with 3 locked doors you can now quick prep in three knocks.

It's not binary. It's not "I've got the right spells and I'm set or I've got the wrong spells and I'm f*#+ed," because if you put wizards in that situation a lot, there's no reason to play a f&&+ing wizard.

Sure agreed.

You're also ignoring that this is a compensation for losing the ability to leave a slot empty, which was vastly superior to preparing a 10%-20% spell.

That also seems op. It makes it harder to dm. At least there should be a limit to how many spells you could leave open just like there should be a limit to how many times you can quick prep (once).

(I also think the way spell heightening works is a net buff to the sorcerer for reasons I've explained before -- in many cases, they're getting spells for free through the spontaneous heighten feature when compared to PF1, like if you choose to have spontaneous heighten on summon monster. You had to take each level individually in PF1 anyways, so net buff. That's not wholly relevant here, though.)

Don't care about sorc comparison to much it's not about that for me but this part is relevant. This is only true for combat/time pressed scenarios. Wiz can now "spontaneously" heighten a spell with quick prep.

How many times did you know what the perfect spell would be after you woke up and prepared but before you were in serious combat?

When I see the castle that I'm about to siege/infiltrate. If i want to sneak in then invisibility, dimension door, spider climb etc is good. If I'm sieging then battle spells/summons etc. When I wake up I can prepare a full list of charm spells until I'm out of town. Then prepare a new list perfect for the road etc.

Even then, in how many cases would Quick Preparation have provided a solution not available with a "prepare later" slot or two in PF1?

All of the above and more. Anytime you have ten mins. Standing in front of a bunch of locked doors as an example.

And what about the case with PF1 wizard where you take preferred spell as a feat and can just spontaneously cast an 80% useful spell with a 10%-20% useful slot?

I wouldn't know. This is not pf1 anyway. If that's the same or worse then I don't want it.

(Also, arcanist could do this way faster in PF1 anyways...?)

See above.

I feel for Paizo, because they have two opposing design goals.

The first is avoiding these dissociated mechanics as you refer to them. Keeping the game feeling grounded in reality. Even in a world with dragons and magic and what have you, that feeling is important. It keeps players invested in the game and inspires good role playing.

The other is fixing the good old martial caster disparity. The problem is that magic is pretty much exempt from constraint. It can do whatever and people will say, "A wizard did it" and move on. It will always have way more narrative power than the mundane.

So the options are essentially:

a) Nerf magic until it's capable of barely more than the mundane. At that point it becomes boring and stale, and the game becomes more gritty low fantasy.

b) Buff martial stuff to be able to do the supernatural. You them get the problems outlined thus far in this thread.

c) Leave it as it was in first edition. You then get endless balance complaints and wars amongst your player base. Threads about martial caster disparity that reach into the ten thousand post mark. Etcetera.

I have no idea what the correct solution is. No matter what they do there will be a huge contingent of angry people shouting that they made the wrong decision.

I think the answer is d) people don't really want power parity, they just want fun options as a martial.

Hard to say if they've succeeded because I've yet to get a game going but the new crit specializations and fun ammo stuff fixes the problems I have with the disparity. I'm comparing it to 5e not pf1 because I have no idea what goes on there but I don't think it matters. This is a new version so I'll just judge it for what it is now. The 3 action system favors martials to me in that they can now chose to not attack as their first action without losing their whole turn essentially. I can now push over a table or try to lie pull levers are whatever else fun there is in the area without giving up my attacks. Most spells are 2 actions so you could cast a spell move to the lever but not use the lever until next turn. Martials will use 1 move 1 attack and 1 fun thing each turn potentially and I just really like that.
Then there's the ammo but it's magic so maybe doesn't count? I mean it is a martial option and it doesn't break my suspension of belief.

I see no reason whatsoever to bother with composite bows. They cost more than regular bows, and it takes Strength 14 to add a measly +1 extra damage to a composite bow. Considering that the majority of damage comes from magic weapon damage dice, I cannot see a dedicated archer ponying up the Strength 14 for the +1 damage.

Why even bother with the Strength 14 when you could be raising Dexterity (for your attacks) and some mix of Constitution, Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma?

Because int is a dump stat for archers anyway.

>i-it's n-not a treadmill

Seems more a matter of people ignoring old inconsistencies because that's just what they were used to. "Sorcery" was just as much "connoted" as sinister, yet nobody complained there, or why it wasn't classed as divine since it was "connoted" as worshipping evil deities.

Probably because sorcery is no longer connoted with something bad and connotations are "just what people are used to".

I:^(

Senkon wrote:

edduardco wrote:

QuidEst wrote:

edduardco wrote:

Unless item effectiveness is also going to increase quadratically prices should increase in a way that correspond to actual item effectiveness, a linear progression is easier to compare and calculate prices, if that means changing treasure progression to linear so be it. Right now looks like Resonance is been placed in order to force players use overpriced consumables.

Hitpoints mostly increase linearly. This allows enemies to be in the level ballpark, rather than needing to wait until the PCs are level 2 to use level 2 enemies.

If hitpoints Increase linearly, healing effectiveness should increase linearly.
So, we can’t change healing to quadratic.

If we make treasure progression linear, that means that two level 10 characters have the wealth of a level 20 character. That’s a huge balance issue, because you can’t have any items that are appropriate for a high level character but broken for a low-level party.

Resonance, the pricing structure, and the healing/health progression push using the same percentage of your wealth by level on healing the same percentage of your health.

But PF2 restricts items by level like Starfinder, isn't that enough?

Lvl 10 chars with wealth of lvl 20 can still equip one lvl 10 with lvl appropriate gear beyond his means. Each slot fully loaded with everything you'd want.

But from where did they get level 20 wealth to begin with? Would that be a real scenario following the rules by the book?

If wealth is linear then the wealth you have at lvl 20 is two times the wealth you have at lvl 10. And so two lvl 10 characters will have the wealth of one lvl 20 character.

KingOfAnything wrote:

tivadar27 wrote:

We don't know this for sure. In fact, all the evidence we have suggests that the increments are +2 even for higher stat boosts (note that Mark gave a bunch of stat arrays and none of them included an odd number...). Personally, I like this way better. Essentially forcing characters to generalize (or get half the usual bonus) is bad in my book.

Confirmed in this thread, actually

Logan mentioned a stat progression with 18 Str/16 Dex at 1st level, 19/18 at 5th level, 20/19 at 10th level, etc.

If this is true, then how did Mark arrive at a Strength of 24 in is example stat spread upthread? Also, Mark's examples have far more stat points then is possible given Starfinder's progression.

Stat boosting magic items probably.

No, at level 1 everything seems to bump by +2.

However, if we're right about it working like Starfinder, that's because you can't get Abilities above 18 at level 1, and when you add a bonus to a stat that's already an 18, it's only a +1 rather than a +2.

That just can't happen until level 5 due to the way character creation is structured.

"Learn it once, use it in perpetuity"

ChibiNyan wrote:

Awesome! But wish they each had like some unique special ability(s) like 5e and SF. That way they are more than just "plug in your 2 boosts, + skill feat + lore" and actually have unique stuff that makes them special!

Otherwise the splatbooks are not gonna offer much in the way of backgrounds besides "some permutation you could have done yourself + some lore on it". The campaign traits in the past were really cool! Wanna see some of those exlcusive powers still in 2e.

The trouble with that idea is that we want backgrounds to be fun but flexible, allowing you to try out all sorts of combinations for your characters. But if they had a unique and desirable ability you can't get anywhere else, suddenly they become extremely inflexible: you have to take the background that gives you a particular unique ability or you will never be able to get that ability. Does that make sense?

But you could just also use 5e custom background system. Pick 3 different boosts +1 skill +1 cool magic thing et cetera. Then splats can still offer up cool magic special power and be 100% flexible.