TiMuSW's page

TiMuSW wrote:

My bad for bringing PF1 into this discussion, but I still don’t think a single spontaneous spell slot to cast any spell they managed to have their hands on and spent gold learning for Wizard is that rude to Sorcerer. Especially when each of the more power classes all have their own unique abilities others can’t take. It’s like saying fighters having +2 is rude to the other martial, or starlight magus is rude to Eldritch archer. Maybe it is, but it looks to me like Paizo don’t mind, and players probably wouldn’t mind so much if the class they want to play ALL have something uniquely powerful.

For what it's worth, I do think those are rude to each other. Fighter is especially frustrating. Seeing the fighter have something like 25-33% fewer misses than you (note that I said fewer misses, not more hits) is pretty unfun.

That sort of conception of what's rude (in the scope of PF2E, at least) does inform my choices. If you disagree, I understand, though.

Quote:

I’m glad you agree imperial sorc focus spell is rude, but if we look at Oracle, sorcerer changes suddenly become very polite…I think even if oracle stays 3 slots the other changes are still enough to put them at tier 0 among spell casters now. If Paizo have no issue making powerful classes, why do they need to keep Wizard in its current spot? They never worried about fighter or magus or the new oracle stealing others show?

In general, I'd say it seems like the design team philosophy changed somewhat over time, probably as design leads and so on changed. I get the feeling if wizard were remade in PC2 by whoever made oracle, we'd be looking at a significantly different class than what we got in PC1.

AestheticDialectic wrote:

Unlike others I do not think wizards should be skill users, at all. I think if you have spells you should not be as good with skills. I only mildly agree with people that they should be alright at recall knowledge as it fits the studious theme and the design

...

Oh and I think the real reason +2 feel so much more powerful isn’t just fewer misses, or even more hits, it’s also a higher crit rate. Coupled with spells like heroism, abilities and spells that gives to circumstance bonus to hit, status debuff from spell-caster and flanking, fighters can have ridiculous crit rates that melts through even +2 or +3 enemies.

TiMuSW wrote:

My bad for bringing PF1 into this discussion, but I still don’t think a single spontaneous spell slot to cast any spell they managed to have their hands on and spent gold learning for Wizard is that rude to Sorcerer. Especially when each of the more power classes all have their own unique abilities others can’t take. It’s like saying fighters having +2 is rude to the other martial, or starlight magus is rude to Eldritch archer. Maybe it is, but it looks to me like Paizo don’t mind, and players probably wouldn’t mind so much if the class they want to play ALL have something uniquely powerful.

For what it's worth, I do think those are rude to each other. Fighter is especially frustrating. Seeing the fighter have something like 25-33% fewer misses than you (note that I said fewer misses, not more hits) is pretty unfun.

That sort of conception of what's rude (in the scope of PF2E, at least) does inform my choices. If you disagree, I understand, though.

Quote:

I’m glad you agree imperial sorc focus spell is rude, but if we look at Oracle, sorcerer changes suddenly become very polite…I think even if oracle stays 3 slots the other changes are still enough to put them at tier 0 among spell casters now. If Paizo have no issue making powerful classes, why do they need to keep Wizard in its current spot? They never worried about fighter or magus or the new oracle stealing others show?

In general, I'd say it seems like the design team philosophy changed somewhat over time, probably as design leads and so on changed. I get the feeling if wizard were remade in PC2 by whoever made oracle, we'd be looking at a significantly different class than what we got in PC1.

AestheticDialectic wrote:

Unlike others I do not think wizards should be skill users, at all. I think if you have spells you should not be as good with skills. I only mildly agree with people that they should be alright at recall knowledge as it fits the studious theme and the design

...

I can respect that you disagree on approaches like giving wizard PF1 bonded item. I do also think a straight +2 is one of the worse ways of giving class identities.

Nevertheless I’m still leaning towards giving classes unique but POWERful abilities that represent their class identities. To me bonded item doesn’t seem to intrude on what sorcerers are suppose to be good at, but we can agree to disagree. It’s a fine balance when it comes to giving classes powerful abilities.

I guess I’m more optimistic because I tend to believe if they make these abilities distinct, and not mess up on what class identity to focus on (like they did with guardian) then it would all be fine. A counter example would be what they did to Thaumaturge and Investigator, where their class identities overlay and some abilities they gave Thaumaturge completely outshines Investigator.

I think your proposed hypothetical ability is cool, might seem a bit underpowered to me because of the new focus spells, and the fact that all damage/summon/counteract spells have strict progression model over ranks. Focus spells like imaginary weapon and cantrips like live wire are deemed overpower because they exceeds that model. (i.e., 2d6 per rank for heightened damage spells, 1d4 per rank for heightened cantrips, 1d8s for focus spells, smaller dices or slower progression for damage spells with extra effects). Therefore, giving focus spells that are heightened to lower than your highest rank, even if they are spell slot spells made focus, still seem a bit weak. You wouldn’t waste actions casting a lower ranked damage/incap/summon/counteract spell in a severe or extreme combat, even if they are free. If the combat is easy, then it wouldn’t feel like an impactful ability.

I can see the power of having the ability to cast spells from spell book you haven’t prepared though, so maybe it’s still fine. I just don’t think is that much more powerful then existing spell substitution or scrolls if used only for out of combat utilities that it would save current wizard by itself (but as it is I would take any improvement to current wizard…)

AestheticDialectic wrote:

Turning wizards spontaneous makes them no longer feel like a wizard is my issue. Learning spells, being able to fill up a spell book, and deliberately prepping cool spells is peak wizard action. Prepared castings not having to learn heightened versions is also something which turns even the baseline into a lot of day to day versatility. At level 4 your don't know 7+4 spells, you know 7+11 spells. At level 6 you know 7+11+15 spells and so on. Each lower rank spell is a potential spell for your higher rank slots and it was said by mark seifter that it was deliberate that heightened spells were as good as the rank of spells they were heightened to. It's a little more granular than this as some spells don't heighten much or often, but most do

They're not spontaneous in this theoretical rendering. They're fully prepared outside of the DBI slots. DBI is already a more limited form of a spontaneous slot anyways.

Wizard being able to upcast "for free" did not give it any meaningful advantage over a sorcerer with its limited upcasting in 2E. (Frankly, I think the only reason Sorcs can't freely heighten is that spontaneous would be far too versatile without the signature spell limitation—far more versatile in practice than most prepared casters could hope to be. Signature spells were an artificial limitation imposed on spontaneous casters to nerf them; free heighten was not a benefit given to prepared classes.)

Wizard upcasting for free just meant it didn't have to go out of its way to fill its spellbook 50 times over, and spell learning costs didn't have to account for it. It is just a much less painful design for a class that can buy spells. It did not give it much of a real advantage over a spontaneous caster.

Upcast spells are usually slightly worse than a spell of that level. It'll usually lack useful riders, range, AoE size, or something else when compared to an on-level spell.

Universalist wizard also still upcasts for free in my shower thought change.

I...

My bad for bringing PF1 into this discussion, but I still don’t think a single spontaneous spell slot to cast any spell they managed to have their hands on and spent gold learning for Wizard is that rude to Sorcerer. Especially when each of the more power classes all have their own unique abilities others can’t take. It’s like saying fighters having +2 is rude to the other martial, or starlight magus is rude to Eldritch archer. Maybe it is, but it looks to me like Paizo don’t mind, and players probably wouldn’t mind so much if the class they want to play ALL have something uniquely powerful.

I’m glad you agree imperial sorc focus spell is rude, but if we look at Oracle, sorcerer changes suddenly become very polite…I think even if oracle stays 3 slots the other changes are still enough to put them at tier 0 among spell casters now. If Paizo have no issue making powerful classes, why do they need to keep Wizard in its current spot? They never worried about fighter or magus or the new oracle stealing others show?

Looking at current wizard and the new Monk and swashbuckler, it seems to me if a team is made only of ‘strong’ classes like the new alchemist, oracle, bard or fighter, the players would still feel unique while all feeling strong. It’s only when you mix wizard with sorcerer, mix Druid with oracle, mix monk with magus or team a rogue with a swashbuckler that players begin to feel the sting.

In other words, wizard already have Infinite Possibility and the Lich option if they gain access. It’s because being able to pull off a spell from a much bigger ‘spell repertoire’ compared to sorcerer in a specific situation is exactly the niche wizards are suppose to fill, it’s their class identity, to study and prepare and have a better option occasionally than the those born spell-casters. I think even if you let Wizards keep the other down sides, the old bonded item would still be something that Wizards should have.

After looking at remaster Oracle changes, feats and focus spells, I feel like remaster Wizard is a complete joke. I would never thought the Imperial Sorcerer new focus spell was just the tip of an iceberg.

Gortle wrote:

Facinating, but this is not a signifcant factor in how I rate wizards. I don't mind if they get access to all the spells in the book. In PF2 the spells are not really hyperspecialised or overpowered in any one situation.

I agree the spells in PF2E generally aren't hyperspecialized or overpowered, but that's why I think it works. In PF2E, the level of versatility I'm giving wizard doesn't blow out the game.

For me, the main point of the change is to give wizard easier access to their versatility, via both the drain bonded item change and the increase to spells learned at levelup. The latter would eliminate table variance in spells known, and the former would make it play better with less accommodating tables.

Capping spells known and the change to heightening for wizard feels right to me in order to keep the 3 prepared slots + 1 superflex slot in line with sorc's four less flexible slots, more than anything else. It would be kind of rude to sorc if wizard had even one slot they could use to cast basically any spell in their spellbook (excepting reaction spells, because of how DBI works).

Why would a PF1 bonded item that’s limited to once per day be rude to sorcerer, when it is already made a feat in the lich archetype that no one ever complained. Mind you Sorcerers are given status bonus to damage that no Wizard player ever considered ‘rude’, and they are being made class feature instead of feat with added benefit of applying to healing spells now. They are also given a new focus spell that gives maximum -3 to enemy saving throw. I seriously doubt bonded item change would be that imbalanced given the much more restricted spell design in 2e.

Also don’t forget Sorcerers (and everyone else) can already learn spells. Arcane Sorcerer can even ‘prepare’ a spell each day from their spell book. Learning spell is already balanced by the new wealth system in 2e, since it would still cost a wizard a significant sum that can otherwise be spent on magic items and scrolls (which comes close and sometimes perform even better as ‘silver bullet’ then preparing from your spell book)

I personally feel like the proposed changes are pushing wizards further down the ‘discounted sorcerer’ track. With too much similarity to sorcerer and losing even more class identities.

After seeing what they did to remaster Oracle and Sorcerer I don’t think there should be any doubt how weak Wizard is, or that Imperial Sorcerer is superior to Wizard in every single aspects that matters to an arcane caster (damage? higher. flexibility? better. spell dc? Not even a competition!)

The thing is being able to flexibly cast 4 spells is already more flexible than casting 4 prepared spells that are gone after one cast. Limitations on bloodline spells can easily be overcome by flexible casting, but you will never do the same for prepared school slots. If they expect every wizard to take spell blending or go specialist to “have the most spell slots”, they should’ve make spell blending an inherent class feature like what they are doing to dangerous magic.

People expect wizard to be able to pull of niche spells that are perfect for a given occasion, but the reality is, flexible casting combined with well chosen scrolls and wands are MUCH better that doing that. What’s better, wizards spending gold learning spells would mean they have less cash to spend on scrolls and wands. And since they expect you to buy scrolls and wands to compensate your limited spells per day, wizard needs to spend that money anyway if the campaign is of any challenge.

Then we have the new imperial bloodline single action focus spell that just put the nails on Wizard’s coffin. Now they have equivalent +1/2/3 spell dc with no check/save needed on top of a spell book, more flexible spell slots, better improvements from scrolls and wands, and extra damage bonus. It’s obvious Paizo just don’t like Wizards and want to keep them on the bottom tier. And I wouldn’t expect them to make any improvement let alone remake the Wizard class in any significant way.