So with spells from prohibited schools costing 2 slots instead of 1:
Does this mean that a specialist can use scrolls and spells from a prohibited school?
Hope not.
Hey I'm a specialist. I've got prohibited schools....wait I really don't.
stuffLet's keep this as spoilers since it's probaly off topic a boring to others ;-)
** spoiler omitted **
Back when I thought it was an Enhancement bonus to the weapon (before JB reclarified that the arcane strike feat still works like it did in beta) I thought the new version (the one that was an Enhancement bonus) was waaaayyy too over powered to be allowed.
Here's why:
Bard picks himself up arcane strike at first level. Now he always has a +1 magic weapon, no matter what weapon he uses. In fact the enhancement bonus that scales with levels means that this is basically a quickened greater magic weapon spell that only lasts one round (swift greater magic weapon if you would as a feat, unlimited times per day).
Now later the bard picks himself up a +1 viscious, merciful, wounding speeding, keen longsword.
And you say, "Why did he nerf himself with a +1 weapon?"
My answer, "He didn't, he now has all those abilities, and he can make his weapon +5 as a swift action, since only the highest enhancement bonus counts he as the equivlent of a +14 weapon."
Or any other weapon he picks up is now a +5 weapon regardless of what type it was before he picked it up.
That sir is over powered for a feat any arcane spell chucker can pick up at first level.
Now that JB has cleared that up though, I have no complaints (other than the really powerful Defensive training feat).
No one will ever play Universalists...
People will only ever play Universalists.
Well, as difficult as it is for me to believe, it looks like I'm at one end of the "two sides shouting that it's utterly broken in the opposite directions" that proves something is balanced.
Majuba, at least you know it and can see it.
Hmm, I like the bound item bit. Kind of reminds me of the way Harry has to use his blasting rod or staff in the early books, but the Merlin just kind of wiggles his eyebrows.
Wait. You can Arcane Bind your EYEBROWS!?
Bravo mr. bulmahn...
Yeah, the only danger is when you and your mates get really drunk, and they shave them off while you are passed out!
|
I followed Jason's suggestion from the playtest and removed the Int for damage bonus. Then you have merely Int for to-hit and you have to spend at least a round getting the thing there, and then you have to concentrate, and it can't make Attacks of Opportunity. I just can't see that that version was overpowered.
Okay, but we're not to know that you're not including the Int bonus if you don't tell us. I realize you are telling us now, but when making the point that you don't think it was overpowered the way it was, it's helpful to know that you were using a modified version.
The issue I didn't see resolved was whether people can move through the weapon's square or not. I've ruled that they can but can't end the round occupying the same square, but I'd relax that last, too, if context...Well.. now that it is catagorized as a ranged attack and not a melee attack, the weapon's presence as a 'melee combatant' has been done away with. The description and mental image that resembled a dancing self-fighting sword worked against the actual text that said it always returned the same round. Initially I had that problem with it, until I really reinforced, to myself even, that the weapon was always coming back to the owner the same round it attack (ergo it was not occupying a space at the end of the wizard's turn).
As a ranged attack, that is less confusing. Does a boomerang or starknife occupy the space of something else in it's return flight? Maybe, but not for very long.
I had already mentioned I wasn't using the Int damage to bonus in an earlier post; my post was meant to be a continuation of that discussion. As for the last part, well, I'm going to stick with the old HotA, which was interesting. A weapon ray is pretty boring to me.
No one will ever play Universalists...People will only ever play Universalists.Well, as difficult as it is for me to believe, it looks like I'm at one end of the "two sides shouting that it's utterly broken in the opposite directions" that proves something is balanced.
Well, I can see there's two camps on this issue. It's probably a style of play thing.
All I can say is that I have never seen anyone play a Specialist besides myself, and the whole time I was cursing myself for the choice.
It looks a little less suboptimal now, which is good. But the benefits are still outweighed by the drawbacks, unless the school powers themselves have improved significantly. So I expect I won't be seeing any specialists in my gaming group any time soon.
For the record I am still very happy with the changes, and very far from screaming "The wizard is ruined forever! I quit Pathfinder! Here is an enumerated list of personal slights that Jason Bulmahn has foisted upon me!"
...but there's still one preview left. ;)
...but there's still one preview left. ;)
There are only two more previews left to go before the release of the Core Rulebook. Since we are done with the core classes, next week we are going to take a look at Seltyiel, our iconic eldritch knight!
What is the 14th preview to be?
Chief Technical Officer
|
...but there's still one preview left. ;)There are only two more previews left to go before the release of the Core Rulebook. Since we are done with the core classes, next week we are going to take a look at Seltyiel, our iconic eldritch knight!What is the 14th preview to be?
I hear it'll be the UPC code.
And Vic is usually such a sweet man.
:(
1. Ray of Enfeeblement was powerful indeed, but it does violate the long held rule of thumb - Ranged touch or Saving throw, very rarely both. Is it at least not subject to Spell Resistance?
2. Universalists got a huge hit with the nerf bat.
- Hand of the Apprentice suddenly being subject to all of the ranged attack modifiers, PLUS having the damage nerfed down by using Strength, PLUS having the times per day limited.
- Metamagic Mastery - Three fewer uses per day, and adding the spell level cap so you can't use metamagic on higher level spells.
- No more bonus spells.
- Decreasing the penalty for specialists by allowing them to memorize opposition school spells (not really prohibited anymore is it?)
1. I think I have already covered this. There are a number of iconic spells in the game that require an attack roll and a save (see disintegrate and harm). This is no different for a spell that is very good.
2. They did get scaled back a bit. I think if you check the playtest logs, most folks agreed that they were way too good. They had a lot of versatility and none of the drawbacks of a specialist. To top it off, their powers were better than most of the specialist powers. Now things are a bit more balanced. Once you get a chance to play with all of them, I am confident that you will change your mind.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
To reiterate
1)First level spell so 1st level spell DC, ranged attack roll, spell resistance, and a FORT save for half. This went from being a spell that was good at almost all levels (though honestly obviated by Enervation at 4th level) to being something that is only good against wizards and other bad fort save baddies at low levels. BOO! Harm and disintegrate are save or die spells. This is a save or be moderately less combat effective. All I'm saying is take away the SR and I'll be happy.2)Scaled back a bit? No. No one will play a universalist now. They're horrible, bad, terrible, and not worthwhile at all. You nerfed it HARD, you did not bring it in line with other choices, you decided to punish generalists.
|
To reiterate
1)First level spell so 1st level spell DC, ranged attack roll, spell resistance, and a FORT save for half. This went from being a spell that was good at almost all levels (though honestly obviated by Enervation at 4th level) to being something that is only good against wizards and other bad fort save baddies at low levels. BOO! Harm and disintegrate are save or die spells. This is a save or be moderately less combat effective. All I'm saying is take away the SR and I'll be happy.2)Scaled back a bit? No. No one will play a universalist now. They're horrible, bad, terrible, and not worthwhile at all. You nerfed it HARD, you did not bring it in line with other choices, you decided to punish generalists.
First of all, Ray of Enfeeblement was too good. It was the end all be all spell to end a tank's presence on the battlefield, and the worst part was they had little defense against it as well. It needed a nerf, and it got one. It's still plenty useful, but is quickly overshadowed as is deserving a 1st level spell.
As for the generalists, I really love it when people think they can speak for every player out there. Generalists are back to being what they used to be in 3.5. Back then, all the specialists got were a bonus spell here and there, with a couple forbidden schools. Sure, now they can learn some spells from their forbidden schools, but the cost is great.
In 3.5 days, no one I knew wanted to play specialists. I had one player in five campaigns feel brave to give one a try, and even then he regretted it later. The balance is better now, and I think I'll be seeing a fair amount of both. But to say *no one* is interested in generalists anymore is just plain silly.
2)Scaled back a bit? No. No one will play a universalist now. They're horrible, bad, terrible, and not worthwhile at all. You nerfed it HARD, you did not bring it in line with other choices, you decided to punish generalists.
Is it really out of line with the other choices?
The Universalist has equal access to all schools. Isn't that worth something?
If you've ever played a 3.5 specialist, you know it is worth a LOT. It's a total pain to have to keep telling your party "But I can't cast that spell." That's something you will still have to do, unless the spell is several levels lower than than the highest you can cast.
The universalist never has that problem. So how much is that problem worth? Evidently, one bonus spell per level. Sounds fair to me, that's how it was before.
HotA and Metamagic mastery were the best school powers in the beta. The best school powers should belong to a school, not to the guy who plays jack of all trades, master of none.
|
Just wanted to give a general "thumbs up" on the wizard preview. It looked great!
The two slots for a prohibited school spell was a most elegant solution to the specialist wizard/general wizard balance conundrum. I bow to your superior game design skills.
Very much looking forward to the final book!
Sounds like preview mission accomplished. It's Miller time.
People lay off the Ray, it's not a huge loss!
Honestly it's not a d6 save for half, it's a d6 + up to 5 save for half. IF you maximize it you're looking at -5 minimum. Even without that you'll still have a minimum of 3 if you roll a one after ninth level, off of a first level spell. Yes it's a ray and you have to hit (Not that hard) yes you have SR (not really so common, or high) and yes there is a save but you still get an effect (unlike say, charm person, sleep, or color spray). Over all it's still an excellent choice of a spell for first level, as it stays useful the whole way up. Sleep doesn't, color spray doesn't, grease not so much.
You still got hot stuff here, you just don't get an auto pass on the uber shafting of melee fighters.
I had already mentioned I wasn't using the Int damage to bonus in an earlier post; my post was meant to be a continuation of that discussion.
My mistake on that then.
To reiterate
1)First level spell so 1st level spell DC, ranged attack roll, spell resistance, and a FORT save for half. This went from being a spell that was good at almost all levels (though honestly obviated by Enervation at 4th level) to being something that is only good against wizards and other bad fort save baddies at low levels. BOO! Harm and disintegrate are save or die spells. This is a save or be moderately less combat effective. All I'm saying is take away the SR and I'll be happy.2)Scaled back a bit? No. No one will play a universalist now. They're horrible, bad, terrible, and not worthwhile at all. You nerfed it HARD, you did not bring it in line with other choices, you decided to punish generalists.
First of all, Ray of Enfeeblement was too good. It was the end all be all spell to end a tank's presence on the battlefield, and the worst part was they had little defense against it as well. It needed a nerf, and it got one. It's still plenty useful, but is quickly overshadowed as is deserving a 1st level spell.
As for the generalists, I really love it when people think they can speak for every player out there. Generalists are back to being what they used to be in 3.5. Back then, all the specialists got were a bonus spell here and there, with a couple forbidden schools. Sure, now they can learn some spells from their forbidden schools, but the cost is great.
In 3.5 days, no one I knew wanted to play specialists. I had one player in five campaigns feel brave to give one a try, and even then he regretted it later. The balance is better now, and I think I'll be seeing a fair amount of both. But to say *no one* is interested in generalists anymore is just plain silly.
I agree, the ray was too good. I'm fine with a moderate nerf, something that would keep it scaling into higher levels. But let's be honest it isn't the be all end all skill you seem to think it is.
The problem seems to arise largely in conjunction with higher level spells (waves of exhaustion, etc.) and getting something's str down so low that it would be immobilized. How about just making it 1d4+1/3 levels to a maximum of 6, and it be a -hit/-dmg penalty? If it were just a will save I wouldn't be whining either.
As for generalists, in 3.5 they didn't get bonus spells but weren't restricted to any schools. Now specialists aren't restricted by schools (its just harder to cast those schools), they get bonus spells, and useful extra abilities. The change to hand of the apprentice or whatever makes it, IMO, not worth using. So I can make a ranged attack roll, likely with a -4 modifier unless I waste a feat slot, to hit its normal AC and do piddly damage. Even if I'm an elf and have proficiency in longsword that's 1d8 and likely no str bonus. I'll just acid splash for a ranged touch. The ability was only really overpowered at level 1-3 or so. I would have changed it so that you add int to your attack roll and int OR your CL whichever is lower to DMG. Then it would be worse than the fighter at low levels and by the time it could even possibly rival the dmg from a fighter, he's getting multiple attacks.
I guess we'll have to wait for the final version to be sure, but for now it seems the wizard is the only class that is genuinely worse off than beta, other than possibly Barbarian (I LIKED rage points :P) and arguably weaker than 3.5.
whiners :-)
Neither does a specialist now, and that extra bonus spell means alot,
I play generalist all the time and was impressed by the way the class
was in Beta, now, it has the most useless abilities, I was looking
forward to Pathfinder, now I am not, all the other schools get special
abilities the generalist has them taken away. And, no the schools
HAVE School Powers in that School, why shouldn't a generalist who knows
about all have a good power?
Simple the Generalist has no school, he gives NOTHING up at all. Sure the others can now cast prohibited schools at x2 cost. But the Generalist lost nothing from 3.5 and gamed 2 useful abilitys
I for one was damned glad to see the pure overpowered Beta one get nerfed and nerfed hard, as there was no other choice if you wanted to play a wizard. Now there is. The beta was over the top 10 times two good. What did tyhey give up at all for the extra power? And HoA was overpowered ask my pbp player who said off topic in our game it needed a nerf, he out fought the fighter, and every other melee class at rang with it, The Int bounes needed to go
Oh and much love on the nerco fix, I houseruled the same fix myself
|
I'm fine now with the reduction of number of the special ability uses per day. The Barbarian's rage and the Bard's bardic abilities are also limited to a certain number per day, so as I see it now, the classes are more even.
True, it was cool to have a levitating weapon, but I think the concentration thing made it difficult to adjudicate. The dancing magic weapon enhancement is still a valid one (I hope), and a Wizard who is bonded with a sword could enchant it at the right level. (5th level if I remember correctly).
So in a way, these rules do remove the extreme imbalance of a constant ability in levels 1-3. And an animated or dancing sword is far more effective than the HoTA. This does truly even out the classes (at least comparing the Universalist to Bards and Barbarians). I will assume the specialists received modifications to make them equal as well.
And seriously, if your Wizard is involved in so many combats a day that he has to rely on HoTA more than a few times a day between 1st and 4th level, it's likely the Wizard isn't preparing his spells right. A Wizard going into combat will hopefully prepare combat spells, not divination ones, and these are much more flashy and exciting. Give me a magic missile or a burning hands any day over a sword moved by concentration.
This moves the focus back on the Wizard's spellcasting rather than his melee combat ability.
The Wizard is a caster class, he's someone for the rogue or fighter to protect, not be intimdated by.
Neither does a specialist now, and that extra bonus spell means alot,
I play generalist all the time and was impressed by the way the class
was in Beta, now, it has the most useless abilities, I was looking
forward to Pathfinder, now I am not, all the other schools get special
abilities the generalist has them taken away. And, no the schools
HAVE School Powers in that School, why shouldn't a generalist who knows
about all have a good power?Simple the Generalist has no school, he gives NOTHING up at all. Sure the others can now cast prohibited schools at x2 cost. But the Generalist lost nothing from 3.5 and gamed 2 useful abilitys
I for one was damned glad to see the pure overpowered Beta one get nerfed and nerfed hard, as there was no other choice if you wanted to play a wizard. Now there is. The beta was over the top 10 times two good. What did tyhey give up at all for the extra power? And HoA was overpowered ask my pbp player who said off topic in our game it needed a nerf, he out fought the fighter, and every other melee class at rang with it, The Int bounes needed to go
Oh and much love on the nerco fix, I houseruled the same fix myself
again, the point is that the generalist now gives up extra spell slots that the specialists get for nothing whatsoever. basically one could be a specialist and give up evocation and necromancy (especially easy now that wall of force and ray of enfeeblement are nerfed) with no drawbacks on their usefulness. why NOT specialize now? generalizing should be the standard IMO, and encouraged not discouraged. no one will use hand of the apprentice now, and the metamagic ability is only good at higher levels, and even then it's not what it once was.
The player in my Crimson Throne, who plays a universal wizard (Started in 3.0, changed to 3.5/Beta) is going to continue as a universalist, and is happy with the changes. He felt that the universalist had no drawbacks in Beta, and the extra spells were above what the specialist deals with.
So, to refute the statements of "no one is going to do this" ... they are :) I have proof under my own roof.
again, the point is that the generalist now gives up extra spell slots that the specialists get for nothing whatsoever. QUOTE]I dont understand this? what did the wizard lose from 3.5? he gained at lest 2 ability. The specialist still give up 2 schools, sure they can still cast em at a price of 2 spells, but they gives something up for that extra power, what does the genelist give up at all?
stuff
Since you don't use spoilers I will answer you in the bard thread in a day or two. Teaser: Greater magic weapon.
No one will ever play Universalists...People will only ever play Universalists.Well, as difficult as it is for me to believe, it looks like I'm at one end of the "two sides shouting that it's utterly broken in the opposite directions" that proves something is balanced.
I'm at the same end. I think very few people will ever play Universalists. Especially if they can use scrolls and spells from a prohibited school. That said the Universalist had to be nerfd
what does the genelist give up at all?
Nothing as far as I know.
Sure a specialists have two prohibited schools. But you'll pick two schools you won't use often. So lets say you are a 8 level wizard.You want one 1-level spell and one 3-level spell from a prohibited school. Since you get a bonus spell at each spell level that's not really a problem. The specialist now has:
- more cool abilities (if the final is the same as the beta)
- one more 2-level spell and one more 4-level spell compared to the Universalist.
Edit:
What has the specialist lost? Nothing?
If he also can use wands and scrolls, then most people won't play Universalists. But still. The Universalist needed a good nerf. I only hope the specialist got one too.
again, the point is that the generalist now gives up extra spell slots that the specialists get for nothing whatsoever. QUOTE]I dont understand this? what did the wizard lose from 3.5? he gained at lest 2 ability. The specialist still give up 2 schools, sure they can still cast em at a price of 2 spells, but they gives something up for that extra power, what does the genelist give up at all?
the specialist can cast from a prohibited school, but it costs him 2 slots. well as it happens he also gets an extra slot, so he can happily memorize one spell from a prohibited school at every level every day and be effectively the same as a generalist. oh except his school powers, which are likely better than the generalist's.
what does the generalist give up? the right to a school power! if it's like beta, each school gets a signature power and then a school power at 1st, 8th, and 20th. transmuter gets, regardless of his level, an enhancement bonus to a physical score on top of his abilities at 1st,8th, and 20th level. generalists don't get that, their 1st level ability is crap, and their 8th level ability is..well okay it's still good but still not worth the trade off.
depending on playstyle I don't think any wizard would have trouble giving up a spell school or two that they wouldn't use anyway. in which case the choice is simple: specialize. I would also agree with the sentiment that the generalist powers were too good in Beta, but now there's almost no reason not to specialize whereas in 3.5 it seemed like there wasn't enough of one.
You get at first level, if you are lucky, 2 spells
No you get cantrips at will. stuff like:
- daze- acid spalsh (by passes all damage reduction)
- Disrupt Undead
All spells ignore armor.
And you get AT LEAST two 1:st level spells...unless your wizard is really stupid.
The player in my Crimson Throne, who plays a universal wizard (Started in 3.0, changed to 3.5/Beta) is going to continue as a universalist, and is happy with the changes. He felt that the universalist had no drawbacks in Beta, and the extra spells were above what the specialist deals with.
So, to refute the statements of "no one is going to do this" ... they are :) I have proof under my own roof.
I concur. I'm not a big fan of running wizards, but if I'm going to play one I want as much versatility as possible. I might specialize a BBEG, but for a PC I'd still go generalist from what I've seen.
Replying to a lot here, just wanted to get in some thoughts. Please take any grumblings as in good spirits.
Decreasing the penalty for specialists by allowing them to memorize opposition school spells (not really prohibited anymore is it?)
They weren't "really prohibited anymore" in the Beta either. Specialists *could* memorize prohibited school spells in the Beta, and the *only* thing they lost was their "Specialist Bonus" power from first level - Necromancy's control 8HD, Transmutations' enhancement bonus to a stat, etc. They don't lose their bonus spells, they don't lose their 1st level ability, they don't lose their 8th level ability, or their 20th. One dinky little power.
2. They did get scaled back a bit. I think if you check the playtest logs, most folks agreed that they were way too good. They had a lot of versatility and none of the drawbacks of a specialist. To top it off, their powers were better than most of the specialist powers. Now things are a bit more balanced. Once you get a chance to play with all of them, I am confident that you will change your mind.
"Most folks" didn't know what they were talking about frankly, not realizing how little specialists gave up by memorizing prohibited spells. The rest (including myself) were almost all refering just to the rather high power of metamagic and 20th level ability (+ Hand).
Hmm.. actually it appears that the heat yesterday might have been cooking my head. Arcane strike is an untyped bonus to damage only. Meaning that it does stack with the weapons bonus, but it does not add to the attack roll. This will be corrected.
You took the damage bonus off as well as the to-hit bonus (changing the assumption that he would use Arcane strike anytime he used the cane).
So with spells from prohibited schools costing 2 slots instead of 1:
Does this mean that a specialist can use scrolls and wands from a prohibited school?
I don't know about the final, but there was no language against it in the Beta.
I don't think Arbitus was complaining about any of the changes so much as asking what about this preview was supposed to get us excited for Pathfinder and Wizards? It seems the whole preview is taken up discussing balance issues with little to no "check out this cool new ability/mechanic" that we saw in most other previews.
Agreed, and quite similar to the cleric preview. The assumed strongest classes of 3.5, so this makes some sense. They also were the most "reverted" I believe.
It only moved 15' a round, which takes a move action for the wizard
This I never knew, thanks. I thought the ability was just slightly iffy - if I'd known this I'd have been satisfied. I don't have a problem with the #/day though.
HotA and Metamagic mastery were the best school powers in the beta. The best school powers should belong to a school, not to the guy who plays jack of all trades, master of none.
No question.
That said the Universalist had to be nerfd
Again - no question.
whiners :-)
Fully admitted :þ
331 hours until release... and counting...
What has the specialist lost? Nothing?
Not picking on you here... but have we seen what exactly the specialist has gained/ lost between the beta and the final? I must have missed that.
Personally, I'm kind of in the dark about what exactly the specialists gained/ lost. Here is what I know:
Many of the schools got a bit of a revamp, most due to playtester feedback. Take the necromancy school for example. The core power of this school now allows a necromancer to control or turn undead (as per the feats) a number of times per day, meaning that a necromancer does not necessarily have to be evil (the white necromancy option). We also changed the way that wizards with an arcane school interact with their prohibited schools. They can now learn and cast these spells just like any other wizard; however, when they prepare them, spells from a wizard's prohibited school take up two slots instead of one. For example, a 6th-level wizard with three 3rd-level spell spots could use two of them to prepare a dispel magic spell, even if abjuration was one of his prohibited schools.
So what we know is a little about necromancer's core power and that they can now prepare prohibited spells by using 2 slots instead of 1. Jason also let slip that Evokers get a little bonus damage...
?? So how do you (and apparently everyone else on this thread other than me) know what the specialist has gained/ lost? I guess we are all just assuming the specialists keep their bonus spells like they had in 3.5? Or do they have bonus spells like in the Beta?... Erm or something?
How about just making it 1d4+1/3 levels to a maximum of 6, and it be a -hit/-dmg penalty?
No. The old was something like 1d3+1/4 levels to hit and damage. At/Dmg penalties are twice as strong as strength penalties.
How about just making it 1d4+1/3 levels to a maximum of 6, and it be a -hit/-dmg penalty?No. The old was something like 1d3+1/4 levels to hit and damage. At/Dmg penalties are twice as strong as strength penalties.
The old? Meaning what 2nd edition? In 3.0 and 3.5 as well as Beta PF it has been 1d6 +1/2 levels STR penalty.
And yeah attack/dmg penalties ARE twice as bad, which is why the cap is half as much. But using a spell to reduce an opponent's attack and damage seems more defensive than offensive, it will never kill an enemy or reduce his ability to defend himself. The only problem I saw with RoE was its ability to halt a heavy armor character who could no longer carry its armor, or in conjunction with higher level spells to do the same. Changing it to an att/dmg penalty instead of STR penalty fixes that.
The player in my Crimson Throne, who plays a universal wizard (Started in 3.0, changed to 3.5/Beta) is going to continue as a universalist, and is happy with the changes. He felt that the universalist had no drawbacks in Beta, and the extra spells were above what the specialist deals with.
So, to refute the statements of "no one is going to do this" ... they are :) I have proof under my own roof.
I am said Universalist Wizard.
Believe me, I fully agreed that the Universal Wizard from Beta needed hit with the Nerf Bat. So, no the changes to the wizard do not make me want to change to a Specialist (or drop the character).
Am I "in love" with all the changes? No.
But they are all well thought out and none destroy the class for me.
what does the genelist give up at all?
Nothing as far as I know.
Sure a specialists have two prohibited schools. But you'll pick two schools you won't use often. So lets say you are a 8 level wizard.
You want one 1-level spell and one 3-level spell from a prohibited school. Since you get a bonus spell at each spell level that's not really a problem. The specialist now has:
- more cool abilities (if the final is the same as the beta)
- one more 2-level spell and one more 4-level spell compared to the Universalist.
Except, that as a player character wizard you do not have complete control over all the spells you get.
For example:
The party defeats an enemy specialist wizard. Unfortunately, his speciality just happens to be one of your prohibited schools ...
The old? Meaning what 2nd edition? In 3.0 and 3.5 as well as Beta PF it has been 1d6 +1/2 levels STR penalty.
Which translates more or less into 1d3 + 1/4lv penalty to attack and damage. Because for every 2 points of damage to Str, you get -1 to attack and damage. More or less.
Saying it's 1d4 +1/3 to attack and damage would be like (1d4+1/3)x2 str penalty.
And yeah attack/dmg penalties ARE twice as bad, which is why the cap is half as much.
So you don't hit people 12 times, but a dozen times? Rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic.
But using a spell to reduce an opponent's attack and damage seems more defensive than offensive, it will never kill an enemy or reduce his ability to defend himself.
Offense is defense. Defense is offense. Being too weak to lift that big hammer means the priest can saunter up to you and cast his touch spells right next to you, since you cannot properly hit him for it. It also means you cannot kill the other fast enough before he kills you.
You can still cast that extended invisbility or acid arrow at a crucial momment without sacrficing a higher level slot.
Still freedom of movement.
Now everyone hold their horses with the specialist. Lets see what the official rules will be before conclusions are made. So far I like the double slot cost for preparation of a prohibited school. It means you wont lose access to two schools of magic, but forces the wizard to think twice before memorizing a spell from a prohibited school. It also cautions players to choose wisely which schools to make prohibited.
Two prohibited schools are crippling. I remember many times I wanted to play a wizard, looked into specialisation, coudln't decide on two schools to kick out, and stayed generalist instead.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Two prohibited schools are crippling. I remember many times I wanted to play a wizard, looked into specialisation, coudln't decide on two schools to kick out, and stayed generalist instead.
Weird, I've never had that problem, I just look at what two schools don't fit the concept. Usually necromancy gets das boot, and either evocation or conjuration.
My banned schools are Necromancy and Conjuration. :)
Question: Does a cantrip of a banned school still count as a cantrip?
I wonder how specialization will work now regarding prestige classes.
If those bonus spells are lost when we go into the PC, but the penalties (prohibited schools) remain, then sure we will not see any specialist wizard going to PC.
|
|
what does the genelist give up at all?
Nothing as far as I know.
Sure a specialists have two prohibited schools. But you'll pick two schools you won't use often. So lets say you are a 8 level wizard.
You want one 1-level spell and one 3-level spell from a prohibited school. Since you get a bonus spell at each spell level that's not really a problem. The specialist now has:
- more cool abilities (if the final is the same as the beta)
- one more 2-level spell and one more 4-level spell compared to the Universalist.Except, that as a player character wizard you do not have complete control over all the spells you get.
For example:
The party defeats an enemy specialist wizard. Unfortunately, his speciality just happens to be one of your prohibited schools ...
CotCT reference
My banned schools are Necromancy and Conjuration. :)
Question: Does a cantrip of a banned school still count as a cantrip?
Well, a cantrip is a cantrip. Remember that Wizards, Clerics and Druids must still prepair their 3 or 4 cantrips per day in order to cast them at will.
So I would say that a Specialist Wizard who has Evocation as a Prohibited School has to 'burn up' two slots to cast his Ray of Frost at will (instead of just one).
My banned schools are Necromancy and Conjuration. :)
Question: Does a cantrip of a banned school still count as a cantrip?
Yeah, but of course, you have to spend two spell slots for them.