| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Based on my past opinion polls, most forum-users agree C/MD exists (casters can find ways to substitute for a lack of martials, while martials are limited without caster support, etc), but a high proportion of players say it doesn't bother them. They find various ways to work around it or ignore it:
"When there's a battle, my Fighter gets to go on a killing spree. What more do I need?"
"My GM adds house-rules to stop casters abusing their powers."
"I found an intelligent magic sword which allows me to contribute in lots of ways I wouldn't otherwise be able to do."
"Who cares about agency from class abilities? The campaign we're playing gives us plenty of agency, irrespective of class."
"Our Sorcerer really only casts fire spells, and our Cleric only casts buffs and heals. I can't say I've noticed much disparity."
"Party balance is unimportant to us; we're creating a story together."
Etc.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I hope that, in general, martials will get more skill points than casters.
While you were learning to cast Levitate, I was learning to Climb. While you were learning to cast Vanish, I was learning Stealth. While you were learning to cast Charm Person, I was learning Diplomacy.
It's unlikely to close the gap at high level, because Dominate Person is more powerful than Intimidate and Fly is more powerful than Climb, and so on. But if the Rogue isn't even better at skills than the Wizard, that feels pretty unbalanced, just as it's not great if the Cleric can out-damage a Fighter with weapons.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've dealt with it in PF pretty deftly, but many do NOT like my fix. Basically, having Anti-Magic Shells abundant and easily accessible to martials (for example, having it on a shield which the martial can activate) depowers a LOT of the Caster/Martial disparity (but it doesn't shut it down entirely, many other options for casterseven with an AMS up).
The thing is the VULNERABILITY things and creatures have to magic. Same holds true for 5e as well (most get two saves they are proficient with, which means with system mastery, you just cast spells for the other four saves they are not).
AD&D up to 3e dealt with it via two methods. The first was to make it so that casting was EASILY disruptible. If you could disrupt the caster, the spell was ruined.
The Second was that as characters got higher level, their vulnerability to magic got lower. In othewords, their saving throws improved to the point that it got very hard to get spells to stick in many instances.
This actually holds true to what we see in films at times from the 80s when spellcasters try to enamor the hero, and while they were successful with the mooks, the hero is able to throw off the spell effects and then slay the evil wizard/caster.
It could be a simple fix to apply some of these to modern RPGs, but post-2000 spellcasters have normally been highly favored and such simple and easy fixes ignored.
Based on my past opinion polls, most forum-users agree C/MD exists (casters can find ways to substitute for a lack of martials, while martials are limited without caster support, etc), but a high proportion of players say it doesn't bother them. They find various ways to work around it or ignore it:
"When there's a battle, my Fighter gets to go on a killing spree. What more do I need?"
"My GM adds house-rules to stop casters abusing their powers."
"I found an intelligent magic sword which allows me to contribute in lots of ways I wouldn't otherwise be able to do."
"Who cares about agency from class abilities? The campaign we're playing gives us plenty of agency, irrespective of class."
"Our Sorcerer really only casts fire spells, and our Cleric only casts buffs and heals. I can't say I've noticed much disparity."
"Party balance is unimportant to us; we're creating a story together."
Etc.
I find these to occur mostly at live tables. I've never seen the issue addressed in a PBP game. PBP games are usually where I see the C/MD heightened the most.
At a table, some people are just being social, whereas on PBP, people actively want to participate in the game/story qua game/story, so the "just let the fighter sit back (and joke/eat snacks) outside of combat" social contract might work for some live tables but few online ones. Possibly this also accounts for the popularity of gestalt in PBP.
Do you know the best way to even the field in the C/MD? (evil laughter)
Have a very small but rising chance of catastrophic spell failure built into the casting system, with increasingly dire results possible with higher level spells, up to and including permanent insanity or having your soul eaten by some extradimensional horror, like Yog-Sothoth.
I suspect there is zero chance of seeing catastrophic spell-failure baked into the PF2.0 magic system, but you gotta admit that it would put a brake on high-level casters tossing magic around like it was candy.
Man if Paizo added a Tzeentch's Curse/Wrath of the Gods/Perils of the Warp to PF2 I would suggest getting a lawnchair, a tub of popcorn, and a cooler of your beverage of choice and sit back because the levels of salt would be positively exquisite to behold.
Oh goodness, I would definitely be contributing quite a bit of salt. I suspect it would indeed be popcorn-worthy. Deep down, I like C/MD.
To me, the culture of C/MD was exemplified the strongest when a new ability was released that allowed a PC to dash in a straight line attacking everyone along that line.
Sounds pretty cool, huh? Except it wasn't an ability any martial class could do, because it was a spell. :/
Said spell was not on the wizard spell list.
It was given exclusively to two 3/4 BAB classes, one of which was heavily focused on martial abilities.
To me, the culture of C/MD was exemplified the strongest when a new ability was released that allowed a PC to dash in a straight line attacking everyone along that line.
Sounds pretty cool, huh? Except it wasn't an ability any martial class could do, because it was a spell. :/
Said spell was not on the wizard spell list.
It was given exclusively to two 3/4 BAB classes, one of which was heavily focused on martial abilities.
That's not the problem.
The problem is the great martial abilities were gated behind a spell.
Bladed Dash is better Spring Attack with no prerequisites. Greater Bladed Dash is better Springing Whirlwind Attack (which doesn't even exist and would cost more than half a dozen feats if it did) with no prerequisites.
The prerequisites are the spellcasting requirements.
|
I'm not certain that this is relevant, but, I noticed in the GC podcast that the 1st level wizard only ever used cantrips.(at least I don't remember anything but 'Light' and 'Acid Splash'). I wonder if that means that Spell casters only get cantrips at 1st, and then 1st at 2nd, and new level every even level, with 10th level spells at 20th. Just a thought.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That is the whole point.The prerequisites are the spellcasting levels...To me, the culture of C/MD was exemplified the strongest when a new ability was released that allowed a PC to dash in a straight line attacking everyone along that line.
Sounds pretty cool, huh? Except it wasn't an ability any martial class could do, because it was a spell. :/
Said spell was not on the wizard spell list.
It was given exclusively to two 3/4 BAB classes, one of which was heavily focused on martial abilities.
That's not the problem.
The problem is the great martial abilities were gated behind a spell.
Bladed Dash is better Spring Attack with no prerequisites. Greater Bladed Dash is better Springing Whirlwind Attack (which doesn't even exist and would cost more than half a dozen feats if it did) with no prerequisites.
I think what kyrt-rider is saying is that if the game had a "super run past everone and hurt them" ability, that it should be a martial ability of some sort, not a spell. Not even a martial tending spelluser. Just flat out something that martials with no spellpower can do.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not certain that this is relevant, but, I noticed in the GC podcast that the 1st level wizard only ever used cantrips.(at least I don't remember anything but 'Light' and 'Acid Splash'). I wonder if that means that Spell casters only get cantrips at 1st, and then 1st at 2nd, and new level every even level, with 10th level spells at 20th. Just a thought.
The same thought had occurred to me as well, maybe they just get “1st level” spells (read: canttips in PF1) and they move up to “2nd level” spells (read: 1st level PF1 spells) at 3rd level. This would effectively delay spell progression by two levels. I think that would be a large positive influence for the game.
To me, the culture of C/MD was exemplified the strongest when a new ability was released that allowed a PC to dash in a straight line attacking everyone along that line.
Sounds pretty cool, huh? Except it wasn't an ability any martial class could do, because it was a spell. :/
Said spell was not on the wizard spell list.
It was given exclusively to two 3/4 BAB classes, one of which was heavily focused on martial abilities.
My samsaran sorcerer says, “hi.”
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Aye, it's probably not something EVERY martial should get, but it should be available and relatively easy.
Say: Whirlwind Bladed Dash requires the Bladed Dash Feat and Whirlwind Attack Feat (neither of which has prerequisites besides Weapon Proficiency (Trained or Expert, not sure atm). MAYBE Whirlwind Attack requires Cleave at most (and cleave certainly has no prerequisites except Weapon Proficiency Trained)
EDIT: thinking it over Whirlwind Attack should just disappear and Cleave can scale with Weapon Proficiency. +1 at trained, + 2 more at Expert +4 more at Master to Unlimited at Legendary.
I think we should get away from prereqs outside of BAB for martial characters. Wizards get far more than 25 spells throughout the game, and they don’t have to take levitate before they can learn fly. If a fighter is only going to get ~25 feats for 20 levels of gameplay, let them stand on their own. Gate them behind level prereqs or bab prereqs if you must, but let’s get away from the design paradigm of, “you must do this before you can do that.”
I believe the idea in PF2 is that feats only have other feats as prequisites if the second feat builds off the first feat somehow (like combat styles in PF1, say) and thus wouldn't make sense without the prereq.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I believe the idea in PF2 is that feats only have other feats as prequisites if the second feat builds off the first feat somehow (like combat styles in PF1, say) and thus wouldn't make sense without the prereq.
If that’s the case then those feat trees need to grow on their own. Thing/improved thing/greater thing/special thing trick should all be one feat that unlocks as you level.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think we should get away from prereqs outside of BAB for martial characters. Wizards get far more than 25 spells throughout the game, and they don’t have to take levitate before they can learn fly. If a fighter is only going to get ~25 feats for 20 levels of gameplay, let them stand on their own. Gate them behind level prereqs or bab prereqs if you must, but let’s get away from the design paradigm of, “you must do this before you can do that.”Aye, it's probably not something EVERY martial should get, but it should be available and relatively easy.
Say: Whirlwind Bladed Dash requires the Bladed Dash Feat and Whirlwind Attack Feat (neither of which has prerequisites besides Weapon Proficiency (Trained or Expert, not sure atm). MAYBE Whirlwind Attack requires Cleave at most (and cleave certainly has no prerequisites except Weapon Proficiency Trained)
EDIT: thinking it over Whirlwind Attack should just disappear and Cleave can scale with Weapon Proficiency. +1 at trained, + 2 more at Expert +4 more at Master to Unlimited at Legendary.
Actually, doing it the other way (IE, Caster spells also have prerequisites) might not be a bad idea. There's plenty of games where you need "Heal" before the Equivalent of "Mass Heal" or "Invisibility" before "Greater Invisibility", or "Fireball" before "Firestorm", or what have you.
Of course, if a wizard/magus/other spellbook class can still learn all the spells they want by just buying scrolls and copying them to a spellbook, you'll still have problems, but it'd be an interesting thing to see.
I think we should get away from prereqs outside of BAB for martial characters. Wizards get far more than 25 spells throughout the game, and they don’t have to take levitate before they can learn fly. If a fighter is only going to get ~25 feats for 20 levels of gameplay, let them stand on their own. Gate them behind level prereqs or bab prereqs if you must, but let’s get away from the design paradigm of, “you must do this before you can do that.”Aye, it's probably not something EVERY martial should get, but it should be available and relatively easy.
Say: Whirlwind Bladed Dash requires the Bladed Dash Feat and Whirlwind Attack Feat (neither of which has prerequisites besides Weapon Proficiency (Trained or Expert, not sure atm). MAYBE Whirlwind Attack requires Cleave at most (and cleave certainly has no prerequisites except Weapon Proficiency Trained)
EDIT: thinking it over Whirlwind Attack should just disappear and Cleave can scale with Weapon Proficiency. +1 at trained, + 2 more at Expert +4 more at Master to Unlimited at Legendary.
Actually, doing it the other way (IE, Caster spells also have prerequisites) might not be a bad idea. There's plenty of games where you need "Heal" before the Equivalent of "Mass Heal" or "Invisibility" before "Greater Invisibility", or "Fireball" before "Firestorm", or what have you.
Of course, if a wizard/magus/other spellbook class can still learn all the spells they want by just buying scrolls and copying them to a spellbook, you'll still have problems, but it'd be an interesting thing to see.
I'm totally game for that sort of thing. Like, if you want to learn a 5th level mind control spell, you'd better also know at least 4 other mind-affecting spells of lower levels as well. Want a 9th level mind control spell, please have 8 other mind affecting spells first.
Unless you're a Wild Mage who learns and casts spells as a sorcerer instead of preparing like a wizard, who might reasonably in-theme be expected to learn spells randomly.
I think we should get away from prereqs outside of BAB for martial characters. Wizards get far more than 25 spells throughout the game, and they don’t have to take levitate before they can learn fly. If a fighter is only going to get ~25 feats for 20 levels of gameplay, let them stand on their own. Gate them behind level prereqs or bab prereqs if you must, but let’s get away from the design paradigm of, “you must do this before you can do that.”Aye, it's probably not something EVERY martial should get, but it should be available and relatively easy.
Say: Whirlwind Bladed Dash requires the Bladed Dash Feat and Whirlwind Attack Feat (neither of which has prerequisites besides Weapon Proficiency (Trained or Expert, not sure atm). MAYBE Whirlwind Attack requires Cleave at most (and cleave certainly has no prerequisites except Weapon Proficiency Trained)
EDIT: thinking it over Whirlwind Attack should just disappear and Cleave can scale with Weapon Proficiency. +1 at trained, + 2 more at Expert +4 more at Master to Unlimited at Legendary.
Actually, doing it the other way (IE, Caster spells also have prerequisites) might not be a bad idea. There's plenty of games where you need "Heal" before the Equivalent of "Mass Heal" or "Invisibility" before "Greater Invisibility", or "Fireball" before "Firestorm", or what have you.
Of course, if a wizard/magus/other spellbook class can still learn all the spells they want by just buying scrolls and copying them to a spellbook, you'll still have problems, but it'd be an interesting thing to see.
I'm totally game for that sort of thing. Like, if you want to learn a 5th level mind control spell, you'd better also know at least 4 other mind-affecting spells of lower levels as well. Want a 9th level mind control spell, please have 8 other mind affecting spells first.
Unless you're a Wild Mage who learns and casts spells as a sorcerer instead of preparing...
Yes, though you have to be careful about that sort of thing, otherwise you end up with quite a disparity.
It's all well and good to say you need to learn Burning Hands before you can learn Burning Arc, and you need Burning Arc before you can learn Fireball, and such and such. But if a prepared caster is still able to add spells to their spellbook/familiar with nothing but gold, then you end up in a situation where you're unfairly penalizing casters with limited spells known and the other casters just not care.
But I'm sure it can be done, with enough work. It's only fair, if a guy needs Cleave before Great Cleave. Although having just a Cleave feat and having it scale with levels is another nice solution.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I believe the idea in PF2 is that feats only have other feats as prequisites if the second feat builds off the first feat somehow (like combat styles in PF1, say) and thus wouldn't make sense without the prereq.If that’s the case then those feat trees need to grow on their own. Thing/improved thing/greater thing/special thing trick should all be one feat that unlocks as you level.
I think that it is possible for one thing to be worth a feat and for a second thing that adds on to it, providing another option, is worth an additional feat.
Like some PF1 combat styles are too good to give the whole thing for a single feat (e.g. outslug style). So as long as every feat is worth the price of admission, it's not a problem if there are self-contained chains. What we need to avoid is things like "combat expertise is needed for improved combat maneuvers" because combat expertise doesn't make you better at disarming (for example) at all, what combat expertise does has nothing to do with what almost everything that has it as a prereq does.
So as long as every feat is worth it for what it does, not for what it unlocks, it's okay to have trees.
Outslug style has a helacious pile of prereqs, but I did build a Brawler who used it with a polearm (thank you Adventurer's Armory 2) and being able to 10' step then flurry against people 15' away was kinda amazing enough to be worth it. Comes online at level 8.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Love how every thread on this just eventually gets around to "guy, we have to nerf casters- if there's any reason for anyone to ever roll one, they are too powerful."
Yes, let's add all casters to the pile of things made unfun and needed to unusuability in the new edition- that's a great idea!
Sits down at PF2 table, "well, what did you bring guys?"
All 6 responses, "fighter using two handed sword; only usable build."
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
Amazingly, one is capable of nerfing casters while also boosting martials while also keeping casters more powerful than martials.
The gulf is that large.
But one wouldn't be able to envision this if one refused to accept that more than two possibilities existed.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Love how every thread on this just eventually gets around to "guy, we have to nerf casters- if there's any reason for anyone to ever roll one, they are too powerful."
Yes, let's add all casters to the pile of things made unfun and needed to unusuability in the new edition- that's a great idea!
Sits down at PF2 table, "well, what did you bring guys?"
All 6 responses, "fighter using two handed sword; only usable build."
Reductionist nonsense.
If you take the time to read and appreciate the conversation here you would see that it is much closer to, "given that casters are awesome and will likely continue to be, how can we help out the fighter? We need to help them to the point that they have options and narrative power commensurate with a caster of the time level. We may need to talk about toning down casters a bit to really achieve parity."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like the way to do this is have feats improve when you level (or increase proficiency or whatever) in one dimension, and have the feats that have that feat as a prerequisite improve that feat along an orthogonal dimension.
Like "Vital Strike" should just improve in the "Improved, Greater" dimension in terms of doing more damage automatically. But if you wanted to print additional feats that added riders to your vital strike or allowed you to vital strike in more situations (as an AoO, on a charge, etc) those are valid feats with VS as a prereq.
Ideas like making casters not get a first level spell till second level, and forcing them to take pre-reqs final fantasy style are essentially the equivalent to removing casters from the game,and you all know that.
Everyone of these ideas is aimed at making casters unplayable.
No one wants to keep casters awesome, it's all "how can we make it so that martial are better in every way and laugh at the people dumb enough to still roll casters"
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ideas like making casters not get a first level spell till second level, and forcing them to take pre-reqs final fantasy style are essentially the equivalent to removing casters from the game,and you all know that.
Everyone of these ideas is aimed at making casters unplayable.
No one wants to keep casters awesome, it's all "how can we make it so that martial are better in every way and laugh at the people dumb enough to still roll casters"
Yeah, because that prevents casters from being incredibly powerful in Dragon Age, or Psykers from being incredibly powerful in all the D100 40,000 games (Pro Tip: It doesn't, it just means they actually have to invest their resources to achieve that power).
Or, I put it to you, why is it okay for a Fighter to have to take Cleave, Great Cleave, Cleaving Finish and Greater Cleaving Finish if he wants to hit targets adjacent to a dude he has hit, but it's not ok to demand pre-requisites for some of the more powerful spells besides "You reached X level."?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ideas like making casters not get a first level spell till second level, and forcing them to take pre-reqs final fantasy style are essentially the equivalent to removing casters from the game,and you all know that.
Everyone of these ideas is aimed at making casters unplayable.
No one wants to keep casters awesome, it's all "how can we make it so that martial are better in every way and laugh at the people dumb enough to still roll casters"
Casters having to put in some small amount of effort to go from "I can't even create a spark with magic." to "I rain fire from the heavens." is going to make them unplayable.
While Martials being able to get at least one good thing from every one feat they take, instead of one good thing for every three, that will make them better in every way.
Your logic is flawed, somehow. But I can't quite pinpoint where the mistake is...
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ideas like making casters not get a first level spell till second level, and forcing them to take pre-reqs final fantasy style are essentially the equivalent to removing casters from the game,and you all know that.
Everyone of these ideas is aimed at making casters unplayable.
No one wants to keep casters awesome, it's all "how can we make it so that martial are better in every way and laugh at the people dumb enough to still roll casters"
You've gotten way too used to being the most powerful person in the party, huh.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ideas like making casters not get a first level spell till second level, and forcing them to take pre-reqs final fantasy style are essentially the equivalent to removing casters from the game,and you all know that.
Everyone of these ideas is aimed at making casters unplayable.
No one wants to keep casters awesome, it's all "how can we make it so that martial are better in every way and laugh at the people dumb enough to still roll casters"
Could you quote a specific post that even suggests this? My post about the podcast was just an observation with no official confirmation.
I think the fact that they have announced that spellcasters get 10 levels of spells, as well as tacitly implying that cantrips are a separate category, I don't think you have anything to worry about.
Chill, dude!
Ideas like making casters not get a first level spell till second level, and forcing them to take pre-reqs final fantasy style are essentially the equivalent to removing casters from the game,and you all know that.
Everyone of these ideas is aimed at making casters unplayable.
No one wants to keep casters awesome, it's all "how can we make it so that martial are better in every way and laugh at the people dumb enough to still roll casters"
Yeah, because that prevents casters from being incredibly powerful in Dragon Age, or Psykers from being incredibly powerful in all the D100 40,000 games (Pro Tip: It doesn't, it just means they actually have to invest their resources to achieve that power).
Or, I put it to you, why is it okay for a Fighter to have to take Cleave, Great Cleave, Cleaving Finish and Greater Cleaving Finish if he wants to hit targets adjacent to a dude he has hit, but it's not ok to demand pre-requisites for some of the more powerful spells besides "You reached X level."?
More seriously, I think now they just have to take Whirlwind Attack without feat pre-reqs now.
Ideas like making casters not get a first level spell till second level, and forcing them to take pre-reqs final fantasy style are essentially the equivalent to removing casters from the game,and you all know that.
Everyone of these ideas is aimed at making casters unplayable.
No one wants to keep casters awesome, it's all "how can we make it so that martial are better in every way and laugh at the people dumb enough to still roll casters"
You’re delusional right now. Take a deep breath and read what you just wrote to yourself out loud.
Spell prereqs make casters unplayable?
Delay spell progression by 1 level makes casters unplayable?They would STILL be the most powerful characters in the universe.
I remember a time when house cats could easily kill casters.
It wasn't fun.
"Hey caster, you get one magic missile once a day, and you don't even get that till 2nd level!"
Great, so now it's 6th level till I can even start having enough spells to meaningfully contribute in any way?
Oh, and you want me to have to hyper specialize, so I won't be able to cast a haste if I want to also be able to cast a fireball?
Sweet.
The martial equivalent would be that he spends 3 feats to be able to MAKE an attack roll at all.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I once read that for magic to be good in a roleplaying game, it had to be :
- with a chance of failure
- rare
- limited in power
Pick only 2 of the list.
And if you check Pathfinder or any D&D edition, you have magic where you are sure to cast your spells (save for the few times you must roll for concentration, but you ca almost always avoid that roll), spells are very powerful (you can decide the ending of a fight with 1 spell often) and save for the early levels, it's not very rare.
In all D20 games I saw, the best magic system was the one in Midnight : casters use a spell point system, but with a very limited pool and could spend more points than they have, but each point above the limit cause 1 pt of Constitution drain (it's a special drain that goes off after a good night of sleep). Yes, in this system a caster thaat goes too far can kill himself witht magic !!
As they are limited in their magic, caster classes are more similar to the 6-level-spell caster class in PRPG (Magus, Summoner, Bard, etc ...)
With such a system, you can always do wonders with magic but you must pay a price as if you cast your highest level spell, you have expended all your normal points and now will take Con-drain at any further spell cast, or put their life in danger.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Like i said before, the VERY real danger of what people are proposing here is that this doesnt promote team play in favor of dimishing the casters.
Simply put, a lot of casters do is supporting others, start adding requisites and restrictions will greatly change this.
Making it a tree makes it unlikely that many spells that focus on helping others will ever be picked, banning entire sections again makes those prime choices, adding risks to spells casts i dont even need to explain...
Playing any kind of support is rarely a choice, but in PF due to the incredibly low cost it still happens for the atleast super strong options, like haste, or in case of need, casting a ress, thus making these less attractive a VERY bad idea.
Ofc, this is leaving outside those that actually said to remove the more powerful spells from the game, which at that point will simply make many who like them not even sit to play PF 2.0 at all.
Like i said before, the VERY real danger of what people are proposing here is that this doesnt promote team play in favor of dimishing the casters.
Simply put, a lot of casters do is supporting others, start adding requisites and restrictions will greatly change this.
Making it a tree makes it unlikely that many spells that focus on helping others will ever be picked, banning entire sections again makes those prime choices, adding risks to spells casts i dont even need to explain...
Playing any kind of support is rarely a choice, but in PF due to the incredibly low cost it still happens for the atleast super strong options, like haste, or in case of need, casting a ress, thus making these less attractive a VERY bad idea.
Ofc, this is leaving outside those that actually said to remove the more powerful spells from the game, which at that point will simply make many who like them not even sit to play PF 2.0 at all.
While I have my own comments about how much of normal Pathfinder is really 'Team Play' and how much is some derogatory remark about Casters giving others permission to be relevant, I do agree with this sentiment, to some extent.
There is a very common aspect among players to focus on their own needs first, and then teamwork second. And I say that as someone that embraces it, I don't really care about team work being a forefront. Not to say I don't care about my group, the people in it contributing. I don't care about precision coordination and such, I'm happy with it just being a group of people doing what they're good at, working together where there are opportunities, not Navy SEALs working together in unison to surgically annihilate a dragon. Though more power to anyone who enjoys playing that way.
Point of fact, I hate playing straight support characters. I'm fine supporting others, but I do not enjoy a character whose focus is empowering others. There is only one, maybe two people, in my group that enjoy doing it.
So if spells like Haste, Heroism, Heals of all stripes, or other supporting spells that begin with 'H' are locked into certain spell progressions, the likelihood of them being used is diminished greatly. Because many people dislike being the Buff Monkey.
I see two solutions:
All spell "Tress" "Progressions" "Schools" "Whatever" have their own unique buffs and utility effects. Haste is on the way to Time Stop, so it will come up a lot. Heroism is part and parcel of the Bard, maybe, so its all over the place when they're here. Healing is just something Clerics progress naturally, probably, so I dunno if that's an issue.
And just saying that casters aren't necessarily limited to being a Fire Mage, and that's it. Maybe you have five or six or fifty-seven spell "Tress" "Progressions" "Schools" you're advancing. Maybe the Universalist spells get expanded as the 'catch all' for magic that doesn't fall into a theme.
But having to get better with lesser magic before you can use greater magic not only makes narrative sense, its the same non-sense Martial characters will still be tormented with and arguably makes mages more flavorful when they aren't all "Good At Absolutely Everything" Wizards.