The wizard's Quick Preparation is totally overpowered


Classes

51 to 74 of 74 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Senkon wrote:

Why would it be an improvement over have to wait a day for the wizard? If waiting a day has no downside then waiting a day is as simple as saying "we wait a day lol" and then you move on. If there is a drawback to waiting a day then that where quick prep is op. But to begin with I wouldn't allow them to wait a day because it's blatant metagaming. Don't they have a reason to press on? Even if they are just looking for fame and glory saying "meh I'll do it tomorrow" does not sound like that of a future hero. Remember, I wanted to challenge the group. The wizard not having the absolute perfect spell setup to get into the castle is what I wanted.

Imagine quick retraining. Each time I announce a castle siege the martials of the group takes 10 to retrain their skill sets to better suit the task at hand. The point of preparing spells is so you have to do a good job at well preparing for the tasks ahead. The point of retraining skills taking a long time is so that you can't just do it to always match the tasks ahead. For some reason I'm sure you wouldn't be fine with the lvl 4 feat quick retraining.

min per lvl buffs no longer exists.

Not having to wait a day has a lot of narrative benefits.

And besides, how is waiting a day metagaming? Do you think a wizard would agree to charge into a situation he's unprepared for, when he's largely useless with the wrong spells? ("Oh yes, I've got comprehend languages and charm person today, but we're suddenly being asked to raid a goblin den? No problem," said no wizard ever.)If you want your players to tackle a situation with suboptimal prep, they need a reason to do so that isn't "the GM thinks it's more fun." No one is going to knowingly do something stupid.

There are a few differences between feat retraining and spell changing. The most notable is that spell changing is already a part of the game that happens daily, while feat retraining is designated as downtime only. Changing from once a day to quick prep is a much smaller change than "downtime only" to quick prep. Secondarily, feats also tend to be optimal/useful in a wider variety of situations than spells, so there's a much lower opportunity cost to having the wrong one. E.G., Power attack is good whenever you want to smack someone; almost no spell, not even fireball or magic missile, is that level of always good. (Haste used to be, but wew lad that nerf.) Thirdly, if you don't have the right feat for a situation, someone else in your party is probably built to deal with said situation instead; but if you, the wizard, have the wrong spell, no one else can cover that weakness. You're just boned. There are plenty more dissimilarities, but I'll leave it at that.

EDIT: And I don't believe spontaneous got nerfed into the ground with the whole "need to know spells at heightened levels" thing. Spontaneous is better at their repertoire spells than prepared is, still has spontaneous heighten on two spells (which is more than enough for most builds, which only focus on one or two spells anyways), and now doesn't have worse acquisition timing on spells. Spontaneous also inherently gets more resonance from being a CHA caster, which is a big deal. I wouldn't say it's better than wizard, but I don't think it got the shaft half as hard as people think.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Witch of Miracles wrote:
Senkon wrote:

Why would it be an improvement over have to wait a day for the wizard? If waiting a day has no downside then waiting a day is as simple as saying "we wait a day lol" and then you move on. If there is a drawback to waiting a day then that where quick prep is op. But to begin with I wouldn't allow them to wait a day because it's blatant metagaming. Don't they have a reason to press on? Even if they are just looking for fame and glory saying "meh I'll do it tomorrow" does not sound like that of a future hero. Remember, I wanted to challenge the group. The wizard not having the absolute perfect spell setup to get into the castle is what I wanted.

Imagine quick retraining. Each time I announce a castle siege the martials of the group takes 10 to retrain their skill sets to better suit the task at hand. The point of preparing spells is so you have to do a good job at well preparing for the tasks ahead. The point of retraining skills taking a long time is so that you can't just do it to always match the tasks ahead. For some reason I'm sure you wouldn't be fine with the lvl 4 feat quick retraining.

min per lvl buffs no longer exists.

Not having to wait a day has a lot of narrative benefits.

And besides, how is waiting a day metagaming? Do you think a wizard would agree to charge into a situation he's unprepared for, when he's largely useless with the wrong spells? ("Oh yes, I've got comprehend languages and charm person today, but we're suddenly being asked to raid a goblin den? No problem," said no wizard ever.)If you want your players to tackle a situation with suboptimal prep, they need a reason to do so that isn't "the GM thinks it's more fun." No one is going to knowingly do something stupid.

There are a few differences between feat retraining and spell changing. The most notable is that spell changing is already a part of the game that happens daily, while feat retraining is designated as downtime only. Changing from once a day to quick prep is a much smaller change than...

you're still arguing that there should be circumstances that there MUST be a wizard and the wizard MUST have X spell prepared to coninue with the adventure.

that's terrible adventure design.

The feat is beyond excessive because the "good thing of wizard" is his ability to be flexible in his spell list and the "bad thing of wizard" is that your current spell selection may not be optimal.

a single level 4 feat obliterates that nagative for the majority of utility spells in the game.

Again, let's give sorcs the ability to swap their spells known within 10mins from whichever they want from a spellbook in their possesion. Seems fair right?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
shroudb wrote:

you're still arguing that there should be circumstances that there MUST be a wizard and the wizard MUST have X spell prepared to coninue with the adventure.

that's terrible adventure design.

The feat is beyond excessive because the "good thing of wizard" is his ability to be flexible in his spell list and the "bad thing of wizard" is that your current spell selection may not be optimal.

a single level 4 feat obliterates that nagative for the majority of utility spells in the game.

Again, let's give sorcs the ability to swap their spells known within 10mins from whichever they want from a spellbook in their possesion. Seems fair right?

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

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. 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.

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.

Anyways, re: Sorc vs. Wiz with this: there are a few big things that keep this level of versatility, in theory, from obseleting Sorc. One is that a Sorc is better at casting the spells they choose to take; they typically have better access to DC increasing effects, duration increasing effects, and damage increasing effects. The Sorc is also likely to be using these effects on the same 60-80% useful spells the wizard is preparing in most of their slots anyways. The second is that even if the Sorc knows a few of those 10% or 20% useful spells, they never have to use their spell slots on them; if the wizard commits to having that spell on a given day and it's bad, the slot is just useless. The Sorc can always reliably use all their spell slots. The last relevant thing I can think of is that Sorc also now has better access to ways to expand their spell list on the fly. (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.)

But yeah, I think you're really making the situations too binary, losing a lot of nuance, and overall blowing things out of proportion. Quick prep is good in theory, but in reality it doesn't change a ton unless your players already have access to the perfect spell for the situation and can't just wait a day, which is rare. 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? Even then, in how many cases would Quick Preparation have provided a solution not available with a "prepare later" slot or two in PF1? 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?

You're making mountains out of molehills and thinking this level of flexibility is new when it already existed. (Also, arcanist could do this way faster in PF1 anyways...?)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Witch of Miracles wrote:
At no point did I imply the adventure should require a wizard.
Witch of Miracles wrote:
but if you, the wizard, have the wrong spell, no one else can cover that weakness. You're just boned.
Witch of Miracles wrote:
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...

Witch of Miracles wrote:
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.

Witch of Miracles wrote:
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.

Witch of Miracles wrote:
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).

Witch of Miracles wrote:
(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.

Witch of Miracles wrote:
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.

Witch of Miracles wrote:
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.

Witch of Miracles wrote:

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.

Witch of Miracles wrote:
(Also, arcanist could do this way faster in PF1 anyways...?)

See above.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

.... Yeah. What else is there to say, really?

Quick Preparation is OP. Even if its a level 14 feat I wouldn't be happy about it in all honesty. This is much more like a level 20 feat as it is, or perhaps a level 14 feat if you have more restrictions on it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Witch of Miracles wrote:
shroudb wrote:

you're still arguing that there should be circumstances that there MUST be a wizard and the wizard MUST have X spell prepared to coninue with the adventure.

that's terrible adventure design.

The feat is beyond excessive because the "good thing of wizard" is his ability to be flexible in his spell list and the "bad thing of wizard" is that your current spell selection may not be optimal.

a single level 4 feat obliterates that nagative for the majority of utility spells in the game.

Again, let's give sorcs the ability to swap their spells known within 10mins from whichever they want from a spellbook in their possesion. Seems fair right?

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

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. 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.

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.

Anyways, re: Sorc vs. Wiz with this: there are a few big things that keep this level of versatility, in theory, from obseleting Sorc. One is that a Sorc is better at casting the spells...

I'm gonna return your comments to yourself.

You're making mountain out of nothings really.

If your wizard is routinely preparing charm persons and comprehend languages when going to face the Undead, then obviously wizard is a very bad choice of class for him, convince him to roll a sorc.

You already said everything I was saying:
A wizard gets to choose, preparing full offence, or keeping 20-30% of his resources for utility

Now, you don't need to.

Now you're basically Sorc+++ with a vastly more extensive spell list but just minor less spontaneity.

"Well, we're going to the mountains, should I keep a fly prepared? Meh, I'll just go full offence, and if needed ill switch on the spot, no biggie "

P. S. You just compared a lvl 4 feat, in an edition where everything got seriously downgraded and their levels massively shifted up, to one of the strongest arcanist (tier 1 class) exploits. Plus, the feat is much stronger because it uses ZERO RESOURCES That should tell something. Sure, in the 1st edition, it would have been about the power level of what you would get as the strongest class in the game. Luckily, we're not playtesting 1st edition, so that feat can go erase itself.


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.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

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.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Xenocrat wrote:

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?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Bhurano wrote:

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.


Senkon wrote:
Xenocrat wrote:

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?

Perhaps you should learn to design encounters to challenge the best possible Wizard layout?


Xenocrat wrote:
Senkon wrote:
Xenocrat wrote:

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?
Perhaps you should learn to design encounters to challenge the best possible Wizard layout?

What a dumb reply. The best possible wizard layout can be challenged. But that layout is not twelve knocks.


Senkon wrote:


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?

It's apparently easy, since the wizard is too dumb to have the rogue just unlock the doors and will run out of spells before any actual combat occurs.

Seriously, it's not hard to challenge the party. You're acting like the wizard is god. You already know what spells are in his spellbook. There are a lot of things in this game a wizard of adventuring level and adventuring means can't deal with, spell-swapping or no. There is a reason there is a rest-of-the-party. Throw them an actual puzzle that isn't "roll a d20 at it," place traps the Wizard won't notice, etc.

You need to think like a player in order to make a good challenge.


Witch of Miracles wrote:
Senkon wrote:


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?

It's apparently easy, since the wizard is too dumb to have the rogue just unlock the doors and will run out of spells before any actual combat occurs.

Seriously, it's not hard to challenge the party. You're acting like the wizard is god. You already know what spells are in his spellbook. There are a lot of things in this game a wizard of adventuring level and adventuring means can't deal with, spell-swapping or no. There is a reason there is a rest-of-the-party. Throw them an actual puzzle that isn't "roll a d20 at it," place traps the Wizard won't notice, etc.

You need to think like a player in order to make a good challenge.

When did I mention combat or a rogue? I wanted them to hunt keys. A scavenge hunt for keys. They could also use shrink item on the door. Not to mention the reason rogue couldn't open the doors could be because it had lock on it and they needed magic keys or a password or something. A different type of item for each door.


Witch of Miracles wrote:
Senkon wrote:


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?

It's apparently easy, since the wizard is too dumb to have the rogue just unlock the doors and will run out of spells before any actual combat occurs.

Seriously, it's not hard to challenge the party. You're acting like the wizard is god. You already know what spells are in his spellbook. There are a lot of things in this game a wizard of adventuring level and adventuring means can't deal with, spell-swapping or no. There is a reason there is a rest-of-the-party. Throw them an actual puzzle that isn't "roll a d20 at it," place traps the Wizard won't notice, etc.

You need to think like a player in order to make a good challenge.

having to design encounters AROUND the wizard not having an answer is just as bad, if not worse. (you got teleport? cool, now every important place is dimension locked. Enjoy)

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.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
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. :)


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Bhurano wrote:
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.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bhurano wrote:
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. :)

you understand the irony here, when the "flexible one" ends up being the wizard and not the actual spontaneous caster (as you yourself just said they should be). no?

a sorcerer picking up a utility spell for one of his very limited spells known is having a very serious cost.

a wizard not having to deal with that should have an equal cost, which, so far, was that if he chosen to prepare the utility spell, it may prove useless (never happens with a smart wizard but whatever that's the theory behind it)

the feat, without ANY COST (<- once again, the main issue) just promoted stupid and bad wizards never preparing utility and bogging down every single exploration encounter to "wait 10mins guys, i got it"


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think quick preparation should have a limit of once per day, and maybe scale it to twice at mid to high lvl. From my experiences with tabletop games, while it would be inefficient to do this in the dungeon 50 times, getting a 10 minute respite or two isn't out of the ordinary to deal with problems, and in exploration periods like traveling to a different nation, it would be fairly easy to get the time to swap multiple spells out on the field.

Wizards are balanced around being able to afford to learn utility magic and being flexible enough to be able to take on numerous different occasions, but not always having the right spells prepared (or enough of the right spells), while sorcerers are balanced around being able to use the right spells more frequently, but not being able to afford utility and having to specialize. With the feat, it kinda takes away from this.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
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?


BluLion wrote:

I think quick preparation should have a limit of once per day, and maybe scale it to twice at mid to high lvl. From my experiences with tabletop games, while it would be inefficient to do this in the dungeon 50 times, getting a 10 minute respite or two isn't out of the ordinary to deal with problems, and in exploration periods like traveling to a different nation, it would be fairly easy to get the time to swap multiple spells out on the field.

Wizards are balanced around being able to afford to learn utility magic and being flexible enough to be able to take on numerous different occasions, but not always having the right spells prepared (or enough of the right spells), while sorcerers are balanced around being able to use the right spells more frequently, but not being able to afford utility and having to specialize. With the feat, it kinda takes away from this.

Just to make the constant arguing over a theory that never saw practice in PF1, I agree that having a per day cap might be a good idea, but of course I'd like to see how actual play test work before doing that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
wraithstrike wrote:
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.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think you people are totally overreacting.

You honestly make it sound as if the wizard could use an action to lose the spell and gain another one instantly.

It's 10 minutes. Granted, in an investigative context it might be very strong, it will not save you from an ugly death in a combat context.

Don't see what the issue is. If anything, it's a welcome addition.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Andarr wrote:

I think you people are totally overreacting.

You honestly make it sound as if the wizard could use an action to lose the spell and gain another one instantly.

It's 10 minutes. Granted, in an investigative context it might be very strong, it will not save you from an ugly death in a combat context.

Don't see what the issue is. If anything, it's a welcome addition.

because not everything is combat.

if anything, combat should be about only half of the encounters of an adventure.

and as you pointed out, in the rest half of the encounters it gives a tremendous edge with no drawback

51 to 74 of 74 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Player Rules / Classes / The wizard's Quick Preparation is totally overpowered All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.