| ApexCarnie |
Hello paizo,
I've noticed somethings in the playtest, that don't make sense to me, and was wondering if you could elaborate.
First is the Paladin, a notice that the class feature, specific weapon doesn't seem to do much. It gives you access to a city's favored weapon if it's uncommon, or increases the damage die if it's a simple weapon. This means it's only good for one deity, Abadar. It I might make a suggestion to the problem. It might be a good idea to give Paladins the expert proficiency with the favored weapon instead. Or to expand the damage die upgrade to martial weapons as well.
The next mechanic is the spells. For spellcasters that use material components that can be substituted with a focus, I haven't met a GM that cares too much about your material components, or a wizard that doesn't have a familiar, so I struggle with comprehending the logic of the system. Also was there ever talk in the initial development phase for a change in the spells per day system if favor of a mana system? I can understand a spells/day system for clerymen who use a divine source that might arbitrarily decide the power the cleric has access to, but for the master of the arcane arts (I.e. wizard) or the descendent of magic (sorcerer) I can't see the same explanation working. A wizard is a variety caster that should be prepared for any situation, however with the current system, wizards seem less like wise men and more like fools, often saying 'oh I wish I hadn't used the spell that I prepared for a situation like this on that very similar situation' or 'oh I have the perfect spell for this, I wish I had prepared for this situation I didn't know I needed it for'. How does Paizo justisify this mechanic, as far as if a wizard were to explain it in Golarian?