| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Naw, they want it to be hard for spellcasters from different traditions to identify each others spells without investment, for magical traps to be customized (a symbol trap may be defused with either Occultism or Arcana, but a haunt is going to need either Religion or Occultism), and for monster identification to remain specialized.
I don’t really see how what I suggest would prevent that from still happening. We don’t roll Knowedge (Engineering) and expect to learn about dragons in PF1, after all. And in PF2, Lore (basketweaving) isn’t going to have a lot of information overlap with Lore (Pathfinder Society).
But in any case, it’s not like any of this matters. I’m just saying how I would have done it to future proof it.
Personally I'd happily gut tradition on the Arcane list, but that second argument is solid. I'd be in favor of taking a page out of 3.5 Psionics, there, actually - instead of needing a wide variety of spells to differentiate specialists, it would be nice if specialist wizards had two or three spells at each level that no other caster could access.
Same. Id organize it like a sorcerer bloodline with multiple spells per level. Because right now with more than 100 spells in common, I’m not sure that Occult and Arcane are different enough at the moment (I’d have the check my spreadsheet again, but I think their spells wound up somewhere around 120 in common), and Divine and Primal could use a bit more overlap.
Edit: forgot to say, but your suggestion would create a difference between the Arcane spell list and the Wizard spell list. More than one class might have arcane casters, but maybe only necromancer wizards can cast Animate Dead as an arcane spell.
Naw, they want it to be hard for spellcasters from different traditions to identify each others spells without investment, for magical traps to be customized (a symbol trap may be defused with either Occultism or Arcana, but a haunt is going to need either Religion or Occultism), and for monster identification to remain specialized.
I don’t really see how what I suggest would prevent that from still happening. We don’t roll Knowedge (Engineering) and expect to learn about dragons in PF1, after all. And in PF2, Lore (basketweaving) isn’t going to have a lot of information overlap with Lore (Pathfinder Society).
But in any case, it’s not like any of this matters. I’m just saying how I would have done it to future proof it.
Personally I'd happily gut tradition on the Arcane list, but that second argument is solid. I'd be in favor of taking a page out of 3.5 Psionics, there, actually - instead of needing a wide variety of spells to differentiate specialists, it would be nice if specialist wizards had two or three spells at each level that no other caster could access.Same. Id organize it like a sorcerer bloodline with multiple spells per level. Because right now with more than 100 spells in common, I’m not sure that Occult and Arcane are different enough at the moment (I’d have the check my spreadsheet again, but I think their spells wound up somewhere around 120 in common), and Divine and Primal could use a bit more overlap.
Edit: forgot to say, but your suggestion would create a difference between the Arcane spell list and the Wizard spell list. More than one class might have arcane casters, but maybe only necromancer wizards can cast Animate Dead as an arcane spell.
Aren't we just taking about Focus Spells at this point? Like, is there a compelling reason to give a Necromancy wizard unique ways to use their spell slots instead of just giving him a bunch of focus points and focus spells to use?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, depending on the interpretation. If you go with "unique spells no other caster has" then yeah, I suppose. If you go with AnimatedPaper's idea of "specialist wizards can access certain spells that aren't otherwise on the Arcane list", that's different from focus spells.
Although I do think there is a certain thematic flair to wizards being able to prepare completely unique spells, instead of just having focus spells.
Oh, so what you're talking about is essentially like bloodline/domain/deity/mystery/spirit spells, but for wizards then. Yeah, that could have some potential.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since schools and sub-schools are still a part of spells, it makes it a lot easier to create unique lists with Archetypes, specialization, or even for new classes:
Divine Spell List
- all spells with Positive descriptor
+ all spells with Negative descriptor
Personally, I feel like the above works a lot better when everyone has to actually learn spells as opposed to selecting from a pool though.
That said, you could theoretically build whole lists with just descriptors:
All Mental, Illusion, Negative, and Scrying make up your spell list.
Or you can modify existing lists with an archetype:
Pacifist
- Remove all Attack spells from your list
+ Add all Positive spells to your list
As for the suggestion to change Knowledge to work like Lore instead of being broken into 4 specific skills, I highly agree with that if only for future proofing it. It also allows for much less print, much easier feat compatibility, and more control for a GM to add additional as they become known (especially in the case of lists like the above or other disciplines of essence being added later).
Not to mention Alchemy and Ki IMO deserve their own category considering how integral they are to the Core game now, instead of being allocated in a sub-section of Craft or roped in with Religion.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you shrink core Arcane spells down to what it should be, more in theory/design based on the new criteria you could have specialist schools be somewhat like cleric/sorcerer domains, except rather than adding only a single spell to spells known, it adds a list of several spells that all get added to their effective spell list.
Thus Arcane's list becomes smaller, but spells that seem like they need to exist for specialist or iconic wizards, but don't really fit can be placed in the 'appropriate' specialty schools list.
Have Universalist wizards get a single 'spell known' per level that they can use to learn a single spell out of any specialty school. This special spell known choices aren't limited to only one school, but will basically be limited to only 1 per level on these more eclectic spells. [basically, Univeralist = all school's spells, but only get to pick one per level to add to their personal list, instead of adding all of them. Where the specialists only get their schools specialty spells list added, but get all of the spells added to their list.]
Thus specialist will have access to all the standard arcane list, plus all the 'deep arcane' of their specialty. Univeralists get all the standard arcane spells and a limited set of the 'deeper arcane' spells. Of course the Arcane arts arrogantly call it Deep arcane, when it is perhaps really more of edge arcane since it most often is probably moving into the realms of other traditions, but they naturally take the opinion that it is just deeper arcane knowledge. This would mean that these spells might include a 'Specialist' trait(or essence) indicating that it falls into the additive spell list for the particular subschool it has the trait.
I think this would leave enough flexibility to allow wizards to have the same sort of wider range/scope of spells as a whole, to respect historical stories, while allowing a decent way of better balancing the spell lists between traditions in the new game.
So for the Black Tentacles spell, it could be made an Occult, and Specialist Essence. Meaning that Occult casters, Conjurers, (and Universalists who choose it specifically) can consider it part of their spell list.
I really like that idea, Loreguard.
If you shrink core Arcane spells down to what it should be, more in theory/design based on the new criteria you could have specialist schools be somewhat like cleric/sorcerer domains, except rather than adding only a single spell to spells known, it adds a list of several spells that all get added to their effective spell list.
Thus Arcane's list becomes smaller, but spells that seem like they need to exist for specialist or iconic wizards, but don't really fit can be placed in the 'appropriate' specialty schools list.
Have Universalist wizards get a single 'spell known' per level that they can use to learn a single spell out of any specialty school. This special spell known choices aren't limited to only one school, but will basically be limited to only 1 per level on these more eclectic spells. [basically, Univeralist = all school's spells, but only get to pick one per level to add to their personal list, instead of adding all of them. Where the specialists only get their schools specialty spells list added, but get all of the spells added to their list.]
Thus specialist will have access to all the standard arcane list, plus all the 'deep arcane' of their specialty. Univeralists get all the standard arcane spells and a limited set of the 'deeper arcane' spells. Of course the Arcane arts arrogantly call it Deep arcane, when it is perhaps really more of edge arcane since it most often is probably moving into the realms of other traditions, but they naturally take the opinion that it is just deeper arcane knowledge. This would mean that these spells might include a 'Specialist' trait(or essence) indicating that it falls into the additive spell list for the particular subschool it has the trait.
I think this would leave enough flexibility to allow wizards to have the same sort of wider range/scope of spells as a whole, to respect historical stories, while allowing a decent way of better balancing the spell lists between traditions in the new game.
So for the Black Tentacles spell, it...
That's rather brilliant.
If it could be simplified/codified in a way that didn't require explicit list creation (like using descriptors/schools/sub schools) I think it would certainly be a brilliant choice.
Certainly makes choosing a specialty a much more interesting choice.
I think perhaps a good coupling with it would be a use of the Rarity system (which I know others do not like, but I love) and saying Uncommon spells can only be selected by school specialists (I.E. Uncommon Illusions can be picked by an Illusionist) and Universalist can only select one Uncommon per level.
Then still allow Wizards to learn spells via a written copy as normal (opening it up to learning anything if you're willing to go find it or spend wealth to earn it).
Seems unlikely to happen if Paizo didn't already plan to use it, since the rules are final and this is something that would have to be integrated in Core, but I do like it a lot.
I think using Rarity is good in that in allows keeping them as fully Arcane, i.e. governed by same skill, but there will be hurdles to access them (and DC may be harder even while governed by same skill, although that side of Rarity was weakly dealt with by playtest IMHO). Actually if Arcane DC exists but is higher than skill whose spell lists the spell is "normally" (more Commonly) on, that establishes how it "easy" to be misled by recognizing a spell and thinking it is Divine or Occult when actually it is Specialist Wizard casting it. Which could be other, less random content, scenario for a "wrong understanding" that doesn't depend on Crit Failures. Hmm...
Anyhow, my take was similar except that it did't assume granting any single spell/level to Universalists, but it made access to each of these "expanded schools" gated by a Feat... which possibly could be rolled into Spell Focus (and Specialists could be barred from taking this Feat for their opposing schools).
The latter is tricky issue, I don't think how 1stEd handled it is the final word. With fewer slots, I think returning to double slot cost is a no-go, but there could be other restrictions for opposed schools (besides banning "expanded school lists") such as not benefitting from or working with abilities that augment your Wizard casting. (potentially still leaving door open to effects that affect - ahem - ANY magical casting, but not Wizard casting specifically as your Specialist Wizard casting is minimally compatible with it's opposed schools...)