| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I once thought about writing a diviner’s hand book for PF1, because I think a lot of players underestimate the value of intelligence in play. Not just the attribute, but the the ability to collect and process information. The bard and the sorcerer just are not that likely to want to keep INT high enough to make prioritizing recall knowledge skills high enough to make critical success likely with arcana or occultism or society, which together can cover more than half of monsters and give you tons on useful information about NPCs. Focusing your skill raises in these three groups and picking skill feats that coincide with them usually go hand in hand with being a wizard, at level one you probably have a 2 point edge over most other characters in these skills. But it increases as you level because very few classes will ever boost intelligence at all and rarely above an 18. By level 10 it is pretty reasonable to assume a wizard will have a +21 or 22 to arcana and maybe occultism. A rogue or Maybe a bard trying to cover knowledge skills might have 19, but a Druid or a cleric or a sorcerer is likely at +16. And the wizard has the most to gain from keeping high up on their arcana skill.
Yes, druids and clerics can keep up with religion and nature which for many campaigns is just as important, but there is only one other class that gets an INT boost and is almost required to focus first on crafting over a knowledge skill, and doesn’t get to use INT to attack.
And as a team game, the synergy of a wizard working with a cleric or a Druid to cover knowledge skills is intended.
Sorcerer’s can be monsters of the face skills, but a party with a wizard should always be the most capable of figuring out what might lie ahead and how to deal with that.
Basically, I think it is a mistake to undervalue the wizard as an INT caster who was the skills and spells to exploit their mastery of knowledge without having to sink class feats into it, and the versatility not to have to dedicate all of their spells to the information gathering.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...
I've read your writeup on the Transmuter, and while you do have a few valid points (lack of Will saves), I also think you miss a lot of things. A few examples:
- you keep listing Physical Boost as a "thing" Druids cannot do, or some spells like See Invisibility. However, you miss that Druids have different ways of achieving similar results, and often much better - specifically, Glitterdust vs See Invisibility, etc.
- you keep listing number of spells Wizard have; but a Druid or Bard will have quite a few of their own, and their Focus abilities are far more flexible and useful. They are equivalent of high level spell slots, while Wizards Focus abilities are generally equivalent of lower level spells
- Specifically Transmuter abilities are really on the order of 1st or 2nd level slots, while Druids are equivalent of max level slots. At level 8 when Wizard gets their Advanced spell, it provides an equivalent of 1st or 2nd level effect. Meanwhile Wild Order Druid gets to fly.
- In all, this build can be trivially improved simply by changing the Wizard specialization to some of the other schools, like Abjuration or Divinitation without losing one bit of mechanical powers.
Using spells for noncombat situations is very problematic because it is not reliable for RP reasons. Sure, you could Charm someone instead of talking, but is it really an option when everyone will see you do it? Or it will be obvious immediately?
Furthermore, you point to some things Wizards get (such as using staffs) as if other classes cannot do similar to boost their power.
Anyway, I don't think we'll convince each other. But as someone who is actually playing a Transmuter Wizard these days, I can tell you it is exceedingly flavourless at low levels. I built it around exploiting Physical Boost to the max (Str 16, proficient in Athletics), and it still doesn't matter. I'd much rather have Guidance.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
...I've read your writeup on the Transmuter, and while you do have a few valid points (lack of Will saves), I also think you miss a lot of things. A few examples:
- you keep listing Physical Boost as a "thing" Druids cannot do, or some spells like See Invisibility. However, you miss that Druids have different ways of achieving similar results, and often much better - specifically, Glitterdust vs See Invisibility, etc.
- you keep listing number of spells Wizard have; but a Druid or Bard will have quite a few of their own, and their Focus abilities are far more flexible and useful. They are equivalent of high level spell slots, while Wizards Focus abilities are generally equivalent of lower level spells
- Specifically Transmuter abilities are really on the order of 1st or 2nd level slots, while Druids are equivalent of max level slots. At level 8 when Wizard gets their Advanced spell, it provides an equivalent of 1st or 2nd level effect. Meanwhile Wild Order Druid gets to fly.
- In all, this build can be trivially improved simply by changing the Wizard specialization to some of the other schools, like Abjuration or Divinitation without losing one bit of mechanical powers.
Using spells for noncombat situations is very problematic because it is not reliable for RP reasons. Sure, you could Charm someone instead of talking, but is it really an option when everyone will see you do it? Or it will be obvious immediately?
Furthermore, you point to some things Wizards get (such as using staffs) as if other classes cannot do similar to boost their power.Anyway, I don't think we'll convince each other. But as someone who is actually playing a Transmuter Wizard these days, I can tell you it is exceedingly flavourless at low levels. I built it around exploiting Physical Boost to the max (Str 16, proficient in Athletics), and it still doesn't matter. I'd much rather have Guidance.
I think a really good question, maybe for a new thread, might be: What does the arcane transmuter need to live up to past expectations for the build, that will not step on the toes of Dragon/Aberration sorcerers or Druids?
The good news is that the answer is probably new spells and focus powers, both of which are relatively easy to see coming in new content. This feels like less of an inherent flaw in the wizard class than a, "The options are not quite here yet" situation.
I wonder if one possible solution wouldn't be to let the transmuter have access to a focus power that lets them trade physical attributes around for a period of time. That would be relatively unique design space that encourages them having one physical attribute that they keep higher then the rest and then switching it around between STR, DEX and CON when necessary.
I do think people got a little to hyped up in the playtest about the idea of Wizards using Heavy Armor and Weapons to fight, just because the 3 action economy and proficiency system made it possible. Letting Wizards excel at melee combat is a very slippery slope to the PF1 situation of the Wizard being the ultimate class. If your character's best action is going to be to attack someone with a melee weapon, their first class is not wizard.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Letting Wizards excel at melee combat is a very slippery slope to the PF1 situation of the Wizard being the ultimate class.
I mean, there's a lot of grey area between "ultimate class best at everything" and "if you invest a lot of resources into something you can actually make it work pretty well." It feels almost insulting to pretend like one must naturally lead to the other.
Like, yeah sure, we can vaguely talk about hypothetical super OP wizards who fulfill all roles simultaneously, but that's not the reality and not what anyone's ever suggested. The reality is that a wizard can throw a significant amount of investment in terms of ability scores and feats into being better with weapons only to end up maybe slightly better off and possibly even worse off than if they had just stuck to cantrips.
Just to be clear, our heavy armor and longsword wizard is eight feats (three general, five class) and fourteen levels in just to get expert in both and is investing in strength beyond what a traditional wizard would too (which means less of something else). This doesn't even get them any special abilities related to their armor and weapons mind you, this is just proficiency (plus some extra skill training from dedication feats). Is that not enough of a buy in to make something work in your opinion?
Letting Wizards excel at melee combat is a very slippery slope to the PF1 situation of the Wizard being the ultimate class.I mean, there's a lot of grey area between "ultimate class best at everything" and "if you invest a lot of resources into something you can actually make it work pretty well." It feels almost insulting to pretend like one must naturally lead to the other.
Like, yeah sure, we can vaguely talk about hypothetical super OP wizards who fulfill all roles simultaneously, but that's not the reality and not what anyone's ever suggested. The reality is that a wizard can throw a significant amount of investment in terms of ability scores and feats into being better with weapons only to end up maybe slightly better off and possibly even worse off than if they had just stuck to cantrips.
Just to be clear, our heavy armor and longsword wizard is eight feats (three general, five class) and fourteen levels in just to get expert in both and is investing in strength beyond what a traditional wizard would too (which means less of something else). This doesn't even get them any special abilities related to their armor and weapons mind you, this is just proficiency (plus some extra skill training from dedication feats). Is that not enough of a buy in to make something work in your opinion?
I thought it was just the five class feats (three and one ancestry with multitalented), and no general feats? With the alternate of two class feats, two ancestry feats and a general feat if your ideal weapon happens to be a racial weapon matching your ancestry.
Still an excessive cost to focus on both. Focusing on weapons or armor seems much more palatable.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah you're right, I was thinking Signifer and not Champion.
Champion dedication doesn't need general feats, but does need Charisma and a good alignment, which could be problematic.
Also I was wrong on another note: It's only 5 feats and level 14 for expert/expert if you're a half elf.
A wizard/fighter/champion can't actually buy into their second multiclass until they finish their first, obviously. So you either need to buy an extra fighter/champion feat to exit early or wait until 16. I mean, hopefully that extra feat improves your build rather than just being dead weight, but it's still another component of cost here.
The other big issue here is speed. The earliest you can get trained in both martial weapons and heavy armor is 3 if you're a versatile human or 7 if you're not, which means our wizard spends a potentially significant chunk of the campaign not actually using the gear they want too.
I would like to see transmute wizard's focus not be on "casterzilla" type buff spells, since that's a narrow view of the school and druids have it covered. It's the school of turning stuff into other stuff, so the powers should reflect that. Just off the top of my head, maybe a focus spell to turn the ground under an enemy into mud/lava/whatever else you can think of. Or something to change the physical properties of items, making something lighter or heavier or stronger or weaker. Temporary special materials to target weaknesses, turn a rope stiff so you can make a temporary ladder out of it, turn water into ice to walk across it. There's lots of fun applications of Transmutation, and the transmuter wizard should lean towards those instead of being a buff bot.
In other words, arcane magic does not influence life essence but matter essence, so arcane Transmutation specialists should focus on manipulating nonliving things.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's lots of fun applications of Transmutation, and the transmuter wizard should lean towards those instead of being a buff bot.
I mean, why not have both be options depending on how you specialize?
Spells like 'form of X' and 'transformation' are transmutation wizard staples, they've just traditionally been kind of a joke because of the way the underlying mechanics of 3.5 and PF play out. It seems a shame that now that we have a system that could handle those mechanics to just dump them.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would like to see transmute wizard's focus not be on "casterzilla" type buff spells, since that's a narrow view of the school and druids have it covered. It's the school of turning stuff into other stuff, so the powers should reflect that. Just off the top of my head, maybe a focus spell to turn the ground under an enemy into mud/lava/whatever else you can think of. Or something to change the physical properties of items, making something lighter or heavier or stronger or weaker. Temporary special materials to target weaknesses, turn a rope stiff so you can make a temporary ladder out of it, turn water into ice to walk across it. There's lots of fun applications of Transmutation, and the transmuter wizard should lean towards those instead of being a buff bot.
I agree on the point that the school needs to be considered more widely. I miss the Animate Rope. And why Grease was left in Conjuration I cannot fathom.
However, I disagree on letting Druids take the self-transformation spells. This has been a Transmuter staple forever, and it is a core part of the specialisation. After all, Transmuter is a specialised in the process of transmuting, whereas a Druid is a nature-worshipping-hippy who gets to cosplay as his favourite animals and/or plants.
I'm not saying take those form spells that they have off their list. Basically, if their main focus is form spells it will always be compared to Druid. Having the school powers and the focus spell they get not be about transforming living creatures is important in my opinion to make it distinct from wild shape druid and to open up new character concepts.
I would have rather had nonliving Transmutation be the assumption for arcane casters and form Transmutation be a subspecialty rather than the other way around. I think it fits better with the idea of the essences and prevents toe stepping. I guess that ship has sailed though.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
If the game designers are not willing to let a specialist be good at what they're supposed to be good, I'd much prefer they just remove that specialisation from the game. Sorry, in Pathfinder world Transmuters don't exist.
I, perhaps more than Nemo, hate druids and their place in DnD with an undying passion. Trees don't give you super powers. Grow up, Druids.
That said, transmutation wizards seem alright. Some other dude has a thread going right now just talking about how OP they think the Jump spell is. Did wizards really ever keep up with Druids in terms of form changing? I feel like shape change wizard builds in 1e were more or less a ticket to an early grave as you gave your fragile bearded man a profile not dissimilar to the broad side of a barn.
Maybe we will get a more bespoke shape shifting class/archetype down the line that doesn't need to rub pine cones on his body to change shape.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I, perhaps more than Nemo, hate druids and their place in DnD with an undying passion.
I actually like Druids. I just don't think they should be better at Transmutation than Wizards specialising in transmuting.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I, perhaps more than Nemo, hate druids and their place in DnD with an undying passion. Trees don't give you super powers. Grow up, Druids.
And, unfortunately for us, neither does reading books. Get real, wizards. :p
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And, unfortunately for us, neither does reading books. Get real, wizards. :pI, perhaps more than Nemo, hate druids and their place in DnD with an undying passion. Trees don't give you super powers. Grow up, Druids.
If magic were real, you would need someone to teach you how to make the special wiggly fingers in order use it. This makes perfect sense to me.
Meanwhile, if magic were real, trees would still use chlorophyll to photosynthesize and otherwise would be useless trash obelisks if we didn't need them for oxygen or food or whatever. I hate tree and I hate that we need trees.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And, unfortunately for us, neither does reading books. Get real, wizards. :pI, perhaps more than Nemo, hate druids and their place in DnD with an undying passion. Trees don't give you super powers. Grow up, Druids.
If magic were real, you would need someone to teach you how to make the special wiggly fingers in order use it. This makes perfect sense to me.
Meanwhile, if magic were real, trees would still use chlorophyll to photosynthesize and otherwise would be useless trash obelisks if we didn't need them for oxygen or food or whatever. I hate tree and I hate that we need trees.
Many problems, one solution: DESTROY THE TREES!
Many problems, one solution: DESTROY THE TREES!And, unfortunately for us, neither does reading books. Get real, wizards. :pI, perhaps more than Nemo, hate druids and their place in DnD with an undying passion. Trees don't give you super powers. Grow up, Druids.
If magic were real, you would need someone to teach you how to make the special wiggly fingers in order use it. This makes perfect sense to me.
Meanwhile, if magic were real, trees would still use chlorophyll to photosynthesize and otherwise would be useless trash obelisks if we didn't need them for oxygen or food or whatever. I hate tree and I hate that we need trees.
mhm mhm
This guy gets it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
One of my favorite examples of "Quadratic Wizard / Linear Fighter" that shows why it's simply not fun to have a party with a high level Wizard in 3.5 / PF1 is a video on YouTube called "Angel Summoner and the BMX Bandit" feel free to look it up if you're interested.
tbf those BMX-related skills were pretty pro I mean just like martials there wasn't anything broken about things at all....
That said, I think too often this thread shifted from the original theme: were casters nerfed too hard. Which is different from going around and around in circles over whether the caster-martial disparity was real or not.
I don't know the new rules enough to know whether overall they were nerfed too hard. But my initial reaction is that there were a number of things that, when I played a wizard or a cleric or whatnot, I could do that are not really worth an action to do anymore.
Could casters do them too well under the previous edition? Yes.
Now you can get (or give) a small bonus (or penalty) for a very short time. OtoH the martials can always use their best ability inexhaustibly. Not just their damage attacks, but their skills and many feats (most that are not Focus-related). Sure, as a caster "you can have skills, too." But that's not a class-related distinction then and most of your "iconic" skills will lay elsewhere. In Treantmonk's old guide to the PF Wizard he described roles, one of which was "The Gimp," which was a role you did not want to end up in. Many caster options seem like they're slotted in for that role, now. Again tho this is just an impression. Again also I still like much of 2E more than I thought I was going to now that I have spent some time exploring it. No bully.
As things stand now, as others pointed out, "gishing" from martial to caster has a "feel" that is far more rewarding than "gishing" from caster to martial (I am having trouble making a build where it would ever make sense for my caster who multiclassed into a martial would ever use his or her martial weapon. OtoH, they're still limited in their casting potential. So what I'm really having a difficult time doing is making someone where their few spells get used and they can still be a meaningful contributor. Cantrips, one says - and cantrips are okay but despite their scaling, still don't really "keep up." They're an area where they are better than 1e [except for Arcane Tricksters, who were better with cantrips], but you are now in the shadow of the martials.*)
But I am probably overlooking things. In any case one seems to get far more "bang for the buck" by multiclassing into a caster than from a caster into a martial. {Of course arguably in 1E it was the same since except for a few builds, multiclassing out of caster was a fool's errand. But it would be one way to make up for what I see as a current discrepancy).
Casters shouldn't be the Angel Summoner to the Martial's BMX bandit. But that's not the original theme of the thread, though it became that. It's whether they got hit *too* hard. Whether the current "meta" pinches too much. Even a couple months after the initial release I don't think I know enough to say if this is the case but it does "feel" this way as I am kicking 2E's tires. That said, I like much of the new "chassis" as people have called it more than the old 3x chassis (which I also liked for years but am personally finished with. I would rather go back to AD&D 2E, tbqh, than any 3e version including PF1).
*This is not a claim that you should be able to outshine them. But instead you are holding their coat, it looks like. Or, at your top spell-level, do something with a limited resource - and not just damage - that equals what they can do without exhausting a resource.
|
And, unfortunately for us, neither does reading books. Get real, wizards. :pI, perhaps more than Nemo, hate druids and their place in DnD with an undying passion. Trees don't give you super powers. Grow up, Druids.
If magic were real, you would need someone to teach you how to make the special wiggly fingers in order use it. This makes perfect sense to me.
So why not tree magic instead of book magic? Do you have to kill the tree to make it magical?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So why not tree magic instead of book magic? Do you have to kill the tree to make it magical?And, unfortunately for us, neither does reading books. Get real, wizards. :pI, perhaps more than Nemo, hate druids and their place in DnD with an undying passion. Trees don't give you super powers. Grow up, Druids.
If magic were real, you would need someone to teach you how to make the special wiggly fingers in order use it. This makes perfect sense to me.
Yes. Yes you do. Until you process the tree in some way it is naught but base grist for the machinations of the cunning and cultured practitioner of the mystic arts.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Responding to Nemo's response to my longpost
Regarding flight, Transmuter can learn the Fly spell in place of any one I noted. That said, if you want a Shapeshifter, then that's one of the Druid's niches (plural, yes, but they're smaller niches than what other casters have). Expect to be outdone. The design philosophy is that you can't beat someone at their niche at comparable level.
Glitterdust fails if you miss your target - they can move after turning invisible. See Invisibility does not miss.
I don't recall pointing to staffs as something big; I just took that for flavor and a bit more options. That said, they do get a wider selection of staves to use, presently. I just checked, too, and I merely mention some tactics with the staff, not touting it as something they can't do - the indented sections are things a Wizard does but Druid doesn't.
"Using spells for noncombat situations is very problematic because it is not reliable for RP reasons. Sure, you could Charm someone instead of talking, but is it really an option when everyone will see you do it? Or it will be obvious immediately?"
Easy answer: read the description for the spells. It may take a little arranging in larger areas, but enchantment got some buffs to make it less likely someone will tumble to it. Are they sure things? No, but neither is talking a sure thing. It's an option the party wouldn't otherwise have if talking fails. But if you really don't like those spells, swap them out! You can, after all. Snag a flight spell or something.
Anyway, if you're trying to use Physical Boost on yourself, you're bringing disappointment on yourself. That's not what it's for. You are the wizard. Use that buff on the Fighter or the Rogue. Sensory and defensive buffs are what you use on yourself. Physical Boost is neither.
Last complaint I'll address: Druid beating Transmuter Wizard at Transmutation. Fine, 11 more spells (35 to 46). Leaving aside that Druids have matter/life to wizard's matter/mind, and thus are skewed towards physical effects...
cantrip: same list
1st: Druids get Magic Fang and Shillelagh only. Both are basically Magic Weapon effects, one for shapeshifting and one for staves. Shillelagh is slightly stronger, but only works on your own staff instead of on the Fighter's Greatsword.
2nd: Animal Form, Enhance Victuals, Entangle, Shape Wood, Tree Shape. Two shapeshifts, one of which is a pure defense. Two more are obvious nature magic (entangle, shape wood). Enhance Victuals is sorta obsolete because of Create Food at the same level, and they both get it. I grant that Entangle is good, but Wizard gets a lot better set of Illusion spells, and an Enchantment that debuffs instead (Hideous Laughter). The utility of this one spell, though, is reduced by both having Web.
3rd: Wizards get Ghostly Weapons, which can save on a Rune, though not much. Also Shrink Item, utility not so much. Druids win with Insect Form, but that's a shapeshift.
4th: Dinosaur Form and Air Walk. Air Walk is a situationally slightly more useful Fly, but doesn't Heighten. Dinosaur Form is a shapeshift.
5th: Elemental Form and Moon Frenzy. Both are shapeshifts.
6th: I'm not sure why Stone to Flesh isn't arcane when Flesh to Stone is.
7th: same list
8th: Wind Walk.
9th: same list.
10th: Nature Incarnate and Primal Herd. Shapeshifts (one on others).
So, what do we take away from this list? Outside of shapeshifting - a Druid's niche - they don't get many useful Transmutions that wizards don't. I grant that Entangle, Wind Walk, and Stone to Flesh are wins for them. But they're the only true wins.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nah b&!~*!~!. You can gather the same magic components and just pray to Gaia. Bam magic.
If Gaia is a real-ass conscious being then what you are describing is a god that likes trees and then that superlady is handing out spells to whoever likes trees the best. If there is a god that likes trees then I guess that works. That doesn't mean I need to like it though.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The issue with the Transmuter specifically is that the Druid gets access to almost every spell the wizard does, and then some, except specifically for the equipment stuff, but that is not a particularly exciting branch of magic to specialize in, like magic weapon, shrinking items and knock.
I think it is fair to ask whether or not Primal casters needed to get spells like haste or gaseous form as default parts of their list that they can pickup on a whim any day? Maybe it would have been better for a fair number of the less animal and plant focused transmutation spells to be uncommon spells on the primal list so that it wasn't such a slap in the wizard's face that a druid gets to 5th level and can instantly cast fireball, haste, nondection, slow and stinking cloud as they desire, while the wizard has to drop a fair bit of gold to have that same level of flexiblity. Since there is no more having access to certain spells earlier than other lists, the primal list does get a lot of the classic wizard spells without the limit of the spellbook. It does also get less spells per day, but it seems a little hokey that the druid can use the nature skill to identify magic and scrolls of so many arcane staples.
Using nature to be able to identify spell effects feels very off to me.
Doesn't need to be, you can pray to Good and bam magic, you can pray to Gaia and bam magic.Nah b&!~*!~!. You can gather the same magic components and just pray to Gaia. Bam magic.If Gaia is a real-ass conscious being-
Harrumph.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Outside of shapeshifting - a Druid's niche - they don't get many useful Transmutions that wizards don't.
Your entire argument hinges on this statement. Yet it is in no way clear why this would be so.
Druids always had the ability to shapeshift into animals - period. Yet somehow that entire subschool of Transmutation is their niche now? Why? Wizards were always the premier shapeshifters. Druids instead got innate animal shapeshifting (and later elementals to make up for no high level animals). Yet somehow they now become good at partial shifting and shifting into everything.And no, sorry, don't buy that thing about essences. If anything, shifting should be physical and mental because it requires mental adaptation to properly control the new form. After all, it's no use having wings if you don't know how to flap them properly.
Also, tactical comment, a Wizard with Str 16 and Athletics is 1 point behind martial for maneuvers on low levels. Far better that they trip the opponent so that martial gets max effect on their turn. Same how Reach spell is actually most valuable at low levels to put Magic Weapon from afar.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Druids are the shapeshifters. That is their thing. Of course they'd get better stuff there.
If you don't buy the essence thing, that's your problem of expectation. Mental adaptation is no more than bleeding into mind from matter and life. Take a look at the spell lists; it's CLEARLY been set as a Life/Matter hybrid, skewed slightly towards Matter. Besides, it's not mental adaptation. It's reflex adaptation. Adjustment of nerves that aren't the brain is adjustment Life. Also the spells don't affect your mental stats.
As for tactics: said wizard also gets huge int and lots of int skills that other classes ignore. Your niches are intelligence and versatility. That high Str comes at the cost of a lot of survivability, too, since you could have put those points into Dex and Con.
In short, what you want would require Wizards to be better at being Druids than Druids are.
EDIT: if you want, say, Merlin from Sword in the Stone, then that shapeshifter fight would probably be two Primal Sorcerers, with Merlin taking the Wizard MCD and his opponent maybe taking a Witch MCD - assuming Witch is like what it was in PF1.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Huh, and here everyone said wizards were bad at necromancy this edition...
I wish they hadn't made wizards so boring while nerfing magic this much. Bard and cleric magic was nerfed as well, but they seem far more fun to play.Couldn't disagree more. 2e wizards are a lot more fun than 1e wizards, especially at low levels.
What are you doing that is more fun than the bards or clerics?
And at least in 1E, you had access to scrolls, wands, and spells that increased in power without taking up higher level spell slots.
Why?? Couldn't disagree more.Cantrips and focus spells give 2e wizards staying power that low level 1e wizards never had.
Tighter system math and spell balance encourages tactics and teamwork instead of just lazily steamrolling encounters with 'I win' buttons
1e wizards are stale, overbearing and prone to quickly running out of tricks if adventuring day standards aren't adhered to (especially at lower levels). It's an all around boring package.
What is so good about wizard focus spells?
Bard focus spells are useful. Wizard are super lame.
Huh, and here everyone said wizards were bad at necromancy this edition...
I wish they hadn't made wizards so boring while nerfing magic this much. Bard and cleric magic was nerfed as well, but they seem far more fun to play.Couldn't disagree more. 2e wizards are a lot more fun than 1e wizards, especially at low levels.What are you doing that is more fun than the bards or clerics?
And at least in 1E, you had access to scrolls, wands, and spells that increased in power without taking up higher level spell slots.
A mid-level feat gives you temporary scrolls that don't take up spell slots. Wands are now a bonus spell prepared per day. Spells that increase in power... okay, that was a nerf, but only to damage, and Cantrips got buffed so you can spam damage all day if you really want to.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think that's true for every class. There's nothing that another class can do that you can't except that class can do even more things. But i wouldn't say everyone can do what wizards do better. Wizards are the best prepared caster even with the nerf from the playtest, and the arcane list feels like the most versatile one.Sure, but in exchange they got anything special about them removed. There is simply nothing relevant Wizard does that another class couldn't do. And that other class would be doing even more things, or doing the same things better.Cantrips and focus spells give 2e wizards staying power that low level 1e wizards never had.
Tighter system math and spell balance encourages tactics and teamwork instead of just lazily steamrolling encounters with 'I win' buttons
1e wizards are stale, overbearing and prone to quickly running out of tricks if adventuring day standards aren't adhered to (especially at lower levels). It's an all around boring package.
Tell me what you do I can't do on my bard or druid that is much more effective?
I played a wizard to level 6. I played a bard and my buddy a cleric to lvl 6. Bard and cleric way more effective at utility and damage than the wizard.
If the wizard is supposed to be utility, why is he way worse at it? If he's supposed to do damage, why is he way worse at it? Wizard is literally the most useless class I've seen so far in the game. No one in the party misses him at all when I replaced him with a bard.
I think that's true for every class. There's nothing that another class can do that you can't except that class can do even more things. But i wouldn't say everyone can do what wizards do better. Wizards are the best prepared caster even with the nerf from the playtest, and the arcane list feels like the most versatile one.Sure, but in exchange they got anything special about them removed. There is simply nothing relevant Wizard does that another class couldn't do. And that other class would be doing even more things, or doing the same things better.Cantrips and focus spells give 2e wizards staying power that low level 1e wizards never had.
Tighter system math and spell balance encourages tactics and teamwork instead of just lazily steamrolling encounters with 'I win' buttons
1e wizards are stale, overbearing and prone to quickly running out of tricks if adventuring day standards aren't adhered to (especially at lower levels). It's an all around boring package.
Tell me what you do I can't do on my bard or druid that is much more effective?
I played a wizard to level 6. I played a bard and my buddy a cleric to lvl 6. Bard and cleric way more effective at utility and damage than the wizard.
If the wizard is supposed to be utility, why is he way worse at it? If he's supposed to do damage, why is he way worse at it? Wizard is literally the most useless class I've seen so far in the game. No one in the party misses him at all when I replaced him with a bard.
The wizard is better at illusions/debuffs than the druid and better at blasting than the bard. They also cast more spells per day.
|
I think that's true for every class. There's nothing that another class can do that you can't except that class can do even more things. But i wouldn't say everyone can do what wizards do better. Wizards are the best prepared caster even with the nerf from the playtest, and the arcane list feels like the most versatile one.Sure, but in exchange they got anything special about them removed. There is simply nothing relevant Wizard does that another class couldn't do. And that other class would be doing even more things, or doing the same things better.Cantrips and focus spells give 2e wizards staying power that low level 1e wizards never had.
Tighter system math and spell balance encourages tactics and teamwork instead of just lazily steamrolling encounters with 'I win' buttons
1e wizards are stale, overbearing and prone to quickly running out of tricks if adventuring day standards aren't adhered to (especially at lower levels). It's an all around boring package.
Tell me what you do I can't do on my bard or druid that is much more effective?
I played a wizard to level 6. I played a bard and my buddy a cleric to lvl 6. Bard and cleric way more effective at utility and damage than the wizard.
If the wizard is supposed to be utility, why is he way worse at it? If he's supposed to do damage, why is he way worse at it? Wizard is literally the most useless class I've seen so far in the game. No one in the party misses him at all when I replaced him with a bard.
You like Bards, how does that make the Wizard useless?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The wizard is better at illusions/debuffs than the druid and better at blasting than the bard. They also cast more spells per day.Tell me what you do I can't do on my bard or druid that is much more effective?
I played a wizard to level 6. I played a bard and my buddy a cleric to lvl 6. Bard and cleric way more effective at utility and damage than the wizard.
If the wizard is supposed to be utility, why is he way worse at it? If he's supposed to do damage, why is he way worse at it? Wizard is literally the most useless class I've seen so far in the game. No one in the party misses him at all when I replaced him with a bard.
What debuffs? Enfeebled that the paladin often hits the main BBEG with?
What blasting? 2d6 burning hands? 6d6 fireball you can't shape to avoid PCs? Then the saves and resistances?
When you can just bard it up with Inspire Courage and Inspire defense at the same time providing a +1 to almost everything and give half level resistance to physical damage spending no spell slots? Or do damage using Inspire Courage while firing a cantrip or a couple of arrows?
What does this do within the context of the game? Make you have to work harder to do less effective tactics?
I made an illusion that allows multiple saves and doesn't work if they save to do anything. Or I let off a single blast spell against 3 targets for 21 damage per target or half or nothing or double depending on save. That did ok damage once in a blue moon. Now the rest of the party gets to clean them up with the boosted bard damage. He didn't have to waste a spell slot to help as much or more than I did.
I can't use charm or sleep against against anything lvl 2 or over because of incapacitate trait.
The wizard is better at illusions/debuffs than the druid and better at blasting than the bard. They also cast more spells per day.Tell me what you do I can't do on my bard or druid that is much more effective?
I played a wizard to level 6. I played a bard and my buddy a cleric to lvl 6. Bard and cleric way more effective at utility and damage than the wizard.
If the wizard is supposed to be utility, why is he way worse at it? If he's supposed to do damage, why is he way worse at it? Wizard is literally the most useless class I've seen so far in the game. No one in the party misses him at all when I replaced him with a bard.
What debuffs? Enfeebled that the paladin often hits the main BBEG with?
What blasting? 2d6 burning hands? 6d6 fireball you can't shape to avoid PCs? Then the saves and resistances?
When you can just bard it up with Inspire Courage and Inspire defense at the same time providing a +1 to almost everything and give half level resistance to physical damage spending no spell slots? Or do damage using Inspire Courage while firing a cantrip or a couple of arrows?
What does this do within the context of the game? Make you have to work harder to do less effective tactics?
I made an illusion that allows multiple saves and doesn't work if they save to do anything. Or I let off a single blast spell against 3 targets for 21 damage per target or half or nothing or double depending on save. That did ok damage once in a blue moon. Now the rest of the party gets to clean them up with the boosted bard damage. He didn't have to waste a spell slot to help as much or more than I did.
I can't use charm or sleep against against anything lvl 2 or over because of incapacitate trait.
Debuffs: Paralysis, hideous laughter, yadda yadda yadda.
For blasting: The 2d6 burning hands as well as electric arc which will actually do consistent (if small) damage every round. Acid splash, produce flame, and freezing ray can also give you plenty of coverage for targeting various weaknesses. Also, inspire courage isn't so great if you already have a bard in the party or someone setting up bless in fights. More spell slots also means you can spend more rounds per day casting max-level spells (blasting harder) than the bard counterpart.
Fireball, burning hands, and cone of cold (and AOE damage in general) are all wonderful to have readied in a high level slot for when you fight that day's fight against multiple foes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1) Paralyze, Daze (sorta, that one's weak but a cantrip), Heightened Sleep, Heightened Charm. On the defense, Blur, Invisibility, Mirror Image, False Life, ...
2) You know you can heighten the blasts, right? And you can place the fireball so the edge doesn't hit the PCs. Just ask your martials to try to not get surrounded, and that's easy enough. Resistances are down, and saves ... to put it bluntly, you can target any save, unlike other casters. Martials are stuck vs AC, while you get to pick one of three, and can hit many enemies at once. That makes a single blast, if done close to correctly, a very strong option.
3) Bards are buffers, too. I don't deny that. The Occult list is more focused on buffs and debuffs than wizards are.
4) I'll gladly take a Wizard in the party over a Bard, if it's one or the other. They get so many better options.
5) Well, at lower levels, that 21 damage ... look. Saves are to magic what AC is to martial attacks. But at that level, a martial with a +1 striking weapon will do maybe 2d12+4 = ~15 damage on a hit, 30 on a crit? You can spam Electric Arc for 3d4+4, or ~11.5 to two people each. Their crit fail is about the same as the martial's critical hit, but you do damage even if they save. More than the Martial can say.
__________
The Wizard buffs the party for tough solo fights and blasts at the hordes and has social spells. Who else can do that?
Bard? Social and buff. Not so many good blasts
Druid? buffs themselves for fights, has some good blasts, passable tanking. Not so social
Cleric? Social and good at tanking, defensive buffs. Some offense, but not much.
Wizard? Sure, the druid out-shapeshifts them. They can't tank. But they can blast and debuff ALL THREE SAVES, unlike every other class. They can also buff.
Wizard = versatile. Just like in 1e.
___________
As soon as my group starts playing in earnest (having some time issues), I will GLADLY stat up a wizard first-thing and play that.
I anticipate my contributions will be immense, more than any other caster could do.
That said, re the title question: yes, there was a nerf. But I think Wizard is still solidly a powerful class. Just not so plausible to play an all-wizard party with the nerfs to summoning.
Doesn't need to be, you can pray to Good and bam magic, you can pray to Gaia and bam magic.Nah b&!~*!~!. You can gather the same magic components and just pray to Gaia. Bam magic.If Gaia is a real-ass conscious being-
If that's true then can't you pray to trees and bam magic?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't intend to single out Unicore here who has been far more active on these boards than I and groks both PF1 and PF2 at a deeper level than I do but to this
What does the arcane transmuter need to live up to past expectations for the build, that will not step on the toes of Dragon/Aberration sorcerers or Druids?I remind of posts like this earlier in this thread:
There is simply nothing relevant Wizard does that another class couldn't do. And that other class would be doing even more things, or doing the same things better.I think that's true for every class. There's nothing that another class can do that you can't except that class can do even more things.
In 3x/PF1 wizards could step on the toes of other classes (except CoD, which simply squashed them under its Gojira-sized feet). So the design reaction that I think the Unicore quote aptly reflects was to insure wizards did not step on the toes of other classes this time around - but it seems to have been fine for those classes to overlap quite a lot with the wizard's toes (thus the oholoko quotation).
It's perhaps why people are finding wizard underwhelming even if the mechanics are working as intended. Perhaps a way - and the underlying rationale for - the pendulum swinging *too* far.
As an earlier poster said, they thought of a number of ways to bring wizards (and casters in general) down a peg - and then used most of them as a kitchen-sink approach, and then "gave back" only a bit.
That said opinion is obviously still "mixed at best" and I still don't have enough time with the new rules to put my feet down in any one camp but my *impression* is that wizards are now whelmed. Not overwhelming, not entirely underwhelming, but whelmed, by many other classes (not just fighter though that one got invoked as the comparison a lot during the portion of the thread that focused on who DPR's best over the course of one round of one combat, and the consensus seemed to form that if the wizard had pre-buffed enough and the party had de-buffed the targets enough, the evoker-wizard could nova with their top spells at that level just fine for that one round when compared to the regular attacks for fighter of the same level, with pretty standard feats for the level).
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Druids are the shapeshifters. That is their thing. Of course they'd get better stuff there.
Why are druids 'the' shapeshifters? It's hardly the only thing they can do. It's not even the main thing they do, depending on your build choice.
It seems weird to have two classes that can buy into a certain concept and just declare that one of them owns it. Especially when a recurring theme of this thread up until now has been the opposite point.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
How long have Druids been the shapeshifters? They had Wild Shape in 3rd.
Druids have been a specific flavor of shapeshifter. Animals, plants and elementals, but stuff like monstrous physique and form of the dragon weren't even on the druid list in PF1.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't intend to single out Unicore here who has been far more active on these boards than I and groks both PF1 and PF2 at a deeper level than I do but to thisWhat does the arcane transmuter need to live up to past expectations for the build, that will not step on the toes of Dragon/Aberration sorcerers or Druids?I remind of posts like this earlier in this thread:In 3x/PF1 wizards could step on the toes of other classes (except CoD, which simply squashed them under its Gojira-sized feet). So the design reaction that I think the Unicore quote aptly reflects was to insure wizards did not step on the toes of other classes this time around - but it seems to have been fine for those classes to overlap quite a lot with the wizard's toes (thus the oholoko quotation)...There is simply nothing relevant Wizard does that another class couldn't do. And that other class would be doing even more things, or doing the same things better.I think that's true for every class. There's nothing that another class can do that you can't except that class can do even more things.
I don’t disagree. I think some folks are just feeling like it might have been better for there to have been less cross over between the arcane and primal lists if certain arcane schools are just much more interesting now played as a different class.
My answer is that I believe there is still room to build back an interesting transmuter wizard, and that trying to come up with interesting and unique spells and focus powers to do so will get it done faster than pushing to retcon another classes list...however, I also think the primal spell list in particular is brutally powerful and similar to many traditional wizard list. At least the Druid will likely trail significantly behind the wizard in being able to craft scrolls and wands, or else the fact that druids inherently gain all common spells when they get a new spell level would be even more over the top. I still think the overall utility a prototypical INT wizard brings to the party, over the course of an entire campaign is a niche not easily filled by another class.
Also, your words at the beginning of your post were very kind. Thank you.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Having now caught up and read through this entire thread, here are my 2c. Did wizards need to be nerfed from PF1e, 3.5 etc... hell yes.
Binary game design (save or suck spells) is a crappy design principle.
Being able to out do another classes schtick with a low level spell is poor game design. Being able to sub in if needed with a similar result - either the same but with negative repercussions (charm) or just a little bit less good at it is fine.
The argument about DPR is flawed and will never have a satisfactory answer. I am of the camp that as magic is limited to a number of times per day, has a pre-req spell prep time, components etc - it should when used be able to out damage a standard fighter's DPR. If I burn a 1 time per day slot it should make the fighter go 'damn that was impressive.'
I understand those that disagree - my design principle is that limited resources should always outshine unlimited ones.
The utility argument is heavily flawed. Skill utility has gone up for all. Martial classes have decent ways of applying debuffs now through feats without significant investment, additionally some skill feats allow decent debuffing.
Utility that requires magic in an adventure is not a satisfying game experience - if it can't be bypassed through mundane means, potions or scrolls by other classes it is a case of 'we bring the wizard else the adventure stops' this is not a satisfying play experience for any party.
The scrying argument - at the scene
Stealthing should (although with slightly higher risk) be able to achieve similar results once at the location.
The scrying argument - before leaving town
If required before the adventure well I can always purchase that from a local wizard or do some research and likely get similar results and then take a class more useful on the scene.
My biggest gripes are these:
A spell (or any ability really) should require either a roll to hit or a roll to save. Granting an ability 2 chances to fail is not rewarding and slows down the game. 1 ability, 1 check. Imagine if every weapon attack allowed a fort save to resist it or halve the damage? So why do we do it for spells that do less damage?
Wizard has limited interaction with their class abilities, particularly in spell casting with the 3 action economy. It would have taken a lot more work to rewrite spells to really use the 3 action economy but damn I wish they had. Magic missile is a perfect example of what I wish they had done more of. Removing the 'have to learn at a higher spell slot' to instead be 'spend more actions casting to achieve a different result' would have been a far more satisfying choice, leading to more combat choices for the player. Shoot a quick scorching ray and then move or stand still and increase the number of rays or the DC etc. Shaping the area of the fireball. Additional chains for lightning etc. I would rather spells took 1 action to cast standard and more actions increased targets, or spell save DC, duration, area etc. I can then make a choice of a quick spell and a cantrip or a more spending longer to get a more powerful result with one. These are interesting magic choices.
Class feats
Building a wizard is boring. Don't get me wrong I love what they did for martials, I now am far more excited about the build choices I have when thinking up character concepts. Sadly I do not feel this way for wizard. Having 'lots of flexible spell choices if I invest in buying the spells for gold etc' is not satisfying. All caster classes get spell choices, may have less flexibility each day in choosing but this allows more choice in the moment (I can pick any spell I know to cast not just what I prepared).
Most classes, martials in particular allow me a lot of cool and varied builds while still giving me great baseline utility with non-build weapons or combat options. I might be an archer but I can still do well with agile melee weapons. I might be a great weapon fighter, but give me a shield and a 1 hander and I am still really good.
Survivability
This is a big one. I accept that wizards have lower HP and armour that is a trope that isn't going away. However better progression for saving throws should be the trade off for loss of power. Most of the arguments on this have been about hitting power. Very little on how empty the wizards class progression table feels for things like saves or even getting better at unarmoured proficiency. I feel that they could have been a little more generous here given this if wizards are to be less BFC or 1 shot cheese mechanics than a small buff to save progression and unarmoured training wouldn't have hurt.
Wizards are still pretty easy to shutdown and athletics (and thus strength) are more important than ever, hell look at the number skill uses athletics has, look a the sheer number of skill feats right now.
Focus spells
Wizards could really have been given stuff to shine here, as it is the options are sort of ok but many have no additional effect for being heightened meaning their longer term use is limited. I really feel more meaningful focus spells or even a feat that allowed you to cast any school spell as a focus spell would have been nice. Right now I am not seeing the point in really investing in feats for them (other than the other feats aren't interesting).
While some of these things can be fixed with more splat books, the interaction between spells and action economy is something that really needed to be better built into the base system.
TLDR - not asking for more power, asking for more real tactical choices per round by using the 3 action economy to interact more with spells and their effects. not just when I prepare spells for a day.