Did wizards get nerfed?


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion

951 to 954 of 954 << first < prev | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | next > last >>

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Temperans wrote:

Except one of the key reasons given for why spellcasting is good is, "2 actions for 1 vs a solo boss is a good use of actions."

And given how solo bosses by nature tend to be lv+2 or higher then they are effectively saying, "spellcasting is fine because sometimes it's a boss who will lose 1 action, meanwhile ignore it's a regular oppoenent."

If its a regular opponent, then it isn't level +2, its at most +1, and probably either -1 or 0 and you have a high chance of succeeding or critically succeeding with your spell- which is especially impactful because many such spells are multi-target.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Xenocrat wrote:
Generally if Reddit disagrees with any other online community, and there is no strong reason to assume the members of the other online community are mentally deficient, Reddit can be safely ruled to be wrong. It's the lowest common denominator catch basin of the internet. Good for obtaining a critical mass of participants for niche topics, bad for quality.

You don't sound like an elitist snob at all.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Temperans wrote:

Except one of the key reasons given for why spellcasting is good is, "2 actions for 1 vs a solo boss is a good use of actions."

And given how solo bosses by nature tend to be lv+2 or higher then they are effectively saying, "spellcasting is fine because sometimes it's a boss who will lose 1 action, meanwhile ignore it's a regular oppoenent."

The point made before is that, even in the worst case against a high saves enemy with the incapacitation rule in effect, spells are still worth doing. Once enemies are your level, and their saves are not so high, your spells will be much more effective. Also in general slow and other single target debuffs do best against a single valuable target, so you'd probably use a different spell if you're fighting a bunch of weaker enemies. As a spellcaster you get many to choose from.

Dark Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.
BellyBeard wrote:
Temperans wrote:

Except one of the key reasons given for why spellcasting is good is, "2 actions for 1 vs a solo boss is a good use of actions."

And given how solo bosses by nature tend to be lv+2 or higher then they are effectively saying, "spellcasting is fine because sometimes it's a boss who will lose 1 action, meanwhile ignore it's a regular oppoenent."

The point made before is that, even in the worst case against a high saves enemy with the incapacitation rule in effect, spells are still worth doing. Once enemies are your level, and their saves are not so high, your spells will be much more effective. Also in general slow and other single target debuffs do best against a single valuable target, so you'd probably use a different spell if you're fighting a bunch of weaker enemies. As a spellcaster you get many to choose from.

The Whole argument around the Slow spell has been frustrating shallow. The "its bad because 2 for 1" crowd seem to ignore several key points around both spell duration and general tactics.

Slow has a potential duration of 10 rounds, but only requires to be cast once. Spending two actions to remove potentially ten actions is a x5 Return on Investment. That's pretty damn good. At 6th level, where the spell can effect up to 10 targets, It's a potential x50 RoI.

Obviously these are potential maximum values based on an ideal scenario. But what happens when we inject some likely outcomes into the mix?

This is where trying to apply Slow as a 'one-size fits all' solution breaks down.

Understandably, the aim is not to have your enemies survive long enough to gain your best RoI. Your target selection needs to be better. You won't throw it on random mooks, but you also don't want to throw it at someone likely to save - except in the scenario where denying even 1 action is worth more.

What ends up happening is that you need to weight the options of each use, as, when applied correctly, Slow is devastating. Applied incorrectly and its 'meh'. The problem people seem to have most with the spell is judging said application. And that's kinda on them.

951 to 954 of 954 << first < prev | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / Did wizards get nerfed? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.