Woefully disappointed

Rules Discussion

201 to 205 of 205 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

Deriven Firelion wrote:

Medicine keeps things going a lot longer. I have a healer cleric who is medicine focused. He can keep the party in combat a long, long time.

The point is if a party is out of spells, or even a member is, it could br better to rest.

Nobody cares if a bard + 3 melee could go on and on forever and ever.

If you play a wizard which is not allowed to rest when needed, the problem is not that the wizard, or any other spellcaster, is weak.

Quandary wrote:
Here's one tip: If you have 3rd level spells, 1st level Burning Hands has nearly no reason to prepare beyond swarms (area damage vulnerability). Because 3rd level Cantrips out do it in damage. Arcane has best damage cantrips of game by far, so use them. Electric Arc is top cantrip damage AND hits two targets with better range, so outside swarms should always be preferred to Burning Hands (Produce Flame cantrip does single target Fire damage). Just because they are humble Cantrips doesn't mean using them effectively isn't important part of Wizardry, you can't play a Wizard without understanding your spell list.

I can't electric arc on bard through feat. Is a good cantrip.

Acting fearfully because of AoOs seems extremely odd given 2E specifically drastically reduced the number of enemies with an AoO.

Number of enemies with AoOs is reduced.Effectiveness of AoOs for enemies that have them has increased. We thought AoO reactive based abilities were mostly gone or useless now until we ran into some creatures with them. They hit hard and are dangeous when you're already getting torn up. Tail whips or strange horn attacks can be nasty.

IMHO it's a bit strange that AFAIK you never once specified which Focus powers you have played with as Wizard, and presumably dislike using. Really there is quite a bit of variety, so it's hard to imagine everything is unlikable... If something isn't your cup of tea, play a different school that is.

You can only pick one, maybe two with feats. I picked necromancy because I liked the necromancy advanced spell. The necromancy first level spell would have been useful were it 1 action. Then you could use it to set something up. A two action, no heigtened sicken for one round focus spell is pretty lame.

But that seems the crux of your complaint, not potential efficacy, but "not liking" and refusing to use the options they do have because they aren't "fun" to you or aren't "wizardly" enough, whatever that means. If you just don't "like" the options available to 2E Wizards, maybe it just isn't the class for you thematically.

I see the wizard as lacking options compared to the other classes. For the most part casters are balanced and well-designed. The wizard seems to be the main class with these very limited, boring, and less effective school focus powers and abilities.

Their familiar is weaker than an animal companion. Not worth taking unless you enjoy the look of a familiar.

Their metamagic feat is good if metamagic provided good options. Metamagic is limited at the moment and not very interesting. Reach and Widen just not super fun and situationally effective.

Spell blending is boring. Get a few more high level slots sacrificing lower level ones. This can be effective, but at the same time not what you want to be doing when everyone else is teeing off without having to worry about whether they have the right sword out or the right composition available.

Spell Substitution is change out your spells in 10 minutes instead of during daily preparations. Can be effective, but boring and only as effective as the number of spells in your spell book and the time you spent scouting and making knowledge checks to set up perfectly when the rest of your party can wade in and start swinging.

You don't lack for much versatility and effectiveness as a bard or druid. A bard's composition cantrips always help. Their spell selection is quite good.

Wizard could use some 1 action option upgrades.

Data Lore wrote:
Naw, because then the caster can cheat and st use reach spell on it.


Yes they can "cheat" and use a reach spell. Three times per day and oh yeah they don't get whatever cool spell of that level instead. Not so solid an argument.

Here is a question. Do scrolls still exist and can casters scribe them every day. This was how the wizard became God of the battlefield. Let's see Volume A is a book of 20 fireballs, Volume B you have five each of every resist energy. Volume c all dispel magic type spells, etc,

Deriven Firelion wrote:
Narxiso wrote:
Well, you do know that focusing on intelligence on a bard also leaves other stats lower. Going for intelligence on a bard comes with a steeper opportunity cost than for a wizard. While it’s not impossible (and far more forgiving than most other systems) to have intelligence on a bard, that does leave a defensive stat lower. It’s impossible to be great at everything. Did you know that?

It does not come at a deeper opportunity cost. Not sure why you believe this.

You get four stats get +2 to +1...2/3rds of your stats. Do the math. No you don't have to be lacking. I am lvl 10. At lvl 10 I have raised Int, Con, Wis, Cha. I don't need dex because unless you're armor focused, it's best to just raise Con. I mostly stay out of battle.

Seriously? Is this all just one big elaborate joke? You're trying to lecture people that AC isn't important and can be ignored, because you just don't get into combat? We already told you that if the rest of your party can beat encounters without you, then your encounters are clearly way too easy. This just takes the cake though.

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Deriven Firelion wrote:
Fumarole wrote:
Deriven Firelion wrote:
The class doesn't have as many options or a unique niche compared to other caster classes.
The class that effectively has unlimited spells known and can literally change what they are capable of doing every single time they do their daily preparations doesn't have as many options?

First, it doesn't have unlimited spells known. Arcane list has a lot spells, but not even close to unlimited.


Much of your post has nothing to do with what I posted, perhaps it was meant for someone else? I didn't contend that the wizard was better than other casters, I just questioned the notion that they don't have as many options as other casters, and it is in this context that my comment should be examined.

Of course wizards are not literally unlimited in spells known because Paizo hasn't released an unlimited number of pages with spell descriptions, but they can have at least as many as any other caster, regardless of what folks are trying to say about the costs involved (see Borrow An Arcane Spell, previously mentioned). This was mentioned to contrast wizards with bards and sorcerers, who cannot come close to the wizard in spells known. Clerics and druids are on par with wizards because they don't have to learn anything, but instead just wait for new books to be released. The day may come where future books have many more spells for the divine and primal traditions than arcane. But it is not this day.

201 to 205 of 205 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Rules Discussion / Woefully disappointed All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.