How do people feel about this feat? I find myself constantly avoiding it, I feel it needs to be slightly buffed. Instead of a frequency of once per day, perhaps once per encounter would be worth grabbing for a 10th level feat.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Once per encounter would be extremely strong.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think it would fit too well with the current design of the game: no activity or ability uses this type of limitation anymore, you either can use it during an encounter or you can't , there are no limited numbers of uses per encounter. The only exception is the way focus spells work, when 10 minutes of rest are available between fights.
For a 10th level feat, Quickened Casting is underwhelming, above all since metamagic feats can no longer be used together on a single cast. I really fail to imagine a recurring scenario where a single spell per day cast faster (not even nearly instantaneously) would make much of a difference. Making it usable once every few minutes would probably work and still wouldn't break the action economy in half.
Once per encounter would be extremely strong.What exactly would make casting a single spell in an encounter in one less action "extremly strong"? It's not as if spell slots grew on trees, and not even the strongest spells available can be quickened (it only works on spells at least 2 levels lower than the caster's maximum spell level).
Completely agree here. Sorry Captain normally I'm with you, but in this case this feat is so weak it needs to be buffed in some manner, once a day restriction is devastating.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
You'll regret this houserule the first time there's a 2-action spell that's really not meant to be cast in the same round as some other 2-action spell UNLESS it's just once per day via Quickened Casting.Example?
You don't need an example. Every designer will be writing 2-action spells with the assumption that you can't combine them with other 2-action spells short of the once-per-day corner case of QC.
If they ever write, assuming this, a spell that combo-es with another spell as in to make it a no-brainer I-win button, then having that with a "once per encounter" houserule will result in all the kind of stuff a GM *really* doesn't want to deal with, such as the caster player becoming a one-trick pony (which was precisely what PF2 was trying to avoid), encounter definition abuse (fiding ways to "reset" encounters, same as PF1 ragecycle cheese) and of course that awkward moment when you have to consider walking back your own houserule.
In short, why make yourself potential trouble down the road? Cue everyone who in 3.5e houseruled more uses for turn/rebuke undead per day (as to make it more useful without being OP) having to walk back the houserule immediately the moment Divine Metamagic was published. That's assuming they were able to spot the incoming tsunami ahead of the game and not have to face the awkward "well you know Billy, your character is way too powerful now, so we gotta change things a little" moment which seldom ends well.
I see your point, instead we have a feat that isn't going to be selected. So what's the remedy here?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I see your point, instead we have a feat that isn't going to be selected. So what's the remedy here?
The truth is that it's not as weak as you think. Action economy is much more important in PF2 and you don't fight more than one boss/critical battle per turn. Additionally, QC allows you to actually get that spell out in a round if you're slowed or in any other way deprived of actions, and one of the best ways of wrecking a caster's day in PF2 is to knock off their actions forcing them to make painful decisions or shutting them out of 2-action spells altogether.
The above is based on actual gameplay, BTW. I've seen casters in QC and the way they would use the feat and I'm pretty sure that increasing its frequency would make it an autopick for every build - again, something PF2 is trying hard to avoid.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
For a caster giving Quickening Casting for each encounter is basically saying if they want a extra round every battle, making it an automatic pick for every caster that can get it.
Synesthesia + Blast Spell from Sorcerer every battle sounds hilarious though...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Haha that is true perhaps it's too strong every battle, but currently it's too weak. Something needs to be done.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think that the original Quickened Casting feat doesn't need to be more powerful, but a later feat which builds off of it could make the feat more appealing.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You could go with a limit of once an hour. That way you'll have it for major encounters, but not every encounter, and don't have to keep resting for the day.
I think it's pretty nice even once a day, but it doesn't suit bards who want to be spamming their cantrips.
You could go with a limit of once an hour. That way you'll have it for major encounters, but not every encounter, and don't have to keep resting for the day.
I think it's pretty nice even once a day, but it doesn't suit bards who want to be spamming their cantrips.
Indeed I am a Bard perhaps that's why I find it weak. Good point.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Haha that is true perhaps it's too strong every battle, but currently it's too weak. Something needs to be done.
Well, I would treat it as a Focus power with the Metamagic trait. Have it increase your Focus pool by 1, and have it cost 1 point, as with other powers, with a 10 minute frequency. This makes it (effectively) once per encounter while also limiting its constant impact.
Good idea
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Throwing out 2 spells per round is really, really good though, to say nothing of the circumstance Gorbacz mentions. Consider how much damage a 5th level blast followed by a 3rd level blast in the same round can deal. Cone of Cold into Fireball is 18d6 in an area, for example. I don't really see that as something you need to be doing every encounter.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I've considered going to once per hour but I certainly wouldn't go any faster than that.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Potentially doing it three times in an encounter, every encounter, is FAR too strong.
Throwing out 2 spells per round is really, really good though, to say nothing of the circumstance Gorbacz mentions. Consider how much damage a 5th level blast followed by a 3rd level blast in the same round can deal. Cone of Cold into Fireball is 18d6 in an area, for example. I don't really see that as something you need to be doing every encounter.
While this might sound strong in theory, let's look at the odds in practice.
Let's assume a 9th level spellcaster with a maximized casting attribute (19) and Expert spellcasting. We'll also go ahead and assume it's 2 of the same exact 5th level spells, Cone of Cold.
So, we know the save DC of this spellcaster will be 27, the highest you can expect to get at that level.
Against even-level monster opponents, they have anywhere from +15 to +20 to their saving throw. Meaning on average, they will make at least one of those saves, and fail the other at worst. Some will save against both on average as well (the +20 in particular).
Without factoring in resistances or weaknesses, two instances of 12D6 would result in an average of 42 damage. Halving that makes it 21, meaning a minimum of 42 damage per target on average with both saves, 63 with a single successful save, or 84 on two fails. For most creatures, this takes quite a bit of their health out, but the ones with the higher saves will be the ones who have the less HP. Resistances would significantly reduce that damage to be less than a 5th of their HP on successes, and weaknesses would bump that up to a little above half on failures. Criticals can happen as well, with the odd saves being able to do so on either part of the spectrum 20% of the time, but assuming an average of +17, criticals will only happen on 20's and 1's, same as any on-level roll. Affecting 4 targets would be an excellent use of the spell, meaning doing anywhere from 84 to 336 damage on average is quite strong.
It's extremely devastating against lower level enemies, but also seemingly pointless against higher level enemies, since the critical probabilities there are extremely heightened. That's to be expected.
You're also cutting out over half of your highest level spell slots to do this, and with the 10 minute frequency I would personally put in, you're only ever reasonably doing this once per encounter, with not-that-high damage spells left for future encounters. I mean, it's extreme when you're only getting one or two encounters in a day. But if you're getting multiple encounters, or you're in a dungeon crawl with no reasonable way to rest, or if you're in a time crunch? A bit of risky business, that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Quicker is better.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Let's assume a 9th level spellcaster with a maximized casting attribute (19) and Expert spellcasting. We'll also go ahead and assume it's 2 of the same exact 5th level spells, Cone of Cold.
...that's not what the feat does.
...that's also not a level at which the feat can be taken.
...I'm confused.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Two cones of cold in a row might not finish the boss. But it would probably clear a lot of minions out of the encounter a lot earlier. That's powerful.
Although personally I think I'd rather use the first spell to place a debuff, like Fear, and then exploit short-lasting lowered saves with a follow up spell.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you want something to use Quickening more often use a variation of the 5e rule. The first time you use Quickening it works as normal, after that once per hour/encounter if you quicken a spell you can only cast a cantrip that turn.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Quickened casting is a feat that suits any caster. If it was good, it would be an autopick. I completely agree with the design to make specialized feats good and generic feats disappointing, it avoids all tax feats.
QC is an ok feat you take if you have nothing else to take. There's no point in having it on par with the other choices.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like Quickened Casting is something my Metamagic Mastery wizard will pick up at 20th level with his floating Metamagic feat of half level.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's no point in having it on par with the other choices.
Hard disagree. The notion that an option 'should' be worse just because is absurd.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm playing a 12th level Wizard in Curse and I've found quickened casting to be great. Especially in the parts of the AP that don't have multiple fights in a day.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Quickened casting is in a somewhat unusual spot, in that it’s a strict upgrade (compared to many class feats which tends to offer more options rather than just a power-up). The effect is extremely useful, but very restricted. I don’t think it’s a terrible feat to take (it’s actually quite nice with the Wizard metamagic thesis, as noted) but is probably going to be overshadowed by class feats that actually synergize with your build.
For a “general” class feat that doesn’t need any help to be good, I think it’s mostly fine. It’s a little unfortunate how underwhelming it appears at first glance, especially given its legacy from 1E/3.5.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
uh, Quickened is really strong- sure you can only use it once, but it isn't a 'rotation' ability (to borrow some MMORPG terminology) its something you should be using in nail biting encounters to nova with big spells- as was mentioned earlier in the thread you could use it to wave clear very hard, potentially just blowing away most of an encounter before your foes have a chance to move, with powerful AOE spells.
Its power scales with the situation- using it in combats you would have easily won anyway obviously makes it feel useless, using it in combats you might only barely pull through makes it feel essential.
Let's assume a 9th level spellcaster with a maximized casting attribute (19) and Expert spellcasting. We'll also go ahead and assume it's 2 of the same exact 5th level spells, Cone of Cold....that's not what the feat does.
...that's also not a level at which the feat can be taken.
...I'm confused.
Forgive me for operating under the old playtest rules where it just worked on whatever spells you had prepared. That actually works against it being "ZOMGOPPLSNERF" levels of power, and makes it more wishy-washy than what I hypothesized.
Even despite that, you could bump the math to 10th level to actually get access to the feat, but the save odds ratio is still the same across the board.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's no point in having it on par with the other choices.Hard disagree. The notion that an option 'should' be worse just because is absurd.
Just because there's no prerequisite. It works for any build, in any situation. Such a feat must not be better than average (otherwise it ends up being a tax feat) and must not compete with specialized feats (otherwise, there's no need to specialize, just grab always the same build and it works whatever you do). So it must be slightly worse, for people to take it only as a fallback if they don't have anything good to take.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just because there's no prerequisite. It works for any build, in any situation. Such a feat must not be better than average (otherwise it ends up being a tax feat) and must not compete with specialized feats (otherwise, there's no need to specialize, just grab always the same build and it works whatever you do). So it must be slightly worse, for people to take it only as a fallback if they don't have anything good to take.There's no point in having it on par with the other choices.Hard disagree. The notion that an option 'should' be worse just because is absurd.
Many feats don't have a pre-requisite anymore in 2E, at least compared to 1E, and this was by design. Some pre-requisites were extremely arbitrary in 1E (even if purposefully) and didn't do much other than to limit what kind of characters can select said feat. With traits and feat pools being mostly tied to class, why have a bunch of arbitrary requirements?
Obviously, some requirements makes sense, otherwise it creates for broken gameplay, and usually those requirements tie into what the feat does, or what the feat is for. I mean, a class feat that doesn't have a requirement shouldn't always (or even usually) be worse than a feat that does.
I think what I would do to make "Quickened Casting" a more attractive feat is to essentially bring back "Spell Perfection" in that a later feat,with Quickened Casting as a prerequisite, can be chosen to allow you to quicken a specific spell below a certain level more often (say, once per combat.)
Does that seem reasonable?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think what I would do to make "Quickened Casting" a more attractive feat is to essentially bring back "Spell Perfection" in that a later feat,with Quickened Casting as a prerequisite, can be chosen to allow you to quicken a specific spell below a certain level more often (say, once per combat.)
Does that seem reasonable?
No, because you take spell perfection in Hydraulic Push and load up on Prismatic Walls. Gross.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
In a game w/ 10-minute lulls, it's pretty simple to extend those to 1-hour lulls. Starting tough combats w/ a Quickened combo would make delaying worthwhile so I don't think 1/hour is feasible.
It really is a powerful feat, especially in games (i.e. Kingmaker) where you have only a few combats per day. If you think it needs to tuning to suit your playstyle, fine, but recognize Paizo had to balance it for all regular playstyles. So far in this thread each recommendation I've seen has made the feat mandatory.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
By that logic, you could wait a full 24 hours. Just sit around on the ground like Geralt of Rivia meditating.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How many encounters are you guys putting into a session? Most games I've run only use on average 2 encounters, usually some kind of smaller battle of minions and a boss fight. 1/day is still being able to use it in half the battles per session.
I get that the limit makes it look really unsexy, but it's actually really strong.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
How many encounters are you guys putting into a session?
In 1st edition it was one or two per six hour session.
Now, in 2nd edition, it's closer to eight.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How many encounters are you guys putting into a session?In 1st edition it was one or two per six hour session.
Now, in 2nd edition, it's closer to eight.
Yep, blew all the way from character creation to level 2 in the first PF2 session I ran.
Yep, blew all the way from character creation to level 2 in the first PF2 session I ran.How many encounters are you guys putting into a session?In 1st edition it was one or two per six hour session.
Now, in 2nd edition, it's closer to eight.
What on Golarion are you fighting? Doesn't it take something like 25 on-level encounters or roughly 5 level+4 party killer encounters to gain one level?
How many encounters are you guys putting into a session?In 1st edition it was one or two per six hour session.
Now, in 2nd edition, it's closer to eight.
How long are your sessions? Our group can easily spend 2 to 3 hours for just one challenging fight...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How long are your sessions? Our group can easily spend 2 to 3 hours for just one challenging fight...How many encounters are you guys putting into a session?In 1st edition it was one or two per six hour session.
Now, in 2nd edition, it's closer to eight.
About 8 hours, but we only really get 6 after accounting for setup, breaks, Tom foolery, and cooking dinner.
What on Golarion are you fighting? Doesn't it take something like 25 on-level encounters or roughly 5 level+4 party killer encounters to gain one level?Yep, blew all the way from character creation to level 2 in the first PF2 session I ran.How many encounters are you guys putting into a session?In 1st edition it was one or two per six hour session.
Now, in 2nd edition, it's closer to eight.
The first part of age of ashes. Between the story xp, and travelling through the citadel fairly quickly, they knocked the whole level out in about eight hours.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How many encounters are you guys putting into a session? Most games I've run only use on average 2 encounters, usually some kind of smaller battle of minions and a boss fight. 1/day is still being able to use it in half the battles per session.
I get that the limit makes it look really unsexy, but it's actually really strong.
1/day doesn't mean real world days. It is in game. So even if your group is as slow or non combative as you suggest it doesn't mean the next session will have the ability recharge.
The adventures paizo puts out support this as well. Their timelines don't expect you to take a full month per dungeon ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In a game w/ 10-minute lulls, it's pretty simple to extend those to 1-hour lulls. Starting tough combats w/ a Quickened combo would make delaying worthwhile so I don't think 1/hour is feasible.
It really is a powerful feat, especially in games (i.e. Kingmaker) where you have only a few combats per day. If you think it needs to tuning to suit your playstyle, fine, but recognize Paizo had to balance it for all regular playstyles. So far in this thread each recommendation I've seen has made the feat mandatory.
To be fair, it's mandatory regardless of whatever "changes" we do because their other feats are junk.
Familiars are too niche and require specific investments to make viable, metamagic feats are only as great as the variables they improve, spending feats to improve or access spell school powers are pretty weaksauce, and feats like Spell Penetration are just there to maintain relevance on the number treadmill, not unlike Weapon Focus or Improved Initiative back in PF1. Some feats are useful, like Scroll Savant, Effortless Concentration, and so on.
Quicken Spell being universal in its application is what makes it so strong compared to other feats, even if this second casting must be of a lower level. Being able to spare yourself an action at any time is crazy strong. Casting Haste onto an ally (or yourself) as a single action is one of the best uses of the feat, bar none. When you can cast 9th level spells, being able to haste the entire group as an action is, again, one of the best uses of the feat. Even if it's once per day. Remember that even in PF1, Quicken was one of the most powerful and desired feats for spellcasters of all kinds, and was taken over some other very powerful feats as well because of stuff like this.
While I'm fine with the ability to be able to do so multiple times being limited to a higher level, this is still something that should at least be possible. Even if you make it a 20th level feat, it should still be possible.
You could always allow the feat itself to be taken multiple times so you could use it multiple times per day...Is the cost of a higher lvl class feat worth being able to cast multiple times per day?