You didn’t explicitly say differently, but you referred to the amount of extra slots in an identical way in 7.1 and 7.2, and I understood from your discussion with SuperBidi in this thread that this is something you’ve missed in your ranking.
Can you indicate where I said differently, so I know what to change? This is exactly why I numbered the paragraphs.
Did I? In 7.1 (Specialists), I wrote:
Specialist wizards each gain four benefits:
An extra spell slot at each level that can only be used to memorize a spell from their specialty.
An extra cantrip slot that can only be used to memorize a cantrip from their specialty.
An extra arcane 1st level spell of their speciality added to their spellbook.
A focus spell.The extra spell slot at each level is akin to a 25% bonus in your number of spells, so that’s awesome.
In 7.2 (Universalists), I wrote:
Universalists receive three benefits:
An extra wizard class feat;
An extra 1st level spell in their spellbook; and
The ability to use Drain Bonded Item once per day for every level of spell you can cast.
I think those are very different and recognize that Specialists gain the extra spell slots.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have a metaquestion for you Tarondor!
Everyone in the thread so far has been super nice with their comments, and most people here generally are!
That said, as a first time guide writer, I was shocked by the sheer volume of really angry or aggressive emails/messages about people having different value opinions as me. Do you get those or am I doing something wrong?
You should go back and read the comments I received. MOST people were kind. Some were very definitely not!
Yeah, it comes with the territory. I have to say that my first guide received a lot of comment, but very little aggression. This one did. I don't know if that's a sign of the changing times or that I did something different with this guide or just that different people saw it.
Anyway, I suppose if you're going to put your opinions out there you need to be ready to hear other people's opinions and recognize that not everyone knows how to play nice with others.
The best part about writing a guide like this is the two-part learning process. First I learn a lot in researching the first draft. Then I learn a lot from the comments of the people who read it.
Wow, what a guide! It's clear that you put a lot of time into this.
You mention that you think a Monk with Wizard Dedication is more effective in melee than a wizard with monk dedication. Do you have any plans to go over that build in the next version?
Well, I didn't, but I can if you'd like. I should have Version 1.2 ready this weekend.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
where 3) summarizes the Con, Dex etc build options. They're not nothing, but they're certainly not equal to "not being where the damage is".
First off, I agree with everything you say. I highlighted just this bit because of how much it contrasts with what others were saying earlier (Dex is the way to go, rating Dex low is a terrible idea, etc.)
It reminds me of the posts above where one person thinks I'm too combat-oriented and the other thinks I'm not combat-oriented enough.
And of course, some people don't know that their opinions are opinions and believe them to be incontrovertible fact. I'm as guilty of that as anyone, I suppose.
In the end, this ain't Highlander. There can be many more than one (opinions, of course). I don't think it's possible to write the definitive work on this subject because so much of it is so subjective.
...
Again, I'm not saying you explicitly say otherwise, but there is no acknowledgment of this pretty big advantage the specialists have, and in the analysis section you say in both section that the option gives a 25% increase in spell slots. This is a point I think can be missed quite easily, so pointing it out could be really helpful.
I am also of the opinion that this makes specialists better, but I have no issue with your ranking, just my personal opinion.
Maximum Champion AC is 10 + prof 8 + level 20 + Plate 6 + Runes 3 = 47
Wizards is 10 + prof 4 + level 20 + unarmored 5 + Runes 3 = 42
They can both wield a shield for AC.
Yeah, well, you're not wrong. Not sure what I was thinking. I should have retained my notes. Even wrong, they'd have shown me where my mistake was. <shrug!>
I'll throw it on the "to do" pile.
Again, I'm not saying you explicitly say otherwise, but there is no acknowledgment of this pretty big advantage the specialists have, and in the analysis section you say in both section that the option gives a 25% increase in spell slots. This is a point I think can be missed quite easily, so pointing it out could be really helpful.
I'll see if I can call that out more clearly in the next version.
I am also of the opinion that this makes specialists better, but I have no issue with your ranking, just my personal opinion.
Sure. That's the beauty of guides like this. You can take what you like and leave the rest. Not that it make me any more right, but I'll point out that both RPGRobot and Principia Arcana also rated Universalist above Specialist. Just saying.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First off, kudos to you Tarondor for a 169 page document!
Also: you have been very gracious in your replies, which I admire.
Re: the Dex-Con debate, I still think you should re-order your "Wizard Defense Strategies".
It is as you say: "The single greatest defensive strategy is simply not being where the damage is."
That is why I would argue Positioning should be the first and foremost tactic of the five. An extra 10 feet of Speed can often save you in a way that Dex or Con simply cannot.
The reality of PF2 is bleak: if a (non-trivial) monster can get to you, nothing will save you. Not AC, not Dex, not Con and not even basic defensive spells. At higher levels perhaps its possible to use magic to prevent monsters from reaching you, but I wouldn't count on it.
You either
a) get out of there
b) kill the monsterThat is, the second best defensive tactic is offense. In PF2, Wizards aren't great single-target damage dealers, and so this basically boils down to telling your friends "you need to kill this monster stat, since I plan to stay put for my next spell".
I would collect the "Wizard Defense Strategies" under three headings:
1) Positioning
2) Offense
3) Other aspects
where 3) summarizes the Con, Dex etc build options. They're not nothing, but they're certainly not equal to "not being where the damage is".Cheers
Yeah, I agree with you so much that I am reworking that section of the guide along the lines you suggest. Credit where credit is due.
|
Thanks for the excellent work.
With the focus on not being where the damage is; will there be discussion on what defensive spell to prefer when slots are limited? e.g. Mage Armor vs Longstrider, Mirror Image vs Heightened Longstrider.
Will the Fleet feat become a staple for all builds not just martial ones?
(Though its so good the monk build has Fleet twice)
Another thing I would like to see is the rating for heightened versions of spells in that spell levels list, which I note you do discuss against the base version for some but not all spells. e.g. Magic Missile 3rd, Enlarge 4th/6th.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've created an updated version of the Guide. It's at the same link as before: VERSION 1.2.
In Version 1.2, I added the following:
- Added summonable monsters from Bestiary 2.
- Added content from Adventure Path #155
- Reworked the Wizard Defensive Strategies section
- Added an explanatory note to the Specialist/Universalist section
- Added a build for a monk with the wizard archetype
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks for the excellent work.
With the focus on not being where the damage is; will there be discussion on what defensive spell to prefer when slots are limited? e.g. Mage Armor vs Longstrider, Mirror Image vs Heightened Longstrider.
No. I think that's too far down in the weeds for a guide. At that point I should just come to your house and play your wizard for you. :-)
Will the Fleet feat become a staple for all builds not just martial ones?
(Though its so good the monk build has Fleet twice)
It could. Movement feats are good stuff.
Another thing I would like to see is the rating for heightened versions of spells in that spell levels list, which I note you do discuss against the base version for some but not all spells. e.g. Magic Missile 3rd, Enlarge 4th/6th.
I'll give that some thought, but I'm not planning on it, no.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For barbarian dedication, doesn't not being able to use actions with the concentrate trait (and thus not being able to cast spells with verbal components) kind of kill that plan, or am I missing something? Even with Moment of Clarity, you're adding a 1-action cost to all your spells - I feel like this basically cancels out the defensive bonuses of rage, as that extra action could have been used to improve your defence instead (raise a shield, stride, etc).
In my experience Reach Spell is just great for Wizards of all kinds. Extending touch spells is cool, but often 30 feet is not enough either, and many spells have a 30 foot range. Reach Spell + 3rd level fear is just pure brutality. Since you rated it blue it's probably not like we disagree here, just wanted to gush about how much I like reach spell.
Always happy to see more love for Blur. Solid at 3rd level, equally solid at 20th. Just a great spell.
I wasn't able to read it all, but thank you for the hard work in making such a comprehensive guide! (And when I read Tarandor's guide, I want to see Tarandor's opinion. Not some kind of hivemind)
For barbarian dedication, doesn't not being able to use actions with the concentrate trait (and thus not being able to cast spells with verbal components) kind of kill that plan, or am I missing something? Even with Moment of Clarity, you're adding a 1-action cost to all your spells - I feel like this basically cancels out the defensive bonuses of rage, as that extra action could have been used to improve your defence instead (raise a shield, stride, etc).
Yep. I rated it orange because it's viable, but not particularly great. Let's just say that Momma Tarondor's boy isn't going to be playing any barbarian wizards any time soon. But it's not red because it's not totally useless.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I just wanted to thank you--and every person--for giving your time for these Guides. I find them entertaining, informative, and helpful for traversing this New Edition!
Keep it up! Wizard has been my favorite class since the beginning; and, I absolutely agree with Treantmonk...lol.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fantastic Guide! I especially like the occasional comparisons to previous systems (1ed and D&D) from time to time. I don't agree with it all but then again I never do.
2 minor corrections under spells:
Negate Aroma (1st level) won't help with troglodytes unless they consent to having it cast on them. Much like the silence spell (divine, occult) it only works on willing targets. Pretty much makes this spell worse than red.
Geas (3rd level ritual). I have also been pronouncing this wrong for 40 years. I used to pronounce it as you now say to (gee -as) but it is actually pronounced gesh - rhymes with mesh - hard g. It's Gaelic, go figure.
One last thing.. I love the fast updates! For those who haven't noticed the summons list has already been updated with Bestiary 2.
Yeah, what Kevin said. Negate Aroma is so critters with Scent don't automagically* detect you. Nifty for all kinds of unsavoury types trying to sneak past guard dogs.
Or a Dragon for that matter.
(* You can usually sense a creature automatically with an imprecise sense,...)
Fantastic Guide! I especially like the occasional comparisons to previous systems (1ed and D&D) from time to time. I don't agree with it all but then again I never do.
2 minor corrections under spells:
Negate Aroma (1st level) won't help with troglodytes unless they consent to having it cast on them. Much like the silence spell (divine, occult) it only works on willing targets. Pretty much makes this spell worse than red.
I hadn't noticed! Fixed in the new update coming out today.
Geas (3rd level ritual). I have also been pronouncing this wrong for 40 years. I used to pronounce it as you now say to (gee -as) but it is actually pronounced gesh - rhymes with mesh - hard g. It's Gaelic, go figure.
Wow. I...did not know that. Forty years of snobbishly getting it wrong!
One last thing.. I love the fast updates! For those who haven't noticed the summons list has already been updated with Bestiary 2.
And a new one about to come out today.
I can't open this website, would you send me a copy? Thank you
Sure. Send me an email address.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Version 1.3 is up. Same address as before.
Added all Heritages and Ancestry feats.
PS: I'm working on a Fighter guide next.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm interested to hear your elaborated thoughts on Armor Proficiency. Isn't getting light armor pretty nice early on? You're only going to have 16 DEX at most, so getting a chain shirt or some padded armor to shore up those trashy wizard defenses seems like a good deal with few drawbacks. It remains relevant until level 13, and getting an effective +1/+2 to AC for so many levels seems like an amazing deal to me. At level 13 it's obsolete so at that point you retrain ofc.
I disagree with your assessment action parity when it comes to the spell Command. 1 for 1 actions is a great deal when the party is up against enemies with worse action economy. In the extreme case of going up against a single boss monster, action parity (1 action for 1 of the enemy's) means you spent a 1/12th of the party's total actions to deal with a third of the enemy's. Very good deal.
"Mending - A quick fix for your fighter buddy’s broken shield"
Yes, but remember it is also 10 minutes casting time, and what self-respecting shield-user does not have Crafting at least Trained? And seeing that the spell repairs 5 HP per spell level, it will eat a pretty high-level slot if you mean to keep it relevant.
But yes, compared to the 10 HP a normal success on a Trained Crafting check yields, this may be occasionally useful when on a tight time budget.
I'm interested to hear your elaborated thoughts on Armor Proficiency. Isn't getting light armor pretty nice early on? You're only going to have 16 DEX at most, so getting a chain shirt or some padded armor to shore up those trashy wizard defenses seems like a good deal with few drawbacks. It remains relevant until level 13, and getting an effective +1/+2 to AC for so many levels seems like an amazing deal to me. At level 13 it's obsolete so at that point you retrain ofc.
See my thoughts at Section 23.4.2 of the guide. Armor is nice to have, but it's a sub-optimal thing to spend precious feats on. You, of course, are free to disagree.
Also, why can't you have a 20 Dexterity?
I disagree with your assessment action parity when it comes to the spell Command. 1 for 1 actions is a great deal when the party is up against enemies with worse action economy. In the extreme case of going up against a single boss monster, action parity (1 action for 1 of the enemy's) means you spent a 1/12th of the party's total actions to deal with a third of the enemy's. Very good deal.
Which is why a GM shouldn't put you up against a single enemy - it's poor encounter design, or at least boring encounter design. Anyway, that's my opinion.
Also, why can't you have a 20 Dexterity?
I was referencing the max dex you can have at level 1 - I should have been more clear about this.
See my thoughts at Section 23.4.2 of the guide. Armor is nice to have, but it's a sub-optimal thing to spend precious feats on.
Partial agree, partial disagree. I think your assessment of armor class is at least pretty fair (though I think tanking AC makes surviving much harder low level when you lack a lot of spell-based defense options. Later you get mobility related spells and stuff like Mirror Image to help you live). But I feel like +2 AC for a general feat, at the very least, makes it somewhat competitive with several other feats like Canny Acumen(Fortitude), Toughness and Fleet. If I'm playing a human Wizard and getting the extra general feat, Armor Training is at the very least going to be in the pool of general feats I'm strongly considering as my first 3.
Which is why a GM shouldn't put you up against a single enemy - it's poor encounter design, or at least boring encounter design. Anyway, that's my opinion.
This is probably going to have to be an agree to disagree. Solo monsters in 2E require unique strategies, and Command gaining tons of value against a solo isn't all that different from Fireball gaining a lot of value against multiple enemies. In my experience GMing the system, being able to run solos without the players just instantly winning due to action economy has been a big plus compared to other TTRPGs.
Regardless, even if you never run into a solo, the same argument for Command can be made in situations where the party is up against asymmetrical power (say, one PL+2 enemy and two PL-2). The high-power enemy's actions have a higher value, so one-for-one-ing on actions is a good trade.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I now also have a guide to the Second Edition Fighter.
Which is why a GM shouldn't put you up against a single enemy - it's poor encounter design, or at least boring encounter design. Anyway, that's my opinion.This is probably going to have to be an agree to disagree. Solo monsters in 2E require unique strategies, and Command gaining tons of value against a solo isn't all that different from Fireball gaining a lot of value against multiple enemies. In my experience GMing the system, being able to run solos without the players just instantly winning due to action economy has been a big plus compared to other TTRPGs.
Regardless, even if you never run into a solo, the same argument for Command can be made in situations where the party is up against asymmetrical power (say, one PL+2 enemy and two PL-2). The high-power enemy's actions have a higher value, so one-for-one-ing on actions is a good trade.
I've been noodling this one around for awhile and I reluctantly have to agree with you. It is a good tactical trade.
So 'splain something to me. If the players can use something like command to gain advantage over a solo enemy, how does that contribute to the players not "just instantly winning due to action economy"?
Hi, folks!
Right now I'm working on a guide to the 2e Rogue. It was nearly finished when the APG dropped and I was very nearly set back to Square One. When I'm finished with that, I will update the Wizard and Fighter guides for the APG. That could be a little while...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey Tarondor, nice guide!
I believe the summoned creature section might need a review on creature power level. Summoned creatures gain the Minion Trait and can't make reactions (unless there is some special feat or ability added later). Many of the monsters in your creature list seem to be considered more powerful than they should be due to Attack of Opportunity or other various cool abilities that summoned creatures don't have access to RAW.
Hey Tarondor, nice guide!
I believe the summoned creature section might need a review on creature power level. Summoned creatures gain the Minion Trait and can't make reactions (unless there is some special feat or ability added later). Many of the monsters in your creature list seem to be considered more powerful than they should be due to Attack of Opportunity or other various cool abilities that summoned creatures don't have access to RAW.
I included that stuff in the notes, but did not include it in the rating. Note that those ratings are at best pseudo-scientific. I don't have the patience for a gritty comparison of that many creatures. They're eyeball comparisons and rated based on my experience with the game. You mileage may vary.
I've just updated this guide for the Advanced Player's Guide. Still the same location.
Heads up, the Tengu section looks like there might've been some copy-pasting from the Rogue guide.
EDIT: So do the Aasimar and Changeling sections. Maybe be worth searching for the word "rogue" in the document.
I'm still not sure why the guide values summoned creatures so much given how the PF2 system works. The creatures are usually 3 or more levels behind the player, which puts them at a huge disadvantage when attacking, especially in the toughest battles where you would use your highest level spells. Using a high level spell slot on a summon monster of some kind seems like a terrible idea given they have ACs so high even the first strike in a round would be a low percentage strike against a high level boss enemy. Most of their powers saving throws are so low as to be shrugged off by a powerful creature.
I have not seen anyone effectively use summons in at level or above battles. One time our wizard used summon dragon using his highest level spell slot against a another level +2 dragon, it didn't hit once and did nothing in battle. This was at lvl 11. So a 6th level summon dragon spell to summon a young brass dragon against an adult Blue dragon.
+19 to hit against an AC of 34. That dragon requires a 15 or better to land one 2d6+8+1d8 fire damage. It's second hit requires a 19 or 20 if it gets the second hit.
It's breath weapon is a DC 26 basic reflex save versus a reflex save of +23 to do maybe 8d6 fire damage.
Summoned creatures are most of the time a very bad spell investment. Yet on this list most summon spells are rated green or blue. Why would you ever use a summon spell cast in your highest level slot over an AOE spell or some kind of group debuff or effect? The damage is low, chance of failing to do damage high, and general creature abilities ineffective against the creatures your fighting.
Even if you're fighting mooks a few levels below your level, the damage of a summon spell using single target attacks is going to be less than unleashing an AoE spell on the mooks. And you don't have to waste a sustain action and get to hit them all at once rather than one a time. Summon spells are terrible in PF2.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm still not sure why the guide values summoned creatures so much given how the PF2 system works. The creatures are usually 3 or more levels behind the player, which puts them at a huge disadvantage when attacking, especially in the toughest battles where you would use your highest level spells. Using a high level spell slot on a summon monster of some kind seems like a terrible idea given they have ACs so high even the first strike in a round would be a low percentage strike against a high level boss enemy. Most of their powers saving throws are so low as to be shrugged off by a powerful creature.
Yeah they have issues and a genuine summoner should really have some more bonuses to use them as a straight out offensive damage source. Yes I would like to see a wizard class feat to up the creature level you could summon by 1.
Some points in their favour, they are totally expendable so:
1) Obviously great for trap detection right from level 1 regardless of whatever else you do with them this is solid.
2) Enable flanking modifiers for your frontline. They will also often be attacking with a flanking bonus.
3) Any attack they absorb is an attack that is not directed at you. So its a flat out win.
4) Make a great wall by just being in the way.
5) Totally flexible choice of summoned creature. You do get the right creature for the job, including swimmers/flyers/spell casters
6) You still have 2 actions to cast another spell.
Obviously you can use them badly - in situations where the enemy doesn't have a good other action so they are just a wasted resource.
Elementals are immune to critical hits, so they can be a good choice for survivability and just staying up.
I probably will always have at least one summon spell in my spell list as a caster. I can't see me building a full summoner yet. Its just not there. But a partial summoner works fine.
I'm still not sure why the guide values summoned creatures so much given how the PF2 system works. The creatures are usually 3 or more levels behind the player, which puts them at a huge disadvantage when attacking, especially in the toughest battles where you would use your highest level spells. Using a high level spell slot on a summon monster of some kind seems like a terrible idea given they have ACs so high even the first strike in a round would be a low percentage strike against a high level boss enemy. Most of their powers saving throws are so low as to be shrugged off by a powerful creature.
Yeah they have issues and a genuine summoner should really have some more bonuses to use them as a straight out offensive damage source. Yes I would like to see a wizard class feat to up the creature level you could summon by 1.
Some points in their favour, they are totally expendable so:
1) Obviously great for trap detection right from level 1 regardless of whatever else you do with them this is solid.
2) Enable flanking modifiers for your frontline. They will also often be attacking with a flanking bonus.
3) Any attack they absorb is an attack that is not directed at you. So its a flat out win.
4) Make a great wall by just being in the way.
5) Totally flexible choice of summoned creature. You do get the right creature for the job, including swimmers/flyers/spell casters
6) You still have 2 actions to cast another spell.Obviously you can use them badly - in situations where the enemy doesn't have a good other action so they are just a wasted resource.
Elementals are immune to critical hits, so they can be a good choice for survivability and just staying up.
I probably will always have at least one summon spell in my spell list as a caster. I can't see me building a full summoner yet. Its just not there. But a partial summoner works fine.
I could see some utility functions for summoned creatures. Keep a low level one to set off hazards and such. Mainly they are not combat effective unfortunately due to the general lack of buffing and the way they scaled the game now.
Then again summoned creatures were never the greatest save for a few side cases that could attack weak defenses like touch spells. My buddy loved summoning his battery of lantern archons to shoot touch AC laser beams at weak touch AC creatures. They had little corner cases like this here and there. And mass summoning was obviously an effective tactic if for no other reason than to clog up the battlefield. Annoying as all get up though.
We banned the Master Summoner from our table. Too annoying of a class that slowed the game down.
I think 5E did a better job with summons than PF2. Some of that is due to the very tight math range on that game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I could see some utility functions for summoned creatures. Keep a low level one to set off hazards and such. Mainly they are not combat effective unfortunately due to the general lack of buffing and the way they scaled the game now.
Yes they need more support to be combat damage effective
mass summoning was obviously an effective tactic if for no other reason than to clog up the battlefield. Annoying as all get up though.We banned the Master Summoner from our table. Too annoying of a class that slowed the game down.
Yes any dedicated summoner should be strongly encouraged to use 1 or 2 summoned creatures at a time. Options to get 3+ should just not be in the game. Purely for gameplay.
I think 5E did a better job with summons than PF2. Some of that is due to the very tight math range on that game.
Their consistant use of really poor ACs for monsters? There is a lot to like about 5e but they really did do a bad job of their basic maths. Don't get me started.
I could see some utility functions for summoned creatures. Keep a low level one to set off hazards and such. Mainly they are not combat effective unfortunately due to the general lack of buffing and the way they scaled the game now.
Yes they need more support to be combat damage effective
mass summoning was obviously an effective tactic if for no other reason than to clog up the battlefield. Annoying as all get up though.We banned the Master Summoner from our table. Too annoying of a class that slowed the game down.
Yes any dedicated summoner should be strongly encouraged to use 1 or 2 summoned creatures at a time. Options to get 3+ should just not be in the game. Purely for gameplay.
I think 5E did a better job with summons than PF2. Some of that is due to the very tight math range on that game.Their consistant use of really poor ACs for monsters? There is a lot to like about 5e but they really did do a bad job of their basic maths. Don't get me started.
We would both get started. So don't worry. I'm here at PF2 because 5E may be a great game for people who want a quick, simple, fun role-playing experience, but it's not a great game for DMs who like to challenge players or players who like to craft highly customizable characters. I rage-quit during Out of the Abyss because the party was able to so easily game the Demon Lords like they were some weak, easily countered orc warlord or something. No powers to counter a group of PCs. I'm so glad PF2 kept casting ability on powerful enemies like balors and mariliths. No casting to counter group spell tactics means anything will die that can't counter the tactics, easily.
Heads up, the Tengu section looks like there might've been some copy-pasting from the Rogue guide.
EDIT: So do the Aasimar and Changeling sections. Maybe be worth searching for the word "rogue" in the document.
Will do.
Yeah, there's a lot of copy-pasting. Usually I'm better at smoothing it out. Thanks for the catch.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
re: Summoned creatures:
I think Gortle said it very well. Summoned monsters are never going to be front-line shock troops. They're there to absorb hits and be used tactically. I rate them -moderately- well (which is what a Green rating is supposed to represent) because they have so many uses in and out of combat, not because they can hang tough with foes many levels above them (which they can't).
Just noticed that Silence didn't make it into the "off-list" list in the Spells section. 2nd level is meh, but heightened to 4th is green to blue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Really nice update to the guide for the APG. Unrelated to the update itself, but there's one feat that I actually want to make a case for here, because it's rated Orange in the guide, but I believe it to be one of the best Wizard feats if not one of the best spellcaster feats in the entire game: Silent Spell.
When you look at it, the obvious use is social situations, which is, yes, niche, but the feat can do so much more than that. Some of these things being:
- Never worry about not being able to use your magic in a dungeon because it might alert enemies with those pesky Verbal Components.
- Cast in zones of Silence.
- Combine it with Invisibility, Greater Invisibility or Disappearance during combat so people don't even have an idea of which square you're casting from.
- Combine it with illusions to double the messing with people's minds. Even just the Ghost Sound cantrip on its own is an amazing tool when you have Silent Spell. Stronger illusions can do much more than that.
- If you get the drop on the enemy, use it to pre-buff with some short duration spells you wouldn't normally be able to use or think is worth to spend in-combat actions on. Haste, Fleet Step and other similar things. The spell has no verbal components, so as long as you're hidden behind a wall or something like that, the enemies won't even be aware that there's someone there casting a spell. After you're done with your shenanigans, your group attacks them.
- Etc.
The amount of stuff this feat can do if you're creative is absolutely amazing. I personally think it deserves at least a green rating, possibly blue for characters who want to play a lot with illusions.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
This still doesn't really address the "Why would you ever use a summon spell cast in your highest level slot over an AOE spell or some kind of group debuff or effect?" question.
And what do you mean by "absorb hits and be used tactically"? They can't absorb anything for crap.
I have to disagree strongly here. I have consistently used used my highest slot on a summons and have turned the tide of battle easily. Consider a battle of a party of 4 vs 1 BBEG. If my character wins initiative and gets a summoned creature into the Big Bad's face, have it do a little damage and maybe some added effect (trip/poison/whatever) and then the Big Bad uses its turn to squash my summoned creature into paste, then I win. My team gets an entire turn to act without taking damage and I have effectively nullified the enemy for one round. There are very few spells that don't carry the incapacitate tag (which means they can hardly ever be used effectively) that can do anything close to that. If my summoned creature survives into round 2 it's all gravy from there. Even if my critter is ignored but can contribute by getting into a flanking position, I'll take that. Hell, sometimes just having my critter eat an attack of opportunity - which will allow my party to move around freely for a round can be well worth it.
Do the summon X spells work all the time? Nope. Can they be made to work depending on the situation? Absolutely.
Note to Tarondor - Thanks for the update! I appreciate all your hard work. I love the "summon X" section but you should not consider a creature's reaction ability as a positive quality since, as a Minion, your summoned creature cannot use them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you consider spending your highest leveled slot to gain flanking or to eat an attack of opportunity "well worth it", then you and I have drastically different expectations on what makes playing a spellcaster fun.
I find defeating enemies fun. If my summoned dung beetle caused my enemy to hold its nose for 1 action and that was the difference between winning and losing then, yep, that's fun.
Ok, you can't actually summon a dung beetle. My level 2 mage was once in a party with a ranger, barbarian, and bard and the ranger dropped due to an untimely crit. There was a bottleneck behind a door and I spied an open space and summoned a flash beetle inside which promptly did an aoe dazzling attack which worked on 3 of the 4 bad guys. Over the course of the fight 4 bad guy attacks were nullified because they failed the flat check after an otherwise successful attack, the beetle lasted 3 rounds despite having all of 6 hit points. The players were howling with laughter. The GM gave my departed flash beetle a posthumous hero point when the dust settled. Yeah, that was fun.
Yes, and that is why I consider the orange rating to be accurate.
I personally rate the summon spells green because they have so much versatility and you can choose the right summons for the right situation. While summoning a shark can be a terrific idea it is awfully situational - but the spell isn't "summon shark", it's "summon animal". When I get a list of 8-10 critters to choose from - even if each individual critter is highly situational - the spell is still very good because I can make one of those options into the right tool for the job.
I respect your opinion and your play choices. I just like to play differently.
(Edit to conform my color rating to Tarondor's system)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
(Edit to conform my color rating to Tarondor's system)
I didn't create it. Treantmonk created it back at the dawn of Pathfinder.
I noticed you said implosion deals 750 damage, when it's actually 75 :P
By my estimation, it's actually a pretty mediocre spell. You have to sustain it to affect more than 1 target, and 75 damage to a single target at a time (with no repeats) doesn't compare favorably to the other level 9 damage options. Power Word Kill for example is 50 damage (no save) for only 1 action. Meteor Swarm is an average of 82 damage to multiple targets and Weird is 56 to multiple targets but also inflicts frightened.
Just now getting the chance to start reading the Wizard guide (did this for your Fighter and Rogue guides in the last few days and so far just barely looked in this one so far to check out the Rogue and Fighter multiclassing, so looking forward to seeing the rest of what you have to say here).
Which class(es) (if any) do you want to cover after Fighter, Rogue, and Wizard?
Found one small problem so far: 9th Level Kobold Ancestry Feats: "Dracomancer - Cast a 1st and 2nd level spell related to your exemplar dragon’s type. Awesome stuff. However, it only gives you" -- something got chopped off here.
Also, no 17th Level Kobold Ancestry Feats at all? Or or is that just a problem inherited from Archives of Nethys and pf2.d20pfsrd.com? (Same thing for Ratfolk and Changelings.)
Orc Ancestry: Nothing to change right now, but keep an eye out in case the Orc Hornbow (from late 1st Edition) makes a comeback in future content -- this will make Orc Weapon Familiarity (and the Orc's Strength bonus) a bit better.