Arcane Theses: Staff Nexus: "But when you craft your first real staff (by upgrading your makeshift staff), you get to add the original cantrip and 1st level staff into it" -- I think you meant to have "1st level spell" in that last part.
Sorcerer/Witch Archetypes: Just had a thought: If you regularly have a 15 hour adventuring day instead of a 15 minute adventuring day, might it not be quite good to use these to double down on Arcane spellcasting? Not sure which would be better, of Wizard multiclassed to Sorcerer or Sorcerer multiclassed to Wizard -- probably depends upon what you want to do, but you're going to be hurting for skills if you go the latter route. For Wizard multiclassed to Witch vs Witch multiclassed to Wizard, the former will give more total spells, but the latter gives more variety of Focus spells at low/mid levels and might be better as long as your 15 hour adventuring day has some times out that you can use to Refocus. (Obviously, for this to be better than increasing variety of spells depends upon whether another party member is covering the stuff you didn't take, like a Sorcerer/Oracle or Oracle/Sorcerer, or a skill savant who has become an insanely good Medic.)
Eldritch Archer archetype: I agree for the most part, but if you are an Elf or Hobgoblin . . . .
Marshal: "This archetype will help you build your fighter into a leader" -- nice to know, but how good is it really for a Wizard?
Spell Mastery: Added bonus: If you have a week to spare, you can retrain the mastered spells for free.
More thoughts on doubling down on Arcane spellcasting: This would make the Spell Blending Arcane Thesis better than it would be normally, because you could let your secondary Arcane class handle the lower level spells while you go hog-wild on Spell Blending with your actual Wizard spells. Of course, since a decent number of Arcane spells also appear on other lists, this would also work fairly well if your secondary spellcasting class had a different tradition (although this still works best if the secondary class is also Intelligence-based).
Spells: Summon Fey: "This was weak until the publication of , which included several summonable fey to fill in many of the gaps present in the Core Rules" -- something missing in the middle -- Advanced Players Guide or Bestiary 2, maybe?
2nd-LEVEL SPELLS NOT ON THE ARCANE LIST: Vomit Swarm actually is on the Arcane list (only missing from the Divine list), at least according to Archives of Nethys.
Cozy Cabin -- I guess for a 4 person party, they figured somebody would be keeping watch at all times. For a bigger party, the shortage of cots is still a problem.
Pillar of Water -- fish ladder, maybe? But I don't think you can bend the top over.
Implosion -- it's up to 750 points of damage total, but only 75 points per target, so bosses and even powerful minions will only be moderately hurt, and a lot of them will have the Fortitude to have a good chance to reduce or even negate it.
Remake -- won't work on a Ring of Power (artifact).
9th/10th-LEVEL SPELLS NOT ON THE ARCANE LIST: Not sure how you are supposed to get these (from what I can determine, your secondary spellcasting class never gets 9th/10th level spells).
Rituals: Word of Recall: Given the long duration, you might level up before the duration expires and before you use it, potentially making yourself no longer a valid target.
Metamagic Feats: Available Without Archetypes: Maybe it's just me being dumb, but I have read Quickened Casting (on Archives of Nethys) several times, and while it says that it reduces the number of actions to cast a spell by 1, it also has the symbol for consuming 1 action itself, which looks to me like overall it does nothing until you get Metamagic Mastery, which is a level 20 Wizard feat, which would make Quickened Casting a trap before level 18 (where you would be taking it just to level it up). Am I just missing something, or does that feat really need a clarity rewrite? And then the once per day really kills it.
Wizard Defensive Strategies: Maximizing Armor Bonus: Instead of investing in Strength, how about being a Dwarf (which also helps a bit with hit points and Fortitude Save) with Unburdened Iron?
Finally, finished! Until Secrets of Magic comes out and inflates everything by several chapters . . . .
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have read Quickened Casting (on Archives of Nethys) several times, and while it says that it reduces the number of actions to cast a spell by 1, it also has the symbol for consuming 1 action itself
Quickened Casting is a free action. I looked to make sure the listing on Nethys has the correct symbol and it does. Maybe you mistook the free action symbol for the one action symbol?
I have read Quickened Casting (on Archives of Nethys) several times, and while it says that it reduces the number of actions to cast a spell by 1, it also has the symbol for consuming 1 action itselfQuickened Casting is a free action. I looked to make sure the listing on Nethys has the correct symbol and it does. Maybe you mistook the free action symbol for the one action symbol?
You're right -- I'm still getting Trained in this edition. But I have to say that those symbols look awfully similar. I wish they had spelled out the action types, or at least used a highly different symbol (like at least Reaction is easily recognizable, and even somewhat intuitive).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I noticed you said implosion deals 750 damage, when it's actually 75 :P
No, it's up to 750 points. 75 points per round for up to 10 rounds.
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.
For a single round, I agree. But I can be dropping those spells at the same time that I'm sustaining an implosion. Its use requires a different tactical vision to be sure, but not an uncommon one.
Which class(es) (if any) do you want to cover after Fighter, Rogue, and Wizard?
This may be the end right here. I started on a Bard guide, but got bored. I may or may not return to the series.
I may spend my time working on a novel instead.
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.)
At present, there are none.
Which class(es) (if any) do you want to cover after Fighter, Rogue, and Wizard?This may be the end right here. I started on a Bard guide, but got bored. I may or may not return to the series.
I may spend my time working on a novel instead.
That is funny, because it pretty well sumerizes my feeling about the bard I play in PFS. I only really have fun with it if I give up on the idea of doing anything other than inspiring courage and then using my other actions to seek, recall knowledge and try to manipulate the battlefield in an interesting way. Casting spells never feels worth it when you have to spend one action out of the gate, every round, doing what the party pays you to be there for.
Arcane Theses: Staff Nexus: "But when you craft your first real staff (by upgrading your makeshift staff), you get to add the original cantrip and 1st level staff into it" -- I think you meant to have "1st level spell" in that last part.
Thanks. You have a good eye for detail. Are you a line editor by trade?
Remake -- won't work on a Ring of Power (artifact).
You sure? I see no evidence for that in either the description of remake or the description of artifacts.
9th/10th-LEVEL SPELLS NOT ON THE ARCANE LIST: Not sure how you are supposed to get these (from what I can determine, your secondary spellcasting class never gets 9th/10th level spells).
I said as much. But included it anyway for purposes of both future-proofing and also sheer comparison.
Metamagic Feats: Available Without Archetypes: Maybe it's just me being dumb, but I have read Quickened Casting (on Archives of Nethys) several times, and while it says that it reduces the number of actions to cast a spell by 1, it also has the symbol for consuming 1 action itself, which looks to me like overall it does nothing until you get Metamagic Mastery, which is a level 20 Wizard feat, which would make Quickened Casting a trap before level 18 (where you would be taking it just to level it up). Am I just missing something, or does that feat really need a clarity rewrite? And then the once per day really kills it.
It's a free action.
I was looking at the Magaambyan Wizard build (20.3.9). Bit confused as to how you are taking Halcyon Spellcasting Adept without taking Halcyon Spellcasting Initiate. Am I missing something? New to pf2e.
By the power of "Whoops!"?
It's a mistake. Where it showed "Shared Synergy" at 10th, that should instead have been (and now is) "Halcyon Spellcasting Adept".
|
I was looking at the Magaambyan Wizard build (20.3.9). Bit confused as to how you are taking Halcyon Spellcasting Adept without taking Halcyon Spellcasting Initiate. Am I missing something? New to pf2e.By the power of "Whoops!"?
It's a mistake. Where it showed "Shared Synergy" at 10th, that should instead have been (and now is) "Halcyon Spellcasting Adept".
There is also an error in the Method II for the same build. Halcyon Spellcasting Sage appears at level 18, but the required earlier feats (Initiate and Adept) are missing. Actually, Initiate seems to be missing from Method I and Method III too.
Which class(es) (if any) do you want to cover after Fighter, Rogue, and Wizard?This may be the end right here. I started on a Bard guide, but got bored. I may or may not return to the series.
I may spend my time working on a novel instead.
Okay, now I want to see your novel . . . .
Arcane Theses: Staff Nexus: "But when you craft your first real staff (by upgrading your makeshift staff), you get to add the original cantrip and 1st level staff into it" -- I think you meant to have "1st level spell" in that last part.Thanks. You have a good eye for detail. Are you a line editor by trade?
No, I work in Modern Necromancy Life Science Research (Alchemical Version). I wonder if it is a mutant power . . . .
Remake -- won't work on a Ring of Power (artifact).You sure? I see no evidence for that in either the description of remake or the description of artifacts.
{. . .}
{. . .}
You fully re-create an object from nothing, even if the object was destroyed. To do so, you must be able to picture the object in your mind. Additionally, the material component must be a remnant of the item, no matter how small or insignificant (even a speck of dust that remains from disintegrate is enough). The spell fails if your imagination relied on too much guesswork; if the object would be too large to fit in a 5-foot cube; if the object still exists and you were simply not aware of it; or if the object is an , has a level over 20, or has similar vast magical power.
{. . .}
Looks like it is in the description of Remake (I bolded and it since it is easy to miss, just like the Free Action symbol was easy for me to misread as a Single Action symbol in Quickened Casting -- really wish they had chosen a more noticeably different design).
There is also an error in the Method II for the same build. Halcyon Spellcasting Sage appears at level 18, but the required earlier feats (Initiate and Adept) are missing. Actually, Initiate seems to be missing from Method I and Method III too.
True. I've eliminated that whole discussion.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I may spend my time working on a novel instead.Okay, now I want to see your novel . . . .
So do I. I've been researching it for decades. Time to plant my butt and write. I'm thinking of an historical fiction set against the rise of Stilicho and Alaric in Late Antique Rome, stretching from the defeat of Valens in 378 to the sack of Rome in 410.
Remake Stuff...
Hmmm. Well, on to Mount Doom, then!
|
|
There is also an error in the Method II for the same build. Halcyon Spellcasting Sage appears at level 18, but the required earlier feats (Initiate and Adept) are missing. Actually, Initiate seems to be missing from Method I and Method III too.True. I've eliminated that whole discussion.
Sorry about that. I was keenly interested on your take on this, which was an excellent idea BTW.
You list the True Perception feat as blue, but its prereq is legendary in Perception. Can a wizard even get that? If so, how?
Nope! You're right. That's why none of my builds have it.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Working on an update. My goodness, there's been a lot added to the game in a year!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've run into an issue that you may want to include in the specialist section: the quality of the spells that are part of a school. I made a conjuration specialist, but conjuration spells for that extra slot are not that great. Lower level summons are pretty useless. And most of the conjuration spells are situational that are not summons.
I think I am going to switch to evocation as that is pretty useful all the time. Even the 1 action magic missile is useful all the time. There are more times when doing a little bit of extra damage that automatically hits is useful.
I think an assessment of the spells you can fill the extra slot with with specialists is a key part of how good a school specialization is.
I've been playing a wizard from level 8 to level 15 in the Extinction Curse AP. While I've heard that the ECAP is built to be on "hard mode" nearly all the way through, I do think it's worth mentioning that the trouble with the evoker is that everything depends upon beating Reflex saves/DCs. . . . . Well, not everything, but close enough.
I swapped over to universalist at level 14, and have opted out of the focus spells as much as possible. I haven't regretted the decision. The ability to recharge one spell slot of each level once per day has been nothing short of clutch gameplay. The evoker is fun and consistent, but just make sure you diversify your prepared spells as much as possible. Telekinetic projectile is a **must**.
Just my two coppers.
Thanks for the guides!!
I've been playing a wizard from level 8 to level 15 in the Extinction Curse AP. While I've heard that the ECAP is built to be on "hard mode" nearly all the way through, I do think it's worth mentioning that the trouble with the evoker is that everything depends upon beating Reflex saves/DCs. . . . . Well, not everything, but close enough.
I swapped over to universalist at level 14, and have opted out of the focus spells as much as possible. I haven't regretted the decision. The ability to recharge one spell slot of each level once per day has been nothing short of clutch gameplay. The evoker is fun and consistent, but just make sure you diversify your prepared spells as much as possible. Telekinetic projectile is a **must**.
Just my two coppers.
Thanks for the guides!!
TBf though, specialists are just one slot per spell level, all other slots can be whatever school you want.
So overall a specialist has more spell slots (1, through the drain bonded item power) and potentially more with spell blending.
Sure, your 1 evocation spell targets either ref or AC or Fort... But what about the other 3?
It's not even as pigeon holed as pf1 where spell focus/greater spell focus would eventually give you less efficiency on other schools. It's just one spell.
I've run into an issue that you may want to include in the specialist section: the quality of the spells that are part of a school. I made a conjuration specialist, but conjuration spells for that extra slot are not that great. Lower level summons are pretty useless. And most of the conjuration spells are situational that are not summons.
I think I am going to switch to evocation as that is pretty useful all the time. Even the 1 action magic missile is useful all the time. There are more times when doing a little bit of extra damage that automatically hits is useful.
I think an assessment of the spells you can fill the extra slot with with specialists is a key part of how good a school specialization is.
I agree with you that it would be useful, but the difficult part is in assessing "best". I think its much more subjective and dependent on style of play.
But I'll give it some consideration.
I've run into an issue that you may want to include in the specialist section: the quality of the spells that are part of a school. I made a conjuration specialist, but conjuration spells for that extra slot are not that great. Lower level summons are pretty useless. And most of the conjuration spells are situational that are not summons.
I think I am going to switch to evocation as that is pretty useful all the time. Even the 1 action magic missile is useful all the time. There are more times when doing a little bit of extra damage that automatically hits is useful.
I think an assessment of the spells you can fill the extra slot with with specialists is a key part of how good a school specialization is.
I agree with you that it would be useful, but the difficult part is in assessing "best". I think its much more subjective and dependent on style of play.
But I'll give it some consideration.
Maybe less best and more go by usefulness at all levels. A max level conjuration I'm finding is not terrible, but a lower level conjuration is pretty terrible.
A low level magic missile or see invisibility is almost always something you can use.
Thanks for the guide.
I would suggest you change your description of MAD (Multiple Ability Dependent) to better reflect 2nd edition.
You currently have:
MAD - Multiple Ability Dependent. Some characters, such as most wizards, are reliant upon a single ability (e.g., Intelligence). They are called SAD (Single Ability Dependent). Others, such as monks or paladins must excel in several abilities in order to function well. These classes, archetypes and builds are known as MAD.
I would use Alchemist as an example of MAD rather than Champion (you said paladin) or Monk.
There are far less MAD classes in 2e. In my experience it has been the Alchemist and Investigator that have the strongest need for a second attribute. There are certain subclasses that also reward it such as the Ki Monk or the Scoundrel racket of the Rogue.
I would say the most common case of MAD would be caused by the requirements of some of the multi class archetypes.
^I wouldn't say it's so much a matter of classes being less multiple-attribute-dependent (although that may be true to some extent) as 2nd Edition being much more generous with the attributes, so that for MAD to hurt, it has to need 5 good ability scores rather than just 3. I think 2nd Edition got TOO generous with this, so that now PC parties are likely to look like GATTACA squads, but 1st Edition was a bit too stingy, and even 1st Edition PFS realized it and so tweaked the point buy.
My wizard died. But I'm going to make another one as I'm determined to play a wizard to high level to see if what players like Exocist say are true that the wizard is a fun, powerful class at higher level.
Nice guide!
Correction on True Target, you say in your guide that it allows you to effectively share True Strike with a single friend, but it actually allows you to share it with up to four creatures!
You already rated it blue at 1/4 the strength, is there perhaps an even bluer blue? Pretty funny that it's still top tier even when nerfed so much.
On another note not specific to Wizards, but what am I not getting about Visions of Danger? I saw that you rated it as Orange. It seems like an absurdly powerful spell to me, but I always see it (and the Occult list) lowly rated in terms of damage. It is near guaranteed to do 16d8 mental damage (basic save obviously, but usually it will hit twice as you say in your guide) in a 30-foot burst, and can easily do more than that if you can combo it or block a hallway with your frontline (centering it 25 ft back from the front most enemy so they have to cross like 55ft to get out of it without tumbling or shoving the party). This is on average more damage than 7th level Chain Lightning WITH Dangerous Sorcery, and a creature crit succeeding only has like a 50/50 chance of ending it for themselves rather than guaranteed ending the Chain Lightning.
Assuming Halcyon Speaker to cast it as Arcane so you get a good DC, Wizard even gets convincing illusion to make disbelieving it even less likely for elite enemies. This is also just the damaging effects, it is still an illusion of a swarm of creatures. If your opponents don't recognise the spell or disbelieve it then they don't really have a great reason to think the swarm won't follow them if they try to leave. Obviously many will still gtfo but I'd be surprised if they don't try to kill the "swarm" they think is attacking them with any AoE they have, I'm sure players would do that if they were unfamiliar with the spell.
Honestly trying to figure out if I'm missing a major downside to this.
Looking to the future, has anyone thought about using the Overwatch Dedication + Vigilant Eye Diviner focus spell to get huge scouting capabilities? See around a corner within 60ft and then cast the diviner focus spell within your line of sight (but not necessarily your line of effect, as per clairvoyance) a few hundred feet away. If you see an encounter, maybe summon a Wandering Monster to send at the NPC's party for a change! Mind, you'd still have to summon it within your line of effect and tell it to go fight those enemies within the minute it sticks around. Dragons would be fast enough to do this kind of thing though. Might be worth softening them up before your main party hits them, preferably after any buffs they cast have run out.
You're right both times. The "True Target" thing was a typo, but on "Visions of Danger" I was just wrong.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've updated the guide to Version 3.0. Same URL as always.
^Looks like it has received enough new material that I'm going to have to give it another go-around when I get the chance.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Some of the ancestry feat ratings seem inconsistent. For example, Tengu's Storm's Lash is rated blue. Elf Otherworldly Magic, which lets you take any Arcane cantrip, including Electric Arc, is rated Orange. Unless you really value your Electric Arc counting as a primal spell for some reason, Otherworldly Magic is always at least as good as Storm's Lash. Gnome First World Magic is only rated green, despite being at least as good Storm's Lash. Realistically, almost no Wizard is ever going to choose to make their primary damage cantrip run off of Charisma, so Storm's Lash should be red, or orange at best; the other ones are at least take-able if you think that one cantrip is a decent deal for an ancestry feat.
Similarly, natural weapon heritages are all over the place. Some are correctly ranked red, but others are ranked as high as green, with no clear relationship between how good the effect is for Wizards and the rating.
It also seems unusual to rate Halflings only orange when they have great ancestry feats and +Dex/Int/Wis, -Str is very close to a perfect set of ability scores for a Wizard. Kitsune, in contrast, can't boost any of Dex, Con, or Wis unless you use voluntary flaws, don't have much in the way of good feat choices, and are rated green.
Minor nitpick, but Azerketi aren't Merfolk. Merfolk are an unrelated species, and Azerketi don't resemble what most people think of when they think of Merfolk. The "recognizable" name for Azerketi is Gillmen.
re: inconsistent ratings:
Yeah, I'm aware. Across years and 400 pages consistency is a difficult thing to maintain. I'll look at the feats you mention but I'm well aware of my vacillation on the value of martial feats. I do need to go clean that up for Edition 3.1. The issue is that I need a rating for "crappy for most wizards, but kinda cool if you do decide to make a martial wizard". But I don't want to introduce a fifth color to the Treantmonk rating system.
re: inconsistent ratings:
Yeah, I'm aware. Across years and 400 pages consistency is a difficult thing to maintain. I'll look at the feats you mention but I'm well aware of my vacillation on the value of martial feats. I do need to go clean that up for Edition 3.1. The issue is that I need a rating for "crappy for most wizards, but kinda cool if you do decide to make a martial wizard". But I don't want to introduce a fifth color to the Treantmonk rating system.
Think the usual practice there is to go half and half when coloring the entry
^. . . Or set the color to the rating for most Wizards, and then in parenthesis put the rating for martial Wizards (or whatever).
Made those changes.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I want to say I love this. It's great, and as someone who wrote a few of these back in 1E, it is a true labor of love.
One suggestion, for each entry instead of just color coding each entry for its value, you should also put a star system next to it.
Instead of RED, YELLOW, GREEN, BLUE, it should be RED (*), YELLOW (**), GREEN (***), BLUE (****). This helps with accessibility for our friends that have difficulty seeing in color.
Your rating of prescient consumable should be blue. You rated it merely green due to restricting your view to only potion. Consumables includes scrolls. Given that general feats are lacking, trick magic item stands out. Combined with prescient consumable you can have a staggeringly large array of non-combat spells at the ready.
Here is a sheet of spells that would be useful for this: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1A5RptcITraMlJ7db_wilQVqSF_UNJZhxcLN M-vvSUYg/edit?usp=drivesdk
Prescient consumable is still tied to using prescient planner which is unable to select magical or alchemical items.