| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
We have already seen that some beloved spells are making their return, such as Aqueous Orb, Mad Monkeys, and Blistering invective. What others do you want back?
I, for one, want the old Bigby's Hand spells back. With how PF2 spells heighten, it could all be one big spell that let's me magic slap everyone.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like to see the thasalonian spells developed by the various runelords. Also, any of the spells with named NPC's in their titles.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I personally would like to see Permanency and Contingency back, presumably as rituals. I love playing the ever prepared wizard, and those two spells really help sell and play that.
I can't stress enough how glad I am to see blistering invective and mad monkeys coming back.
Chord of Shards was a fun spell I hope to see back. Not sure if it fits 2e's occult spell list but I like the image of singing a song so metal it turns to glass and shreds enemies. Maybe as a focus spell for bards or something.
A Reincarnate ritual would be great though I don't necessarily expect one.
Hedging Weapons was pretty cool too. A bit of defense, a bit of offense, and a neat visual effect.
They certainly seem like something suitable for an “advanced” guide. So fingers crossed!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Stone Call and Ice Storm, I also want Sleet Storm/Ash Storm as well. I love big battlefield control spells that provide tactical advantage rather than damage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Divine Power. For Warpriests to finaly shine in melee.
I'd like to see any of the 25 spells I ported over from 1E return. It'd be a lot of fun to see how Paizo's designs differ from my own.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ooh, just remembered a couple shapeshifting spells I hope we get to see in 2e. Ooze form and Fey form. I like fey and ooze, and I like that fey form was a shape shifting spell that augmented magical capabilities in addition to melee ones. I don't expect them in the APG, but I sure would be thrilled to see them.
And on the topic of shape shifting, I really hope spells like Animal Form get more forms in later books.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
blessing of fervor
terrible remorse
channel vigor
infernal healing
blood money
sirocco
blistering incentive
ill omen
prediction of failure
calcific touch
Of course, I wouldn't mind if they weren't as OP/borderline OP as in PF1 ;-)
Divine Power. For Warpriests to finaly shine in melee.Heroism pretty much covers that. A +1 to +3 keeps the warpriests attack bonus on par with a non-fighter martial.
Heroism is not a personal spell, so you better cast it on the Fighter. Divine Power was way better than Heroism back in PF1 and that's what I expect for the Warpriest.
I’d like a new Divine Power purely because of how many enemy divine casters used it in 1E (nearly all of them of the appropriate level)
Would make conversions easier !
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
With the tight maths for pathfinder 2e I can't see them providing anything substantially better than herorism or anything that would stack with it.
A personal range spell combining Heroism and Haste seems possible, though, and would be about equivalent to the old Divine Power.
Magic jar, possession, and simulucrum.
Magic jar, possession, and simulucrum are what I miss most.
|
I’d like a new Divine Power purely because of how many enemy divine casters used it in 1E (nearly all of them of the appropriate level)
Would make conversions easier !
Ah, the "spends first three turns casting buffs on themselves" PF1 casters where in practice applying these tactics meant that they die on turn two having not done anything? ;-)
I want the Create Pit line of spells. They amuse me, provide something offensive in Conjuration, and seem like something a Wizard should be capable of.
That sort of isolation of an enemy will be unlikely in PF2, except maybe on a critical failure on save.
Compare to Resilient Sphere which steals about a round on a failure (though has a defensive use too).I guess the pits could be easy to climb out of?
Crit save: avoids
Save: leaps aside, prone?
Failure: fall in, damage so prone, easy climb out
Crit fail: falls in, damage so prone, Stunned 1?, harder climb?
Not sure if the adjacent squares would remain at risk of falling in (from spell, obviously pushing happens).
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think falling in the pit on a failure and needing to make a check to climb out is probably how that'd work, yes. As for the check to climb out, I'd be surprised if it wasn't just the Save DC (very rarely do spells involve a flat DC other than this).
On the other hand, I'd think they'd probably be something like Flat Footed rather than prone on a success.
I'm pretty sure it would also make use of and reference to the Grab An Edge Reaction, which potentially makes it a multiple Save requiring spell...if the victim has a hand free. Though successfully using Grab An Edge does mean you still need to spend at least one action climbing out. Or maybe you can only do this if you're on the 'adjacent' spots that would've given a +2 to saves in PF1, or maybe crit failure costs you the opportunity to Grab An Edge.
Really, I don't know exactly how they'd do Create Pit, which just makes me more interested in seeing a reprise of the spell.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ice Storm is another MIA spell. That said, the damage was lackluster for its level, and the environmental effect didn't really make up for it.
Raven's Flight: Not the most powerful spell, but I always liked preparing it as an "oh crap" option to quickly leave combat without getting slaughtered by AoOs. Also worked as an early flying option to reach some places in a pinch. And really, I just love the image it creates.
More a category than a specific spell, but 3.5 and PF had a handful of spells that encouraged the spellcaster to go into melee combat... but between half BAB and general martial-caster issues, they ended up almost universally being real bad and it'd be cool to see a PF2ified take on them.
Not referring to shapeshifting spells, we have a bunch of those and those were really good in PF1.
From the Arcane side of things:
Scorching Ray
Stone Call
Ear-Piercing Scream
Gravity Bow
The Various [Animal] [Trait] spells (Bear's Endurance, Fox's Cunning, etc.)
Animate/Control Dead (current rules are lame, hopefully APG rules, even if alternates, can fix the situation)
Ghoul Touch
Protection From Arrows
Ice Storm
The Various Symbol, Pit, and Hand spells
Sirocco
Additional Wall spells (like Wall of Iron, Wall of Sound, etc.)
Battering Blast (think Ring of the Ram but in spell form)
Spellbane
Tsunami
I imagine several of these spells can be cast from other spellcasting traditions as well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Magic jar, possession, and simulucrum are what I miss most.
Worth mentioning that one of those three spells already exists! Granted, you have to be a Bard or Occult Sorcerer (or soon, an Occult Witch) since it turns out sending your mind and soul into a target body to take over is pretty much right up the Mental/Spiritual intersection.
Ice Storm is another MIA spell. That said, the damage was lackluster for its level, and the environmental effect didn't really make up for it.
Difficult terrain is great if your side can ignore it and the enemy can't. It great for the action economy advantage, triggers more reactions and outright lets even your slower characters outmaneuver the enemies, that's pretty good. Also, the non-scaling damage was weak because it had no saving throw, huge AOE and bypassed Spell Resistance, that's a pretty good deal.
You would love my players' faces when I used it with to start a fight, it was 23 damage and every one picked up their dice for the saving throw, I just said "There's no need, just take the damage. This whole area here..." and I pointed out pretty much 90% of the area they would be fighting in the next rounds "Is difficult terrain now. Now roll initiative!". That was a rough fight for them, but I also liked it because due to Pathfinder's monster building rules I got to experience a high level Winter Witch, something I wouldn't be very likely to come up myself.
I really enjoy Tears to Wine in PF1, but there's no way that should ever be ported to PF2 without some substantial changes. +2, +5, or +10 to all Wis and Int skill checks, that stacks with everything, for an arbitrarily large group, for ten minutes per level, with the bonus of temporary Enhance Water, with 30x the volume, on more spell lists, at a comparable spell level? I love it.
Magic jar, possession, and simulucrum are what I miss most.Worth mentioning that one of those three spells already exists! Granted, you have to be a Bard or Occult Sorcerer (or soon, an Occult Witch) since it turns out sending your mind and soul into a target body to take over is pretty much right up the Mental/Spiritual intersection.
Well, in that case, we need mirror polish back. That was such a useful spell!
I personally would like to see Permanency and Contingency back, presumably as rituals. I love playing the ever prepared wizard, and those two spells really help sell and play that.
Definitely want Permanency back as well, but good news for you! Contingency is in the core rulebook. Not as a ritual, sure, but in the same form 1e had it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Scorching Ray but only if they fix the spell-attacks being impossible to land without True Strike.
Scorching Ray but only if they fix the spell-attacks being impossible to land without True Strike.
I can’t imagine the APG will contain such a change. That would surely be errata territory ?
Scorching Ray but only if they fix the spell-attacks being impossible to land without True Strike.I can’t imagine the APG will contain such a change. That would surely be errata territory ?
I don't know, one of the biggest (at least perceived, in-play results may vary) issues is the lack of Item Bonus, while the game assumes an Item Bonus to attack. This would be easily fixed in APG, if Paizo sees it as something needing fixing.
Changing the unequal rate of proficiency scaling would be more errata territory though, yeah.
Scorching Ray but only if they fix the spell-attacks being impossible to land without True Strike.Can you explain that statement?
"Impossible" is a bit of hyperbole, but because Touch AC was removed, spellcasters have to target regular AC without getting the magical +bonuses that fighters and other melee types get. I'm unsure off-hand if their spellcasting TEML (as opposed to their attack TEML) is used, I think it is, but would have to double check. Even so, over 20 levels, that's +3 worth of to-hit that wizards and sorcerers just Don't Get.
"Impossible" is a bit of hyperbole, but because Touch AC was removed, spellcasters have to target regular AC without getting the magical +bonuses that fighters and other melee types get. I'm unsure off-hand if their spellcasting TEML (as opposed to their attack TEML) is used, I think it is, but would have to double check. Even so, over 20 levels, that's +3 worth of to-hit that wizards and sorcerers just Don't Get.Scorching Ray but only if they fix the spell-attacks being impossible to land without True Strike.Can you explain that statement?
Spell Attacks technically have their own proficiency, but a spellcaster's Spell Attack proficiency and Spell DC proficiency for their tradition pretty much universally (so far) increase together. It's theoretically possible they may someday have a class that increases one but not the other, but it seems unlikely.
ETA: Also, since all main-class casters eventually get Legendary in their casting, that means that the only class they end 3 points behind is Fighter. Any other martial they wind up 1 point behind, thanks to the +2 from Legendary. On the other hand though, they don't reach Legendary until level 19, and get all other proficiencies (except Trained of course) later, so they do spend most of their careers a fair bit behind.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Spell Attacks technically have their own proficiency, but a spellcaster's Spell Attack proficiency and Spell DC proficiency for their tradition pretty much universally (so far) increase together. It's theoretically possible they may someday have a class that increases one but not the other, but it seems unlikely.
ETA: Also, since all main-class casters eventually get Legendary in their casting, that means that the only class they end 3 points behind is Fighter. Any other martial they wind up 1 point behind, thanks to the +2 from Legendary. On the other hand though, they don't reach Legendary until level 19, and get all other proficiencies (except Trained of course) later, so they do spend most of their careers a fair bit behind.
Anybody got a side by side comparison of the fighter attack modifiers, versus other martial modifiers, versus the spell attack modifiers?
No? Okay. Guess I'll do it myself then. ;P
Proficiency Progressions for the fighter, other martials, and spellcasters, by level:
As you can see, they are never more than 2 points behind the fighter (best in the game!) except for levels 5, 6, 13, and 14, where they are 4 points behind for some reason.
Now let's look at that again with the weapon rune factored in for the fighter and other martial classes. Based on item level, you can presumably get a +1 rune at level 2, a +2 rune at level 10, and a +3 rune at level 16.
If you account for those weapon runes, at their lowest point (level 14) spellcasters are behind by 6 points behind the fighter. That's pretty huge. They remain behind the other martials by 2-3 points for most of their career.
Scorching Ray but only if they fix the spell-attacks being impossible to land without True Strike.I can’t imagine the APG will contain such a change. That would surely be errata territory ?I don't know, one of the biggest (at least perceived, in-play results may vary) issues is the lack of Item Bonus, while the game assumes an Item Bonus to attack. This would be easily fixed in APG, if Paizo sees it as something needing fixing.
Changing the unequal rate of proficiency scaling would be more errata territory though, yeah.
I don't see anything at all unfair about the uneven scaling of proficiency. Legendary capability is not the norm at all! Anyways.
As Shinigami said, they're not really way off most martials.
The APG could easily fix it by carefully adding in some + to hit item bonuses for casting. I'm not sure if they need item bonuses to spell DCs, but still. I have not witnessed any sort of significant inaccuracy from spellcasters at my tables, but they also tend not to spend spell slots on attack rolls (I think that's just a function of save spells having a cooler selection).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You also have to balance the damage & effects of the spell with the attack bonus. Are spells supposed to hit like a Fighter? Or maybe more like a Barbarian w/ extra damage instead of an easier attack?
I'd think the latter, which in turn makes any attack bonuses that much more powerful.
Looking at only one half of the equation misleads, given how tight Paizo made the math in PF2.
That said, I'd expect the Magus to have such a bonus, hopefully with a cost on their save DCs. I'd expect the math on a Disintegrate to balance out for Wizards & Magi.
I don't know if we want the wizard to be better at hitting with spells than the ranger is at hitting with arrows, or the monk is at hitting with fists.
If accuracy is an issue, straight numerical bonuses aren't the answer. Something like a metamagic where the casting the whole process of casting the spell and attacking with it consumes three actions could work though, a la Hunter's Aim.
Spell Attacks technically have their own proficiency, but a spellcaster's Spell Attack proficiency and Spell DC proficiency for their tradition pretty much universally (so far) increase together. It's theoretically possible they may someday have a class that increases one but not the other, but it seems unlikely.
ETA: Also, since all main-class casters eventually get Legendary in their casting, that means that the only class they end 3 points behind is Fighter. Any other martial they wind up 1 point behind, thanks to the +2 from Legendary. On the other hand though, they don't reach Legendary until level 19, and get all other proficiencies (except Trained of course) later, so they do spend most of their careers a fair bit behind.
Anybody got a side by side comparison of the fighter attack modifiers, versus other martial modifiers, versus the spell attack modifiers?
Don't forget the Item bonuses at 4, 10, 16 that applies to Martials only. At level 13, for example, they're gonna be 4 points behind a Non-Fighter Martial. non-Fighters already have like 50% chance to hit same-level enemies (or less), this puts Casters at 25-45% chance to hit (depending on level) any time after level 4. This is pretty silly since evn at 19 when they get legendary they are still behind martial chance to hit (+2 from proficiency -3 from runes). These are the same chars that are trying to land their one Disintegrate they prepared that day.
Hell, with good runes, there's a few levels where Wizards have equivalent chances to hit with a sword or arrow compared to the spell. (+2 from rune -2 from low prof).
Levels 19-20 are still kind of a myth compared to 4-18.
Spell Attacks technically have their own proficiency, but a spellcaster's Spell Attack proficiency and Spell DC proficiency for their tradition pretty much universally (so far) increase together. It's theoretically possible they may someday have a class that increases one but not the other, but it seems unlikely.
ETA: Also, since all main-class casters eventually get Legendary in their casting, that means that the only class they end 3 points behind is Fighter. Any other martial they wind up 1 point behind, thanks to the +2 from Legendary. On the other hand though, they don't reach Legendary until level 19, and get all other proficiencies (except Trained of course) later, so they do spend most of their careers a fair bit behind.
Anybody got a side by side comparison of the fighter attack modifiers, versus other martial modifiers, versus the spell attack modifiers?
Don't forget the Item bonuses at 4, 10, 16 that applies to Martials only. At level 13, for example, they're gonna be 4 points behind a Non-Fighter Martial, for example. non-Fighters already have like 50% chance to hit same-level enemies (or less), this puts Casters at 25-45% chance to hit (depending on level) any time after level 4. This is pretty silly since evn at 19 when they get legendary they are still behind martial chance to hit (+2 from proficiency -3 from runes). These are the same chars that are trying to land their one Disintegrate they prepared that day.
Levels 19-20 are still kind of a myth compared to 4-18.
I didn't forget it. I just posted it in chunks because I have unreliable internet and didn't want to lose the work.