| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think Physical boost is as bad as it is getting talked about here. Its purpose isn't really to be a combat trick. Its purpose is to be an incredibly flexible +2 to saving throws when you know you are going to need to be making them, with the added flex features of being able to be used to boost someone needing to make an acrobatics or athletics check AND it can be used on someone else. That is a lot of versatility.
I get that it doesn't help someone looking for an every battle offensive focus spell power, and that will knock it down for a lot of people evaluating it in comparison to druid or sorcerer focus powers. But it isn't nearly as broken an element as I first thought it was. Form control is still a mess, but the buff focused transmuter is not a bad wizard build, it just suffers from the same thing the alchemist does, but the bard does not, so much, in that most of its lower level buffs are single target and thus better cast on someone else in the party, making the transmuter feel more like a vending machine.
Would be way better as a reaction focus spell. Like a magical aid that automatically works.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
i dont see how you can get a 10+ minute break inside a dungeon or cave or hideout. without risk of being ambushed.
And yet the system assumes you have regular and reliable access to them, to do things like search rooms for secret doors and loot, plus to recover hitpoints and focus points.
Its on the GM to figure out the particulars, but if you don't have this you're playing on Super Extra Hard Mode.
Would be way better as a reaction focus spell. Like a magical aid that automatically works.I don't think Physical boost is as bad as it is getting talked about here. Its purpose isn't really to be a combat trick. Its purpose is to be an incredibly flexible +2 to saving throws when you know you are going to need to be making them, with the added flex features of being able to be used to boost someone needing to make an acrobatics or athletics check AND it can be used on someone else. That is a lot of versatility.
I get that it doesn't help someone looking for an every battle offensive focus spell power, and that will knock it down for a lot of people evaluating it in comparison to druid or sorcerer focus powers. But it isn't nearly as broken an element as I first thought it was. Form control is still a mess, but the buff focused transmuter is not a bad wizard build, it just suffers from the same thing the alchemist does, but the bard does not, so much, in that most of its lower level buffs are single target and thus better cast on someone else in the party, making the transmuter feel more like a vending machine.
I mean, sure it'd be better but its not like its unusable or terrible as it stands. One action is 'fast' enough to be useful, and +2 status to a number of common adventuring checks is pretty sweet. Not to mention that it helps the theoretical Grapple-Wizard make up the one or two points of deficiency they have over a true strength class...
Unlike Form Retention, which provides a serious NOT-benefit (due to 10 minute durations still not be being 'multi encounter') at an extreme cost.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
i dont see how you can get a 10+ minute break inside a dungeon or cave or hideout. without risk of being ambushed.And yet the system assumes you have regular and reliable access to them, to do things like search rooms for secret doors and loot, plus to recover hitpoints and focus points.
Its on the GM to figure out the particulars, but if you don't have this you're playing on Super Extra Hard Mode.
No it is the DMS responsibility to convey the game world and the rules as well as logical repurcussions and rewards.
It is not to pause whatever mission you are on to rest up.
This is why I believe the statement of time that is ten minute rest is poor wording. Because in many scenarios it's unrealistic.
Shoving off responsibility of the group's decisions because it's expected for them to get a ten minute rest virtually whenever they want is bad role play. Though I'm pretty sure it's also off topic for this thread.
Physical Boost is a problem because its a 1 action single target Focus spell, that requires melee range, with a limited application, that only lasts 1 round.
If you are looking to increase a Skill Check. Inpired Competence cost no Focus point, has 60 ft range, works on any skill, and can eventually give +4 bonus automatically.
If you are looking to increase Saves. Inspired Defense has 60 ft range, gives a +1 to all saves, and to all allies. Along with Resistance and +1 to AC. Inspired Heroics increases the bonus to +2 or +3, Which makes the entire thing worth a lot more than Physical Boost.
Clerics can get Magic Vessel which grants +1 to save and has free sustain when the Cleric casts a spell.
Etc.
The fact it is a +2 status bonus though gives it some utility. NemoNoname has pointed out that that utility is very difficult to use effectively in combat as an every encounter kind of power, which is what you really want from a wizard focus power, especially in a PFS type scenario where you can't plan on how useful your specific abilities will be to the rest of the party, and I choose to believe them that it has been a difficult ability for them to use on themselves for being an effective combat bonus.
However, if my ally gets poisoned, having a 1 action way to give them that +2 is pretty huge, especially as it will stack with item bonuses from alchemical elixirs. Wizards saving throws are abysmally bad. A lot of fortitude saves are ones you have to keep making, and reflex ones are often possible to see coming, (niether of these are always true, but they are true enough that many characters that could buy a charm that cost 1 action to use that granted these bonuses would do it in a heart beat). It is also a verbal only action that is not a manipulate action, so you can cast it before having to do something like escape from the belly of monster, or a giant tentacle.
Also, as a status bonus, it stacks with the circumstance bonus of inspire competence, so it doesn't have to compete with that bonus from the bard. If I was a martial character, in a party with a bard and a buff focused transmuter, I would be very happy. The problem isn't a lack of power, it is that the buff wizard is often times a character that is better as an NPC than as a player character, like the support alchemist.
I am not trying to argue that it is better than other 1st level wizard focus powers, just that it is not a completely broken and useless ability. Its design is understandable, and for someone looking more to focus powers for out of combat utility (where they become a spell that can be cast 6 times an hour) it is not a bad one. That just happens to be a place where wizards are not usually struggling (out of combat utility). It is not a character defining ability unless you are likely to use it every encounter. It feels like a two out of five star ability instead of a one.
Form Retention's biggest problem is that the design of the ability itself doesn't make any sense. From referencing a spell that wizards can't get, to being available at a level that renders it unusable, to the fact that it is just plainly inferior, in every possible way, to similar abilities granted to a druid. It just doesn't make sense why it was created and if you are a fan of the transmuter, it leaves you feeling like that is a wizard specialist that is being intentionally made unplayable as a PC, as opposed to the illusionist, for example, who seems to getting supported in all the right ways to make it more fun and playable.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
However, if my ally gets poisoned, having a 1 action way to give them that +2 is pretty huge
Unless you are using it on yourself, it's almost never a 1 action due to Touch range. It's quite common to be too far and have to move, or use Reach spell, or indeed even both.
I literally managed to use it once in my whole 7 levels of PFS scenarios to give a bonus to Saving Throws to someone else. And another couple of times for myself.Also, given how short duration it is (single roll), it's may be statistically notable, but it is strictly feel bad power, since most times it won't make a difference.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
No it is the DMS responsibility to convey the game world and the rules as well as logical repurcussions and rewards.
Its the DMs responsibility to facilitate a game, not simulate reality.
The Game assumes you have regular access to 10 minute refocus breaks. However that ends up justified, the game in general breaks down without them. That's literally how it's designed.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
On the topic of 10 minute breaks; a GM that makes players have to weigh the risks of these breaks is doing their job. That doesn't mean a monster have to stop all of those breaks, but a danger should exist.
And I can certainly understand players who don't want to wait on the fifth wheel who keeps reshuffling his spells.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On the topic of 10 minute breaks; a GM that makes players have to weigh the risks of these breaks is doing their job. That doesn't mean a monster have to stop all of those breaks, but a danger should exist.
And I can certainly understand players who don't want to wait on the fifth wheel who keeps reshuffling his spells.
Thats definitely a fair position.
Generally, in a dangerous situation I will ask my players to justify their ability to rest safely and detail what precautions they're taking to safeguard against danger. If they do that, I generally don't press it unless they attempt to kill large swathes of time unreasonably.
More commonly though, there is no pressing danger. Many "dungeons" don't actually include active or wandering foes, sophisticated warning or alarm systems, or or similar threats. Most organized foes or baddies run into the problem of not having infinite resources - they can't magically replace the patrol the party ambushed and silenced, first because they don't know it was lost and second because they don't have an endless supply of spare minions.
I find its better to apply time pressure to parties by making sure they're aware of the time pressures acting on their goals to keep them moving forward and using their "rest periods" like a resource to manage. Though again, often there is no such time pressure.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Spell substitution is great for a wizard that wants to gear up to investigate/recon first and then refit for the encounter. A diviner, for example, can even create and leave behind a vigilant Eye to keep to tabs on the situation as they refit their spell list as necessary. The ability to control when fights happen is one of the most fun and rewarding aspects of being a wizard. It is a big part of why spells like teleport have been made uncommon, because it can wreck havoc on a GM that isn't prepared for that style of play, but the super tactical recon wizard is still a playable character in PF2 with GM consent, which is something that always should have been required anyway.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Isn't the whole ten minutes thing kind of abstracted anyways? The tasks involved aren't always going to take exactly 10 minutes. It's more like an approximation; the tasks take roughly about ten minutes, give or take a few minutes.
It's just an attempt by the developers to make things more simplified and streamlined through abstraction so that the game can keep moving quickly and the GM doesn't have to waste time coming up with inconsistent numbers pulled out of their *ahem* hat.
I certainly feel less weird with my players taking 20 minutes after each fight than my group taking an hour after every two fights in 5e. My group tends to fall back to a previous room to rest rather than just plopping down where they are, so I've never felt a need to send threats their way while they're taking a quick break. And also, I just don't think wandering guards and that sort of thing are particularly fun. I enjoy combat, but I enjoy meaningful combat more. And clogging up a dungeon with random encounters just isn't fun for me or my group.
But I think we're getting a little sidetracked.
I certainly feel less weird with my players taking 20 minutes after each fight than my group taking an hour after every two fights in 5e. My group tends to fall back to a previous room to rest rather than just plopping down where they are, so I've never felt a need to send threats their way while they're taking a quick break. And also, I just don't think wandering guards and that sort of thing are particularly fun. I enjoy combat, but I enjoy meaningful combat more. And clogging up a dungeon with random encounters just isn't fun for me or my group.
But I think we're getting a little sidetracked.
im not sure how sidetracky that line of direction is; a recurring theme in this thread is GM dependence on wizard usefulness to include: handling of 10 minute breaks, rulings on illusions, generosity with Recall Knowledge info, how clearly they hint that monsters are probably going to fall into incapacitation rules, how many encounters involve aoe opportunities, etc.
That might not be the whole issue, but i dont think it’s a ‘sidetrack’ here.
Don't forget GMs making it difficult to fill out / add to Spellbooks.
The fact that Wizards are particularly succeptible to certain GM traits or quirks, or failures to provide certain things the game assumes players have, is absolutely relevant to a discussion on Wizard Balance / play experience.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Unicore I agree having a +2 bonus is nice in isolation. However, looking at the whole power its just no fun. If it had at least 1 of these: Longer durarion, easier action use, no focus cost, or better range. Than the power would be fine. But as is it fails to provide any benefit.
Also, that Power was meant to replicate the Enhancement School power: An action to get a bonus to an ability score. But then the Enchantment Power scales to +6 (impossible in PF2), was capable of increases AC, and lasted for up to a minute.
So if it at least had gotten that 1 minute duration it would have made the Power a low more useable.
I think giving it a +2 and allowing it to apply to saving throws just made it too powerful to stick a duration on. If it lasted a minute, I think it would be essentially giving the Transmuter a proficiency bonus to a saving throw that they got to chose every fight. I wonder if people would like it better or worse if it could only apply to athletics or acrobatics, but lasted a minute?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Would be way better as a reaction focus spell. Like a magical aid that automatically works.I don't think Physical boost is as bad as it is getting talked about here. Its purpose isn't really to be a combat trick. Its purpose is to be an incredibly flexible +2 to saving throws when you know you are going to need to be making them, with the added flex features of being able to be used to boost someone needing to make an acrobatics or athletics check AND it can be used on someone else. That is a lot of versatility.
I get that it doesn't help someone looking for an every battle offensive focus spell power, and that will knock it down for a lot of people evaluating it in comparison to druid or sorcerer focus powers. But it isn't nearly as broken an element as I first thought it was. Form control is still a mess, but the buff focused transmuter is not a bad wizard build, it just suffers from the same thing the alchemist does, but the bard does not, so much, in that most of its lower level buffs are single target and thus better cast on someone else in the party, making the transmuter feel more like a vending machine.
I mean, sure it'd be better but its not like its unusable or terrible as it stands. One action is 'fast' enough to be useful, and +2 status to a number of common adventuring checks is pretty sweet. Not to mention that it helps the theoretical Grapple-Wizard make up the one or two points of deficiency they have over a true strength class...
Unlike Form Retention, which provides a serious NOT-benefit (due to 10 minute durations still not be being 'multi encounter') at an extreme cost.
Saves are so hard to time on your turn, much easier to time as a reaction.
Yeah. Form Retention is no bueno. Not even sure shapechange spells are good at this point. Have you tested them?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Physical Boost is a problem because its a 1 action single target Focus spell, that requires melee range, with a limited application, that only lasts 1 round.
If you are looking to increase a Skill Check. Inpired Competence cost no Focus point, has 60 ft range, works on any skill, and can eventually give +4 bonus automatically.
If you are looking to increase Saves. Inspired Defense has 60 ft range, gives a +1 to all saves, and to all allies. Along with Resistance and +1 to AC. Inspired Heroics increases the bonus to +2 or +3, Which makes the entire thing worth a lot more than Physical Boost.
Clerics can get Magic Vessel which grants +1 to save and has free sustain when the Cleric casts a spell.
Etc.
The fact it is a +2 status bonus though gives it some utility. NemoNoname has pointed out that that utility is very difficult to use effectively in combat as an every encounter kind of power, which is what you really want from a wizard focus power, especially in a PFS type scenario where you can't plan on how useful your specific abilities will be to the rest of the party, and I choose to believe them that it has been a difficult ability for them to use on themselves for being an effective combat bonus.
However, if my ally gets poisoned, having a 1 action way to give them that +2 is pretty huge, especially as it will stack with item bonuses from alchemical elixirs. Wizards saving throws are abysmally bad. A lot of fortitude saves are ones you have to keep making, and reflex ones are often possible to see coming, (niether of these are always true, but they are true enough that many characters that could buy a charm that cost 1 action to use that granted these bonuses would do it in a heart beat). It is also a verbal only action that is not a manipulate action, so you can cast it before having to do something like escape from the belly of monster, or a giant tentacle.
Also, as a status bonus, it stacks with the circumstance bonus of inspire competence, so it doesn't...
Personally, I think it is because the don't want a way for caster's to martial it up. They don't want the PF1 scenario where casters can outmartial martials with shapechanging and summoning, so they took the path of extreme nerfs and limited ability to enhance summoned creatures.
Would be way better as a reaction focus spell. Like a magical aid that automatically works.I don't think Physical boost is as bad as it is getting talked about here. Its purpose isn't really to be a combat trick. Its purpose is to be an incredibly flexible +2 to saving throws when you know you are going to need to be making them, with the added flex features of being able to be used to boost someone needing to make an acrobatics or athletics check AND it can be used on someone else. That is a lot of versatility.
I get that it doesn't help someone looking for an every battle offensive focus spell power, and that will knock it down for a lot of people evaluating it in comparison to druid or sorcerer focus powers. But it isn't nearly as broken an element as I first thought it was. Form control is still a mess, but the buff focused transmuter is not a bad wizard build, it just suffers from the same thing the alchemist does, but the bard does not, so much, in that most of its lower level buffs are single target and thus better cast on someone else in the party, making the transmuter feel more like a vending machine.
I mean, sure it'd be better but its not like its unusable or terrible as it stands. One action is 'fast' enough to be useful, and +2 status to a number of common adventuring checks is pretty sweet. Not to mention that it helps the theoretical Grapple-Wizard make up the one or two points of deficiency they have over a true strength class...
Unlike Form Retention, which provides a serious NOT-benefit (due to 10 minute durations still not be being 'multi encounter') at an extreme cost.
Saves are so hard to time on your turn, much easier to time as a reaction.
Yeah. Form Retention is no bueno. Not even sure shapechange spells are good at this point. Have you tested them?
I've run for a Wildshape Druid, who found them OK. A big part of the problem was that the party already had a Barbarian and a Champion, making the extra melee combatant thing fairly redundant, especially when he COULD be dropping spells. He eventually respected to Tempest.
Shape changing (for a Druid at least) shone when it's ability to gain special traits, like specialized movement modes, came into play. In a general fight changing shape was kindof "OK", but in fights with flying, elevated (climb) or aquatic foes being able gain a matching move type AND combat traits in one spell was really worth it.
Ironically, because of how these spells are essentially 1 slot to be decent at combat for an encounter, I think a Wizard packing one in his top slots is likely a solid choice for an encounter where it may matter. Even if its not a Silver bullet, its adequate.
As a specialization for a character, I worry its lackluster (not TERRIBLE, but merely ok) as it stands. Transmuters are definitely a specialization that is notable for needing work, and even if they don't get shapechange as a Focus spell (they have plenty of slots) they could really use something like Wild Shapes status bonus to attacks.
That's in addition to being bizarrely limited in form choices. I'm absolutely all for giving transmuters a feat that opens up all Form spells (and conjurers all summons, for that matter) since the balance is so tight on them already anyways.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe the wizard chassis was built as a generic caster with a lot of spell slots and the intent is to multiclass into something else. You have a lot of levels where you won't feel bad at all multiclassing while being able to cast a lot of spells.
That.
Casting's your thing? Here's the Wizard, all spells, 'tastes like chicken', a blank canvas to do with whatever you please, and you will get ever more spices to work with as more books get released.
Same as Fighters really.
Fighting's your thing? Here's the Fighter, nobody hits stuff with other stuff better then him. Pick your preferred fighting style and go be awesome. Big-ass sword? Power Attack. Two weapons? Double Slice. Ranged? Point Blank Shot. Bam, set to go from lv. 1 and good all the way to 20.
Flavour? My Dude, nobody is ever going to be more accurate then you, no matter what else you do, so do whatever you want. It's all just more spice.
And that's it for the Wizard. Having no distinctive flavour shoved down your throat with him is his flavour. And thus, you are free to go wild with whatever you want, because no matter what you do, you will always have spells up to the gills.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Given you think having double the top-level slots of a druid is no way an advantage, I'm not sure there's anything you would think is an advantage that doesn't break the game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Given you think having double the top-level slots of a druid is no way an advantage, I'm not sure there's anything you would think is an advantage that doesn't break the game.The double of 3 is 6
3 base + 1 school + 1 bonded item + 1 spell blending = 6
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Having double slots does not mean having more spells or being better at casting them. Its just that simple.
As for advantages, there are many things that can be an advantage. The problem is that you all think its broken. When many are not.
Having more slots means that the wizard is casting higher level spells, longer, and not having to rely on inferior focus spells.
Wizard spell quality will be higher over all, guaranteed.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe the wizard chassis was built as a generic caster with a lot of spell slots and the intent is to multiclass into something else. You have a lot of levels where you won't feel bad at all multiclassing while being able to cast a lot of spells.That.
Casting's your thing? Here's the Wizard, all spells, 'tastes like chicken', a blank canvas to do with whatever you please, and you will get ever more spices to work with as more books get released.
Same as Fighters really.
Fighting's your thing? Here's the Fighter, nobody hits stuff with other stuff better then him. Pick your preferred fighting style and go be awesome. Big-ass sword? Power Attack. Two weapons? Double Slice. Ranged? Point Blank Shot. Bam, set to go from lv. 1 and good all the way to 20.
Flavour? My Dude, nobody is ever going to be more accurate then you, no matter what else you do, so do whatever you want. It's all just more spice.
And that's it for the Wizard. Having no distinctive flavour shoved down your throat with him is his flavour. And thus, you are free to go wild with whatever you want, because no matter what you do, you will always have spells up to the gills.
i actually disagree on multiple levels.
no class should be the my core class is meh so multiclass to fix me.
fighters do not fall into this boat. fighters are incredibly powerful and able to be built a myriad of ways with flexibility and are rewarding to use and interact IMMENSELY well within the 3 action system getting constant boosts to action economy via special attacks that let you combine actions in different ways.
they are incredible.
Having double slots does not mean having more spells or being better at casting them. Its just that simple.
As for advantages, there are many things that can be an advantage. The problem is that you all think its broken. When many are not.
Being able to cast more spells is not the same as having more spells. Huh?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
3 base + 1 school + 1 bonded item + 1 spell blending = 6Given you think having double the top-level slots of a druid is no way an advantage, I'm not sure there's anything you would think is an advantage that doesn't break the game.The double of 3 is 6Hum, wizard can change spell in 10 min
Hum, wizard have spell bleding
Hum, not.
Yeah, thats definitely a thing anyone suggested.
Oh wait, it is not.
A Wizard can have double a druids spell slots. If so, they don't have spell substitution.
...of course, they can have spell substitution at the cost of only having 66% more spell slots. How terrible.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The person literally said that the "Given you think having double the top-level slots" wizard has is different from may have. Things here are so ridiculous that people do the math for what the wizard might have with multiclass and other class feats.3 base + 1 school + 1 bonded item + 1 spell blending = 6Given you think having double the top-level slots of a druid is no way an advantage, I'm not sure there's anything you would think is an advantage that doesn't break the game.The double of 3 is 6Hum, wizard can change spell in 10 min
Hum, wizard have spell bleding
Hum, not.
Yeah, thats definitely a thing anyone suggested.
Oh wait, it is not.
A Wizard can have double a druids spell slots. If so, they don't have spell substitution.
...of course, they can have spell substitution at the cost of only having 66% more spell slots. How terrible.
Uh, a spell blending wizard literally has twice the top level slots as a Druid. That's just simple truth.
You seemed to be making some point about not having both spell blending and spell substitution, but if thats not what you were getting at, apologies.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The person literally said that the "Given you think having double the top-level slots" wizard has is different from may have. Things here are so ridiculous that people do the math for what the wizard might have with multiclass and other class feats.3 base + 1 school + 1 bonded item + 1 spell blending = 6Given you think having double the top-level slots of a druid is no way an advantage, I'm not sure there's anything you would think is an advantage that doesn't break the game.The double of 3 is 6Hum, wizard can change spell in 10 min
Hum, wizard have spell bleding
Hum, not.
Yeah, thats definitely a thing anyone suggested.
Oh wait, it is not.
A Wizard can have double a druids spell slots. If so, they don't have spell substitution.
...of course, they can have spell substitution at the cost of only having 66% more spell slots. How terrible.
Uh, a spell blending wizard literally has twice the top level slots as a Druid. That's just simple truth.
You seemed to be making some point about not having both spell blending and spell substitution, but if thats not what you were getting at, apologies.
if your top level is 4 slots, and druid top level is 3 slots, spell blending gives you..5 slots doesnt it? or are you as example, if you have 4 5th level slots, sacrafficing 2 4th level and 2 3rd level to get 2 more 5th level?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
if your top level is 4 slots, and druid top level is 3 slots, spell blending gives you..5 slots doesnt it? or are you as example, if you have 4 5th level slots, sacrafficing 2 4th level and 2 3rd level to get 2 more 5th level?The person literally said that the "Given you think having double the top-level slots" wizard has is different from may have. Things here are so ridiculous that people do the math for what the wizard might have with multiclass and other class feats.3 base + 1 school + 1 bonded item + 1 spell blending = 6Given you think having double the top-level slots of a druid is no way an advantage, I'm not sure there's anything you would think is an advantage that doesn't break the game.The double of 3 is 6Hum, wizard can change spell in 10 min
Hum, wizard have spell bleding
Hum, not.
Yeah, thats definitely a thing anyone suggested.
Oh wait, it is not.
A Wizard can have double a druids spell slots. If so, they don't have spell substitution.
...of course, they can have spell substitution at the cost of only having 66% more spell slots. How terrible.
Uh, a spell blending wizard literally has twice the top level slots as a Druid. That's just simple truth.
You seemed to be making some point about not having both spell blending and spell substitution, but if thats not what you were getting at, apologies.
You actually quoted the math, but for the sake of clarity -
3 base + 1 school + 1 bonded item + 1 spell blending = 6
More spells slots is not more spells because Focus spells are reuseable.
You get 6 Wizard spells? Fine the Druid is getting his 3 Spells and 9 castings of Wild Shape, or Tempest Surge, or what ever at their highest level.
Tempest Surge is not equivalent to a full blown spell slot. Wild Shape is a spell that makes you a pseudo martial. Focus spells are not equivalent to spell slots.
Druids have essentially infinite endurance, but their performance is below that of a Wizard once they're out of good spell slots, because they're forced to rely on Focus spells.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
3 base + 1 school + 1 bonded item + 1 spell blending = 6Given you think having double the top-level slots of a druid is no way an advantage, I'm not sure there's anything you would think is an advantage that doesn't break the game.The double of 3 is 6
So ALL wizards that take spell blending can have 6? * looks at universalist wizard*
|
*looks back*
You are right. I can only have 5. Guess I'm not as good.
At 8th level, bond conservation can cascade into 1 free drain bond. At 9 it can cascade into 2 free. 13 cascades into 3, and so on. That is just when I drain for the highest slot. That doesn't even consider draining for every level spell below, which at higher levels can also cascade. But that probably doesn't get considered in the calculation of spells per day. I mean why would it? Also, make sure to ignore that each of the drains can be used on dedication spell slots.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*looks back*
You are right. I can only have 5. Guess I'm not as good.At 8th level, bond conservation can cascade into 1 free drain bond. At 9 it can cascade into 2 free. 13 cascades into 3, and so on. That is just when I drain for the highest slot. That doesn't even consider draining for every level spell below, which at higher levels can also cascade. But that probably doesn't get considered in the calculation of spells per day. I mean why would it? Also, make sure to ignore that each of the drains can be used on dedication spell slots.
No comment of what is good, bad or indifferent... Just pointing out that not even all spell blending wizards have double a druids highest slots, let alone non-spell blending wizards. YMMV depending on how much importance you put on that point.
|
|
You were right to bring it up. Now we can ride this train.
I did some figures..
At level 13 a universalist with bond conservation can effectively cast, per day...
7 1st level spells
6 2nd level spells
6 3rd level spells
5 4th level spells
5 5th level spells
4 6th level spells
3 7th level spells
With spell blending it turns into...
5 1st level spells
4 2nd level spells
5 3rd level spells
4 4th level spells
4 5th level spells
5 6th level spells
4 7th level spells
Other classes can cast that many spell as well right?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You were right to bring it up. Now we can ride this train.
I did some figures..
At level 13 a universalist with bond conservation can effectively cast, per day...
7 1st level spells
6 2nd level spells
6 3rd level spells
5 4th level spells
5 5th level spells
4 6th level spells
3 7th level spellsWith spell blending it turns into...
5 1st level spells
4 2nd level spells
5 3rd level spells
4 4th level spells
4 5th level spells
5 6th level spells
4 7th level spellsOther classes can cast that many spell as well right?
Ha, I doubt a Wizard can effectively cast that many, given it makes the spells cost one more action and you have to cast lower and lower level spells consecutively.
Might be worth going Cavalier Wizard to make it more viable. Watch out though, this playstyle might trick you into reducing your effectiveness in harder fights as you end up wasting your time casting lower level spells when you should be spending higher level slots every turn to actually contribute.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Other classes can cast that many spell as well right?
Spells? Yes, yes they can when you factor in class features, innate, focus and archetype: Cleric alone adds 1 + Cha highest level slots from a single feature. Do note that things like Font are truly additive additions vs speculative white room additions like Bond Conservation as you're often hard pressed to use all of the uses. Heck a bard may cast many more spells a day vs the wizard as they can cast 2 a round [composition and normal spell slot or harmonize]. Tossing around raw spell slot numbers doesn't really prove much in a 'who can cast more spells' debate IMO.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The biggest thing about a wizard I think, and spellcasters in general, is that spells don't become really potent until mid-game. Which means you are playing a low life, low save, largely low mobility, low AC class with limited potency per day and poor action economy interaction.
By mid-game, some of the spells start getting good enough to sort of cover up these shortcomings.
Sure sounds like the age old wizard class is playing as intended to me! XD
As long as I've been alive (nearly 40 years) the wizard class has really sucked at low levels and really rocked at high levels. It's a time honored tradition.