| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Bard is not broken or near broken. It may be binary but it's also the base level of caster performance. Less than bard and it's underpowered.Bard level power should be baseline for casters. All casters should be around bard power level.No offense, but this is an incredibly silly view of balance.
If I could take a 1-action effect which let me increase the whole party's effectiveness by ~15%, it'd be a near guaranteed pick on every character.
That's the Bard's level 1 skill.
I'm a tad confused on your position. Are you saying the bard is not merely good, but in fact overpowered?
Are you saying that the bard has something very good, but only they should have something of that level of power (regardless of what the power is, such as buff, debuff, battlefield control etc.) in order to create something of ceiling we know other classes shouldn't be able to reach?
Are you assuming Deriven meant that all casters should be able to use bard cantrips?
I think what Deriven meant to imply in any case was not that all casters should be bardic super buffers, but in that in their own arena, they should feel like equivalent options to play (rather than say, the witch feeling worse at debuffing, arguably its shtick, than the bard does at buffing.)
I'm pretty sure what he's saying is that the Bard is an bad bar to set, because even its default level one ability is grossly out of line with anyone else's level 1 abilities. And it only gets more powerful from there.
Bards are monstrously powerful because they get not only the best 'Status bonus' buff in the game, they get it for free and cheap. On top of that, they get the Occult spell list, which is full of powerful support which allows the class to have an 'all in one' package that shifts the numbers in a way no one else can entirely manage.
Bards warp the power of the entire party upwards unlike any other class in the game.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Bard is not broken or near broken. It may be binary but it's also the base level of caster performance. Less than bard and it's underpowered.Bard level power should be baseline for casters. All casters should be around bard power level.No offense, but this is an incredibly silly view of balance.
If I could take a 1-action effect which let me increase the whole party's effectiveness by ~15%, it'd be a near guaranteed pick on every character.
That's the Bard's level 1 skill.
I'm a tad confused on your position. Are you saying the bard is not merely good, but in fact overpowered?
Are you saying that the bard has something very good, but only they should have something of that level of power (regardless of what the power is, such as buff, debuff, battlefield control etc.) in order to create something of "ceiling of usefulness" we know other casters shouldn't be able to reach? In other words, we should pick a casting class, make it the best, and then balance all other casters below it just to be safe for the sake of the game?
Or are you assuming Deriven meant that all casters should be able to use bard cantrips?
I think what Deriven meant to imply in any case was not that all casters should be bardic super buffers, but in that in their own arena, they should feel like equivalent options to play (rather than say, the witch feeling worse at debuffing, arguably its shtick, than the bard does at buffing.)
Exactly. Each class should have something extraordinarily good.
Like bard buffs or druid tempest surge or wild shape.
Not some weak d4 damage single shot magic missle or +1 AC sustain aura for a focus point.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Funny story: Wild Shape and Force Bolt are approximately on the same relative power framework. Both are a certain spell type (pest form/animal form vs magic missile) heightened to max level.
It's just the perception of Wild Shape is different when you spend 4 feats on it and then compare it, because you can't do that with Force Bolt. Especially if a wizard takes Bonded Focus, Force Bolt shines as a third-action attack spell, letting you pump out almost completely unstoppable damage (shield also can't block it, by the by) every combat.
Protective Ward is also quite solid, just the problem is that it compares to Inspire Defense, which is so much better that it's ridiculous. Inspire Defense also compares ridiculously well to most spells, as a note, being better than Divine Aura - an 8th level spell - against anything of neutral alignment.
The problem children in the wizard focus spells, in my opinion, are Call of the Grave, Augment Summoning, and Charming Words, though at least Charming Words helps out with the "literally everything in existence ignores everyone else to attack my wizard" problem some people seem to have. I'm not particularly convinced it needed Incapacitation on it, but it at least can see use.
|
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wild Shape is objectively better than Force Bolt even based on that analysis for four big reasons:
#1. For a Wild Order Druid, the +2 Status bonus is very good. Force Bolt has no equivalent boost making it better than the base spell.
#2. Force Bolt is, in fact, notably worse than the base spell instead, being limited to a small and less than optimal subset of Magic Missile's functions. Magic Missile can be used for additional damage with two or three actions, while Force Bolt cannot.
#3. Wild Shape is higher impact. It's arguable whether Animal Form is better than Magic Missile on its own, but battle forms are something you can build a character around in a way you can't with a single attack spell.
#4. Finally, as you mention, Feats exist to enhance Wild Shape. None really exist to boost Force Bolt.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Druid's Focus Spells are clearly above most other focus spells. But, honestly, it's what makes a Druid a Druid. If you remove them, you're good to remove the class entirely.
Wizards and Sorcerers have less class features for more spells. They have less class identity (even if Sorcerer has a lot of it through tradition choice).
But I really find it's a matter of preference.
I really dislike PF2 Bard despite being a Bard player in all previous editions. I'm fed up with casting the same buff every round over and over (that I have tested extensively in Starfinder with my Envoy).
And I also have issues with the Druid (my Druid never went above level 1). It's in my opinion a very complex class that needs a lot of dedication to be properly played due to the sheer number of abilities you have (full caster + full martial + animal companion). And I dislike to play a character to a portion of its efficiency.
On the other hand, I'm crazy in love with the Sorcerer, which is certainly my preferred class in PF2. It's a solid caster chassis that you can apply to whatever tradition you want. Outside the tradition choice, there are not much class abilities (Bloodlines are not very impactful to be honest) but I really like the concept of building my ideal spell list.
I think it's something important. Classes have a lot of differences, in gameplay and roles. You may find a class completely bad and someone next to you will love it. The goal is not for everyone to love every class. The goal is for everyone to love at least one class. Asking for every class to have 1-action cantrips or strong focus spells or whatever, it's just unifying all gameplays. You will love more classes, but some people may end up without a single class to love. And I don't think the game will be better because of that.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Speaking from personal experience GMing for a wizard, wizard becomes fine around level 5 when they get 3rd level spells. I think levels 1-4 are a rough spot for them (and am looking for a solution to make that better) but once they get third level spells they're doing pretty good. Honestly, my biggest issue there is how lacklustre a lot of second level spells are. It honestly feels like a lot of them were intended for high level characters who have a lot of low level slots to spend rather than low level characters who really need those slots.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Funny story: Wild Shape and Force Bolt are approximately on the same relative power framework. Both are a certain spell type (pest form/animal form vs magic missile) heightened to max level.
It's just the perception of Wild Shape is different when you spend 4 feats on it and then compare it, because you can't do that with Force Bolt. Especially if a wizard takes Bonded Focus, Force Bolt shines as a third-action attack spell, letting you pump out almost completely unstoppable damage (shield also can't block it, by the by) every combat.
Protective Ward is also quite solid, just the problem is that it compares to Inspire Defense, which is so much better that it's ridiculous. Inspire Defense also compares ridiculously well to most spells, as a note, being better than Divine Aura - an 8th level spell - against anything of neutral alignment.
The problem children in the wizard focus spells, in my opinion, are Call of the Grave, Augment Summoning, and Charming Words, though at least Charming Words helps out with the "literally everything in existence ignores everyone else to attack my wizard" problem some people seem to have. I'm not particularly convinced it needed Incapacitation on it, but it at least can see use.
Here is what I know for sure: wild shape feels way more interesting and versatile than force bolt which is a 1 action magic missile once a combat.
If you're going to give the wizard a protective ward they have to sustain and slowly expand, then make it worth using.
The wizard focus powers are unspectacular and uninteresting. Not even sure why it is open for debate at this point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Speaking from personal experience GMing for a wizard, wizard becomes fine around level 5 when they get 3rd level spells. I think levels 1-4 are a rough spot for them (and am looking for a solution to make that better) but once they get third level spells they're doing pretty good. Honestly, my biggest issue there is how lacklustre a lot of second level spells are. It honestly feels like a lot of them were intended for high level characters who have a lot of low level slots to spend rather than low level characters who really need those slots.
What style of Wizard were you running for?
2nd level arcane doesn't have anything as exciting as fireball necessarily, but it does have a lot of staples that feel reasonably good when you get them (flaming sphere, illusory creature, enlarge, invis, hideous laughter, sudden bolt) to me.
There is a distinct lack of a good encounter-ender like Calm Emotions on the arcane list at that level... Sleep just isn't the same, with no useful combat debuff on its Success level of saves and more obvious "snap out of it" condition.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Speaking from personal experience GMing for a wizard, wizard becomes fine around level 5 when they get 3rd level spells. I think levels 1-4 are a rough spot for them (and am looking for a solution to make that better) but once they get third level spells they're doing pretty good. Honestly, my biggest issue there is how lacklustre a lot of second level spells are. It honestly feels like a lot of them were intended for high level characters who have a lot of low level slots to spend rather than low level characters who really need those slots.What style of Wizard were you running for?
2nd level arcane doesn't have anything as exciting as fireball necessarily, but it does have a lot of staples that feel reasonably good when you get them (flaming sphere, illusory creature, enlarge, invis, hideous laughter, sudden bolt) to me.
She technically wasn't a wizard, she was a playtest witch, but honestly the playtest witch was so similar to wizard that she was basically playing a familiar thesis wizard, especially considering she literally never used her hexes. When the APG dropped she switched to wizard because she realized that was what she actually wanted to play. She's now a universalist spell blending wizard.
Out of the spells you listed, she only had flaming sphere and invisibility, the former of which got a lot of use. Invisibility didn't get much use until around 7th level when she didn't depend on her low level slots as much. She was primarily going for blasting and utility, neither of which have more than a couple great options at that level (flaming sphere and comprehend languages being standouts, but a lot of the utility spells at the level didn't feel worth a top slot to her). Sudden Bolt also didn't exist at the time.
I've also felt it in my own wizard that I'll be playing next month, since I also wanted to go for more of a utility caster (I see wizards as the rogues of casters, so their out of combat utility matters a lot to me). There's just a lot of "yeah this might be useful, but is my highest slot worth something that might be useful?" Spell Substitution does mitigate this a bit, though.
Here is what I know for sure: wild shape feels way more interesting and versatile than force bolt which is a 1 action magic missile once a combat.
If you're going to give the wizard a protective ward they have to sustain and slowly expand, then make it worth using.
The wizard focus powers are unspectacular and uninteresting. Not even sure why it is open for debate at this point.
Yeah. I've mentioned before, but I think they made the wrong call with Wizards and the Arcane list in general. I'd have preferred they keep a tighter focus on what spells were in the Arcane list so that they could boost the power of the wizard chassis.
I understand the logic and history behind why they put everything but the healing sink in Arcane. But given the changes between editions, specifically how they are making spell lists class agnostic, I do not agree with their choice here.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is definitely possible to play a powerful damage dealing wizard, a powerful debuffing wizard, and a powerful utility wizard in PF2, but you have to be ready and willing to use spell slot spells often, sometimes even two a round if you really want to see the class shine. There are some elements of wizards that are still underdeveloped, like transmutation and summoning in particular, which struggle, but it is possible to play to the class' strengths and make a very powerful character.
A lot of players refuse to chose the options that make it powerful, and no one should have to play any class in one specific way, or one of three specific ways to have fun, but lots of classes in PF2 don't really work outside of 3 major play styles either, and I am still hopeful that with more spells and feats, and some caster centric archetypes in Secrets of magic, the flexibility will continue to expand.
I don't want to see wizard focus powers turned into their best first action of combat, like is the case with bards and most druids. I like that their abilities now fit around the idea that they will mostly be casting spells from their spell slots.
What may be necessary though is ways to make playing the wizard a little easier, although I am not sure how to do it, since it is 70% a question of spell selection, 20% feats, and 10% equipment.
The bard is boring in play (even as I play one and have fun, it is because I can invest almost all of my character resources into what I do outside of combat, with only reserving a couple of feats to make sure I pick up things like dirge, because my combat round is pretty much already determined before combat begins), but it is easy to play well. The druid took my new players (new to any version of Pathfinder) a little more time to figure out, and he has had some trouble with spreading himself too thin with options, but, if the party didn't need healing, I think he would prefer at this point to be a wizard, as casting spells from spell slots is his favorite thing to do and I think he finds the animal companion much less fun than he thought it would be, but mostly because it means having to make two saving throws every time the party gets hit with an area debuff and often one of the two of them ends up nearly useless in combat, which really will be a major problem for the summoner as well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What may be necessary though is ways to make playing the wizard a little easier, although I am not sure how to do it, since it is 70% a question of spell selection, 20% feats, and 10% equipment.
Wizards definitely went from being fairly forgiving due to their Raw Power to being a high skill class, due to how important it is to pick the right spells if you want to be reliably successful.
Even with added stuff like Spell Substitution, you often need the right spell in the moment and unless you're focused on something generally applicable (like Blasting - run with hammers, treat all obstacles as nails) that can be tricky.
That said, if you want to do a specific thing with magic - like throw fireballs or chain lightnings - no one can do it more than a wizard that focuses on it.
The trick is having an alternative plan for when you encounter something immune to that gimmick...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think it’s just hard to find focus abilities that are both exciting and not high power. Wild Shape and Tempest Surge are examples of a power that is quite powerful, as are ofc every bard focus power and most of the oracle powers stand out too. They clearly went with the arcane casters (witch included) for a lower power level of focus spells, but I think they’ve found it hard to balance giving something useful that is less powerful. Another place I’m underwhelmed by is the bloodline buffs. Some are good (angelic, elemental, fey) and some seem just really boring or weak. (Imperial, most of the new ones from APG)
It might have been nice if there were a sidebar somewhere that discussed the apparently different role of Focus Spells for different classes.
For Bard, focus spells and composition cantrips are a core part of their function, and should be coming up very often as part of their basic function.
For Druids, focus spells are a first-line primary combat option, with the apparent intent that you often lead with a Wild Shape or Tempest Surge.
Cleric focus spells vary with domains, but tend to be supplemental or situational abilities outside of your normal capabilities - but most domain spells aren't an "every encounter" thing.
Wizard focus spells seem to be designed as almost exclusively supplemental - almost never as a first line option, but as an option to aid or supplement whatever your main thing is or was.
Theres a lot of variance in that design, and it may have helped if that was clear and explicit.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It’s part that sure but also part inconsistencies between traditions/bloodlines. It’s more of an issue to be sure for wizard since most of the sorcerer ones are at least decent.
Undeath's Blessing? Tentacular Limbs? Glutton's Jaw? Dragon Claws? Faerie Dust? Ancestral Memories? Dim the Light?
Sorcerer focus spells are mostly bad. There are just a few of them which are fine.| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don’t think Ancestral Memories is too bad. Being able to be trained or expert in a skill can be quite useful for those times where you need to swim or something. I think the main issue with that is people all things being equal would prefer focus powers with more in combat usage. I do agree some of those others are very poor and it’s very much a balance thing between bloodlines. Some are good and others are weak. In general I do think they were trying to go with slightly higher power for sorcerers though.
I personally think that what people want from Focus Spells are Focus Spells they'll use on a regular basis.
The Bard and Druid focus spells fit this definition. They practically demand to be used every single encounter.
Sorcerer and Wizard focus spells (and many Cleric ones) do not. Theyre highly situational, and even if they're legitimately good in those situations you end up sitting there with focus points, ostensibly a valuable resource, sitting unused.
Glutton's Jaws isn't objectively terrible, it just doesn't have a real use-case for most Sorcerers.
I think that feels bad for people, and doubly so for focus powers like augment summoning which isn't just situational, its crippled and bad because of how its action cost is designed...
I know that was challenging for me when I built a cleric of a more obscure deity, who didn't have any domains that were clearly and reliably going to be always useful during encounters. I considered it to be a cost of doing business with a less mainstream Deity, but it also made me start looking into other ways (archetypes/multiclass) to make use of my "wasted" focus point.
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
Weak and high skill are not the same thing.
They are objectively weak for the first 4 levels. And ok after. Only really feeling good when they have a excess of slots to play around with.
The focus powers could have been something to use every fight especially at low levels to shore up the lack of spell slots. But they massively under shot them.
As far as power balance. Even if bard is boring to play. It's the benchmark of expectations because it is good. It's why I've laughed at witch and oracle and cringe inwardly when a new player chooses them (to a lesser extent wizard and sorcerer) at level 1.
Your never, ever, ever going to get my to agree that a wizard, sorcerer, witch, or oracle are acceptable benchmarks for caster balance. You might be able to talk me into druid though.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
You can make a powerful damage dealing wizard or sorcerer who will do great damage on occasion. They will rely more than any other class on spell saving throw rolls when using limited resources.
I learned this reality when playing a druid and a bard. I keep hearing the glory of these extra spell slots, but when monsters are saving 50% plus of the time then spell resources are only 50% effective.
Whereas a once or twice per combat high quality focus spell is usable one or two times per combat, which can be anywhere from 6 to 10 times per day at the highest possible level. This is basically 6 to 10 maximum level spell slots. Some of them that do things the wizard couldn't do with their best spells.
These classes can do this while having higher hit points, better armor and weapon choices, and a high quality casting stat that also provides a bonus to saving throws or a bonus on highly useful skills.
I think both the bard and druid have superior class feats as well. When making a wizard I pick maybe 4 or 5 wizard feats. When I play a druid or bard, every feat is a class specific feat that often competes with another good option.
I really hope they fix some of this in the next magic book. Throw a few wizard archetypes with some much better focus abilities. This idea that quality focus spells will cause people not to play other classes is ridiculous. Even if they give the wizard and sorcerer good focus spell, people will still notice their weaker AC, hit points, and weapon options as well as inferior and boring feats.
You can make a powerful damage dealing wizard or sorcerer who will do great damage on occasion. They will rely more than any other class on spell saving throw rolls when using limited resources.
I learned this reality when playing a druid and a bard. I keep hearing the glory of these extra spell slots, but when monsters are saving 50% plus of the time then spell resources are only 50% effective.
Whereas a once or twice per combat high quality focus spell is usable one or two times per combat, which can be anywhere from 6 to 10 times per day at the highest possible level. This is basically 6 to 10 maximum level spell slots. Some of them that do things the wizard couldn't do with their best spells.
These classes can do this while having higher hit points, better armor and weapon choices, and a high quality casting stat that also provides a bonus to saving throws or a bonus on highly useful skills.
I think both the bard and druid have superior class feats as well. When making a wizard I pick maybe 4 or 5 wizard feats. When I play a druid or bard, every feat is a class specific feat that often competes with another good option.
I really hope they fix some of this in the next magic book. Throw a few wizard archetypes with some much better focus abilities. This idea that quality focus spells will cause people not to play other classes is ridiculous. Even if they give the wizard and sorcerer good focus spell, people will still notice their weaker AC, hit points, and weapon options as well as inferior and boring feats. [/QUOTE
Sorcerers get pretty focus spells from what I have seen. Some of the 1st level options are duds (at least on certain builds) but stuff like Dragon's breath is great.And sorcerers don't have to specifically refocus which is choice.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wild Shape is objectively better than Force Bolt even based on that analysis for four big reasons:
#1. For a Wild Order Druid, the +2 Status bonus is very good. Force Bolt has no equivalent boost making it better than the base spell.
The +2 status bonus to attack in wild shape when using your own unarmed bonus is less strong than it appears. If we assume the following:
Starting Strength 16
Handwraps with the highest level-appropriate potency rune (and assuming that they help - there's some debate on the issue, but let's say they do for the sake of the argument, because otherwise the +2 bonus becomes even less useful)
Boost Str at levels 5, 10, and 15 (to 18, 19, and 20).And compare this to the available form with the highest attack bonus, the results are:
At level 3 and 4, it's a significant boost, because at that point the Animal Form attack bonus is kinda low.
From level 5 to 18, the bonus makes no difference at odd levels and 1 point of difference at most even levels (because forms scale with spell level which improve at odd levels). At level 10 and 16 the advantage is 2 points — this is because at those levels, +2 and +3 runes become available, and the native forms don't catch up until the next higher spell level.
At 19 and 20, the bonus helps because there's none of the forms granted by wild shape has a 10th level option. If you take True Shapeshifter at 20th level you can shift into Kaiju form (or maybe Green Man form) 1/day for a +34 attack bonus, same as the unarmed attack bonus — but since that's not Wild Shape, you wouldn't get the +2 bonus anyway.The main advantage of letting you use your own unarmed attack bonus +2 when wild shaped is that it makes lower-level forms at least somewhat viable. If you get attacked while scouting as a bird, you might not be able to hit back very hard but at least you'll hit level-appropriately well.
If you focus on a wild shape druid building up strength using point buy you will end up with a 22 strength with an Apex Item. This will give you a +35 to hit.
24 proficiency +6 strength +3 item +2 Status = +35. One less than a master proficiency martial.
On top of this, you will get a good damage martial attack with temporary hit points, increased mobility, reach, size, and sometimes a breath weapon or some other benefit.
It's a very viable build.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The +2 status bonus to attack in wild shape when using your own unarmed bonus is less strong than it appears. If we assume the following:Wild Shape is objectively better than Force Bolt even based on that analysis for four big reasons:
#1. For a Wild Order Druid, the +2 Status bonus is very good. Force Bolt has no equivalent boost making it better than the base spell.
I wasn't necessarily saying it's a huge bonus, but it's something and Force Bolt gets nothing remotely similar.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you focus on a wild shape druid building up strength using point buy you will end up with a 22 strength with an Apex Item. This will give you a +35 to hit.
24 proficiency +6 strength +3 item +2 Status = +35. One less than a master proficiency martial.
On top of this, you will get a good damage martial attack with temporary hit points, increased mobility, reach, size, and sometimes a breath weapon or some other benefit.
It's a very viable build.
It is, but do remember that martials can have all of the benefits from feats, which can include temporary hit points, increased mobility, reach, size, and sometimes a breath weapon, but also special attacks, like powerattack, one inch punch, etc etc, while the druid only has the given form attacks.
And because the +2 is a status bonus, other status bonusses (inspire courage, heroism, bless, there is always something) don't stack, while martials do get them.
So viable, yes, but clearly still weaker than martials.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you focus on a wild shape druid building up strength using point buy you will end up with a 22 strength with an Apex Item. This will give you a +35 to hit.
24 proficiency +6 strength +3 item +2 Status = +35. One less than a master proficiency martial.
On top of this, you will get a good damage martial attack with temporary hit points, increased mobility, reach, size, and sometimes a breath weapon or some other benefit.
It's a very viable build.
It is, but do remember that martials can have all of the benefits from feats, which can include temporary hit points, increased mobility, reach, size, and sometimes a breath weapon, but also special attacks, like powerattack, one inch punch, etc etc, while the druid only has the given form attacks.
And because the +2 is a status bonus, other status bonusses (inspire courage, heroism, bless, there is always something) don't stack, while martials do get them.
So viable, yes, but clearly still weaker than martials.
Wild Shape gives you a lot of benefits, too. Reach, Grab, forms of movement, senses, etc... And once you add Flurry of Blows, a Wild Shaped Druid becomes a very strong martial.
Wild Shape gives you a lot of benefits, too. Reach, Grab, forms of movement, senses, etc... And once you add Flurry of Blows, a Wild Shaped Druid becomes a very strong martial.
Indeed, I was just agreeing with Deriven on that. Druids get that in the forms, martials get that through feats, but druids don't get any special attacks.
Flurry of Blows doesn't make you a better martial, it doesn't improve the attack value, it just adds better action economy, which is good, but not the point of discussion. You're still behind on attacks, more if other martials get a status bonus which doesn't add to the druid form. How much value do you add with a second attack at a -4 or -5, if you're already behind the martials.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wild Shape gives you a lot of benefits, too. Reach, Grab, forms of movement, senses, etc... And once you add Flurry of Blows, a Wild Shaped Druid becomes a very strong martial.Indeed, I was just agreeing with Deriven on that. Druids get that in the forms, martials get that through feats, but druids don't get any special attacks.
Flurry of Blows doesn't make you a better martial, it doesn't improve the attack value, it just adds better action economy, which is good, but not the point of discussion. You're still behind on attacks, more if other martials get a status bonus which doesn't add to the druid form. How much value do you add with a second attack at a -4 or -5, if you're already behind the martials.
The thing is: You're not behind martials. You deal the same amount of damage, you lack feats but your forms give you other benefits, and Flurry of Blows or Attack of Opportunity complement Wild Shape nicely. The only real drawback of Wild Shape compared to being a Fighter is the round lost polymorphing yourself. That is a heavy cost. But besides that, you are fine with a Wild Shaped Druid.
If you focus on a wild shape druid building up strength using point buy you will end up with a 22 strength with an Apex Item. This will give you a +35 to hit.
24 proficiency +6 strength +3 item +2 Status = +35. One less than a master proficiency martial.
On top of this, you will get a good damage martial attack with temporary hit points, increased mobility, reach, size, and sometimes a breath weapon or some other benefit.
It's a very viable build.
It is, but do remember that martials can have all of the benefits from feats, which can include temporary hit points, increased mobility, reach, size, and sometimes a breath weapon, but also special attacks, like powerattack, one inch punch, etc etc, while the druid only has the given form attacks.
And because the +2 is a status bonus, other status bonusses (inspire courage, heroism, bless, there is always something) don't stack, while martials do get them.
So viable, yes, but clearly still weaker than martials.
Dragons have breath weapons too. Energy resistance. Untouchable aerial mobility. Reach.
Martial do better damage, at least two-handed martials, but wild shape is a very viable build for a druid, especially when combined with animal companion. You can make a very cool dragon with a pterodactyl or bird AC. It seems like it could be fun.
I think you won't do as much damage as a two-hander fighter or barbarian martial, probably somewhere around rogue damage absent property runes.
I've never seen a druid in animal form out damage a competently built and played martial. Not that I'd expect it too.
I view animal form as, unfortunately or not. Conservation options. You out of top level blasting? Burn a focus point to do decent but not amazing martial damage. With some potentialy useful abilities tied to the forms.
That might interfere with a player who only ever wants to fight in animal forms. But it's part of the game.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Having Good (but not Great) damage, for a full combat, at just the cost of a single focus point, on a 10th level caster, is amazing by itself.
It obviously doesn't need to de better than a barbarian to be a great option by itself because the one that's using it is indeed still a full caster.
I expect that sometime in the future we will get a Shifter, either as a druid class archetype (that removes spellcasting for better martial proficiencies or something like that) or as an individual class to cover up the "i shift to forms and attack and nothing else" niche, but atm animal barbarian is pretty much kinda like this either way from a level and onwards.
Oh I am not of the opinion that it needs buffed. I think it's quite serviceable. Good even. They are still a full caster and can play the martial have better than any wizard.
Having Good (but not Great) damage, for a full combat, at just the cost of a single focus point, on a 10th level caster, is amazing by itself.
It obviously doesn't need to de better than a barbarian to be a great option by itself because the one that's using it is indeed still a full caster.
I expect that sometime in the future we will get a Shifter, either as a druid class archetype (that removes spellcasting for better martial proficiencies or something like that) or as an individual class to cover up the "i shift to forms and attack and nothing else" niche, but atm animal barbarian is pretty much kinda like this either way from a level and onwards.
If they figure out the Synthesis summoner, that will pick up some of the slack as well.
Though hopefully shifter becomes a class again. Broader than just druid-lite by preference.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
A dedicated polymorphing class is something I have always wanted. It doesn't need to be a caster. Just the ability to shapeshift for every fight, and not just into animals but other cool things (dragons, aberrations, whatever.)
Obviously it would have to be limited (sort of like the polymorph spells just let you refluff certain stat blocks) but thematically it would be cool and would make an amazing magical martial (just probably without any actual magical ability outside of shapeshifting- but what more do you need as long as its buffed to be an effective, all day option?)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A dedicated polymorphing class is something I have always wanted. It doesn't need to be a caster. Just the ability to shapeshift for every fight, and not just into animals but other cool things (dragons, aberrations, whatever.)
Obviously it would have to be limited (sort of like the polymorph spells just let you refluff certain stat blocks) but thematically it would be cool and would make an amazing magical martial (just probably without any actual magical ability outside of shapeshifting- but what more do you need as long as its buffed to be an effective, all day option?)
I've suggested it before, but this is why I want to see the Shifter.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you focus on a wild shape druid building up strength using point buy you will end up with a 22 strength with an Apex Item. This will give you a +35 to hit.
24 proficiency +6 strength +3 item +2 Status = +35. One less than a master proficiency martial.
On top of this, you will get a good damage martial attack with temporary hit points, increased mobility, reach, size, and sometimes a breath weapon or some other benefit.
It's a very viable build.
I think you misunderstood my point. It wasn't that wild shape was bad, it definitely isn't. My point was that the +2 status bonus isn't what makes it good, because for the most part the inherent attack bonus of the form is the same as the one you'd get from your class, or one better the level after you get the new form.
I'll admit to not considering an apex item though, which gives the class bonus a one-point advantage from level 14 on, assuming you wouldn't rather have the +2 to Wisdom.
I'm going out the +2 status bonus built into the ability is very nice compared to a wizard.
If you're going to go all in for shapeshifting, Apex item on strength is the way to go. If you roll stats rather than do point buy, you might even be able to push this to +36 with a maxed out strength.
That's the gist of the issue in my opinion. Wizard's just don't have these options to build really cool characters around their schools. Their schools offer some usually lame focus spell with one other upgrades. Whereas druids or bards or clerics offer very thematic builds built around powerful abilities like wild shape or tempest surge, maestro or polymath, or divine font. The wizard is supposedly this specialist in the magic of a particular school and they get an extra spell slot and a weak focus spell.
You would think an evocation wizard would unleash awe-inspiring destruction, but I'd take a storm druid or sorcerer for awe-inspiring blasting. You would think a transmutation wizard would be turning people to stone or transforming into powerful creatures to do battle, but I'd take a wild shape druid over a transmutation wizard for battle forms. The wizard has a single advantage: 1 more spell slot per level, some feats to cast more, and a use of Arcane Bond. He has the best casting endurance in the game. But if the spells don't outdo focus options, suddenly all those slots look like "meh, who cares."
Right now I'm not sure there is any reason to play a wizard other than you like to do it. There is no real power advantage. They don't stand out for much. Their focus abilities aren't exciting. Their hit points are lowest. Intelligence is only an ok key statistic providing a bonus on Crafting and certain intelligence based skills.
There's just not a lot of bang for your buck playing a wizard that you can't accomplish with more interesting options playing something else. That is really disappointing for one of the most iconic classes in fantasy gaming.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you focus on a wild shape druid building up strength using point buy you will end up with a 22 strength with an Apex Item. This will give you a +35 to hit.
24 proficiency +6 strength +3 item +2 Status = +35. One less than a master proficiency martial.
On top of this, you will get a good damage martial attack with temporary hit points, increased mobility, reach, size, and sometimes a breath weapon or some other benefit.
It's a very viable build.
I think you misunderstood my point. It wasn't that wild shape was bad, it definitely isn't. My point was that the +2 status bonus isn't what makes it good, because for the most part the inherent attack bonus of the form is the same as the one you'd get from your class, or one better the level after you get the new form.
I'll admit to not considering an apex item though, which gives the class bonus a one-point advantage from level 14 on, assuming you wouldn't rather have the +2 to Wisdom.
I'm going out the +2 status bonus built into the ability is very nice compared to a wizard.
If you're going to go all in for shapeshifting, Apex item on strength is the way to go. If you roll stats rather than do point buy, you might even be able to push this to +36 with a maxed out strength.
That's the gist of the issue in my opinion. Wizard's just don't have these options to build really cool characters around their schools. Their schools offer some usually lame focus spell with one other upgrades. Whereas druids or bards or clerics offer very thematic builds built around powerful abilities like wild shape or tempest surge, maestro or polymath, or divine font. The wizard is supposedly this specialist in the magic of a particular school and they get an extra spell slot and a weak focus spell.
You would think an evocation wizard would unleash awe-inspiring destruction, but I'd take a storm druid or sorcerer for awe-inspiring blasting. You would think a transmutation wizard would be...
I'll say that while the sorcerer is a slightly better blaster, that's about where the advantage ends. You do anything else with a sorcerer, they're equally lackluster, and a divine sorcerer or occult sorcerer is just a cleric/bard without any of the additional features of those things.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...If you focus on a wild shape druid building up strength using point buy you will end up with a 22 strength with an Apex Item. This will give you a +35 to hit.
24 proficiency +6 strength +3 item +2 Status = +35. One less than a master proficiency martial.
On top of this, you will get a good damage martial attack with temporary hit points, increased mobility, reach, size, and sometimes a breath weapon or some other benefit.
It's a very viable build.
I think you misunderstood my point. It wasn't that wild shape was bad, it definitely isn't. My point was that the +2 status bonus isn't what makes it good, because for the most part the inherent attack bonus of the form is the same as the one you'd get from your class, or one better the level after you get the new form.
I'll admit to not considering an apex item though, which gives the class bonus a one-point advantage from level 14 on, assuming you wouldn't rather have the +2 to Wisdom.
I'm going out the +2 status bonus built into the ability is very nice compared to a wizard.
If you're going to go all in for shapeshifting, Apex item on strength is the way to go. If you roll stats rather than do point buy, you might even be able to push this to +36 with a maxed out strength.
That's the gist of the issue in my opinion. Wizard's just don't have these options to build really cool characters around their schools. Their schools offer some usually lame focus spell with one other upgrades. Whereas druids or bards or clerics offer very thematic builds built around powerful abilities like wild shape or tempest surge, maestro or polymath, or divine font. The wizard is supposedly this specialist in the magic of a particular school and they get an extra spell slot and a weak focus spell.
You would think an evocation wizard would unleash awe-inspiring destruction, but I'd take a storm druid or sorcerer for awe-inspiring blasting. You would think a
Yeah. Sorcerer is close to the same boat as the wizard. There are a few of those focus spells that are nice though. Elemental toss if it is hits is a real nice blast boost. 10d8+10 for 1 action with another class spell is not terrible, though you have to roll a hit roll. But still you'd feel pretty good spending a focus spell on that once per battle.
At least the sorcerer has some interesting build options and flexibility. You can make a divine sorcerer who is a really good healer with angel sorcerer, while still snagging a few nice powerful other spells from other lists to boost your flexibility. Dangerous Sorcerer is a nice feat. And Charisma is a good key stat for some highly effective skills Intimidation and Diplomacy with Bon Mot.
That's the only reason I give the sorcerer a slight advantage over the wizard. They have more interesting build options for different character concepts.
|
|
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
to me it feels so weird that the caster who relies the least in luck and outside powers is the weakest when logically it should have been the strongest
makes me wonder why anyone would chose to be a wizard in golarion when you can get far better by going to a bard college
For one thing, the inherent aptitudes in the two types of magic are completely different (Cha vs. Int), for another a Bard is actually only super good when they have martials to support, taken in isolation as a single person, I think the Wizard is fairly provably significantly better, so it depends on how much you want to rely on others.
Also, being a Bard is not a matter of pure study, it doesn't seem, while being a Wizard more or less is. Additionally, what's powerful for PCs and what's good to be in-universe are different in a few ways. For example, Wizards are a lot better at destroying legions of lower level people than a Bard is, even if Bards are better at dealing with someone of higher level...and if you hit 20th level, the number of people of higher level than you becomes infinitesimal. PCs tend to always fight on-level threats, but in-universe that's gonna be a rarity past a certain level.
And finally, the rules are not a perfect reflection of the world of Golarion. Think of all the rules systems you've seen for playing games in the real world and how close they actually approximated reality. PF1 and PF2 are both rules systems for approximating Golarion, but neither is a perfect reflection, and assuming Wizards are less powerful than Bards in universe is thus a pretty unwarranted assumption.
All assuming you buy into the core premise that Bards are stronger than Wizards in PF2, of course. Which, in fairness, I certainly do. I think Wizards are significantly better than people often give them credit for, but Bards are the most powerful caster Class and possibly the most powerful Class in PF2.
And that's considering that bards and wizards have the same progression. A good wizard school may get you to level 5 in a few years when bards need to travel for decades to get to the same level.
I'll say that while the sorcerer is a slightly better blaster, that's about where the advantage ends. You do anything else with a sorcerer, they're equally lackluster, and a divine sorcerer or occult sorcerer is just a cleric/bard without any of the additional features of those things.
I'm playing a Divine Sorcerer and my character has nothing to do with a Cleric. It's far from being a "Cleric without additional features". It's just a completely different character. Clerics are mostly about healing. Outside Divine Font, there's not much to find.
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
If we're looking at level 20 bards and wizards are tied for crowd control the wizards have more spells but the Bard has weird which is super solid and pied piper is a hilariously powerful focus spell which is far better at crowd control than anything the wizard has focus spell wise.
The Bard and wizard have similar defensive options. It's pretty much a wash
I'm not sure I agree, and what about 15th level? That's a lot more achievable and yet you'll still be meeting a lot more people much lower level than you than you will of your level or higher.
Cha is a lot better than Int overall.
Is it? I'm not sure that's the consensus even for PCs, and even if it is it's mostly for its in-combat uses and because Trained Skills become slightly less useful at high levels...vs. on level challenges. Which, like on-level opponents, become much rarer in-universe as you level in a way they don't in gameplay. So again, even if you buy that it's worse for PCs I'm not sure it being worse in-world holds up.
Bard might work better with a group of martials, but a group of bard is better than a group of any other caster. All thanks to stacking compositions.
Possibly, but so? That's still relying on others outside yourself. My point was that Wizards were more self sufficient, which I stand by.
Being a Bard is all about studying, the studying just happens differently. While Wizards are all about books, Bards are all about practice and listening.
Becoming a Bard also involves some rather nebulous additional stuff. An inherent talent that being a Wizard does not require and a burst of inspiration that, in PF2, takes the form of a Muse. Inspiration can't really be taught. Knowledge, the fundamental basis of being a Wizard, can be.
As for the PC vs in-universe the problem there lies with the fact that up until PF2 was released the strongest casters were full casters. The bard used to be a 6th level caster meaning that they could never get as much power as the Wizard, instead they had the best support ability in the game. When PF2 hit, Bard got a huge power boost by getting full casting and not losing their support ability, even if they did lose their martial ability. On the other hand Wizards suffered a massive power loss; Most of their spells, feats, items, and abilities were nerfed, erased, or altered. Leaving them is a really bad spot.
I don't think it's as bad as all that, but yes, things definitely changed between editions. Unambiguously, the two are not the same rules set and do not work the same way.
So you have this weird scenario where in lore lv 20 Wizards are casting world changing spell quite easily. While mechanically they are casting is quite weak. While in lore lv 20 Bards are casting very strong 6th level spells with powerful AoE abilities. While mechanically they are casting the strongest 10th level spells and the strongest AoE abilities.
Er...not really. 20th level characters have always been world changingly powerful in both editions regardless of Class, and PF2 actually reinforces that for Wizard at least as well as it always has. Because level matters more now even if being a Wizard matters less.
But Wizards were not, fundamentally in the fiction, treated as different or more powerful than other characters of the same level. Not even Fighters or Rogues, which were objectively much worse in the system in PF1.
This is because, as I said, the rules of both editions are imperfect reflections of how the world of Golarion actually works in-universe.
The whole thing is just made more complicated by the fact that there is no reason for the power to have changed. A complain that I have had since the beginning. If it were a different universe, a different region, some type of event, or anything than the lore would be less problematic. But since that is not the case, we have to contend with the idea that in lore Bards were incredible Gishes able to cast magic up to level as well as hold their own against foes in a fight. While Wizards where casting long duration buffs, high damage low level spells, and were able to cast with a large number of metamagic that is impossible to even think of in PF2.
But none of that is really part of the lore. Those are all mechanical terms. If you read the novels, for example, while you can certainly point out bits that are clearly reflective of a specific mechanical rule in PF1, with the exception of certain options that are not available yet almost all still work in PF2, the specific levels certain characters are required to be to do them, or the specific options they are required to have picked, have just changed.
Because the two systems reflect the same world, just in somewhat divergent ways.