| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Too bad that, for a Wizard, they are one and the same.
Razmir being a super high level Wizard nearing the cusp of immortality falls apart fast when he could be a Druid or a Bard and have better tools to access his latent power and be better considered a "god."
Razmir's 'godhood' isn't about being a Wizard specifically, it's about the ability of any 19th level spellcaster to impersonate a God. Which they very much still can. Any Class at all can wreck just about anyone 4 levels below them pretty casually, and the number of adversaries around who are higher than 15th level is very small.
Nex and Geb are two extremely powerful Spellcasters who are basically at war with each other. I imagine their battles would be more legendary with access to the power and utility a Bard has compared to a Wizard.Uh... Bards are Spontaneous, making their options for utility limited, and very limited in their ability to effect the physical world. They are also much worse than Wizards at Rituals, due to their casting stat being Cha-based rather than Int-based.
I don't think that fight makes more sense for Bards at all.
And I imagine there are numerous other in-lore "wizards" who are just basic Arcane schmucks who can sling average spells that are so easily trounced by Occult and Primal spellcasters.Occult and Primal aren't better than Arcane. They're different, with different strengths and weaknesses. In fact, I'd argue that Arcane is unambiguously better than Primal for everything but healing. Occult and Arcane are more on par, but that's borne out by the fluff of the setting (the most powerful spellcaster to have influence in the Inner Sea is not an Arcane caster, but Baba Yaga, who is an Occult caster).
This was more of a bit about PF1 letting level 20 Wizards take a feat that make them immortal, now poofed in PF2, hence why the "Razmir is a Level 19 Wizard" meme came about, whereas a Bard could make enough gold to buy immortality with ridiculous bonuses with Earn Income, and Druids have lower level feats that, while not immortality, are close enough by reducing the effects of aging to let you pursue your goal uninhibited by the effects of old age.
You could change Bard to Occult Witch and it would be about the same comparison, then, if prepared versus spontaneous is an issue. There's the whole "familiar" thing, but it's not like Wizards get anything much better in comparison, so having familiars being involved in the Nex and Geb rivalry won't change the story that much. Point is that Occult has much better debuff and utility spells than Arcane does, and Arcane loses out simply because their damaging spells just aren't worth casting compared to even one of Occult's incredible debuffing spells. Synesthesia wrecks most any single target spell Arcane has due to making enemies Clumsy 3, forcing flat checks on all targeting effects, and reducing speed, all within a single spell, which has results even on a success, and on a failure, it's basically gameover for the bad guy. Synaptic Pulse is like Slow+, and Occult gets access to the Slow spell as well, which is an amazing thing to combo with Synesthesia.
Even if we want to argue that "each has their niche," Bard poached the best spell effects from Divine with their performances while having the incredible utility and debuffing from Occult, making them effectively two spellcaster classes in one. Druids with Primal don't have a lot of the specific target baggage from Divine, while also having some of the good utility spells that Divine doesn't have, Haste in particular. Arcane might have the most blasting spells in the game, but gameplay and math proves that it's not worth it, and quite frankly an Elemental Sorcerer with Dangerous Sorcery amounts to the best blaster due to actually having feat and bloodline synergies with damage spells. What do Wizards get to synergize with damaging spells? A Force Bolt thing that's like Magic Missile but worse. The only nice thing is that it's a single action, which may be helpful to augment your damaging turn. As long as the enemy is within 30 feet, which is very, very dangerous for a spellcaster. There's also metamagic feats like Reach, which add range to spells, but as far as actual battle math, no.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So one thing is that while it's not impossible to imagine a bard or a cleric or a druid whose goals are something like "world domination", this does sort of work against the themes of those classes. None of these classes are normally great schemers and their whole schtick involves "helping or working with others."
Wizards get the nod because "knows what's best, believes they should be in charge, and has the acumen to pull it off" works against precisely none of the class themes. Like when the big bad is a druid, or a bard that's a subversion.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
So one thing is that while it's not impossible to imagine a bard or a cleric or a druid whose goals are something like "world domination", this does sort of work against the themes of those classes. None of these classes are normally great schemers and their whole schtick involves "helping or working with others."
Wizards get the nod because "knows what's best, believes they should be in charge, and has the acumen to pull it off" works against precisely none of the class themes. Like when the big bad is a druid, or a bard that's a subversion.
This is nitpicking, but a bard trying to conquer the world or what have you is definitely not subversion. They're iconic leaders, schemers, villains, and rulers.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The biggest disappointment to me was the shift in runes and staves. I accept it. It really nerfs gishes. Runed-up staves were (from my perspective) the best thing that made gishes really solid. They were never on the power level for the extreme optimizers. But for the rest of us, it made them pleasantly playable. I can still work with what it is now, but my characters mechanical actions will be far sillier. *shrug* It is what it is. He'll now be grabbing onto the stave that is permanently affixed to his back to cast those spells when they are needed and wield a runed-up staff.
I'd be into a feat that gives benefits for wielding a staff in your off-hand, so gishes can feel good about weapon+staff as an alternative to weapon+shield. Make it it's own archetype if you wanna expand on that concept, but it could easily work as just a level 4 feat available to any archetype that gives basic spellcasting benefits.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So one thing is that while it's not impossible to imagine a bard or a cleric or a druid whose goals are something like "world domination", this does sort of work against the themes of those classes. None of these classes are normally great schemers and their whole schtick involves "helping or working with others."
Wizards get the nod because "knows what's best, believes they should be in charge, and has the acumen to pull it off" works against precisely none of the class themes. Like when the big bad is a druid, or a bard that's a subversion.
*side eyes Curse of the Crimson Throne*
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
This was more of a bit about PF1 letting level 20 Wizards take a feat that make them immortal, now poofed in PF2, hence why the "Razmir is a Level 19 Wizard" meme came about, whereas a Bard could make enough gold to buy immortality with ridiculous bonuses with Earn Income, and Druids have lower level feats that, while not immortality, are close enough by reducing the effects of aging to let you pursue your goal uninhibited by the effects of old age.
Razmir's existence and place in the world predates the ability for Wizards to become immortal at level 20 by several real world years. They took it into account by making him 19th rather than 20th (when his Class and level were eventually revealed), but it's not an essential part of his character arc or place in the world that he's one level away from immortality, just that he's mortal.
You could change Bard to Occult Witch and it would be about the same comparison, then, if prepared versus spontaneous is an issue. There's the whole "familiar" thing, but it's not like Wizards get anything much better in comparison, so having familiars being involved in the Nex and Geb rivalry won't change the story that much.
It's not the only issue. It's one of several. More relevant is that the kinds of magic they did primarily involved warping the physical world in various ways, something Occult magic doesn't do so well.
Point is that Occult has much better debuff and utility spells than Arcane does, and Arcane loses out simply because their damaging spells just aren't worth casting compared to even one of Occult's incredible debuffing spells. Synesthesia wrecks most any single target spell Arcane has due to making enemies Clumsy 3, forcing flat checks on all targeting effects, and reducing speed, all within a single spell, which has results even on a success, and on a failure, it's basically gameover for the bad guy. Synaptic Pulse is like Slow+, and Occult gets access to the Slow spell as well, which is an amazing thing to combo with Synesthesia.
Versus what enemies and in what circumstances aren't the Wizard's damage spells worth it? It's a good question, and an important distinction to bear in mind. Bards are very powerful in the specific context of a PC group because they have multiple other on-level people to take advantage of their buffs and debuffs. That's by no means a given in-universe.
A Wizard is much better at wiping out hordes of mooks solo than a Bard is, and probably better in a one-on-one fight as well, especially with prep time. Damage spells also aren't the only things Arcane has over Occult. Flesh To Stone, Baleful Polymorph, Disjunction, Shapechange, and a host of other examples are all available to Arcane and not Occult. It's just a wider range of tools in many ways.
Now, none of that is to say that Wizards couldn't use a bit of a buff, I think they could, but that's because they're less powerful in the context of a PC group (which is the relevant environment for PC power level determinations), not because they're less powerful in absolute terms in-universe.
Even if we want to argue that "each has their niche," Bard poached the best spell effects from Divine with their performances while having the incredible utility and debuffing from Occult, making them effectively two spellcaster classes in one. Druids with Primal don't have a lot of the specific target baggage from Divine, while also having some of the good utility spells that Divine doesn't have, Haste in particular.
Primal is a good, solid, list, but Arcane does everything it does other than heal and can target Will Saves and do other mental stuff as well. It's just better unless you want to heal.
Occult is on par with Arcane, having better buffs and debuffs but basically no Reflex Save spells, and serious limitations in dealing with the physical world as such. It's an excellent list, and Synesthesia in particular is probably the best single spell in the game in some ways, but it's just one spell. It does not, by itself, make the Occult list in general flatly better than the Arcane list in general.
Arcane might have the most blasting spells in the game, but gameplay and math proves that it's not worth it, and quite frankly an Elemental Sorcerer with Dangerous Sorcery amounts to the best blaster due to actually having feat and bloodline synergies with damage spells. What do Wizards get to synergize with damaging spells? A Force Bolt thing that's like Magic Missile but worse. The only nice thing is that it's a single action, which may be helpful to augment your damaging turn. As long as the enemy is within 30 feet, which is very, very dangerous for a spellcaster. There's also metamagic feats like Reach, which add range to spells, but as far as actual battle math, no.
The math actually proves that blasting is quite good vs. multiple foes. Single targets not so much, but hey, multiple foes is a real situation that crops up a lot. Wizards aren't the best at it, it's true, but being an adequate blaster on top of some of the more debuff oriented stuff a Wizard can do is a good and versatile combination. Spell Penetration is also a pretty absurd math boost vs. most high level foes, and a very nice trick that's Wizard exclusive for the most part (while Dangerous Sorcery is much easier for a Wizard to just grab).
Is all thatt enough to make Wizard a good Class? Maybe not, that's not really my point though. My point was not that Wizards didn't have mechanical issues, it was that whatever issues Wizards might have, they can still easily fill their story/lore roles with the tool kit they currently possess.
The issue here is whether they're mechanically good enough, not whether Razmir still works as a Wizard in PF2 (he pretty unambiguously does).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Bards are better than wizards at everything
yeah, def better for buffs and debuffs, but better at everything?
Arcane is the only list that can consistently attack various defenses of monsters(AC, FORT, REF, WILL) with best spells for each defense.
Occult can't attack reflex almost at all...and AC mostly with 1 short range cantrip.
they suck at blasting until level 11(calamity) and it's still lowest damage blast compared to other of it's level
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, I've never been convinced Wizards were weak-- i think ya'll just undervalue extra castings.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, I've never been convinced Wizards were weak-- i think ya'll just undervalue extra castings.
The only way this argument really works is if sorcerer didn’t have 4 slots as standard.
As it stands the extra slot of the specialist wizard (build restriction) is restricted to the specialist school they choose. They can have 1 additional slot of their higher level spells over a sorcerer through Spell Substitution (build restriction) to over come the natural slots numbers of a sorcerer (no build restriction) but doing so halves their lower level spell slots.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is nitpicking, but a bard trying to conquer the world or what have you is definitely not subversion. They're iconic leaders, schemers, villains, and rulers.
The original iconic role for a Bard is the wingman, the entertainer, the distraction, the dilettante, the comic relief.
The mastermind Bard started out as a subversion of that, though it's been done enough now (and it makes sense, given their abilities) that it no longer feel subversive.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think people are really downplaying the strength of the arcane list. Sure, it has less unique spells than other tradition, but boy are those staple.
I mean, contingency. Hello.
Spell turning. Oh boy.
Power Words. No save.
Merely spell turning makes any encounter with a spellcaster from another tradition trivial.
Also, let's not forget that wizards are the brainiac casters, with high INT to power their skills. This makes them arguably the best ritual casters to make clones, golems and the like.
A level 20 wizard isn't more powerful than another caster. But it still fits the theme better.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, I've never been convinced Wizards were weak-- i think ya'll just undervalue extra castings.The only way this argument really works is if sorcerer didn’t have 4 slots as standard.
As it stands the extra slot of the specialist wizard (build restriction) is restricted to the specialist school they choose. They can have 1 additional slot of their higher level spells over a sorcerer through Spell Substitution (build restriction) to over come the natural slots numbers of a sorcerer (no build restriction) but doing so halves their lower level spell slots.
You're discounting the free spell of their highest level a Wizard gets from their bonded item.
A specialist gets 5 (3+1+1) spells of their highest level, plus 4 of every other - putting them a definitive step ahead of Sorcerers.
With spell blending, its 6 of their highest level and 5 of the next highest vs 4 and 4. That's 50% more top-level spells than a sorcerer.
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Once again, that’s not inherent to all Wizards. It’s literally only one Thesis option gets that extra +1 potential. It’s also not free, it’s requires halving another spell levels.
I’m also not discounting Arcane Bond, it’s a 1 a day class feature of a wizard. In the same way I didn’t factor in Sorcerers superior focus abilities into their count.
If the only way you come out a head of a sorcerer in spells per day is for a specific build of Wizard, using their once a day class feature VS the sorcerers base, neutral, spell numbers, then it’s hardly actually comparable.
If a wizard has to commit two entire class features to out number the base number of spells of a sorcerer, for a single level of spells, it should be way more impactful than it is.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Once again, that’s not inherent to all Wizards. It’s literally only one Thesis option gets that extra +1 potential. It’s also not free, it’s requires halving another spell levels.
I’m also not discounting Arcane Bond, it’s a 1 a day class feature of a wizard. In the same way I didn’t factor in Sorcerers superior focus abilities into their count.
If the only way you come out a head of a sorcerer in spells per day is for a specific build of Wizard, using their once a day class feature VS the sorcerers base, neutral, spell numbers, then it’s hardly actually comparable.
If a wizard has to commit two entire class features to out number the base number of spells of a sorcerer, for a single level of spells, it should be way more impactful than it is.
A standard Wizard (ie, not including thesis and assuming you dont go the outlier route of Universalist) has 5 spell slots to the Sorcerers 4 when you dont discount bonded item.
And 4 of every other spell level.
Spell Blending is not required to come out ahead of a Sorcerer on the most important level of spells, you literally have to opt out by choosing to go universalist.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, once again, they have to commit a class feature to gain a single, one, spell over the base of a sorcerer. But, only so long as you become a specialist.
So a class featured required, and a build decision made for you, all to get a single spell, one, over a sorcerer - who commits nothing.
K.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
So then we can say, unlike any other class in the game, the wizard has options (including class features and feats) to have significantly more spells per day than any other caster in the game. Spells that they can swap out in their entirety every day.
If that doesn't appeal to you, then there is the sorcerer, and the witch that can be used to make characters that largely fill the same narrative space but have slightly different mechanical foci.
The Errata changes overall are pretty minor. Where they are clear, their effect on overall game balance is in the category of tweaks rather than complete rebalancing of the classes
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, I've never been convinced Wizards were weak-- i think ya'll just undervalue extra castings.The only way this argument really works is if sorcerer didn’t have 4 slots as standard.
As it stands the extra slot of the specialist wizard (build restriction) is restricted to the specialist school they choose. They can have 1 additional slot of their higher level spells over a sorcerer through Spell Substitution (build restriction) to over come the natural slots numbers of a sorcerer (no build restriction) but doing so halves their lower level spell slots.
I'm not sure of your personal opinion on it, but I've definitely seen people on here who view the sorcerer as around the same power level as wizards because they don't think four slots is enough of a power boost. And while I disagree with them that either class is weak, I do think the two classes are very similar power-wise since they have similar strengths (the most spell slots) and weaknesses (garbage defenses, not great focus spells) with certain sorcerer bloodlines pulling ahead just a little bit.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think a lot of people have whiplash from the edition change turning Wizards from "Eventually, the most powerful thing bar none" to "about as good as some other classes, but not even the best spellcaster."
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think a lot of people have whiplash from the edition change turning Wizards from "Eventually, the most powerful thing bar none" to "about as good as some other classes, but not even the best spellcaster."
This has nothing to do with Wizard power level in general, just the lack of any flavour whatsoever.
You are correct it's "not even the best spellcaster", but there is also the problem of "it has nothing except spells".
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think at this point, if your belief is that the wizard's power level is low, that is not something that is going to be addressed by Errata. *
In fact, I don't see any other narrative or power issue being addressed by Errata for the wizard either.
This isn't to say that new content might not be developed that will help players feel like more different kinds of wizards are supported, but it will very likely be with lateral additions not vertical power ones.
I say all of this, but it is possible that some of the lateral additions that came in the APG, that really missed the mark of being a lateral addition (like form retention) could be errata'd, although I think it is just as likely they are left alone and players need to keep up the call for new, more interesting specialization options.
* I say this because, unlike with the alchemist, you have never had a developer admit that they think wizards power levels are below what they were meant to be.
I'm not sure of your personal opinion on it, but I've definitely seen people on here who view the sorcerer as around the same power level as wizards because they don't think four slots is enough of a power boost. And while I disagree with them that either class is weak, I do think the two classes are very similar power-wise since they have similar strengths (the most spell slots) and weaknesses (garbage defenses, not great focus spells) with certain sorcerer bloodlines pulling ahead just a little bit.Honestly, I've never been convinced Wizards were weak-- i think ya'll just undervalue extra castings.The only way this argument really works is if sorcerer didn’t have 4 slots as standard.
As it stands the extra slot of the specialist wizard (build restriction) is restricted to the specialist school they choose. They can have 1 additional slot of their higher level spells over a sorcerer through Spell Substitution (build restriction) to over come the natural slots numbers of a sorcerer (no build restriction) but doing so halves their lower level spell slots.
My personal opinion (unasked for) is that I'd have to be wanting to do something very specific to consider a Sorcerer or Witch over another caster, including Wizard.
For example, if I wanted to do an Arcane Blaster, I might consider a Dragon Sorcerer over an Evoker Spell Blending Wizard due to the dragon breath weapon focus spell being very good. Very close to a Focus Fireball.
But even then, the Evoker can have 50% more top level spell slots and Force Bolt, letting them do more burst damage than the Sorcerer by having a reliable way of dumping all three actions into reliable damage.
You'd realistically need more than 6 encounters in a day for the sorcerers focus spell advantage to come up (assuming dropping 2 big spells a combat), and the Wizard is benefitting from his focus spell in addition to his spell slots.
I am assuming a two feat tax for the Wizard for Dangerous Sorcery, but realistically, I have a hard time ever seeing Sorcerer as the "better" option.
The same applies to Sorcerers relative to Clerics, Bards and Druids - only more so, because those chassis are generally better than Wizard.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, once again, they have to commit a class feature to gain a single, one, spell over the base of a sorcerer. But, only so long as you become a specialist.
So a class featured required, and a build decision made for you, all to get a single spell, one, over a sorcerer - who commits nothing.
K.
I'd argue that bloodline is a class feature, and the spells you get from it being a build decision made for you. That forces one of your 3-4 known spells per level into something you might not want or ever use.
Do you disagree?
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why would I disagree?
Sorcerers get the same number of spell slots no matter what bloodline they pick. This isn’t strictly true for the Wizard, who need to pick a specialist school to get that extra slot, which is then restricted to their chosen school.
So neither have wholly unfettered use of their slots.
_________
That said, I think we are getting away from the point.
Wizards might have the most spells per day in the strictest sense, but the margin of that can be as low as a single spell slot, and it costs the Wizard most of their class features to get that. This is opposed to the Sorcerer, who can achieve almost the same result without having to commit class features in the same way. It’s just not equitable cost for the payoff.
That said, I think we are getting away from the point.
Wizards might have the most spells per day in the strictest sense, but the margin of that can be as low as a single spell slot, and it costs the Wizard most of their class features to get that. This is opposed to the Sorcerer, who can achieve almost the same result without having to commit class features in the same way. It’s just not equitable cost for the payoff.
If by "costs most of their class features" you mean the Wizard chooses any class option but one specific choice that is equivalent to any of the specialize schools, Universalist.
Literally every other Wizard that is not a Universalist - which is the vast majority - gets five top level slots.
That's not a significant commitment.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It’s a commitment, one which sorcerers just don’t have to make.
Why should a Wizard have to make a choice which can strip them of, what is apparently, their most important value? It’s not even a question for sorcerers.
Wizards still have to use 2 class features to get a single spell slot over the sorcerer base.
Their role as “spell slot man” is undermined by the sorcerers having 4 base slots per level on top of their generally better focus spells.
It’s not like that extra spell is even special or more powerful.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
It’s a commitment, one which sorcerers just don’t have to make.
Why should a Wizard have to make a choice which can strip them of, what is apparently, their most important value? It’s not even a question for sorcerers.
Wizards still have to use 2 class features to get a single spell slot over the sorcerer base.
Their role as “spell slot man” is undermined by the sorcerers having 4 base slots per level on top of their generally better focus spells.
It’s not like that extra spell is even special or more powerful.
Specialist Schools for a Wizard are no more of a class feature than a Sorcerer getting an extra spell per level. Its just a different way of providing the Wizard an extra spell per level than the Sorcerer - the Wizard doesn't have to "use" anything to get it, theres no opportunity cost.
Likewise, bonded item is not optional and does not require the Wizard to "use" anything to gain the benefit - its literally just an extra free flexible spell slot for Wizards.
It is extremely misleading to imply that Wizards have to "use" class features to get these spells - 4 spells per level is a Wizard feature just like it is a Sorcerer feature, it just has extra thematic limitations to it.
And then, for free, they get an extra spell on top.
Arcane Thesis is what should be compared against a Sorcerer Bloodline, and many Thesis compare extremely strongly to the limited benefits provides by bloodlines (Spell Blending, Spell Substitution, and Familiar Master are all extremely strong).
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
This has nothing to do with Wizard power level in general, just the lack of any flavour whatsoever.
Isn't "the wizard no longer gets an extra 10th level slot" explicitly an issue about power level? Class features that don't show up for your first 17 levels don't have much to say about flavor, after all.
I mean, what are the themes of the Wizard? You're the person who went to school to learn magic, you have an abstract theoretical understanding of magic, and you can leverage that to do things with magic other people can't. Mechanically this manifests as "you are the best at metamagic" and "you can get more mileage out of your spell slots than others" (through drain bonded object, etc.)
I'm wondering if the best fix here would be to just grant wizards an "order explorer" style option for arcane theses.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Or really any feats at all that interact with your thesis.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Or really any feats at all that interact with your thesis.
I'd like a Focus spell that lets you substitute a spell on the fly for Spell Substitution.
Or maybe a feat that lets you "un-blend" a higher level slot for multiple lower level ones in a pinch.
Maybe a focus spell that lets you Transform Familiar and reassign its abilities in the field.
That sort of stuff?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why would I disagree?
Sorcerers get the same number of spell slots no matter what bloodline they pick. This isn’t strictly true for the Wizard, who need to pick a specialist school to get that extra slot, which is then restricted to their chosen school.
So neither have wholly unfettered use of their slots.
_________
That said, I think we are getting away from the point.
Wizards might have the most spells per day in the strictest sense, but the margin of that can be as low as a single spell slot, and it costs the Wizard most of their class features to get that. This is opposed to the Sorcerer, who can achieve almost the same result without having to commit class features in the same way. It’s just not equitable cost for the payoff.
You might notice that Sorcerer's entire class set of class features is the bloodline, which is what also gives them the extra spell. Saying that they "don't have to commit class features" is completely incorrect - they have to commit just as hard as the wizard, and possibly even harder if you consider that the wizard doesn't have to tie their Arcane Thesis to it.
It's not correct to say "wizards still have to use 2 class features to get a single spell slot over the sorcerer base" - sorcerers have to use a large portion of their one class feature to catch up to Arcane School. In the worst case, a wizard without bonded item and without arcane thesis is on the same level spells-wise as a sorcerer.
What bonded object/arcane thesis should be compared to is the sorcerer's blood magic, since the bloodline spell can generally map against the wizard's school spell.
Or really any feats at all that interact with your thesis.I'd like a Focus spell that lets you substitute a spell on the fly for Spell Substitution.
Or maybe a feat that lets you "un-blend" a higher level slot for multiple lower level ones in a pinch.
Maybe a focus spell that lets you Transform Familiar and reassign its abilities in the field.
That sort of stuff?
For the second one, I'd prefer something more like how Combine Extracts works, where you fire off two spells in one combined burst, but I'm concerned that something like that would lean too heavily on the design space of Quicken Spell. Getting more lower-level slots on the fly (with presumably the ability to prepare spells in them instantly) leans too heavily on the style of Spell Substitution for my taste.
I wonder how a focus spell to cast a spell from your staff for Staff Nexus would do...
|
Or really any feats at all that interact with your thesis.I'd like a Focus spell that lets you substitute a spell on the fly for Spell Substitution.
Or maybe a feat that lets you "un-blend" a higher level slot for multiple lower level ones in a pinch.
Maybe a focus spell that lets you Transform Familiar and reassign its abilities in the field.
That sort of stuff?
For the second one, I'd prefer something more like how Combine Extracts works, where you fire off two spells in one combined burst, but I'm concerned that something like that would lean too heavily on the design space of Quicken Spell. Getting more lower-level slots on the fly (with presumably the ability to prepare spells in them instantly) leans too heavily on the style of Spell Substitution for my taste.
I wonder how a focus spell to cast a spell from your staff for Staff Nexus would do...
Would probably lean on Spell Combination’s toes a bit too much as well.
Or really any feats at all that interact with your thesis.I'd like a Focus spell that lets you substitute a spell on the fly for Spell Substitution.
That would be too powerful. There's already a thesis that lets you spend 10 minutes to swap spells.
Spending 10 minutes now to spend an action (up to three times!) at some point in the future is incredibly powerful. It doesn't only obliviate the thesis, but it starts making the wizard look like a sorcerer.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Or really any feats at all that interact with your thesis.I'd like a Focus spell that lets you substitute a spell on the fly for Spell Substitution.That would be too powerful. There's already a thesis that lets you spend 10 minutes to swap spells.
Spending 10 minutes now to spend an action (up to three times!) at some point in the future is incredibly powerful. It doesn't only obliviate the thesis, but it starts making the wizard look like a sorcerer.
The idea in question was a response to abilities that interact with Thesis, and the specific ability in question would likely require that Thesis. An upgrade or development, if you will.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This has nothing to do with Wizard power level in general, just the lack of any flavour whatsoever.Isn't "the wizard no longer gets an extra 10th level slot" explicitly an issue about power level? Class features that don't show up for your first 17 levels don't have much to say about flavor, after all
Sorry for being unclear, I was responding to previous commenters, not to the original topic of Wizards losing the extra 10th level slots. I indeed don't think it matters. As a matter of course, anything past level 16 plays very little in my appreciation of the class.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Razmir's existence and place in the world predates the ability for Wizards to become immortal at level 20 by several real world years. They took it into account by making him 19th rather than 20th (when his Class and level were eventually revealed), but it's not an essential part of his character arc or place in the world that he's one level away from immortality, just that he's mortal.
It's not the only issue. It's one of several. More relevant is that the kinds of magic they did primarily involved warping the physical world in various ways, something Occult magic doesn't do so well.
Versus what enemies and in what circumstances aren't the Wizard's damage spells worth it? It's a good question, and an important distinction to bear in mind. Bards are very powerful in the specific context of a PC group because they have multiple other on-level people to take advantage of their buffs and debuffs. That's by no means a given in-universe.
A Wizard is much better at wiping out hordes of mooks solo than a Bard is, and probably better in a one-on-one fight as well, especially with prep time. Damage spells also aren't the only things Arcane has over Occult. Flesh To Stone, Baleful Polymorph, Disjunction, Shapechange, and a host of other examples are all available to Arcane and not Occult. It's just a wider range of tools in many ways.
Now, none of that is to say that Wizards couldn't use a bit of a buff, I think they could, but that's because they're less powerful in the context of a PC group (which is the relevant environment for PC power level determinations), not because they're less powerful in absolute terms in-universe.
Primal is a good, solid, list, but Arcane does everything it does other than heal and can target Will Saves and do other mental stuff as well. It's just better unless you want to heal.
Occult is on par with Arcane, having better buffs and debuffs but basically no Reflex Save spells, and serious limitations in dealing with the physical world as such. It's an excellent list, and Synesthesia in particular is probably the best single spell in the game in some ways, but it's just one spell. It does not, by itself, make the Occult list in general flatly better than the Arcane list in general.
The math actually proves that blasting is quite good vs. multiple foes. Single targets not so much, but hey, multiple foes is a real situation that crops up a lot. Wizards aren't the best at it, it's true, but being an adequate blaster on top of some of the more debuff oriented stuff a Wizard can do is a good and versatile combination. Spell Penetration is also a pretty absurd math boost vs. most high level foes, and a very nice trick that's Wizard exclusive for the most part (while Dangerous Sorcery is much easier for a Wizard to just grab).
Is all thatt enough to make Wizard a good Class? Maybe not, that's not really my point though. My point was not that Wizards didn't have mechanical issues, it was that whatever issues Wizards might have, they can still easily fill their story/lore roles with the tool kit they currently possess.
The issue here is whether they're mechanically good enough, not whether Razmir still works as a Wizard in PF2 (he pretty unambiguously does).
It isn't now, since we retconned immortality being so easy to acquire. Well, maybe Razmir might consider Lichdom, since that appears the only adequate way to reach "godhood." Jokes aside, Razmir is in a much worse position in PF2 than he was in PF1. And that's assuming he isn't already dead. We never knew what happened to, well, anyone, past PF1's lifespan. Maybe Nex and Geb blew eachother up too?
Occult does it enough, though. Shadow Blast, Vampiric Exsanguination, Magic Missile...plenty of blasting spells that can simulate what Wizards can do to the point that it's "close enough." Do they need to be as strong as Fireball or Chain Lightning? Not really. They have many, many other strengths at their disposal that blasting spells aren't that great. And it's not like they can't do other impressive stuff with their spell list. Black Tentacles, Wall of Force, Prying Eye...all things a Wizard can do, that Occult can do as well.
Most Elemental damage can be outright negated from certain enemies. Fireballs don't work on Red Dragons, Fire Elementals, even Ice Demons. Chain Lightning doesn't work on Air Elementals, Blue Dragons, and Vrocks. It also empowers Golem types more often than not, and all it takes is a very lucky 20 and your spell falls apart fast. There's always Magic Missile, but that's not spell list exclusive to Arcane, and Shadow Blast has much more flexibility (even if less damage, made up for by exploiting vulnerabilities), giving it much more universal application to certain combats compared to a spell like Fireball or Vampiric Touch, spells that are outright useless against certain enemies, enemies that are much more common than we think. Not to mention, flexible targeting. I can do a smaller burst, or I can do a cone, or I can do a line. I don't get that kind of flexible targeting with Fireball or Vampiric Exsanguination.
Let me give you an in-play example of what I'm getting at. We had a very large group of mooks in front of a big bad, figure 40+ targets. They are all 4 levels lower than us. We have our spell lists selected. The Bard in our party had Black Tentacles, I had Chain Lightning. We both cast these spells twice. Black Tentacles targets an area and persists. Chain Lightning is a one-off. Against these lower level fighter types, Black Tentacles outperformed simply because it has much better usage (control) and application (locking enemies with grab checks and fortitude saves, lasting until dismissed or duration expires) than Chain Lightning does (which is pure damage) simply due to the basic laws of mathematics with probability exclusivity. If it only takes a Nat 20 to critically succeed my DC, 1 in 20 targets will make it on average, meaning that after 20 trials, one will succeed, and that's all it will take. But this also means it can (and usually does) succeed within less trials, or even on the first trial. For comparison, in my first Chain Lightning cast, after the 3rd target, the 4th rolled a Nat 20 and ruined my spell. In my second Chain Lightning cast, after the 11th target, the 12th rolled a Nat 20. Compared to the original 1 in 20 chance that has been projected, both have occurred well before their expected trial. Yes, the probability that it can occur past the expected trial is possible as well, but not something that is likely.
Moving on. My first cast only did about 100 damage total. My second cast did over 700 damage, since it targeted three times as many enemies (and I rolled twice as much damage, the first roll was lucky to break 30 per target), but compared to how much damage we ended up sparing ourselves from the Black Tentacles, it outperformed by a lot, and still did upwards of 50+ damage per cast, while preventing hundreds of points of damage. Sure, if both of my spells actually worked out well, clearly a 6th level spell would outperform, but that's just where the problem lies. Chain Lightning falls apart from one good roll, and if it's early (or even first) in the targeting phase, that's a ton of damage you're missing out on. Black Tentacles persists and serves as an obstacle for enemies to either deal with or avoid, buying us time and saving ourselves hits. We've saved ourselves hundreds of points of damage (and dealing maybe 100 damage per cast on average based on the targeting), which is a much bigger victory than, what the math would suggest, is shooting fish in a barrel.
Suggesting that those spells are actually useful is laughable to me. There are no creatures, PC or otherwise, that have bad Fortitude saves, and creatures most likely to use it on will be higher level than you and be much stronger in the saves department, meaning that any counterargument of "X creature has bad fortitude saves" doesn't hold water. As to the spells themselves, Flesh to Stone is just a glorified overleveled Slow spell that gives a slight bit more on a bad roll, and ends an encounter from a string of bad rolls, not something that's pretty guaranteed. Baleful Polymorph isn't much different from Flesh to Stone, it's just instead of Slowed it's Ray of Sickening (or whatever other low level spell is a single-target Sickened effect). This might not require a string of bad rolls, but it's still difficult enough to not be a reliable spell. Disjunction is uncommon, and targets items you may want as loot. Wizards might be radical enough to do this, but Bards wouldn't dare be that stupid. Shapechange only lasts a minute, and it's really only good for Battle Forms and stuff. It's nice for a prepared spellcaster who actually wants or needs to use a Battle Form, it's not so great otherwise. None of these spells would top a spell like Synesthesia when used in a combat situation. 1 minute of significant AC and Reflex Save loss, reduced speed, and flat checks on basically everything, is probably one of the biggest debuffs in the game, and it's much more reliable than anything in the Arcane spell list, Slow included. Even on a success, 1 round is definitely more than enough for your allies to capitalize on.
Let's say our PCs are mercenaries, and receive a contract to track down and defeat one of these "legendary" beings (should they still be around in PF2). If it turns out they're pushovers in-game because their overall power level and mechanics are junk, I feel like the players would feel underwhelmed at the apparent threat they were thrown. There was another spellcaster NPC baddie we fought in an AP that was basically the same way; with what we fought before, we expected a significant threat. When the combat started, we were pretty underwhelmed by the time the combat was over due to how big of a pushover they were. To me, the mechanics justify the lore and the flavor. When Razmir and Nex and Geb don't have mechanics within their class to justify their fabled stories, I can't make an aspiring rival or an usurper to compensate what the lore states they can do, because there are no mechanics for it. If I can't do it, how can they? Because Paizo says so? It just seems bizarre for you to work your character to be a legend, just for it to be actually impossible. It's a cheap trick. It's unfair. It's also a pile of shenanigans because if those 3 played by actual PC rules, they wouldn't be capable of the things the lore says they are. But I'm digressing...
Considering how strong of a spell Heal is, that alone definitely makes me go "Yup, Primal is a better spell list." If it was Soothe or something similar, I might be less inclined to view it as such, but let's be honest: Primal having good flexibility between blasting, utility, healing, and basically anything else under the sun is what makes it so strong. They don't really need spells like Wall of Force or Disjunction because they have other better spells to utilize. Like Heal, as one example.
I disagree. If one spell can do the work of several spells put together, then it's a very strong spell, and if its combination is so unique and powerful that no other list can match it? Yes, it definitely becomes better than any other spell list in the game. And since it gets something like Soothe (which isn't Heal, but close enough), it covers most every base you need. In short, Occult doesn't need Reflex save spells when Will save spells are the best to target. Plenty of Reflex creatures out there, and every creature has good Fortitude Saves, so who cares about using those spell types. And plus, as we've seen, Synesthesia is a Will save targeting spell. Meaning it has the best application on the most likely of targets. I don't see any spell within the Arcane spell list matching Synesthesia's power, and since Bards are the most powerful character in the game in a party setting, the only kind of setting that matters for the players, it's just pointless for a Wizard to exist on that front.
There is one other major issue with blasting, and that is friendly fire. Lines are very difficult to, you know, line up enemies with unless they're either stupid or in a very congested area, making them very hard to use whatsoever, and adding friendly fire into the mix does not work out at all. Bursts can be difficult if both enemies and allies are in the area, and can be negated with proper use of cover and avoidance. Cones are in a similar position, but also add an application of self harm at risk. That is, you're putting yourself well within arm's reach of enemies if the Cone does not kill them. Targeting spells are probably the least problematic of all of them, but a spell like Chain Lightning still has short range and also has the added element of flubbing up a great spell if a good roll is made early in the chain. There are little to no tools to help alleviate any of these concerns (even if at least yet), and a Wizard doesn't have any sort of tool outside of maybe Force Bolt to actually help with blasting. Maybe Spell Blending, but that requires sacrificing lower level utility spells to make happen, and it's not a guaranteed pick if other playstyles suit the fancy.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are no creatures, PC or otherwise, that have bad Fortitude saves, and creatures most likely to use it on will be higher level than you and be much stronger in the saves department, meaning that any counterargument of "X creature has bad fortitude saves" doesn't hold water.
No offense, but this suggests you don't know that much about the design of PF2 monsters. The majority of undead do, to start with, and there's a lot of creatures that also have it as their second-worst save, but only a point or two behind their worst (at high levels in B1, the Simurgh and Ancient Bronze/Blue Dragons are prime examples). A lot of NPCs do as well - the Tempest-Sun Mage, Cult Leader, and Assassin being obvious examples.
Yeah, fort is one of the worst saves in general. More things have better reflex (and that's still second fiddle to high AC).
bunch of anecdotes
cool stories...you do realize that black tentacles are also on arcane list?
Magic missile is far from a blast spell, shadow blast is the worst blast spell in the game....even worse than sound burst or weapon storm.
being an INT caster will get you bunch of good knowledge and lore skills to identify creatures and their resistances and weaknesses, so your argument that elemental damage is lame is totally wrong....usually monsters with immunities on 1 element also have a weakness in another.
WILL saves are best overall to attack, but only by a small margin compared to REF saves. Having no opportunities to attack 1 of 3 main defenses is a big deal.
cutting it short - There is almost no enemy that you can face in any of the books that occult list will handle better than arcane...same is true for most utility spells.
beside Soothe(which is much worse than heal as you hit higher levels) and Synesthesia, occult doesn't hold anything over arcane. That list is much longer if you look at it vice versa
You might prefer Occult over Arcane, that's totally valid, but Occult is not better...not even remotely.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It was always my impression that the arcane list has the most stuff in it, since you need to support all the different flavors of specialist wizards at all levels.
Probably "Access to the biggest spell list" is counted as a + in the wizard column by the devs.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
At first level, arcane has about 65 spells (I did a quick count, easily could have missed by one or two because there are so many). Primal has about 44, and occult has about 48. Divine has 27.
Arcane is definitely still the powerhouse of most spells. by a huge margin.
Wizards in particular don't have to cut the niche spells, because they can keep them in their spell book to memorize them when they are useful.
1st level is a good place to look too, because wizards can always heighten lower level spells once they know them, without having to waste space and time learning higher level versions of the spells they already know. Thus learning level 1 shocking grasp at level 5 of play is useful to the wizard, while learning it as a sorcerer is not so great unless you are ready to commit to making it a signature spell.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
At first level, arcane has about 65 spells (I did a quick count, easily could have missed by one or two because there are so many). Primal has about 44, and occult has about 48. Divine has 27.
Arcane is definitely still the powerhouse of most spells. by a huge margin.
Wizards in particular don't have to cut the niche spells, because they can keep them in their spell book to memorize them when they are useful.
1st level is a good place to look too, because wizards can always heighten lower level spells once they know them, without having to waste space and time learning higher level versions of the spells they already know. Thus learning level 1 shocking grasp at level 5 of play is useful to the wizard, while learning it as a sorcerer is not so great unless you are ready to commit to making it a signature spell.
While I agree the arcane tradition is good, your points about niche spells and heightening are true of all prepared casters. In fact clerics and druids have an advantage over wizards and witches, since the former automatically know most of the spells of their tradition.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
While I agree the arcane tradition is good, your points about niche spells and heightening are true of all prepared casters. In fact clerics and druids have an advantage over wizards and witches, since the former automatically know most of the spells of their tradition.
If you look to the strong points of others for your comparisons, you're always going to come up short.
Yes, Wizards don't get access to the entire Arcane spell list while Druids and Clerics get their entire lists... except, as noted by Unicore's numbers, Arcane is the size of both the Primary and Divine lists together when it comes to level 1 spells.
That's the advantage (theoretically greater spell diversity), and the associated disadvantage is having to collect those spells.
The strengths of others don't diminish your own strengths.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For clerics, having 27 potential instead of 65, or less than half, is a pretty big difference. Druids get more like 3/4 the spell options, but are also limited to being able to memorize about 3/4ths as many spells per day (with is also true of clerics for utility spells). This matters because a cleric or druid spending even one spell slot on an obscure utility spell per level is dropping to only 2 spells per level for other, more typical functions. for wizards it is a 1/4th reduction instead of a 1/3rd reduction in spell power.
This problem is compounded when you factor it that clerics and druids are much, much less likely to be able to make scrolls to supplement their daily spell allowance (requiring the crafting skill, a crafting skill feat, and likely not having any points spent in INT).
It is not difficult for a wizard to have a scroll or 4 of any useful utility spell that they might need, especially for lower level spells.
Clerics and Druids can buy such things directly, if your GM lets you, and you end up often in settlements selling them. I have found that easier in PFS, but much less frequent when playing APs.
Druids and clerics can provide a lot of utility options for the party, but really have to bend their character concept around quite a bit to provide that utility in practice. For wizards, you almost have to build against type not to provide that utility.
As a player of a cleric playing against type to provide the party with a lot of utility, it is possible, but it takes a lot of dedication to keep boosting skills and spending feats to keep up over levels.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean that use to be true before, not so much now. The numbers are now much more closer, and I think Arcane actually has the 2nd most at the moment. If someone could check the latest number that would be great.
D20pfsrd changed their layout for spells, so it is now REALLY easy for this kind of analysis. Some errors to be fixed, but on the whole a lot faster this time around. Unfortunately, unlike AoN, they don't include spells from AP issues, so this is an incomplete accounting (for instance, one of the recent AP issues had several divine poison spells). I'll add those in later at some point.
Arcane still has the most, at 334 of 510 non-focus spells in the game, total. Occult has 292, Primal 242, and Divine 186.
The overlap between Arcane and Occult is 207, Divine and Occult 123, Divine and Primal 74, and Arcane and Primal 159. These numbers include spells that are on 2, 3, and 4 lists. Assuming we can definitively assign spells that are shared between only 2 adjacent lists to an essence, we can assign 116 spells to Mental, 102 to Material, 23 to Life, and 38 to Spirit.
Arcane has 13 spells unique to it, Divine 27, Occult 28, and Primal 42. There are 27 spells common to all lists.
There are 140 focus spells of all classes.
There are 2 spells, Drop Dead and Admonishing ray, which is shared between only Arcane and Divine. There are 4 spells shared between only Primal and Occult: Blanket of Stars, Shatter, Summon Fey, and Threefold Aspect.
Edit: updated numbers to include AP spells.
Spell list doc
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vR_CCUExruy1mdFHD4GOPvf_YI3 8jtRqVqf4pkRNZr-kFYPdVdXRWkqzqNCeU89zFbMqMU3Ecv00d0w/pubhtml
link
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I was curious about Wizard casting vs Sorcerer casting. Looking only at quantity rather than versatility, and Lv 1-10 slots (Lv 10 not being referred to when I say "highest-level spells") instead of focus spells. "Lower levels" pretty much always means at least 2 levels below your highest level of slot.
Specialist Wizard: ★4th slots limited to school.
Universalist Wizard: ★no 4th slots. DBI is once a level.
★Drain Bonded Item (repeat a cast of any level)
8• Bond Conservation (metamagic to repeat more casts of lower level(s) after Drain Bonded Item)
10•Scroll Savant (2-4 free scrolls of different lower levels)
14•Superior Bond (extra use of DBI for a lower level)
18•Second Chance Spell (repeat an enchantment spell that did nothing on another target next turn)
18•Reprepare Spell (10 minutes to renew an instant Lv 4 or lower spell slot, Substitution can work)
20•Spell Mastery (4 spells of different levels always prepared with their own spell slots)
Total at 10: 20 slots+2 scrolls of lower levels, repeat 1 cast, metamagic to repeat lower cast(s) after repeating cast
or: 15 slots+2 scrolls of lower levels, repeat 5 casts, metamagic to repeat lower cast(s) after repeat(s)
Total at 20: 37 slots+4 scrolls of lower levels+1 2nd Lv 10 slot or 4 slots of different levels, repeat 1 cast*, metamagic to repeat lower cast(s) after repeating cast, repeat 1 cast of lower level, repeat ineffective enchantment spells or renew Lv 4 slots
or: 28 slots+4 scrolls of lower levels+1 2nd Lv 10 slot or 4 slots of different levels, repeat 9 casts*, metamagic to repeat lower cast(s) after repeat(s), repeat 1 cast of lower level, repeat ineffective enchantment spells or renew Lv 4 slots
(Repeat is not a real word anymore.)
Sorcerer: ★4th slots with no limits. (4th spells limited to bloodline, but not necessary to cast.)
4• Divine Evolution (extra highest level slot for Heal or Harm), or
4• Primal Evolution (extra highest level slot for Summon Animal/Plant/Fungi. No love for blasties :< )
16•Greater Vital Evolution (extra cast for two spell levels)
18•Echoing Spell (metamagic to repeat an instant Lv 4 or lower spell next turn)
20•Bloodline Conduit (metamagic to cast Lv 5 or lower spell for free, once/minute)
Total at 10: 20 slots+1 spell-limited slot
or: 20 slots
Total at 20: 37 slots+1 spell-limited slot*+2 different level slots+1 2nd Lv 10 slot or metamagic for free Lv 5 spell once/minute, metamagic for repeating Lv 4 spell
or: 37 slots+1 2nd Lv 10 slot or metamagic for free Lv 5 spell once/minute, metamagic for repeating Lv 4 spell
Overall, Wizards have many more options for casting extra slot spells, and they more heavily rely on repeating spells already cast. Divine and Primal Sorcerers have an analogue to Drain Bonded Item and Spell Mastery for highest-level slots via their respective Evolutions, but the first extra slot is spell-limited (and the Summons don't scale super well), Greater Vital Evolution is 2 spell levels instead of 4 (though they retain the ability to get Conduit or an extra Lv 10 slot), and they don't have an analogue to Spell Blending if the Wizard chooses that, or answers to all of the "lower level" options for Lv 8 and below slots. Universalist Wizards miss out on a highest-level slot but could potentially cast more lower-level slots, Arcane and Occult Sorcerers simply miss out on more casts. Both classes have endgame options to cast more ~Lv 4 spells, Wizard requiring time to renew them and Sorcerer needing to conserve them/pick good times to echo.
...then I got curious about other casters...
16•Studious Capacity (Enigma, extra cast for a spell level below highest)
Total at 10: 15 slots
Total at 20: 28 slots+1 2nd Lv 10 slot+1 slot
Cleric: no 4th slots.
★Divine Font (up to 6 highest-level heal or harm spells based on Charisma)
14•Ebb and Flow (metamagic to repeat 2-action heal/harm on different type of creature)
18•Echoing Channel (metamagic to add 1-action heal/harm at new target onto 2-action version)
Total at 10: 15 slots+0-4 highest-level heal/harm slots
Total at 20: 28 slots+1 2nd Lv 10 slot+0-6 Lv 9 heal/harm slots, metamagic to repeat 2-action heal/harm, metamagic to add 1-action heal/harm
Druid: no 4th slots.
20•Leyline Conduit (metamagic to cast Lv 5 or lower spell for free, once/minute)
Total at 10: 15 slots
Total at 20: 28 slots+1 2nd Lv 10 slot or metamagic for free Lv 5 spell once/minute
Oracle: no 4th slots.
18•Divine Effusion (extra cast for two spell levels)
20•Mystery Conduit (cast instant Lv 5 or lower spell as revelation spell, curse and all)
Total at 10: 15 slots
Total at 20: 28 slots+2 slots of different levels+1 2nd Lv 10 slot or metamagic for free Lv 5 spell once/minute
Witch: no 4th slots.
10•Temporary Potions (...kinda: 2-4 free potions/oils, which often have spell-like effects, 6 levels below)
16•Siphon Power (free cast of a spell one level below highest once/day)
Total at 10: 15 slots+2 pseudo-spells?
Total at 20: 28 slots+2 pseudo-spells?+1 2nd Lv 10 slot+1 slot
General Level 10 rankings: S. Wizard 23+var, U. Wizard 22+VAR, Sorcerer 20-21, Cleric 15-19, Witch 15/17, Bard/Druid/Oracle 15
General Level 20 rankings: S. Wizard 43-46+VAR+renewal, U. Wizard 42-45+BIGVAR+renewal, Sorcerer 37-41+free, Cleric 29-35+free, Oracle 31-30+free & Witch 30/32, Bard 30, Druid 29-28+free
General results: Most casters only start getting/differentiating extra casts after Lv 10. Before then, Clerics with high Charisma actually have the most slots at the earliest levels (how long they keep this advantage depends on how high the stat is), though with restricted spells, while Divine/Primal Sorcerers can gain a similarly restricted extra scaling slot, and Specialist Wizards tie with them until Lv 8, afterwards having the most potential/actual spells by a decent margin. Of course, casters with fewer spells tend to have more focus spells and other features to make up for it.
...and then I got curious about focus spell capabilities.
1•Familiar
4•Linked Focus (+1 FP when using DBI once/day)
14•Double Focus
Sorcerer: niche/poor quality to general/solid focus spells depending on bloodline. Starts with 1. Max 3 in-class.
1•Familiar
12•Double Focus
18•Triple Focus
Bard: absurd number of focus cantrips and spells, mostly solid, some very good (mostly for Maestro). Starts with 1 (Maestro 2) and a cantrip.
12•Double Focus
Champion: fairly general/solid focus spells with a notable martial bent, and domain spells. Starts with 1.
4• Desperate Prayer (+1 FP once/day)
10•Double Focus
Cleric: niche/poor quality to general/solid focus spells depending on domains. Cloistered starts with 1.
8• Surging Focus (+1 FP when ally hits 0 HP once/day)
12•Double Focus
18•Triple Focus
Druid: fairly general/solid focus spells. Starts with 1.
1• Familiar (for Leaf)
12•Double Focus
18•Triple Focus
Monk: fairly general/solid focus spells with a slight martial bent.
12•Double Focus
18•Ki Center (requires Stance Savant and MoMS, cast ki stance for free once/minute)
18•Triple Focus
Oracle: slightly niche to fairly general/solid focus spells with a little more power but a double edge, plus domains (also double-edged). Starts with 2.
11★Double Focus, 3 FP
17★Triple Focus
Ranger: niche to general/solid focus spells with a martial bent.
12•Warden Focus
18•Warden Wellspring
Witch: niche/poor quality to general/solid focus spells and cantrip depending on patron. Starts with 1 and the cantrip.
★Familiar
12•Hex Focus
18•Hex Wellspring
So, yeah. There's a direct inverse between number of slot spells able to be cast and quality/frequency of focus spells, with Champion being a little weird and Wizard being absolutely desolate. By extension, general satisfaction with PF2 spells varies wildly while most class-exclusive focus spells tend to be enjoyed. There's definitely more that could be done with Wizard feats and capabilities, but their bad focus casting seems intentional (even if not necessarily sensible (why do they have the worst refocus level all they do is study)). They're very clearly meant to leverage traditional slots across the full spectrum of levels more often than anyone else.
And, honestly, having looked over the numbers from a bird's eye view, it seems pretty much fine? Deadmanwalking has written homebrew that nicely addresses the focus spells and various other things, if that interests anyone. Classes struggling to appeal such as Wizard will probably get more cool stuff in the future to make up for it. I really need a nap. Hopefully this helped someone, somewhere.
Edit: OH MY GOD THIS IS AT THE BOTTOM OF A PAGE AGAIN I'M CURSED
Edit 2: Actually Themetricsystem reposted it for visibility which is very nice ;w; So I guess I'll stuff this post into spoilers to avoid excess length or overshadowing AnimatedPaper's post.