| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The problem with the Ability score enhancing spells in 2E is how valuable Ability score enhancement is. The Apex items in 2E are all 17th level items, whereas in 1st you'd be expected to start grabbing these items around 8th or so.
Having a spell available that granted the same benefit available too far earlier kind of negates their existence, unless that spell had a Very short duration.
Paizo has largely gone away from the crazy buff stacking meta game that dominated PF1. So it stands to reason that Ability score shenanigans went with untyped bonuses.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They are basically trying to reduce the number of buffs a character can have and avoid the stat insanity of PF1: You can get a single stat to 24 now (with an item boost) and maybe a couple of 20/21s, but that's it.
Outside of the Apex items, direct bonuses to stats do not seem to have any place in PF2.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Those spells could be remade in a way that doesn't touch ability scores directly, and affect what you do instead.
For example, Bull's Strength could grant +1 status bonus on melee damage and Athletics checks.
The enhancement spells such as bull's strength and cat's grace always stuck out to me as a weird omission considering how classic those spells are. I am interested in the reason why they are not in the game. Is it because heroism exists? do the designers wish to crack down on the arcane list somewhat? did they just pass over on it and we will see it in secrets of magic? ;)
It's because the ability to buff your character in general was several toned down/removed.
You will find most buff spells give way less bonus than they used to, and many were outright removed so they couldn't be stacked, in addition to reducing the number of possible bonus types to further prevent stacking.
So why aren't ability enhancement spells a thing? Well, because there was no room left in terms of bonus types and overall quantity.
For the intended balance of the game, they can't exist.
Edit: I guess they could exist, but probably as 1st level spells that gave status bonus (can't stack with heroism) and would do something like:
Strength: +1 status to melee attack rolls
Dex: +1 status to ranged attack
Con: +1 status to fort
Int/Cha: +1 status to skills
Wis: +1 status to perception
So...basically lesser heorism.
For the intended balance of the game, they can't exist.
Edit: I guess they could exist, but probably as 1st level spells that gave status bonus (can't stack with heroism) and would do something like:
Strength: +1 status to melee attack rolls
Dex: +1 status to ranged attack
Con: +1 status to fort
Int/Cha: +1 status to skills
Wis: +1 status to perceptionSo...basically lesser heorism.
I think an argument can be made that these spells can be slotted in at level 2 and make each one less all encompassing as heroism but stronger in its focus.
Strength: +1 status to str based attack rolls, athletics and melee damage.
Dex: +1 status to dex based attacks, skills and reflex saves.
Con: +1 status to fort saves, death flat checks and level in temp hp
Int/Cha: +1 status to skills, spell attacks and dc.
Wis: +1 status to perception, skills, will saves, spell attacks and dc.This seems like a fair attempt at the spell. spell attack and dc is abit of a questionable point but i think we can agree spellcasters need a spell attack booster.
Increases to spell DC will never happen most likely. Except that, I agree with this.
They could even have a heightened version that lasts a lot (1h or more).
For the intended balance of the game, they can't exist.
Edit: I guess they could exist, but probably as 1st level spells that gave status bonus (can't stack with heroism) and would do something like:
Strength: +1 status to melee attack rolls
Dex: +1 status to ranged attack
Con: +1 status to fort
Int/Cha: +1 status to skills
Wis: +1 status to perceptionSo...basically lesser heorism.
I think an argument can be made that these spells can be slotted in at level 2 and make each one less all encompassing as heroism but stronger in its focus.
Strength: +1 status to str based attack rolls, athletics and melee damage.
Dex: +1 status to dex based attacks, skills and reflex saves.
Con: +1 status to fort saves, death flat checks and level in temp hp
Int/Cha: +1 status to skills, spell attacks and dc.
Wis: +1 status to perception, skills, will saves, spell attacks and dc.This seems like a fair attempt at the spell. spell attack and dc is abit of a questionable point but i think we can agree spellcasters need a spell attack booster.
Agree with the previous poster that said no spell attacks and DC, even heorism doesn't do that. In fact nothing does that, so that's a big no.
I also don't like what you've done because it make the various version very imbalanced against each other. Also, heorism doesn't add to damage, so I don't think str should either.
Maybe you could do a second level version that does more than one thing, but I think it still basically needs to fall under the things heroism already does.
That or increase the amount of people. Buffs in 2e seem to only last a minute.Increases to spell DC will never happen most likely. Except that, I agree with this.
They could even have a heightened version that lasts a lot (1h or more).
That's pretty intentional, buffs aren't supposed to last a long time. I think a heightened version which affects multiple targets is more likely than a version that last more than 1 minute.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's pretty intentional, buffs aren't supposed to last a long time. I think a heightened version which affects multiple targets is...
I thing there should be design space for both strong buffs that you are supposed to cast mid combat and weak buffs you can precast safely.
Look at second level longstrider. Great buff, last 8 hours. I don't see why a 4th or 5th level version of this kind of concept couldn't last for an hour or so.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well Heroism affects all attack rolls, so that includes Spell Attack rolls. Spell DC however is probably a big no.
That's pretty intentional, buffs aren't supposed to last a long time. I think a heightened version which affects multiple targets is...I thing there should be design space for both strong buffs that you are supposed to cast mid combat and weak buffs you can precast safely.
Look at second level longstrider. Great buff, last 8 hours. I don't see why a 4th or 5th level version of this kind of concept couldn't last for an hour or so.
Mostly because Longstrider don't directly increase combat power. Put something that increase +1 to melee attack rolls and now players will always have that up and become a spell tax.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well Heroism affects all attack rolls, so that includes Spell Attack rolls. Spell DC however is probably a big no.
Mostly because Longstrider don't directly increase combat power. Put something that increase +1 to melee attack rolls and now players will always have that up and become a spell tax.That's pretty intentional, buffs aren't supposed to last a long time. I think a heightened version which affects multiple targets is...I thing there should be design space for both strong buffs that you are supposed to cast mid combat and weak buffs you can precast safely.
Look at second level longstrider. Great buff, last 8 hours. I don't see why a 4th or 5th level version of this kind of concept couldn't last for an hour or so.
In which way having a +10 to speed is not a combat boost? It allows you to outspeed some enemies, allowing to stride, strike at melee and stride back and force them to take 2 actions to move towards you. Or to just "kite" an enemy while attacking at range.
Heroism is not a tax, and it is much powerful when heightened.
In a world when you can give a single ally a +1 to hit for an hour using a let's say 5th level spell, wouldn't you just cast Synesthesia or a Wall of Stone?
IMO it would help to bring other classes near the buffing power of Bards.
Heroism covers quite a lot and my version is to keep to the classic design of those spells in being focused on increasing a stat, Inspire confidence increases damage so i see no problem in bull's strength doing the same for melee attacks.
I don't mean any offense but your level 1 spell just seems really dull and not what i would want from a bulls/cats/eagle etc spell.
The spell attack and DCs are give or take as i said. I still believe spellcasters do need some kind of accuracy buff.
I mean, if I'm honest this is just another facet of PF2 I dislike. But I do think my suggestion is better balanced when compared to other spells that are already available, compared to your suggestion.
Yes it's boring. So are most of the buff spells in PF2 (IMO).
That's pretty intentional, buffs aren't supposed to last a long time. I think a heightened version which affects multiple targets is...I thing there should be design space for both strong buffs that you are supposed to cast mid combat and weak buffs you can precast safely.
Look at second level longstrider. Great buff, last 8 hours. I don't see why a 4th or 5th level version of this kind of concept couldn't last for an hour or so.
The simple answer is that longstrider isn't really comparable in effect as pluses to attack/damage.
And you also have to remember that extra speed is only situationally useful. Inside a room, it doesn't help much. Against enemies that are naturally faster, it's just getting you back on par.
I wonder if buff spells could be introduced that are more powerful than the current math expects, but requires the caster to maintain them with 2 actions per round, or something similar.
It'd be awfully nice to have the ability do those "mega buff" moments once in a while at some significant cost.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder if buff spells could be introduced that are more powerful than the current math expects, but requires the caster to maintain them with 2 actions per round, or something similar.
It'd be awfully nice to have the ability do those "mega buff" moments once in a while at some significant cost.
No.
Paizo took them out quite purposefully. They could have made it so the math factors those in, yet that then would be the normal maximum build, which would lead to the discrepancies between parties based on system mastery that we saw in PF1, rather than tactical mastery.Having made maximum use of commando runs in PF1 where you clean a level during one or two extended Haste spells w/ half your spells precast w/ Extend Rods, I can say I appreciate not having mega-buff moments because they become the norm to strive for, which IMO kinda ruins the meta and breaks the balance.
---
Separately, I've tried to think of the meta-narrative of the current absence of low-midlevel stat boosters as being a side effect of these stats boosts at 5th/10th/etc. So I pretend those are Enhancement bonus that don't stack with standard items (and need the powerful Apex items to stack upon). With NPC money, it'd only be the very highest level ones (w/ exceptions) buying stat items that have a higher bonus than that gained by levels, and there aren't too many of those on Golarion.
So the previous stat item/stat spell market went bust due to this new, empowerment mortals have found through themselves...somehow.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder if buff spells could be introduced that are more powerful than the current math expects, but requires the caster to maintain them with 2 actions per round, or something similar.
It'd be awfully nice to have the ability do those "mega buff" moments once in a while at some significant cost.
No.
Paizo took them out quite purposefully. They could have made it so the math factors those in, yet that then would be the normal maximum build, which would lead to the discrepancies between parties based on system mastery that we saw in PF1, rather than tactical mastery.Having made maximum use of commando runs in PF1 where you clean a level during one or two extended Haste spells w/ half your spells precast w/ Extend Rods, I can say I appreciate not having mega-buff moments because they become the norm to strive for, which IMO kinda ruins the meta and breaks the balance.
---
Separately, I've tried to think of the meta-narrative of the current absence of low-midlevel stat boosters as being a side effect of these stats boosts at 5th/10th/etc. So I pretend those are Enhancement bonus that don't stack with standard items (and need the powerful Apex items to stack upon). With NPC money, it'd only be the very highest level ones (w/ exceptions) buying stat items that have a higher bonus than that gained by levels, and there aren't too many of those on Golarion.
So the previous stat item/stat spell market went bust due to this new, empowerment mortals have found through themselves...somehow.
Nah, I disagree. I think there's definitely room for it, the more I think about it.
You already have variable action spells and spells like bless which get better the more you invest in them.
I'm willing to bet a more powerful buff that makes you sacrifice your turn and has a short duration would be doable. That would significantly help the buffing focused characters who are suffering right now without having any decent shining moments.
If I was going to do it, I would do it something like this:
Traditions divine, primal Cast 2 somatic, verbal Range touch Targets 1 creature Duration sustained up to 1 minute.
The creature touched gains an 18 to one Ability Score stated by the Caster when the spell is cast. This spell has no effect if the creature already has an 18 or higher in the stated ability. The Boosted stat is considered a Status bonus so you can only benefit from one spell at a time IE they will not stack nor will this spell stack with Apex Items.
The big issue with Bull's Strength and its ilk is that they provide a bonus to ability scores which then cascade on to affect other things. That's a bunch of needless complexity. I don't know of anything else which does that at "run-time" (stuff you do in the middle of a session, as opposed to things like apex items you generally handle at downtime). The closest things, as people have noted, are mutagens, and they instead note a number of specified things they do affect.
There's also the more general issue of PF2 being rather buff-hostile as part of its tighter math, but that also applies to the lack of other classic buffs like Prayer or Aid.
I'd be happy to see these things as buffs, by that I mean just status bonuses as has been suggested elsewhere in this thread. That means they would clash with other similar status bonuses and not effect balance much.
Increasing ability score would affect balance and complexity. But there are enough things already that modify ability based checks - such as sickened and stupified conditions - that status buffs there would not be anything more complex.
|
I like that the OP put "in a heroism world" in there, because that puts the spotlight on why the answer is going to be "kinda no".
If these spells existed they'd be status bonuses to specific kinds of checks, just like mutagens (but status bonus, not item bonus). They wouldn't stack with heroism because they're both status bonuses.
Also, Heroism is already at the peak duration for "combat numbers" buffs. At the very significant 10m duration, meaning you can't do two encounters with a (healing) break in between. That doesn't look like a coincidence.
Yes, there are some other spells that last longer, like boosted Water Walking or Longstrider. But those also have overland travel applications. And while speed in combat is super good to have, it's not quite an "opposed" number in the way that to-hit, saves, AC and spell attacks/DCs are. So it seems there's a bit more leeway for longer buffs that don't affect opposed numbers.
Buffing exists in 2E and anyone who only sometimes plays with a bard knows that a +1 is a lot in this game. But the amount of difference there is supposed to be between buffed and unbuffed is deliberately kept small, starting at just about a +1 and eventually widening a bit more to +3 by endgame levels. (Incidentally, by then differences between classes have also widened. I expect the endgame will feel like escalation.)
Looking at the alchemist items also gives an insight into the design philosophy. The boosts you can get from these items are typically just +1 above what you could get from permanent items available around the same levels.
So... is there a place for bull's strength and friends? Maybe.. but they'd be very limited, and wouldn't stack with heroism. So you'd have to come up with a clever design that makes them work a bit harder in their small corner, but not too much harder because at any given ceiling there's a definite ceiling for what you can get as a bonus.
A for example L2 bull's strength could do a +1 status bonus to melee attack, +1 status to melee damage, +1 status to Athletics. Probably for a minute or so. It's kinda sandwiched between inspire courage which doesn't cost you spells per day, but needs to be renewed every round, and heroism which lasts longer but doesn't help damage.
Yeah, I think you can find a corner to squeeze these spells into, but you have to calibrate your expectations. Non-stacking of buffs is a deliberate design goal. One I like personally. As much as I enjoyed playing my PF1 investigator that ran ~7 buffs at the same time and scared the beejeezus out of same-level barbarians, it was not at all a balanced character and also not beginner-friendly. The gap between beginner, medium and optimized was extreme. Also, if I hadn't played the character in a few months I pretty much had to do my homework to remember how all of it worked. This sort of multilayer buff complexity is something PF2 deliberately tossed out of the window.
PF2's design is much more "there's more than one way to do it" than "you should stack all the ways to do it".
I think if we do see similar spells in PF2 they will have several of the following traits, if not all:
-simpler math; as noted above, additions to stats leads to a waterfall of calculations. The spells will instead give specific bonuses.
-shorter durations; nothing that can be pre-buffed, this could also be achieved by...
-Sustained: so that the spells essentially balances well w/ Aid
-weak; like Bless, which I find a poor spell. Seldom are my groups so tightly packed so it'd take several rounds to get going on what's a minor bonus (which means Aid would likely have been a better plan!)
-non-stacking; because math. I think the net gain will be about +1 for those already at peak levels (so they may just be mini-Heroisms as others have noted), though I do think there's space for the suggestion above for the buffs to give set bonuses like "18 in a stat".
In fact, PF2's quite generous in methods to get from poor ability to average ability (if a bit class-centered for getting from average to excellent). I could see all 6 spells returning if they took the form of giving you a 14 in a stat! (or its equivalent, as PF2 avoids multiple step accounting in its temporary numbers) And maybe ramping up to 16 and later 18 when Heightened, maybe even 20 at 9th+ level.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Another thought is the spells, rather than set a main stat (with all the accounting) could set stats much like form spells do.
So Bear's Endurance might set one's Fortitude save to a specific number that's level appropriate, and would increase as the spell's heightened. The number would be competitive (like the form spells are), yet not at the top of curve (like say a high Con character in a class with strong Fort saves). So PCs with lower Con or in classes with poor Fort saves would benefit (and those with both would by quite a bit), yet none would break the balance curves.
That'd take care of three of the stats: Dex, Con, & Wis.
Maybe Str could give set athletics/Bulk, Int give set Everything Lore, and Charisma set Deception/Diplomacy/Intimidation numbers.
All balanced in a similar fashion to the above, where they can't overtake anybody invested in such abilities, yet could possibly patch up a weakness well (or very well if abysmal!).
Having second thoughts about heightening if these spells can be cast on other people because if cast on lower level schmucks the bonuses might be a bit extreme. That doesn't matter much inside most parties, yet NPCs matter in many campaigns.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Having second thoughts about heightening if these spells can be cast on other people because if cast on lower level schmucks the bonuses might be a bit extreme. That doesn't matter much inside most parties, yet NPCs matter in many campaigns.
No, no, I like this. Even the potential for high level shenanigans when cast on lower level targets.
Given proficiency, you still won't be able to go too crazy with it, but it might be fun for an enemy to say cast Bear's strength on a commoner and give them semi-competence for a few rounds.
Heck, go ahead and make them polymorph or morph spells. There's natural limits already set up with those traits.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The classic six, reconfigured for PF2.
Transmutation, Morph (very likely most are on most spell lists)
Range: touch, one target
2-action casting, 1 minute duration (as per most buffs)
In all cases the following stats get set to a fixed, level-appropriate number; I'll leave the final numbers to Paizo as they should have the progression curves mapped out. The target's actual ability score does not get altered, i.e. Bull's Strength doesn't change one's Strength score.
Bull's Strength: Athletics and Bulk/lifting. (Maybe) melee damage.
Cat's Grace: Reflex and Acrobatics
Bear's Endurance: Fort Save and temp h.p.
Fox's Cunning: Everything Lore*
Owl's Wisdom: Will Saves and Perception
Eagle's Splendor: Deception, Diplomacy, and (maybe) Intimidation
*that seems broad enough despite being "one" thing.
Heightening would likely remain at one target, though I suppose the progression could be like Resist Energy's (a definite must-have spell from PF1) where you add targets while boosting numbers. And if you're shoring up weaker stats, hopefully there aren't too many targets getting great use!