| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
All of the above, depending on the proportion of spell slots, I'm great single target or AOE damage, battlefield control absolutely exists, debuffs are great too.
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
Be right back, creating a "what is the job of a champion" thread with the argument that since smite evil doesn't let you instantly obliterate any evil thing you choose, now champions are out of a job.
That said, wizard job is whatever they choose. Enervation has proven to be a hilariously good damaging spell, fear is a nice cheap AoE debilitation, phantasmal killer is the bridge between the two. Resilient sphere can still baby-timeout someone, fireball can still blast people, hideous laughter is still great against fighters.
Battlefield control still totally exists, wall spells still do their job, and invisibility is still a very strong spell.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you are looking for an explicitly carved out and defined role for the Wizard in the overall position of the game, sadly you won't really find one.
Paizo haven't really given Wizards overall a niche, nor do they bring anything overly tangible in overall terms.
In a given party, especially in your party, a Wizard can bring all sorts of things depending on the overall composition of the group. However, Wizards are neither specifically nor explicitly good at anything in particular.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm puzzled by these references to debuffs. None of the conditions (prone, frightened, dazed, etc.) have any effect on saves, right? And even if they did, the maximum effect is -1 since they don't stack. Spending two rounds to work up an attack combo with a -1 save penalty seems like a lot of effort that's still likely to fail. Debuff spells have the same problem already mentioned: they allow a save (low and fixed DC), and therefore don't work.
I recognize that it's best to target different spells to different save types, but Knowledges are gone too, so we don't know what an enemy's weakness might be unless we waste a round trying to figure it out (and usually failing, according to the DCs).
The wizard in our group spends every combat doing the same thing; two actions to cast an attack spell that fails, then third action to move or cast Shield (which is a pointless gesture, since +1 AC never matters to the enemy's overwhelming attack bonuses). She almost never takes down an enemy apart from the occasional low-level goon who's already weakened by the party's actual combatants (the warrior classes). It's kinda frustrating.
Just the fact that you don't know how conditions work undermines a lot of your arguments.
My friend's Necromancer did really well across 11 levels despite him not being a particularly minmaxer player. He casually picked spells and didn't plan ahead in his build/spell selection at all, but his character still did a lot of really important stuff.
He wasn't particularly worse than anyone else in boss fights. In fact, the worst class by far against bosses was our Alchemist, that had critical failures even when rolling 5 sometimes, which made their pitiful impact nonexistent.
Wizards, and casters in general, lost a lot of their broken utility that invalidated lots of classes or negated encounters entirely (Black Tentacles, anyone?), but they gained a lot of consistency AND damage.
The thing is that spellcasters were way too strong previously, specially with the s!!%ty Big 6, that for casters translated into saving money to invest everything in my casting stat and nothing else, making so that my saving throws are above the curve), but now they're more tame. It's still not at the point where I would want them, mind you, because Paizo went overboard on the culling (less utility, less spells lots, less unique features, creatures with consistent saves, all of these contributes with de-powering magic).
Nevertheless, it's sufficient to say that magic as a whole has been nerfed, that's undeniable, but casters are doing really fine in terms of overall power level (damage and utility, with the former being buffed and the later nerfed), the issue with them stems more of a lack of unique features, since they watered down a lot of class features that engaged with magic schools and other stuff. Their feats also are lackluster, not in utility or power (some are just awful), but in how little the make Spellcasters different from each other (some classes are exception though and that's why people like them).
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm puzzled by these references to debuffs. None of the conditions (prone, frightened, dazed, etc.) have any effect on saves, right? And even if they did, the maximum effect is -1 since they don't stack. Spending two rounds to work up an attack combo with a -1 save penalty seems like a lot of effort that's still likely to fail. Debuff spells have the same problem already mentioned: they allow a save (low and fixed DC), and therefore don't work.
I recognize that it's best to target different spells to different save types, but Knowledges are gone too, so we don't know what an enemy's weakness might be unless we waste a round trying to figure it out (and usually failing, according to the DCs).
The wizard in our group spends every combat doing the same thing; two actions to cast an attack spell that fails, then third action to move or cast Shield (which is a pointless gesture, since +1 AC never matters to the enemy's overwhelming attack bonuses). She almost never takes down an enemy apart from the occasional low-level goon who's already weakened by the party's actual combatants (the warrior classes). It's kinda frustrating.
I think you misunderstand the rules a bit. Frightened condition imposes a penalty on everything including saves. Casting a 1st level Fear against an enemy and them failing means a -2 to everything (saves, attacks, AC, etc), which is quite potent. Sickened works the same way too. Other conditions harm specific abilities, which in turn lower those abilities' DCs such as Drained for Fortitude and Clumsy for Reflex saves. Besides debuffing DCs, many debuff spells target other things such as reducing their speed, knocking them prone, making them flat-footed, blinding them (nasty condition), immobilizing them, slowing them (slow spell is so good), etc. I wouldn't write off debuff spells or abilities as they are very strong.
Most debuff spells still cause an effect if the creature saves, which is still really nice. Casting slow on a boss only for them to save is still good. Taking an action away from can save your party from a nasty 3-action combo or for caster bosses, means the boss has to choose between casting a spell and staying still, or not casting so they can move.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would also say gust of wind and grease are amazing low level spells, that continue to be useful into high level. They don't need to heightened since they dont interact with incapacitation and while some of the utility lessens( i.e flying creatures can avoid grease) other aspects of it remain universal, such as greasing an opponents weapon, i've also seen gust of wind completely immobilize enemies, and in one hilarious encounter the party wizard knocked several pirates over board their ship with gust of wind ( and constantly brings down flying enemies with it.
Conditions are incredibly powerful in this edition. and knowledge absolutely do exist, arcana, occultism, nature, crafting, religion, and society can all be used to identify creatures as well as lore skills.
Anyway, the wizard's job is not that different from any arcane caster. Arcane tradition gives you access to most spells outside of healing, so that means AOE damage spells, buffs, debuffs, control spells, utility spells, etc. The Wizard has tools to handle most situations in combat besides healing an ally.
You need some AOE blasting, the wizard can do that. You need some debuffs, the wizard can do that. You need some battlefield manipulation (the wall spells for example), the wizard can do that. You need some buffs, the wizard can do that too. Outside of combat, the wizard can provide some magical utility too, especially with time to prepare ahead. Are you going to do a heist? Great, the wizard can prepare some thematic spells to help.
There are going to be people in thread hating on wizards, but don't let that discourage you. Sure, they are weaker than in PF1E, but all casters were nerfed in PF2E. I wouldn't mind wizards getting some better feats and better focus spells, but the arcane spell list is still good at anything besides healing. Wizards aren't the top dogs for casters (probably thats the bard), but they aren't useless either.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wait, does Obscuring Mist blocks line of sight ?
I thought it only concealed people in it or on the other side of it, but it's "just" a DC 5 check to hit. Am I missing something ?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm puzzled by these references to debuffs. None of the conditions (prone, frightened, dazed, etc.) have any effect on saves, right? And even if they did, the maximum effect is -1 since they don't stack. Spending two rounds to work up an attack combo with a -1 save penalty seems like a lot of effort that's still likely to fail. Debuff spells have the same problem already mentioned: they allow a save (low and fixed DC), and therefore don't work.
I recognize that it's best to target different spells to different save types, but Knowledges are gone too, so we don't know what an enemy's weakness might be unless we waste a round trying to figure it out (and usually failing, according to the DCs).
The wizard in our group spends every combat doing the same thing; two actions to cast an attack spell that fails, then third action to move or cast Shield (which is a pointless gesture, since +1 AC never matters to the enemy's overwhelming attack bonuses). She almost never takes down an enemy apart from the occasional low-level goon who's already weakened by the party's actual combatants (the warrior classes). It's kinda frustrating.
I didn't see anyone mention this but Flat Footed stacks with other condition because it's a circumstance penalty and the other conditions are status penalties. That frequently means an easy +3/+15% chance to hit/crit. Separately, without getting into the specific debuffs like clumsy,etc. Frightened gives a -1 to all checks and DCs which includes saving throws and AC.
You mentioned a cleric in the party so guidance or bless could add another +1 to spell attack rolls.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Frighten is likely one of the best debuffs in the game, stackable too.
So a Sorcerer could spend one action to demoralize and then cast fear to try and get someone to Frighten 3 or even more.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is no niche for Wizard. They're just a spell dispensary, except other classes do it all better.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you're looking for lower level battlefield control, don't write off Illusory object, either, as a spell that gets really good really fast. Remember, creatures need to spend an action closely examining or interacting with an illusion before they get a save to try to disbelieve it. And if enemies always try to disbelieve illusions without, say, someone walking through them first, but never test other spells for an illusory nature, that isn't the system at work, but a faulty GM.
Frighten is likely one of the best debuffs in the game, stackable too.
So a Sorcerer could spend one action to demoralize and then cast fear to try and get someone to Frighten 3 or even more.
I thought this too, but the numeric conditions don't stack in value, they can just both be running with different durations.
I was certain for ages that you could demoralise, then use fear, but I don't think you actually can. I'd love to be shown where in the rules it says that you can stack frightened levels.
Redundant Conditions with Values
Conditions with different values are considered different conditions. If you’re affected by a condition with a value multiple times, you apply only the highest value, although you might have to track both durations if one has a lower value but lasts longer. For example, if you had a slowed 2 condition that lasts 1 round and a slowed 1 condition that lasts for 6 rounds, you’d be slowed 2 for the first round, and then you’d change to slowed 1 for the remaining 5 rounds of the second effect’s duration. If something reduces the condition value, it reduces it for all conditions of that name affecting you. For instance, in this example above, if something reduced your slowed value by 1, it would reduce the first condition from the example to slowed 1 and reduce the second to slowed 0, removing it.
Frighten is likely one of the best debuffs in the game, stackable too.
So a Sorcerer could spend one action to demoralize and then cast fear to try and get someone to Frighten 3 or even more.I thought this too, but the numeric conditions don't stack in value, they can just both be running with different durations.
I was certain for ages that you could demoralise, then use fear, but I don't think you actually can. I'd love to be shown where in the rules it says that you can stack frightened levels.
Redundant Conditions with Values
Conditions with different values are considered different conditions. If you’re affected by a condition with a value multiple times, you apply only the highest value, although you might have to track both durations if one has a lower value but lasts longer. For example, if you had a slowed 2 condition that lasts 1 round and a slowed 1 condition that lasts for 6 rounds, you’d be slowed 2 for the first round, and then you’d change to slowed 1 for the remaining 5 rounds of the second effect’s duration. If something reduces the condition value, it reduces it for all conditions of that name affecting you. For instance, in this example above, if something reduced your slowed value by 1, it would reduce the first condition from the example to slowed 1 and reduce the second to slowed 0, removing it.
Oh, I see. Thank you.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Instead of arguing about it, I will tell a couple of stories about how the wizard in our party has learned to be an essential part of the team and how it has really helped our party excell.
We have a party of 4 playing through Age of Ashes. We have come close to a TPK twice, because the encounter distribution in the early books is pretty brutal, but we still have 2 of our original party members alive and have had one PC death and a couple of retirees.
Our current party composition is Cleric, Rogue, Champion, Wizard.
Almost boringly traditional, and yet only the wizard really plays like what people think of in a traditional party. We are currently level 8.
At this level we do a masterful job of controlling the battlefield, drawing multiple encounters into a killzone, and then laying on thick AoE damage and sniper fire, with a melee wall that is nearly unkillable and really good at killing evil things. The rogue is an arcane archer with tanglefoot as his cantrip and the cleric is a beast master just turned shadowdancer. We are not hyper optimized. Our choices mostly come from narrative decisions we have been presented along the way that build off of where our GM has taken us with down time options.
But we do a really good job of supporting each other in play and it lets us destroy encounters, even against enemies a level or two ahead of us by themselves.
The cleric uses greater darkness to cover the back line of the party in darkness that gives us concealment, even against foes with darkvision.
The rogue leads with a tanglefoot arrow from concealment that often crits on a 15+ and at least hits almost every major encounter, because he is willing to spend a hero point on it when it misses. This will almost always leave the enemy wasting at least 1 action (often 2) before they are going to be able to move on their own. With the Champion moving into position to protect the party, the cleric giving all the weak targets concealment, and the rogue acting as battle field control, the wizard gets to decide if AoE attacking multi enemies is the best option, or debuff/damaging one enemy is more valuable. Fireball, lightning bolt and enervation are his favorites for AoE, and Acid Arrow, magic missile, Slow, and Phantasmal Killer are his favorites for single target damage/debuffing.
At level 7 we had slightly less powerful defenses, but could still drop a level +1 monster to half dead with a single shot from the rogue, and leave that enemy with no actions to do anything meaningful before we cleaned up the next round. We get lots of crits because we usually attack from hiding and then benefit when the enemy tries to come to us in force with snares, AoE, and a paladin Chomping at the bit to smite.
I think that wizards ability to do effective single target damage is wildly undervalued on these message boards, and it is less effective than a pure martial destroyer, but that doesn't factor in how much battlefield control and tactics can make it so that enemies are never able to get close in PF2.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am not sure I see the full value of concealment. Maybe we just had poor rolls but flat DC 5 to miss doesn't seem so good ?
DC 5 to miss is definitely helpful, though still not that high. Having concealment also adds Hide to the list of things you could do with 1 action to protect yourself, which can be good.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am not sure I see the full value of concealment. Maybe we just had poor rolls but flat DC 5 to miss doesn't seem so good ?
When you are facing enemies that can hit on a 4 or a 5, you are basically making them have to roll 2x to attack. It is most valuable against enemies that can attack with very powerful attacks. Also greater darkness gives a DC 11 flat check against those few foes without darkvision, and the darkness domain greater spell takes away darkvision from enemies, even for one round on a success, at 60ft. It is a pretty nasty way to flip the script on a solo monster.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
DC 5 to miss is definitely helpful, though still not that high. Having concealment also adds Hide to the list of things you could do with 1 action to protect yourself, which can be good.
It also lets the rogue alternate rounds of firing a couple of times and then hiding, and then unleashing an eldritch shot with sneak attack. Concealment is very good for snipers.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The cleric uses greater darkness to cover the back line of the party in darkness that gives us concealment, even against foes with darkvision.
That would debuff the back line too: "treat targets seen through the darkness as concealed" works both ways. So for instance, that rogue with "that often crits on a 15+" also has to roll vs the DC 5 to miss.
I see, I did misunderstood how it worked then. Wasn't sure you could Hide in your Obscuring Mist for example.
Makes me wonder, if someone is Blinded, is there something like greater concealment or something?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The cleric uses greater darkness to cover the back line of the party in darkness that gives us concealment, even against foes with darkvision.That would debuff the back line too: "treat targets seen through the darkness as concealed" works both ways. So for instance, that rogue with "that often crits on a 15+" also has to roll vs the DC 5 to miss.
Not if the rogue chooses blind fighting as their level 8 feat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No one really has a role or job any more. You can make whatever group you want and probably find a way to survive in PF2. There are more optimal groups than others where you'll have an easier time, but nothing is a must and no one has a job. The closest to a job might be the player who takes Medicine to make bookkeeping between fights easier. But you can have multiple people take Medicine.
Wizard can be part of a group just fine. I'd build the wizard with a multiclass archetype myself and make sure to use a weapon for the lower levels. Wizard kind of boring but his spells work well enough. If you're not trying to avoid using a weapon, you should be able to build an effective damage dealer or caster.
But as far as roles go, make what you want. Any party works as long as someone gets Medicine and has a heal or two at lower level to get you through those tough levels where one or two hits can take you down. The more you level, the less you need in combat healing. You can all focus on being decent at offense, then do out of combat Medicine healing during downtime and refocus periods.
I wouldn't get caught up in the idea of jobs or roles. They really don't exist in PF2.
I see, I did misunderstood how it worked then. Wasn't sure you could Hide in your Obscuring Mist for example.
Makes me wonder, if someone is Blinded, is there something like greater concealment or something?
If your foe is blinded, and has no additional senses for perception, the best they can do with a perception check is make a target hidden to them.
Not if the rogue chooses blind fighting as their level 8 feat.The cleric uses greater darkness to cover the back line of the party in darkness that gives us concealment, even against foes with darkvision.That would debuff the back line too: "treat targets seen through the darkness as concealed" works both ways. So for instance, that rogue with "that often crits on a 15+" also has to roll vs the DC 5 to miss.
On, that's the rogue... Is he the only back line person in the darkness?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
On, that's the rogue... Is he the only back line person in the darkness?Not if the rogue chooses blind fighting as their level 8 feat.The cleric uses greater darkness to cover the back line of the party in darkness that gives us concealment, even against foes with darkvision.That would debuff the back line too: "treat targets seen through the darkness as concealed" works both ways. So for instance, that rogue with "that often crits on a 15+" also has to roll vs the DC 5 to miss.
I am the cleric, I have greater darkvison from being a shadow dancer. The darkvision spell lasts an hour. The wizard is usually fine with darkvision and using AoE abilities, or moving out of the darkness when they want to use a single target ability.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Apart from AC, bosses are meant to have 3 different saves :
-Good
-Moderate
-LowThis even without considering debuffs.
In either AoA and EC, for example, bosses have an average chance to fail a saving throw.
To give you an example, the last one my party fought by lvl 8 ( spell DC = 10+8+4+4 = 26 and spell hit +16 ) had these stats:
AC 30; Fort +17, Ref +23, Will +20
So, 40% chances to fail a fortitude one, 10% chances to fail a reflex one, 25% chances to fail a will save and a 30% chance to be hit with a spell attack ).
Unless you know what the boss's saves are in advance (which is pretty unlikely since the first you see of them is usually the boss fight and they may well not have the same save spread as their minions) you probably don't have many spells for each save, so a 10% chance your spell is completely wasted and a 50% chance it has only a minor effect for one round is really not great.
Now sure, if you know the boss has fort as his weakest save you could just prepare slow in all your 3rd level slots and then you'll probably manage to land one, but if you need to spend spells on minions and/or don't know in advance you'll have one, maybe two, shot at it and that shot will probably fail.
If your foe is blinded, and has no additional senses for perception, the best they can do with a perception check is make a target hidden to them.I see, I did misunderstood how it worked then. Wasn't sure you could Hide in your Obscuring Mist for example.
Makes me wonder, if someone is Blinded, is there something like greater concealment or something?
Specifically, all the enemies of the blinded character become undetected to that character, as Blindness takes away your ability to detect using vision as your precise sense.
Well, really, all other creatures become undetected, but the enemies are a more immediate concern.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Cast slow on the bbeg and get back to me on how much wizards suck in 2e
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
Cast slow on the bbeg and get back to me on how much wizards suck in 2e
Slow doesn't make the boss vulnerable to a coup de grace so it isn't good enough for PF1 wizard players
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The wizard's role is to find and fire silver bullets that solve or sidestep conflicts, and there's a couple ways to go about this.
The spell blender specialist wizard just throws out the most top 2 level spell slots of any caster and has access to spells to target any save. That gives them some of the best conflict solving potential in the game when you have the right spells. They try to have the right spells through quantity prepared and guesswork.
The spell substitution generalist is mostly focused on out of combat utility and are only good in combat with lots of pre-fight knowledge. The second role is aided by the first with the ability to prepare knowledge generation spells like invisibility at the beginning of a day then swapping thr spare slots to silver bullets between combats once you have a firing solution. Generally, this role is going to require a lot of cooperation with the party to give them the space to do this.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Cast slow, you win. If you fail, do it again, until win.
|
Cast slow, you win. If you fail, do it again, until win.
Slow isn't auto-win on its own right?
Depriving a boss of 1 action is nice but doesn't inconvenience most monsters that much (their lowest attack for most) unless the party also denies the boss actions right?
Or am i missing some common tactics?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Cast slow, you win. If you fail, do it again, until win.Slow isn't auto-win on its own right?
Depriving a boss of 1 action is nice but doesn't inconvenience most monsters that much (their lowest attack for most) unless the party also denies the boss actions right?
Or am i missing some common tactics?
This isn't universally the case, but a lot of monsters will struggle to use their strongest attacks without all of their actions. If they are already in position for a two action activity they can still do that, but if they need to move then it stops them and if the activity is three actions then that's right out.
For example, a dragon recharges its breath weapon if it critically succeeds on a Strike, which it has a high chance of doing if it's higher level than the party. With three actions, it could crit, recharge its breath weapon, and then use it immediately - that's a whole lot more dangerous than just making an extra attack at -10.
Cast slow, you win. If you fail, do it again, until win.Slow isn't auto-win on its own right?
Depriving a boss of 1 action is nice but doesn't inconvenience most monsters that much (their lowest attack for most) unless the party also denies the boss actions right?
Or am i missing some common tactics?
This isn't universally the case, but a lot of monsters will struggle to use their strongest attacks without all of their actions. If they are already in position for a two action activity they can still do that, but if they need to move then it stops them and if the activity is three actions then that's right out.
For example, a dragon recharges its breath weapon if it critically succeeds on a Strike, which it has a high chance of doing if it's higher level than the party. With three actions, it could crit, recharge its breath weapon, and then use it immediately - that's a whole lot more dangerous than just making an extra attack at -10.
Also worth noting that many of a boss' biggest moves take 2, sometimes 3 actions. In the former, you can just move in such a way it cant bring the ability to bear, and in the latter, they are completely locked out.
Also, in response to TSRodrigas, since when was implied slow was an auto win, ans wht should any one class be able to auto win? This was the problem with casting in 1e
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
The party IS failing, quite often, over and over.
Okay, so you have a number of threads over here and recently in the AoA section and it really seems like someone or many people over in your games are misinterpreting the rules or getting them outright wrong. This isn't an attack on you, but when checks come up that players should routinely crush and the odds end up in the casters' favor and they still fail, it's hard not to wonder.
Putting aside potential GM getting rules wrong, it seems that your group has fallen into the trap of playing out PF2 as though it were PF1. Cleric heals and electric arc spams, bard stays out of combat and only uses inspire courage, and debuffing is held at a lower priority than attacking, Recall Knowledge completely written off. While wizards may have their issues (lack of interesting feats or spell schools feeling weak), it's not as though their spell DCs are any different from any other caster. Is this is a feeling that you're getting from not having DC boosting feats ala PF1? A level+2 opponent is only going to have a 80% chance to resist on their best save while that drops to around 50% on their worst, but that's without doing any debuffing. Even dropping a failed Fear spell is going to put those numbers further into your favor.
I'll use an example from AoA:
But it sounds like conditions are being ignored, forgotten, or handwaved at your table despite being very core to gameplay. It also sounds like you have a large group which the GM may be handling by (unwisely) adding elite adjustments to opponents when they should use the additional XP budget to introduce on-level complications.
It really seems like you should have a talk with your GM and your group and see where the problems lie.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Cast slow, you win. If you fail, do it again, until win.Slow isn't auto-win on its own right?
Depriving a boss of 1 action is nice but doesn't inconvenience most monsters that much (their lowest attack for most) unless the party also denies the boss actions right?
Or am i missing some common tactics?
You're just undervaluing the lack of 1 action for the boss. It's steep. That's basically one less critical hit per round (they're just that strong. It sucks) or simply limiting them to one attack per round if they have to move.
That will be 2 actions against 12 actions of a 4 PC party. Depending on the creature, it can mess up their whole routine.
|
Cast slow on the bbeg and get back to me on how much wizards suck in 2eAlready tried, several times in several different fights. Not just successful saves, but critical successes, are commonplace when this wizard throws out attack spells. This is part of what led to the conclusion "bosses don't fail saves."
As Thunder points out, even if you do have a good guess of the boss's weakness and have the right type of spell to target it, that still gives you a very slim chance of weakening him. A bit.
With AOEs, most of the enemies make their saves and take half damage. So the wizard has blown one of her three precious top-level spell slots for the entire day to do maybe half as much damage to 2-3 foes as the warrior does in a single swing. And there are probably several more fights today. Not looking good for resources.
The party IS failing, quite often, over and over.
What’s the DC/Spell attack bonus of your spells, and what level are you? The game kind of does assume you maxed your casting DC (which means you maxed your stat as there’s no other way to increase casting DC).
If the AoA thread is any indication, level 8 versus a level 9 boss, which should put his DC at 26 and the bosses saves between 18 and 16. Very far from "bosses don't fail saves."
If this is about a certain book 1 encounter, that's a whole 'nother story that has nothing to do with wizards and everything to do with the wonkiness of that encounter.
|
|
You're just undervaluing the lack of 1 action for the boss. It's steep. That's basically one less critical hit per round (they're just that strong. It sucks) or simply limiting them to one attack per round if they have to move.
That will be 2 actions against 12 actions of a 4 PC party. Depending on the creature, it can mess up their whole routine.
The fact that the 3rd attack is still deadly on a boss is a good point and of course the fact that bosses are already losing the action economy vs the PCs as well.
Hmm, I wonder how a debuff like slow stacks up vs buffs and which effect you should do first in combat (if you weren't able to pre-buff)?
Casting greater invis or even blur on your teammates is pretty powerful without the failure chance but might have to hit 2 teammates if another buffer isn't available vs a decent chance of at least slowing the boss on the first round (with a simple success) and possibly denying it an action on a round it has to move.