| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My opinion on this build.
It bascially a Spell Blending Wizard with the two feats first being Spell Penetration that you have taken in class, and that was 10 levels after it was available clearly not that important to the build. Plus Spell Combination which is OK but for level 20 I'm not really feeling it, so I'm thinking that is sarcasm on your part again.
You have taken a number of really useful generic build bits and tacked them on:
Sentinel for some good armour feats. It is solid. Though I normally just take a general feat in Armor Proficiency and retrain out when my Dexterity gets high enough for unarmoured (bracers/explorers clothes) to work. But you want the resistance bonuses cool.
A number of feats to get Quick Shield Block. Solid again. Yes I do like real shields over the shield spell. The +2 AC bonus and the extra resistance is just better and the disadvantage of no magic missile defense is normally unimportant. For me it falls into the same situation as Spell Penetration. If your game is going to come up against a lot of enemies that are built like PCs - then they will sometimes have magic missile or spells up to give them status bonuses. But if not you will rarely see them.
Medic done well. I agree that Doctor's Visitation is awesome action economy. Its like a one action heal with range. Thankyou for reminding me and putting it in a build.
You are going to have to be careful here with the number of hands you have free for battle medicine. As you will need a hand to cast spells, you have got a shield in one, so I'm thinking that you aren't going to be using a staff.
The way you have minimised the class feat cost by using skill feats is very nice.
Now for the feedback. Why are you a wizard? I'm not seeing that you are doing anything with your intelligence score. You have worked really hard on your AC and healing but your Reflex saving throw is a couple below where it should be. There are other ways to get top level spell slots rather than spell blending and that is expensive. Your other spell slots are still useful. I could do this build as a sorcerer and have ability score points spare.
No weapon option - you don't have a DEX or STR high enough for you to do anything useful here. I guess you can use spell attacks if you want. But this is a minor gripe you have plenty else do do.
You have got your self some good action economy here. You can always raise a shield or visit a patient, to usefully use a spare single action well. You have Shield Block and Aid as good reactions.
But there is one part of resource management that the build is missing: no focus spell. Its something that comes back on ten minutes of rest. You might as well pick up something here. I guess you will often be busy as a medic, but not always and you often can take 20 minutes not just 10.
The one change I would do to this build is remove the One for All and take something else Silent Spell. You have a Charsima score here, so why not take ranks in Deception instead of Performance. You should be able to describe a feint as an Aid attempt in a way that a GM will allow you to roll Deception to aid an attack roll. In fact I do think Deception makes for a really good skill to rank for most combat uses of Aid. Now you are a really good illusionist as well.
I'll try to put up a build for you to critique ....
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
(Please move to Advice)
You're going to have to calibrate your expectations, at least if you're playing in APs and other challenging adventures. (PFS is less difficult so ignore all this if playing there!)
"Impact the battlefield with powerful AOE effects, action denial abilities, enabling massive crits for your party, all while being extremely hard to kill.
Wizards (or more specifically the Arcane spell list) can deliver AoE effects and action denial abilities. Check, but do expect enemies to survive; you'll do more than your share though.
"Enabling massive crits" is not a thing. Buffs are incremental in PF2, and often too short term (especially if pausing to do Medicine, recharge Focus Points, or repair shields). Buffs remain worthwhile, just not like in 3.X/5.0/PF1. Wizards can do okay at this, though often it's in the form of debuffing the enemy's AC/saves rather than bumping up the allies directly.
Of course there's a budget in spell slots as to how much of AoE/action denial/buff-debuffing that's available, but they're all doable.
(I see you later going for One for All, though I'd say a Wizard's not the best source for that. Hopefully the team can Aid well, yes, but the Wizard's not typically the best source.)
Wizards cannot become "extremely hard to kill", at least not alone. You will have to rely on your party and there's no getting around that fact. Even if you invested a major portion of your spell slots into defense and h.p., your Wizard would remain at risk. This includes going the Sentinel/Bastion route, since a Wizard's saves and hit points struggle and your build focus most of its energy on AC. Even at your best AC (or a Ranger's/Rogue's/etc) you will get hit consistently, leading to a Grab, Knockdown, poison, or some other major mishap a Wizard can't weather.
There are other statements that make me wonder:
-Does your campaign only fight one battle per hour? That seems situational IMO.
-Being able to move & Battle Medicine defensively is great, you're right, but it's still a Wizard so "very hard to die" isn't achievable. This is important when measuring whether to use Medicine on others. If your ally's in the front line, you don't want to end your turn next to them, yet you'd also want to get a spell off if the battle's that tough.
-Stacking debuffs to destroy one's enemy is difficult since few debuffs stack. Most are a Status Penalty and adding up lots of "Condition 1" effects doesn't add up, though it might broaden what rolls the -1 applies to. (And of course the target should be made flat-footed, though that's best left to martials flanking or tripping the enemy.)
---
That's funny you want to be Human so you can Adopt Ancestry (Halfling) when you could simply be a Halfling and at 5th take Cultural Adaptability (Human) which puts you in the same position AND gives you a bonus feat on top. So given your reasons for choosing Human, you should choose Halfling instead (and the Str penalty is a good thing IMO, giving 2 points to go somewhere more useful).
Except of course you're trying to tank up w/ armor at 1st & a shield later, which I wouldn't recommend. The Shield Cantrip should serve you better than a shield if you're positioned well, something that's hard to do if your low Str PC is slowed by armor. If you only move 20', even slow creatures (the kind that often Grab!) can catch you.
And what's in your hands? In PF2, carrying a staff pays dividends since they're so good now and you'll want a hand free for Medicine if you're investing so much into it (and dislike dropping magic items like most players). Staff > shield (though carrying one at lower levels can be worthwhile for the AC bonus even w/o Shield Block).
--
I'd recommend Assurance (Medicine) instead of Diviner's Sight unless you have a lot of Divination spells you like to take daily. Plus it works all the time.
Seems you've fallen into the common pitfall of trying to cover too many bases with one build. You've done an excellent job navigating the feat system to juggle all of those Dedications, yet all of those feats add up to little change to your PC's hardiness. That's a lot of expense for what should be covered by teamwork and positioning (because that's the nature of battles in PF2, where you win more from your choices on the battlemat than one's build when in PF1 (etc.) one's build could guarantee a win). Meanwhile you're hardly making use of that expensive Charisma until much later, when Bon Mot & the Swashbuckler Dedication could do wonders from the beginning (plus Swashbuckler has some defensive options too).
Uncanny Acumen on Perception?? That's just asking for a crit fail to wipe you out.
I recommend Reach Spell. If you really want to keep safe take this so you don't need to cast one move away from enemies.
And you kind of need to get your Dex to 18 to narrow that Critical Failure window.
Given your stated goals/actions, I think Bard would suit better, starting closer to your end goals w/o using all those feats; light armor which scales up, best group buffing, perhaps best list for enemy debuffing/control, more use for that Charisma, and more hit points. And Soothe frees you up to go right into Swashbuckler rather than Medic (and to heal safely from a distance). Freeing up those Int points allows more points into Con too. It has fewer AoE options, but it has some.
Sorcerer, while still fragile, also seems more in line with your build. Mix it w/ Blessed (and maybe Reach spell) and you get decent healing per combat plus other feats give your PC the ability to address those conditions that poor saves allowed through.
If resolved to be a Wizard, I'd rethink the Charisma to keep Dex, Con, and Wis higher so you can get closer to the tough Wizard you're trying to build. One for All is great, but your build gets it so late, and will you have the combat actions to spare on it?
And if you do, its Reaction interferes w/ your Reactive Shield which in turn makes your extra Reaction to Shield Block defunct that turn. Like I said, the build's trying to do too much IMO.
And all of this advice could turn on a dime depending on the party's composition and default strategies!
And what Gortle said.
A lot of your build is generic stuff available to anybody, with some classes having a head start or outright advantage, so why Wizard?
If your PC mainly runs around as a Medic w/ One for All (and maybe some skill-based debuffs), a sturdier foundation would serve better, i.e. a Monk w/ Ki Blast for those emergency AoEs.
And I'd forgotten about a Wizard's unique feats re: hiding spells!
The major hurdle is the Charisma cost to make it reliable, and you're already invested there. Usefulness depends on campaign, but in most that subterfuge would be worthwhile. At least one forum regular took MCD Wizard for his Sorcerer just for those feats and has found it very useful and fun, with lots of anecdotes.
Odd build. Not what I would do with a wizard. If you have fun playing it, more power to you.
Not sure why you're focused on healing as a wizard. Is your group lacking?
Casters who want to do a lot of what you want to do need to have 1 action available for sustaining spells and usually get Effortless Concentration to add on to action economy.
Why are you the intimidate guy? You don't have a charisma class with you?
In general, it looks like an unfocused mess that tries too hard to do too much.
Seems like you'd be better off being a sorcerer with this build, an arcane sorcerer of some kind so you can still change out spells.
It's a playable build in PF2 as any build is playable in PF2. Just hope you're in a group that will take advantage of a Swiss army knife build that gives up optimization for variability.
Maybe you're the main group healer or playing with a bunch of martial players who are focused on damage dealing. This character would probably fit in such groups as it's kind of a jack of all trades, master of none build.
Odd build. Not what I would do with a wizard. If you have fun playing it, more power to you.
Not sure why you're focused on healing as a wizard. Is your group lacking?
Casters who want to do a lot of what you want to do need to have 1 action available for sustaining spells and usually get Effortless Concentration to add on to action economy.
Why are you the intimidate guy? You don't have a charisma class with you?
In general, it looks like an unfocused mess that tries too hard to do too much.
Seems like you'd be better off being a sorcerer with this build, an arcane sorcerer of some kind so you can still change out spells.
It's a playable build in PF2 as any build is playable in PF2. Just hope you're in a group that will take advantage of a Swiss army knife build that gives up optimization for variability.
Maybe you're the main group healer or playing with a bunch of martial players who are focused on damage dealing. This character would probably fit in such groups as it's kind of a jack of all trades, master of none build.
The medic dedication is just too good to pass up even if there was a healer. I am gonna take damage, and I like to stride. Thus the ability to heal such a significant amount while moving is always extremely useful and far exceeds what my class features can give me.
Maybe it's me, and I don't get it, but, One for all is really powerful? I can almost guarantee criting a DC 20 check, meaning I can give any of my teammates a 3+/4+ to their attack roll for just an action + a reaction. Maybe I am wrong I think 3+/4+ is a lot.
One for All is good. Your build is very playable. It's a jack of all trades build.
You're a caster. There is no real need for you to do be within 30 feet of a battle. You built him so he has to be within 30 feet a lot to be most effective. So he's going to be getting hit by auras, gazes, AOE melee attacks, and attackable by monsters with reach.
And you only have 6 hit points, max out at Expert armor class, and never get any of the normal martial save upgrades except to Will saves. So you're always getting some nasty thing happening to you unless you critically succeed which isn't easy to do at all.
I tend to like to play wizards so they can operate at longer range. Pick up Reach Spell. Have longer range cantrip attacks. Stay back from the battle. Be that control and damage caster who does the job from closer to 60 feet, often while invisible at higher level, and staying away from all the bad nasty stuff.
If you only think your campaign will go to level 8 or so, then no big deal. Things don't get quite as nasty by lvl 8. If you think you will get to 20 with Spell Blending, I'd think of a longer range build.
Pick up reach spell. Effortless Concentration. Learn to operate at longer range. With a haste spell, Effortless Concentration, you can get up to the following type of action economy:
1. Haste allows you to move or strike if you have a bow or something.
2. Effortless Concentration allows a free sustain of some sustainable attack or control spell.
3. Then you have 3 actions to do something like reach a 30 foot range spell. Or cast a 2 action spell while also some 1 action spell like shield or true target.
Hopefully this will work out for you. I personally prefer a nice ranged control/damage caster build that tends to stay away from the battle. Casters in PF2 are not well equipped for being close to a battle in this edition. It's a recipe for getting wiped out.
Even recently in Abomination Vaults I was playing an elemental sorcerer. I usually play the character far back. But we were in tight quarters and I had to get off freedom of movement. Ended up getting grabbed up and constricted. Really nasty. Got dropped because I couldn't get away in time.
Some of these PF2 monsters are brutal to casters if they are close up in battle. They're brutal to martials too, but martials get abilities to help them take the pain in up close and personal battles that casters do not.
And that's just one person's view. You may have a blast playing this build and doing all the things it can do. I know we play a particularly lethal game and not everyone does, so the value of a build may differ in our group's campaign versus yours. If your DM isn't particularly cruel about targeting soft target casters in your games, it may work out ok.
SpellBlending to me is just too powerful to pass up, having 6 max-level slots per day just makes you the most impactful person on your team.
Fair enough. It is pretty good. But while your are getting two extra top level spell slots out of this, your choice not to be using a staff costs you a spell slot one down from your top. The other options I'm thinking of are largely unavailable to arcane. SO if this is what you really want then go for it.
Sorry my previous reply missed your school Divination. Interesting. But I think I'll be struggling to find spells I really want at each level in divination still. Though it does give an OK focus spell and you do seem to be very keen on initiative which is fair.
My comment would be still to look at what you can get out of the intelligence based classes alchemist, investigator, inventor, witch before heading down the charisma route. It is hard to get and INT/CHA build to work as you have 3 other stats you can't ignore. I need to think on that some more.
if you check the spell guide part of my guide(in the link), there is a large number of combos I want to do a lot, some of them just win buttons, casting them more means more encounters wons.
Will do.
"1. Dunno maybe I don't know what tanky is, but, being able to heal more than half my health with a stride 2 per encounter,2+ AC on-demand, plus the ability to reduce crit damage, alongside all of the defensive stacks the wizard gives you. Am I not sure how that doesn't result in a "hard to kill character"?
2. The enabling crits comment was the use of all for one, giving a player 3+/4+ to attack roll with a long-distance aid check, I think that is amazing, not sure if they is a bigger bonus I could give for one action?
3. The halfling thing is a good point, I could just make this halfling with some work applied to it(IF I choose cultural adaptation I wouldn't be able to get halfling luck at level 5?).
4. Yea, I keep a free hand.
5. As for why wizard, Spell blending is amazing. I have a spell guide that shows some of the insane stuff you can do with spells, and I want to keep doing that as much as I can. Additional diviner's sight also isn't a bad action to just tack on."
1. That's does make a Wizard tankier, but never tanky. That's why so many people mention Reach spell. That inescapable inability to tank is why some are wary you'd take Medic where you have to get adjacent to an ally, though I can see it's perhaps mainly for personal use. It's also why the 30' range of One for All looks dicey.
To put it perspective, the martial PCs at minimum have to do what you're suggesting just to get by and they have higher saves and much higher hit points (and more purpose being there). A Warpriest with all its armor and Shield Block is somewhat expected to Heal itself to endure the front. Personally I think only Champions, defensive Monks, and shield Fighters should remain in front, with other martials skirmishing instead. One of the devs even asserted that a Step away from an enemy is better than Raise a Shield (though I haven't fully accepted that yet).
The reason you can heal more than half your health is because your health is so poor. You can consider Wizards pre-damaged. :-P
A normal AoE from an enemy at your level will do about half your hit points on fails (about half the time), and perhaps drop you if you crit fail, which is too often w/ your poor Reflex save.
2. Yeah, One for All's good, which is why I'd recommended Bard/MCD Swashbuckler taken immediately (instead of after 3 other Dedications). That 30' range still isn't great, but a Bard can survive a bit better, and unlike a Wizard isn't expected to cast a 2-action spell every round. If they can get their Composition out, that's often enough contribution.
Also as mentioned, every time you use One for All in that danger zone, you're also turning off your shield since your Reaction's being spent already so no Reactive Shield. This also turns off the extra Shield Block from Bastion, unless of course you Raise a Shield, in which case you'll be down to one-action, so no 2-action spell that round.
That's anti-synergy IMO.
3. Yeah, it gets messy juggling order of Ancestry feats, especially with them spaced so far apart. A General Feat could work (though I'm personally against doing that). I feel Adopted Ancestry burns a feat just to get through the gate so I dislike it.
4. Okay. There are other items, mostly consumables, that can make good use of that free hand.
5. Re: Spell Blending. I guess? I don't foresee monsters getting shut down as dramatically as you paint it, and I love having a breadth of spells, so it's not for me.
Diviner's Sight definitely has strong uses especially outside of combat. In combat I'd think it'd be hard to decide when that one use is worth the action, especially given all the other actions your PC has available. It is a better focus spell than most Wizard ones, but IMO worthwhile only if you have enough divination spells you like.
Alternatively, after Swashbuckler picking up Blessed would give a Focus point for two good bursts of backup healing per lull. And those would be usable w/ Reach Spell.
It's also why the 30' range of One for All looks dicey.
Criticising a wizard build for being within 30ft is too harsh. That the range of a lot of good spells. You often need to move forward in a lot of scenarios just to get the line of sight you need. There is nothing in this build which requires it to be in the front line. At best the Doctors Visitation, but again that is a choice for one ability. But even that when you are using it on yourself you can move away/anywhere and then do it.
Also as mentioned, every time you use One for All in that danger zone, you're also turning off your shield since your Reaction's being spent already so no Reactive Shield. This also turns off the extra Shield Block from Bastion, unless of course you Raise a Shield, in which case you'll be down to one-action, so no 2-action spell that round.
That's anti-synergy IMO.
Which is why he takes Quick Shield Block so he has an extra reation. Both that and One for All are only available from level 10 so its really a question of which do you take first and what else are you missing out on to do it. In fact you can use the retraining rules to have both show up at the same time in the characters career. Choosing it is a tactical judgement call the player makes in game. I'll be trusting this player to make the best choose.
One for All is not something you will do every round, in fact if you are facing a large number of enemies its often not optimal, its just something you can do every round.
So, let's see, the ultimate Wizard is a discount Cleric with barely almost no "Wizard" feats... Not even Scroll Savant, one of the few good Wizard feats.
Wow how the mighty have fallen.
Yep when I build a Sorcerer of any type I've got 4 must haves. The Barbarian and Druid have got 6+. The wizard in PF2 has none, just a couple of nice to haves that are reasonable. You can build a perfectly good Wizard with zero Wizard feats and not feel like you have traded anything away. The Cleric is not a whole lot better. It's not so much a comment about the effectiveness of the class just their feats.
I agree this is possibly objectively the best build for wizard. People seem to think that investing in tankiness in a wizard is a waste, since you would be better off hiding, invisible, or out of reach of the enemy.
This is a very common mistake, the same one people make when they say ranged characters have the "advantage" over melee characters in being out of harms way. What they don't realize is that being out of range actually makes the enemy focus fire your frontline, and thus REDUCES the tankiness of your party. HP is a resource, and not using it is reducing survivability except on a selfish individual level. Distributing damage across the party is good because for the same reason focus fire is good. I will admit that ranged characters do have an easier time avoiding AoE, which is an actual survivability increase (as long as you go in to contribute your HP to tank once the AoE threat is gone).
People are also questioning charisma, and I agree that this build might be even better as a sorcerer or bard, but the challenge was not to create the ultimate caster, it was to create the ultimate wizard. I think charisma is too good to pass on even on wizard. All the best skill actions (coercion, bon mot, intimidate, one for all, request, make an impression) are governed by intimidate and diplomacy. There is actually a striking lack of good skill actions (for combat especially) using most other skills, athletics and medicine being the notable exceptions.
The intelligence skill actions are much weaker, and recall knowledge is the only one that is usually usable in combat. The problem is recall knowledge is gm-dependent and bad, I would never take it without session 0 concessions from the GM to reveal almost the entire monster stat block and all special abilities on success. Otherwise, I would always use one of my 9-12 actions in a regular combat for intimidate, aid, battle medicine or trip/shove instead, the opportunity cost is too great. Nobody would take the RAW recall knowledge success effect over...
Why do you think this? If your casters are in range of auras and attacks, then they have a much higher chance of getting absolutely destroyed at higher level.
There are monsters with auras and gazes that give barbarians problems rolling their Fortitude save, much less a caster. Some poisons will eat them alive.
Then if the monster decides to focus fire them and gets a few crits, lights out and game over. Then there is AoOs is he is striding around the creature.
We fought a monster like this in Agents of Edgewatch the other day. It was everything we could do to keep the fighter and monk alive. The monster almost took them out in a single round each attack sequence. We had to focus our healing and spell power heavily on these martials. This monster took an oracle that ran too close with a single AOO to near dead and poisoned with a harsh saving throw they had a 70 percent chance of failing.
That tanky caster stuff is fine at fairly early levels. But it's not great at higher levels when what you are fighting gets real brutal including the saves to resist their abilities.
High level monsters can rip apart a Champion. They take caster AC and shred it. They really encourage casters to stay out of range at higher level and stay away from the BBEG.
Some clarifications since I'd last posted.
-I don't think anybody said one-shot AoE except in the case of some crit fails, an above average roll from an at-level opponent, doubled.
Ex. Most breath weapons in the game are (level+1) x 1d6 damage (or a different die type to get comparable damage). This Wizard gets level x (6+Con) + 8; (human, no Toughness). Let's look at 10th level where there's a boost to Con (14, +2), so 88 hit points.
An 11d6 blast averages 38.5 damage, doubled on a crit is 77 damage, or 7/8 of the PC's h.p., so a strong blast + crit fail drops the Wizard immediately.
Or one could look at 2 9d6 blasts from lower level opponents; 31.5 damage, let's say one success, one failure (15.75 damage). Rounding down, that's still 46 hit points, or half; and that's fairly normal rolling.
The Wizard's Reflex save is 10 (level) + 4 (Expert) + 1 (item) + 2 (Dex)= +17 The first CR 10 dragon I spotted had a DC of 29, so 10% chance of crit fail (which is better than I'd thought it'd be, but we are talking at-level, while a +2 boss could get that to 25% and not need to roll high).
The first CR 8 dragon I spotted had DC 26, so a success + a fail is quite likely.
If somebody thinks dragons are OP, we can use a Hell Hound (CR 3, 4d6, Ref DC 19) vs. this Wizard (level 3, 29 h.p., Reflex +6).
If the Hell Hound, average damage 14, rolls a 15, there's a 15% chance the Wizard goes down. That's not supposed to be that dangerous, and going down on crit when AoE's might continue is risky.
Two Hell Hounds against level 4 (a reasonable encounter, kinda tough) would do similar damage, and one could recharge the other's breath weapon for 14 more damage the next round.
---------
-Nobody's arguing against making the Wizard tankier that I've seen; IMO all 6 h.p. classes need to tank up! It's calling any Wizard a tank as if it's safe and thinking so might lead to poor tactics.
Couple this with the expectation that the Medic will be adjacent to frontline allies (which I suspect isn't the case and Medic's mainly for self-preservation).
As for the 30' range, I agree w/ Gortle that it's a common range to be in. I see that as unfortunate. Hopefully when constrained like that the warriors can also block enemies. And Reach Spell seems a better defensive investment than many feats in this build.
-Yes, Quick Shield Block does give an extra Shield Block Reaction. But in the hypothetical the Wizard's SOP uses their first Reaction for Raise a Shield (via Bastion) and their second to Shield Block. If the first Reaction's being used for One for All, then neither shield Reaction is available unless the Wizard had spent an action Raising a Shield (as noted in the first comment). So the SOP needs fixing.
BTW, I think both are great options! And if within 30' of the front line, one would likely want that shield up. Yet if using one action for One for All and another for Raise a Shield, there aren't two actions left to cast a decent spell. I'd think that's the point of being a Wizard.
(And yes, Gortle, I agree a PC, especially a Wizard saying they want to launch AoEs, wouldn't use One for All vs. groups. In that case it'd be best to Raise a Shield so you could block twice (or move and block once), then cast an AoE. I can only see using One for All in easier battles (or somehow where you're safe at 30'), yet it took so much investment to get!
-I disagree that this is a contender for objectively best build, mainly because some defenses are so low (despite all the effort into being tanky). IMO that Charisma will get the Wizard killed due to low Reflex, Fort, and h.p. Mobility's also subpar, though less important for a caster. This Wizard will do some truly astonishing things, if it lives long enough to acquire those abilities.
-Yes, advice should differ if one is focused on the Wizard class (which due to Spell Blending it seems we are), though there was also a list of PC objectives...which would be served better by another class. I offer new "Wizard" advice below.
-The chain armor specialization is getting overrated it seems. It's definitely worth a low-level skill feat if one has Sentinel! In that case, take it, yes. It's just odd when people start talking as if it's effect is larger than it is. (And while Sentinel might be worthwhile for a Wizard, debatable, the Bard skips needing that.)
-Tanking up the Wizard, yes, should not cause the Wizard to be close. Yet being a Medic implies they will be, as does writing "very hard to die". Also the tankiness in this build trades Ref & movement for AC, so it's a minor net bonus IMO. (And hopefully they aren't taking Sentinel & medium armor mostly to get to this feat!)
-I'd think the Wizard would be the last person you'd want to distribute damage to, not just because of their low h.p., but also vulnerability to taking more than intended. Of course the healer going down would be worst case, though they can more often take a hit.
----------
Advice (this time focused on Wizard and more modest, while as a general concept I still stand by my previous advice)
-Take Toughness; as a % it's a good increase.
-Improve Dex; that armor's tricking you into thinking you don't need it. Dex 14 from 15th-20th is risky.
-Improve Con. Con 12 for 1st-9th is very risky.
(to get those stats, you might need to halt Wis & Cha at 18)
-Put Uncanny Acumen into a saving throw, and early. (Train out and back in if desired.)
-Cast False Life. Even though it eventually becomes minor (and IMO not worth Heightening), so does its cost. Wands eventually could make this available for every battle.
You've done a good job building around defending against taking Strike damage and bouncing back from hit point damage, yet there's a whole world of hurt that's inevitable so you need actual hit points too as well as well rounded saves. This might get compounded if you do unleash a great Spell-Blended offense as you draw aggro from all your opponents!
I agree with you on auras and AoE effects, being close to melee is definitely a detriment there, and the caster would be better off staying at a distance. But even here, being tanky doesn't actually make things worse for you. I think the biggest opportunity cost for taking sentinel and bastion feats would probably be taking a witch dedication to give you more lower level spell slots and a familiar. This I believe is a reasonable trade-off.
For your second example about the oracle, I think it is not necessarily bad. If the oracle can tank a boss crit without going down (which I believe this build is supposed to accomplish with the chain armour specialization), eating an AoO or strike instead of the low-hp barbarian who is trying to reposition or magus who wants to spell-strike can be a great thing to do, especially if you have battle medic to heal yourself or them back up.
In your example you are saying you could barely keep your champion and monk alive through the encounter. If the AoO against your oracle would have been targeted against the low hp champion instead and he would have gone down, wouldn't the situation have been even worse?
I agree that against fortitude saving throws, casters are notably worse, and against persistent damage, having another sack of hp helps less since getting rid of persistent damage eats up actions and persistent damage of one type can only apply once per character anyway, so against these types of enemies I would follow your advice.
I guess my point is that
1. making your wizard tanky is not making you worse at playing safe and doesn't force you to be close, and the feat opportunity cost is not unbearable.
2. Distributing damage between party members (when auras/AoE are not destroying you, so not all fights) is an element of team play that is often ignored, and can really help your party survive in situations where your frontline would otherwise collapse, for example eating a strike from a +2 brute type enemy (or multiple ones using mirror image). Of course,...
Maybe this is a difference in DM style, but in general in our campaigns monsters focus fire on single targets until they are dead. If the damage is getting spread around, it's because it's an AoE attack like an aura, gaze, or an AoE melee attack.
I have never had an assurance the DM is going to take a creature with three actions and attack different people each round or every other round. The monsters we go against pretty much focus on what it perceives as the most dangerous target and tries to kill that PC until they are on the ground and not moving, multiple attacks per round, no mercy shown.
Maybe that's what drives my thinking. If you're playing with a DM spreading the attacks, then I can see the logic of having more targets in range to spread the damage. But I don't feel like it's something you can count on given the number of creatures with AoE attacks.
Not sure how the OPs DM handles attacks. If they spread it around, then maybe his armored wizard can absorb some of the damage. If the DM decides to focus fire on the wizard, he could end up shredded on the ground really quickly. Even with Battle Medicine he won't stay up long as well as having to spend actions on battle medicine and risk an AoO striding in range of a dangerous creature.
I really learned to value Reach Spell due to higher level play. Reach Spell used to be ok for specific builds in PF1. Reach Spell is extremely powerful in PF2 because it's a 1 action "move" equivalent that doesn't cause you to enter into range of a lot of dangerous stuff.
Also, I am not a champion I don't just tank attacks and heal, the "tank" of this build is intended not to replace the defensive stack of wizards but, to be in addition to spells like:
invisibility
Mirror image
Stoneskin
Time Jump
Unexpected Transposition
Contingency
Corrosive Body/Fiery Body
Energy Aegis
and more.
It will really come down to how much you like being the guy who does a little thing here or there to win.
You have a lot of actions to choose from, but only three actions per round to use them with. You will have an opportunity cost when choosing actions and you'll have to hope you can make an ideal or at least helpful choice that is better than a simple, focused choice.
I've found over the years some people really like having lots of options to help a party rather than focusing on just being a powerful casting wizard which can get kind of boring. I would maybe test run this build in a few battles and see how your action economy is going to work. Then adjust if you see one of your options not being used too often and another being used more. Then you can get an idea of what the flow of your rounds will look like in actual play.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This feels like you're not really taking advantage of any benefits the wizard can have. So much has gone in to patching up the wizard's subpar defenses that basically any build that just takes random wizard feats will shine much more at being a wizard than this.
You've also spent so many feats to do something that would be more at home on a sorcerer/bard chassis. Nothing in here really does anything with the large Int mod you have to have (except Crafting to repair your shield at level 14!)
And after all that, you're really not that much stronger defensively than the average martial. You still can't evade any saves until level 17, and you're maybe about as survivable AC-wise as a martial with a shield - which, while good, is not enough to keep you safe against any decent threat. And you also don't do anything another wizard wouldn't be doing better.
If this limited itself to one of the four dedications it's taking, it'd feel much stronger to me. As is, by the time you've hit level 12, you've spent all your feats on level 2-4 things poached from other classes, and don't really get much bonus. The fact that this never takes anything higher than a level 10 feat is just wild to me, and even then you're taking level 10 feats at levels 12 and 14.
Maybe we have different definitions of tank?
Comparing your build to a Champion's shows a stark contrast in our views, as in your build doesn't even get the Wizard to a normal warrior's level much less a Champion's. And normal warriors get chewed up in PF2!
Which is to say many martial PCs also cannot tank except they have the hit points and saves to endure somewhat (and often other tricks). Yes, Medic helps you rebound okay, yet that should be in emergencies only (which might come too often w/ such low hit points). Carrier effects like poison, Grab, or even knocking the Wizard prone are notably worse on the Wizard than a martial.
Perhaps we're dwelling too much on one word, but you did write "extremely hard to kill" as a goal. I don't believe that goal's achievable by a Wizard (w/o party help like a Champion & Cleric nearby in which case all their allies are extremely hard to kill). That said you have achieved "hard Wizard to kill via Strikes" despite low starting Con and lacking Toughness.
---
I think people assumed standard defensive spells (depending on how much one thinks you're pouring into Spell Blending I suppose). Yet note that spells like Stoneskin don't stack w/ the Armor Specialization, and rival caster builds have access to similar defenses (or healing for that matter).
Those spells address only a fraction of the problem w/ low saves, and of course cut into your actions and offense. And might not be at their best levels if Spell Blending's stripping out half your 3rd & 4th highest level spell slots. Plus there are so many levels to survive before most of them come into play.
Spell blending is pretty good. + Drain Bonded Item, + School Specialisation => getting 5 or 6 top level spell slots is great compared to a sorcerers 3 or 4.
However you have chosen the Divination school. Which is really light on good spells. On the plus side you can sack all your Divination Schools slots to spell blending which removes a lot of that limitation. But you can't do that with your top 2 spell levels. What are you actually taking in those top 2 slots from Divination?
Looking at your own spell recommendations you only highlight two divination spells: Anticipate Peril (level 1), and Foresight(level 9). I totally agree with Foresight being awesome and its a great selection for level 9. I am not that keen on Anticipate Peril as there are other ways to get status bonuses to skills and initiative. To my mind it is just OK, not great. The other divination spells are useful they are just not things I have to have in a top level slot.
To my mind you are wasting 2 slots at character levels 5 to 16, mostly they will be stuck in Anticipate Peril or another less powerful spell. When you also realise that many of your spell recommendations are also available to primal and many are summons (a primal sorcerer can get an extra top level slot here) I'd be taking a primal Phoenix sorcerer. It gets Disintegrate and Contingency. It can take the cross blooded feat to get another spell from arcane that you want (3 at level 18). You get a couple of extra top level slots at level 16 with Greater Vital Evolution. You haven't lost any low level spells, your Charisma skills will be better, you don't have a Dex problem or wasted Int score, and you will actually use all your top level slots rather than have slots trapped in a ordinary spell, you have effectively more high level slots.
For me if I was playing this build of wizard - which I do think is a good build, I'm just being reservered about calling it great, tastes differ - I'd be taking Illusion or Conjuration as my school.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wizards have great feats for casting spells from spell slots as often and effectively as possible. Widen spell and reach spell are both fantastic feats for wizards and wizards have the slots for them. Silent spell is probably the best meta magic feat in the game because spell casting draws attention and half the utility spells in the game are much better when the person casting them isn’t shouting at the top of their lungs “magic going on over here!” Remember most people on the planet don’t know the difference between a caster detecting magic or casting charm/read thoughts on them.
Conceal spell works well for casting spells around much lower level towns folk/etc, but it is really silent spell that lets you buff in the room before opening the door to the boss encounter without tipping them off you are there. If your GM requires a stealth roll when the enemy can’t see you casting spells silently, they are being incredibly mean spirited. Thus this chain really only requires trained in deception and stealth, even though deception + illusions is something a lot of GMs will call for anyway.
Spell penetration is probably too good to have been a feat in the first place and from 8 up, there are exceptional wizard feats for making those AoE energy attacks nasty.
I am not trying to hate on a sentinel build for a wizard, but spells can be a lot more effective than feats at giving a wizard durability and difficulty being targeted.
When I design a caster, I like to look at the spell list and plan a spell strategy. That informs my feats and other choices with a class.
With a wizard I am trying to play to its strengths which is intelligence and lots of casting, so I like feats like the one that gives you scrolls and perhaps extra uses of bonded items.
I tend to look for good sustained spells on the list because Effortless Concentration is one of the best Action Economy boosters casters get. It's high level, but if you get there it is really good.
Do you plan to generally cast as needed hoping you have the right spell or does this build have a particular spell strategy?
You're kind of tanky or tankier than a standard wizard. It seems like this wizard might be a good evoker able to use their advanced focus spell because they will be able to survive being more up close and personal in battle. So you can launch that AoE spell while activating your focus spell to hit everything around you.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, "tank" is a party/tactical role blocking out monsters (or driving into the heart of them!), not a comparison internal to a class.
And I'd say your build is of average Wizard toughness (poor) for 1st-6th because of low Dex (mitigated by armor to average) & low Con (mitigated by one Battle Medicine use to average). It's not until you get 2 BMs/hour + Shield Block at 7th that you get a nudge, though many others likely have Toughness and better speed).
And I think it's more "if you're focused on defense, take Reach" than it is "take Reach or be irrelevant, even die". It's like getting a free move. Rather than moving into range-casting-moving back to the safer spot (four actions, can't do cleanly), you're just remaining in the safer spot (three actions, less chance of triggering something). And as you've noted, that's very important w/ touch range spells. (Speaking of which Vampiric Touch is a decent way to improve durability, though IMO that does require Reach to be safe.)
It would be cool if you rolled high on Diviner's Sight, but it's also taking an action (which if you're using Battle Medicine you instead usually should be unleashing a 2-action spell w/ your actions) and a Focus point (so which use will you spend it on? Why not Blessed for Lay on Hands 1/lull + Medic 2/hour?). And as Gortle noted, it's hard to fill those divination slots well.
Note that I still like Diviner's Sight! It's strong out of combat (much like most divination spells); it's just dubious as some game changer re: Medicine. I'd more likely use it when I know a saving throw is coming.
Again, all these choices depend on the party's composition and default strategies.
--
Trouble with the Bone Croupier tactic is the creature can't survive late levels when that 5th level slot can be burnt to augment a better spell. Wizard casts it the first round. If attacked before your second round, it might use its ability to ruin the attack and whoops, that was the point of the critter.
So maybe your PC tells it (because it's your PC commanding it, not you as a player) in Common (its only language) to wait for your cue before changing an opponent's luck. And now it has to survive a round after you've revealed your plan. (And PF2 summoning brings in a faux creature, so you can't build a rapport or code word w/ a specific Croupier.)
Can it survive?
At what level does it start being that a 5th level spell to get a fail on an Xth level spell is better than a 5th level spell doing its own thing and the Xth level spell doing its own thing? (Noting that the Croupier is an insignificant a combatant unless immune to some major ability of the enemy.)
I'm thinking this combo gels at such a high level where that CR 5 Croupier dies not only with one hit (which might be worth it), but with most any AoE too (which likely wouldn't be). A CR 12 Athach says 30% survival chance vs. its boulder throw, never mind multiple melee attacks if closer. And I doubt a CR 12 creature's worth the combo.
Also one of the devs said that even though usually only errata hardcovers, he'd make a point of making Bone Croupier an Uncommon monster. It's been awhile and hasn't happened yet so who knows.
Of course if it remains Common, you can team up w/ an ally and one of you can set it up for the other! That's pretty strong, and demonstrates that coordination that PF2 encourages. Many strong feats work best for the person's ally (much like One for All as you know).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Apologies that sometimes I'm overly detailed.
I'm responding to you as well as lurkers so they can follow along, understand not just the suggestion, but the context, reasoning, etc.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think more spell casting guides should highlight just how good getting concealment or even better yet hiding is against solo higher level monsters. A level +2 or more monster who misses 20% of the time it attacks is greatly reduced in effectiveness. It is nearly the equivalent of a +4 to your AC.
When I design a caster, I like to look at the spell list and plan a spell strategy. That informs my feats and other choices with a class.
With a wizard I am trying to play to its strengths which is intelligence and lots of casting, so I like feats like the one that gives you scrolls and perhaps extra uses of bonded items.
I tend to look for good sustained spells on the list because Effortless Concentration is one of the best Action Economy boosters casters get. It's high level, but if you get there it is really good.
Do you plan to generally cast as needed hoping you have the right spell or does this build have a particular spell strategy?
You're kind of tanky or tankier than a standard wizard. It seems like this wizard might be a good evoker able to use their advanced focus spell because they will be able to survive being more up close and personal in battle. So you can launch that AoE spell while activating your focus spell to hit everything around you.
The build has a spell list actually.
[removed]
Ah. I'm starting to see your expectations of how to use the build.
Give it a shot. Some people love the wizard, some do not. I have yet to play a wizard that lived or I enjoyed playing past lvl 5 or so. I've only seen another wizard played at to lvl 10 or so. Neither one was particularly impressive.
Main impressive casters I've seen have been bards and druids with certain sorcerers doing well enough. Perhaps this is an ideal wizard build that will elevate them some.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Apologies that sometimes I'm overly detailed.
I'm responding to you as well as lurkers so they can follow along, understand not just the suggestion, but the context, reasoning, etc.
I always appreciate that about your posts.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think this build is highly criticizable.
Tanking though class feats on a Wizard is not a good idea at all. If you want to tank, go Gnome and take the incredible Fortuitous Shift reaction that should cover all you do with Sentinel and Bastion without spending a single class feat.
Having a good third action is important, having all the good third actions is overkill. As a side note, Scare to Death can only be done by one character, and every +1 counts as it's dependent on 2 checks. So, leave it to the characters who can maximize it instead of trying to cover things you can't do very well.
As Voideternal pointed out, you have to increase int-based skills, because that's what your party expects from you. You are not alone (unless the Ultimate Wizard is one that fights alone, and in that case, I understand your build better).
Healing is not the same than extra hit points. Extra hit points allows you to survive to damage spikes. Healing allows you to heal the party. Also, when you start taking damage, healing may become much harder (hello AoOs and Grapple). So don't add it to your hit points as if it was a given.
In my opinion, you should choose from Sentinel, Bastion and Medic. Because at some point, your class feats will be way better than archetype feats.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The not trying to do it all alone advice is important to remember. If everyone in the party is expected to cover their own healing, then a whole lot of important skills are lost. If the wizard is the primary healer, then there will be too many turns where the party expects you to spend 2 actions at least moving around and healing others. That is going to cut into your spell casting time. Meanwhile, characters like clerics and champions usually benefit from spending actions moving to stay close to allies. Having the wizard move up to perform that role can often end up wasting actions from the party as a whole.
I think this is something about the wizard that is overlooked by a lot of people. The party really should expect the wizard to spend as many actions as possible casting as high of level spells as possible. That is the strength of spell blending thesis after all.
Spending a third action hiding with a decent stealth and dex at low levels and the sneaking to move with greater invisibility is often a super effective third defensive action that plays into your wizard feat strengths. Keeping a bucket full of good one action spells around can also make your wizard more effective. The wizard has some good 3 action spells as well. Bards , druids and clerics often end up filling such specific roles in the party that the whole party has expectations on what they are doing with 1 or even 2 actions every single round. The wizard definitely has one of the most free action economies in the game, but that can be a little deceiving if it ends up with the party expecting you to do something else more often than cast as many spells as possible.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am not saying it's the same as HP, but, me healing is a free action with a stride isn't really the same as just giving up an to cast battle medicine, and I do damage reduction from crits, alongside the damage reduction of Shield block.
Again, I think optionality exists, having the option doesn't mean, I am forced to use the option when it isn't best to do so, if someone can target a monster better, I can just do something like gives them a 3+ bouns to the check if needed. Many of the skills here are mostly additive here hardly an either/or here.
I don't think the class feats of a wizard are notable, giving up bastions reflexive shields for something like widen spell seems like a waste. Their very little offensive power being lost here.
First and foremost: How often do you expect to end up attacked? Because you have 3 archetypes just to suck damage. Unless you tell me you want to stay in frontline like a martial, I don't understand the point in having that many. Your party should prevent enemies to get to you. So you need to survive one round, if you can move away from the monster, you can go where you won't be hit again.
Then, lots of options is always good. But there are diminishing returns. At some point, you should try to improve your current options instead of grabbing new ones.
And you don't like Wizard feats, don't like int-based skills... I don't understand why you choose to play a Wizard. Your Wizard looks like a non-Wizard. Actually, that's a legitimate question: Why do you want to play a Wizard? I have the feeling that Wizard isn't the class you are looking for.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I expect to be attacked with the same frequency that a wizard would be attacked.
Then I can tell you with complete seriousness that you don't need all these dedications to survive when it happens.
As a side note, at greater levels, spells will put you down more often than melee attacks. Your weak Reflex save nearly invalidates the tankiness of your build (that's why I say that Fortuitous Shift should guarantee your survival as much as your 3 Dedications).
And if you expect to end an encounter with one spell then you're not playing the right game. It will happen, but very rarely. What's your current experience with spellcasters in PF2?
I am not the primary healer I am the wizard.
It doesn't look like it. The only argument that makes your build a wizard is "you can't cast spells if you're knocked out". Which is a valid argument, mind you, but you invest too much into it.
Even if the wizard class feats aren't to your liking, there's plenty of archetypes that make you better at being a wizard. Witch can give you great one action focus spells, familiar master allows you to cast spells from VERY far away, Scroll Trickster can cast spells from all four traditions, alchemist gets tons of utility buffs, overwatch allows you to make use of fog spells to grant your whole party concealment without downside, rogue or Investigator greatly improve your skills, beastmaster probably adds more "HP" than Medic, and so on.