Is there any specific reason why magus and wizard have one less starting trained skill than other classes with same chassis i suppose for wizard reason was that he was class with intelligence as main stat but existence of int based Psychic contradict that and i am currently still wonder what is the reason for magus
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Because they have 18 Int. I mean I see your point technically but are 7 starting skills not enough. I mean most other caster classes will have 4 and you want even more?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because they have 18 Int. I mean I see your point technically but are 7 starting skills not enough. I mean most other caster classes will have 4 and you want even more?
Why same penalty does not apply to Psychic then? he start with 18 int as well and Int is not main Magus stat by the way so that only apply to Wizard
Because not everything is identically equivalent. That would be boring. Every class has little differences.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah it is annoying. Int is already a bad stat.
That is the more important problem. That Int is, or to many people seems to be a poor stat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As I already said in another topic. This perception os Int being the poor stat is more class related than anything else.
I say this but for a caster view point Str is way worse. This view of Int being poor is more based in martial perspective than in general.
Having extra trained skill is far from bad. Even in medium to high level games with players with some master or legendary skills, trained skill are still very useful specially in many situations where there's no one expert or more with that same skill. Also any trained character can use it's trained skills to provide Aid in many situations granting very useful up +2 circumstance bonus (specially if the GM follow the default DC 20 recommendation) to more expert characters.
So no, extra provided skills from int are very useful many times. But in general doesn't worth the investment if you class don't use it as key stat because there will be a better benefit stat for that class. Otherwise will be so restricted useful like Str is utility for Athletics for a caster build.
Because they have 18 Int. I mean I see your point technically but are 7 starting skills not enough. I mean most other caster classes will have 4 and you want even more?Why same penalty does not apply to Psychic then? he start with 18 int as well and Int is not main Magus stat by the way so that only apply to Wizard
By referring to this difference as a penalty, you are suggesting that all of those classes should have the same number of skills by default.
Why are you making that assumption?
I don’t think wizard or magus need more skills
I find myself sometimes being stuck not knowing what skill to choose that fits my character because I have so many skills, I’ll often just use lore but even then sometimes I don’t know what lore to put other than something so extremely specific that it will never come up
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As I already said in another topic. This perception os Int being the poor stat is more class related than anything else.
I say this but for a caster view point Str is way worse. This view of Int being poor is more based in martial perspective than in general.Having extra trained skill is far from bad. Even in medium to high level games with players with some master or legendary skills, trained skill are still very useful specially in many situations where there's no one expert or more with that same skill. Also any trained character can use it's trained skills to provide Aid in many situations granting very useful up +2 circumstance bonus (specially if the GM follow the default DC 20 recommendation) to more expert characters.
So no, extra provided skills from int are very useful many times. But in general doesn't worth the investment if you class don't use it as key stat because there will be a better benefit stat for that class. Otherwise will be so restricted useful like Str is utility for Athletics for a caster build.
I disagree. Unless I'm playing a caster that uses Int as their key ability I would much rather pump Str or Cha than intelligence. They both offer a broader selection of options while Int's roll in recalling knowledge can be somewhat bypassed by Wis-based skills.
Because they have 18 Int. I mean I see your point technically but are 7 starting skills not enough. I mean most other caster classes will have 4 and you want even more?Why same penalty does not apply to Psychic then? he start with 18 int as well and Int is not main Magus stat by the way so that only apply to Wizard
I am not sure why Psychic is the only comparison point here - especially since only half of the build options have INT as primary stat. Witch also gets 4 + INT trained skills. As does Alchemist and Inventor.
Wizard and Magus are the only ones that start with 3 + INT.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
By referring to this difference as a penalty, you are suggesting that all of those classes should have the same number of skills by default.
Why are you making that assumption?
Looking at all of the classes, 4 + INT seems to be the baseline. Some classes get more than that, such as Bard, Oracle, Ranger, and Swashbuckler. Some skill heavy classes get many more than that, such as Rogue and Investigator.
But only Wizard and Magus get 3 + INT. Sorcerer looks like it is possible to start with only 3 + INT, but all of the bloodlines currently printed give 2 skills - though that may not be true in the future.
And if the argument is that Wizard would have more skills than expected because they are an INT based class, then why do Witch, Psychic, Alchemist, and Inventor still have 4 + INT?
So that is the reason for the assumption. That out of 22 classes, only 2 of them have that few skills.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think Psychic has an extra skill for an obvious reason... It's not always an INT based class. It is INT or CHA, and so Int could actually very easily be a dump stat for them. Magus can choose to not have a great int, but int does do a lot for them.
Inventor, Alchemist and Witch. Well now those are a good question.
Inventor and Alchemist are "martial" whose key stats are INT, some have argued this has made them weaker than other martials. Now to the people who say that, I doubt 1 extra train skill would be the balance they want. But I can see that being a minor aspect of the classes, power budget.
Witch has fewer slots than a wizard(thanks to the school extra slot.) Once again this is not the same chassis as the wizard, and perhaps a skill was given because of this.
Now then, am I gonna fight to keep Wizards and Magus with fewer skills than every class? No.
But i think if we look beyond what the key ability score is, I can see reasons as to why things might have turned out the way they did.
edit: as for flavor reasons, yeah I'll admit it makes sense for them to be skilled in things. But that could be represented by the actual techniques and spells they know( at least I can see that as an understandable justification). Someone who has a master or doctorate in a field, might have terrible knowledge/skill in a bunch of things outside of their specific study.(heck sometimes they are bad at specific thing in their greater field of study, if they have hyper-focused in an even more specific specialization)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think witches have more skills simply because, thematically, some scrappy woodsy hedge witch having diverse talents makes a lot of sense.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That would be boring.
PF2 would be boring if Wizards had one additional trained skill?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
That would be boring.PF2 would be boring if Wizards had one additional trained skill?
Don't misquote people. That is obviously not what Gortle said.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
PF2 would be boring if Wizards had one additional train
:( Attitudes like this are is why we'll never get that PF2 Eberron sourcebook.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
:( Attitudes like this are is why we'll never get that PF2 Eberron sourcebook.
PF2 would be boring if Wizards had one additional train
Yeah but if we're lucky we might get a Wizards of Alkenstar supplement.
Or maybe Irrisen? Maybe some of the post reign of winter immigrants there were appropriately skilled engineers. That might be the most plausible place to put wizard trains.
Because they have 18 Int. I mean I see your point technically but are 7 starting skills not enough. I mean most other caster classes will have 4 and you want even more?Why same penalty does not apply to Psychic then? he start with 18 int as well and Int is not main Magus stat by the way so that only apply to WizardBy referring to this difference as a penalty, you are suggesting that all of those classes should have the same number of skills by default.
Why are you making that assumption?
Because their are only one who have less skill than other clases i want to know what is the reason behind that
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not all psychics are Int-based. That's it. As for maguses, they only get 1 skill fewer than fighter. That seems pretty fair considering they're still extremely Int-dependent.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not all psychics are Int-based. That's it. As for maguses, they only get 1 skill fewer than fighter. That seems pretty fair considering they're still extremely Int-dependent.
I just really cannot see a good reason for it. 4 + Int seems to be the absolute standard and neither wizard nor magus have any thematic reason to be trained in fewer skills.
"They get more skills via INT anyway" is the opposite of a good reason. That's like saying a champion needs to have lower AC because they can wear heavy armour.
I'll agree that it's odd to have 2 plus Intelligence bonus skills on a class. I never liked that for a fighter in 1E (one reason I went with a barbarian back then), and I do like how they have enough to be competent people in 2E.
Honestly, I wonder if the limit is so that you don't get wizards who, with little thinking, decide that instead of grabbing Lore (smart thing), go for Athletics. Remember, those skills you get from Intelligence aren't always academic.
It's tempting to say 'well, wizards can get 2 + Int skills, plus two "free" Lore skills' to try to force the issue. I wonder if that'd be good -- you could have a wizard go all in on Lore, while the other who's on the Arcanamirium football team would have a couple Lore skills, plus Athletics and Performance for when on the field. Would that be a good compromise?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I disagree. Unless I'm playing a caster that uses Int as their key ability I would much rather pump Str or Cha than intelligence. They both offer a broader selection of options while Int's roll in recalling knowledge can be somewhat bypassed by Wis-based skills.As I already said in another topic. This perception os Int being the poor stat is more class related than anything else.
I say this but for a caster view point Str is way worse. This view of Int being poor is more based in martial perspective than in general.Having extra trained skill is far from bad. Even in medium to high level games with players with some master or legendary skills, trained skill are still very useful specially in many situations where there's no one expert or more with that same skill. Also any trained character can use it's trained skills to provide Aid in many situations granting very useful up +2 circumstance bonus (specially if the GM follow the default DC 20 recommendation) to more expert characters.
So no, extra provided skills from int are very useful many times. But in general doesn't worth the investment if you class don't use it as key stat because there will be a better benefit stat for that class. Otherwise will be so restricted useful like Str is utility for Athletics for a caster build.
Why do you will to pump Str and not Int for a Sorcerer for example?
About Wizard skill I don't know real reason but probably the designers think that once int is a key stat the wizard have guaranteed 4 skills at minimum and Magus they just copied from Wizard without thinking too much. While Alchemist they probably keep 3+int due the all-rounder nature of the class. But after CRB they standardized 3+int as default for any classes (magus was just a copy-paste), I won't be surprised if any time they change the wizard and magus skill numbers in PC1 or any other errata.
About Wizard skill I don't know real reason but probably the designers think that once int is a key stat the wizard have guaranteed 4 skills at minimum
3 minimum: For instance, a Leshy has a flaw in int, meaning you could start with a 10 int by taking wizard and putting no boosts in it.
I'll agree that it's odd to have 2 plus Intelligence bonus skills on a class. I never liked that for a fighter in 1E (one reason I went with a barbarian back then), and I do like how they have enough to be competent people in 2E.
Honestly, I wonder if the limit is so that you don't get wizards who, with little thinking, decide that instead of grabbing Lore (smart thing), go for Athletics. Remember, those skills you get from Intelligence aren't always academic.
It's tempting to say 'well, wizards can get 2 + Int skills, plus two "free" Lore skills' to try to force the issue. I wonder if that'd be good -- you could have a wizard go all in on Lore, while the other who's on the Arcanamirium football team would have a couple Lore skills, plus Athletics and Performance for when on the field. Would that be a good compromise?
Maybe. I wouldn’t be opposed to free lore lol
A muscle wizard could choose “Exercise” or “Weight Training” or “Protein” for their lores XD
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The biggest problem with having too many skill training is the dreaded moment when you run out of non-lore skills to take. With backgrounds, dedications, and other random sources of training you can quickly find yourself bumping against the soft-ceiling of "but I don't want any of these"
For some, Lore skills aren't seen as a big deal, and they may already have one or two and feel like going for more is a waste, especially since they won't likely increase proficiency level in those.
So I can see why Paizo would feel like they should pump the brakes on high int classes. However, I agree with everyone here who thinks its a pretty feels-bad way to solve the problem.
I think forcing them to get training in another Lore skill so that they don't run out of choices for the "main" skills is a decent compromise, but I'd like to see additional emphasis on Lore skills in general. Perhaps even a special feature for Int classes to have a floating Lore skill training they can switch out.
The biggest problem with having too many skill training is the dreaded moment when you run out of non-lore skills to take. With backgrounds, dedications, and other random sources of training you can quickly find yourself bumping against the soft-ceiling of "but I don't want any of these"
For some, Lore skills aren't seen as a big deal, and they may already have one or two and feel like going for more is a waste, especially since they won't likely increase proficiency level in those.
So I can see why Paizo would feel like they should pump the brakes on high int classes. However, I agree with everyone here who thinks its a pretty feels-bad way to solve the problem.
I think forcing them to get training in another Lore skill so that they don't run out of choices for the "main" skills is a decent compromise, but I'd like to see additional emphasis on Lore skills in general. Perhaps even a special feature for Int classes to have a floating Lore skill training they can switch out.
I kind'a like Lore as in a way a catch-all skill, although there is the issue of what's appropriate in the good-enough sense. Not quite as sure about swapping it out on the fly though ... at least, not at full power. I can see someone with Trained at least being able to bounce a little if they Just Read About This Thing, but they definitely wouldn't become an Expert without some investment.