Potential Changes to Core 1 Classes

[CaffeinatedNinja]

Old_Man_Robot wrote:

Since the game came out I’ve been saying that the Arcane sorcerer ate the Wizards lunch.

Even their limited preparation allows them to go operate like a Wizard a lot of the time, without the drawbacks and being Charisma driven.

I have played both. I like the wizard flavor far more, but you are totally right.

I mean, arcane sorcerer gets 4 actual slots, wizards only get 3, then a restricted slot or use the bond to recast.

[Corwin Icewolf]

Jacob Jett wrote:

I mean part of the issue here is I'm making changes for my game and you're like why would you do this? And part of it is, I like a more realistic take on the setting for the game.

No I just wanted to know what feats you're missing

Quote:

Right now, fighters best simulate individual heroes, like Celtic warriors, skirmishers, scouts, rangers, etc. that don't fight in organized, regimented groups (unlike say, cavalry, phalanxes, legionnaires, pike blocks, etc.). Fighters really only have 2 feats that support building fighters like this: United Assault and Shield Wall. However, once I select the Hobgoblin ancestry, suddenly I have a smorgasbord of thematically appropriate feats, such as Expert Drill Sergeant, Formation Training, Fell Rider (for actual cavalry), Squad Tactics, Formation Master, We March On, and Rallying Cry.

Okay, so that answers that. I do still think that soldier sounds like something that should be an archetype, that way a barbarian or ranger could take it to represent a very disorganized sort of warrior moving to a very organized one.

Or even a spellcaster if the archetype had feats that allow for using spells in combat in such a way.

Quote:

I mean part of the issue here is I'm making changes for my game and you're like why would you do this? And part of it is, I like a more realistic take on the setting for the game.

So sure, sure, sure. I'll attempt to explain my position but I fear that you're so entrenched in your "don't do that" position, that it'll all be nonsensical from your point of view.

Quote:

So yep, I'm going to argue that an enterprising houserule writer can totally substitute abilities that are similar to some of those Hobgoblin feats I mentioned above in place of abilities the fighter...

I feel like I'm being confused with someone else...?

[batimpact]

Bards getting different starting composition cantrips based on their Muse is an idea I’ve heard more of lately. I don’t know how I feel about it overall, but I enjoy the thought of Inspire Courage being the Warrior muse’s signature cantrip. The different cantrips would just become low level feats any other muse can still take on their own.

[Jacob Jett]

Corwin Icewolf wrote:

Jacob Jett wrote:

I mean part of the issue here is I'm making changes for my game and you're like why would you do this? And part of it is, I like a more realistic take on the setting for the game.

No I just wanted to know what feats you're missing

Quote:

Right now, fighters best simulate individual heroes, like Celtic warriors, skirmishers, scouts, rangers, etc. that don't fight in organized, regimented groups (unlike say, cavalry, phalanxes, legionnaires, pike blocks, etc.). Fighters really only have 2 feats that support building fighters like this: United Assault and Shield Wall. However, once I select the Hobgoblin ancestry, suddenly I have a smorgasbord of thematically appropriate feats, such as Expert Drill Sergeant, Formation Training, Fell Rider (for actual cavalry), Squad Tactics, Formation Master, We March On, and Rallying Cry.

Okay, so that answers that. I do still think that soldier sounds like something that should be an archetype, that way a barbarian or ranger could take it to represent a very disorganized sort of warrior moving to a very organized one.

Or even a spellcaster if the archetype had feats that allow for using spells in combat in such a way.

Well, back in 3.5 my take was on looking at the cultural moors of the society in question. Do they value strength? -->Barbarian; Talent? -->Warrior (which was a class I built up on the bones of the NPC warrior pseudo-class); Discipline? --> Fighter; Formation? --> Fighter but also a customization I made from the Samurai class that I called Heritage Warrior. 3.5 fighter was surprisingly better at building soldiers because more feats were treed (which I leveraged to build feat tree paths for the heritage warrior - not only could you make a variety of different stereotypical samurai but I managed to also create something that would let you make Roman Legionnaires, Persian Immortals, Mongolian Horse-Archers, European Knights, etc., etc.), but also there were simply feats that catered to that style of character. Here some of the most interesting feats are gated behind Ancestry.

Corwin Icewolf wrote:

Jacob Jett wrote:

I mean part of the issue here is I'm making changes for my game and you're like why would you do this? And part of it is, I like a more realistic take on the setting for the game.

So sure, sure, sure. I'll attempt to explain my position but I fear that you're so entrenched in your "don't do that" position, that it'll all be nonsensical from your point of view.

So yep, I'm going to argue that an enterprising houserule writer can totally substitute abilities that are similar to some of those Hobgoblin feats I mentioned above in place of abilities the fighter...

I feel like I'm being confused with someone else...?

That is quite likely the case. Since I typically only post on breaks, especially lunch, I sometimes loose track of folks I'm responding to. Hopefully other objector now also understands where I'm coming from.

Note I don't disagree that the above could be handled with Archetypes but I personally have taste for consistency across the character classes, which means they all have sub-classes that don't revolve around free-form feat selection. And this is what house rules are for.

[YuriP]

CaptainRelyk wrote:

YuriP wrote:

It's from 1st print of CRB. Where druid archetype still don't have metal armor anathema the elf in the page also uses a metal armor.

It was repainted to be a leather armor in 2nd print when they added the armor anathema to archetype too. kkkk

You have a link to a picture?

I don't know if I can post here without break any forum rules (it isn't in AoN so probably it's copyrighted).

PossibleCabbage wrote:

Gisher wrote:

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

Hm...I wouldn't mind ditching the "metal armor druids" stuff, especially since there's art of an example druid multiclass character literally drawn wearing metal armor.

Look again. They changed the armor in that image to leather in the second printing of the APG.

I'm really hoping for a "metal order" druid class archetype in Rage of the Elements. It could be a somewhat heretical perspective for druids, but the plane of metal is now unarguably a thing that is, in a sense, natural.

Obviously the shtick can't be "gird yourself in as much metal as possible" but should be more about "using what nature provides respectfully and responsibly." After all, nobody recycles more than blacksmiths.

Oh! God! A Full Plate Druid from Order of Metal!

I don't know why a heavy metal disk cover with heavy armored Eddie controlling some metallic elemental comes to my mind!

CaffeinatedNinja wrote:

Old_Man_Robot wrote:

Since the game came out I’ve been saying that the Arcane sorcerer ate the Wizards lunch.

Even their limited preparation allows them to go operate like a Wizard a lot of the time, without the drawbacks and being Charisma driven.

I have played both. I like the wizard flavor far more, but you are totally right.

I mean, arcane sorcerer gets 4 actual slots, wizards only get 3, then a restricted slot or use the bond to recast.

Not only. Currently bloodline gives better and more interesting bonus (like additional damage from Elemental and Fenix bloodlines) and usually more useful and interesting options.

My problem with non-flexible prepared casters is that the prepared casting was never look liked a better option than spontaneous and with PC1 having no other spontaneous option than Bards it will be like the only option available to new players that don't know about AoN or that don't have older versions with sorcerers.

[Deriven Firelion]

Druid needed to be stronger being able to wear metal armor and plate, sure it did.

[Temperans]

Themetricsystem wrote:

Frankly, I think the best way to deal with the gripes about how Prepared Casters aren't flexible enough is to simply let them prepare more and/or give them ways to better customize, their existing prepared spells, not simply cave to the sentiment that they should be given more spontaneous-lite options.

Action-tax-free ways to boost/heighten/metamagic prepared spells using Focus Points would be a great option but in terms of bringing them closer to Sorc/Bard/Orc, nah, big no, that's moving in the wrong direction IMO, they need to make prepared casting more appealing and interesting, not just move them closer toward the schtick that defines other Classes.

I keep saying that they should bring back prepared metamagic as that was what made Wizards compete with Sorcerer despite Sorcerers having 6 spell slots. But every single time it gets shot down with "it was too powerful back then".

I still say people are vindictively against the Wizard being good because of some horror stories that aren't even the Wizard's fault.

[Corwin Icewolf]

Temperans wrote:

Themetricsystem wrote:

Frankly, I think the best way to deal with the gripes about how Prepared Casters aren't flexible enough is to simply let them prepare more and/or give them ways to better customize, their existing prepared spells, not simply cave to the sentiment that they should be given more spontaneous-lite options.

Action-tax-free ways to boost/heighten/metamagic prepared spells using Focus Points would be a great option but in terms of bringing them closer to Sorc/Bard/Orc, nah, big no, that's moving in the wrong direction IMO, they need to make prepared casting more appealing and interesting, not just move them closer toward the schtick that defines other Classes.

I keep saying that they should bring back prepared metamagic as that was what made Wizards compete with Sorcerer despite Sorcerers having 6 spell slots. But every single time it gets shot down with "it was too powerful back then".

I still say people are vindictively against the Wizard being good because of some horror stories that aren't even the Wizard's fault.

As someone who's favorite class in 1e was the wizard, and who feels the 2e wizard is way too bland, mostly in the class feats department: I'm mostly against it because I never liked prepared metamagic. It's needlessly complicated, and unintuitive.

Then again, vancian casting is really unintuitive to begin with, but why add an entire other layer of unintuitive mess on top of that?

[CaffeinatedNinja]

YuriP wrote:

My problem with non-flexible prepared casters is that the prepared casting was never look liked a better option than spontaneous and with PC1 having no other spontaneous option than Bards it will be like the only option available to new players that don't know about AoN or that don't have older versions with sorcerers.

Huh. Never thought about this, but it is an excellent choice.

Yeah it is funny how in previous editions spontaneous casters had slower spell progression to balance it out, but now they don't.

[Kobold Catgirl]

Deriven Firelion wrote:

Druid needed to be stronger being able to wear metal armor and plate, sure it did.

If it's for balance reasons, that's fair. But the rogue's and wizard's proficiencies weren't, and this is an equally old rule. It's possible, though, that PF2 decided to balance around the old rule, making it more difficult to extract.

[QuidEst]

Deriven Firelion wrote:

Druid needed to be stronger being able to wear metal armor and plate, sure it did.

It's a class archetype, so trades can be made. It already costs a feat and an archetype "slot", and almost certainly counts as their subclass. There could be additional restrictions, like locking out Wildshape, or just making their forms obviously unnatural so they're useless for infiltration.

Considering a human Bard can also get heavy armor as fast, I don't think it's entirely unreasonable even if it's only spending the archetype feat and subclass.

[Twiggies]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

Gisher wrote:

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

Hm...I wouldn't mind ditching the "metal armor druids" stuff, especially since there's art of an example druid multiclass character literally drawn wearing metal armor.

Look again. They changed the armor in that image to leather in the second printing of the APG.

I'm really hoping for a "metal order" druid class archetype in Rage of the Elements. It could be a somewhat heretical perspective for druids, but the plane of metal is now unarguably a thing that is, in a sense, natural.

Obviously the shtick can't be "gird yourself in as much metal as possible" but should be more about "using what nature provides respectfully and responsibly." After all, nobody recycles more than blacksmiths.

Thankfully, that is confirmed to be in the book! I'm hyped!

[bugleyman]

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

I wasn't necessarily replying to you, to be clear! It's just a recurring attitude I see on the forums lately--"just give wizards flexible casting at no cost".

It isn't a power thing to me, but a flavor thing. I'd be totally OK with it coming with its current cost; I'd just prefer it to be the default. Or at the very least, include flexible spellcaster in Player Core. That way everyone will have access to it without having to scoop up another supplement. Win/win.

[Golurkcanfly]

A possible buff to Spontaneous casters if Prepared casters became Flexible casters would be to have Spontaneous casters treat every spell as a signature spell. It still establishes a fiction of learned magic vs innate magic while being a less rigid to both.

[Kobold Catgirl]

bugleyman wrote:

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

I wasn't necessarily replying to you, to be clear! It's just a recurring attitude I see on the forums lately--"just give wizards flexible casting at no cost".

It isn't a power thing to me, but a flavor thing. I'd be totally OK with it coming with its current cost; I'd just prefer it to be the default. Or at the very least, include flexible spellcaster in Player Core. That way everyone will have access to it without having to scoop up another supplement. Win/win.

That's totally fair! I kind of agree, even. Flexible casting just feels better.

[Errenor]

Golurkcanfly wrote:

A possible buff to Spontaneous casters if Prepared casters became Flexible casters would be to have Spontaneous casters treat every spell as a signature spell. It still establishes a fiction of learned magic vs innate magic while being a less rigid to both.

So, they would still be strictly worse (assuming the number of spell slots is not reduced according with the Flexible archetype)? Flexible casters already have every spell as signature. And if the number of slots is reduced, common spontaneous casters remain much better, tinkering with signature spells is not that bad.

I dislike both vancian prepared magic and severe reduction of spell slots in the flexible archetype. At the very least the number of prepared spells must have remained the same (with reduction of spell slots number). And the number of prepared cantrips must be higher, not 2 lower than default prepared caster.

[QuidEst]

Golurkcanfly wrote:

A possible buff to Spontaneous casters if Prepared casters became Flexible casters would be to have Spontaneous casters treat every spell as a signature spell. It still establishes a fiction of learned magic vs innate magic while being a less rigid to both.

Paizo tested this out internally during the initial system design, and it was just too much cognitive load to worry about every spell at any level every round, especially for new players. It also made it feel bad to select anything that didn't have a heighten effect. Signature spells were actually created as a way to address those issues.

So, probably something that's fine at some tables, but would be an issue if they made it the official rules.

[Errenor]

QuidEst wrote:

Golurkcanfly wrote:

A possible buff to Spontaneous casters if Prepared casters became Flexible casters would be to have Spontaneous casters treat every spell as a signature spell. It still establishes a fiction of learned magic vs innate magic while being a less rigid to both.

Paizo tested this out internally during the initial system design, and it was just too much cognitive load to worry about every spell at any level every round, especially for new players. It also made it feel bad to select anything that didn't have a heighten effect. Signature spells were actually created as a way to address those issues.

So, probably something that's fine at some tables, but would be an issue if they made it the official rules.

What? 5e spellcasting works exactly like this, and people quite like it and have no problem to choose spell levels. There are problems in 5e, but definitely not this. And it wouldn't be a problem in PF2.

[Old_Man_Robot]

Personally I'm not a huge fan of 5e casting as standard.

I'm glad there is an option in game for those who like, but I wouldn't want to see it brought into PF as a base.

[Kendaan]

For the cloistered cleric, I'd love:

-reviewed/rebalanced domain focus spells. A lot of them are really poor. (That one could also be of use to Warpriest, champions, oracle and a few archetypes).

-reviewed feats related to domains use. I think there is only 2, they came a bit late and are underwhelming.

-allowing the healing fonts metamagic to be used with the aoe version of heal/harm when you can use it as 2 actions (except probably for Cast Down).
It really feel sad to invest a lot of feats in the font and not be able to do an area heal that gives +1 status to attack at lvl 14 with 2+ feats investment.

-have the metamagic feats for the harming font more useful/powerful. Instead of having them do the equivalent of heal, but on undead, why not have debuff effects or something like it?

[Dubious Scholar]

Oh yes. Domain spells are incredibly hit or miss on value, and there's a LOT of outright bad ones in there.

[Trixleby]

Who or what is Eorean or Forian? Are they a bot? Someone sock puppeting two accounts? clearly one is a something and the other is a familiar but...like I never quite know what's going on here. Kind of off-topic but just been confused about it for awhile.

[Dancing Wind]

Because there is a huge Play By Post section of the Paizo website, each Paizo account can create aliases for different characters.

Two clues:
1) If the username is blue, it's the primary account. If the user name is red, it's an alias .

2) If you click on the username, you will be taken to the account page. You then click on the Alias tab to see what characters/aliases that account uses on this site.

It's all legit and above board. That account is role-playing a familiar having a conversation with another character from that account. And you can see all the relationships by clicking the username/alias tab.

[Eydis, A Hooligan]

This is Dancing Wind, posting as Eydis.

[AM DOGGO]

BORK BORK *This is Themetricsystem, posting as AM DOGGO* BORK BORK

[captainyesterday]

This is the real captainyesterday.

;)

[WatersLethe]

This is a Smurf, posting as a Smurf!

[Deriven Firelion]

Errenor wrote:

QuidEst wrote:

Golurkcanfly wrote:

A possible buff to Spontaneous casters if Prepared casters became Flexible casters would be to have Spontaneous casters treat every spell as a signature spell. It still establishes a fiction of learned magic vs innate magic while being a less rigid to both.

Paizo tested this out internally during the initial system design, and it was just too much cognitive load to worry about every spell at any level every round, especially for new players. It also made it feel bad to select anything that didn't have a heighten effect. Signature spells were actually created as a way to address those issues.

So, probably something that's fine at some tables, but would be an issue if they made it the official rules.

What? 5e spellcasting works exactly like this, and people quite like it and have no problem to choose spell levels. There are problems in 5e, but definitely not this. And it wouldn't be a problem in PF2.

We use flexible casting. It was easy to implement. Given PF2 has enough balance points in place where it changes nothing. It allows casters to cast the spell they need when they need it, but it doesn't make them much better compared to martials. It allows them to shine when the opportunity presents itself rather than be stuck if they cast a spell, the save is made, and they are now out of that spell if it is a prepared slot.

Even with this change, my players mostly still prefer playing martials. Martial actions work more consistently than spellcasting and are usually a limitless resource.

[MadamReshi]

I feel like I'm missing something about Flexible Casting being default for Prepared Casters versus Spontanious Casters as they are now, and that being something that wouldn't make the Spontanious Caster chasis strictly worse at spellcasting.

What is the advantage, as a chasis, for Spontanious Casters if Prepared Casters got Flexible Casting for free? Not as a class - I can accept that with class abilities, Spontanious Casters have a place still. But it would seem to me then that being a Spontanious Caster would be a limit on your raw spellcasting power versus being a Prepared Flexible Spellcaster.

Am I misreading the rules?

[QuidEst]

Errenor wrote:

QuidEst wrote:

Golurkcanfly wrote:

A possible buff to Spontaneous casters if Prepared casters became Flexible casters would be to have Spontaneous casters treat every spell as a signature spell. It still establishes a fiction of learned magic vs innate magic while being a less rigid to both.

Paizo tested this out internally during the initial system design, and it was just too much cognitive load to worry about every spell at any level every round, especially for new players. It also made it feel bad to select anything that didn't have a heighten effect. Signature spells were actually created as a way to address those issues.

So, probably something that's fine at some tables, but would be an issue if they made it the official rules.

What? 5e spellcasting works exactly like this, and people quite like it and have no problem to choose spell levels. There are problems in 5e, but definitely not this. And it wouldn't be a problem in PF2.

Doesn't 5e solve the same problem by only giving Sorcerer 15 spells known?

[Deriven Firelion]

MadamReshi wrote:

I feel like I'm missing something about Flexible Casting being default for Prepared Casters versus Spontanious Casters as they are now, and that being something that wouldn't make the Spontanious Caster chasis strictly worse at spellcasting.

What is the advantage, as a chasis, for Spontanious Casters if Prepared Casters got Flexible Casting for free? Not as a class - I can accept that with class abilities, Spontanious Casters have a place still. But it would seem to me then that being a Spontanious Caster would be a limit on your raw spellcasting power versus being a Prepared Flexible Spellcaster.

Am I misreading the rules?

In my particular games, the sorcerer has better and more flexible build options with a better key stat.

So when I made the wizard and witch with flexible casting, they still weren't played very often because the other build options with feats and focus spells are still much better on the sorcerer.

The thing I'm noticing about PF2 is there are so many limiters in place, you can take one limiter off and the game runs fine. Even with flexible casting, the creature saves and innate power of the spells keeps them from becoming overpowered. Martials have sufficient options with higher success rates than casters to do things like knock creatures prone, slow them (Debilitating Shot), and there is no power shift from allowing fully flexible casting without reducing spell slots.

Casters are already very limited in PF2. So letting them cast a key spell at the right time at a level they need makes them more fun without disrupting the balance of the game.

[CaffeinatedNinja]

Deriven Firelion wrote:

MadamReshi wrote:

I feel like I'm missing something about Flexible Casting being default for Prepared Casters versus Spontanious Casters as they are now, and that being something that wouldn't make the Spontanious Caster chasis strictly worse at spellcasting.

What is the advantage, as a chasis, for Spontanious Casters if Prepared Casters got Flexible Casting for free? Not as a class - I can accept that with class abilities, Spontanious Casters have a place still. But it would seem to me then that being a Spontanious Caster would be a limit on your raw spellcasting power versus being a Prepared Flexible Spellcaster.

Am I misreading the rules?

In my particular games, the sorcerer has better and more flexible build options with a better key stat.

So when I made the wizard and witch with flexible casting, they still weren't played very often because the other build options with feats and focus spells are still much better on the sorcerer.

The thing I'm noticing about PF2 is there are so many limiters in place, you can take one limiter off and the game runs fine. Even with flexible casting, the creature saves and innate power of the spells keeps them from becoming overpowered. Martials have sufficient options with higher success rates than casters to do things like knock creatures prone, slow them (Debilitating Shot), and there is no power shift from allowing fully flexible casting without reducing spell slots.

Casters are already very limited in PF2. So letting them cast a key spell at the right time at a level they need makes them more fun without disrupting the balance of the game.

Yup. It also tends to help casters more in long dungeons, where they need the help the most. One fight in a day, you have a lot of spells prepped. Towards the end of a dungeon, without flex or spontaneous casting your options have dwindled greatly.

[Golurkcanfly]

I think there's also one case where making prepared casters into flexible by default without penalty is the Magus.

Magus has only 4 spell slots, so a single "mis-prepared" spell is rather devastating.

[Ed Reppert]

One wonders why, if flexible casting has so much upside and so little downside,
Paizo didn’t make it the default in the first place.

[Errenor]

QuidEst wrote:

Errenor wrote:

QuidEst wrote:

Paizo tested this out internally during the initial system design, and it was just too much cognitive load to worry about every spell at any level every round, especially for new players. It also made it feel bad to select anything that didn't have a heighten effect. Signature spells were actually created as a way to address those issues.

So, probably something that's fine at some tables, but would be an issue if they made it the official rules.

What? 5e spellcasting works exactly like this, and people quite like it and have no problem to choose spell levels. There are problems in 5e, but definitely not this. And it wouldn't be a problem in PF2.

Doesn't 5e solve the same problem by only giving Sorcerer 15 spells known?

Are you serious? 'Solved'? They heavily punished sorcs for something, yes. But bards are same 'spontaneous' and have much more spells. But that is a lesser issue. The main one is - spellcasting works exactly the same for prepared casters too. And wizard prepares, each day, more spells than sorcerer knows at all. It's completely senseless.

P.S. I don't know (and don't really care) at all what they are doing with their new edition. Maybe they will solve these imbalances. Doubt it though.

[Deriven Firelion]

Ed Reppert wrote:

One wonders why, if flexible casting has so much upside and so little downside,

Paizo didn’t make it the default in the first place.

Near as I can tell is tradition. Some designer at Paizo...I hear Buhlman...wants to keep the sacred cow of Vancian casting alive.

[Ed Reppert]

Sacred cows make pretty good hamburger. :-)

[Golurkcanfly]

Honestly if they killed daily spells/resources in general in PF3E or SF2E ai'd be overjoyed. It just causes a lot of book-keeping and doesn't work well with more varied pulp adventure structures.

That and daily spells, especially at low levels, can induce the "save it for never" issue like with rare consumables in video game RPGs, where it can feel like there's never a good time to use them.

[Kobold Catgirl]

I don't see what we gain from pointing fingers about it. Vancian casting for certain classes is built into the balance of the game, and that's not changing until the day 3e comes around, if it ever does.

I do think it would be neat to house rule it so that everyone defaults to Flexible Caster except the witch. The witch is the one class where Vancian casting kind of makes sense to me--she's hashing out deals with her patron, preparing creepy wicker dolls and eyes of newts and baby's breath blossoms, assembling a small collection of spells and charms she'll have on hand until the next sunrise. It would give her a little more of a mechanical distinction from the other casters. But that's a tangent.

[Golurkcanfly]

Oh, daily spellcasting going away for PF2e is certainly a bad idea and horribly out of scope, but it is weird that the closest equivalent to it in another class is Alchemist's reagents, which it can both prepare ahead of time at a higher efficiency/lower potency or produce spontaneously at lower efficiency/greater potency.

[QuidEst]

Errenor wrote:

QuidEst wrote:

Errenor wrote:

QuidEst wrote:

Paizo tested this out internally during the initial system design, and it was just too much cognitive load to worry about every spell at any level every round, especially for new players. It also made it feel bad to select anything that didn't have a heighten effect. Signature spells were actually created as a way to address those issues.

So, probably something that's fine at some tables, but would be an issue if they made it the official rules.

What? 5e spellcasting works exactly like this, and people quite like it and have no problem to choose spell levels. There are problems in 5e, but definitely not this. And it wouldn't be a problem in PF2.

Doesn't 5e solve the same problem by only giving Sorcerer 15 spells known?

Are you serious? 'Solved'? They heavily punished sorcs for something, yes. But bards are same 'spontaneous' and have much more spells. But that is a lesser issue. The main one is - spellcasting works exactly the same for prepared casters too. And wizard prepares, each day, more spells than sorcerer knows at all. It's completely senseless.

P.S. I don't know (and don't really care) at all what they are doing with their new edition. Maybe they will solve these imbalances. Doubt it though.

Ah, I was doing a Sorcerer-to-Sorcerer comparison, but it seems that was unfair. In any case, 5e Bard has 22 spells known compared to 37 for PF2 Sorcerer. "5e deals with the decision load problem by having fewer spells known" still seems reasonable. It looks like even Psychic gets more spells known than 5e Bard.

[Gortle]

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

I don't see what we gain from pointing fingers about it. Vancian casting for certain classes is built into the balance of the game, and that's not changing until the day 3e comes around, if it ever does.

Agreed.

It remains a big issue for some ex D&D players. From both sides of the issue.

I would like to see it as an official variant rule in the game masters guide. If might be as simple as hand out Flexible Casting for free to anyone who wants it.

[Kobold Catgirl]

I think the variant rule is called the Flexible Spellcaster class archetype. You could always homebrew it to remove the drawbacks, if the balance isn't a priority in a home game. Nothing wrong with that.

[J R 528]

Corwin Icewolf wrote:

Temperans wrote:

Wizard needs massive upgrades all around:

* Skills the same as other casters.

I feel like they could take it or leave it, they already get a bunch from being int based, after all.

I mean, shoot, spare a thought for the sorcerers, they get 3 or 4 trained if they don't add anything to int.

How about giving them an extra skill determined by their school

Quote:

* Reintroduction of prepared metamagic.

Hard disagree. Prepared metamagic wasn't particularly fun, and made everything a lot harder. Plus I'm pretty sure 2e wants to limit the advantages you get from being a system master, and I feel like that be harmful to that goal.

I don't fully recall prepared metamagic honestly but I would like to see more metamagic options but without getting as out of hand as they did in 1st edition

Quote:

* Upgrades to existing school abilities.

Agree.

Quote:

* More feats period (seriously, they have given wizards so few feats).

Totally agree on this in particular it's annoying that there so little that differentiates the Arcane Schools choice. You get one extra spell and a couple of often rather lackluster Focus spells but nothing in the way of feats so often your best choice is to take a Universalist just for extra bonded spell.

And more interesting feats. I'd like if the class feats they get can stand on their own in regards to flavor.

I myself having literally been working on feats for the Schools and Thesis's (VERY Slowly unfortunately) with the thought of putting it up on Pathfinder Infinite

Quote:

* More archetypes that actually care about Int and work with Wizard's proficiency. Way too many are more focused on literally any other class. (Only Con gets less love).

Would be nice.

What also be nice is if you had some Archetypes that helped open up the availability of weapons and armor (keep it simple you don't have give full access to all martial weapons maybe gain to one to three specific weapons/weapon types and maybe gain access to light and or medium armor. Presently it's Mauler for Two Handed Simple and Martial weapons and Sentinel for Light and Medium and nothing else outside the Fighter for weapons and the Champion for armor access in the main classes archetypes. Where as every one of casting classes archetypes the spell and you can even gain from a fair number of non main class archetypes.

Quote:

* More poaching of other classes. If all other casters are going to get feats that let them take spells from any list, why are Wizards being left out when their thing is studying magic?

Yeah. Call a feat "elective studies" or something and let them pick from a handful of spells from other spell lists.

Personally this isn't as much of an issue for me but I can your argument for it.

Quote:

* Rebalance Thesis because right now some are clearly way too weak. Not to mention that Spell Substitution should had been either a feature or a feat if wizards had actual features.

This really comes back to the issue with a lack of feats that truly differentiate. As an example I can see a set of feats for the Transmutation School Wizard having similar options like the Wild Shape Druid in that they could stay in a Battle Shape for much longer duration etc

I like spell substitution as a thesis. But a lot of them might need a boost, that's true.

Quote:

* Related to more feat, more metamagics and way to modify said metamagic. As well as ways to modify spells period.

Seconding more metamagics.

See my previous comments

Quote:

* If spontaneous casters are going to get ways to get prepared spells, Wizards should have ways to get spontaneous spells.

WHY??

Eh... Wizards...

Apologies for any formatting issues I'm doing this on my phone.

[Arcaian]

Ed Reppert wrote:

One wonders why, if flexible casting has so much upside and so little downside,

Paizo didn’t make it the default in the first place.

It really makes spontaneous casters struggle to justify their existence - just look at 5e, where the spont casters are just worse than the prepped casters in most contexts.

[Temperans]

Hmm let me check something.
* DnD3.5e: Spontaneous Vancian and Prepared Vancian about equally good. Pick spontaneous and you get more spells, pick prepared and you can do some special tricks.
* PF1e: Repeat of DnD3.5e but more streamlined and more options. They also added Arcanist which is Prepared Spontaneous Vancian.
* DnD4e: ??? Everything is a power, and from what I hear largely just reskins.
* DnD5e: Prepared Spontaneous Flexible is the default and better than Spontaneous Flexible. Prepared just has more flexibility.
* PF2e: Spontaneous Vancian is better than Prepared Vancian by a wide margin despite having less spells. Prepared casters either need a lot of extra spells or some very powerful at will spells.

So there were 2 editions where things were okay despite having vancian casting. 1 edition of ???. 2 editions where one type is better than the other.

Why not fix the issues that makes PF2 prepared casters worse, instead of saying they should just copy 5e? Or alternate thought if fixing those issues is so problematic (I don't believe so but wte), why not just adopt Arcanist casting? Alternate alternate, why not actually developt the Words of Power system from Pathfinder Unchained? Alternate alternate alternate, why not look at any non-DnD non-Warhammer magic system?

If the goal is to get away from DnD then copying 5e is the worst way to go about it.

[Vasyazx]

On side note for those who think that fighter is overpowered in your opinion what nerf he should receive to be in line with other Martials?

[Rysky]

Never nerf, buff others to even the playing field.

[Vasyazx]

Well that is better solution overall but it would be far harder to implement