|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Paizo understood that using bespoke weapon list for classes did not work well with the rest of the PF2 mechanics. This was readily shown by the discussions in threads about Rogue and Wizard.
So, they are taking this feedback into account and improving the class accordingly.
I think they will do the same with all the easy to correct problems people mentioned about the Wizard class for the past years.
Those erratas were likely low on their todo list, but now they have the opportunity to do them, and so they will.
Yep, the real issue is all the non quality of life changes.
The proficiency thing is a nothing burger. If anything the fact that they are granting that means they wont provide Wizards better casting than say Cloistered Cleric, not that they will add negatives for it.
The negatives will come instead because of the apparent dislike for Wizards as a class that some people have. Specially given how arcane casters are almost always underpowered or actioned taxed to high heaven.
Why would people hate the Wizard class ?
And who would these people be ?
Arcane casters have the list with the greatest versatility by far. I do not see them as worse than other casters at all. Do you have any specific example in mind ?
Well look at development cycle.
Tons of people complained about how wizards were too strong and then paizo nerfed the wizards to oblivion.
Tons of people argued that the nerfs were taken too far. People counter argued that wizards were fine "if you play them this exact way". Well Paizo did nothing to fix the issues, which I see as silent agreement with the people saying wizards were fine.
Tons of people hate that wizards are focused on being good at sets of spells because they disagree with those sets.Finally, most damning of all, Paizo spent 4 years not giving wizards anything. There are 72 results for things tagged with the wizard trait, 38 of which are from the CRB...
I honestly do not see why Paizo would hate any given class in their own game.
| 17 people marked this as a favorite. |
The lead designer has listed wizards as one of his top two favorite classes and is a lich enthusiast. The idea that Paizo hates wizards is pretty asinine.
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pn0z?Ask-Jason-Bulmahn-ALL-your-NonRules-Ques tions#45
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
Everyone has things that they like and dislike. Not to mention that a lot of people have come and gone from the team and so it wouldn't surprise me if the people left just don't like the class. For example the person writing the witch class left before it was finished, and look how that turned out.
You're now making a lot of assumptions on the character of the designers, which is pretty unnecessary and quite rude. If the changes found in the game are going to have you this mad at the design team over at Paizo, maybe you need to consider moving on to a different game.
You're comparing classes, whereas Temperans (and my comment to them on that point) was about Traditions ("arcane casters").
My point applies to both, so acting like this is an important distinction makes no sense. Arcane is an easily poached and unimpressive list, which by proxy applies to Wizards likewise being easily poached and unimpressive as a class, because they have few other features to them that define them apart from their spell list.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wizards need to stay the spell slot class. The casters with the most spell slots to fill with a wide range of spells. I think 4 flat with an arcane bond with be enough for that, possibly with having the cascading bond feat a school specific feat or a general feat for more total spell slots. I too would like to see some more good focus spells, but they probably should stay like force bolt, where they are third action spells or at least just not 2 action blasty spells so they keep that spell slot casting identity.
I thought it was confirmed that Wizards, Rogues, and Bards got their bespoke spell lists errata'd finally because the developers thought people would riot if they changed them and they'd always planned these for the next errata now that there's been time to see that it wasn't realistically that big of a concern compared to the kludge of having certain classes whose weapon lists are weirdly core-locked.
I couldn't name a source for this, but for some reason I thought that sentiment had been expressed somewhere by a designer, perhaps in one of the streams.
It was one of the two Remaster videos on twitch. Unfortunately I watched both back to back so I can't recall which one.
Basically a beefed up deity list is what I'm suggesting, so there's a precedent for it.
<Temperance Brennan>I don't know what that means.</Temperance Brennan>
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Soon enough you will know, so why fret about it?" -- R.A. Heinlein
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why are you assuming I am mad? Also, I am making conjectures based on the knowledge that I know off, that is neither unnecessary or rude.Everyone has things that they like and dislike. Not to mention that a lot of people have come and gone from the team and so it wouldn't surprise me if the people left just don't like the class. For example the person writing the witch class left before it was finished, and look how that turned out.You're now making a lot of assumptions on the character of the designers, which is pretty unnecessary and quite rude. If the changes found in the game are going to have you this mad at the design team over at Paizo, maybe you need to consider moving on to a different game.
Hard disagree there. You're making statements that I disproved with like 60 seconds of googling. You're making things up and presenting them as true. How is that necessary or considerate?
If I said "Temp hates TTRPGs because he spends more time complaining about them than actually playing them," how would that make you feel?
My (inaccurate) observations tell me that,
1. Life magic is best with Healing, Spirit magic Buffing, Mind magic Debuffing, and Material magic Blasting.
2. For the party's success and survival, defensive (= healing + buffing) magic seems to have more recruit value than offensive (= blasting + debuffing) ones. Although as a standalone character, a mix of both is the best (hence Bard and Druid classes being the mist satisfactory).
3. The Arcane spell list now specializes on Material and Mind magic, all "offensive" and slot cost diminishing values (PF2 Wizard).
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My (inaccurate) observations tell me that,
1. Life magic is best with Healing, Spirit magic Buffing, Mind magic Debuffing, and Material magic Blasting.
2. For the party's success and survival, defensive (= healing + buffing) magic seems to have more recruit value than offensive (= blasting + debuffing) ones. Although as a standalone character, a mix of both is the best (hence Bard and Druid classes being the mist satisfactory).
3. The Arcane spell list now specializes on Material and Mind magic, all "offensive" and slot cost diminishing values (PF2 Wizard).
Since they are going to overhaul the spells, I feel we cannot make predictions based on the old paradigm / data.
|
|
You're comparing classes, whereas Temperans (and my comment to them on that point) was about Traditions ("arcane casters").My point applies to both, so acting like this is an important distinction makes no sense. Arcane is an easily poached and unimpressive list, which by proxy applies to Wizards likewise being easily poached and unimpressive as a class, because they have few other features to them that define them apart from their spell list.
Arcane is the biggest list because the Wizard had to keep all the toys they previously had.
This is why it is "poached". Because it includes many spells that should not have been Arcane but were for legacy reasons (and specifically for the Wizard).
I really hope they will reduce it in the future to what the Mental + Material Tradition should be. I think it will happen in PF3, but I would love for it to happen in Remastered.
Such a refocusing of the Arcane list would likely come with an even greater boost to the Wizard class features. Because I am pretty sure the Wizard had lackluster class features to balance having access to the widest spell list.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Because I am pretty sure the Wizard had lackluster class features to balance having access to the widest spell list.
I don't know how much that makes sense. The bard is the primary class for the second most expansive list (and arguably the most broad feature wise) and still gets to have amazing class features.
Arcane Witch, Sorcerer, and Summoner options aren't significantly worse than their non-arcane counterparts to 'balance' spell list.
Wizard is probably the way it is because they put a lot of value on the extra spell slots.
|
|
Because I am pretty sure the Wizard had lackluster class features to balance having access to the widest spell list.I don't know how much that makes sense. The bard is the primary class for the second most expansive list (and arguably the most broad feature wise) and still gets to have amazing class features.
Arcane Witch, Sorcerer, and Summoner options aren't significantly worse than their non-arcane counterparts to 'balance' spell list.
Wizard is probably the way it is because they put a lot of value on the extra spell slots.
Likely both of those.
Wizard, Bard, Sorcerer came in the CRB. Paizo was still learning the balance of the post-playtest game.
I think they undertuned the Wizard because of highly valued spell slots, wide Arcane list and prepared spells (which were likely higher valued than what we now see with our shared experience).
The Bard is IMO an outlier benefiting from the disappearance of 6-levels casting. They overtuned the class without realizing how much.
That said, the second best list IMO is Primal because healing + blasting rather than Occult. All enemies that are immune to Mental spells shut down a big part of the Occult caster's toolbox.
I feel Sorcerer is mostly at the proper level of tuning for the game. I have seen very few people lamenting it being overpowered or nerfed into uselessness.
Witch and Summoner came later and benefitted from far more experience of how the game's balance actually worked.
IMO Remastered is, in addition to the removal of OGL parts, the fine-tuning that wide users' and designers' experience with the game now allows.
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Look, the weapon proficiency change is purely a Quality of Life update to the class because it was the only class not to have it. There will not be a compensatory cost applied to Wizards because of this. This will merely be correcting a design choice which they have since moved away from.
If you must think of it in terms of totally-made-up-and-really-really-don't-exist class budgets. The Wizard shipped with an unspent surplus of points. This change would be using a tiny fraction of those unspent points.
Just to point out, but class budgets do exist. They are of course more of a starting point than a straight jacket, but they've been mentioned here or there over the years by the designers.
I agree with your larger point that simple weapon proficiency probably does not affect said budget, but Darksol is at least correct that it is a possibility.
They exist in a very loose sense. Not the stringently costed version that some people seem to think exists. People have taken the mention of the design guidelines as these master formulas where everything is costed and balanced according to a hidden trove of data that Paizo secretly hordes, when the reality is far more freeform and interruptive.
Its why people get into mindsets like Darksol here. "How are they going to pay for it?!" when its not actually something that's literally costed in a meaningful way for the Wizard.
|
|
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think they undertuned the Wizard because of highly valued spell slots, wide Arcane list and prepared spells (which were likely higher valued than what we now see with our shared experience).
This is really the crux of it. At the time of first publication, a lot of inherent value assumptions had been brought over from 1st ed that were simply no longer true.
The "value" of the size of the Arcane list was generally overvalued, and that size as a power-source was overstated due to the opportunity cost that comes with being a 3 slot prepared caster. With the growth of all the spell lists over the years, the only one I consider to be any sort of outlier is Divine, in that its currently subpar compared to the others.
Prepared casting is also not what it used to be. With greatly more limited spellslots compared to 1e, the value of preparation has been greatly constrained. This ties into spell heightening as design factor, where lower level spells just don't have the same amount of robustness they might have had previously.
The additional spell slot is an interesting one. On paper it is very powerful, but a much stronger version of it was given to the sorcerer without the same constrains as the Wizard.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is really the crux of it. At the time of first publication, a lot of inherent value assumptions had been brought over from 1st ed that were simply no longer true.
I think they undertuned the Wizard because of highly valued spell slots, wide Arcane list and prepared spells (which were likely higher valued than what we now see with our shared experience).
Which is completely understandable. This is also the main reason why I expect the remaster to be a much better game. They most know now what they over valued.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think they undertuned the Wizard because of highly valued spell slots, wide Arcane list and prepared spells (which were likely higher valued than what we now see with our shared experience).
This is really the crux of it. At the time of first publication, a lot of inherent value assumptions had been brought over from 1st ed that were simply no longer true.
The "value" of the size of the Arcane list was generally overvalued, and that size as a power-source was overstated due to the opportunity cost that comes with being a 3 slot prepared caster. With the growth of all the spell lists over the years, the only one I consider to be any sort of outlier is Divine, in that its currently subpar compared to the others.
Prepared casting is also not what it used to be. With greatly more limited spellslots compared to 1e, the value of preparation has been greatly constrained. This ties into spell heightening as design factor, where lower level spells just don't have the same amount of robustness they might have had previously.
The additional spell slot is an interesting one. On paper it is very powerful, but a much stronger version of it was given to the sorcerer without the same constrains as the Wizard.
Not sure I'd agree with the sorcerer getting a much stronger version, not when wizards get to drain their bond for a 5th slot. Calling the wizard slots more constrained mostly comes down to prepared vs spontaneous which isn't as simple as one being better than the other.
But I will add another legacy problem that the wizard (and witch) have. They are prepared casters that have to pay to fill their spell book with options. Personally, I'd argue the arcane list is still the strongest overall, but not so much stronger as it was in PF1. Paying to learn spells where clerics and druids don't have to feels bad. If we are going to keep that asymmetrical design, I hope having a proper spell book gets some kind of advantage to compensate.
But I will add another legacy problem that the wizard (and witch) have. They are prepared casters that have to pay to fill their spell book with options. Personally, I'd argue the arcane list is still the strongest overall, but not so much stronger as it was in PF1. Paying to learn spells where clerics and druids don't have to feels bad. If we are going to keep that asymmetrical design, I hope having a proper spell book gets some kind of advantage to compensate.
Wouldn't the most logical balance be to make clerics and druids pay for their spells? I thought they did that already in PFS, for instance.
Wouldn't the most logical balance be to make clerics and druids pay for their spells? I thought they did that already in PFS, for instance.
Wut? 8O
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, allow Wizard to add Spells to their Spellbook in the same manner an Alchemist does, trim all the fat and legacy garbage relating to "translating it with special unique Arcane inks in your own handwriting." It eliminates the fussy, extra cost and fiddly bits relating to expanding their Spellbook but it does STILL incur a cost in that you'd need to have the Scroll. Did you get a copy of the Spell via Arcane Scroll? Cool, just slap that sucker in your book and it's yours!
Either that or they can just go full mask-off and abandon the traditional idea of a Wizard as it's been known as they are doing with Alignment and so many other D&D-like concepts and just reforge the Wizard into the Arcanist ala PF1, lord knows when they made that class it was the class favorite at it got about 75% of everything cool that any Wizard and Sorcerer could get and was far more flexible and powerful than both.
|
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not sure I'd agree with the sorcerer getting a much stronger version, not when wizards get to drain their bond for a 5th slot. Calling the wizard slots more constrained mostly comes down to prepared vs spontaneous which isn't as simple as one being better than the other.
The sorcerers 4th slot is just that, a 4th slot. It comes with no strings or baggage.
The Wizards 4th slot requires you to only prepare from a particular school of magic, which has to be chosen at 1st level and can't be changed. It also doesn't interact with things like the flexible casting archetype, or is disadvantageous if you are universalist and want to use things like spell blending, etc.
I'm not saying its bad or anything like that, I'm just saying the sorcerers 4th slot is a better version because it doesn't come with any restrictions.
Sure there can be room for nuance here, in that Wizards can manipulate their numbers of spell slots in a couple of ways whereas sorcerers can't. But we can get into this things like the Arcane and Primal Evolution feat chains, Greater Vital 2 additional spells from spent slots, the wider and better focus spells, etc. Its a bigger conversation than would serve the interests of this thread
But, generally, an unencumbered 4th slot is better than an encumbered one.
You're comparing classes, whereas Temperans (and my comment to them on that point) was about Traditions ("arcane casters").My point applies to both, so acting like this is an important distinction makes no sense. Arcane is an easily poached and unimpressive list, which by proxy applies to Wizards likewise being easily poached and unimpressive as a class, because they have few other features to them that define them apart from their spell list.Arcane is the biggest list because the Wizard had to keep all the toys they previously had.
This is why it is "poached". Because it includes many spells that should not have been Arcane but were for legacy reasons (and specifically for the Wizard).
I really hope they will reduce it in the future to what the Mental + Material Tradition should be. I think it will happen in PF3, but I would love for it to happen in Remastered.
Such a refocusing of the Arcane list would likely come with an even greater boost to the Wizard class features. Because I am pretty sure the Wizard had lackluster class features to balance having access to the widest spell list.
No they didn't. They lost a good amount of them when they rebalanced the spell mechanics and the math, saying they still kept everything isn't very accurate of a statement or a design goal of this edition. Spellcasters got necessarily nerfed, and the spells were where the nerfing took place. Wizards didn't have a whole lot of features in PF1 because of their power. Take it away, and they weren't given anything as compensation.
It's also ironic you say that not many spells should be Arcane, yet were because of "legacy" reasons. Meanwhile, Arcane has the least spell list identity compared to every other tradition, and has the least amount of exclusive spells. Yeah, sure, Wizard certainly has a lot of legacy spells on their list. /s
Arcane is a pretty lackluster list, and you want it nerfed more? At that point just scrap the Wizard class, because Paizo hasn't given them jack in years, and we're clamoring for a spell list nerf (which affects more than just Wizard) to have an excuse to buff Wizards. That's insanity and madness.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The sorcerers 4th slot is just that, a 4th slot. It comes with no strings or baggage.
While true, it's worth pointing out that Sorcerers do pay on the other hand by having one of their spells known permanently locked to a specific bloodline option.
The only time we've seen a fully unrestricted 4-slot spellcaster was the Playtest version of the witch... which nobody really considered overpowered and most people thought was kind of lame.
My suspicion is that Paizo was initially very skeptical of 'full' 4-slot casters, but hopefully their lesson from the APG playtest is that it's not a big deal and Wizards just get that in the Remaster because why not.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I wouldn't mind if all the spell lists were carved back to the Essences that the Traditions are supposed to be composed of.
Then specific Sub-Traditions could be used for the variety and special stuff.
IE Arcane would have material and mental spells as a common baseline, but schools could be where they branch out.
Every Wizard can do fireballs and clairvoyance and charm and grease and such, but wizards who draw their lore from Ustalavian sources have access to spirit magic that is normally found in occult or divine lists and maybe some special lightning abilities.
That might be out of scope, though
This is actually something I'd hoped the wizard was going to do before 2e rolled out. Back when they announced the various traditions and the issue of filling out school spell lists for wizards came up, it seemed only natural and fitting that wizards gain special access to spells within their school to add beyond their tradition. At the time it had just recently been announced that deities would provide clerics with off-tradition spells, such as Sarenites being able to throw fireballs, so it seemed quite plausible.
Unfortunately, instead they chose to give all Arcane spellcasters regardless of pedigree an expanded spell list, when narratively it was wizards who invented or discovered ways to cast all those grey-area spells.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wizards didn't have a whole lot of features in PF1 because of their power. Take it away, and they weren't given anything as compensation.
Now, that's not true.
- Spell Blending/Spell Substitution (pick one) is not nothing.
- PF2 staves are rather nicer than PF1 staves, if you're the sort who tends to have yoru adventuring days back-to-back.
- Focus spells are a thing.
- As you said, they didn't have a lot of features in PF1... which meant that they didn't have the features that other classes cashed in for their class feats, beyond the four bonus feats across 20 levels. So you kind of have to count the "got a full set of class feats" in there somewhere.
- Defenses against physical attack meaningfully improved by the general math-tightening. Similarly, they're not *great* at using weapons, but even at max level, if they choose to use a ranged weapon and invest in dex, they're hitting about as often as a fighter's second attack.
I make no statements at this time about the rest of the discussion, but it's simply not correct to say that the Wizard didn't get anything out of the shift to PF2.
Wizards didn't have a whole lot of features in PF1 because of their power. Take it away, and they weren't given anything as compensation.Now, that's not true.
- Spell Blending/Spell Substitution (pick one) is not nothing.
- PF2 staves are rather nicer than PF1 staves, if you're the sort who tends to have yoru adventuring days back-to-back.
- Focus spells are a thing.
- As you said, they didn't have a lot of features in PF1... which meant that they didn't have the features that other classes cashed in for their class feats, beyond the four bonus feats across 20 levels. So you kind of have to count the "got a full set of class feats" in there somewhere.
- Defenses against physical attack meaningfully improved by the general math-tightening. Similarly, they're not *great* at using weapons, but even at max level, if they choose to use a ranged weapon and invest in dex, they're hitting about as often as a fighter's second attack.I make no statements at this time about the rest of the discussion, but it's simply not correct to say that the Wizard didn't get anything out of the shift to PF2.
Spell Blending/Substitution only makes having useless lower level spells less of a drag, meaning it's at-best a parity option, and should have basically just been baseline Wizard if we're not going to give them features to compensate. It also doesn't explain why we don't include Staff or Familiar or Metamagic options if apparently these should also be comparable options to these (which they aren't).
To a point; PF1 Staves were extremely expensive, but at least gave powerful options as loot. PF2 Staves are basically like wands, but worse, and don't scale or upgrade worth a damn. At best they are good for utility spells that you don't want to spend slots on, but at that point you might as well take scrolls (or even take the Scroll Savant feat) instead, and save the money for actually learning spells or other gear.
I would like for you to point out what their 4 bonus feats got converted to. I'd be interested to see what sort of answer comes forth, if any at all, since I'm of the opinion that they haven't done anything with this sort of thing. Heck, even Fighters at least got some comparison with their bonus feats with their flexibility features. Wizards don't get that (and rightfully so, since they don't have even half the number of feats Fighters have), meaning they still got shafted.
Defenses improving basically results in an overall nerf to the Wizard (and by extension all spellcasters in general), since everyone else's (read: martials) accuracy was likewise adjusted to compensate for that. My point there is that a Wizard in PF1 could optimize their casting to the point of being almost unstoppable, and didn't have the four degrees rule in place to balance that out, meanwhile they had extremely potent spells that scaled quadratically with their spellcasting. We took that away and gave them jack in return. It's a nerf. Let's not sugarcoat it or red herring it in an attempt to downplay what actually happened. That's what they were given. Saying it was a good thing they got it at the expense of being worse than most other spellcasters is hardly something to gloat about. (And people wonder where Temperans gets the idea of "People hate Wizards;" it shows right here.)
I'm not saying Wizards should be as powerful as they were, but even compared to other spellcasters in this edition they are pretty weaksauce, since they have very little to offer the party that another class doesn't do better. Really, the only reason my Wizard was as effective for the party as he was, is solely because of my system mastery. Put a newbie in that place, and they will feel pretty useless and not have many avenues in which to improve their play, and they likely would have TPK'd far earlier than we could have. Whereas if you put them in another spellcaster's shoes (or even a martial's shoes), and you won't have that problem. At best they will complain about the stale gameplay, which is a fair complaint, but they certainly won't be complaining about uselessness.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I find I simply do not care enough to engage in intense point-by-point debate with you. You clearly have much greater enthusiasm than I. My previous statement will have to stand or fall on its own.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You're comparing classes, whereas Temperans (and my comment to them on that point) was about Traditions ("arcane casters").My point applies to both, so acting like this is an important distinction makes no sense. Arcane is an easily poached and unimpressive list, which by proxy applies to Wizards likewise being easily poached and unimpressive as a class, because they have few other features to them that define them apart from their spell list.Arcane is the biggest list because the Wizard had to keep all the toys they previously had.
This is why it is "poached". Because it includes many spells that should not have been Arcane but were for legacy reasons (and specifically for the Wizard).
I really hope they will reduce it in the future to what the Mental + Material Tradition should be. I think it will happen in PF3, but I would love for it to happen in Remastered.
Such a refocusing of the Arcane list would likely come with an even greater boost to the Wizard class features. Because I am pretty sure the Wizard had lackluster class features to balance having access to the widest spell list.
No they didn't. They lost a good amount of them when they rebalanced the spell mechanics and the math, saying they still kept everything isn't very accurate of a statement or a design goal of this edition. Spellcasters got necessarily nerfed, and the spells were where the nerfing took place. Wizards didn't have a whole lot of features in PF1 because of their power. Take it away, and they weren't given anything as compensation.
It's also ironic you say that not many spells should be Arcane, yet were because of "legacy" reasons. Meanwhile, Arcane has the least spell list identity compared to every other tradition, and has the least amount of exclusive spells. Yeah, sure, Wizard certainly has a lot of legacy spells on their list. /s
Arcane is a pretty lackluster list, and you want it nerfed more?...
I don't understand why people keep trying to sell the Arcane list as great. It isn't.
Arcane lost heroism which is a major buff in PF2. Don't have healing. Don't have the best debuff in synesthesia. Share most of their blasting and quality spells with other lists with higher value spells.
Arcane is not a strong list. Occult is clearly the strongest list in the game for doing what casters do well. Primal and Arcane are about on the same level, which Primal able to fill more party roles due to healing, condition removal, and such.
Some people still think PF1 wizard spell list equals Arcane list when it doesn't. The PF1/3E wizard spell list was clearly the best. Arcane list in PF2 is not at all clearly the best, not even close.
|
|
You're comparing classes, whereas Temperans (and my comment to them on that point) was about Traditions ("arcane casters").My point applies to both, so acting like this is an important distinction makes no sense. Arcane is an easily poached and unimpressive list, which by proxy applies to Wizards likewise being easily poached and unimpressive as a class, because they have few other features to them that define them apart from their spell list.Arcane is the biggest list because the Wizard had to keep all the toys they previously had.
This is why it is "poached". Because it includes many spells that should not have been Arcane but were for legacy reasons (and specifically for the Wizard).
I really hope they will reduce it in the future to what the Mental + Material Tradition should be. I think it will happen in PF3, but I would love for it to happen in Remastered.
Such a refocusing of the Arcane list would likely come with an even greater boost to the Wizard class features. Because I am pretty sure the Wizard had lackluster class features to balance having access to the widest spell list.
No they didn't. They lost a good amount of them when they rebalanced the spell mechanics and the math, saying they still kept everything isn't very accurate of a statement or a design goal of this edition. Spellcasters got necessarily nerfed, and the spells were where the nerfing took place. Wizards didn't have a whole lot of features in PF1 because of their power. Take it away, and they weren't given anything as compensation.
It's also ironic you say that not many spells should be Arcane, yet were because of "legacy" reasons. Meanwhile, Arcane has the least spell list identity compared to every other tradition, and has the least amount of exclusive spells. Yeah, sure, Wizard certainly has a lot of legacy spells on their list. /s
Arcane is a pretty lackluster list, and you want it nerfed more? At that point just scrap the Wizard class, because Paizo hasn't given them jack in years, and we're clamoring for a spell list nerf (which affects more than just Wizard) to have an excuse to buff Wizards. That's insanity and madness.
And it is most definitely not what I was talking about.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
...You're comparing classes, whereas Temperans (and my comment to them on that point) was about Traditions ("arcane casters").My point applies to both, so acting like this is an important distinction makes no sense. Arcane is an easily poached and unimpressive list, which by proxy applies to Wizards likewise being easily poached and unimpressive as a class, because they have few other features to them that define them apart from their spell list.Arcane is the biggest list because the Wizard had to keep all the toys they previously had.
This is why it is "poached". Because it includes many spells that should not have been Arcane but were for legacy reasons (and specifically for the Wizard).
I really hope they will reduce it in the future to what the Mental + Material Tradition should be. I think it will happen in PF3, but I would love for it to happen in Remastered.
Such a refocusing of the Arcane list would likely come with an even greater boost to the Wizard class features. Because I am pretty sure the Wizard had lackluster class features to balance having access to the widest spell list.
No they didn't. They lost a good amount of them when they rebalanced the spell mechanics and the math, saying they still kept everything isn't very accurate of a statement or a design goal of this edition. Spellcasters got necessarily nerfed, and the spells were where the nerfing took place. Wizards didn't have a whole lot of features in PF1 because of their power. Take it away, and they weren't given anything as compensation.
It's also ironic you say that not many spells should be Arcane, yet were because of "legacy" reasons. Meanwhile, Arcane has the least spell list identity compared to every other tradition, and has the least amount of exclusive spells. Yeah, sure, Wizard certainly has a lot of legacy spells on their list. /s
Arcane is a pretty
What are you talking about then? Because when we hear Arcane, we imagine the person is talking about the Arcane spell list which isn't a particularly powerful list to justify wizard arguments about spell lists.
The Arcane list is not a plus for the wizard. It's at best a break even and at worst a weakness.
My particular group views the arcane list as the weakest spell list because it can fill the fewest important party roles and thus limits party class options.
Arcane list cannot fill healer role. It isn't a good buffing spell list. Not good at condition removal.
Arcane can do blasting as well as primal with slightly more options. Arcane can do debuffing but uses fear, phantasmal killer, and such spells much like Occult without the most powerful debuff.
Arcane is a limited list that limits the classes that use the list.
So not sure why it keeps being brought up in wizard discussions as it is not a check in the plus column for wizards. At best it is a push.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And it is most definitely not what I was talking about.
I highly doubt I was strawmanning your statements, but I will go through them more thoroughly if you disagree with that sentiment. Feel free to point out what I don't engage with, though.
Arcane is the biggest list because the Wizard had to keep all the toys they previously had.
This is why it is "poached". Because it includes many spells that should not have been Arcane but were for legacy reasons (and specifically for the Wizard).
I really hope they will reduce it in the future to what the Mental + Material Tradition should be. I think it will happen in PF3, but I would love for it to happen in Remastered.
Such a refocusing of the Arcane list would likely come with an even greater boost to the Wizard class features. Because I am pretty sure the Wizard had lackluster class features to balance having access to the widest spell list.
You say that many spells that are in Arcane shouldn't be in Arcane, but were because of legacy, which is a relatively false statement, since a good amount of Arcane spells in PF1 are no longer Arcane spells in PF2, and also a good amount of Arcane (read: Wizard) spells in PF1 didn't have much overlap with spells from Divine (read: Other spellcasters) in the same edition. As it stands, this comes off more as "Arcane list needs a nerf, it has too many spells because of PF1" to me, which is ironic because Arcane has probably lost more spells from PF1 than gained, and is the 3rd place spell list behind Primal and Occult, and only edges out Divine due to its utility (which isn't unique by any means, but simply because Divine doesn't have it); it still loses out in most other areas, though.
You then say that you hope it is "reduced" (not simply changed, reduced,) because it's apparently not an accurate representation of the Mental + Material type combinations, which is funny since Arcane shares at least the Mental part of the Occult tradition, as well as shares at least the Material part of the Primal tradition, but doesn't have a large amount of spells that Occult and Primal gets exclusively (when its other half probably has little or nothing to do with the spell itself). Primal might be fine with its exclusivity, since a large amount of their spells aren't expressly better, and because Primal pilfers the mostly weaker spells of Arcane, but Occult is by far the bigger culprit by taking both the better spells and having better unique spells that, honestly, in my opinion, Wizards should have as well by being able to cast Occult tradition spells. (Again, where is my Occultist Wizard? I would probably prefer this compared to the Schools mechanic they planned to introduce, and if Arcane is so good, then it shouldn't be a balance concern to allow this to happen.)
You then follow-up with the idea that, if these reductions were to take place, that the Wizard will then be granted more robust features to play around with, which I will debunk by pointing out that Sorcerers and Psychics have robust features, even when relegating themselves to the Arcane spell list, so the idea that they had to "pay" for the Arcane spell list isn't really well-founded outside of the Wizard.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it was the idea at the time of the playtest and release of the game. You seem to be talking about the current situation and the current assessment, which benefit from 4 years of experience and new products.
Please tell me why the Arcane list is so big and with so much overlap with other Traditions if not for this reason ?
In fact, I am pretty sure one of the designers mentioned it in a post at the time of the playtest. But I do not remember who it was nor on which thread.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the arcane list has fewer exclusive spells because the premise of the arcane spell list is that "it poaches stuff from other traditions".
I believe it was Mark Seifter who said something to the effect of the reason the Arcane List was greedy was that they needed to make sure all the various kinds of specialists had enough options.
I think it was the idea at the time of the playtest and release of the game. You seem to be talking about the current situation and the current assessment, which benefit from 4 years of experience and new products.
Please tell me why the Arcane list is so big and with so much overlap with other Traditions if not for this reason ?
In fact, I am pretty sure one of the designers mentioned it in a post at the time of the playtest. But I do not remember who it was nor on which thread.
Probably, but we're not talking about the playtest here. We're talking about the current state of the Arcane list, and by proxy, the Wizard class, since it's been argued (even by yourself) that the Arcane list is the reason why the Wizard has such little features going for it. Things that were done during playtest doesn't matter compared to what the finished product is, which is that Arcane has no defining spells by nature of being bloated with garbage (which gets worse with each splatbook published), and Wizard is a lackluster class with little to no in-class feats worth taking; meanwhile, Sorcerer and Psychic are robust unique classes with mechanics that are worthwhile and have purpose. Wizards are about as bad as Champions (at least in the early levels) and Druids for feat selection, whereas these other classes have more feats and better option parity amongst them, even despite having some trap options themselves; the ratio of trap options to acceptable options is significantly higher by comparison for the Wizard, which just beckons the question of why. And when the Arcane list is cited as an excuse, I look at Sorcerer and Psychic and go "Hm, that doesn't track as a valid explanation at all."
If the idea is that Arcane is delegated to be a "PF1 Bard" type of spell list, AKA Jack of All Trades, Master of None, then it would explain why they have so many spells (most of which are garbage, the rest of which are replicated elsewhere) and don't have anything exclusive to them. I don't personally think the Arcane list was meant to be defined like that, but if that's an express design choice from the developers, then it's just a difference of perspective, then. Yes, it can have flexibility and versatility in its selection, but its flexibility and versatility aren't as good as Occult's or Primal's, and certainly isn't going to have the uniqueness that Occult or Primal does. At best, arguing that Arcane has the most spells is what makes it unique is like saying being morbidly obese has value and isn't a detriment at all to the person. It might be a defining feature, but that doesn't make it a good thing to have, and that's ultimately my point: Spell bloat is bad for both identity and function. Why have 1000 spells when only a dozen or so of them are worth anything, and when those 1000 spells don't even contain spells that other characters/classes can cast (which are better than most all of those 1000 spells, by the way)?
A designer mentioning it really just tells me that they acknowledge that it's there and that it seems to be working as intended, given that there hasn't been any action towards making Arcane have an identity besides the initial approach of "I am a fat spell list full of garbage spells with a handful of good spells that other classes can take/cast as well." Given that I am a Quality over Quantity type of person, I doubt I would ever see eye to eye with that design choice, especially if the Quantity doesn't serve much purpose.
I really believe that the Developers have been in a bit of state for the last couple of years over the arcane list and doing interesting stuff with wizards that wasn't just providing options to play more D&D style wizards. Like Dungeons and Dragons had such a monopoly on the identity of wizards that doing something new and original, that was still a wizard, and not something else was having to tip-toe around another companies properties.
I think Strength of Thousands and the Magaambya academy is the most Golarion unique wizard thing right now, and it also happens to be some of the best wizard lore around. I think there is room for Chelaxian Devil callers to fill a very rich space as well if and when Cheliax comes back into focus, but getting the whole remaster done so we can reinvent hellknights away from Law vs Chaos and into Anathema and Edicts, as well as possibly make champions that are more flexible in their goals makes sense because If the default, iconic Hellknight build is not some form of almost zealous champion of a cause, then I think PF2 is missing a serious opportunity.
But as far as wizards go and the arcane tradition, I think it is just too premature to assume that the spell lists are going to look nearly identical and serve the same purpose. I think these are much better questions to ask the developers when we get the chance to, rather then just tell each other how it is going to be.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the arcane list has fewer exclusive spells because the premise of the arcane spell list is that "it poaches stuff from other traditions".
I believe it was Mark Seifter who said something to the effect of the reason the Arcane List was greedy was that they needed to make sure all the various kinds of specialists had enough options.
Funnily enough I sort of feel like Arcane's problem is the opposite:
While there are a lot of spells, the walls between what it can and can't do seem more clearly defined.
Like it's been said that Occult is clearly worse at blasting, and in general it does have fewer options there. It's also comparatively worse at targeting Reflex.
But then there are spells like Animated Assault that give them some 'off color' options.
Comparatively, healing is not part of Arcane's portfolio. So it doesn't heal. That's it.
The problem is there's kind of a diminishing returns here. Unless it's just objectively terrible, there's a huge spike of versatility when you get one spell that does a thing, and then much less of one with the second spell (and then even less and less for the third and beyond).
So Occult and Divine being able to cheat a little bit ends up being a much bigger deal than Arcane having an extra 10 blasting spells in the same category.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the arcane list has fewer exclusive spells because the premise of the arcane spell list is that "it poaches stuff from other traditions".
I believe it was Mark Seifter who said something to the effect of the reason the Arcane List was greedy was that they needed to make sure all the various kinds of specialists had enough options.
The arcane list is a pie with a lot whipped cream. It looks like it has more than other lists, but really it is stacked with lots of fluffy, sweet, but useless whipped cream. Arcane spells don't offer more than any other list. There are a lot of them because the wizard that uses the list is a preparation class that can switch them out (possibly in 10 minutes), so you want to stack a lot of spells in the list so it looks like the wizard has a lot of options. But truly useful and viable options are about the same as other lists, so you don't end up switching too often.
I don't think the Arcane list should focus on Mental and Material. It should be Arcane focusing on lots of different aspects of magic. Strange universal secrets meant to manipulate the various forces in the world through arcane ritual and study.
|
|
I think the arcane list has fewer exclusive spells because the premise of the arcane spell list is that "it poaches stuff from other traditions".
I believe it was Mark Seifter who said something to the effect of the reason the Arcane List was greedy was that they needed to make sure all the various kinds of specialists had enough options.
The arcane list is a pie with a lot whipped cream. It looks like it has more than other lists, but really it is stacked with lots of fluffy, sweet, but useless whipped cream. Arcane spells don't offer more than any other list. There are a lot of them because the wizard that uses the list is a preparation class that can switch them out (possibly in 10 minutes), so you want to stack a lot of spells in the list so it looks like the wizard has a lot of options. But truly useful and viable options are about the same as other lists, so you don't end up switching too often.
I don't think the Arcane list should focus on Mental and Material. It should be Arcane focusing on lots of different aspects of magic. Strange universal secrets meant to manipulate the various forces in the world through arcane ritual and study.
That is not the Arcane Tradition in the PF2 setting and system though. And it has already been debated at lengths in Wizard's threads.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the arcane list has fewer exclusive spells because the premise of the arcane spell list is that "it poaches stuff from other traditions".
I believe it was Mark Seifter who said something to the effect of the reason the Arcane List was greedy was that they needed to make sure all the various kinds of specialists had enough options.
The arcane list is a pie with a lot whipped cream. It looks like it has more than other lists, but really it is stacked with lots of fluffy, sweet, but useless whipped cream. Arcane spells don't offer more than any other list. There are a lot of them because the wizard that uses the list is a preparation class that can switch them out (possibly in 10 minutes), so you want to stack a lot of spells in the list so it looks like the wizard has a lot of options. But truly useful and viable options are about the same as other lists, so you don't end up switching too often.
I don't think the Arcane list should focus on Mental and Material. It should be Arcane focusing on lots of different aspects of magic. Strange universal secrets meant to manipulate the various forces in the world through arcane ritual and study.
There have been numerous conversations about this exact topic in the wizard threads over the years.
The thing is, the essences of magic are pathfinders core system of understanding magic. It is unique to this system and isn’t going anywhere. Healing is almost entirely vital essence or spirit essence in this cosmology. “Targeting a specific save” just doesn’t fit as squarely in mental or material enough to really prevent other traditions from having access to some options that give those lists flexibility.
We will see if and how much moving away from schools frees up what spells can go where, but it is just impossible at this point to know how much the devs want to move those needles in a remaster, vs a full edition change. If magic schools can break the rules and offer out of tradition spells, then the arcane list itself doesn’t need to offer so much. Every other class with it gets poaching options.