| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd give their class DC progression the same scaling as the fighter's weapon proficiency for whatever their chosen school is.
| 15 people marked this as a favorite. |
If people have been following the thread(s) so far, the changes that people have been wanting are pretty clear:
1. Stronger Focus Spells. A lot of the Focus Spells from a Wizard's School are extremely underwhelming, with the best of them being a passable third action option (like Force Bolt, whose real value comes from being capped as a 1 action Magic Missile). Even the Advanced School Spells are difficult to justify spending feats on, since those are often even worse than the likes of Focus Spell feats from Sorcerer, Oracle, etc., which are often worth spending the feat on for what they give. Also, those classes are given "Greater" Focus Spells to gain access to, whereas the Wizard just...doesn't have them to begin with. You would think a class that has an actual specialization for their school would be incentivized to spend resources on this sort of thing, and be able to reach levels that characters who are allowed to opt out of can. But for some reason, they only ever get an Advanced School Spell? That should be fixed ASAP. Give us some Greater School Spells as well, and make these spells really strong and actually worth the feat(s).
2. Better Class Feats. There's only a few class feats that are actually worth spending the feats on compared to taking a Dedication or its associated feat(s). Scroll Savant is a nice feat, even if it's way late in the game and requires skill training that they may or may not possess. Bond Conservation offers a way of manipulating spell slots with careful planning and casting, which rewards tactical player behavior. Even the Counterspell feats have some merit to mitigate enemy spellcasters (though honestly are better suited for Spontaneous Spellcasters than a Prepared one like a Wizard). There should be more feats with this level of design and apparent value, and less "filler" feats that are basically trap options (looking at you, Form Retention). The less niche options there are, the better these feats appear to be.
3. Better Class Features. You're a 6 HP/Level with zero armor/minimal weapon proficiencies class, and have the worst scaling saves in the game. You should have a lot more features in your class to compensate for the fact that you have less durability than tissue paper. You know, things that make your flaws worth paying for. Yes, people cite "But spellcasting" as the justification for these defensive deficiencies, but when compared to other spellcasters who have better advantages with less payment for them, I call BS on it. Even compared to classes with a similar chassis, short of Witch, they are all given more to compensate for their lack of defenses, which isn't saying much since Witch is given the weakest class feature in the game (Familiars) as its baseline. Clerics have more HP, and a Font, and class feats that actually synergize with their kit. Sorcerers have Bloodlines, and guess what? Their class feats also synergize with their kit. And one of the biggest reasons why that is, is because Wizards don't have much of a "kit" to begin with. They have prepared spellcasting, a thesis (which alters their spell preparations/features), and an Arcane Bond. That's...it. The rest of the class' "features" is just proficiency scaling. They're so front-loaded that they have nothing in their mid-game or endgame, either in terms of feats or class features.
I'd give their class DC progression the same scaling as the fighter's weapon proficiency for whatever their chosen school is.
This is actually very interesting option given the tightening of the curriculum from the OGL schools.
I'm not exactly sure though how that would interact with wizards whom go the route of whatever is replacing the Universalist school. Might be kind of hard to balance out. However, it is an interesting concept.
I have to admit, although it wasn't limited to Wizards only, I've contemplated the thought of having the caster's Tradition's skill rank affect the range of spells a little bit. It would give some variability to range a little bit, potentially giving a full caster a little bit of a tactical advantage over a multiclass one in some cases if they let their casting skill lag.
I'd also split the cost of learning a spell up a bit. At present it seems like the cost of learning the spell is the cost of the special inks to enter the spell into your spellbook. If you copy the spell into a backup tome, you'd be paying the same, etc. However, despite the very expensive inks to enter a spell into your spellbook, ever few spells (whenever you level up) you seem to extrude natural expensive ink to write the new spells into your book for free)
I know the above isn't actually as intended, but the divergence bugs me a bit. I kind of wish that the cost of inks was something like 1/10th the given cost. But learning 'extra spells' cost the given amount in experimentation materials as you learn it. (and your 'free spells could skip the experimentation materials, but would still cost the transcription) Or something of the sort. I'm sure there would be other ways it could be balanced out.
The new version of Magical Shorthand for free at level 1 would be nice.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If people have been following the thread(s) so far, the changes that people have been wanting are pretty clear:
1. Stronger Focus Spells. A lot of the Focus Spells from a Wizard's School are extremely underwhelming, with the best of them being a passable third action option (like Force Bolt, whose real value comes from being capped as a 1 action Magic Missile). Even the Advanced School Spells are difficult to justify spending feats on, since those are often even worse than the likes of Focus Spell feats from Sorcerer, Oracle, etc., which are often worth spending the feat on for what they give. Also, those classes are given "Greater" Focus Spells to gain access to, whereas the Wizard just...doesn't have them to begin with. You would think a class that has an actual specialization for their school would be incentivized to spend resources on this sort of thing, and be able to reach levels that characters who are allowed to opt out of can. But for some reason, they only ever get an Advanced School Spell? That should be fixed ASAP. Give us some Greater School Spells as well, and make these spells really strong and actually worth the feat(s).
2. Better Class Feats. There's only a few class feats that are actually worth spending the feats on compared to taking a Dedication or its associated feat(s). Scroll Savant is a nice feat, even if it's way late in the game and requires skill training that they may or may not possess. Bond Conservation offers a way of manipulating spell slots with careful planning and casting, which rewards tactical player behavior. Even the Counterspell feats have some merit to mitigate enemy spellcasters (though honestly are better suited for Spontaneous Spellcasters than a Prepared one like a Wizard). There should be more feats with this level of design and apparent value, and less "filler" feats that are basically trap options (looking at you, Form Retention). The less niche options there are, the better these feats appear to be.
3. Better Class Features. You're a 6 HP/Level with...
I'd also add a 4th to this list of common demands:
4) Better Internal Balance of Spells: The problem-solving spells should be buffed so they're more worth preparing as a silver bullet and a hard look should be taken at how to balance damage, rider effects, and pure buffing/debuffing spells against one another so there's more incentive to branch out from the high-floor moderate-ceiling ever green spells that many players default to.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would make the wizard's control way more bold.
Thesis:
IMO thesis is how about Wizards deal and understand magic and spells with able to completely change how each wizard would deal with it.
You gain access to spells from all 4 traditions that have the same traits of your school.
You prepare spells like a flexible spellcaster but without loose an spell slot per rank and without the dedication feat.
Your can cast your schools spells as they as heightened to your max rank spell slot but this hight power makes your control over these spells proportionally more difficult. When you cast a spell of your school in a lower spell slot you can choose to heightening it to the rank of your hight spell slot but the your spell attack bonus and spell DC proficiency level is reduced to the double of your spell rank. Spells that don't use your spell attack bonus or spell DC cannot be casted in this way.
You receive a focus point. You can cast a school spell that you have prepared in this day using your focus points. The max rank of the spell that you can cast this way is you max spell rank -1 (with minimum 1).
Instead of you receive a school exclusive spell slot per rank you get a number of school charges equals to the sum of your spell ranks. For example a level 5 wizard have level 1, 2 and 3 spells ranks, so it will have 1 + 2 + 3 = 6 school charges. Like a staff when you cast your school spells using your school charges diminish the number of charges equals to the spell rank that you casted.
Schools:
IMO the great mistake that the designers made in remaster was abandon the school system as they are. Instead of make a bloodline variant they could simple switched added and removed traits from spells as used them as schools without even need to limit to 8. This could allow them to make the school of fire, or school of mentalist, or school of any trait they wanted to add to any school including new future schools.
Feats:
I would add more interesting feats linked to schools and thesis like being able to add different spells as school spells or to improve or extend some school or thesis functionality.
Obs.: Notice that I linked most thesis to schools. This makes them more thematic and interesting and open space to a long combination of thesis-schools to a players choose.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I will only make this one post in this thread and then leave it for folks who want to homebrew new options for their own tables, but this very much is a homebrew thread.
The remastered wizard is long done at this point. Asking for things like new and more interesting schools, focus spells and class feats is still something that could result in new printed options, and there is a possibility of archetypes like Elementalist, Rune Lord, cathartic mage, and Dragon Disciple being offered as ways to hone in specifically on thematic ideas, but that isn't about remastering the wizard, a process which, for better or worse, was done entirely in house with minimal direct and specific feedback from players.
So I don't really know how to treat this like "something more positive," for players frustrated at the decisions made about the wizard remastery, because nothing anyone posts here possibly could change the wizard remastery, even if it was the best, most universally loved idea possible. The best case scenario for class-based changes to the structure of the wizard here would be a homebrew class that became exceedingly popular amongst players, but it would still need to be homebrew first at this point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I will only make this one post in this thread and then leave it for folks who want to homebrew new options for their own tables, but this very much is a homebrew thread.
The remastered wizard is long done at this point. Asking for things like new and more interesting schools, focus spells and class feats is still something that could result in new printed options, and there is a possibility of archetypes like Elementalist, Rune Lord, cathartic mage, and Dragon Disciple being offered as ways to hone in specifically on thematic ideas, but that isn't about remastering the wizard, a process which, for better or worse, was done entirely in house with minimal direct and specific feedback from players.
So I don't really know how to treat this like "something more positive," for players frustrated at the decisions made about the wizard remastery, because nothing anyone posts here possibly could change the wizard remastery, even if it was the best, most universally loved idea possible. The best case scenario for class-based changes to the structure of the wizard here would be a homebrew class that became exceedingly popular amongst players, but it would still need to be homebrew first at this point.
There is nothing stoping the devs from implementing our ideas as errata. Other gaming companies are willing to make large changes via errata to keep their communities happy so I don't see why Paizo can't do the same.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would have made them baseline 4 prepared slot casters and given them the ability to spontaneously cast spells from their curriculum, so they always have their thematic spells online but without otherwise containing them, also some better focus spells cause some of those wizard focus spells are kind of crap
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Re: hopes for arcane theses changes, someone on the Pathfinder discord I follow dug up this James Case quote from the Paizocon discord channel back in the day: "For the remastered wizard, we focused mainly on remixing and remastering the spell schools--the arcane theses haven't changed too much, other than some necessary things brought about by other changes."
RIP.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll tell what I did:
1. I made every caster including the wizard like 5E casting meaning they can prepare spells and cast and heighten them as they choose.
I did this by taking the Signature Spell rule for Summoners and applying it to every class. So every spell in the game is a signature spell for every class including multiclass archetypes.
Casting is balanced enough as is with Incap and other limiters that casters all spontaneous casting is more fun without balance issues.
2. Wizard specific: I made the Spell Substitution thesis a standard class feature.
3. I tried rewriting the focus spells, but I found it wasn't worth it. Most are not good at their most basic level and not worth using. So I threw out my attempt to make them interesting and useful. I figure a player will find a use for them if they feel like putting the effort in as a few are not bad like Hand of the Apprentice or Force Missile.
What else would I like to see to make the wizard a worthwhile class in PF2:
1. More interesting feats that support the concept of a given curriculum. Universalist feats are in the best place right now, so that concept is well-developed.
2. Better focus spells for each curriculum that support the expected play-style. An evoker should be blasting, so force missile is fine for a level 1 focus spell, but their advanced focus spell should be empower or something that boosts their blasting that only the battle magic wizard can have.
The Augment Summoning focus spell as an example should be a free action with scaling to a level 9 heroism like effect to make their summons the best in the game.
Improvements that make you go, "Wow. I really want to use that at higher level."
Incentivizes wizard players to want to play a wizard all the way up by giving them impactful scaling powers to look forward to.
3. A few spells unique to the arcane list that are high impact spells like Synesthesia if they don't ruin that one in the remaster. A spell or two that makes the arcane list feel more valuable for control or support/debuff/buffing, which wizards are known for.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
1- Reliable third action focus spells and a third focus like other classes.
"Third action" focus spells are a lot less interesting than normal ones. A good focus spell is important for extending a class' longevity and defining their conceptual niche. So I don't think that's where the focus should be.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
The remastered wizard is long done at this point.
Feedback is a continuous process. There is always a new errata or edition.
Your reminders it is too late are tiresome.| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wizards are quite playable, but there is lots that could be improved.
The one that I think is most needed - a rewording of recall knowledge so it is not useless at the majority of tables. Thereby making INT a better stat.
At a minimum we should get a few more feats and focus spells for some options.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think a good question to ask is: would prepared spellcasters break the system if they all had Flexible Spellcaster without losing spellslots per day, cantrips learned, or having a specific collection of spells to prepare from?
I would like that to be a variant rule presented in the GM Core - mainly to hear the designers' thoughts on it. Does that make prepared spellcasters too strong?
Here's another question: would Wizard be too strong if they had Flexible Spellcaster but with the same amount of spellslots and cantrips learned as of now, and being able to use any spell in their spellbook whenever?
I've done this for wizards in my home games.
It has not made them more popular to play. Wizard class features are not very interesting and the arcane list is the least useful list in general play.
Occult is the best list with powerful buffs, debuffs, and healing.
Primal has healing, blasting, condition removal, and is attached to classes with more interesting class features.
Divine has healing and buffing and is also attached to classes with better class features.
Even with Spontaneous casting it is the least played caster classes in my games due to boring class feats and builds.
The wizard has no role versatility and doesn't do anything well enough to make it feel worth playing. If you play a wizard, you are pretty much a support damage dealer and so many other classes do that so much better than you with more role versatility.
You really didn't need role versatility in PF1. In PF1 in our home games we had a dedicated healer for survival. Wizards were a dedicated arcane caster when the Arcane list was amazing. It had almost everything.
Now it's much better to have casters who can heal and do lots of other things. That isn't the wizard or arcane casters. As a caster, it's much better to have a lot of role versatility and wizards and arcane casters provide the lowest amount of that versatility in PF2.
"Third action" focus spells are a lot less interesting than normal ones. A good focus spell is important for extending a class' longevity and defining their conceptual niche. So I don't think that's where the focus should be.
1- Reliable third action focus spells and a third focus like other classes.
I agree. 3rd action focus spells IMO is more useful as auxiliary spells for martials than casters.
Casters could use a sustainable spell as 3rd action during an entire battle, so a 2-action heightenable all-rounder focus spell usually is more interesting because it saves spell slots.The remastered wizard is long done at this point.Feedback is a continuous process. There is always a new errata or edition.
Your reminders it is too late are tiresome.
Yep. Probably the wizard will be the next "alchemist" in order to get erratas.
Wizards are quite playable, but there is lots that could be improved.
The one that I think is most needed - a rewording of recall knowledge so it is not useless at the majority of tables. Thereby making INT a better stat.
At a minimum we should get a few more feats and focus spells for some options.
No class in PF2 is unplayable. But some like the wizard is visible subpar that's why the complains.
Anyone that saw this and begin to dislike the wizards could (and probably will) play with any other better class or can play with wizard knowing that will be subpar but will still work and be somewhat useful yet don't feels right have to choose another class or being forced to play subpar to keep the flavor thats why we complain in order to Paizo do improvements in the class or even make an unleashed version.| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I will only make this one post in this thread and then leave it for folks who want to homebrew new options for their own tables, but this very much is a homebrew thread.
The remastered wizard is long done at this point. Asking for things like new and more interesting schools, focus spells and class feats is still something that could result in new printed options, and there is a possibility of archetypes like Elementalist, Rune Lord, cathartic mage, and Dragon Disciple being offered as ways to hone in specifically on thematic ideas, but that isn't about remastering the wizard, a process which, for better or worse, was done entirely in house with minimal direct and specific feedback from players.
So I don't really know how to treat this like "something more positive," for players frustrated at the decisions made about the wizard remastery, because nothing anyone posts here possibly could change the wizard remastery, even if it was the best, most universally loved idea possible. The best case scenario for class-based changes to the structure of the wizard here would be a homebrew class that became exceedingly popular amongst players, but it would still need to be homebrew first at this point.
Squaring up like a linebacker towards all dissenting opinion is tiring to watch, Unicore, and that's coming from soneone who agrees with 70 percent of the stuff you say.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Squaring up like a linebacker towards all dissenting opinion is tiring to watch, Unicore, and that's coming from soneone who agrees with 70 percent of the stuff you say.I will only make this one post in this thread and then leave it for folks who want to homebrew new options for their own tables, but this very much is a homebrew thread.
The remastered wizard is long done at this point. Asking for things like new and more interesting schools, focus spells and class feats is still something that could result in new printed options, and there is a possibility of archetypes like Elementalist, Rune Lord, cathartic mage, and Dragon Disciple being offered as ways to hone in specifically on thematic ideas, but that isn't about remastering the wizard, a process which, for better or worse, was done entirely in house with minimal direct and specific feedback from players.
So I don't really know how to treat this like "something more positive," for players frustrated at the decisions made about the wizard remastery, because nothing anyone posts here possibly could change the wizard remastery, even if it was the best, most universally loved idea possible. The best case scenario for class-based changes to the structure of the wizard here would be a homebrew class that became exceedingly popular amongst players, but it would still need to be homebrew first at this point.
In their defense, it is useful context to know Paizo's not going to implement any of this in time for the Remaster so people aren't getting their hopes up, though yeah in general I dislike people trying to shut down/derail discussions others are finding useful.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like subclass features for wizard. The biggest part of the of the witch glow up was as simple as adding a non resource dependent subclass lever in each patron's familiar. Wizards just slightly alter how they interact with their spell slot spells...which sure wizards and spells and such....but in an edition with tightly balanced spells they're not the wow factor they're intended to be (imo). A class that only has spell slots as it's wow factor is gonna feel lacking next to the bards and the druids and the psychic, who all happily sacrifice one or multiple slots per rank for something INTERESTING in their subclass or class feats. If three slots per rank or less is the price to pay for fun, non attrition based class stuff I say start hacking away at the wizard and sorcerer.
If people have been following the thread(s) so far, the changes that people have been wanting are pretty clear:Ok so you want:
1- Reliable third action focus spells and a third focus like other classes.
2- Feats that have more flavor and are less situational/niche/trap and at least better than taking a dedication.
3- Class features that can compensate for the low defense and that have more synergy with the kit.
Sounds good but how would you go about it? What would the third focus spells be like? What would a flavorful feat look like? What would a good class feature look like?
1. It depends on the school. Given how they are changing curriculums in the Remaster, it can be pretty open-ended, even if I personally dislike the "GM May I" approach to designing a curriculum (unless you use a pre-generated one, which look to be terrible). Given that there are alternative starter focus spells depending on school choice, I would prefer the Subschool approach that PF1 did in regards to the curriculum system PF2 is going, taking Admixture as an example for Evocation, which let you substitute the element of a spell you cast with a different element (perfect for Elementalist Wizards, by the way). I would treat this as a Free Action Metamagic Focus Spell which lets you exchange the trait and damage type a spell does with a different trait and damage type (and if a spell has multiple applicable types, you pick one).
Keep in mind that I'm not saying all of the school spells (especially the starter ones) should be one action effects, merely that they should actually be focus spells you want to use on a regular basis, and should scale relatively well, since ideally you'll be using them from the start of your career all the way up until the end.
2. Maybe some feats that better interact with Staves or Wands as well, so they are more incentivized to use these types of items instead of a weapon like a Crossbow or an Air Repeater? Such as Arcane Bond being able to be used with Wands/Staves, or getting an extra use from a Wand per day without expenditure, something like that. The Wizard class is stated to be a class that can undermine and manipulate the laws of reality. Feats that actually do this kind of thing with the tools they are most comfortable with (such as Bond Conservation and Scroll Savant) are good examples of Wizard feats players want to take. Feats that are situational number crunchers or have notable drawbacks for taking them are not.
3. The Theses should be expanded upon more and give more than what they give. For example, the Metamagic Thesis should let you prepare spells with a Metamagic Feat effect (which cost an action) built into them without increasing action cost, but cannot otherwise be cast normally. For example, a Widened Fireball means you have increased risk of friendly fire/collateral damage, but you can still cast such a spell with an increased area for a mere 2 actions. This lets the Wizards interact with Metamagic effects in ways others can't in a more meaningful way other than "You get a free feat, plus a free scaling feat." If we need to put a limit on the number of spells you can prepare with Metamagics (because there comes a point where there is no reason not to prepare spells in that manner), we can limit it based on your spellcasting proficiency (1 for Trained, 2 for Expert, 3 for Master, 4 for Legendary), or your primary modifier (Intelligence), depending on the scale we want.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, this is strictly my opinion. I think some dnd-isms left over from the transition from 3.5-> 1e-> 2e are part of the problem with Wizards, and why their class feels so weak in comparison.
The one issue I have with current pathfinder second edition design is the assumption of attrition for casters, but not for martials. I feel like this causes a lot of problems for the casters which could be solved by making them not reliant on daily attrition.
In my home game, one of my players wanted to play a Wizard, and he and I discussed this very issue. I'm still playing around with it, and it seems like it is not unbalancing play as we go. It does make him a bit more useful out of combat, which I don't see as a bad thing, but in combat it seems like he is roughly on par with the martials. Ultimately, we settled on the following.
1: Rather than limited spell slots per day, casters get a set spell pool, with a number of points equal to the rank of their highest rank spell.
2: The wizard can memorize a number of spells equal to their number of spell points, plus two, and four cantrips. Wizards are not able to take the class feature that allows them to swap out spells on the fly and must spend a night resting to change spells. The wizard may choose to heighten a spell they know to any level they can cast.
3: When casting a spell, it costs a number of spell points equal to the level of the spell. The only exception to this are cantrips, which cost 0 spell points.
4: The Wizard may spend 10 minutes out of combat to replenish his spell points back to full.
Right now the Wizard player is 11th level and just got their 6th spell point. Like I said, so far the system is working fine. I think you could expand this to sorcerers as well with the simple expedient of increasing the spell points slightly, keeping the number of spells known, and not allowing them to change spells like normal.
Basically, every combat the wizard has the option to go all out and get one massive spell, or ping enemies for smaller damage. Most times he casts 1-2 leveled spells per combat, and with our combats typically lasting 3-4 rounds I feel like it maintains the feel of spacing out the use. He always has his cantrips as a backup option once he's blown his spell points. I'm sure there are ways to break this like a kit-kat bar, but he's not a hyper optimizer so it works.
If I were rewriting the entire class, I would probably also make some changes to focus spells and the way a wizard chooses their school. My idea would be to make their focus spells be the 'on theme' spells, while their spell point spells are 'off theme' spells. An wizard from a theoretical Irriseni school might have some extra ice or wilderness themed spells that they can pull out every combat. Meanwhile, a wizard from Quadira might have mastery over fire or the sun, and have spells to reflect that. Another wizard from Taldor may have some spells which are useful for court intrigue and socializing, etc. I'd keep the power level of these spells around the level of their max level spell slot, and make it much slower to get focus points. Spit balling it without trying it out, I might create a school with two focus spells and one focus point at first level, then let the wizard gain a new focus spell every fourth level and a new focus point every seven levels, gaining an extra focus point at eighth and fifteenth level.
Just my .02, use it as you will.
|
|
snipI see so you get less spells but they can be replenished, This could be very balanced if they spell points are not too high but also not too low, It would ensure wizards won't sit on their spells but also encourage them to avoid spamming the most powerful spells since they would be left with low points for the rest of the fight, this way lower level spells, high level AOEs and buffs would be more efficient in comparison to spending all points in a few high level single target damage spell.
Exactly my thought process. It also gives the wizard the option of a lot of creatively used lower level spells, or going all out for that max rank fireball, for instance. Keeps them going all day like the martials, keeps them from going absolutely nova in a fight, and doesn't force a rest just to keep to the hypothetical adventuring day.
The number of spell points may need to be adjusted, but so far I like the balance of one point per spell rank, then falling back on cantrips. It also prevents the, 'OK, we fought one battle guys, I got to get a good night's rest in,' adventuring day a lot of Wizard players seem to prefer.
|
|
Yep, I'd generally agree with this idea. Might have to tweak it a little, but making wizards (and other resource-based classes) replenish their resources on a roughly per-encounter basis is vastly easier to balance than a per-day basis. Because every group will have a different setup for fights per day.Nobody wants the wizard to hog the spotlight with 15-minute workdays, but equally nobody wants to watch the wizard struggling along late in a long day while the fighter keeps on ticking. Especially since GMs tend to have a preference for one or the other.
Precisely. We already expect full HP at the beginning of every fight, and the encounters are balanced around it. Why not do the same with spells?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like subclass features for wizard.
This would be big. It was honestly something I was hoping to see happen with the new school system (especially considering the spell restriction) and it's a bummer it didn't.
Subclass features would not only make the class feel stronger but also make your subclass identity feel more relevant. Robust subclass features could help combat the feeling that every Wizard needs to be a generalist.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, this is strictly my opinion. I think some dnd-isms left over from the transition from 3.5-> 1e-> 2e are part of the problem with Wizards, and why their class feels so weak in comparison.
The one issue I have with current pathfinder second edition design is the assumption of attrition for casters, but not for martials. I feel like this causes a lot of problems for the casters which could be solved by making them not reliant on daily attrition.
In my home game, one of my players wanted to play a Wizard, and he and I discussed this very issue. I'm still playing around with it, and it seems like it is not unbalancing play as we go. It does make him a bit more useful out of combat, which I don't see as a bad thing, but in combat it seems like he is roughly on par with the martials. Ultimately, we settled on the following.
1: Rather than limited spell slots per day, casters get a set spell pool, with a number of points equal to the rank of their highest rank spell.
2: The wizard can memorize a number of spells equal to their number of spell points, plus two, and four cantrips. Wizards are not able to take the class feature that allows them to swap out spells on the fly and must spend a night resting to change spells. The wizard may choose to heighten a spell they know to any level they can cast.
3: When casting a spell, it costs a number of spell points equal to the level of the spell. The only exception to this are cantrips, which cost 0 spell points.
4: The Wizard may spend 10 minutes out of combat to replenish his spell points back to full.
Right now the Wizard player is 11th level and just got their 6th spell point. Like I said, so far the system is working fine. I think you could expand this to sorcerers as well with the simple expedient of increasing the spell points slightly, keeping the number of spells known, and not allowing them to change spells like normal.
Basically, every combat the wizard has the option to go all out and get one massive spell, or ping enemies for...
I relatively agree with this, but IMO I feel this would make better for a PF3 solution instead of a Remastered solution, since this is a large break from the intended function of spellcasting in this edition. Just as well, I believe this solution is already presented to us in the form of the Psychic, who has access to both reduced spells but also constant powerful cantrips/amps. In fact, a Wizard going Psychic dedication would be awesome if Wizards were also Occult spellcasters themselves. (Which actually brings up another complaint I have, which is why a Wizard can't be an Occult tradition spellcaster as a choice?)
I 100% agree that a lot of the assumptions from D&D 3.X/PF1 are being applied to PF2 when they are literally untrue anymore, though, and I'll even cite a few examples.
-A lot of the spell list power has shifted away from Arcane, meaning it loses a lot of unique identity and power it had in editions past. Arcane isn't the only spell list throwing out Fireballs anymore, Arcane isn't the only spell list tossing Vampiric Touches/Teleport anymore, and a majority of Wizard's power budget revolves around their exclusive spell list. I mean, I suppose Arcane being a "jack of all trades" spell list is a technically unique identity, serving as the "Swiss Army Knife" of traditions, but given that Bard has always been identified as a "jack of all trades" class, you would expect the spell list type to match up to the character type, and it just...doesn't. And to be clear, I'm not saying Arcane needs to be able to do everything at the absolute best like it has in previous editions, but it needs to have more identity and niche behind it besides being what is apparently the "jack of all trades" spell list that it currently seems to fill.
-A lot of the "Super OP" spells in D&D 3.X/PF1 for the Wizard have either been nerfed away or removed in PF2. Really, a lot of the "Super OP" spells are actually not a part of the Arcane spell list (Synesthesia, Heal, etc. aren't Arcane, for example), and anything "Super OP" that remained is still nerfed (Time Stop, I'm looking at you), relegated to Rituals (which are available to anyone with access/resources, meaning even Fergus the Fighter can summon a Solar with a Gate ritual, but are also impractical to use in a combat situation), and/or also available to other classes. (Druids can cast Haste now, Bards can cast Teleport whereas before they couldn't, etc.)
-A lot of the cheese that made Wizards strong are gone as well. There's no Metamagic spell level manipulation for blasting, no extreme amounts of bonus spells, and no ridiculous DC scaling effects, meaning no easy ways to optimize or boost blasting capabilities to extreme levels, as well as no ability to outright nullify the Rocket Tag contest that was present in endgame PF1, and no "15 Minute Adventuring Day" shenanigans possible due to the adjusted balance of the system. All of which to say that these aren't things I want to have kept in this edition, but acting like the Wizard is awesome because they thrive in these otherwise non-existent situations is an absurd comparison to draw, meaning I won't accept this as an excuse for the Wizard to be a "fine" class.
And that's just from the spells. Honestly, given that the Wizard's power in previous editions past was mostly tied to their spells and spell list, it doesn't surprise me that things which nerf spells/spell lists would also inadvertently nerf the Wizard as well. And this is technically true of other classes, but a fair amount of those classes are given other features to compensate. Whereas Wizard just doesn't get anything besides the ability to shoot an Air Repeater like everyone else could before.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think NerdOver9000's idea would be great if you do adventuring days with an absolute ton of encounters, but it's not really good if you have shorter days with a few big encounters that all need big guns. Because their solution really really reduces the amount of spells available per encounter. And in a severe or extreme encounter, you need more than that.
I think the solution is rather in bumping up the focus spells a bit in power, so they sit in between your cantrips and your highest level spells.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like subclass features for wizard.This would be big. It was honestly something I was hoping to see happen with the new school system (especially considering the spell restriction) and it's a bummer it didn't.
Subclass features would not only make the class feel stronger but also make your subclass identity feel more relevant. Robust subclass features could help combat the feeling that every Wizard needs to be a generalist.
Would be nice if they had this for their spellcasting traditions, and it's already present in terms of identifying which type of Wizardry they are, as well
Arcanist -> Arcane
Primalist -> Primal
Occultist -> Occult
Diviner -> Divine
Bonus points if the curriculums actually enforce this type of spellcasting, restricting which type of spellcasters you can be. For example, a Necromancer could be either Occultist, Arcanist, or Diviner. And heck, you could even make Elementalist its own type of Wizardry, since we already have the rules for the Elemental spell list.
|
|
Darksol,
100%. The reason why you played a wizard in previous editions was because of the OP spells...now that those are less powerful, there's less draw to play the class. You're also right about PF3 vs remaster. It would be a big change, but the reason I'm experimenting in my home game was because we liked the balance brought by having consistent spell access across the entire day.
Ascalaphus,
So far that hasn't been a problem in the game I'm running, but I don't typically throw extreme encounters at my players regularly. If you wanted to go that route, you could probably have a once per day or twice per day ability where the spellcaster could tap a hidden power source like a hidden secret talent, a ley line underfoot, or heck, the power of friendship, to grant them extra spellcasting ability at the expense of some kind of drawback. Maybe the mental energy makes them Stupefied 1 until they get a full night's rest, and increases by 1 each time they use the ability.