snipRank 4 spells means you're 7th level. The WBL for a 7th level character stipulates 1 permanent 6th level item, 2 5th, 1 4th, 2 3rd, and 125 gp in currency. So realistically, the game expects you to have 125 gp to use for consumables at this level. It would not be "tough to have even ten [rank 3 spell scrolls];" it should be impossible at most tables. If you had a GM that let you sac permanent items to buy scrolls, they'd use the lump sum total, and you'd only have 720 gp total in wealth.
Further, your heighten math is misleading without listing the exact spells chosen, as many spells do not heighten every level (like magic missile) or only gain heighten benefits at specific levels (like haste).
It's likewise just odd to ignore arcane evolution in this context, since assuredly this Sorc would take it. This all further ignores a lot of other realities of item selection, feats, and so on.
Then there's just the low value of casting a wide variety of spells in this game. Regardless of how fun it is—and I agree it is fun—there are far fewer spells worth taking and using regularly than those that are not. Even if there were more that were useful, we're talking about learning so many spells that you start getting into functional overlap with the rest of your party members' abilities and even your own spells. Spells are not all equally valuable, and spell knowledge gives heavily diminishing returns.
Overall, the argument glosses over a lot of things and those glosses make the argument look a lot better than it is.
You two are looking at different wealth charts. You are referencing the starting wealth chart, and Unicore I believe is referencing the rewards chart, basically what you get over the course of the level:
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Casting is casting. We don't need these little boxes any more. Spell slots are limited now. Spells are all balanced. Metamagic works the same for everyone now whether prepared or spontaneous.Also I very vehemently disagree with this. Kinds of magic, approaches to magic, should feel very different. Wizards and Bards quite literally interact with and see the world in entirely different ways. Bards tap into some kind of Jungian collective unconscious for their magic, and wizards do like esoteric science nonsense, while sorcerers are like the athletes of spellcasters practicing using the magic inherent within them. When you play one of these the mechanics should reflect these differences, and right now prepared casting reflects a difference that makes wizards feel just that extra but wizardy. My only contention is that prepared casting doesn't add much flavor-wise to clerics and druids, especially clerics. It's great for the witch, magus and wizard though
Thematically, the wizard and bard to interact differently. Mechanically, they don't. They are both legendary progression casters sharing many of the same spells casting them exactly for the same action cost and same effect.
Thematically, the wizard and bard to interact differently. Mechanically, they don't. They are both legendary progression casters sharing many of the same spells casting them exactly for the same action cost and same effect.Casting is casting. We don't need these little boxes any more. Spell slots are limited now. Spells are all balanced. Metamagic works the same for everyone now whether prepared or spontaneous.Also I very vehemently disagree with this. Kinds of magic, approaches to magic, should feel very different. Wizards and Bards quite literally interact with and see the world in entirely different ways. Bards tap into some kind of Jungian collective unconscious for their magic, and wizards do like esoteric science nonsense, while sorcerers are like the athletes of spellcasters practicing using the magic inherent within them. When you play one of these the mechanics should reflect these differences, and right now prepared casting reflects a difference that makes wizards feel just that extra but wizardy. My only contention is that prepared casting doesn't add much flavor-wise to clerics and druids, especially clerics. It's great for the witch, magus and wizard though
Considering one prepares spells and one has spells known, already there is a mechanical divergence which represents their thematic divergence. More over bards get focus cantrips and such, wizards get theses, schools and so on. They have very different feats, bards get all kinds of songs, performances, things dealing with lore and emotion, and wizards get feats which weave protective sigils, alter the function of spell slots, and other much more utilitarian effects. Mechanics reflect thematics, and they should. Where there isn't enough differentiation between casters is precisely a place I see a problem. Different casters should feel different
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Being spontaneous and prepared simultaneously is an extremely large power boost and should eat up a significant portion of the power budget. Spontaneous prepared, aka flexible casting, should probably be limited to 2 slots per rank. It's absurdly powerful. 2 slots and next to no unique class features. Sorcerers would look pathetic in comparison otherwise. Combining this with Spell Substition means you just get access to your whole spell list. You have every silver bullet pretty much exactly as you need it. Absurd
No, it isn't. There are no silver bullet spells, stop pretending they exist any longer.
The sorcerer has36 spells. 36. They get 45 at level 16. They cast them spontaneously with signature spells. They can even change out a spell with Arcane Evolution and it doesn't break the game.
You're making stuff up to continue this false problem that doesn't exist.
Spontaneous and Prepared was already blended in PF1 with the Arcanist and it still wasn't as strong as the wizard because of the number of spell slots and the power of metamagic and feats like Spell Perfection and Spell Mastery.
I never quite get why people make these claims that are so easy to prove wrong and so utterly unprovable. Just pure conjecture with plenty of already available evidence to the contrary like spontaneous casters in 2E mixing prepared already existing.
I've played multiple casters to level 17 plus before I implemented spontaneous for all. I played a level 17 druid, level 17 bard, level 10 sorcerer, level 5 wizard, level 17 cleric, and a level 12 wizard. I did not make the decision to move everyone to spontaneous like 5E until I saw how PF2 worked.
It doesn't increase power at all. Why? This game is already balanced at the spell level. There are no silver bullet spells. Saves can't be altered from caster to caster. Fights are a short number of rounds with each spell costing the same action cost.
Unless you're doing an enormous number of fights per day, spontaneous versus prepared is mostly irrelevant and prepared is just an inconvenience if you try too hard to find what you call "silver bullet" spells when you're just as likely to get the same result using slow or lightning bolt or magic missile.
You spend this time pretending there are these massive number of scenarios that require preparation and that isn't true. 90 percent plus of combats can be solved by the same spells. You just change it up for your own amusement.
Out of combat the spell changing is a little more useful, but even in those encounters a good rogue or skill monkey can accomplish nearly all the same things without a spell lost.
This Schroedinger's wizard argument is one I've heard so many times over the years and yet if I were walk into your games, I wreck them in far less time without trying to get too clever about my spell loadout.
Changing spells has always been a vastly overrated ability. Even in PF1 I took power spells and wrecked nearly everything. I did not need much change to solve problems or "silver bullets." I took the power spells that worked great on everything with rare exception.
Some of you really like to dress something up that isn't that complicated. I have tons of experience across every edition of this game from the red box DMing and playing. I have tons of experience with other games.
I know with absolute certainty this game would run just as well with spontaneous and prepared blended. It already does. Even the wizard arcane bond and a few feats are basically spontaneous casting so you can grab that one spell from your book if you know it and blast it off. It doesn't break the game at all.
PF2 is built balanced regardless of what you do to it with the most imbalanced possibilities the blending of marital classes, not caster classes. PF2 breaks far worse if you let a dual class fighter and barbarian get made. A dual class fighter and cleric is just fine because of the actions per round limitation and that's one of the very worse caster and martial combinations that exist.
There is zero need to put handcuffs on that aren't necessary. This game doesn't break mixing spontaneous and prepared anymore than 5E broke or the Arcanist broke PF1.
You two are looking at different wealth charts. You are referencing the starting wealth chart, and Unicore I believe is referencing the rewards chart, basically what you get over the course of the level:
If I'm not mistaken, those charts express (close to) the same thing in different ways. It's just that one gives the starting wealth for the level for a single character (which is far easier to use), and the other says how much treasure the GM should give to the party as a whole over a given level (which is not as useful to players evaluating builds, but is helpful for GMs to benchmark loot against). The party currency for a level in the party chart can be divided by four to get the individual currency for that level+1 in the character chart, which is about as clear an indication of this as one could hope for.
It's admittedly somewhat confusing, both because the similarities are obscured by the assumption players will sell items they outgrow, and because there's an additional important clause in the text above the character wealth chart that helps square the differences between the two: "If the PC is joining a party that has already made progress toward the next level, consider giving the new character an additional item of their current level. "
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If I'm not mistaken, those charts express (close to) the same thing in different ways. It's just that one gives the starting wealth for the level for a single character (which is far easier to use), and the other says how much treasure the GM should give to the party as a whole over a given level (which is not as useful to players evaluating builds, but is helpful for GMs to benchmark loot against). The party currency for a level in the party chart can be divided by four to get the individual currency for that level+1 in the character chart, which is about as clear an indication of this as one could hope for.
It's admittedly somewhat confusing, both because the similarities are obscured by the assumption players will sell items they outgrow, and because there's an additional important clause in the text above the character wealth chart that helps square the differences between the two: "If the PC is joining a party that has already made progress toward the next level, consider giving the new character an additional item of their current level. "
I think she was just simplifying by having all the gold go to scrolls rather than getting into staves and wands etc. when creating an example some degree of abstraction and simplification is necessary to illustrate a point
snip
Always being able to target the weakest save with the best kind of spells effect against an enemy is a silver bullet. It's back breaking and even in this game solves an encounter, it's just less obvious. I don't know how you can consistently write the same things to me and everyone else day after day and expect things to go differently. Some spells affect different scenarios more, some spells still invalidate skills. Consider how fly invalidates athletics used to climb. Easy simple example, no skill check. Yes the game is well balanced, but part of that balance is restricting these things. Flexible casting has a cost for a reason, the designers were right to give it a cost of a spell slot per level
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Always being able to target the weakest save with the best kind of spells effect against an enemy is a silver bullet. It's back breaking and even in this game solves an encounter, it's just less obvious. I don't know how you can consistently write the same things to me and everyone else day after day and expect things to go differently. Some spells affect different scenarios more, some spells still invalidate skills. Consider how fly invalidates athletics used to climb. Easy simple example, no skill check. Yes the game is well balanced, but part of that balance is restricting these things. Flexible casting has a cost for a reason, the designers were right to give it a cost of a spell slot per level
"Silver bullet" is typically used to describe a uniquely efficacious spell. The main example still in 2E is something like Revealing Light against a poltergeist; it mitigates the most obnoxious aspect of the fight. Another example would be Roaring Applause against a creature uniquely dependent on its reaction to be threatening. (Roaring Applause is quite good even when this isn't true... but we'll ignore that for the sake of example.) The spell choice should have a uniquely significant detrimental effect on the enemy, or solve some important problem in the encounter, in order to be a silver bullet. It is not typically used to describe what often comes out to the equivalent of targeting the correct save with a shadow signet.
I feel like in some ways, you're agreeing with Deriven without realizing it here; it's just masked by disagreeing with the terminology being used.
Also, Fly hardly invalidates climb in this game; there comes a point where you autosucceed at most typical climb checks if you've been putting skill increases in, and a lot of martials get access to means of flight regardless. Heck, when fly comes online, the martial with Master athletics and a +4 STR is looking pretty good. That's what, level (7)+stat(4)+proficiency(6) for +17? You only fail or crit fail an expert DC 10% of the time, and by level 9, you'll never crit fail. That's resourceless! Fly costs a top rank or next to top rank slot.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, Fly hardly invalidates climb in this game; there comes a point where you autosucceed at most typical climb checks if you've been putting skill increases in, and a lot of martials get access to means of flight regardless. Heck, when fly comes online, the martial with Master athletics and a +4 STR is looking pretty good. That's what, level (7)+stat(4)+proficiency(6) for +17? You only fail or crit fail...
There is something to be said about how spells can just take the spotlight away from others if you just allow casters to swap in the thing they need at that moment. In the example with fly, you really take a moment for the strength character away from them in this moment. There is also something to be said about fly being quicker than climbing since it's just movement and you don't have to move incrementally with each check, and also sheer surfaces. I also think spending a top rank slot when they're all modal and you can even refill one is less of a cost than if you had normal prepared casting. Fly isn't the best example, but it's the one I thought of in the moment. It's probably good things like knock now help your rogue pick locks instead of just opening doors now
My example was taking lump sum and spending all wealth on scrolls for the sorcerer, because that is very close to how I play casters. In reality I spend about 75-80 of my character wealth on scrolls which by level 7 usually amounts to about 1000 gold than 720, but I simplified for this example, because I wanted to demonstrate how much more the spell substitution wizard gets out of scroll usage than a sorcerer.
Again, I only gave the wizard half as much gold for scrolls as the sorcerer, when 65 to 70% would have been more accurate, so probably something more like 650 to 700 gp is what my actual, real Wizard has spent on scrolls, of which I am currently down to only 5 1st rank scrolls left because I use them like candy to cast spells all day long.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
snipAlways being able to target the weakest save with the best kind of spells effect against an enemy is a silver bullet. It's back breaking and even in this game solves an encounter, it's just less obvious. I don't know how you can consistently write the same things to me and everyone else day after day and expect things to go differently. Some spells affect different scenarios more, some spells still invalidate skills. Consider how fly invalidates athletics used to climb. Easy simple example, no skill check. Yes the game is well balanced, but part of that balance is restricting these things. Flexible casting has a cost for a reason, the designers were right to give it a cost...
Yeah, “there are no silver bullet spells” is a wild take lol.
I throw Laughing Fit when facing a Black Dragon and know that we’ll die against its Reaction, Acid Grip when my friend is Restrained, Wall of Stone when facing 4x on-level enemies as a difficult encounter, Freezing Rain when facing 8+ lower level enemies as a difficult encounter, etc.
Not only are situationally good spells a powerful and useful thing in this game, the entire caster experience is balanced around their use.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So keeping in mind that one is a rank 1 signature spell, and one has to be a bloodline spell, what are the 5 total rank 2 spells that make up the obvious must have spells for a sorcerer? We can just look at a level 7 arcanesorcerer for now.
Mist? Revealing Light? Dispel magic? Invisibility? Laughing fit? Acid grab? Floating flame? Illusory creature? False Vitality? Telekinetic Maneuver?
Because my 7th level wizard casts all of those pretty regularly plus at least 5 more second level spells enough that scrolls would be a lot of wealth down the drain at this point. And none of those are heightened 1st level spells.
So keeping in mind that one is a rank 1 signature spell, and one has to be a bloodline spell, what are the 5 total rank 2 spells that make up the obvious must have spells for a sorcerer? We can just look at a level 7 arcanesorcerer for now.
Mist? Revealing Light? Dispel magic? Invisibility? Laughing fit? Acid grab? Floating flame? Illusory creature? False Vitality? Telekinetic Maneuver?
Because my 7th level wizard casts all of those pretty regularly plus at least 5 more second level spells enough that scrolls would be a lot of wealth down the drain at this point. And none of those are heightened 1st level spells.
More a contribution than an answer, but when checking this, I would assign a lower value to spells like Revealing Light that have their silver bullet aspect well-covered by nonmagical consumables.
Cat's Eye Elixir
Revealing Mist
The primary value adds for Revealing Light over these are inflicting dazzled, which is nice, but ultimately unnecessary to counter invisibility; and using the caster's actions instead of the martials'. The consumables have the upside of never failing, instead.
Ok, so we get rid of revealing light, leaving 9 more.
As a spell substitution wizard, I like having revealing light as one rank 2 spell whenever it sounds like we might be fighting fiends, ghosts, etc where it might be useful, then switching it out as I run down on other important spells, thus only using a consumable to cover it if it is a late encounter in the day, rather than something I have to use a consumable for every time I encounter an invisible creature, but I get that there are many campaigns where its useage is rare enough for it not to be a big deal.
Unrelated, but I felt "glitter dust" fit the aesthetic of wizards and arcane casters in general better than revealing light does, which feels more divine than arcane. Obviously I can just reflavor this, lowest tier of complaint possible
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Unrelated, but I felt "glitter dust" fit the aesthetic of wizards and arcane casters in general better than revealing light does, which feels more divine than arcane. Obviously I can just reflavor this, lowest tier of complaint possible
If I'm being honest, every time I see the spell, I just think of the picture on SWORDS OF REVEALING LIGHT from ygo, of all things. So I can't exactly say I'm much better off than you here.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So keeping in mind that one is a rank 1 signature spell, and one has to be a bloodline spell, what are the 5 total rank 2 spells that make up the obvious must have spells for a sorcerer? We can just look at a level 7 arcanesorcerer for now.
Mist? Revealing Light? Dispel magic? Invisibility? Laughing fit? Acid grab? Floating flame? Illusory creature? False Vitality? Telekinetic Maneuver?
Because my 7th level wizard casts all of those pretty regularly plus at least 5 more second level spells enough that scrolls would be a lot of wealth down the drain at this point. And none of those are heightened 1st level spells.
Exactly. It’s not about whether there are 4 or 5 spells a Wizard switches up between that the Sorcerer can more or less replicate. It’s the 40 or 50 spells which the Wizard switches between that the Sorcerer usually can’t replicate without a lot of good expenditure.
Over the course of levels 1-10, the spells that my Wizard found crucial for some or the other reason (at various levels) were:
- 1st rank: Runic Weapon, Befuddle, Fear, Force Barrage, Air Bubble, Mystic Armour, Interposing Earth, Summon Animal
- 2nd rank: Acid Grip, Floating Flame, Entangling Flora, Revealing Light, Blazing Armoury, Tailwind, Laughing Fit, Propulsive Breeze, Water Breathing, Timely Tutor, Blur
- 3rd rank: Floating Flame, Thunderstrike, Fear, Fireball, Force Barrage, Hypnotize, Slow, Dehydrate, Horizon Thunder Sphere, Haste, Wooden Double, Agonizing Despair, Earthbind, Lightning Bolt, Time Jump
- 4th rank: Floating Flame, Fireball, Horizon Thunder Sphere, Vision of Death, Cinder Swarm, Wall of Fire, Fly, Rust Cloud, Dispel Magic, Heightened Invisibility, Confusion
- 5th rank: Floating Flame, Dehydrate, Summon Elemental, Wall of Stone, Wave of Despair, Freezing Rain, Quicken Time
That’s all I can remember, I probably had way more spells that I used as a “one and done” on very short notice that I’m forgetting about. Some of those spells came out of scrolls and wands but the vast majority came out of my own slots.
A Sorcerer across these levels would’ve learned a total of… 20 spells, with access to 9 guaranteed retrains (let’s say 14-15 ish with reasonable amounts of downtime?), and 4 signature spells. They’d have had to spend nearly all their gold to match my flexibility via scrolls and wands here, while I spent a fraction of that on learning spells, and got to spend the rest of my gold on magic items that boosted me. What’s more is, I got plenty of “short notice” flexibility: the flexibility to spec into things on only a day’s notice without time to buy scrolls. Just a constantly swapping repertoire of spells, adjusting day by day to the challenges I expect to see in the coming days, something a Spomtaneous caster can’t really even try to match.
And the best part? I’m not describing a Spell Substitution Wizard… I’m describing an Improved Familiar Attunement one. It should go without saying that a Spell Sub will have exponentially more flexibility than I described.
Whenever we bring up the flexibility of Prepared casters, people always try to make light of it by saying that a Spontaneous caster can learn 4-5 of those spells and have “just as much” flexibility. The fact is, you can’t. Prepared casters have way, way more day to day flexibility than a Spontaneous caster, and Spell Sub Wizards have better hour to hour flexibility too.
It goes without saying that if you try to play a Wizard like a Spontaneous caster (as a mostly-constant pile of wide-ranging, generically useful spells) they’ll feel lacklustre compared to Sorcerers. But Prepared casters are a constantly shifting pile of narrowly-focused spells that catch the challenges you face within a single day, and that’s how you have to play them to make them shine. Another character can make judicious use of consumables and scrolls to approximate a small portion of that flexibility but a well-played Prepared caster will still have significantly more than the former can manage, while also getting to spend their gold on more permanent things (as well as always having the option to get scrolls or consumables whenever they best work).
OK. lets use the text.
GM might allow means exactly that they didnt set the curriculum spell list in stone. It is not homebrew to follow this prompt and work...
Curriculum Spells: You automatically add some of the
spells listed in your school’s curriculum to your spellbook.
At 1st level, you add a cantrip and two 1st-rank spells
of your choice. As soon as you gain the ability to cast
wizard spells of a new rank, choose one of the spells from
your curriculum of that rank to add to your spellbook.
A superscript “U” indicates an uncommon spell. Your
GM might allow you to swap or add other spells to your
curriculum if they strongly fit the theme.
I mean, it is homebrew on the end because they set no guidance on what it means to strongly fit the theme. It sure can't be another PC1 spell, because they would have included it already, right? Compare this the the way they phrase custom staffs and you can see there's a big gulf.
Also, bluntly speaking, if one of the key decision point in building a Wizard is going to vary in power level depending on whether the GM does extra work or not, it's entirely fair to evaluate it in the strictest basis - after all, any GM can boost a flagging class by giving it more stuff, the fact this is text rather than subtext for a wizard only speaks to how badly off it is at baseline.
No, it can absolutely be another pc1 spell. There is nothing saying swapping must come from other books.
Creating a new spell or new school with a new focus spell and advanced focus spell is homebrewing.
I'm not going to quibble what the actual line on honebrewing is but can you see how bad it is that the main defense of the spell choices for schools is "the GM is explicitly allowed to replace any and all spells"?
No, it can absolutely be another pc1 spell. There is nothing saying swapping must come from other books.
Creating a new spell or new school with a new focus spell and advanced focus spell is homebrewing.
Yeah I can see that since some GMs might not want to deal with allowing a swap at all.
That kind of hard line thinking though isnt what the design expects though. They knew the problems associated with strict once time printed lists of spells. I think this was an attempt at keeping it open for groups at each table to expand or swap out spells into the existing lists as that table sees is appropriate with the guiding principle of spells allowed being on theme.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not going to quibble what the actual line on honebrewing is but can you see how bad it is that the main defense of the spell choices for schools is "the GM is explicitly allowed to replace any and all spells"?
No, it can absolutely be another pc1 spell. There is nothing saying swapping must come from other books.
Creating a new spell or new school with a new focus spell and advanced focus spell is homebrewing.
Yeah I can see that since some GMs might not want to deal with allowing a swap at all.
That kind of hard line thinking though isnt what the design expects though. They knew the problems associated with strict once time printed lists of spells. I think this was an attempt at keeping it open for groups at each table to expand or swap out spells into the existing lists as that table sees is appropriate with the guiding principle of spells allowed being on theme.
This is part of the high table variance problem.
There can be such a wild swing in what is allowed from table to table due to this type of implementation that it creates this gulf of experiences.
Some tables will have a basically unrestricted 4th slot. Others will be mostly locked down to the printed with maybe a rare addition.
I'm not going to quibble what the actual line on honebrewing is but can you see how bad it is that the main defense of the spell choices for schools is "the GM is explicitly allowed to replace any and all spells"?
No, it can absolutely be another pc1 spell. There is nothing saying swapping must come from other books.
Creating a new spell or new school with a new focus spell and advanced focus spell is homebrewing.
Yeah I can see that since some GMs might not want to deal with allowing a swap at all.
That kind of hard line thinking though isnt what the design expects though. They knew the problems associated with strict once time printed lists of spells. I think this was an attempt at keeping it open for groups at each table to expand or swap out spells into the existing lists as that table sees is appropriate with the guiding principle of spells allowed being on theme.This is part of the high table variance problem.
There can be such a wild swing in what is allowed from table to table due to this type of implementation that it creates this gulf of experiences.
Some tables will have a basically unrestricted 4th slot. Others will be mostly locked down to the printed with maybe a rare addition.
I would say if im casting judgment that the tables not allowing any swaps are as far from the expectations for the wizard as the ones allowing it to be unrestricted. But we are all unerringly subjective in what we do in any specific proposed swap so i get it.
it might be nice to start an advice thread on this topic where we weigh in on suggested spells and if they meet the theme strongly enough to be considered a respectable swap.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I hear what people are saying about the table variance with curriculum spells, but it also doesn't really matter all that much in actual play. The way your options balloon up with heightening, there is no school that has nothing to cast with their curriculum spells except maybe the rank 1 spell at higher levels, where that one spell slot is about the most insignificant fraction of the wizards power or character definition.
Spell Blending can easily erase even that limitation, so even the most strict tables are really not all that limiting on making the curriculum at worst a non-factor in your character's identity and with focus spells it should be able to easily be more than that. And again, that is the absolute worst case scenario for the player. With any GM support or interest in letting the wizard player have fun and play their character well, it goes a lot better.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Curriculum spells make up a very small percentage of the spells a wizard knows. I don’t know why anyone would play a boundary wizard and not learn at least summon construct as well as summon undead, and then learn final sacrifice as well. As a GM, I would probably let a player sub those in if they wanted, but even if I didn’t, it’s not like they can’t learn them on their own and then memorize summon undead at rank 1 and rank 2 to use as creatures to flank, draw attacks, control positioning, and then blow up after using.
The same is really true with civic wizardry as well. If creatures attack a summons to keep you from blowing it up, then your rank 1 spell did more than a slow spell. Congratulations.
The focus spells are more important than the curriculum spells, so if you hate both of those, it is a bad school for your character, but getting different focus spells is trivially easy in PF2, and generally a good idea for a class that only has 2 or less.
Also, my preferred thesis is substitution. I don’t have issues with the curriculum spells. I don’t live every option in Ars Grammatica, but command and dispel magic have been plenty good enough, and enthrall has had some non-combat utility to it too. I really like dispelling globe for some of the very caster heavy dungeons in our campaign, but almost always find a way to use a top rank dispel magic every day.
My point about spell blending is that the game gives multiple ways to deal with the limitations of spell school curriculums that can very easily minimize the problems that people keep having with it. Blend the spells away, choose a school that works for you, choose universalist, or talk to your GM about subbing out one or two low rank spells and your actual play experience will be fine.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I hear what people are saying about the table variance with curriculum spells, but it also doesn't really matter all that much in actual play. The way your options balloon up with heightening, there is no school that has nothing to cast with their curriculum spells except maybe the rank 1 spell at higher levels, where that one spell slot is about the most insignificant fraction of the wizards power or character definition.
Spell Blending can easily erase even that limitation, so even the most strict tables are really not all that limiting on making the curriculum at worst a non-factor in your character's identity and with focus spells it should be able to easily be more than that. And again, that is the absolute worst case scenario for the player. With any GM support or interest in letting the wizard player have fun and play their character well, it goes a lot better.
I feel like every time people mention their issues with the wizard you insist they're not really a problem or that it's the GM's fault.
Like, the dead 1st rank slot is very relevant from 3rd to 6th level! And it's not like the other ranks have evergreen spells, either, so even at 7th level you need to concern yourself with what's on your 2nd and 3rd rank slots and yeah those have issues too. Sure hope you are going to come up against an invisible enemy 1/day as Civic or Boundary, because that's what's stuck in your 2nd and 3rd rank slots once they aren't your highest.
And if the answer to all that is spell blending, Paizo sure made a mistake publishing any other thesis at all.
(Focus spells once again s&+& on poor boundary, who has technically 2 spells it applies to but practically 1 because nobody uses phantasm minion in combat)
To be fair why pick a school if overall you dont want to cast spells in the curriculum?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think part of the problem with curriculums is that they only cover a small subset of the spells that would actually fit them. If you want to prepare fear into your Mentalism slot or summon construct into your Boundary slot, either your GM has to make a special allowance or you just can't, irrespective of how thematically appropriate it would be. It's not just that that fourth slot is mechanically restricted, it's fairly thematically restricted as well, since you're expected to make use of your fairly broad arcane school only in a very specific, prescribed way, when there are a vast number of different ways to approach that same flavor using other arcane spells.
I think part of the problem with curriculums is that they only cover a small subset of the spells that would actually fit them. If you want to prepare fear into your Mentalism slot or summon construct into your Boundary slot, either your GM has to make a special allowance or you just can't, irrespective of how thematically appropriate it would be. It's not just that that fourth slot is mechanically restricted, it's fairly thematically restricted as well, since you're expected to make use of your fairly broad arcane school only in a very specific, prescribed way, when there are a vast number of different ways to approach that same flavor using other arcane spells.
Theme is the appropriate measure there. The cool thing about theme is how the designers backed of from overly describing magic spells in this edition. Fear is a great example. It can theme appropriately to mentalism of course as it affects emotions and the mind but it can theme on boundry or battle or even protean as well.
Imagine your fear spell gives a glimpse of unknown horrors from other planes to your victim (Boundary). OR your fear spell is in the form of a magically terrifying battle cry (Battle). Or your fear spell taps into the innate physiological flight response of living creatures (Protean)I remember reading the designers talking about moving away from overly describing the themeing of spells somewhere to allow those playing the game to think of spells in their own way. This is all theming not just tags.
This is not to say any spell fits into any school and that is what the GM is there to do. Keep players from just picking for power reasons and not even trying to fit the theme.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes but all these things you mentioned requires the GM to be a designer. If you don't, you get a mediocre ciruculum. That's survivable if the class slathers enough incentives to use them anyway (sorcerer, mostly, and i suppose remaster oracle) but the wizard isn't really in a place to afford someone picking 1/4th of their spells with a roulette.
Designer implies the GM is creating content. Its a characterization that I disagree with.
That's not what swapping is at all.Also players are going to make the argument for something fitting their school theme. the GM is just acting as the gate to keep it within reason.
On the matter of having enough incentives I actually agree there. i think wizard would be a more interesting class to play if they got a free additional lore that fits the school theme and if theses had some feet progression on top of what they are including some kind of order explorer equivalent tree to get some of the benefits of a thesis you didnt start with.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Like, the dead 1st rank slot is very relevant from 3rd to 6th level! And it's not like the other ranks have evergreen spells, either, so even at 7th level you need to concern yourself with what's on your 2nd and 3rd rank slots and yeah those have issues too.
I can’t think of any school except perhaps Ars Grammatica for which the 1st rank slot is already dead by level 3.
And by level 5 sure the slot has fallen off but… it’s also your 12th weakest slot at this point, before even considering scrolls, wands, and staves. I don’t think “the slot that was largely gonna be worse than a cantrip already got worse” is the huge downside you’re making it out to be.
Obviously YMMV depending on the table, but I’ve never been in a situation where I was fully out of slots and my fourth rank 1 slot was the deciding factor and I wasn’t better off just using one of my scrolls or wands or staves or cantrips. The game expects you to be looking to rest by the time you’re fully through with your top 2 ranks.
Not saying all Schools are perfect though. Ars Grammatica, in particular, often struggles to make good use of their Curriculum slots without homebrew.
And if the answer to all that is spell blending, Paizo sure made a mistake publishing any other thesis at all.
The “just use Spell Blending” thing is largely just a solution for people who look at the above theoretical inefficiencies and don’t want them to be around. There’s also the more practical solution of “use whatever thesis you want and don’t worry about needing to bleed every single ounce of value out of your weakest spell slots.
(Focus spells once again s**# on poor boundary, who has technically 2 spells it applies to but practically 1 because nobody uses phantasm minion in combat)
Boundary’s focus spell is fine.
Mentalism is the one crying in the corner.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And by level 5 sure the slot has fallen off but… it’s also your 12th weakest slot at this point, before even considering scrolls, wands, and staves. I don’t think “the slot that was largely gonna be worse than a cantrip already got worse” is the huge downside you’re making it out to be.
I personally don't think low-level slots become weaker than cantrips unless you're expressly preparing stuff in them that needs to be heightened to remain relevant, chiefly damage spells. Generally, one of the advantages to spellcasting is that as you level up, you can use your higher-rank slots for damage and other effects that heighten well, and your lower-rank slots for utility, particularly utility that kind of scales by itself. In-combat, a slow spell is always going to be useful even just at a lowly 3rd rank while you're 20th level, and out of combat, nifty little spells like knock, lock, or synchronize can almost always have some use.
This I think is also why curriculums frustrate some players, I think, because a lot of them only let you prepare spells in certain slots that are doomed to become obsolete at those low ranks. Mechanically it's not going to hugely affect your character when your spells go many ranks above those wasted slots, but it's still a little bit of wasted power, and that feels bad, particularly when the Wizard's made to feel like they pay a high price for their fourth slots per rank.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Are people confusing charm and command? Ars Grammatica gets command. It is a solid action waster (some times 2 or more) that targets will, and it isn’t an incapacitation effect.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
1st level slots: Sure Strike, Force Barrage Signature, Bless,
You could also take Charm, Command, or a different signature if you don't use force barrage that often.
I take heal signature on a primal or divine spontaneous caster or Soothe sometimes on an occult.
Low level slots are fine for spontaneous casters as the can take low level ones that are still useful and then signature a low level spell to be able to heighten without having to prepare it at a higher level.
Heres the thing. Lets say your a level 3 battle wizard.
Force barrage rank one is great.
Maybe rank 2 feels like a waste because hieghten is +2 and you dont like the spells for rank 2.
You always can throw that rank 2 slot into a staff you prep instead. Also the benefit if you went staff nexus would be you have a staff with any rank 1 spell already even if you havnt found or bought one yet in game.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Exactly. It’s not about whether there are 4 or 5 spells a Wizard switches up between that the Sorcerer can more or less replicate. It’s the 40 or 50 spells which the Wizard switches between that the Sorcerer usually can’t replicate without a lot of good expenditure.
Over the course of levels 1-10, the spells that my Wizard found crucial for some or the other reason (at various levels) were:
- 1st rank: Runic Weapon, Befuddle, Fear, Force Barrage, Air Bubble, Mystic Armour, Interposing Earth, Summon Animal
- 2nd rank: Acid Grip, Floating Flame, Entangling Flora, Revealing Light, Blazing Armoury, Tailwind, Laughing Fit, Propulsive Breeze, Water Breathing, Timely Tutor, Blur
- 3rd rank: Floating Flame, Thunderstrike, Fear, Fireball, Force Barrage, Hypnotize, Slow, Dehydrate, Horizon Thunder Sphere, Haste, Wooden Double, Agonizing Despair, Earthbind, Lightning Bolt, Time Jump
- 4th rank: Floating Flame, Fireball, Horizon Thunder Sphere, Vision of Death, Cinder Swarm, Wall of Fire, Fly, Rust Cloud, Dispel Magic, Heightened Invisibility, Confusion
- 5th rank: Floating Flame, Dehydrate, Summon Elemental, Wall of Stone, Wave of Despair, Freezing Rain, Quicken TimeThat’s all I can remember, I probably had way more spells that I used as a “one and done” on very short notice that I’m forgetting about. Some of those spells came out of scrolls and...
Buckle up; this is a long one.
Alright, I think I count 44 unique spells there. I may have miscounted (and likely did, even).
Our point of comparison is a level 9 Arcane Sorc (so Draconic, Genie, or Imperial). They would know 19 chosen spells and 5 bloodline spells, have five signature spells, and probably have two focus spells. Your wizard has close to double that when we include their focus spells, which, prima facie, is a big advantage. However, I don't think it actually makes as good a case for the Wizard as it seems. To understand this, though, we have to dig a little deeper. Let's start by grouping these spells by defense targeted; whether they're utility, debuff, offense, etc.; and function. Spells that I think have especially similar functions are grouped in brackets, [like this]. I'm also going to make the lists small text and have the formatting be a bit ugly to compact it more, because this post is already massive.
NONE (DAILY BUFFS)
Mystic Armor | TailwindNONE (SHORT COMBAT BUFFS)
[Runic Weapon/Blazing Armory] | [Haste/Quicken Time] | Blur | FlyNONE (SHORT UTILITY BUFFS)
Air Bubble/Water Breathing | Timely Tutor | Fly | Heightened InvisibilityNONE (OFFENSE)
Force Barrage | Summon Animal | Summon Elemental | Wall of Fire | Wall of StoneNONE (SINGLE ACTION UTILITY)
Time JumpNONE (HELPFUL REACTIONS)
[Interposing Earth/Wooden Double] | Propulsive Breeze | Air BubbleNONE (COUNTERACT)
Dispel MagicAC
Horizon Thunder SphereFORTITUDE (UTILITY/DEBUFF)
Slow (Action Denial, 1A) | Earthbind (Reduces flying altitude on s/f/cf, denies flight for a round on f/cf. Not quite a silver bullet, since you're not entirely disabling flight. But still very helpful)FORTITUDE (SUSTAINED DAMAGE, POSSIBLE DEBUFFS ON FAILED SAVES)
Dehydrate (Persistent fire damage upfront, plant creatures/water creatures downgrade their save; possible enfeeble if followup is failed) | Cinder Swarm (Sustained fire damage, Dazzle/Blind, incap) | Rust Cloud (Sustained AoE Slashing from a persistent cloud, additional effect vs. metal, concealment)REFLEX (DAMAGE)
[Lightning Bolt/Fireball/6A Horizon Thunder Sphere] (AoE Reflex Blast) | Floating Flame (Sustained Damage vs Reflex) | [Thunderstrike/Acid Grip] (Single Target Blast) | [Acid Grip/Cinder Swarm] (Forced Movement+damage via reflex) | [Entangling Flora/Freezing Rain] (Area control)REFLEX (UTILITY)
Revealing Light (Silver Bullet vs invis, inflicts dazzled)WILL (DEBUFFS, DAMAGE ON HIGHER RANKS)
[Befuddle/Fear/Agonizing Despair/Vision of Death] (inflict status effects that inflict status penalties, so they do not stack; higher ranks have damage as a rider) | [Laughing Fit/Wave of Despair] (Action Denial of R and possibly worse) | Hypnotize (guaranteed dazzle while in AoE, fascinate on failed save; possible silver bullet vs creatures reliant on concentrate actions) | Confusion (Action Denial of 1A or worse)
Alright, so I count about ~35 separate "functions" here (treating similar effects as different functions when they target a different defense). So about 20% of the list has some sort of overlapping function with another part of it. If we consider effects that are overall more similar than different (like most of the damaging fortitude spells) to have the same function, the number gets even lower; it gets lower still if we start considering single target and multitarget blasts to have similar functions even if their damage profiles are different. At that point, I think we're down to more like ~30 unique functions, possibly fewer.
(I do want to be clear, though; how finely or coarsely you group functions is a matter of preference. I'm largely ignoring damage types when grouping functions, but I am distinguishing riders. This might not be to everyone's tastes. Likewise, you might have a different view of what is the primary effect of a spell, and what's a rider. Someone else may see Agonizing Despair as a single target damage spell that gets fear as a rider; I see it as upgraded rank 1 Fear spell, with damage as a rider. This affects my groupings.)
Anyways, this all matters because we only need to have access to a spell while it's relevant. Many spells fall off hard as the game progresses. With only a few exceptions (like roaring applause, laughing fit, or slow), we'll want the most upgraded version of a function possible, and we'll want to cast it from a top rank or next-to-top rank slot. Less upgraded versions of a function become action-inefficient and outmoded. As such, we want to use our spell swaps at levelup to replace spells that have fallen off with good utility spells, strong reaction and one action spells, and so on. And furthermore, those 1A/R functions aren't really relevant before we grow into having enough spell slots to play with this kind of action economy—so we don't have to know the spells before then. Our spell burden is alleviated in this way.
Furthermore, there are also several spells that never have their function replaced, but also become unnecessary. Runic Weapon is a good example of this, as is Mystic Armor; you're going to stay on-curve with your gear, and these spells are only particularly helpful when you're able to get ahead of that curve with them early in the game.
So, let's look at the spells we'd probably want to swap out over our Sorc's career.
Spells that fall off over this character's known lifetime and are best retrained or swapped into good reaction/third action spells as a Sorc
Mystic Armor (need save bonuses on armor and the higher slot isn't worth it)
Runic Weapon/Blazing Armory (people will just buy weapons, higher slot isn't worth it)
Befuddle (the spell isn't bad, but the action economy on casting it falls off like a rock)
Fear (once rank 3 fear is outscaled in action economy)
Summon Animal (if not chosen as signature)
Dehydrate (if not chosen as signature; especially falls off once Cinder Swarm comes online. practically speaking, it's worse than cinder swarm in every way except the save downgrade against plants/water creatures)
Horizon Thunder Sphere (if not signature; some slight lenience here bc this is your only AC targeting spell, but it's pretty bad to use without sure strike anyways, so you could get rid of it and probably do better than you would keeping it. that being said, it's probably this character's rank 1 signature)
Acid Grip (heighten +2 is not worth being a signature, and Cinder Swarm has forced movement on reflex)
Floating Flame (if not a signature... but this would be singature for this character)
Thunderstrike (if not signature; it probably won't be)
Entangling Flora (becomes action-inefficient compared to freezing rain)
Since we're swapping out these spells as they fall off, we can use their old repertoire slots to gain the functions we're missing—such as these.
Spells you would likely swap or retrain into as Sorc:
Interposing Earth
Propulsive Breeze
Timely Tutor
Time Jump
Wooden Double
Possibly higher-rank versions of lower rank spells (e.g. fear)
Blur (not an ideal use of a slot when it's top rank, but much better when it's a cheap slot)
Sure Strike (not listed, but this character should take it if they have Horizon Thunder Sphere as a signature)
Mirror Image (I do find it weird this character doesn't have this)
When you consider that our Sorc gets eight spell swaps from L1-L9, it looks like we have enough swaps to learn almost all of these spells while getting rid of many of the less desirable choices via leveling swap or retraining.
And then, we have spells that we just don't have much of a reason to keep around all the time, or spells we want to cast so often we should just buy wands. Either way, casting them should be shoved off onto items.
Spells that strike me as situational, and have their functions best shunted onto scrolls/arcane evolution/nonmagical consumables:
Air Bubble/Water Breathing (assuming this wasn't an aquatic campaign; I suppose Air Bubble is good vs. poison clouds as well if your GM isn't mean about it)
Earthbind
Dehydrate (for silver bullet use past early levels)
Revealing LightSpells that should be shoved onto a wand
Tailwind. (This is being cast every single day right after prep. No questions.)
On top of that, Sorcerers get a disproportionate benefit in effective spells known from staves, so we can't forget those.
Staves that might be desirable
Atmospheric staff (gives air bubble, has some forced movement spells that could soften the loss of acid grip)
Staff of Fire (could let us change our signature spell choices)
Librarian Staff (gives timely tutor and pocket lore, but more importantly, gives loads of out-of-combat scroll management ability)
Staff of Control (command, laughing fit, stupefy; greater staff adds confusion. It sucks we can't take the Pipes of Compulsion instead, though. why does bard get item this when we don't? it doesn't need itttttt)
And lastly, sorcerer focus spells can cover some spell functions, as well. Draconic can cover some blasting functionality with Dragon Breath, and can cover flying with Dragon Wings. Genie has some reaction economy out the gate with Genie's Veil, and can inflict stupefied and target will Heart's Desire. Imperial's focus spells are currently pretty weak, unfortunately; only extend spell is particularly interesting or useful, and it's mainly good because it makes it easier to prebuff. It doesn't really fill any of the functions we need filled.
Once all of this is taken into account, Sorc isn't actually covering functions much worse than a wizard at all, but they also get spontaneous casting benefits. Wizard isn't meaningfully more versatile in reality.
P.S. This doesn't matter if I can't actually create a reasonable sorc build that works around these limitations, though. So I'll probably try to see what I can do sometime soon.
As a start, though... given your list, I'd guess this character would take Horizon Thunder Sphere as rank 1 Signature, Floating Flame as rank 2, and Fireball as rank 3. Cinder Swarm is a good candidate for rank 4 signature, since it's incap and scales at heighten +1. Unsure about rank 5; probably wall of stone. (This assumes you aren't screwing around with how you learn spells and abusing retraining to attempt to get maximum value out of signatures.)
..Now that I think about it, it's also true that a Sorcerer bent on learning a lot of spells benefits from casting dedications disproportionately when compared to a wizard, much as a sorcerer benefits from a staff with spells they don't know disproportionately. Even if we couldn't get all the way to the versatility of your list with Sorc alone, I'm almost certain we could get there with a multiclass dedication.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So keeping in mind that one is a rank 1 signature spell, and one has to be a bloodline spell, what are the 5 total rank 2 spells that make up the obvious must have spells for a sorcerer? We can just look at a level 7 arcanesorcerer for now.
Mist? Revealing Light? Dispel magic? Invisibility? Laughing fit? Acid grab? Floating flame? Illusory creature? False Vitality? Telekinetic Maneuver?
Because my 7th level wizard casts all of those pretty regularly plus at least 5 more second level spells enough that scrolls would be a lot of wealth down the drain at this point. And none of those are heightened 1st level spells.
Exactly. It’s not about whether there are 4 or 5 spells a Wizard switches up between that the Sorcerer can more or less replicate. It’s the 40 or 50 spells which the Wizard switches between that the Sorcerer usually can’t replicate without a lot of good expenditure.
Over the course of levels 1-10, the spells that my Wizard found crucial for some or the other reason (at various levels) were:
- 1st rank: Runic Weapon, Befuddle, Fear, Force Barrage, Air Bubble, Mystic Armour, Interposing Earth, Summon Animal
- 2nd rank: Acid Grip, Floating Flame, Entangling Flora, Revealing Light, Blazing Armoury, Tailwind, Laughing Fit, Propulsive Breeze, Water Breathing, Timely Tutor, Blur
- 3rd rank: Floating Flame, Thunderstrike, Fear, Fireball, Force Barrage, Hypnotize, Slow, Dehydrate, Horizon Thunder Sphere, Haste, Wooden Double, Agonizing Despair, Earthbind, Lightning Bolt, Time Jump
- 4th rank: Floating Flame, Fireball, Horizon Thunder Sphere, Vision of Death, Cinder Swarm, Wall of Fire, Fly, Rust Cloud, Dispel Magic, Heightened Invisibility, Confusion
- 5th rank: Floating Flame, Dehydrate, Summon Elemental, Wall of Stone, Wave of Despair, Freezing Rain, Quicken TimeThat’s all I can remember, I probably had way more spells that I used as a “one and done” on very short notice that I’m forgetting about. Some of those spells came out of scrolls and...
None of those spells are necessary. I'm not sure what you're doing with them. Give me an example of a spell loadout that's necessary for what you're fighting and if it works for all day or you have to what? Change again the next encounter? You're not getting a day of rest between every encounter.
I have not found any of this necessary.
I'm wondering what you need to prove this isn't necessary. Someone like me to walk into your game with my sorcerer that changes nothing and wreck things? I already know what the high value spells are. These little niche spells are for what? What are you doing with them? Is your group standing around while you cast one of these spells while you somehow win the encounter alone? What's going on?
Explain it. Because I hear this all the time, "The fact is, you can’t. Prepared casters have way, way more day to day flexibility than a Spontaneous caster, and Spell Sub Wizards have better hour to hour flexibility too."
Yet I have played across many editions and the above is mostly theoretical. Even on my prepared caster wizards, I usually loaded up the same spells all the time with rare exception. I chose a power spell with Spell Perfection and Spell Mastery that I could spontaneously cast.
Even now what you don't seem to accept and keep ignoring is sorcerers have 36 to 45 spells known in their repertoire. If Arcane, they get a spellbook. They have signature spells, which basically allows you to heighten some lower level spell without having to prepare it at higher level.
So you have more daily flexibility. What does that give you in actual battle? How often is it necessary? Do you memorize spells for a problem that your group can solve? I've seen that so many times where the wizard or prepared caster memorizes something like Earthbind to ground a flier, then the monk or barb trip martials just smashes the flier out of the air and kills them in a few rounds with the earthbind being completely unnecessary. That's why I stopped trying to use earthbind. It's one of those spells that looks good on paper, but if your martials are even marginally competent they don't even need it. You would have been far better off hitting the monster with a debuff or a damage spell.
These day to day versatility is a thing we all know, but we don't agree on how useful it is in actual gameplay. I haven't found it very useful. But some of you play in groups where it is apparently super useful. If that is your group, then you will value the wizard more.
If you're playing in a group like mine, you better bring the power spells or you're just wasting their time. They don't need you to earthbind a flier. They don't need wall of fire or roaring applause. They're going to whack everything out quickly and efficiently without the need of special spells, though they would probably let you change spells so you feel good about your character.
That's the wizard right now. A class that a party has to give opportunities to feel good about their daily spell versatility.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
snip
While I partially agree with this (especially since skills do accomplish a lot of what magic used to), I have to disagree on Roaring Applause. Removing reaction economy with caster actions is good, and failures just let the martials look even better with guaranteed reactive strikes.
Stuff like Earthbind, though? I agree, you kind of have to intentionally concoct a scenario as GM where it's needed. The player needs to be grounding a dragon that's literally 120 feet in the air. Even then, if I'm honest, the spell feels weak. Unless the creature fails, the spell doesn't really solve any problems; even if the creature fails, it only solves problems temporarily. It's a bit unfortunate.
EDIT: Like, at bottom, PF2E is designed so spells can't truly outstrip what other characters might be able to do. But in the end, it often makes it feel like the wizard is the guy magically flying to the second floor instead of taking the stairs like everyone else. You solve the same problems as other classes; you just throw a glitterbomb when you do it.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
all scenarios are intentionally concocted, they dont exist otherwise in a ttrpg.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yet I have played across many editions and the above is mostly theoretical. Even on my prepared caster wizards, I usually loaded up the same spells all the time with rare exception. I chose a power spell with Spell Perfection and Spell Mastery that I could spontaneously cast.
I'm gonna be honest brother, this is a you problem. You are given the option and you don't use it and don't want to use it. Wizards aren't for you, and that's fine
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
all scenarios are intentionally concocted, they dont exist otherwise in a ttrpg.
Would you have preferred I said something like "the spell isn't generically useful, and can fail to feel organically useful in the cases where it is?"
It feels okay to use it ground something that's just taking off, or a creature indoors in a room with a very high ceiling, even if those are both cases where martials can more likely do something about it without you. But for any creature that's already flying outdoors—especially one already aware of your party—the fact they're going to have to conveniently be closer to you than the height of a 12 story building on your turn is a bit painful. It just feels like the GM has to give you a bit of a benny for you to use it sometimes.
As you level, dragons can have fly speed speeds greater than 150 and ranged attacks with range increments of over 100 feet. It would be great to be able to ground a creature like that, right? Even a party with the ability to fly can't chase that kind of speed. You can pretty much be kited forever. But Earthbind can't do a thing about it. 120 foot range and all. Even Falling Sky, an 8th level spell, would be hard pressed to deal with an enemy actively trying to kite you; 120 foot range with a 60 foot tall and 30 foot radius cylinder still isn't enough (and the save portion has incapacitation attached because no fun allowed). Again, it just feels like the GM kind of has to give you a benny.
Meanwhile, martials will probably groan and pull out longbows and fire them with range penalties.
all scenarios are intentionally concocted, they dont exist otherwise in a ttrpg.Would you have preferred I said something like "the spell isn't generically useful, and can fail to feel organically useful in the cases where it is?"
It feels okay to use it ground something that's just taking off, or a creature indoors in a room with a very high ceiling, even if those are both cases where martials can more likely do something about it without you. But for any creature that's already flying outdoors—especially one already aware of your party—the fact they're going to have to conveniently be closer to you than the height of a 12 story building on your turn is a bit painful. It just feels like the GM has to give you a bit of a benny for you to use it sometimes.
As you level, dragons can have fly speed speeds greater than 150 and ranged attacks with range increments of over 100 feet. It would be great to be able to ground a creature like that, right? Even a party with the ability to fly can't chase that kind of speed. You can pretty much be kited forever. But Earthbind can't do a thing about it. 120 foot range and all. Even Falling Sky, an 8th level spell, would be hard pressed to deal with an enemy actively trying to kite you; 120 foot range with a 60 foot tall and 30 foot radius cylinder still isn't enough (and the save portion has incapacitation attached because no fun allowed). Again, it just feels like the GM kind of has to give you a benny.
Meanwhile, martial will probably groan and pull out longbows and fire them with range penalties.
Good a dragon example.
A smart party in general doesnt face a dragon in open spaces where it has the advantage right?If the party gets caught in that situation and they are smart about it, it becomes a chase scene not a normal encounter. The next part of the scenario is the effort to find its lair or to lure it somewhere where its flight cannot be easily used. In that situation earthbind plays a better role of keeping it down rather than trying to get into range to use it when the dragon is in its element.
You could come with a bunch of scrolls but then you cant move if you want to use them. Im guessing every action is going to matter. A wizard can slot enough earth binds to keep it from escaping needed (of course the wizard will have self buffed with fly first so they can fly then earthbind) and unlike a sorcerer trying to replicate this with scrolls the wizard with the same scroll and learning time knows the spell and can slot it as much as they think they will need. A sorcerer cant afford to slot that niche of a spell let alone make it signature.
If instead the party is fighting several same level dragons the wizard can easily prepare a couple earthbind in their top slots and that will likely keep them on the ground.
This only matters ofcourse if the party is set up to take advantage of it. Or if this is a situation where you are luring the dragon into an area you have an advantage in maybe you have traps set up you are earbinding the dragon into.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I still want to go back and look at the tank 2 spell selection for a sorcerer and try to understand how you cover even the basic basics?
Rank 2 tailwind, invisibility, dispel magic as a signature spell and then one bloodline spell is not covering half of what I want to be able to do with rank 2 spells as a wizard. Sorcerers do not get enough spells to really cover even basic stuff without using a ton of scrolls.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
And then, we have spells that we just don't have much of a reason to keep around all the time, or spells we want to cast so often we should just buy wands. Either way, casting them should be shoved off onto items.
How much gold will that end up being that the Wizard spends on other, more relevant, permanent items?
Further also you mentioned the "relevancy window" issue, but that's doubly true for these itemed spells! For example Earthbind is a spell you shoved off onto items. But I used Earthbind as my anti-flier strategy for levels 6-8, and a scroll of Earthbind is 30 GP which is... quite expensive for levels 6-7, it's somewhere between 1/6th to 1/4th of your total free currency available at these levels already! By the time it gets cheap for you (level 9 ish) I had stopped casting Earthbind as my go to anti-flier spell, I was casting Fly which, again, would cost too much GP.
On top of that, Sorcerers get a disproportionate benefit in effective spells known from staves, so we can't forget those.
...
And lastly, sorcerer focus spells can cover some spell functions, as well.
...
Now that I think about it, it's also true that a Sorcerer bent on learning a lot of spells benefits from casting dedications disproportionately when compared to a wizard, much as a sorcerer benefits from a staff with spells they don't know disproportionately. Even if we couldn't get all the way to the versatility of your list with Sorc alone, I'm almost certain we could get there with a multiclass dedication
I was ignoring staves, class features (Wizards don't have the best focus spells but they have Spell Blending, Spell Sub, or Staff Thesis available), and Archetypes too though!
And yes a Sorcerer gets higher marginal returns on taking a spellcasting Archetype for versatility than a Wizard does, but:
- the Wizard can pick a spellcasting Archetype for potency rather than versatility, for higher marginal returns. For example, my wizard had Cleric Archetype for access to a Staff of Healing, and
- the Wizard doesn't have to worry about picking a spellcasting Archetype, they can pick Rogue Archetype (for light armour, Mobility, and Skill Mastery).
Ultimately the problem here isn't that you can't make up for a Sorcerer's lack of day to day versatility, it's just that you pay an opportunity cost for it, an opportunity cost the Wizard doesn't have to pay (they pay the cost in other ways, by losing within-day flexibility).
None of those spells are necessary. I'm not sure what you're doing with them. Give me an example of a spell loadout that's necessary for what you're fighting and if it works for all day or you have to what? Change again the next encounter? You're not getting a day of rest between every encounter.
I gave you actual in-play examples of several dozen spells I swapped between over the course of a campaign and felt they were super relevant.
If you think I'm lying and can't take me at face value, that's your prerogative. I ain't tryna give you a day by day breakdown of how and when and why they mattered, especially given how you seem unable to approach this conversation without condescendingly "bragging" about how you play the game lol.
I'm wondering what you need to prove this isn't necessary. Someone like me to walk into your game with my sorcerer that changes nothing and wreck things? I already know what the high value spells are. These little niche spells are for what? What are you doing with them? Is your group standing around while you cast one of these spells while you somehow win the encounter alone? What's going on?
I'm wondering what you need to prove this is necessary. Someone like me to walk into your game with my Wizard that changes spells day-to-day and wrecks things? I already know what a high value the game places on versatility. These generically good spells are for what? What are you doing with them? Is your GM babysitting you by constantly giving you encounters that never demand variety and somehow generically good spells win the encounter alone? What's going on?
Even now what you don't seem to accept and keep ignoring is sorcerers have 36 to 45 spells known in their repertoire. If Arcane, they get a spellbook. They have signature spells, which basically allows you to heighten some lower level spell without having to prepare it at higher level.
I didn't ignore anything. In fact I explicitly mentioned how many spells a Sorcerer would've learned, signatured, and retrained in the same window I mentioned for my Wizard.
So you have more daily flexibility. What does that give you in actual battle? How often is it necessary? Do you memorize spells for a problem that your group can solve? I've seen that so many times where the wizard or prepared caster memorizes something like Earthbind to ground a flier, then the monk or barb trip martials just smashes the flier out of the air and kills them in a few rounds with the earthbind being completely unnecessary. That's why I stopped trying to use earthbind. It's one of those spells that looks good on paper, but if your martials are even marginally competent they don't even need it. You would have been far better off hitting the monster with a debuff or a damage spell.
I used Earthbind when our level 7 party was faced with two erinyes who flew far above enough that the party's martials couldn't reach them to Trip them, and they had ranged Strikes that would far outpace our damage if the melees had swapped to their backup ranged weapons. How exactly are these level 7 martials supposed to be Tripping these enemies who never enter their melee reach?
It should also go without saying that I am only preparing spells that cover my group's weaknesses, so no I don't memorize spells to cover things the party is already good at.
If you're playing in a group like mine, you better bring the power spells or you're just wasting their time. They don't need you to earthbind a flier. They don't need wall of fire or roaring applause. They're going to whack everything out quickly and efficiently without the need of special spells, though they would probably let you change spells so you feel good about your character.
That's the wizard right now. A class that a party has to give opportunities to feel good about their daily spell versatility.
If you think versatility is completely useless, it's usually an indication that the GM is catering the challenges you face to your party composition. Especially so if you are just standing in place and whacking things so quickly that nothing else ever matters.
Which makes it doubly funny that you think a Wizard can't be good without party help...
I still want to go back and look at the tank 2 spell selection for a sorcerer and try to understand how you cover even the basic basics?
What do you mean? Deriven assured us that they can break the game by coming to my table, neither of our actual concrete examples matter in the face of that assurance!
You could come with a bunch of scrolls but then you cant move if you want to use them. Im guessing every action is going to matter. A wizard can slot enough earth binds to keep it from escaping needed (of course the wizard will have self buffed with fly first so they can fly then earthbind) and unlike a sorcerer trying to replicate this with scrolls the wizard with the same scroll and learning time knows the spell and can slot it as much as they think they will need. A sorcerer cant afford to slot that niche of a spell let alone make it signature.
And of course, the crux of the point is that it's not just Earthbind specifically. That is one single spell. A well-played Wizard is swapping between dozens of such spells!
I still want to go back and look at the tank 2 spell selection for a sorcerer and try to understand how you cover even the basic basics?
Rank 2 tailwind, invisibility, dispel magic as a signature spell and then one bloodline spell is not covering half of what I want to be able to do with rank 2 spells as a wizard. Sorcerers do not get enough spells to really cover even basic stuff without using a ton of scrolls.
Why do you use tailwind in a repertoire? This is a spell where you in a wand.