| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
But when?
It only triggers off of blood magic. Your focus spell is one action. If you cast it, you are not casting anything else to actually use it.
Sorry I didn't realise you were playing the 1 action game system.
The “use arcana to recall knowledge on any creature” ability of tap into blood is nearly a combat only ability and one that you can’t really benefit from until minimally the second of combat as an imperial sorcerer. If you one action magic missile, one action tap into blood recall knowledge, you don’t really have the actions left to cast a spell that will target a weak save or likely trigger a weakness. That is a set back for the sorcerer because the best time to recall knowledge is before combat begins (if you can find out what you will be facing), followed by the very first action of combat. Neither of these are times you can be using tap into blood. I am not saying that makes it totally useless, but it is a significant limitation on an ability that still requires you to pump a skill that you could otherwise leave at trained and dump the corresponding attribute for.
It is the oracle’s vision of weakness which everyone should be jealous of/multiclassing to steal.
As a wizard player, I definitely don’t feel like my lunch has been stolen by tap into blood. Even if I somehow could get a similar ability (RK with arcana against any creature after casting a spell), I’d still be disinclined to want to dump nature, religion and society as skills, and would be much more likely to MC Oracle than Sorcerer.
I'm actually a fan of the one round prep. I just haven't seen much support for that idea in a while.
I take it from reading through this thread that there are no fans of Counterspells? I realize that Clever Counterspell comes online only at 12th, but it plays into my Wizard fantasy so well. My GM has been thinking about letting us rebuild our characters (we ported over from D&D 3.5 at Level 12, then played until 15 before going on hiatus) and I've been seriously thinking about going into that.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wizard is good, you only need perfect information of the day ahead or a GM that have pity of you, so you can be be almost as effective as a Sorcerer.
We just have to ignore that Sorcerer have a better casting stat,features, feats and focus spells.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
you don’t really have the actions left
Apologies that Sorcerer can't do RK as a free action like a Tome Thaumaturge can. Just that it can do it better than a Wizard was the point. For some reason PF2 doesn't let you completely invalidate other classes. Wizard is still an effective caster, just worse that an Imperial Sorcerer for RK.
It is the oracle’s vision of weakness which everyone should be jealous of/multiclassing to steal.
Whispers of Weakness is the name. Yes it will be a popular steal and is probably better than Tap into Blood. But both are a lot better than anything the Wizard can do for RK.
As a wizard player, I definitely don’t feel like my lunch has been stolen by tap into blood. Even if I somehow could get a similar ability (RK with arcana against any creature after casting a spell), I’d still be disinclined to want to dump nature, religion and society as skills, and would be much more likely to MC Oracle than Sorcerer.
The question is not a similar ability, it is RK at all. RK being one of the only things the Wizard actually had where they were better than the Sorcerer. Now they are just worse.
It has nothing to do with the sorcerer's RK not being a free action, it has to do with you having to cast one of a very specific subset of spells first, then still have an action left over to recall knowledge. It is almost limited to casting a one or two action force barrage and your haste spell as the only two spells you will ever use to trigger this ability. Those aren't terrible options, but you will almost never want to RK without this ability (or why take the feat), so it is incredibly limiting.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I guess they will never bother to use Ancestral Memories. It is only one action and is only useful against almost every enemy in the game.
Nor one of those annoying reactions like Arcane Countermeasure.
I'm sorry that doesn't conform to how you think the optimal rotation for RK is. Really the best answer is that RK is most useful when you know that you need it. I know the Wizard has so few spells they have to know before they cast, the Sorcerer has heaps of spells so they can try something and think about the action cost of RK if they want.
Yes you are right it costs an action and has a sequence limitation. But it didn't really cost you anything bar a level 1 feat. For which you can RK about everything.
Ancestral memories costs an action and needs to be followed up by casting a spell. Reaction spells only work if you use them on your turn and have an action left over afterwards, because your blood magic ends at the start of your turn.
EDIT: It is better on the arcane dragon sorcerer, as you can cast your claws, your breath, fear, haste, fly or dragon form, but that is not the sorcerer everyone is accusing of replacing the wizard.
Reaction spells only work if you use them on your turn and have an action left over afterwards, because your blood magic ends at the start of your turn.
Good point but also wrong.
Different Bloodmagic effects have different durations. There are some that say until the beginning of your next turn, but most say for 1 round, a round of course being a turn for everyone.
With CrossBloodedEvolution any Bloodline can get any other bloodlines bloodmagic effect including one with a longer duration
Reaction spells only work if you use them on your turn and have an action left over afterwards, because your blood magic ends at the start of your turn.Good point but also wrong.
Different Bloodmagic effects have different durations. There are some that say until the beginning of your next turn, but most say for 1 round, a round of course being a turn for everyone.
With CrossBloodedEvolution any Bloodline can get any other bloodlines bloodmagic effect including one with a longer duration
So tap into blood went from being " the way an imperial sorcerer can be better than a wizard at recalling knowledge from level 1," to "if you take a level 8 sorcerer feat, and pick the right crossblooded evolution (and not one that boosts damage, as that is an instant effect), then maybe you will be able to use Tap into blood at the start of the 2nd round."
Again, I am not saying that the feat is entirely unusable, but it follows the general sorcerer design philosophy of "cast the same few spells over and over again," and it is a lot more limiting than the narrative people keep spinning about the imperial sorcerer just doing everything a wizard wants to do, but better.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
pick the right crossblooded evolution(and not one that boosts damage, as that is an instant effect), then maybe you will be able to use Tap into blood at the start of the 2nd round."
Hmmm. You make a point then just spurt out falsehood again. Here is the elemental bloodline's blood magic effect. Probably a common pick.
you gain a +2 status bonus to Intimidation checks for 1 round, or a target takes 1 damage per spell rankThat is the sorcerer's choice.
So to quote you
an imperial sorcerer can be better than a wizard at recalling knowledge from level 1
is false because you have discovered the action economy isn't to your liking. But you do admit that the imperial sorcerer can RK about ANY topic with 1 feat, and the poor wizard can't. Not even close till level 15 unified theory that everyone could get anyway. Though I'm sure you can do better with archetypes. So if the Sorcerer wants to RK they can, and they are better at it, whereas the Wizard in all likelyhood doesn't have the right lore skill so his RK knowledge skill is useless.
And you are upset I still think the Sorcerer is better at RK than the wizard?The best use for RK is to roll it when it is free like Tome Thaumaturge, or to roll it when you are getting some other benefit. Like a Ranger or Investigator can do. But that is not the Wizard.
Again, I am not saying that the feat is entirely unusable, but it follows the general sorcerer design philosophy of "cast the same few spells over and over again," and it is a lot more limiting than the narrative people keep spinning about the imperial sorcerer just doing everything a wizard wants to do, but better.
You still haven't gotten over that the arcane sorcerer can get a spellbook and swap a spell every day. Any sorcerer can retrain a spell in a week anyway. Your description is a poor mischaracterisation.
The sorcerer can do everything of significance that the wizard can. It is just better.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To be clear I am nudging the argument that the Wizard is underdone. Relatively speaking RK was something the Wizard had versus the Sorcerer. Now they don't really have that.
A section of the community have been arguing for a Spell Attack/DC boost for casters for a while. I have been mostly accepting of Pazio's position that casters were good enough as they were. Well the Imperial Sorcerer got just that in Ancestral Memories.
Yes the Wizard and any other character who wants can archetype and get it with Cha +2 and a level 2 and 4 feat. Though probably that won't be a Bard as they have party things to do with their actions. So it is a power boost. Many powergamers will struggle to take anything else. But it doesn't take casters above where the Fighter is now.
Arcane Evolution now explicitly allows making the spell you add to your repertoire for the day any rank of your choice.
Thats a significant clarification in the remastered version
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am pretty much certain the wizard will receive some improvements in future content. i dont think they are a bad class but I agree with Gortle that they seem to have not had as much development attention as other casters. I think the designers were more focused on OGL to ORC conversion and not looking at rebalancing the class for the remaster overall as they did with the witch, cleric, and now oracle and sorcerer.
They are underdone in certain areas(focus spells/no feat support for improving theses/no feat support for expanding curriculum options/lacking wizard only spellshape feats/ school could be more important to the class than it is now)and though they still have the ability to set up a new list of spells daily from a larger pool than any sorcerer can, they dont have the focus spell, feat, and class chassis support that other casters have now. (arcane evo does expand a sorcerer spell pool but really its only changing out one spell, the sorcerer is going to functionally be the same caster no matter which 1 spell they sub out. And honestly the days when you have to pick a niche spell is also a day with one less signature spell than you could have otherwise had)
Wizards do still have the single most powerful class feature of any caster class drain bonded item. An extra spell cast of any spell prepared that day is very highly valued if you compare what feats that try to add extra casts of spells actually cost.
I was reminded of a rule so I am going to back track on one point.
It does seem that 1 round duration is basically the same until the start of your next turn from Player Core p435. So even though the terms are quite different, if you cause them their durations decrement on your turn.I suspect many people will miss that, or choose to ignore it anyway so effects for 1 round last for a whole round. I could make a natural language argument about it, but RAW wise definitely concede it. The only question is if the effect is on you or on them. In this instance we need the effect to be on us.
|
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
I honestly don't understand this "throwing the toys out of the pram" issue with Tap Into Blood is.
It being an action instead of a Reaction/Free Action does make it a bit awkward. That awkwardness is far from a deal breaker.
I would LOVE to have a similar option as the Arcane Tap Into Blood for Wizard's. Tying it to School spells would be utter trash, given how much more limited those options are compared to the Sorcerers ability to trigger blood magic. But this should be something Wizards can do.
To reframe this discussion, it's not that Tap Into Blood is the most OMG AMAZEBALLS ability ever.
Its that it takes something that feels like it should be a Wizard feature, and gives it Sorcerers, while the Wizard simply lacks anything like that.
The Wizard should be a knowledge class. But they aren't.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I honestly don't understand this "throwing the toys out of the pram" issue with Tap Into Blood is.
It being an action instead of a Reaction/Free Action does make it a bit awkward. That awkwardness is far from a deal breaker.
I would LOVE to have a similar option as the Arcane Tap Into Blood for Wizard's. Tying it to School spells would be utter trash, given how much more limited those options are compared to the Sorcerers ability to trigger blood magic. But this should be something Wizards can do.
To reframe this discussion, it's not that Tap Into Blood is the most OMG AMAZEBALLS ability ever.
Its that it takes something that feels like it should be a Wizard feature, and gives it Sorcerers, while the Wizard simply lacks anything like that.
The Wizard should be a knowledge class. But they aren't.
That's the rub that gets me. Bypassing the hassle of using every skill increase to lift RK skills (and still not being able to take all of them to legendary) and consolidating it into the thematically class driven arcana (freeing up skill space to make a character driven wizard with varying skills) seems like an easy win for the scholar class. But no, the caster that's already strong gets it (also they can get a free -3 on DC spells too, why not). It was bizarre to see. I wouldn't be so salty if the wizards class feats weren't so bone dry in comparison to sorc. But yea, from the outside it looks like one of the four slot casters is the golden child while the other is the milk man's son.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I honestly don't understand this "throwing the toys out of the pram" issue with Tap Into Blood is.
It being an action instead of a Reaction/Free Action does make it a bit awkward. That awkwardness is far from a deal breaker.
I would LOVE to have a similar option as the Arcane Tap Into Blood for Wizard's. Tying it to School spells would be utter trash, given how much more limited those options are compared to the Sorcerers ability to trigger blood magic. But this should be something Wizards can do.
To reframe this discussion, it's not that Tap Into Blood is the most OMG AMAZEBALLS ability ever.
Its that it takes something that feels like it should be a Wizard feature, and gives it Sorcerers, while the Wizard simply lacks anything like that.
The Wizard should be a knowledge class. But they aren't.
I think what it boils down to for me is that people are only looking at Tap into blood at a very surface level, and then imagining that it means any arcane sorcerer (and especially the imperial sorcerer) will be doing all of their recall knowledge checks with arcana, whenever they want to.
I saw all the hype and decided to try to build an imperial sorcerer for myself to see how it felt in play, and the very first thing I noticed about the bloodline is that it's focus spells are all contingent upon casting other spells and that that is a pretty significant limiter of your ability to use any bloodline powers or effects, not to mention the action economy on the imperial sorcerer is incredibly tight. So figuring out how to use Tap into blood wasn't just a bit awkward, at level 1 it means having to cast force barrage every time you want to recall knowledge. So then I looked through the rest of the imperial sorcerer's bloodline spells and realized that they are incredibly restricted on what they can do to activate their bloodline magic and still have an action left. Dispel magic, translocate, scouting eye, retrocognition...these are cool spells to have, but they are not great bloodline magic spells, and will be very limited as your first actions of combat to recall knowledge afterwards.
Haste is really the best option for regular use, but until it can effect the whole party, casting it as your first actions every combat can be limiting and not particularly effective as tactical game play for the whole party, just to be able to recall knowledge. Disintegrate, quandary and implosion are fine spells, but are not really spells you want to cast before recalling knowledge on an enemy, and are all spells that you would much rather combine with your focus spell than with tap into blood.
So I agree that the Imperial sorcerer hype is not actually about what an imperial sorcerer will actually play like at the table (which is probably worse that an arcane draconic sorcerer), it is about the fantasy of what they potentially could do, and how that impedes on some players fantasy of how the wizard should feel. But those don't seem like actual game play issues, they seem like player expectation issues.
Because Tap into blood for the imperial sorcerer is very much like the boundary wizard getting a feat that let them recall knowledge with arcana on any creature after having cast a school spell, so where your first focus spell can never trigger it and a good chunk of your school spells require 3 actions to cast or are just not spells you would often want to cast before recalling knowledge.
I would also push back on the fantasy that wizards are supposed to generally be "the scholar" class. Wizards are very specifically scholars of arcane magic, a field so broad, that its true mastery is supposed to be beyond the reach of any one character anywhere. I too would not complain about more recall knowledge feats working their way either into the class itself or into skill feats that the wizard can take, but I don't think knowing the difference between two different kinds of Corvid birds, or whether a specific cult of Lamashtu is leaning on scripture focused around childbirth or sacrificing children to monsters is particularly the area of expertise of Wizards. Being able to specialize in recalling knowledge generally is much better space for an archetype like Loremaster, which Wizards are much better at utilizing that sorcerers, as you really want a high INT for the generic recall knowledge skills.
Rising blood is interesting, but it is another 1st level feat for a class that doesn't get feats at first level, so to combine it with tap into blood is a very heavy investment that only pays off if you have another member in the party with the same tradition as you that is going to be targeting you with a lot of spells (hopefully buff spells!). That is a use case, but still a lot of feats for a feat starved class.
As far as the quickened spell, you are suggesting casting ancestral memories, then tapping into blood, then casting a quickened spell as the third action? That is clever, but it is a once a day party trick, not a strong piece of evidence for "my character always recalls knowledge with arcana."
The reaction spell is useless for the imperial sorcerer's usage with Tap into blood because the blood magic ends at the start of your round. And the recall knowledge benefit of tap into blood is tied directly to using an action on your turn to tap into blood, while under the effect of blood magic, so it really isn't going to combine well with items and archetypes that give you free action recall knowledge activities.
I guess there is nothing stopping an imperial sorcerer from just casting ancestral memories for no other purpose than triggering blood magic, then recalling knowledge using arcana and just being down a focus point until you can refocus. I love focus spells that help with recall knowledge and pick them up on many characters because you often do have the ability to refocus before needing to act on that information. That is a good idea, but it means you have to loudly cast a spell every time you want to recall knowledge (sorcerers don't get conceal spell), so it limits what you can do with recalling knowledge while scouting/right before combat. I agree that makes it better, but it is still a bit risky having arcana be your only recall knowledge option because there will be times you can't use it.
I also agree that the ways to use it are limited by how familiar the player is with the available resources, but that includes a lot more limits than people are claiming it to have on these forums. I think it translates much more into "the ability to sometimes recall knowledge with arcana instead of another skill" instead of "the ability to always recall knowledge with arcana instead of another skill."
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Being able to specialize in recalling knowledge generally is much better space for an archetype like Loremaster, which Wizards are much better at utilizing that sorcerers, as you really want a high INT for the generic recall knowledge skills.
Well, tell that to Thaumaturges, Commanders and Sorcerers. The latter two of which get to use their key stat to make the check.
I would also push back on the fantasy that wizards are supposed to generally be "the scholar" class. Wizards are very specifically scholars of arcane magic, a field so broad, that its true mastery is supposed to be beyond the reach of any one character anywhere.
I could not disagree more with this sentiment. As far as I am aware, we both of PhD's, naturally we both have our areas of literal expertise, but over the years I have picked up so much specific information from different fields as well. This is through a mix of needing to know things for my own research, collaboration and just being friends with other scientists. Whats more however, through education, I learned how to learn, which is generally transferrable skill.
Much like Arcane magic, my particular area is so vast that there is no one master of it, but that doesn't mean those who are experts are literal experts on what our understanding is.
Being a scholar is not about tunnel vision. I know there is the old joke about "knowing more and more about less and less until you know everything about nothing." But almost every scientist I've ever met has a broad array of knowledge, often electic.
The idea of being so into one topic that you are ignorant of others just doesn't vibe.
Isn't loremaster an OGL casualty? It's not something remaster wizards are getting anymore
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Arcane Evolution now explicitly allows making the spell you add to your repertoire for the day any rank of your choice.
Thats a significant clarification in the remastered version
I never realized it was under contention. I've always run it that way.
@TiMuSW, maybe go back and read my response to your last post about these points because I address them there. Also read Tap into Blood a little more carefully because the only recall knowledge check you can use arcana for is the one granted by the action you spend Tapping into blood/ getting free action recall knowledge checks for the arcane sorcerer is completely useless unless they would already be arcana checks to begin with.
As far as everyone else that is super excited by the imperial sorcerer and Tap into Blood...Great! Play it! See if it works the way you want it to and how many hoops you are jumping through to recall knowledge with one skill. Just trying to put together a 4 slot caster who is good at recall knowledge that way sounded miserable to me and was way too restrictive to be how I would want to play that character. If the goal is just to learn saves and weaknesses, then the Oracle offers much better options. If the goal is to be good at recalling knowledge about many different topics, I'd still much rather just spend skill boosts, skill feats, and probably pick up a focus spell like Scholarly Recollection. Not getting to start combat off recalling knowledge is, by itself too much of a restriction for my tastes, especially when you can't even recall knowledge while invisible before combat, because you have to be casting spells loudly to use your ability.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wizard does not even have a high Recall Knowledge chance on most of the things, as it's is divided on like 6 skills (Arcane, Society, Crafting, Nature, Religion and Occultism) and don't have extra skill increases for them, and going into an archetype like loremaster means being stuck on the s!++ty wizard focus spells instead of just picking something like Psychic.
In combat at some point Haste + Tap into Blood is not a bad turn for sorcerer, and because charisma is a good stat skill wise when that is not a good option Sorcerer will usually have intimidation/Bon Mot + spell as well.
I would also push back on the fantasy that wizards are supposed to generally be "the scholar" class. Wizards are very specifically scholars of arcane magic, a field so broad, that its true mastery is supposed to be beyond the reach of any one character anywhere.I could not disagree more with this sentiment. As far as I am aware, we both of PhD's, naturally we both have our areas of literal expertise, but over the years I have picked up so much specific information from different fields as well. This is through a mix of needing to know things for my own research, collaboration and just being friends with other scientists. Whats more however, through education, I learned how to learn, which is generally transferrable skill.
Much like Arcane magic, my particular area is so vast that there is no one master of it, but that doesn't mean those who are experts are literal experts on what our understanding is.
Being a scholar is not about tunnel vision. I know there is the old joke about "knowing more and more about less and less until you know everything about nothing." But almost every scientist I've ever met has a broad array of knowledge, often electic.
The idea of being so into one topic that you are ignorant of others just doesn't vibe.
For me, what you are describing is why INT grants additional skills and why the game inherently gives every character skill feats separate from class feats or general feats. Because those are areas of learning and knowledge beyond the professional training. Funneling Wizard class resources into them generally doesn't sound like a good idea to me because there are very good ways to pick that stuff up with class feats through archetypes that don't have to saddle down the wizard class (and can remain available to any character that wants to be more scholarly about a wide range of topics). The animist and the commander (who both now dabble in gaining and using lore abilities beyond just recalling knowledge about a specific topic or earning income) both had to have their lore elements built into the class a fair bit (enabling certain class feats and being useful for other types of roles) in order to make the gaining a lore thing be more than a colorful ribbon. I think a similar thing could have been done with the wizard, but it wasn't and isn't going to be easily errata'd in, but I think re-envisioning a loremaster-like archetype that plays around with lores in a scholarly way would be really cool and probably better for the game.
Because of the way that Tap into the blood is worded it works like Bardic Lore, that means including specific lore skills that the DC is way lower.
I never realized it was under contention. I've always run it that way.Arcane Evolution now explicitly allows making the spell you add to your repertoire for the day any rank of your choice.
Thats a significant clarification in the remastered version
heres the original preremaster text below. Notice two things.
1 When you learn a spell from a scroll you learn it at the rank of the scroll. To clarify why, your using the learn a spell activity from a scroll of a particular rank.2 when you add a spell not in rep to it it doesnt actually specify that you can add it any rank.
That is important because the spells rank in repertoire is a standard limiting feature of the spontaneous casting. If you know a rank 3 fireball and its not signature you dont know a rank 4 fireball. The limitation wouldn't suddenly be lifted unless there was text telling you to do so.
The remastered version states you can put the spell in rep at any rank.
FEAT 4
ARCANE SORCERER
Prerequisites bloodline that grants arcane spells
Your arcane legacy grants you an exceptional aptitude for intellectual and academic
pursuits. You become trained in one skill of your choice. Additionally, you keep a book of
arcane spells similar to a wizard’s spellbook. You add all the spells in your spell repertoire
to this book for free, and you can add additional arcane spells to the book by paying the
appropriate cost and using your Arcana skill, similarly to how a wizard can Learn Spells to
add those spells to his spellbook.
During your daily preparations, choose any one spell from your book of arcane spells.
If it isn’t in your spell repertoire, add it to your spell repertoire until the next time you
prepare. If it’s already in your spell repertoire, add it as an additional signature spell
for that day.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Quick question, going back to wizards being weak.
When any of us play a wizard do you try to set up your daily casting based on the same spell set up you would expect to cast as a sorcerer?
Just to jump ahead so you know where my head is at, I am thinking this is kind of why anyone who looks at the sorcerer would just say its flat out better. I mean it is flat out stronger at damage per spell, has many rider effects on casting certain spells. It is stronger when casting the same thing.
In Deriven's case he feels hes found the best spells and doesnt need more than the 30 or so spells throughout a 1-20 play through.
I can see why that would get boring quick too with no special class features to change things up from just casting those 30 or so spells.
And really all the schools play almost exactly the same. Focus spells are not strong enough to differentiate playstyle. Curriculum seems to be a thing people are just trying to avoid and compensate for rather than lean into anyway from this threads comments. There is no interaction between curriculum chosen and thesis chosen. The more spells different wizards collect the more the similar they become.
So really if a wizard is weak aside from focus spells and a limited 4th slot it comes down to spells. Ive said it before. If spell diversity is not actually powerful then spells then are the problem with the wizard who essentially branches out to casting more of a variety of them then anyone else and whose best class feature is one extra cast per day.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Quick question, going back to wizards being weak.
When any of us play a wizard do you try to set up your daily casting based on the same spell set up you would expect to cast as a sorcerer?
Back when I played prepared casters, mostly clerics, I would design three spell lists: one for in the dungeon, one for on the road, and one for in town. They were built for the kind of encounters I would expect in those environments. My caster might make one or two changes based on additional information. This was more optimal than the one-repertoire-fits-all of a spontaneous caster, but was weaker against encounters of an unexpected type. "I did not plan for a portal to Hell to open up in the town square! I planned to go shopping."
Likewise, as a GM I often have my prepared-caster villains stuck with the wrong spell preparations when the party catches them by surprise. A wizard villain caught by surprise would not have 10 minutes to use Spell Substitution, so I would give them a more visible Arcane Thesis.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Quick question, going back to wizards being weak.
When any of us play a wizard do you try to set up your daily casting based on the same spell set up you would expect to cast as a sorcerer?
I have a generic "combat day" spell list; it omits situational spells on purpose, so I have as few wasted slots as possible. I substitute in more situational spells as needed.
It is not about "playing like a sorcerer." It is about playing like I don't know what the encounters for the day are, and only adjusting when I do.
The remastered version states you can put the spell in rep at any rank.
True but you can always have had multiple copies of the spell in your book at different ranks. So it was never much of a limitation.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Quick question, going back to wizards being weak.
When any of us play a wizard do you try to set up your daily casting based on the same spell set up you would expect to cast as a sorcerer?Just to jump ahead so you know where my head is at, I am thinking this is kind of why anyone who looks at the sorcerer would just say its flat out better. I mean it is flat out stronger at damage per spell, has many rider effects on casting certain spells. It is stronger when casting the same thing.
In Deriven's case he feels hes found the best spells and doesnt need more than the 30 or so spells throughout a 1-20 play through.
I can see why that would get boring quick too with no special class features to change things up from just casting those 30 or so spells.And really all the schools play almost exactly the same. Focus spells are not strong enough to differentiate playstyle. Curriculum seems to be a thing people are just trying to avoid and compensate for rather than lean into anyway from this threads comments. There is no interaction between curriculum chosen and thesis chosen. The more spells different wizards collect the more the similar they become.
So really if a wizard is weak aside from focus spells and a limited 4th slot it comes down to spells. Ive said it before. If spell diversity is not actually powerful then spells then are the problem with the wizard who essentially branches out to casting more of a variety of them then anyone else and whose best class feature is one extra cast per day.
I'm in agreement with Deriven on this point. I simply do not believe that there is a wide enough variability in spells for the ability of the Wizard to prepare situation-specific spells to actually matter in a meaningful way. This relates back to the point that has been brought up many times about "silver bullet" spells being weak or essentially not existing (in the way they do in other systems) within PF2e. Slow is a reliable sledgehammer that never gets old and even works with reasonable efficacy against the types of targets who should be the worst possible target choices for it. Its existence pushes out so many potential competing debuff options that any minor benefit they could provide is rendered barely worth the effort. Even though the Wizard has the freedom to prepare these more specific options, even with advance scouting knowledge it is unlikely that their grasp of the situation is so extensive and their knowledge so ironclad that it is worth committing to an option that does not really provide much additional power.
If there were, for example, a spell called "Mangle Aboleth" and it was a non-incapacitation spell that had no effect if it didn't target an aboleth but provided significantly more powerful effects compared to other spells of its level in both damage and debuffs, that would certainly allow one to make a reasonable argument that a Wizard could, unequivocally, have a distinct advantage over Sorcerers in some situations (such as knowing they will need to fight many aboleths the following day). No Sorcerer would ever take this spell, but a Wizard could gleefully add it to their ever-growing spellbook and prepare multiple uses of it when it's useful. If enough spells like this existed, the Wizard could then operate in a situation where they could genuinely use their foreknowledge to a meaningful advantage. The problem is that spells that work this way really just don't exist any more. I'm not making the argument that they should be brought back, but I am saying that this is a design change that explicitly weakens prepared casting, especially a prepared caster that doesn't even gain access to every spell on their list for free.
Phrased a different way, to return to your example from much earlier about preparing for a hag in a swamp versus an ogre in the mountains, the issue is that having that degree of information still does not provide enough knowledge to make meaningfully different decisions when preparing for combat. Since the generic logic remains the same, the Sorcerer is always better off in this situation. If you knew every single enemy you were going to be fighting against, and had reliable information on their saving throws, and you knew that there was no chance that the enemies you were going to be fighting would change or prepare differently, you would have enough information to potentially eliminate all spells targeting a specific saving throw if you're sure that won't show up as an optimal target...but you still might prep Slow anyway even if you're sure nothing has a low Fort save just because it's that useful.
If there is a way in which a Wizard maintains some significant benefit over an Arcane Sorcerer, it's in taking on the job of maintaining utilities and infrastructure in a country over many years. As the savvy Sorcerer player would point out, though, the Sorcerer can certainly retrain their spells known to deal with this situation as well. They would be worse off if they were suddenly caught in an ambush or assassination attempt with their spells less optimized for combat, though...but the Wizard probably wouldn't be any better off, since they're not likely to have advance warning about such an attack either.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Focus spells are not strong enough to differentiate playstyle.
That is way too negative. If your choice of focus spell from your School/Bloodline/subclass is not going to affect your playstyle then you are playing the wrong subclass. It probably means you have blinkers on and are stuck on the one true path and aren't open to the options that are out there. Yes there are powerful options like Slow or Haste. But they aren't the right choice every time. Besides you should make an effort to try different tactics yourself just for your own enjoyment.
Example the Sorcerer can have Elemental Toss or Ancestral Memories. Very different, and different again from Drain Life or Dragon Breath. Some might affect your A game some you B game.
The remastered version states you can put the spell in rep at any rank.True but you can always have had multiple copies of the spell in your book at different ranks. So it was never much of a limitation.
Right, but there was a money aspect to doing that the wizard did not worry about, now the sorcerer doesnt either.
Focus spells are not strong enough to differentiate playstyle.That is way too negative. If your choice of focus spell from your School/Bloodline/subclass is not going to affect your playstyle then you are playing the wrong subclass. It probably means you have blinkers on and are stuck on the one true path and aren't open to the options that are out there. Yes there are powerful options like Slow or Haste. But they aren't the right choice every time. Besides you should make an effort to try different tactics yourself just for your own enjoyment.
Example the Sorcerer can have Elemental Toss or Ancestral Memories. Very different, and different again from Drain Life or Dragon Breath. Some might affect your A game some you B game.
True for sorcerer focus spells, but is that true for wizard focus spells or have people here argued that they ignore wizard focus spells.
Also with regards to trying different tactics and using different spells to make possible approaches to combat you may not otherwise have had I agree with. I am playing devils advocate here a bit by asking if spell diversity is not useful or powerful in the game and thus the wizard's access to spell diversity beyond what any 1 sorcerer can already do with their repertoire is not useful or powerful.
I'm in agreement with Deriven on this point. I simply do not believe that there is a wide enough variability in spells for the ability of the Wizard to prepare situation-specific spells to actually matter in a meaningful way. This relates back to the point that has been brought up many times about "silver bullet" spells being weak or essentially not existing (in the way they do in other systems) within PF2e. Slow is a reliable sledgehammer that never gets old and even...Quick question, going back to wizards being weak.
When any of us play a wizard do you try to set up your daily casting based on the same spell set up you would expect to cast as a sorcerer?Just to jump ahead so you know where my head is at, I am thinking this is kind of why anyone who looks at the sorcerer would just say its flat out better. I mean it is flat out stronger at damage per spell, has many rider effects on casting certain spells. It is stronger when casting the same thing.
In Deriven's case he feels hes found the best spells and doesnt need more than the 30 or so spells throughout a 1-20 play through.
I can see why that would get boring quick too with no special class features to change things up from just casting those 30 or so spells.And really all the schools play almost exactly the same. Focus spells are not strong enough to differentiate playstyle. Curriculum seems to be a thing people are just trying to avoid and compensate for rather than lean into anyway from this threads comments. There is no interaction between curriculum chosen and thesis chosen. The more spells different wizards collect the more the similar they become.
So really if a wizard is weak aside from focus spells and a limited 4th slot it comes down to spells. Ive said it before. If spell diversity is not actually powerful then spells then are the problem with the wizard who essentially branches out to casting more of a variety of them then anyone else and whose best class feature is one extra cast per day.
I appreciate this perspective.
I am wondering if the conclusion is not something that can be said at all tables and in all campaigns though. I say this because table variation/campaign variation affects how much a player might value some spells over others.This is most apparent in a dungeon crawl were there are many points of entry for the various rooms. Each point of entry putting players in a different situation in terms of distance and terrain advantages/disadvantages. If the combat situations are stagnant 20 by 20 rooms certain spells are already advantaged over others (im not assuming this is what happens in your games, but just using it to make a point).
One thing spell diversity current does seem to allow is the use of different ranges/areas of effect of spells to target the same save and or weakness and or provide the same debuff.
I thinks its less common to see spells targeting different saves for the same debuff or weakness, they are there but not very common.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
True for sorcerer focus spells, but is that true for wizard focus spells or have people here argued that they ignore wizard focus spells.
Fair enough mostly true for wizards.
I honestly don't understand this "throwing the toys out of the pram" issue with Tap Into Blood is.
It being an action instead of a Reaction/Free Action does make it a bit awkward. That awkwardness is far from a deal breaker.
I would LOVE to have a similar option as the Arcane Tap Into Blood for Wizard's. Tying it to School spells would be utter trash, given how much more limited those options are compared to the Sorcerers ability to trigger blood magic. But this should be something Wizards can do.
To reframe this discussion, it's not that Tap Into Blood is the most OMG AMAZEBALLS ability ever.
Its that it takes something that feels like it should be a Wizard feature, and gives it Sorcerers, while the Wizard simply lacks anything like that.
The Wizard should be a knowledge class. But they aren't.
It's a deal breaker for Divine, Occult and Primal sorcerers. This feat is basically pointless for them, and the only way it would make sense would be if the ability was a free action or a reaction.
FYI the reason why Occult is bad is because you need to cast a spell before getting your boosted step. In 99% of scenarios, you've already defeated the purpose of the step by casting a spell, because Reactive Strike is provoked by spells.
Primal and Divine are self explanatory.
Why is this whole discussion centered around Arcane? That's the only part of the feature that does not suck.
If Tap into Blood sounds awesome to you, again, I suggest trying it out in play. Just make sure you realize its many limitations or you will probably get pretty frustrated when your GM tells you you are not under the effect of blood magic and that it doesn't pair with very many other recall knowledge items or abilities.
Until I see this massive shift in players abandoning wizards for imperial sorcerers and having more fun with that class than with wizards, I am not really worried that Wizard has been replaced or that Imperial Sorcerer is a better wizard, because I know that I cannot build an imperial sorcerer to do what I want a wizard to do, since I tried to do it. I. just have no interest in casting haste at the start of every single encounter where I want to recall knowledge. I find my wizard does fine recalling knowledge picking up about 3 additional lores as skill feats over 20 levels and keeping society and either Religion (usually) or Nature (depending on the campaign) at expert and then later master, often having a decent focus spell to assist RK by level 6. You really dont want to be spending 2 focus points on every RK check,which would be necessary to use something like loremaster's etitude or scholarly recollection.
So what are the ~30-40 (arcane) spells that a sorcerer can take that would be functionally as good as prepared spellcasting? It seems like this is the key point of contention and it would helpful for people who think this to actually enumerate what they think these spells are to see if there's actually a consensus. I'm sure everyone can agree on the top 10-15, but I wonder about the rest. If there's no consensus here then maybe there's room for the wizard after all.
The top three ranks of spells should be the powerful fight-for-your-life spells that the sorcerer will need during the most challenging combats.
The middle four ranks of spells should be ones that make life easier and conserve the more valuable top-rank spells, such as travel spells to avoid random encounters on journeys, scrying spells to gain advance knowledge, and battlefield-control spells to let the martial characters handle the fighting with minimal spell use.
The bottom three ranks of spells should be for in-town convenience and utility, such as disguises and charms and food purification, that prevent facing the mundane problems of common villagers.
Cantrips should have some potshots for easier combats and utility for convenience. Why wash laundry in a wilderness stream when prestidigitation can clean clothing?
For lower-level sorcerers, the three grouping of ranks are narrower, such as only two ranks for each group at 12th level, and might overlap a lot.
For a list of the exact spells, use a spell guide for combat and common sense for utility.
Wizards use almost the same spells as the arcane sorcerers, but the wizards can specialize better if they had a day's advance warning.